alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                     5
<MULTIPLIER>                  1,000
<CURRENCY>                    U.S. Dollars
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                                   DEC-31-1998 
<PERIOD-START>                                                      JAN-01-1998 
<PERIOD-END>                                                        JUN-30-1998 
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                                               1 
<CASH>                                                                   20,811 
<SECURITIES>                                                                968 
<RECEIVABLES>                                                            32,741 
<ALLOWANCES>                                                                  0 
<INVENTORY>                                                                   0 
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                                         81,073 
<PP&E>                                                                  108,596 
<DEPRECIATION>                                                           25,112 
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                                          191,931 
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                                    85,836 
<BONDS>                                                                  58,622 
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                                         0 
<PREFERRED>                                                                   1 
<COMMON>                                                                    107 
<OTHER-SE>                                                               28,187 
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                                            191,931 
<SALES>                                                                       0 
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                                        192,610 
<CGS>                                                                         0 
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                                           196,384 
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                                           (814)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                                              0 
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                                        2,976 
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                                          (5,936)
<INCOME-TAX>                                                                  0 
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                                      (5,936)
<DISCONTINUED>                                                                0 
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                                               0 
<CHANGES>                                                                     0 
<NET-INCOME>                                                             (5,936)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                                             (0.71)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                             (0.71)
        

</TABLE>
<PAGE>


                                  EXHIBIT 12.1

                                 MICROTUNE, INC.
                        COMPUTATION OF RATIO OF EARNINGS
                                TO FIXED CHARGES
                                 (IN THOUSANDS)
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

                                                                        YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31,
                                        ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<S>                                           <C>               <C>              <C>               <C>              <C>
                                              2001              2000             1999              1998             1997
                                        ----------------- ----------------- ---------------- ----------------- ----------------
Loss before provision for income taxes        $ (64,373)        $ (29,760)       $  (8,508)        $  (3,487)       $  (2,406)
Add: Estimate of interest within
rental expense (1)                                  755               696               38                21               23
                                              ----------        ----------       ----------        ----------       ----------
              Total loss                      $ (63,618)        $ (29,064)       $  (8,470)        $  (3,466)       $  (2,383)
                                              ----------        ----------       ----------        ----------       ----------

  FIXED CHARGES AND PREFERRED STOCK
              DIVIDENDS
  Fixed charges-estimate of interest
      within rental expense (1)               $     755         $     696        $      38         $      21        $      23
      Preferred stock dividends                      --                --               --               811            4,183
                                              ---------         ---------        ---------         ---------        ---------
  Total fixed charges and preferred
           stock dividends                    $     755         $     696        $      38         $     832        $   4,206
                                              ---------         ---------        ---------         ---------        ---------

Deficiency of total earnings to fixed
               charges                        $ (64,373)        $ (29,760)       $  (8,508)        $  (3,487)       $  (2,406)
                                              ----------        ----------       ----------        ----------       ----------
Deficiency of total earnings to fixed
charges and preferred stock dividends         $ (64,373)        $ (29,760)       $  (8,508)        $  (4,298)       $  (6,589)
                                              ----------        ----------       ----------        ----------       ----------
</TABLE>

(1) Fixed charges include the estimated interest component of rent expense
included in the loss before provision for income taxes.
*Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be

published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 00-10351

Summary Calendar

 

PEGGY SUE YBARRA,

Petitioner-Appellant,

versus

GARY L. JOHNSON, DIRECTOR

TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL 

JUSTICE, INSTITUTIONAL DIVISION,

Respondent-Appellee.

__________________________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 4:99-CV-230-Y

___________________________________________

March 1, 2001

Before POLITZ, HIGGINBOTHAM, and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Peggy Sue Ybarra, Texas prisoner # 569925, appeals the denial of her 28

U.S.C. § 2254 petition for writ of habeas corpus. She contends that the state court

erred when it denied her claims that: (1) the State violated the confrontation clause

by failing to produce an adverse witness at her parole-revocation hearing, and
1Williams v. Johnson, 171 F.3d 300, 307 (5th Cir.) (internal quotation marks, footnote,

and citations omitted), cert. denied, 528 U.S. 882 (1999). 

2Spann v. Wainwright, 431 F.2d 482 (5th Cir. 1970); United States v. McCormick, 54

F.3d 214 (5th Cir. 1995). 

(2) her parole revocation ruling violated the due process clause because the

evidence supporting the revocation lacked sufficient reliability.

Ybarra’s contentions do not warrant habeas relief. It is well settled that we

“may not grant habeas relief unless the error at issue had substantial and injurious

effect or influence in determining the proceeding’s outcome.”1 Ybarra challenges

only the determination that she violated the conditions of her parole by committing

aggravated robbery. Any error made in reaching this conclusion is harmless,

however, because the order revoking Ybarra’s parole also relied on the

unchallenged finding that she violated the conditions of her parole by failing to

report to her parole officer.2 Either finding is sufficient to support a revocation of

parole. Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
**EXHIBIT      32.2**

**CERTIFICATION      OF PERIODIC REPORT**

**PURSUANT      TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

|   | 1. | The                quarterly report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the period ended                April                30, 2006 (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of section                13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 as amended,                and |
|--------|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | 2. | The                information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material                respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the                Company. |
|--------|----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   |   |   |                                                                                             |
|--------|--------|--------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   |   |   | /s/ JAY              C.              PETERSON                                               |
|        |   |   | Jay                C. PetersonChief                Financial OfficerJune                14, 2006 |

----
NO. 07-08 -033 4-CV IN THE CO URT OF APPEA LS FO R THE S EVEN TH D ISTRI CT O F TEXAS

AT AM AR ILLO PAN EL D DE CE MB ER3, 2008

_________

_________

_________

___ J ES SE W AL KE RA N D M EL IS SA W AL KE R , AP PE LL AN TS v. HU NTER S C RO SSIN G, APPEL LEE

_________

_________

_________

______ FRO M T HE COU NT Y COUR T AT LAW NO. 1 O F P OT T ERCOU NT Y; NO. 96, 861 ; HON. W . F. “CORKY ” ROBERTS , PRESIDING

_________

_________

_________

____ Before QUINN, C.J., and CAMPBELL and PIRT LE, JJ. ME MO RA ND UM OPI NI ON Appel lan ts Jes se and M eli ss a W alk er fil ed a notic e o f

a p p eal from a jud g ment entered ag ain st the m o n Aug ust14, 2008. The c ler k’ s record was filed i n thi s C our t on Oct ober 13, and t he repor

ter ’s record, on October 9, 2008.2

By l etter of Nov ember

20, 2008, the Cou rtreminde d appel lan ts that thei r br ief was due no lat er

than W ednes day , N ov ember 12, and t hus was pastdue. The l etter noti fied app ellant s thattheir app eal was subje ct to dismissal for w ant of prose cution unless th eir br ief w as filed , al ong w it h a mot ion for e xtens ion of ti me, by M onday , De cember 1. See Tex . R . Ap p. P . 38. 6. An appel lat e c our

t may di smi ss an a ppeal for want o f pros ecut ion i f an appel lan t fails to ti mely

fil e a b ri ef unle ss the appel lan t reason abl y ex pla ins the failu re and the a p p e ll e e is n o tsi gn if ic a n t ly i n ju re d b y t h e fa il u re . T e x. R . A p p . P . 3 8 . 8 (a )( 1 ). On it s o wn moti on, w it h ten days’ noti ce to the parti es, an appel lat e court may di smi ss a c iv il appeal fo r wan t o f

pro se cu ti o n or fa ilu re to co m p ly w it h a n o ti ce f ro m th e cle rk re qui rin g a re spons e or

othe r act ion w it hin a s peci fied ti me. Tex . R. App. P. 4 2.3( b) , ( c) . Here, appel lan ts hav e notfil ed a br ief or a mot ion for e xtens ion by the dat e s p e cif ied by

the Cou rt , des pit e notic e that their fail ure to do so w oul d subje ct the a ppeal to dis mis sal . The Cou rthasg iv en th e par ti es the req uired te n days’ noti ce. Acc ordin g ly , we di smi ss appel lan ts’ appeal for w a nt of prosec uti on and failu re to compl y w it h a n oti ce from the Cou rt . See T ex. R . App . P. 38 ,8(a)(1); 42 .3(b), (c). Jam es T . Camp bell Justice
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF SUNPHARM CORPORATION SET FORTH IN THE COMPANY'S FORM
10-QSB FOR THE SIX MONTHS ENDED JUNE 30, 1997 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY
BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                         450,680
<SECURITIES>                                 5,926,331
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             6,518,454
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               6,661,542
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          729,109
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                              567
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                   5,931,426
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 6,661,542
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                94,968
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,986,624
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (1,867,119)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (1,867,119)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (946,576)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.40)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.40)
        

</TABLE>
----

| 1. | The                Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d)                of                the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;                and |
|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 2. | The information contained in                the Report fairly presents, in all material                respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the                Company. |
|----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|                                                      |   |                                                      |   |
|-----------------------------------------------------------|--------|-----------------------------------------------------------|--------|
| Date:                  December                  21, 2007 | By:    | /s/ Michael                McLaren                   |   |
|                                                      |   | Michael                McLaren                            |   |
|                                                      |   | Principal                Executive                Officer |   |
|                                                      |   |                                                      |   |
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 98-6855

JAMES B. SKIPWITH,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

JOHN WHITEHURST, Commonwealth Attorney,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Henry C. Morgan, Jr., District

Judge. (CA-98-592-2)

Submitted: September 30, 1998 Decided: October 15, 1998

Before ERVIN, LUTTIG, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

James B. Skipwith, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

James B. Skipwith appeals from the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp. 1998) complaint.

We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and

find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning

of the district court. Skipwith v. Whitehurst, No. CA-98-592-2

(E.D. Va. June 8, 1998). We deny Skipwith’s motion for appointment

of counsel and dispense with oral argument because the facts and

legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before

the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr., Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Marilyn Kelly

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

 _________________________________________

 Clerk

June 25, 2012

s0618

Order 

June 25, 2012

144638

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 144638

COA: 301327

Wayne CC: 10-006616-FC

BOBBY RAY WILDER,

Defendant-Appellant.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the January 17, 2012 

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
# cpsaat24
EXHIBIT D

Case 2:11-cv-04211-DMC -MF Document 47-5 Filed 09/06/11 Page 1 of 3 PageID: 2510
EFiled: Aug 15 2011 9:09PM EDT 

Transaction ID 39295464 

Case No. 6720-CS

Case 2:11-cv-04211-DMC -MF Document 47-5 Filed 09/06/11 Page 2 of 3 PageID: 2511
Case 2:11-cv-04211-DMC -MF Document 47-5 Filed 09/06/11 Page 3 of 3 PageID: 2512
EXHIBIT 31.1


CERTIFICATION


I, Mark Clancy, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB/A of Hybrid Fuel Systems,
Inc.;

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a
material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements
made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not
misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the
financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the small business
issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4. The small business issuer's other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible
for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined
in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the small business issuer and
have:

a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure
controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that
material information relating to the small business issuer, including its
consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities,
particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

b) evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer's disclosure
controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the
effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the
period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

c) disclosed in this report any change in the small business issuer's internal
control over financial reporting that occurred during the small business
issuer's most recent fiscal quarter (the small business issuer's fourth fiscal
quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is
likely to materially affect, the small business issuer's internal control over
financial reporting; and

5. The small business issuer's other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed,
based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial
reporting, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of the small
business issuer's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
functions):

a) all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal controls
which could adversely affect the small business issuer's ability to record,
process, summarize and report financial data and have identified for the small
business issuer's auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and

b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the small business issuers internal
control over financial reporting.


September 27, 2005

                          /s/ Mark Clancy
                          Name: Mark Clancy
                          Title: Chief Executive Officer
                          (Principal Executive and Financial Officer)
I 

108TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 642

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide that certain deductions of school bus owner-operators shall be allowable in computing 

adjusted gross income. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 5, 2003

Mr. VITTER introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee 

on Ways and Means 

A BILL

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide 

that certain deductions of school bus owner-operators 

shall be allowable in computing adjusted gross income.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘School Bus Driver Tax 

5 Fairness Act of 2003’’. 
2

•HR 642 IH 

1 SEC. 2. DEDUCTIONS OF SCHOOL BUS OWNER-OPERATORS 

2 ALLOWABLE IN COMPUTING ADJUSTED 

3 GROSS INCOME. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Paragraph (2) of section 62(a) of 

5 the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to certain 

6 trade and business deductions of employees) is amended 

7 by adding at the end thereof the following new subpara8 graph: 

9 ‘‘(E) CERTAIN EXPENSES OF SCHOOL BUS

10 OWNER-OPERATORS.—The deductions allowed 

11 by part VI (section 161 and following) which 

12 consist of expenses paid or incurred by the tax13 payer in connection with the performance by 

14 the taxpayer of services as an employee while 

15 driving a school bus (as defined in section 

16 4221(d)(7)(C)) owned by the employee.’’

17 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by 

18 this section shall apply to taxable years beginning after 

19 December 31, 2003.

Æ
LINCOLN PARTNERS FUND, LLC,

Tax Matters Partner,

Civil Action

Plaintiff, No. 2:10-cv-153-CEH-SPC

and consolidated cases

v. (Middle District of Florida)

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

by and thrughitagent,t - flRDER

INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE,

Defendant.

For the reasons set forth in the Memorandum Opinion filed

contemporaneously with this Order,

IT IS on this 18th day of April 2013;

ORDERED that the Government’s appeal is DENIED and Magistrate

Judge Shipp’s July 13, 2012 Opinion and Order is AFFIRMED. ,

/

KE’JINMCNULTY 7United States District Jucg,)