alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
WARNING: THE EDGAR SYSTEM ENCOUNTERED ERROR(S) WHILE PROCESSING THIS SCHEDULE.

<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1988
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                           1,882
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    3,265
<ALLOWANCES>                                      (77)
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                         109,515
<DEPRECIATION>                                (68,711)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  61,376
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                         23,588
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                      34,406
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    61,376
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                24,047
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                19,994
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    27
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,950
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  2,370
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              2,370
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     2,370
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.20
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.20


</TABLE>
**Exhibit 12.1****COMPUTATION OF RATIO OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES**           **Three Months Ended**   **March 31,**   **2007**  **2006**   (in thousands, except ratios) **Fixed Charges:**        Gross interest expense $3,767  $10,376 Interest portion of rent expense.  59   48           3,826   10,424          **Earnings:**        Income before taxes  15,573   45,854 Plus: fixed charges  3,826   10,424 Less: capitalized interest  662   1,655          $18,737  $54,623          **Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges**  4.9x  5.2x
<PAGE>   1
                                                                   EXHIBIT 23.1


                        [ARTHUR ANDERSEN LLP LETTERHEAD]


                   CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS

As independent public accountants, we hereby consent to the incorporation by
reference in Form S-8 Registration Statements (Nos. 33-66672 and 33-66674)
pertaining to the 1988 Stock Option Plan and the 1991 Stock Option Plan of JMAR
Technologies, Inc., Form S-3 Registration Statements (Nos. 33-47390 and
33-96848) and Form S-8 Registration Statements (Nos. 333-10923 and 333-10925) of
our report dated March 2, 1999 with respect to the consolidated financial
statements and the financial statement schedule included in this Annual Report
(Form 10-K) of JMAR Technologies, Inc.

                                                  /s/ Arthur Andersen LLP
                                                  ARTHUR ANDERSEN LLP

San Diego, California
March 27, 1999
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    EXHIBIT 11.1

DYNAMEX INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CALCULATION OF NET INCOME (LOSS) PER COMMON SHARE
(In Thousands except Per Share Amounts)
(Unaudited)



<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                              Three Months Ended                  Six Months Ended
                                                   January 31,                        January 31,
                                                 1997          1998             1997              1998

<S>                                           <C>           <C>               <C>              <C>     <C>
Net Income                                    $      679    $    1,039        $     962        $     2,007
                                               
Weighted Average Common shares                 
   Outstanding                                     6,759         7,412            6,223              7,387
                                                                                                  
Common Share Equivalents Related to            
   Options and Warrants                              188           204              220               171
                                               
Common Shares and Common Share                 
   Equivalents                                     6,947         7,616            6,443             7,558
                                               
Common Stock Price used under Treasury         
   Stock Method                               $    10.17     $   10.56       $     9.87    $         9.50
                                               
                                               
Net Income per Common Share:                   
   Basic                                      $     0.10     $    0.14       $     0.15    $         0.27
   Diluted                                     
                                              $     0.10     $    0.14       $     0.15    $         0.27

</TABLE>
                                               
                                               




                                       15
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

EASTERN DISTRICT

IN THE INTEREST OF: V.M.C., A MINOR

PETITION OF: A.P., MOTHER :

:

:

:

: No. 213 EAL 2017

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from

the Order of the Superior Court

IN THE INTEREST OF: V.M.C. , A MINOR

PETITION OF: A.P., MOTHER :

:

:

:

: No. 214 EAL 2017

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from

the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 7th day of July, 2017

, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is

DENIED

.
Cite as 2023 Ark. 193

SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS

Opinion Delivered: December 14, 2023

IN RE ADMINISTRATIVE PLAN FOR 

THE TENTH DISTRICT COURT

PER CURIAM

Pursuant to Administrative Order No. 18, an amendment to the currently approved 

administrative plan has been submitted by the Tenth District. The amendment is approved 

and shall be effective January 1, 2024.
Exhibit 13(a)

906 Certification

The
certification set forth below is being submitted in connection with the Annual Report on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2012 (the Report) for the purpose of complying with Rule 13a-14(b) or Rule 15d-14(b) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the Exchange Act) and Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code.

Richard Solomons, the Chief Executive Officer, and Thomas Singer, the Chief Financial Officer of InterContinental Hotels Group PLC, each certifies that,
to the best of his knowledge:



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



|2. | the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of InterContinental Hotels Group
PLC.
|-- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: March 26, 2013



By:

/s/ Richard SolomonsName:

Richard SolomonsTitle:

Chief ExecutiveBy:

/s/ Tom SingerName:

Thomas SingerTitle:

Chief Financial Officer
#### UNITED STATES of America, Petitioner-Appellee, v. Michael GARNER, Respondent-Appellant.

No. 07-7539.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: June 3, 2008.

Decided: June 24, 2008.

*236Thomas P. McNamara, Federal Public Defender, Jane E. Pearce, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Diana Pereira, Research and Writing Specialist, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellant. George E.B. Holding, United States Attorney, Anne M. Hayes, Assistant United States Attorney, David T. Huband, Special Assistant United States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Before NIEMEYER and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Michael Drew Garner appeals the district court’s order committing him to the custody of the Attorney General under 18 U.S.C. § 4246 (2000). The district court found by clear and convincing evidence that Garner “is presently suffering from a mental disease or defect as a result of which his release would create a substantial risk of bodily injury to another person or serious damage to property of another.” 18 U.S.C. § 4246(d) (2000).

We review the district court’s determination for clear error. *United States v. Cox,*964 F.2d 1431, 1433 (4th Cir.1992). A factual finding is clearly erroneous when the reviewing court is “left with the definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed.” *Anderson v. City of Bessemer City,*470 U.S. 564, 573, 105 S.Ct. 1504, 84 L.Ed.2d 518 (1985) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted).

We have reviewed the record, the district court’s conclusion, and the briefs of the parties, and find that the district court’s determination is supported by the record and is not clearly erroneous. Accordingly, we affirm the order of the district court. We 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.*
I 

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 290 

To amend title 36, United States Code, to ensure that memorials commemorating the service of the United States Armed Forces may contain 

religious symbols, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 12, 2011 

Mr. HUNTER (for himself, Mr. BILBRAY, and Mr. ISSA) introduced the 

following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Natural Resources 

A BILL 

To amend title 36, United States Code, to ensure that memorials commemorating the service of the United States 

Armed Forces may contain religious symbols, and for 

other purposes. 

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 ‘‘War Memorial Protec5 tion Act’’. 


eMCDONALD on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 290 IH

1 SEC. 2. INCLUSION OF RELIGIOUS SYMBOLS AS PART OF 

2 MILITARY MEMORIALS. 

3 (a) AUTHORITY.—Chapter 21 of title 36, United 

4 States Code, is amended by adding at the end the fol5 lowing: 

6 ‘‘§ 2115. Inclusion of religious symbols as part of mili7 tary memorials 

8 ‘‘(a) INCLUSION OF RELIGIOUS SYMBOLS AUTHOR9 IZED.—To recognize the religious background of members 

10 of the United States Armed Forces, religious symbols may 

11 be included as part of— 

12 ‘‘(1) a military memorial that is established or 

13 acquired by the United States Government; or 

14 ‘‘(2) a military memorial that is not established 

15 by the United States Government, but for which the 

16 American Battle Monuments Commission cooperated 

17 in the establishment of the memorial. 

18 ‘‘(b) MILITARY MEMORIAL DEFINED.—In this sec19 tion, the term ‘military memorial’ means a memorial or 

20 monument commemorating the service of the United 

21 States Armed Forces. The term includes works of archi22 tecture and art described in section 2105(b) of this title.’’. 


eMCDONALD on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 290 IH

1 (b) CLERICAL AMENDMENT.—The table of sections 

2 at the beginning of such chapter is amended by adding 

3 at the end the following: 

‘‘2115. Inclusion of religious symbols as part of military memorials.’’. 

Æ 


eMCDONALD on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with BILLS
Exhibit 10.1

 

FIRST AMENDMENT TO

HELEN OF TROY

1997 CASH BONUS PERFORMANCE PLAN

 

This First Amendment (this “Amendment”) to the Helen of Troy 1997 Cash Bonus Performance Plan (the “Plan”) is approved by the Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors of Helen of Troy Limited on this 14th day of February 2011 and is effective as of the same date.

 

Article I

DEFINITIONS

 

All capitalized terms not defined herein shall have the meaning assigned to them in the Plan.

 

Article II

AMENDMENTS

 

Section 4.2.  The following sentence is hereby added immediately following the last sentence of Section 4.2 of the Plan:

 

“Notwithstanding the foregoing, (a) with respect to the Performance Period for the Year ending February 28, 2011, for the purpose of computing the Bonus payable to the CEO under the provisions hereof, ECO to the extent attributed to Kaz Inc. and its Subsidiaries for such Performance Period shall be reduced by the lesser of $1,666,667 or an amount equal to the ECO of Kaz Inc. and its Subsidiaries for the period beginning January 1, 2011 through and including February 28, 2011 and (b) beginning with the Performance Period for the Year ending February 29, 2012 and for each Performance Period thereafter, ECO for such Performance Period shall be reduced by $10 million for the purpose of computing the Bonus payable to the CEO under the provisions hereof.”

 

Article III

GENERAL

 

Except as expressly set forth herein, this Amendment shall not by implication or otherwise alter, modify, amend or in any way affect any of the terms, conditions, obligations, covenants or agreements contained in the Plan, all of which are ratified and affirmed in all respects and shall continue in full force and effect.

 

1
NO. 07-10-00459-CR

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

AT AMARILLO

PANEL A

SEPTEMBER 9, 2011

ERNESTO GARZA, APPELLANT

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, APPELLEE 

 FROM THE 64TH DISTRICT COURT OF HALE COUNTY;

NO. A18533-1008; HONORABLE ROBERT W. KINKAID JR., JUDGE

Before CAMPBELL and HANCOCK and PIRTLE, JJ.

**MEMORANDUM OPINION**

	Appellant, Ernesto Garza, pleaded guilty to the felony offense of evading arrest or detention.[footnoteRef:1]  After hearing the punishment evidence, a jury assessed appellant’s punishment at confinement in the State Jail Division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice for a period of two years.  Appellant gave notice of appeal.  We will affirm the judgment of the trial court. [1:  See TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. § 38.04(a), (b)(1)(A) (West 2011).] 

Appellants attorney has filed an Anders brief and a motion to withdraw.  Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed. 2d 498 (1967).  In support of his motion to withdraw, counsel certifies that he has diligently reviewed the record, and in his opinion, the record reflects no reversible error upon which an appeal can be predicated.  Id. at 744-45.  In compliance with High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 813 (Tex.Crim.App. 1978), counsel has candidly discussed why, under the controlling authorities, there is no error in the trial courts judgment.  Additionally, counsel has certified that he has provided appellant a copy of the Anders brief and motion to withdraw and appropriately advised appellant of his right to file a *pro se* response in this matter.  Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 510 (Tex.Crim.App. 1991).  The Court has also advised appellant of his right to file a *pro se* response.  Appellant filed a response.  By his Anders brief, counsel reviewed all grounds that could possibly support an appeal, but concludes the appeal is frivolous.  We have reviewed these grounds and made an independent review of the entire record to determine whether there are any arguable grounds which might support an appeal.  SeePenson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988); Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824 (Tex.Crim.App. 2005).  Additionally, we have reviewed the grounds set forth in appellant’s response.  SeeBledsoe, 178 S.W.3d at 827.  We have found no such arguable grounds and agree with counsel that the appeal is frivolous.

Accordingly, counsels motion to withdraw is hereby granted, and the trial courts judgment is affirmed.[footnoteRef:2] [2:  Counsel shall, within five days after this opinion is handed down, send his client a copy of the opinion and judgment, along with notification of appellants right to file a pro se petition for discretionary review.  See TEX. R. APP. P. 48.4.] 

								Mackey K. Hancock

                                                       Justice

Do not publish. 

3
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 99-7599

ALVIN L. MCCARVER, III,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

ERNEST V. CHANDLER,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. W. Earl Britt, Senior District Judge. (CA-99-391-5-BR)

Submitted: March 23, 2000 Decided: March 30, 2000

Before LUTTIG, WILLIAMS, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Alvin L. McCarver, III, Appellant Pro Se. Rudolf A. Renfer, Jr.,

Assistant United States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Alvin L. McCarver, III, appeals the district court’s order

denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (1994) petition. We have

reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion accepting the

recommendation of the magistrate judge and find no reversible

error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district

court. See McCarver v. Chandler, No. CA-99-391-5-BR (E.D.N.C.

Sept. 27, 1999). We 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
|                                                                                              |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                                                                                              |  |
| Name of Subsidiary                                                                           | Jurisdiction of    Incorporation |
| MIX TELEMATICS AFRICA PROPRIETARY LIMITED                                                    | Republic of South Africa |
| MIX TELEMATICS INTERNATIONAL PROPRIETARY LIMITED                                             | Republic of South Africa |
| MIX TELEMATICS EUROPE LIMITED                                                                | United Kingdom |
| MIX TELEMATICS NORTH AMERICA INCORPORATED                                                    | United States of America |
| MIX TELEMATICS AUSTRALASIA PROPRIETARY LIMITED                                               | Australia |
| MIX TELEMATICS EUROPE GMBH                                                                   | Germany |
| MIX TELEMATICS MIDDLE EAST FZE                                                               | United Arab Emirates |
| MIX TELEMATICS ENTERPRISE SA PROPRIETARY LIMITED                                             | Republic of South Africa |
| MIX TELEMATICS SERVIÇOS DE TELEMETRIA E RASTREAMENTO DEVEÍCULOS DO BRAZIL LIMITADA | Brazil |
| MIX TELEMATICS FLEET SUPPORT PROPRIETARY LIMITED                                             | Republic of South Africa |
| MIX TELEMATICS EAST AFRICA LIMITED                                                           | Uganda |
| MIX TELEMATICS TECHNOLOGY HOLDINGS PROPRIETARY LIMITED                                       | Republic of South Africa |
| MIX TELEMATICS INVESTMENTS PROPRIETARY LIMITED                                               | Republic of South Africa |
| MIX TELEMATICS ROMANIA SRL                                                                   | Romania |
| MIX TELEMATICS (THAILAND) LIMITED                                                            | Thailand |
consorteum_10q-ex1011a.htm


 







Exhibit 10.11(a)


 



 


 


 


 


PROMISSORY NOTE



	
$ 75,000.00

	
Due: December 31, 2011







 


Toronto, Ontario


December, 2010


 


FOR VALUE RECEIVED, the undersigned hereby promises to pay to the order of Timothy John Brown as trustee for the T. Brown Family Investment Trust, on the 31st day of December, 2011 the principal amount of $75,000 (Seventy-Five Thousand Dollars) in Canadian funds, together with interest thereon at a rate of twelve percent (12%) per annum, payable on maturity, with interest on overdue interest at the same rate, at the registered office of Consorteum Holdings Inc. in Ontario, Canada.


 


The undersigned hereby waives demand and presentment for payment, notice of non-payment, protest and notice of protest of this note. This note shall be governed and construed by the laws of the Province of Ontario, Canada


 




 



	 	 
Consorteum Holdings, Inc.


 


Per:  /s/ Craig Fielding                          


Craig Fielding, CEO and President


 


 


/s/ Tim Brown                                            


Tim Brown
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 23.2




                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS


We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements of
NewsEdge Corporation on Forms S-8 (File Nos. 33-98786, 333-46863, and 333-46899)
of our report dated January 30, 1998, except as to the information in Note 15,
for which the date is February 27, 1998, on our audit of the consolidated
financial statements of Individual, Inc. for the year ended December 31, 1997
which report is included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.


PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
March 28, 2000