alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>   1
                                                                EXHIBIT (11)

                STATEMENT RE:  COMPUTATION OF PER SHARE EARNINGS

                                
                                          Three Months Ended March 31,
                                           1997                  1996
                                     Primary   Diluted    Primary  Diluted
                                     -------   -------    -------  -------

Net Income                           3,294      3,294      3,488    3,488      
                                     =====      =====      =====    =====
Average Shares:
   Common                            8,339      8,339      7,499    7,499
   Common equivalents                  283        319        521      532
                                     -----      -----      -----    -----
      Total                          8,622      8,658      8,020    8,031
                                     =====      =====      =====    =====

Earnings per common share             0.38       0.38       0.43     0.43
                                     =====      =====      =====    =====

Common share equivalents assume exercise of stock options and warrants, if
dilutive.
[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 39 (Tuesday, February 27, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Pages 12459-12460]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-4774]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

Foreign-Trade Zones Board

[Docket 11-2001]


Foreign-Trade Zone 147--Reading, Pennsylvania; Application for 
Subzone, C&J Clark America, Inc., Distribution of Footwear, Hanover, 
Pennsylvania

    An application has been submitted to the Foreign-Trade Zones Board 
(the Board) by the Foreign-Trade Zone Corporation of Southeastern 
Pennsylvania, grantee of FTZ 147, requesting special-purpose subzone 
status for the footwear warehousing/distribution facility of C&J Clark 
America, Inc. (Clark), in Hanover, Pennsylvania. The application was 
submitted pursuant to the provisions of the Foreign-Trade Zones Act, as 
amended (19 U.S.C. 81a-81u), and the regulations of the Board (15 CFR 
part 400). It was formally filed on February 15, 2001.
    The Clark Hanover Logistics Center (305,668 sq. ft./3 bldgs. on 
24.8 acres) is

[[Page 12460]]

located at 240 Kindig Lane in Conewago Township, just outside Hanover, 
Pennsylvania. The facilities (210 employees) are used for storage, 
inspection, repairing, packaging and distribution of footwear received 
by Clarks Companies, N.A., in North America. Almost all of the products 
are sourced from abroad and some 8 percent are currently exported.
    Zone procedures would exempt Clark from Customs duty payments on 
foreign products that are reexported. On domestic sales, the company 
would be able to defer payments until merchandise is shipped from the 
plant. The application indicates that the savings from zone procedures 
will help improve the plant's international competitiveness.
    In accordance with the Board's regulations, a member of the FTZ 
Staff has been designated examiner to investigate the application and 
report to the Board.
    Public comment is invited from interested parties. Submissions 
(original and 3 copies) shall be addressed to the Board's Executive 
Secretary at the address below. The closing period for their receipt is 
April 30, 2001. Rebuttal comments in response to material submitted 
during the foregoing period may be submitted during the subsequent 15-
day period (to May 14, 2001).
    A copy of the application and accompanying exhibits will be 
available for public inspection at each of the following locations:

U.S. Department of Commerce, Export Assistance Center, One Commerce 
Square, 228 Walnut St., 850, P.O. Box 11698, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 
17108-1698; and
Office of the Executive Secretary, Foreign-Trade Zones Board, U.S. 
Department of Commerce, Room 4008, 14th & Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, 
Washington, DC 20230.

    Dated: February 15, 2001.
Dennis Puccinelli,
Executive Secretary.
[FR Doc. 01-4774 Filed 2-26-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
SCHEDULE D 

(Form 965)

(January 2019)

U.S. Shareholder’s Aggregate Foreign Cash Position

Department of the Treasury 

Internal Revenue Service

▶ Attach to Form 965. 

▶ Go to www.irs.gov/Form965 for instructions and the latest information. 

OMB No. 1545-0123

Name of person filing this return Identifying number

Name of 

Specified Foreign Corporation

(a)

EIN or Reference ID 

Number of the 

Foreign Corporation 

(see instructions)

(b)

Cash Position at Close 

of the Last Taxable Year 

Prior to the Year 

Referenced in Column (d) 

(enter amount from 

Schedule E, column (b)(3))

(c)

Pro Rata Share 

of Column (b)

(d) 

Cash Position at Close 

of the Last Taxable Year 

That Ends Before 

November 2, 2017 

(enter amount from 

Schedule E, column (c)(3))

(e)

Pro Rata Share 

of Column (d)

(f)

Cash Position at Close 

of the Last Taxable Year 

Beginning Before 

January 1, 2018 

(enter amount from 

Schedule E, column (d)(3))

(g)

Pro Rata Share 

of Column (f)

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16 Total (lines 1–15) . .

Add schedules as needed. 

For Privacy Act and Paperwork Reduction Act Notice, see the separate instructions. Cat. No. 71325R Schedule D (Form 965) (1-2019)

Enter amounts in U.S. Dollars.
Schedule D (Form 965) (1-2019) Page 2

17 Enter the total of column (g) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ▶ 17

18 Combine totals of columns (c) and (e) and divide by two . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ▶ 18

19 Aggregate Foreign Cash Position. Enter the larger of the amount on line 17 or the amount on line 18 . . . . . . . . . . . ▶ 19

20 Aggregate Foreign Cash Position Taken Into Account on the 2017 Tax Return . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ▶ 20

21 Aggregate Foreign Cash Position Taken Into Account on the 2018 Tax Return . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ▶ 21

Schedule D (Form 965) (1-2019)
#### Gurpreet KAUR, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 05-76579.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

*676Submitted Feb. 20, 2007 *.

Filed Feb. 27, 2007.

Hector M. Roman, Jr., Esq., Roman *&*Singh, LLP, Jackson Heights, NY, for Petitioner.

Ronald E. LeFevre, Chief Counsel, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, Virginia Lum, DOJ — U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Div./Office of Immigration Lit., Gregory C.J. Lisa, Organized Crime and Racketeering Section, U.S. DOJ/Criminal Division, Washington, DC, for Respondent.

Before: BEEZER, FERNANDEZ, and McKEOWN, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Gurpreet Kaur, a native and citizen of India, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying her motion to reopen removal proceedings. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen, *see Konstantinova v. INS,*195 F.3d 528, 529 (9th Cir.1999), and we deny the petition for review.

The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Kaur’s motion to reopen as untimely where Kaur filed the motion more than four months after the BIA’s final order of removal, *see*8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2), and failed to submit evidence of changed country conditions in India that would excuse the late filing, *cf. Malty v. Ashcroft,*381 F.3d 942, 945 (9th Cir.2004) (requiring circumstances to “have changed sufficiently that a petitioner who previously did not have a legitimate claim for asylum now has a well-founded fear of future persecution”).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Union Calendar No. 128

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 2356

[Report No. 103–234]

A BILL

To amend the Water Resources Development Act of

projects in the Virgin Islands.the Army to carry out certain construction1990 to extend the authority of the Secretary of

SEPTEMBER 9, 1993

Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the

State of the Union and ordered to be printed
IB

Union Calendar No. 128

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 2356

[Report No. 103–234]

To amend the Water Resources Development Act of 1990 to extend the

authority of the Secretary of the Army to carry out certain construction

projects in the Virgin Islands.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JUNE 9, 1993

Mr. DE LUGO introduced the following bill; which was referred to the

Committee on Public Works and Transportation

SEPTEMBER 9, 1993

Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union

and ordered to be printed

A BILL

To amend the Water Resources Development Act of 1990

to extend the authority of the Secretary of the Army

to carry out certain construction projects in the Virgin

Islands.

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

3 That section 406 of the Water Resources Development Act
2

•HR 2356 RH

1 of 1990 (48 U.S.C. 1405c note; 104 Stat. 4646) is amend2 ed by striking subsection (c).
Attachment 1 

United States Department of Agriculture 

Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) 

Field Operations (FO) 

PRIVACY ACT NOTICE

The Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 522A) requires that certain information be given to 

you when you are requested to furnish personal information to a Government Agency. 

The required information is provided in this Notice. The act does not apply, however, to 

business information about your firm. 

AUTHORITY FOR REQUESTING INFORMATION

Authority for requesting both personal and business information is contained in the 

Federal Meat Inspection Act (21 U.S.C.601 et seq.) and the Poultry Products Inspection 

Act (21 U.S.C. 451 et seq.). Under these Acts, the Secretary of Agriculture is authorized 

to determine the fitness of applicants for or recipients of inspection service to engage in 

business requiring inspection. Your disclosure of personal information to aid in this 

determination is mandatory. The Acts also require full and complete disclosure of 

records and information showing the transactions of your business. 

PURPOSE FOR WHICH THE INFORMATION WILL BE USED

This information is being requested to establish and record your identity as a responsible 

official of the business and to determine your fitness to receive a Grant of Inspection. 

ROUTINE USES WHICH MAY BE MADE OF THE INFORMATION

In appropriate situations, a report containing the information you furnish may be referred 

to other federal, state, local or foreign agencies charged with law enforcement or the 

investigation or prosecution of law violations. 

EFFECTS OF FAILURE TO FURNISH INFORMATION

Failure to provide requested information may delay or interfere with your receiving 

inspection service and may result in civil penalties of $100.00 per day against you or your 

business, as prescribed by (15 U.S.C. 50). In addition, persons making false, fictitious, or 

fraudulent statements or entries are subject to a $10,000.00 fine or imprisonment for not 

more than 5 years or both, as prescribed by (18 U.S.C 1001).
Exhibit 32.2





CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO


18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,


AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002







In connection with the Quarterly Report of American Tax Credit Properties L.P. (the “Registrant”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 29, 2012 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, James Hussey, Chief Financial Officer of Richman Tax Credit Properties Inc., general partner of Richman Tax Credit Properties L.P., general partner of the Registrant, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:





(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 Registrant.





/s/James Hussey


James Hussey


Chief Financial Officer of Richman Tax


Credit Properties Inc., general partner of


Richman Tax Credit Properties L.P., general


partner of the Registrant


August 9, 2012
### IN THE COURT OF APP EALS OF TENNESS EE AT NAS HVILLE A pr il 28, 200 6 S es sio n
WI LLI S BRUCE AMOS, ET AL 

### . v. TH E METRO POLI TAN GOVE RNMENT OF NA SHV ILLE A ND DA VID SON CO UN TY, TEN NES SEE
Appeal f rom the Chancer y Court for Davidson Cou nty No. 02-2622-I C laud ia C. Bonn ym an, Jud ge

No. M2005- 00932-COA-R 3-CV - F iled on Au gust 2, 2007

F RAN K G. C L EME NT , J R

. , J

. , d i s s en t i n g.

I re sp e c tf ull y dis a g re e wi th the ma

jor ity ’s c on c lus ion that the lum p- su m pa y me nts ma de to Appellants upon t heir retirement were not for perfor ming personal ser

vices; but instead, we re in lieu of the e mpl oy e e us inghis /he r a c c ru e d v a c a tio n ti me

. Al tho ug h the pa y me nts we re ind e e d ma de in lieu of the e mploy ee using his/her ac crue d vacation time, the pa y ments were compensa tion for the employ ee pe rfor

ming pe rsonal ser

vices during his/her employ ment.
As this Court noted in G a in e s v

. R e s p o n s e G r a

p hics, Inc., “[a] paid vacation is a for m of compensa tion.” Gaines v. Response Graphics, I nc ., 1992 WL 319441, *1 (Tenn. Ct. App. Nov. 6, 1992) (c iting 48A Am.Jur.2d L abor a nd L abor Rela tions § 1822). The Court we nt on to state that “[a]bsent some ag ree ment to the contra ry , vacation pay

is just like any

other c ompensation that has
acc rued up to the time of se paration.” Id.

Th e Me tr op oli ta n Co de § 3 .0 8. 01 0( 3) , in pe rt ine nt part , de fi ne s “e a rn ing s” a s “th e tot a l c a sh compensa tion paid by the Metropolitan Gover nment

. . . to a Metropolitan employ ee for his per sonal service s . . . .” The r ecor d tells us, if an employ ee use s vaca tion tim e to take a day off, the e mploy ee rec eives c ompens at i o n fo r that day , as if the e mploy ee ha d worke d, which is remitted in the employ ee’ s periodic pa

y chec k, usually

at t he end of

the month. When an employ ee r etires, if the
e mpl oy e e ha s a c c ru e d v a c a tio n ti me no t take n, the e mpl oy e e may e le c t to re c e ive a

lum p- su m c a sh pa y me nt f or the a c c ru e d v a c a tio n ti me no t us e d, or the e mpl oy e e ha s the op tio n to e le c t to re ma in on the pay roll, take the day s off that rema in until they are exti ng uished, and re ceive pay ment for e ach day as thoug h the employ ee ha d worke d that day . I n either e vent, the employ ee is c ompensated f or the ea rned va cation day

. The e mploy ee is c ompensated f or the va lue of a

vacation day , whether

still o n t he ac tive pay roll or just retired. The only differ ence betwee n the two forms of compensa tion is the timing of the compensation and whether it is paid in i nstallments, usually monthly , or in one lump sum.-2-

I n su m m ar y , Iwould reve rse the de cision of the trial c ourt and hold that the lump-sum pay ments for acc rued vacation time are to be included in the calc ulation of Appellan t s ’ p en s ion benef its.

___________________________________ FRANK G. CL EMENT, JR ., J UDGE
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2693 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2693

     To amend the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1938 to limit the 
    imposition of civil money penalties for violations of marketing 
allotments for sugar and crystalline fructose to those violations that 
                        are knowingly committed.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             July 21, 1993

 Mr. Pomeroy introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                        Committee on Agriculture

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
     To amend the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1938 to limit the 
    imposition of civil money penalties for violations of marketing 
allotments for sugar and crystalline fructose to those violations that 
                        are knowingly committed.

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

SECTION 1. KNOWING VIOLATIONS OF MARKETING ALLOTMENTS FOR SUGAR AND 
              CRYSTALLINE FRUCTOSE.

    (a) Penalties Limited to Knowing Violations.--Section 359b(d)(3) of 
the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1938 (7 U.S.C. 1359bb(d)(3)) is 
amended by inserting ``knowingly'' before ``violates'' both places it 
appears.
    (b) Application of Amendment.--The amendment made by subsection (a) 
shall apply with respect to any violation of paragraph (1) or (2) of 
subsection (d) of section 359b of the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 
1938 occurring--
            (1) on or after the date of the enactment of this Act; or
            (2) before such date if a civil penalty for such violation 
        has not been collected before such date.

                                 <all>
```
Dismiss and Opinion Filed July 11, 2013 

S 

In The 

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-12-01287-CV 

ADRIAN BOOKER, ET AL., Appellants 

V. 

SANNA LUI CHUI, ET AL., Appellees 

On Appeal from the 101st Judicial District Court 

Dallas County, Texas 

Trial Court Cause No. DC-11-14809 

MEMORANDUM OPINION 

Before Chief Justice Wright and Justices FitzGerald and Lewis 

Opinion by Justice FitzGerald 

The clerk’s record in this case is overdue. By letter dated June 21, 2013 we informed 

appellants that the District Clerk had notified the Court that the clerk’s record had not been filed 

because appellant had not paid for or made arrangements to pay for the clerk’s record. We 

directed appellants to file written verification that they had paid for or made arrangements to pay 

for the clerk’s record or that they had been found entitled to proceed without payment of costs. 

We cautioned appellants that if they did not file the required documentation within ten days, we 

might dismiss the appeal without further notice. To date, appellants have not provided the 

required documentation or otherwise corresponded with the Court regarding the status of the 

clerk’s record. 

 
 –2– 

Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 37.3(b). 

 

 

121287F.P05 

 

/Kerry P. FitzGerald/ 

KERRY P. FITZGERALD 

JUSTICE 
 –3– 

S 

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

JUDGMENT 

ADRIAN BOOKER, ET AL, Appellants 

No. 05-12-01287-CV V. 

SANNA LUI CHUI, ET AL, Appellees 

 On Appeal from the 101st Judicial District 

Court, Dallas County, Texas 

Trial Court Cause No. DC-11-14809. 

Opinion delivered by Justice FitzGerald. 

Chief Justice Wright and Justice Lewis 

participating. 

 In accordance with this Court’s opinion of this date, this appeal is DISMISSED. 

 It is ORDERED that appellees SANNA LUI CHUI, SHERMAN SHIN-SHIN CHUI, 

JESSICA SUNG-EN CHIU, LAU HUNG FAN, AND RICHTOWN INVESTMENTS, INC. 

recover their costs of this appeal from appellants ADRIAN BOOKER AND NICOLE D. 

SMITH. 

Judgment entered July 11, 2013 

/Kerry P. Fitzgerald/ 

KERRY P. FITZGERALD 

JUSTICE
Exhibit 10.4


 


Form of Activated Carbon Sales Agreement


 


	Customer (Party A): 	Contract No.




 


	Supplier (Party B): Greater Khingan Range Forasen Energy Technology Co., Ltd. - Tahe Biopower Plant 	Date:




 


1. Product, unit, quantity, price per unit,
and total amount


 


	No.	Product Name	Specification	Unit	Quantity	Price per Unit (RMB)	Total Amount (RMB)	Note
	1	Activated Carbon	 	Ton	 	 	 	 
	Total amount with tax (RMB):	 


 


2. Payment method and term: Party A shall
make the payment by bank’s acceptance bill or wire transfer within three month after delivery;


 


3. Quality requirements: The quality shall
meet the national requirements for related products;


 


4. The Delivered place: Appointed by Party
A;


 


5. Transportation and expenses: Party B
shall handle the transportation on behalf of Party A. Party B should fully consider Party A’s requirements, and negotiate
an applicable transportation way and transportation tool, as well as any expenses occurred during the transportation;


 


6. Package standard and requirements: the
packages should be qualified for multiple loads and unloads and to endure long-distance transportation. Package standard is to
ensure the goods will reach destination safely and in undamaged condition with normal multiple loads and unloads. Party B will
provide packaging materials and pay for the related packaging cost;


 


7. Inspection standards and methods: Party
A shall inspect the goods according to the standards in this agreement. Party A shall express disagreement in writing within 10
days upon receiving the goods. If Party A does not express any disagreement on the quality during that period, the goods will be
considered as qualified.


 


8. Breach of the Agreement: if Party B
fails to deliver the products to Party A within the 10 days after the agreed delivery date, Party A shall have the right to terminate
the agreement without consent from Party B.


 


9. Damages: If Party B fails to meet the
quality requirements of the products, it should pay liquidated damages of 10% of the total amount for those products. If either
party fails to perform its obligations under this agreement due to force majeure, it shall inform the other party at the earliest
time possible and shall not be held responsible.


 






     


     


    

 


10. Others: Any dispute occurred during
the implementation of this agreement is allowed to be solved by negotiation between two parties. In case no settlement has been
reached, any party may sue at the local court.


 


11. Term: this agreement will take effect
on the signing date and terminate after all responsibility are performed.


 


12. This agreement is made in duplicate
with one copy held by each party. All facsimiles and scan copies have the same legal force as the original one.


 


Corporate stamp of Party A:


 


 


Party A:


Name:


Address:


Contact Person:


Tel:


Bank:


Account No.


Tax No.


 


 


Corporate stamp of Party B:


 


 


Party B: Greater Khingan Range Forasen
Energy Technology Co., Ltd. - Tahe Biopower Plant


Name:


Address:


Contact Person:


Tel:


Bank:


Account No.:


Tax No.: