Injunction Litigation Under Sections 10(e), 10(j), and 10(l), Fiscal Year 1992

p. 187. Twelve printed columns. The stub column carries no printed heading on this crop (the top-left header cell is blank); the caption line above the table was excluded as instructed, and a sliver of it is clipped at the very top edge of the image. "Total proceedings", "Total dispositions" and "Pending in district court Sept. 30, 1992" are tall single headings spanning both heading levels, so each is repeated in both rows; "Injunction proceedings" spans 2 columns and "Disposition of injunctions" spans 6. Row labels: the scan renders the adjacent parenthesis pair ")(" as a single "X"-like glyph (e.g. "8(aX1X3)"), which is the printed "8(a)(1)(3)"; I have transcribed them in the standard form. Likewise "Under Sec. 10(l)" is set with a lowercase letter l that reads like a digit 1 in the scan; the section is 10(l), consistent with the 8(b)(4)/8(b)(7)(C)/8(e) subcategories listed under it. Scan artifacts, not data: a stray dot sits just left of the "0" in the "Filed in district court fiscal year 1992" column of row 8(a)(1); a small stray mark sits just left of the "7" in the "Pending in district court Oct. 1, 1991" column of row "Under Sec. 10(l) total"; a stray dot sits in the left margin beside row 8(b)(7)(C). None are footnote markers, and no footnotes are printed under the table. Blank spacer lines separate the three sections (10(e), 10(j), 10(l)); they carry no label and are not transcribed as rows. Arithmetic check (reported, not applied): every row and both section totals are internally consistent — pending Oct. 1 + filed = total proceedings, the six disposition columns sum to total dispositions, and total proceedings - total dispositions = pending Sept. 30; the subcategory columns also sum exactly to the 10(j) and 10(l) total lines. No misprints detected.