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

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE
TO SUCH ANNUAL REPORT ON FORM 10-K FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1997.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                         156,131
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                               12,920,004
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                  8,245,125
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            23,103,927
<PP&E>                                      19,318,814
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              43,832,883
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       20,344,624
<BONDS>                                      5,548,021
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                        4,379,527
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        27,037
<OTHER-SE>                                  11,752,948
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                43,832,883
<SALES>                                     91,219,621
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            91,219,621
<CGS>                                       62,199,321
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               89,617,095
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             (295,087)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             968,128
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                929,485
<INCOME-TAX>                                   510,987
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            418,498
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                 91,958
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   510,456
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.12
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.15
        

</TABLE>
§ 71.10 Default upon failure to file an answer. ( a ) If the defendant does not file an answer within the time prescribed in § 71.9(a), the reviewing official may refer the complaint to the ALJ.
( b ) Upon the referral of the complaint, the ALJ shall promptly serve on the defendant in the manner prescribed in § 71.8, a notice that an initial decision will be issued under this section.
( c ) The ALJ shall assume the facts alleged in the complaint to be true and, if such facts establish liability under § 71.3, the ALJ shall issue an initial decision imposing the maximum amount of penalties and assessments allowed under the statute.
( d ) Except as otherwise provided in this section, by failing to file a timely answer the defendant waives any right to further review of the penalties and assessments imposed under paragraph (c) of this section and the initial decision shall become final and binding upon the parties 30 days after it is issued.
( e ) If, before such an initial decision becomes final, the defendant files a motion with the ALJ seeking to reopen on the grounds that extraordinary circumstances prevented the defendant from filing an answer, the initial decision shall be stayed pending the ALJ's decision on the motion.
( f ) If, on such motion, the defendant can demonstrate extraordinary circumstances excusing the failure to file a timely answer, the ALJ shall withdraw the initial decision in paragraph (c) of this section, if such a decision has been issued, and shall grant the defendant an opportunity to answer the complaint.
( g ) A decision of the ALJ denying a defendant's motion under paragraph (e) of this section is not subject to reconsideration under § 71.38.
( h ) The defendant may appeal to the authority head the decision denying a motion to reopen by filing a notice of appeal with the authority head within 15 days after the ALJ denies the motion. The timely filing of a notice of appeal shall stay the initial decision until the authority head decides the issue.
( i ) If the defendant files a timely notice of appeal with the authority head, the ALJ shall forward the record of the proceeding to the authority head.
( j ) The authority head shall decide expeditiously whether extraordinary circumstances excuse the defendant's failure to file a timely answer based solely on the record before the ALJ.
( k ) If the authority head decides that extraordinary circumstances excused the defendant's failure to file a timely answer, the authority head shall remand the case to the ALJ with instructions to grant the defendant an opportunity to answer.
( l ) If the authority head decides that the defendant's failure to file a timely answer is not excused, the authority head shall reinstate the initial decision of the ALJ, which shall become final and binding upon the parties 30 days after the authority head issues such decision.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Before the

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 

Release No. 85832 / May 10, 2019

ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDING

File No. 3-14163

In the Matter of

MMR INVESTMENT BANKERS,

LLC (d/b/a MMR, Inc.),

WILLIAM G. MARTIN, JR.,

EUGENE R. RANKIN,

JOHN A. HUBERT, and

AARON D. FIMREITE,

Respondents.

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

ORDER APPOINTING 

TAX ADMINISTRATOR

By order dated February 22, 2019, the Commission issued the “Omnibus Order 

Directing the Appointment of Tax Administrator in Administrative Proceedings that 

Establish Distribution Funds” (“Omnibus Order”),1authorizing the Secretary to issue 

orders for calendar years 2019-2021 appointing, upon request by the Commission staff, 

Miller Kaplan Arase LLP (“Miller Kaplan”), a certified public accounting firm, with one 

of their offices located in San Fransciso, California, as tax administrator (“Tax 

Administrator”) in administrative proceedings where the distribution fund may incur 

tax-related obligations as a Qualified Settlement Fund (“QSF”) under the Department of 

the Treasury Regulation § 1.468B-1(c). 

On May 9, 2019, the Commission staff requested, pursuant to the Omnibus 

Order, the appointment of Miller Kaplan as the Tax Administrator for the QSF in the 

above-referenced proceeding. 

Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that Miller Kaplan, pursuant to and in accordance 

with the Omnibus Order, is appointed the Tax Administrator for the QSF in the abovereferenced proceeding. 

For the Commission, by its Secretary, pursuant to delegated authority.

Vanessa A. Countryman

Acting Secretary

 

1

 Exchange Act Rel. No. 85174 (Feb. 22, 2019).
### §410zzz–5. Authorization of appropriations

There are hereby authorized to be appropriated such sums, but not more than $10,632,000 for development, as may be necessary to carry out the purposes of this subchapter. For the acquisition of lands or interest therein, there is authorized to be appropriated not to exceed $2,000,000.

(Pub. L. 88–543, §6, Aug. 31, 1964, 78 Stat. 749; Pub. L. 94–578, title I, §101(10), title II, §201(7), Oct. 21, 1976, 90 Stat. 2732, 2733; Pub. L. 106–491, §1(2), (3), Nov. 9, 2000, 114 Stat. 2209.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

2000—Pub. L. 106–491 substituted "$10,632,000" for "$2,677,000" and "$2,000,000" for "$80,000".

1976—Pub. L. 94–578, §201(7), substituted "$2,677,000" for "$210,000".

Pub. L. 94–578, §101(10), inserted at end "For the acquisition of lands or interest therein, there is authorized to be appropriated not to exceed $80,000."
#### Winford WHITE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CITY OF GRAND RAPIDS, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 01-2292.

United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.

May 7, 2002.

Before MERRITT, SUHRHEINRICH, and GILMAN, Circuit Judges.

*ORDER*

Winford White, proceeding pro se, appeals a district court order dismissing his civil rights complaint filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This ease has been referred to a panel of the court pursuant to Rule 34(j)(l), Rules of the Sixth Circuit. Upon examination, this panel unanimously agrees that oral argument is not needed. Fed. R.App. P. 34(a).

On June 11, 2001, White filed a complaint against the City of Grand Rapids, Michigan (“City”). Relying upon the Fourteenth Amendment, White alleged that the City violated his due process rights when it seized and sold his property located at 1238 Alto Avenue S.E. in Grand Rapids due to nonpayment of delinquent property taxes. White alleged that he was incarcerated in a Michigan prison at the time of the sale of his property and did not receive notice of the sale prior to its execu*211tion. White sought monetary relief from the City.

On June 22, 2001, an order was filed granting White permission to proceed in forma pauperis and ordering him to pay an initial partial filing fee of $.85 to the court clerk. The order warned White that if he failed to comply -with the order, his case may be dismissed. On July 3, 2001, the envelope containing White’s copy of the June 22, 2001, order was returned to the court bearing the notation “Paroled.” On August 6, 2001, the district court dismissed White’s civil rights complaint without prejudice for want of prosecution because he failed to keep the court apprised of his current address. White’s motion for rehearing was subsequently denied. White has filed a timely appeal.

We review for an abuse of discretion a district court’s dismissal of a suit for want of prosecution. *Link v. Wabash R.R.,*370 U.S. 626, 633, 82 S.Ct. 1386, 8 L.Ed.2d 734 (1962); *Knoll v. Am. Tel. & Tel. Co.,*176 F.3d 359, 363 (6th Cir.1999); *Jourdan v. Jabe,*951 F.2d 108, 109 (6th Cir.1991).

Upon review, we conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion when it dismissed White’s complaint for want of prosecution. Following the filing of his complaint on June 11, 2001, White did not have any further communication with the court until August 20, 2001, after his complaint had been dismissed. White did not receive notice of the actions taken by the district court following the filing of his complaint because he did not keep the district court apprised of his current address. The district court mailed the June 22, 2001, order to the address provided by White in his complaint. Upon receiving notice of White’s parole, the district court waited an additional thirty-three days, presumably to allow White an opportunity to make contact with the court, before dismissing the complaint. Under these circumstances, White’s complaint was subject to dismissal for want of prosecution because he failed to keep the district court apprised of his current address.

Accordingly, the district court’s order is affirmed. Rule 34(j)(2)(C), Rules of the Sixth Circuit.
Lease Amendment


     THIS  AGREEMENT   made  the  9th  day  of  April,   1996,  by  and  between
Envirometrics,  Inc.  hereafter  referred to as "Lessee"  and Reba H.  Wilkinson
hereafter referred to as "Lessor";

                                   WITNESSETH

     For and in  consideration  of the sum of One Dollar  ($1.00) and other good
and valuable considerations paid by Lessee to Lessor, receipt of which is hereby
acknowledged, and in consideration of the mutual covenants and agreements herein
contained, the parties hereto do agree as follows:

     1. The expiration  date of the term of the Lease Agreement shall be amended
to be May 31, 1999.

     2. Rental payments  described in paragraph 3 of the Lease Agreement will be
amended to be following:

Year    From         To                       Monthly                 Annual
Year 1  June 1, 1996 May 31, 1997           $ 1,262.92              $ 15,155.00
Year 2  June 1, 1997 May 31, 1998           $ 1,371.17              $ 16,454.00
Year 3  June 1, 1998 May 31, 1999           $ 1,515.50              $ 18,186.00

     3.  Landlord  will  give the  Tenant  an  allowance  of up to  $15,000  for
improvements  requested by the Tenant.  The total cost of the  improvements  are
projected to be $18,908.00.  Plans and actual  construction of the  improvements
are subject to approval  compliance  with  applicable  building  codes and final
approval by the owner.


     All  other  terms  and  conditions  of the  Lease  Agreement  shall  remain
unchanged and in full effect.


LESSOR:      Reba H. Wilkinson


                                  BY: Witness



LESSEE:        Envirometrics, Inc.
BY:                                                            Witness


                                 FOR USE BY TENANT/CORPORATION

     I, a Notary Public of  Charleston  County,  South  Carolina do certify that
Robin A. Bowers  personally came before me this day and acknowledged  that (s)he
is Secretary of Envirometrics,  Inc., a corporation,  and that by authority duly
given and as the act of the corporation  the foregoing  instrument was signed in
its name by its  President,  sealed with its  corporate  seal,  and  attested by
him/her as Secretary.


My Commission Expires:  4-26-2003
                                                              Notary Public




                                FOR USE BY LANDLORD

     I, a Notary Public of Johnston County,  North Carolina do certify that Reba
H. Wilkinson  personally came before me this day and acknowledged  that (s)he is
Secretary of a  corporation,  and that by authority duly given and as the act of
the  corporation  the  foregoing  instrument  was  signed  in  its  name  by its
President, sealed with its corporate seal, and attested by him/her as Secretary.


My Commission Expires:  3-22-97

 Notary Public
|        |        | Questions and Feedback
Please use this form to send us your questions and comments. If you have a complaintabout your broker or a securities transaction, you will get better results by using our onlineComplaint Center. 

Although we use secure socket layer encryption, do not hesitate to print this formand send it by mail or fax if you have any concerns about security.  Please read our Privacy Act Notice to learn more about how we may use the information you send to us.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       | OMB Number:3235-0547Expires:August 31, 2026Estimated average burdenhours per response:0.25 |
|--------|--------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   |   | Please correct the following error(s) before proceeding:
**Tell Us About Yourself**
 * You must complete this information.TitleMr.Ms.Mrs.Dr.Rev.The HonorableFirst nameMiddle initialLast nameDaytime phone* E-mail        Please double-check your email address. Also, while we do not require a         phone number, our specialists can often answer your question more quickly by phone.        
**Your Question or Feedback**

This collection of information has been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget ("OMB") in accordance with the clearance requirements of 44 U.S.C. §3507. The applicable Privacy Act system of records (SORN) is SEC 31 and the routine uses of the records are set forth at 85 FR 85440 (January 27, 2021).
*https://www.sec.gov/oiea/QuestionsAndComments.html* |
### §546a. Boundaries

#### (a) Saint Helena Island

The scenic area shall comprise all of Saint Helena Island, in Lake Michigan, Michigan, and all associated rocks, pinnacles, islands, and islets within one-eighth mile of the shore of Saint Helena Island.

#### (b) Boundaries of Hiawatha National Forest extended

Upon establishment of the scenic area, the boundaries of the Hiawatha National Forest shall be extended to include all of the lands within the scenic area. All such extended boundaries shall be deemed boundaries in existence as of January 1, 1965, for the purposes of section 100506 of title 54.

#### (c) Payments to local governments

Solely for purposes of payments to local governments pursuant to section 6902 of title 31, lands acquired by the United States under sections 546 to 546a–5 of this title shall be treated as entitlement lands.

(Pub. L. 106–431, §3, Nov. 6, 2000, 114 Stat. 1905; Pub. L. 113–287, §5(d)(18), Dec. 19, 2014, 128 Stat. 3266.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

2014—Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 113–287 substituted "section 100506 of title 54" for "section 460l–9 of this title".
UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA

ALEXANDRIA, VIRGINIA

IN RE: 

Lynn&Kenneth Kincaid Case No. 17-10089-KHK

Debtors Ch 13

NOTICE OF CHANGE OF ADDRESS 

The clerk of the Court will please note the new address of debtor as:

19800 Cornerstone Square,

Apt. 329

Ashburn, VA 20147

/s/Robert S. Brandt, 

VSB # 46196

1513 King Street

Alexandria, VA 22314

(703) 342-7330

brandt@brandtlawfirm.com

Counsel for Debtor 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

This is to certify that on this 22nd day of July, 2017 I caused to be served the foregoing 

change of address notice on the chapter 13 trustee Thomas P. Gorman by ECF.

/s/Robert S. Brandt 

Case 17-10089-KHK Doc 24 Filed 07/22/17 Entered 07/22/17 20:05:51 Desc Main

 Document Page 1 of 1
§ 12.10 How is a Public Benefit Allowance (PBA) calculated? ( a ) The Secretary calculates a PBA in accordance with the provisions of appendix A to this part taking into account the nature of the applicant, and the need for, impact of, and type of program and plan of use for the property, as described in that appendix.
( b ) The following are illustrative examples of how a PBA would be calculated and applied under appendix A: ( 1 ) Entity A is a specialized school that has had a building destroyed by fire, and that has existing facilities determined by the Secretary to be between 26 and 50% inadequate. It is proposing to use the surplus Federal real property to add a new physical education program. Entity A would receive a basic PBA of 70%, a 10% hardship organization allowance, a 20% allowance for inadequacy of existing school plant facilities, and a 10% utilization allowance for introduction of new instructional programs. Entity A would have a total PBA of 110%. If Entity A is awarded the surplus Federal real property, it would not be required to pay any cash for the surplus Federal real property, since the total PBA exceeds 100%.
( 2 ) Entity B proposes to use the surplus Federal real property for nature walks. Because this qualifies as an outdoor educational program, Entity B would receive a basic PBA of 40%. If Entity B is awarded the surplus Federal real property, it would be required to pay 60% of the fair market value of the surplus Federal real property in cash at the time of the transfer.
( 3 ) Entity C is an accredited university, has an ROTC unit, and proposes to use the surplus Federal real property for a school health clinic and for special education of the physically handicapped. Entity C would receive a basic PBA of 50% (as a college or university), a 20% accreditation organization allowance (accredited college or university), a 10% public service training organization allowance (ROTC), a 10% student health and welfare utilization allowance (school health clinic), and a 10% service to the handicapped utilization allowance (education of the physically handicapped). Entity C would have a total PBA of 100%. If Entity C is awarded the surplus Federal real property, it would not be required to pay any cash for the surplus Federal real property, since the total PBA is 100%.
( 4 ) Entities A, B, and C all submit applications for the same surplus Federal real property. Unless the Secretary decides to apportion it, the Secretary transfers or leases the surplus Federal real property to Entity A, since its proposed program and plan of use has the highest total PBA.
(Authority: 40 U.S.C. 484(k)(1)(c))
<Page>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.2

                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
                         OF FLAG TELECOM GROUP LIMITED

    This certification is provided pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, and accompanies the quarterly report on
Form 10-Q (the "Form 10-Q") for the quarter ended September 30, 2002 of FLAG
Telecom Group Limited (the "Issuer").

    I, Patrick Gallagher, the Chief Executive Officer of Issuer certify that:

    (i) the Form 10-Q fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
        Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m(a)
        or 78o(d)); and

    (ii) the information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all
         material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
         the Issuer.

Dated: July 3, 2003.

<Table>
<S>                                                    <C>    <C>                        <C>
                                                       /s/ PATRICK GALLAGHER
                                                       --------------------------------
                                                       Name:  Patrick Gallagher
</Table>