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

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          APR-30-2001
<PERIOD-START>                             MAY-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               OCT-31-2000
<CASH>                                             480
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      106
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                   586
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                     586
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            4,177
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         2,673
<OTHER-SE>                                     (6,264)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                       586
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    1,036
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (1,036)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (1,036)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (1,036)
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0<F1>
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0<F1>
<FN>
<F1>Less than .01 per share.
</FN>


</TABLE>
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Before the

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 

Release No. 72487 / June 27, 2014

ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDING 

File No. 3-15654

____________________________________

 :

In the Matter of :

 :

G-TRADE SERVICES LLC, :

CONVERGEX GLOBAL MARKETS : EXTENSION ORDER

LIMITED, and CONVERGEX :

EXECUTION SOLUTIONS LLC :

:

Respondents. :

____________________________________:

The Division of Enforcement (“Division”) has requested an extension of time until 

August 8, 2014 for entry of an order approving or disapproving the Proposed Plan of 

Distribution that was noticed for public comment on May 9, 2014. 

On December 18, 2013, the Commission issued an Order Instituting Administrative 

and Cease-and-Desist Proceedings, Pursuant to Sections 15(b) and 21C of the Securities 

Exchange Act of 1934 and Section 9(b) of the Investment Company Act of 1940, Making 

Findings, and Imposing Remedial Sanctions and a Cease-and-Desist Order (“Order”) against 

G-Trade Services LLC (“G-Trade”), ConvergEx Global Markets Limited (“CGM”), and 

ConvergEx Execution Solutions LLC (“CES”)1(collectively, “Respondents”). The Order

required Respondents to pay a total of $107,424,429 in disgorgement, prejudgment interest,

and civil money penalties into an escrow account and created a Fair Fund pursuant to Section 

308(a) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, as amended. In two related proceedings, the 

Commission ordered that the disgorgement and prejudgment interest paid in those 

 

1 Exchange Act Rel. No. 71128 (Dec. 18, 2013).
2

proceedings, totaling $1,228,592, may be combined with the funds paid in this matter for 

distribution to harmed customers.2Payment was made into the escrow as required by the 

Order on December 17, 2013.

On May 9, 2014, pursuant to Rule 1103 of the Commission’s Rules on Fair Fund and 

Disgorgement Plans,3the Commission published a Notice of Proposed Plan of Distribution 

and Opportunity for Comment (“Notice”) for the distribution of monies placed into the Fair 

Fund.4 The Notice provided all interested parties thirty (30) days from the date of the Notice 

to submit a comment on the proposed Plan of Distribution. The Commission received 

comments on the proposed Plan of Distribution.

In its request for an extension of time, the Division states that additional time is needed 

to allow for further evaluation, analysis and consultation with other offices to properly address 

the comments. 

Accordingly, for good cause shown, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Division’s 

request for an extension of time until August 8, 2014 for entry of an order approving or 

disapproving the proposed Plan of Distribution is granted.

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

Lynn M. Powalski

Deputy Secretary

 

2

See In the Matter of Jonathan Samuel Daspin, Administrative Proceeding File No. 3-15652 (Exchange Act Rel. 

No. 71126 (Dec. 18, 2013)), and In the Matter of Thomas Lekargeren, Administrative Proceeding File No. 3-

15653 (Exchange Act Rel. No. 71127 (Dec. 18, 2013)).

3

17 C.F.R. 201.1103.

4 Exchange Act Rel. No. 72146 (May 9, 2014).
Exhibit 31.1

CERTIFICATION

I, Brent M. Cook, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Raser Technologies, Inc. (the Registrant); and

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.



|             |  |  |  |                  |  |                        
|------------ |  |  |  | ---------------- |  | -----------------------
|May 22, 2009 |  |  |  | /s/Brent M. Cook
|             |  |  |  |                  |  | Brent M. Cook,         
|             |  |  |  |                  |  | Chief Executive Officer
§ 668.94 Limitation. A limitation may include, as appropriate to the Title IV, HEA program in question— ( a ) A limit on the number or percentage of students enrolled in an institution who may receive Title IV, HEA program funds;
( b ) A limit, for a stated period of time, on the percentage of an institution's total receipts from tuition and fees derived from Title IV, HEA program funds;
( c ) A limit on the number or size of institutions with which a third-party servicer may contract;
( d ) A limit on the number of borrower or loan accounts that a third-party servicer may service under a contract with an institution;
( e ) A limit on the responsibilities that a third-party servicer may perform under a contract with an institution;
( f ) A requirement for a third-party servicer to perform additional responsibilities under a contract with an institution;
( g ) A requirement that an institution obtain surety, in a specified amount, to assure its ability to meet its financial obligations to students who receive Title IV, HEA program funds;
( h ) A change in the participation status of the institution from fully certified to participate to provisionally certified to participate under § 668.13(c).
( i ) A requirement that a third-party servicer obtain surety, in a specified amount, to assure the servicer's ability to meet the servicer's financial obligations under a contract; or
( j ) Other conditions as may be determined by the Secretary to be reasonable and appropriate.
(Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1094)
[59 FR 22450, Apr. 29, 1994. 81 FR 76072, Nov. 1, 2016. Redesignated at 82 FR 6257, Jan. 17, 2017]
§ 34.18 Issuance of the wage garnishment order. ( a ) ( 1 ) If you fail to make a timely request for a hearing, we issue a garnishment order to your employer within 30 days after the deadline for timely requesting a hearing.
( 2 ) If you make a timely request for a hearing, we issue a withholding order within 30 days after the hearing official issues a decision to proceed with garnishment.
( b ) ( 1 ) The garnishment order we issue to your employer is signed by an official of the Department designated by the Secretary.
( 2 ) The designated official's signature may be a computer-generated facsimile.
( c ) ( 1 ) The garnishment order contains only the information we consider necessary for your employer to comply with the order and for us to ensure proper credit for payments received from your employer.
( 2 ) The order includes your name, address, and social security number, as well as instructions for withholding and information as to where your employer must send the payments.
( d ) ( 1 ) We keep a copy of a certificate of service indicating the date of mailing of the order.
( 2 ) We may create and maintain the certificate of service as an electronic record.
(Authority: 31 U.S.C. 3720D)
§ 668.242 Transition to a prison education program. For institutions operating eligible prison education programs in a correctional facility that is not a Federal or State penal institution: ( a ) A confined or incarcerated individual who otherwise meets the eligibility requirements to receive a Federal Pell Grant and is enrolled in an eligible program that does not meet the requirements under subpart P of this part may continue to receive a Federal Pell Grant until the earlier of— ( 1 ) July 1, 2029;
( 2 ) The student reaches the maximum timeframe for program completion under § 668.34; or
( 3 ) The student has exhausted Pell Grant eligibility under 34 CFR 690.6(e).
( b ) An institution is not permitted to enroll a confined or incarcerated individual on or after July 1, 2023, who was not enrolled in an eligible program prior to July 1, 2023, unless the institution first converts the eligible program into an eligible prison education program as defined in § 668.236.
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

DAY HIGH

 698

 684

 665

 655

 652

 660

 630

 629

 631

 630

 621

 641

 599

 636

 636

 636

 638

 642

 637

 629

 627

 632

 641

 646

 647

 652

 682

 656

 698

 742

 713

 544

 553

 560

 533

 529

 521

 541

 561

 581

 583

 582

 590

 585

 590

 592

 600

 611

 598

 580

 614

 587

 611

 602

 616

 615

 621

 631

 618

 625

 653

 641

 644

 622

 622

 609

 598

 598

 596

 595

 603

 599

 599

 607

 592

 612

 614

 622

 625

 623

 623

 621

 612

 621

 623

 630

 631

 633

 650

 639

 656

 678

 664

LOW MEAN

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

U.S. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION-CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT-CALIFORNIA

OCTOBER 2001 WATER QUALITY REPORT RUN DATE: November 5, 2001

ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY, UMHOS 

TDS

 414

 400

 400

 392

 386

 386

 384

 384

 389

 386

 386

 391

 382

 394

 395

 400

 402

 401

 401

 400

 394

 400

 401

 405

 406

 407

 418

 411

 421

 435

 426

TOTAL 19,261

Comments:

0 reading indicates that the station was out of service.

DELTA MENDOTA CANAL AT CHECK 20
### §3556. Order of restitution

The court, in imposing a sentence on a defendant who has been found guilty of an offense shall order restitution in accordance with section 3663A, and may order restitution in accordance with section 3663. The procedures under section 3664 shall apply to all orders of restitution under this section.

(Added Pub. L. 98–473, title II, §212(a)(2), Oct. 12, 1984, 98 Stat. 1991; amended Pub. L. 99–646, §20(b), Nov. 10, 1986, 100 Stat. 3596; Pub. L. 104–132, title II, §202, Apr. 24, 1996, 110 Stat. 1227.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

1996—Pub. L. 104–132 substituted "shall order restitution" for "may order restitution" and "section 3663A, and may order restitution in accordance with section 3663. The procedures under section 3664 shall apply to all orders of restitution under this section" for "sections 3663 and 3664".

1986—Pub. L. 99–646 substituted "may order restitution in accordance with sections 3663 and 3664" for "under this title, or an offense under section 902(h), (i), (j), or (n) of the Federal Aviation Act of 1958 (49 U.S.C. 1472), may order, in addition to the sentence that is imposed pursuant to the provisions of section 3551, that the defendant make restitution to any victim of the offense in accordance with the provisions of sections 3663 and 3664".

#### **Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries**

#### Effective Date of 1996 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 104–132 to be effective, to extent constitutionally permissible, for sentencing proceedings in cases in which defendant is convicted on or after Apr. 24, 1996, see section 211 of Pub. L. 104–132, set out as a note under section 2248 of this title.

#### Effective Date of 1986 Amendment

Pub. L. 99–646, §20(c), Nov. 10, 1986, 100 Stat. 3596, provided that: "The amendments made by this section [amending this section and section 3663 of this title] shall take effect on the date of the taking effect of section 212(a)(2) of the Sentencing Reform Act of 1984 [section 212(a)(2) of Pub. L. 98–473, effective Nov. 1, 1987]."

#### Effective Date

Section effective Nov. 1, 1987, and applicable only to offenses committed after the taking effect of this section, see section 235(a)(1) of Pub. L. 98–473, set out as a note under section 3551 of this title.
§ 628.30 How does the Secretary evaluate an application for an endowment challenge grant? ( a ) In evaluating an application for an endowment challenge grant, the Secretary— ( 1 ) Judges the application using the selection criteria in § 628.31 and the priorities in § 628.32;
( 2 ) Gives, for each criterion and priority, a score up to the maximum possible points in parentheses following the description of that criterion or priority; and
( 3 ) Gives up to 130 total points, 90 points maximum for the criteria in § 628.31, and 40 points maximum for the priorities in § 628.32.
( b ) In selecting recipients for grants, the Secretary follows the procedures in 34 CFR 75.217(d) and (e) of the Education Department General Administrative Regulations.
(Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1065)
[49 FR 28521, July 21, 1984, as amended at 52 FR 11258, Apr. 8, 1987]
# j ARMED SERVICES BOARD OF CONTRACTAPPEALS Appeal of

-- Qwest Government Services, Inc.

d/b/a CenturyLink QGS Under Contract No. HC1013-12-D-0002 APPEARANCES FOR THE APPELLANT: ) ) ) ) ) )

APPEARANCES FORTHE GOVERNMENT: ASBCA No. 60263

Thomas 0. Mason, Esq. Francis E. Purcell, Jr., Esq. Erin M. Estevez, Esq.

Cooley LLP Washington, DC William E. Brazis, Jr., Esq.

DISA General Counsel Laura R. Barke, Esq. Colleen M. Eagan, Esq.

Trial Attorneys Defense Information Systems Agency Scott Air Force Base, IL ORDERDISMISSING APPEAL WITH PREJUDICE Pursuant to the request in appellant's "MOTIONFORVOLUNTARY DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE," dated 28 July 2016, this appeal is hereby DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. Dated: 3 August 2016
J.REIROUTY Administrative Judge Armed Services Board ofContractAppeals I certify that the foregoing is a true copy ofthe Order ofDismissal ofthe Armed Services Board ofContract Appeals in ASBCA No. 60263, Appeal ofQwest Government Services, Inc. d/b/a/ CenturyLink QGS, rendered in conformance with the Board's Charter. Dated:
JEFFREY D. GARDIN Recorder, Armed Services Board ofContract Appeals
§ 4.1 Definitions. As used in this part: ( a ) *Labor Act* means the Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act of 1959 (73 Stat. 519).
( b ) *Pension Act* means the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (Pub. L. 93-406) (88 Stat. 829).
( c ) *Acts* means both of the above statutes.
( d ) *Commission* means the United States Parole Commission.
( e ) *Secretary* means the Secretary of Labor or his designee.
( f ) For proceedings under the “Labor Act” ( 1 ) *Employer* means the labor organization, or person engaged in an industry or activity affecting commerce, or group or association of employers dealing with any labor organization, which an applicant under § 4.2 desires to serve in a capacity for which he is ineligible under section 504(a) of the “Labor Act”.
( 2 ) All other terms used in this part shall have the same meaning as identical or comparable terms when those terms are used in the “Labor Act”.
( g ) For proceedings under the “Pension Act” ( 1 ) *Employer* means the employee benefit plan with which an applicant under § 4.2 desires to serve in a capacity for which he is ineligible under section 411(a) of the “Pension Act” (29 U.S.C. section 1111).
( 2 ) All other terms used in this part shall have the same meaning as identical or comparable terms when those terms are used in the “Pension Act”.
EXHIBIT 23.1

We have issued our report dated February 7, 2003 accompanying the consolidated financial statements of VitalStream Holdings, Inc. and subsidiaries
included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K (this "Form 10-K"). We hereby consent to inclusion of said report in the Form 10-K and the
incorporation by reference of said report in the Registration Statement of VitalStream Holdings, Inc. on Form S-8, File No. 333-82218, and the Registration
Statement of VitalStream Holdings, Inc. on Form S-2, File No. 333-96887, as amended.

/s/
ROSE, SNYDER & JACOBS

Encino,
CA
March 28, 2003

---

QuickLinks
#### Ammi B. Todd et al. v. A. L. Houghton & Company.

Filed January 3, 1900.

No. 10,903.

Law of the Case: Former Appeal. This court ordinarily will not re-examine questions of law presented and determined on a ' prior appeal of the saiqe cause.

Error from the district court of Lancaster county. Tried below before Holmes, J. ■

*Affirmed.*

*Byron Olarlc*and *G. A. Rawls,*for plaintiffs in error.

*John S. Bishop, contra.*

Norval, J.

This cause was before us at a former term. See *Houghton v. Todd,*58 Nebr., 360. After the judgment of *539reversal was entered the canse was again tried in the district court, upon the evidence adduced upon the first trial, and from the judgment recovered by plaintiff a petition in error has been prosecuted by defendants. Every legal question involved herein was decided in the former opinion. It was determined that the knowledge of an agent engaged in an independent fraudulent scheme without the scope of his agency is not knowledge of his principal; and that the contract between the plaintiffs and defendants was not a suretyship, but one of sale. This adjudication became the law of the case, and the soundness of the decision will not now be inquired into. See *Omaha Life Ass’n v. Kettenbach,*55 Nebr., 330. The verdict on the first trial in the district court was rendered for defendants in obedience to a peremptory instruction of the court, which was determined by this court to have been prejudicial error, since the evidence presented a question for the determination of the jury as to the implied or apparent authority of Dundas. This was, in effect, an adjudication that the evidence was sufficient to justify a finding and judgment in favor of plaintiffs. Upon the evidence before us on the former hearing the trial court ha's found the issues against the defendants. No other questions are presented by this record, and the judgment must accordingly be

Affirmed.
COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 02-13-00136-CV

IN RE DAVID DANIELS RELATOR

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

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

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

MEMORANDUM OPINION1

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

The court has considered relator’s petition for writ of mandamus, the 

response by real parties in interest, and the parties’ reply briefs. The court is of 

the opinion that relief should be denied. Accordingly, relator’s petition for writ of 

mandamus is denied.

PER CURIAM

PANEL: GARDNER, WALKER, and MCCOY, JJ.

DELIVERED: May 15, 2013

 1

See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4, 52.8(d).
§ 664.30 How does the Secretary evaluate an application? ( a ) The Secretary evaluates an application for a Group Project Abroad on the basis of the criteria in § 664.31. The Secretary informs applicants of the maximum possible score for each criterion in the application package or in a notice published in the Federal Register.
( b ) All selections by the Secretary are subject to review and final approval by the J. William Fulbright Foreign Scholarship Board.
( c ) The Secretary does not recommend a project to the J. William Fulbright Foreign Scholarship Board if the applicant proposes to carry it out in a country in which the United States does not have diplomatic representation.
(Authority: 22 U.S.C. 2452(b)(6), 2456)
[63 FR 46366, Aug. 31, 1998, as amended at 70 FR 13376, Mar. 21, 2005]
§ 668.40 Conviction for possession or sale of illegal drugs. ( a ) ( 1 ) A student is ineligible to receive title IV, HEA program funds, for the period described in paragraph (b) of this section, if the student has been convicted of an offense under any Federal or State law involving the possession or sale of illegal drugs for conduct that occurred during a period of enrollment for which the student was receiving title IV, HEA program funds. However, the student may regain eligibility before that time period expires under the conditions described in paragraph (c) of this section.
( 2 ) For purposes of this section, a conviction means only a conviction that is on a student's record. A conviction that was reversed, set aside, or removed from the student's record is not relevant for purposes of this section, nor is a determination or adjudication arising out of a juvenile proceeding.
( 3 ) For purposes of this section, an illegal drug is a controlled substance as defined by section 102(6) of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 801(6)), and does not include alcohol or tobacco.
( b ) ( 1 ) *Possession.* Except as provided in paragraph (c) of this section, if a student has been convicted— ( i ) Only one time for possession of illegal drugs, the student is ineligible to receive title IV, HEA program funds for one year after the date of conviction;
( ii ) Two times for possession of illegal drugs, the student is ineligible to receive title IV, HEA program funds for two years after the date of the second conviction; or
( iii ) Three or more times for possession of illegal drugs, the student is ineligible to receive title IV, HEA program funds for an indefinite period after the date of the third conviction.
( 2 ) *Sale.* Except as provided in paragraph (c) of this section, if a student has been convicted— ( i ) Only one time for sale of illegal drugs, the student is ineligible to receive title IV, HEA program funds for two years after the date of conviction; or
( ii ) Two or more times for sale of illegal drugs, the student is ineligible to receive Title IV, HEA program funds for an indefinite period after the date of the second conviction.
( c ) If a student successfully completes a drug rehabilitation program described in paragraph (d) of this section after the student's most recent drug conviction, the student regains eligibility on the date the student successfully completes the program.
( d ) A drug rehabilitation program referred to in paragraph (c) of this section is one which— ( 1 ) Includes at least two unannounced drug tests; and
( 2 ) ( i ) Has received or is qualified to receive funds directly or indirectly under a Federal, State, or local government program;
( ii ) Is administered or recognized by a Federal, State, or local government agency or court;
( iii ) Has received or is qualified to receive payment directly or indirectly from a Federally- or State-licensed insurance company; or
( iv ) Is administered or recognized by a Federally- or State-licensed hospital, health clinic or medical doctor.
(Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1091(r))
[64 FR 57358, Oct. 22, 1999, as amended at 71 FR 45696, Aug. 9, 2006]