alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
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

 26,623

 26,573

 30,659

 26,427

 27,076

 26,508

 25,327

 25,544

 24,637

 25,838

 25,751

 24,500

 24,722

 26,396

 26,812

 27,334

 27,798

 27,832

 24,609

 25,121

 24,178

 24,853

 26,150

 26,103

 25,325

 25,010

 25,845

 27,254

 26,420

 25,883

 25,008

 17,318

 19,059

 18,746

 19,217

 19,461

 18,167

 17,838

 18,393

 17,812

 19,213

 18,273

 12,222

 18,554

 19,372

 17,086

 19,439

 19,904

 19,383

 18,723

 17,893

 16,570

 18,530

 19,574

 19,603

 19,540

 18,756

 18,707

 18,617

 18,844

 18,111

 17,639

 22,318

 22,967

 23,976

 23,355

 23,251

 22,456

 21,986

 21,754

 21,941

 22,593

 22,334

 20,991

 22,484

 23,503

 23,565

 24,059

 24,553

 24,069

 22,369

 21,961

 21,416

 22,476

 23,136

 23,043

 23,155

 22,893

 23,024

 23,352

 23,135

 22,599

 22,241

LOW MEAN

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

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

OCTOBER 2015 WATER QUALITY REPORT RUN DATE: November 2, 2015

ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY, UMHOS 

Comments:

0 reading indicates that the station was out of service.

PORT CHICAGO TOP IN SUISUN BAY
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 18-7326

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

MICHAEL PAUL PUZEY,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, 

at Martinsburg. Gina M. Groh, Chief District Judge. (3:00-cr-00064-GMG-2; 3:17-cv00129-GMG)

Submitted: April 4, 2019 Decided: April 9, 2019

Before NIEMEYER and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and SHEDD, Senior Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Michael Paul Puzey, Appellant Pro Se. Jeffrey Akira Finucane, Assistant United States

Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Martinsburg, West 

Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Michael Paul Puzey seeks to appeal the district court’s order accepting the 

recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing as successive his 28 U.S.C. 

§ 2255 (2012) motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues 

a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) (2012). A certificate of 

appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional 

right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2012). When the district court denies relief on the 

merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would 

find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. 

Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); see Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 

336-38 (2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner 

must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable, and that the 

motion states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Slack, 529 U.S. at 

484-85. 

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Puzey has not made 

the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss 

the appeal. We also deny Puzey’s motion to dismiss the indictment. We dispense with 

oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the 

materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
EXHIBIT 11a


                              AMERITECH CORPORATION
                    COMPUTATION OF PRIMARY EARNINGS PER SHARE
                                   (Unaudited)
                                        
                                        
                                           Three Months Ended
                                              September 30
                                             -------------
                                          1997              1996
                                          ----              ----
Net income                           $613,298,000      $518,575,000
                                     ============      ============


Weighted average number of
shares outstanding                    549,035,348       549,830,266

Additional dilutive effect of
outstanding options (as determined
by the application of the treasury
stock method)                           1,909,517         2,425,548
                                     ------------      ------------

Weighted average shares outstanding
on which primary earnings per share
are based                             550,944,865       552,255,814
                                     ============      ============
Primary earnings per share                  $1.11             $0.94
                                     ============      ============


We submit this calculation in accordance with Regulation S-K,Item 601(b)11.
It is not required by footnote 2 to paragraph 14 of Accounting Principles
Board Opinion No. 15 because it results in dilution of less than three
percent.


We have restated amounts for the prior year to include the windfall tax
benefit in our determination of the dilutive effect of outstanding options.
§ 1002.23 What must the individual show to carry the burden of proving that the employer discriminated or retaliated against him or her? ( a ) In order to prove that the employer discriminated or retaliated against the individual, he or she must first show that the employer's action was motivated by one or more of the following: ( 1 ) Membership or application for membership in a uniformed service;
( 2 ) Performance of service, application for service, or obligation for service in a uniformed service;
( 3 ) Action taken to enforce a protection afforded any person under USERRA;
( 4 ) Testimony or statement made in or in connection with a USERRA proceeding;
( 5 ) Assistance or participation in a USERRA investigation; or,
( 6 ) Exercise of a right provided for by USERRA.
( b ) If the individual proves that the employer's action was based on one of the prohibited motives listed in paragraph (a) of this section, the employer has the burden to prove the affirmative defense that the action would have been taken anyway absent the USERRA-protected status or activity.
### §7974. Preemption

Nothing in this subpart 1 is intended to preempt any provision of law of a State or political subdivision of a State that is more restrictive than a provision of this subpart.1

(Pub. L. 89–10, title VIII, §8574, formerly title IV, §4304, as added Pub. L. 107–110, title IV, §401, Jan. 8, 2002, 115 Stat. 1776; renumbered title IX, §9564, renumbered title VIII, §8574, Pub. L. 114–95, title IV, §4001(a)(4)(A), (B), (C)(ii), title VIII, §8001(a)(9), Dec. 10, 2015, 129 Stat. 1966, 2088, 2089.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

This subpart, referred to in text, was in the original "this part", and was translated as reading "this subpart", to reflect the probable intent of Congress. Pub. L. 114–95 redesignated part C of title IV of Pub. L. 89–10 as subpart 5 of part F of title VIII of Pub. L. 89–10, which is classified to this subpart.

#### Codification

Section was classified to section 7184 of this title prior to renumbering by Pub. L. 114–95.

1 See References in Text note below.
March 2023

STORAGE COMPUTED* RELEASE - C.F.S. EVAPORATION

ACRE-FEET INFLOW RIVER JUDGE (2)

DAY ELEV IN LAKE CHANGE C.F.S. POWER SPILL OUTLET

(1)

FRANCIS CARR

POWER PLANT C. F. S. INCHES

14.248

1 1,901.44 14.240 -8 684 0 475 186 27 0 0.00

2 1,901.48 14.270 30 705 0 474 189 27 0 0.02

3 1,901.42 14.225 -45 663 0 469 189 27 1 0.05

4 1,901.16 14.031 -194 597 0 478 189 27 1 0.04

5 1,901.19 14.053 22 761 0 535 189 26 0 0.00

6 1,901.25 14.098 45 827 0 588 189 27 0 0.00

7 1,901.14 14.016 -82 753 0 578 189 27 0 0.00

8 1,901.33 14.158 142 802 0 514 189 27 0 0.00

9 1,900.98 13.896 -262 596 0 512 189 27 0 0.00

10 1,900.84 13.793 -103 677 0 513 189 27 0 0.00

11 1,900.58 13.602 -191 680 0 560 189 27 0 0.01

12 1,900.74 13.720 118 921 0 646 189 27 0 0.01

13 1,901.25 14.098 378 992 0 584 189 27 1 0.03

14 1,900.62 13.631 -467 501 0 521 189 26 0 0.02

15 1,901.11 13.993 362 938 0 538 189 27 1 0.04

16 1,900.99 13.904 -89 765 0 592 189 27 2 0.08

17 1,900.75 13.727 -177 777 0 650 189 27 0 0.00

18 1,900.55 13.580 -147 897 0 753 189 27 2 0.08

19 1,900.44 13.499 -81 1,126 0 950 189 26 2 0.07

20 1,900.89 13.830 331 1,890 42 1,505 147 27 2 0.07

21 1,901.28 14.120 290 1,730 97 1,367 92 26 2 0.10

22 1,901.36 14.180 60 1,377 100 1,129 89 27 2 0.08

23 1,900.52 13.558 -622 865 100 962 89 27 1 0.06

24 1,901.41 14.218 660 1,418 100 861 89 35 0 0.00

25 1,901.67 14.412 194 1,113 100 794 89 32 0 0.00

26 1,900.94 13.867 -545 772 100 831 89 27 0 0.00

27 1,901.71 14.442 575 1,389 100 884 89 26 0 0.00

28 1,900.89 13.830 -612 859 100 945 89 26 8 0.35

29 1,901.18 14.046 216 1,254 100 927 89 26 3 0.16

30 1,901.53 14.307 261 1,220 106 868 89 25 0 0.00

31 1,901.19 14.053 -254 915 114 791 112 25 1 0.05

TOTALS -195 29,464 1,159 22,794 4,740 839 29 1.32

ACRE-FEET -195 58,442 2,299 45,212 9,402 1,664 58

* COMPUTED INFLOW IS THE SUM OF CHANGE IN STORAGE, RELEASES, PUMPING AND EVAPORATION

(1) OUTLET RELEASE INCLUDES FISH RELEASE. (2) INCHES OF EVAPORATION TAKEN FROM PAN AT TRINITY RIVER HATCHERY

SUMMARY

Release (ACRE-FEET)

Total Power 2,299 Judge Francis Carr Powerplant 1,664

Total River 56,913 Total Release 58,578

Historical Archive and Report Database

Lewiston Lake Daily Operations

Run Date: 4/1/2023
Exhibit 32

Certification of the Companys Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer Pursuant to

Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. Section 1350)

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, the undersigned officers of Continental Resources, Inc. (the Company), hereby certify that
the Companys Report on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2010 (the Report), fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information
contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



|                                                  |  |                                                          
|------------------------------------------------- |  | ---------------------------------------------------------
|/s/ HAROLD HAMM                                   |  | /s/ JOHN D. HART                                         
|Harold Hamm                                       |  | John D. Hart                                             
|Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive
Officer |  | Sr. Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer
|May 6, 2010                                       |  | May 6, 2010
### §§781 to 788. Repealed. Pub. L. 91–346, §5(d)(3)(B), July 20, 1970, 84 Stat. 445

For general subject matter of sections 781 to 788, see section 955 of this title.

Section 781, Pub. L. 88–579, §2, Sept. 3, 1964, 78 Stat. 905, set forth a Congressional declaration of policy to encourage and promote the Nation's artistic and cultural progress by establishing a National Council on the Arts.

Section 782, Pub. L. 88–579, §3, Sept. 3, 1964, 78 Stat. 905, proscribed Federal control over policy or program determination in the administration of this chapter.

Section 783, Pub. L. 88–579, §4, Sept. 3, 1964, 78 Stat. 905, established in the Executive Office of the President a National Council on the Arts. See section 955 of this title and notes thereunder.

Section 784, Pub. L. 88–579, §5, Sept. 3, 1964, 78 Stat. 905; Pub. L. 89–209, §6(d)(1), (2), Sept. 29, 1965, 79 Stat. 849, 850, provided for appointment, composition, terms of office and vacancies in the National Council on the Arts.

Section 785, Pub. L. 88–579, §6, Sept. 3, 1964, 78 Stat. 906; Pub. L. 89–209, §5(d)(2)(A), Sept. 29, 1965, 79 Stat. 847; Pub. L. 90–83, §10(b), Sept. 11, 1967, 81 Stat. 223, provided for appointment of a Chairman of the National Council on the Arts, his term of office and reimbursement for his expenses.

Section 786, Pub. L. 88–579, §7, Sept. 3, 1964, 78 Stat. 906; Pub. L. 89–209, §6(d)(3), (4), Sept. 29, 1965, 79 Stat. 850, provided that the National Council on the Arts meet at the call of the Chairman at least twice a year, established 14 Council members as constituting a quorum, and set forth functions and duties of the Council.

Section 787, Pub. L. 88–579, §8, Sept. 3, 1964, 78 Stat. 907, provided for compensation of Council members.

Section 788, Pub. L. 88–579, §9, Sept. 3, 1964, 78 Stat. 907, authorized appointment of and compensation for secretarial, clerical, and other staff and further authorized procurement by the Chairman of temporary and intermittent services.

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

#### Effective Date of Repeal

Repeal effective July 1, 1970, see section 5(d)(3)(B) of Pub. L. 91–346.
#### In the Matter of the Claim of Joseph H. Warnock, Respondent, against Warnock & Zahrndt, Inc., et al., Appellants. State Industrial Board, Respon*804dent.

All concur.
§ 229.49 Adjustment of benefits under family maximum for change in family group. ( a ) *Increase in family group.* If an overall minimum rate is adjusted for the family maximum and an additional family member can be included, the benefits payable to previous auxiliary beneficiaries (spouse and children) are reduced to provide a share for the new family member. The difference between the Overall Minimum PIA (see § 225.15 of this part) and the family maximum amount is divided by the increased number of auxiliary beneficiaries. If the amount of each benefit is not a multiple of $0.10, it is rounded to the next lower multiple of $0.10. After determining a beneficiary's share (the amount after reduction for other benefits) the amount is rounded to the next lowest multiple of $1.00, if it is not already a multiple of $1.00.
( b ) *Decrease in family group.* If an overall minimum rate is adjusted for the family maximum and there is a decrease in the number of eligible family members, the benefits for the remaining auxiliary beneficiaries (spouse and children) are increased. If the family maximum still applies, the difference between the Overall Minimum PIA and the family maximum amount is divided by the number of remaining auxiliary beneficiaries. If the amount of each benefit is not a multiple of $0.10, it is rounded to the next lower multiple of $0.10. After determining the beneficiary's share (the amount after reduction for other benefits) the amount is rounded to the next lowest multiple of $1.00, if it is not already a multiple of $1.00.
( c ) *Effective date of rate change.* The overall minimum rate changes described in paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section are effective the month in which the number of auxiliary beneficiaries changes.
Exhibit 31.1—Section 302 CertificationI, Ellen Z. Lamale, certify that:I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K, and all reports on Form 8-K containingdistribution or servicing reports filed in respect of period included in the year covered by thisannual report, of Principal Life Income Fundings Trust 2005-35;1. Based on my knowledge, the information in these reports, taken as a whole, does not containany untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make thestatements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, notmisleading as of the last day of the period covered by this annual report;2. Based on my knowledge, the distribution or servicing information required to be provided tothe depositor by the trustee under the pooling and servicing, or similar agreement, forinclusion in these reports is included in these reports;3. I am responsible for reviewing the activities performed by the depositor and the trusteeunder the pooling and servicing, or similar agreement, and based upon my knowledge and theannual compliance review required under that agreement, and except as disclosed in thereports, the depositor and trustee have each fulfilled its obligations under that agreement;and4. The reports disclose all significant deficiencies relating to the compliance by the trusteeand the depositor with the minimum servicing or similar standards based upon the reportprovided by an independent public accountant, after conducting a review in compliance with theUniform Single Attestation Program for Mortgage Bankers or similar procedures, as set forth inthe pooling and servicing, or similar agreements, that is included in these reports.In giving the certifications above, I have reasonably relied on information provided to me by thefollowing unaffiliated parties: Ernst and Young and Citibank, N.A.Date: March 24, 2006   By: /s/ Ellen Z. LamaleName: Ellen Z. LamaleTitle: Senior Vice President and Chief Actuary
Exhibit 12.1
      2004


2005


2006


2007


2008EARNINGS:Income before provision for incomes taxes

$
9,797


$
23,293


$
52,714


$
62,325


$
66,174Less: Pre-tax preference dividends


















(108
)Add: Fixed charges


310



566



478



282



3,017Total earnings

$
10,107


$
23,859


$
53,192


$
62,607


$
69,083FIXED CHARGES:Interest expense(1)

$
310


$
566


$
478


$
282


$
2,834Dividend requirements(2)


















183Total fixed charges

$
310


$
566


$
478


$
282


$
3,017Ratio of earnings to fixed charges*


32.6



42.2



111.3



222.0



22.9     (1)
    
    Amortization of debt issuance costs is included in interest
    expense.(2)
    
    Preference security dividend requirements for purposes of
    computing fixed charges is defined as the amount of preference
    earnings that is required to pay dividends on outstanding
    preference securities. The dividend requirements are computed as
    the amount of the dividend divided by (1 minus the effective
    income tax rate applicable to continuing operations).*
    
    Our consolidated ratios of earnings to fixed charges plus
    preferred stock dividends for the years ended December 31,
    2004, 2005, 2006 and 2007 is identical to our consolidated
    ratios of earnings to fixed charges as we did not have any
    outstanding preference securities dividends during the periods
    indicated.
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

DAY HIGH

 2,247

 3,450

 1,313

 676

 452

 271

 185

 157

 267

 2,725

 3,786

 3,778

 6,623

 6,335

 4,701

 4,173

 4,179

 4,465

 3,889

 2,201

 1,418

 1,173

 3,128

 4,967

 7,917

 9,413

 9,073

 9,587

 11,323

 12,567

 150

 149

 146

 147

 143

 140

 136

 130

 125

 124

 129

 135

 147

 141

 136

 137

 146

 151

 162

 169

 154

 158

 165

 170

 288

 866

 719

 489

 433

 613

 418

 547

 315

 244

 207

 179

 154

 143

 145

 304

 504

 780

 1,198

 1,115

 1,014

 913

 983

 1,042

 932

 654

 495

 458

 735

 1,294

 2,206

 3,548

 3,498

 3,574

 4,426

 5,293

LOW MEAN

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

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

JUNE 2019 WATER QUALITY REPORT RUN DATE: July 1, 2019

ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY, UMHOS 

Comments:

0 reading indicates that the station was out of service.

PORT CHICAGO TOP IN SUISUN BAY
#### Jennie Lapisardi, Appellant, v. City of New York, Respondent.

Action to recover damages for personal injuries suffered by plaintiff in a fall on an ice covered city street. Plaintiff appeals from a judgment in favor of the defendant, dismissing the complaint at the close of her ease. Judgment unanimously affirmed, with costs. No opinion. Present — Carswell, Acting P. J., Johnston, Adel, Sneed and Wenzel, JJ.
# C_2012322EN.01001301.xml

| 24.10.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 322/13 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.10.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 322/13

---

Publication of a cancellation request pursuant to Article 12(2) of Council Regulation (EC) No 510/2006 on the protection of geographical indications and designations of origin for agricultural products and foodstuffs

2012/C 322/06

This publication confers the right to object to the cancellation request pursuant to Article 7 of Council Regulation (EC) No 510/2006 (1). Statements of objection must reach the Commission within six months of the date of this publication.

1

CANCELLATION REQUEST

COUNCIL REGULATION (EC) No 510/2006

COUNCIL REGULATION (EC) No 510/2006

CANCELLATION REQUEST PURSUANT TO ARTICLE 12(2)

CANCELLATION REQUEST PURSUANT TO ARTICLE 12(2)

‘WERNESGRÜNER BIER’

‘WERNESGRÜNER BIER’

EC No: DE-PGI-0117-1174-17.10.2011

EC No: DE-PGI-0117-1174-17.10.2011

PGI ( X ) PDO ( )

PGI ( X ) PDO ( )

1.   Registered name proposed for cancellation:

Registered name proposed for cancellation:

‘Wernesgrüner Bier’

2.   Member State or Third Country:

Member State or Third Country:

Germany

3.   Type of product:

Type of product:

| Class 2.1. | Beer |
| --- | --- |

Class 2.1.

Beer

4.   Person or body making request for cancellation:

Person or body making request for cancellation:

| Name | : | Wernesgrüner Brauerei GmbH |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Address | : | Wernesgrün/Bergstraße 4 |
| 08237 Steinberg |
| DEUTSCHLAND |

Name

:

Wernesgrüner Brauerei GmbH

Address

:

Wernesgrün/Bergstraße 4

08237 Steinberg

DEUTSCHLAND

Nature of legitimate interest in making the request:

The requester is the legal successor to the original applicant and user of the protected geographical indication.

5.   Reasons for cancellation:

Reasons for cancellation:

The requester currently appears to be the sole user of the protected geographical indication. The requester has no further interest in using the name ‘Wernesgrüner Bier’ as a protected geographical indication and therefore no longer wishes to bear the inspection costs.

No other potential producers are known to have an interest in using the protected geographical indication.

---

(1)  OJ L 93, 31.3.2006, p. 12.

1

---
Exhibit 3.14
 AMENDED AND RESTATED
LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY AGREEMENT
OF
MEDASSETS SERVICES LLC
(FKA MEDASSETS FINANCIAL SERVICES LLC)
 Agreement Company Member
  Act
   Original Agreement
   1. Name.
   2. Business.




---



##### 



3. Principal Place of Business.
  4. Duration.
  5. Fiscal Year.
  6. Member.
   7. Management.
 Board of Directors
 Board of Directors Board
  2




---



##### 



Delegation of Authority and Duties
   3




---



##### 



Officers
    4




---



##### 



Officers
  Liability of Board Representatives and Officers
   5




---



##### 



Indemnification
 Indemnitee provided,
however provided, further
    6




---



##### 



8. Capital Contributions.
  9. Tax Status.
  10. New Members.
  11. Withdrawals.
  12. Limited Liability of the Member.
  13. Amendments.
  14. Miscellaneous.
 Severability
 Captions
 7




---



##### 



Governing Law
 Successors and Assigns
 15. Interest Certificates
  8




---



##### 



rd
 MEDASSETS, INC.By:
    /s/ Jonathan H. GlennJonathan H. GlennExecutive Vice President, Chief Legal and
Administrative Officer 9
#### Elsa Nenninger, as Administratrix of the Estate of Fred H. Nenninger, Deceased, Respondent, v. George Saulpaugh et al., Appellants.

No opinion. Present — Martin, P. J., Townley, Dore, Cohn and Callahan, JJ.
#### § 404.1521 Establishing that you have a medically determinable impairment(s).

If you are not doing substantial gainful activity, we will then determine whether you have a medically determinable physical or mental impairment(s) (see § 404.1520(a)(4)(ii)). Your impairment(s) must result from anatomical, physiological, or psychological abnormalities that can be shown by medically acceptable clinical and laboratory diagnostic techniques. Therefore, a physical or mental impairment must be established by objective medical evidence from an acceptable medical source. We will not use your statement of symptoms, a diagnosis, or a medical opinion to establish the existence of an impairment(s). After we establish that you have a medically determinable impairment(s), then we determine whether your impairment(s) is severe.

[82 FR 5868, Jan. 18, 2017]