alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE> <S> <C>
 
  <ARTICLE>    5
  <LEGEND>
                         COVER-ALL TECHNOLOGIES INC.
                            FINANCIAL DATA SCHEDULE

          THE SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED
          FROM COVER-ALL TECHNOLOGIES INC. FORM 10-Q FOR THE QUARTER ENDED
          SEPTEMBER 30, 1996 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE
          TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.

          </LEGEND
                 
          <S>                                <C>
          <PERIOD-TYPE>                      9-MOS
          <FISCAL-YEAR-END>                  DEC-31-1996
          <PERIOD-END>                       SEP-30-1996
          <CASH>                             1,585,544
          <SECURITIES>                       0
          <RECEIVABLES>                      1,149,680
          <ALLOWANCES>                       284,132
          <INVENTORY>                        0
          <CURRENT-ASSETS>                   2,581,766
          <PP&E>                             3,068,124
          <DEPRECIATION>                     2,582,738
          <TOTAL-ASSETS>                     10,038,202
          <CURRENT-LIABILITIES>              3,852,481
          <BONDS>                            0
	         <PREFERRED-MANDATORY>              0  
       	  <PREFERRED>                        0
       	  <COMMON>                           173,509
          <OTHER-SE>                         6,012,212
          <TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>       10,038,202
          <SALES>                            0
          <TOTAL-REVENUES>                   4,069,522
          <CGS>                              0
          <TOTAL-COSTS>                      1,459,556
          <OTHER-EXPENSES>                   6,734,729
          <LOSS-PROVISION>                   0
          <INTEREST-EXPENSE>                 0
          <INCOME-PRETAX>                    (4,124,763)
          <INCOME-TAX>                       0
          <INCOME-CONTINUING>                (4,124,763)
          <DISCONTINUED>                     (392,872)
          <EXTRAORDINARY>                    0
          <CHANGES>                          0
          <NET-INCOME>                       (4,517,635)
          <EPS-PRIMARY>                      (.32)
          <EPS-DILUTED>                      (.32)
                  


</TABLE>
<page>			EXHIBIT 32.02


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 Dean Witter Cornerstone
Fund II (the ?Partnership?) on Form 10-Q for the period ended
September 30, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the ?Report?), I, Kevin Perry,
Chief Financial Officer, Demeter Management Corporation, the
general partner of the Partnership, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-
Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge:
(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 Partnership.







By:  /s/Kevin Perry

Name:	   Kevin Perry
Title:  Chief Financial Officer

Date:	November 14, 2005
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

WARWICK TOWNSHIP,

Respondent

v.

JAIME WINTERS AND JASON WINTERS,

Petitioners :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 567 MAL 2017

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from

the Order of the Commonwealth Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 29th day of January, 2018

, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal

is DENIED

.
<PAGE>   1

                                                                       EXHIBIT 5


                          [DYKEMA GOSSETT LETTERHEAD]


                                December 23, 1999



Comshare, Incorporated
555 Briarwood Circle
Ann Arbor, Michigan 48108

             Re:      1998 Global Employee Stock Option Plan

Ladies and Gentlemen:

         We have served as counsel to Comshare, Incorporated, a Michigan
corporation (the "Company") in connection with the preparation of the
Registration Statement (Form S-8) to be filed by the Company with the Securities
and Exchange Commission under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the
"Act"), providing for the sale by the Company in the manner described in the
Registration Statement, of up to 500,000 shares of the Company's Common Stock,
$1.00 par value per share (the "Common Stock"), under the Company's 1998 Global
Employee Stock Option Plan.

         We have examined and relied upon the originals, or copies certified or
otherwise identified to our satisfaction, of such corporate records, documents,
certificates and other instruments as in our judgment are necessary or
appropriate to enable us to render the opinions expressed below.

         Based upon such examination and our participation in the preparation of
the Registration Statement, it is our opinion that the 500,000 shares of
Common Stock, when sold in the manner described in the Registration Statement,
will be validly issued, fully paid and nonassessable.

         We consent to the filing of this opinion as Exhibit 5 to the
Registration Statement. In giving such consent, we do not concede that we are
experts within the meaning of the Act or the rules or regulations thereunder or
that this consent is required by Section 7 of the Act.

                                          Sincerely,

                                          DYKEMA GOSSETT PLLC



                                          /s/ Thomas S. Vaughn
                                          --------------------
                                              Thomas S. Vaughn
### Gormas. Michael 

## (OSn

From: 

### Sent: To:

Cc:

Subject: Attachments:

Follow Up Flag: 

### FlagStatus:
Hello everyone, Gormas, Michael (OST) Wednesday, May 28, 2014 1:46 PM obell@co.venango.pa.us; Robert W. Shaffer; Thomas C. Frungillo 

# Z:i4
.'Y? 8 P 3: G! (tom@bradfordairport.net); Tom Reil (mayor@bradfordpa.com); 'sanctuad@co.chautauqua.ny.us'; 'jeffmcdoug le@flymov.com'; 'dbaker@franklinpa.gov'; 'tfauver@pa.gov'; 'SpanosG@co.chautauqua.ny.us' 'Dave Hackett (dhackett@gosunair.com)'; josh@citylinkair.com'; 'Jamie Kogutek (Jamie.Kogutek@silverairways.com)'; 'Daniel Helland (daniel@boutiqueair.com)'; Schlemmer, Kevin (OSD; Faulk, Scott (OST);Martin, Michael (OST); 'Nick_Dhimitri@schu mer.senate.gov'; 'Gerry_Petrella@schumer.senate.gov'; 'shawn@boutiqueair.com' Updated EASat Bradford, DuBois, Franklin, PA,Jamestown, NYand Parkersburg, WV/Marietta,OH RESUBMITTEDCityLinkAir EASProposal PKB140S27-6.pdf; RESUBMITTEDSilver lAD EAS Bid Revision Final.pdf; RESUBMITTEDBoutique Air Proposals PITBidDeck21.pdf; RESUBMITTEDCityLinkAir EASProposal BKWJHW 140S27-7.pdf; RESUBMITTED CityLinkAir EASProposal DUJ FKL140S27-1.pdf; RESUBMITTEDSun Air Proposal to Provide EASat Bradford, Dubois, Franklin-Oil City, Jamestown, Clarksburg, Morgantown and Parkersburg.pdf Follow up Completed

Please find attached resubmitted proposals for Essential Air Service (EAS)at Bradford, DuBois, and Franklin, PA, Jamestown, NY, and Parkersburg, WVjMarietta, OH. Order 2014-3-12 (March 19, 2014) was issued requesting proposals from airlines interested in providing EASfor a new term. In response to that request, four air carriers submitted proposals: Silver Airways (the incumbent), Boutique Air, City LinkAir, and Sun Air. Subsequently, we issued a Notice on May 14, 2014, which stated the Department received requests from two air carriers asking that they be allowed to modify their proposals at some or all of the abovementioned communities. We reviewed the requests and found that it was in the public interest to grant this request. Therefore, the air carriers that submitted proposals in response to the most recent Request for Proposals at the above-mentioned communities had until May 27,2014 to resubmit a revised proposal, ifthey wished do so. I expect them to be uploaded on www.regulations.gov sometime later today. I request that you review the proposals and submit any comments you may have assoon as possible, but no later than Thursday. June 19. 2014. Please send your comments directly to me via e-mail at michael.gormas@dot.gov. Also, please forward this to all relevant parties that I have not included on the distribution list. Feel free to contact me ifyou have any questions. Regards, Michael D. Gormas United States Department of Transportation Office of Aviation Analysis 1200 New Jersey Ave SE Washington, DC20S90 1
# In the United States Court of Federal Claims

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

No. 15

- 0 322 V

Filed: July 6, 2015

Unpublished

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

BEATRICE THOMURE

, *

*

Petitioner, * Ruling on Entitlement; Concession;

* Influenza (“ flu ”) vaccine; Shoulder Injury

v. * Related to Vaccine Administration

* (“SIRVA”) ; Special Processing Unit

* (“SPU”)

SECRETARY OF HEALTH *

AND HUMAN SERVICES, *

*

Respondent. *

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Lauren Faga

, Conway

, Homer & Chin

- Caplan

, P

. C

. , Boston, MA

, for petitioner.

Alexis Babcock , U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.

RULING ON ENTITLEMENT 1

Vowell

, Chief Special Master:

On March 30 , 2015

, Beatrice Thomure filed a petition for compensation under the

National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, 42 U.S.C. §300aa

- 10, et seq

, 2 [ the

“Vaccine Act” or “Program”]. The petition alleges that as a result of an influenza (“ flu ”)

vaccination on October 1, 2013

, petitioner suffered a brachial plexus injury

. Petition a t

1

. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit (“SPU”) of the Office of

Special Masters.

On July 6, 2015 , respondent filed her Rule 4(c) Report [“Res

. Rep ort ”], in which

she concedes that petitioner is entitled to compensation in this case. Resp

. Repo rt at 3

. R espondent disagrees that petitioner suffered a vaccine

- related “ brachial plexus ” injury ;

1 Because this unpublished ruling contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, it will be

posted on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website, in accordance with the E

- Government Act

of 2002, Pub. L. No. 107

- 347, § 205, 116 Stat. 2899, 2913 (codified as amended at 44 U.S.C. § 3501

note (2006)) . In accordance with Vaccine Rule 18(b), petitioner has 14 days to identify and move to

redact medical or other information, the disclosure o f which would constitute an unwarranted invasion of

privacy. If, upon review, I agree that the identified material fits within this definition, I will redact such

material from public access.

2 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, Pub. L. No. 9 9

- 660, 100 Stat. 3755. Hereinafter, for

ease of citation, all “§” references to the Vaccine Act will be to the pertinent subparagraph of 42 U.S.C. §

300aa (2006).however, she has concluded , based on the preponderance of the medical evidence,

that petitioner suffered a Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine Administration [ “ SIRVA ” ]

and should rece i ve compensation for that injury

. Id. Respondent ’ s concession is

limited to SIRVA and appropriate sequel ae. Id.

In view of respondent’s concession and the evidence before me, I find that

petitioner is entitle d to compensation

.

s/Denise K. Vowe ll

Denise K. Vowell

Chief Special Master

2
#### § 703.1 Scope of part.

Part 703 governs insurance carrier authorizations, insurance carrier security deposits, self-insurer authorizations, and certificates of compliance with the insurance regulations. These provisions are required by the LHWCA and apply to the extensions of the LHWCA except as otherwise provided in part 704 of this subchapter.
February 2023

STORAGE ACRE-FEET COMPUTED* RELEASE - C.F.S. EVAPORATION PRECIP

DAY ELEV IN LAKE CHANGE INFLOW C.F.S. PUTAH 

SOUTH

PUTAH 

CREEK

C.F.S. INCHES INCHES

579

1 129.89 569 -10 85 60 30 0 0.12 0.00

2 129.78 558 -11 93 69 30 0 0.05 0.00

3 129.92 572 14 101 64 30 0 0.05 0.24

4 129.94 574 2 90 59 30 0 0.02 0.00

5 129.84 564 -10 77 52 30 0 0.06 0.44

6 129.65 546 -18 71 50 30 0 0.05 0.03

7 129.46 527 -19 67 46 31 0 0.14 0.00

8 129.68 549 22 90 47 32 0 0.09 0.00

9 129.95 576 27 100 54 32 0 0.07 0.00

10 130.11 592 16 91 51 32 0 0.06 0.00

11 130.04 585 -7 82 54 32 0 0.10 0.05

12 129.93 573 -12 81 55 32 0 0.09 0.00

13 129.98 579 6 91 55 32 1 0.25 0.00

14 130.11 592 13 95 55 32 1 0.17 0.00

15 130.23 604 12 94 55 32 1 0.18 0.00

16 130.40 623 19 93 51 32 0 0.14 0.00

17 130.57 641 18 91 50 32 0 0.08 0.00

18 130.73 659 18 92 50 32 1 0.14 0.00

19 130.79 666 7 89 53 32 0 0.11 0.00

20 130.88 676 10 88 51 32 0 0.10 0.00

21 130.83 670 -6 78 50 31 0 0.09 0.00

22 130.44 627 -43 58 50 30 0 0.13 0.00

23 130.08 589 -38 63 50 31 1 0.20 0.00

24 130.18 599 10 111 50 56 0 0.02 1.50

25 129.95 576 -23 63 50 25 0 0.00 0.23

26 130.19 600 24 87 50 25 0 0.04 0.02

27 129.71 552 -48 124 50 98 0 0.05 0.28

28 129.70 551 -1 238 34 205 0 0.01 0.97

TOTALS -28 2,583 1,465 1,128 5 2.61 3.76

ACRE-FEET -28 5,123 2,906 2,237 10

Comments: *Computed inflow is the sum of change in storage, releases and evaporation.

Release (ACRE-FEET)

Putah South Canal 2,906

Putah Creek 2,237

Total 5,143

Precipitation

This month = 3.76

October 01, 2022 To date = 26.53

SUMMARY

Historical Archive and Report Database

Lake Solano Daily Operations

Run Date: 4/17/2023
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Elizabeth A. Weaver

Maura D. Corrigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

 _________________________________________ 

 Clerk

May 27, 2009 

p0518 

Order 

 

May 27, 2009 

138147 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 138147 

COA: 280986 

Jackson CC: 06-004562-FH 

JERRY EDWARD HILL, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the December 23, 2008 

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
§ 678.620 What is the one-stop operator's role? ( a ) At a minimum, the one-stop operator must coordinate the service delivery of required one-stop partners and service providers. Local WDBs may establish additional roles of one-stop operator, including, but not limited to: Coordinating service providers across the one-stop delivery system, being the primary provider of services within the center, providing some of the services within the center, or coordinating service delivery in a multi-center area, which may include affiliated sites. The competition for a one-stop operator must clearly articulate the role of the one-stop operator.
( b ) ( 1 ) Subject to paragraph (b)(2) of this section, a one-stop operator may not perform the following functions: Convene system stakeholders to assist in the development of the local plan; prepare and submit local plans (as required under sec. 107 of WIOA); be responsible for oversight of itself; manage or significantly participate in the competitive selection process for one-stop operators; select or terminate one-stop operators, career services, and youth providers; negotiate local performance accountability measures; or develop and submit budget for activities of the Local WDB in the local area.
( 2 ) An entity serving as a one-stop operator, that also serves a different role within the one-stop delivery system, may perform some or all of these functions when it is acting in its other role, if it has established sufficient firewalls and conflict of interest policies and procedures. The policies and procedures must conform to the specifications in § 679.430 of this chapter for demonstrating internal controls and preventing conflict of interest.
### SUBCHAPTER VI—PROTECTION OF NATIONAL SECURITY INFORMATION AND ACTIVITIES
Exhibit 23.1Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting FirmWe consent to the incorporation byreference in the Registration Statements (Form S-8 No.333-131647) of Tronox Incorporated and (Form S-4/A No. 333-133757-09)of Tronox Worldwide LLC andTronox Finance Corp. and in the related Prospectuses of our reportsdated March 13, 2008, withrespect to the consolidated and combined financial statements and schedule of Tronox Incorporatedand the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting of Tronox Incorporated, includedin this Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31, 2007./s/ ERNST& YOUNG LLP Oklahoma City, Oklahoma
### §§812 to 814. Transferred

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section 812, acts May 24, 1924, ch. 182, §18, formerly §11, 43 Stat. 142; renumbered §18 and amended Feb. 23, 1931, ch. 276, §7, 46 Stat. 1209, which related to fees, accounting, and stamps, was transferred to section 4224 of this title.

Section 813, act May 24, 1924, ch. 182, §35, as added Feb. 23, 1931, ch. 276, §7, 46 Stat. 1216 and amended, which related to establishment of fiscal districts and district accounting and disbursing offices, was transferred to section 4225 of this title.

Section 814, act May 24, 1924, ch. 182, §36, as added Feb. 23, 1931, ch. 276, §7, 46 Stat. 1216, which related to disposition of fees and official monies from diplomatic missions, consular offices and district accounting and disbursing offices, was transferred to section 4226 of this title.
(No. 74-CC-352

#### Zion Nursing Home Inc., Claimant, *vs.*State of Illinois, Department of Mental Health, Respondent.

*Opinion filed March 25, 1974.*

Zion Nursing Home, Inc., Claimant, pro se.

William J. Scott, Attorney General; Edward L. S. Arkema, Jr., Assistant Attorney General, for Respondent.

Per Curiam.
#### Mary O’Connell, Individually and as Administratrix of the Estate of Edward J. O’Connell, Deceased, Respondent, v. Paul N. Weiner, Appellant.

No opinion. Present — Martin, P. J., Townley, Untermyer, Dore and Callahan, JJ.
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 32.1

                                  CERTIFICATION

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Cellcom I Corp. on Form 10-QSB for
the period ending June 30, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Jay H. Brown, Chief Executive
Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant
to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

     1. The Report 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 result of operations of the Company.


Date: March 16, 2007                    By: /s/ Jay H. Brown
                                            ------------------------------------
                                            Jay H. Brown
                                            Chief Executive Officer


                                       17
#### Ernest Freund, Appellant, v. Laenderbank Wien Aktiengesellschaft, Respondent.

No opinion. Present—Martin, P. J., Townley, Dore, Cohn and Callahan, JJ.
### §6034. United States opposition to Cuban membership in international financial institutions

#### (a) Continued opposition to Cuban membership in international financial institutions

#### (1) In general

Except as provided in paragraph (2), the Secretary of the Treasury shall instruct the United States executive director of each international financial institution to use the voice and vote of the United States to oppose the admission of Cuba as a member of such institution until the President submits a determination under section 6063(c)(3) of this title that a democratically elected government in Cuba is in power.

#### (2) Transition government

Once the President submits a determination under section 6063(c)(1) of this title that a transition government in Cuba is in power—

(A) the President is encouraged to take steps to support the processing of Cuba's application for membership in any international financial institution, subject to the membership taking effect after a democratically elected government in Cuba is in power, and

(B) the Secretary of the Treasury is authorized to instruct the United States executive director of each international financial institution to support loans or other assistance to Cuba only to the extent that such loans or assistance contribute to a stable foundation for a democratically elected government in Cuba.

#### (b) Reduction in United States payments to international financial institutions

If any international financial institution approves a loan or other assistance to the Cuban Government over the opposition of the United States, then the Secretary of the Treasury shall withhold from payment to such institution an amount equal to the amount of the loan or other assistance, with respect to either of the following types of payment:

(1) The paid-in portion of the increase in capital stock of the institution.

(2) The callable portion of the increase in capital stock of the institution.

#### (c) "International financial institution" defined

For purposes of this section, the term "international financial institution" means the International Monetary Fund, the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development, the International Development Association, the International Finance Corporation, the Multilateral Investment Guaranty Agency, and the Inter-American Development Bank.

(Pub. L. 104–114, title I, §104, Mar. 12, 1996, 110 Stat. 794.)
I 

114TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 4282 

To clarify the meaning of the term ‘‘prevailing party’’ with regard to the 

recovery of attorneys’ fees. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

DECEMBER 17, 2015 

Mr. CARTWRIGHT introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

To clarify the meaning of the term ‘‘prevailing party’’ with 

regard to the recovery of attorneys’ fees. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Catalyst Theory Res5 toration Act of 2015’’. 

6 SEC. 2. IN GENERAL. 

7 (a) MEANING OF PREVAILING PARTY.—In deter8 mining the meaning of any Act of Congress, or of any 

9 ruling, regulation, or interpretation of the various depart10 ments and agencies of the United States, or of any judicial 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 4282 IH

1 or administrative rule, which provides for recovery of at2 torneys’ fees, the term ‘‘prevailing party’’ shall include a 

3 party whose pursuit of a nonfrivolous claim or defense was 

4 a catalyst for a voluntary or unilateral change in position 

5 by the opposing party that provides any significant part 

6 of the relief sought. 

7 (b) RULE OF CONSTRUCTION.—This section shall not 

8 alter special eligibility criteria established for prevailing 

9 defendants nor alter any specific eligibility criteria con10 tained in any statute that expressly limits or qualifies who 

11 may be considered a prevailing party for purposes of that 

12 statute. 

Æ 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS