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

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                          32,959
<SECURITIES>                                   653,677
<RECEIVABLES>                                  174,216
<ALLOWANCES>                                    75,000
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,493,632
<PP&E>                                       2,128,692
<DEPRECIATION>                                 790,443
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               3,656,750
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          990,605
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                  2,800,000
<COMMON>                                           715
<OTHER-SE>                                   8,457,901
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 3,656,750
<SALES>                                         93,402
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                93,402
<CGS>                                          414,599
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,729,560
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              16,363
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (1,670,228)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   120,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (1,550,228)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (1,550,228)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.31)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.31)


</TABLE>
97277-7

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE 15TH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT

IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA

ANGELA HANNA,

 Plaintiff,

vs.

DESIGNER BRANDS, INC.,

 Defendant.

____________________________/

CIRCUIT CIVIL DIVISION

CASE NO. 50-2020-CA-006283-XXXX-MB

DEFENDANT, DESIGNER BRANDS, INC.’S, NOTICE OF FILING 

NOTICE OF REMOVAL

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that a Notice of Removal in the above-styled cause of action was 

duly filed with the Clerk of the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida on 

August 26th, 2020. A true and correct copy of the Notice of Removal is attached hereto as Exhibit 

“A” and is being filed herewith pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§1332 and 1441(b), which provides that upon 

removal “the state court shall proceed no further unless and until the case is remanded.” 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

WE HEREBY CERTIFY that a copy hereof has been electronically served via Florida 

ePortal to: Frances Faccidomo, Esquire, ffaccidomo@wolfsonlawfirm.com; 

eservice3@wolfsonlawfirm.com; on this 26th day of August, 2020. 

/s/ William M. Bromley 

William M. Bromley, Esquire

Florida Bar No. 123502

WICKER SMITH O'HARA MCCOY & FORD, P.A.

Attorneys for Designer Brands, Inc. 

515 E. Las Olas Boulevard

SunTrust Center, Suite 1400

Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33301

Phone: (954) 847-4800

Fax: (954) 760-9353

ftlcrtpleadings@wickersmith.com

EXHIBIT D 

Case 0:20-cv-61744-XXXX Document 1-4 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/26/2020 Page 1 of 1
§ 10002.7 Changes following public announcement. ( a ) The time or place of a meeting may be changed following the public announcement described in § 10002.4. The Council must publicly announce such change at the earliest practicable time.
( b ) The subject matter of a meeting or the determination of the Council to open or close a meeting, or a portion thereof, to the public may be changed following public announcement only if: ( 1 ) A majority of all members determine by recorded vote that Council business so requires and that no earlier announcement of the change was possible; and
( 2 ) The Council publicly announces such change and the vote of each member thereon at the earliest practicable time.
§ 1400.202 Waivers and exceptions to preappointment investigative requirements. ( a ) *Waivers* — ( 1 ) *General.* A waiver of the preappointment investigative requirement contained in section 3(b) of Executive Order 10450 for employment in a national security position may be made only for a limited period: ( i ) In case of emergency if the head of the department or agency concerned finds that such action is necessary in the national interest; and
( ii ) When such finding is made a part of the records of the department or agency.
( 2 ) *Specific waiver requirements.* ( i ) The preappointment investigative requirement may not be waived for appointment to positions designated Special-Sensitive under this part.
( ii ) For positions designated Critical-Sensitive under this part, the records of the department or agency required by paragraph (a)(1) of this section must document the decision as follows: ( A ) The nature of the emergency which necessitates an appointment prior to completion of the investigation and adjudication process;
( B ) A record demonstrating the successful initiation of the required investigation based on a completed questionnaire; and
( C ) A record of the Federal Bureau of Investigation fingerprint check portion of the required investigation supporting a preappointment waiver.
( iii ) When a waiver for a position designated Noncritical-Sensitive is granted under this part, the agency head will determine documentary requirements needed to support the waiver decision. In these cases, the agency must favorably evaluate the completed questionnaire and expedite the submission of the request for an investigation at the appropriate level.
( iv ) When waiving the preappointment investigation requirements, the applicant must be notified that the preappointment decision was made based on limited information, and that the ultimate appointment decision depends upon favorable completion and adjudication of the full investigative results.
( b ) *Exceptions to investigative requirements.* Pursuant to section 3(a) of E.O. 10450, upon request of an agency head, the Office of Personnel Management may, in its discretion, authorize such less investigation as may meet the requirement of national security with respect to: ( 1 ) Positions that are intermittent, seasonal, per diem, or temporary, not to exceed an aggregate of 180 days in either a single continuous appointment or series of appointments; or
( 2 ) Positions filled by aliens employed outside the United States.
( c ) *Applicability.* This section does not apply to: ( 1 ) Investigations, waivers of investigative requirements, and exceptions from investigative requirements under 42 U.S.C. 2165(b);
( 2 ) Investigative requirements for eligibility for access to classified information under Executive Order 12968; or
( 3 ) Standards for temporary eligibility for access to classified information established by the Security Executive Agent pursuant to section 3.3(a)(2) of Executive Order 12968.
#### § 18.42 Direct exportation.

At the port of exportation, the container or road vehicle, the merchandise, and the TIR carnet shall be made available to the port director. Any required Electronic Export Information (EEI) shall be filed in accordance with the applicable regulations of the Bureau of the Census (15 CFR part 30). The port director shall examine the merchandise to the extent he believes necessary to determine that the carnet has been properly completed and shall verify that the container or road vehicle has the necessary certificate of approval or approval plate intact and is in satisfactory condition. After completion of any required examination and supervision of loading, the port director will seal the container or road vehicle with customs seals and ascertain that the TIR plates are properly affixed and sealed. See § 18.4(d). In the case of heavy or bulky goods moving under cover of a TIR carnet, the port director shall cause a customs seal or label, as appropriate, to be affixed. He shall also remove two vouchers from the carnet, execute the appropriate counterfoils, and return the carnet to the carrier or agent to accompany the merchandise.
### §1912. Volunteer chaplain services

(a) The Chief of the Capitol Police shall have authority to accept unpaid religious chaplain services, whereby volunteers from multiple faiths, authorized by their respective religious endorsing agency or organization, may advise, administer, and perform spiritual care and religious guidance for Capitol Police employees.

(b) Chaplains shall not be required to perform any rite, ritual, or ceremony, and employees shall not be required to receive such rite, ritual, or ceremony, if doing so would compromise the conscience, moral principles, or religious beliefs of such chaplain or employees or the chaplain's endorsing agency or organization.

(c) Effective Date.—This section shall apply with respect to fiscal year 2023 and each succeeding fiscal year.

(Pub. L. 117–328, div. I, title I, §120, Dec. 29, 2022, 136 Stat. 4926.)
NRC NEWS

 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

 Office of Public Affairs, Region IV

 611 Ryan Plaza Drive - Suite 400

 Arlington TX 76011-4005

No. IV-03-011 March 28, 2003

CONTACT: Victor Dricks E-mail: opa4@nrc.gov

Phone: 817-860-8128

 

NRC TO MEET WITH ENTERGY OPERATIONS, INC. TO DISCUSS

 PERFORMANCE OF WATERFORD 3 NUCLEAR POWER PLANT

 

 Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff will meet with representatives of Entergy Operations,

Inc. on Tuesday, April 1, to discuss the results of the agency’s annual assessment of safety

performance at the Waterford 3 Nuclear Power Plant. The facility is located near Taft, Louisiana, and

operated by Entergy. 

 The meeting, which will be open to the public for observation, is scheduled to begin at 6:30

p.m. at the St. Charles Parish Courthouse Council chambers, 15045 River Road, Hahnville.

Before the session is adjourned, NRC staff will be available to answer questions from the

public on the safety performance of the plant, as well as the role of the NRC in ensuring safe plant

operation.

 The performance period to be discussed is January 1 to December 31, 2002. In addition, NRC

staff will provide an overview of how the agency’s Reactor Oversight Process works.

 A letter sent from the NRC Region IV Office to representatives of Entergy Operations, Inc., 

addresses the performance of the plant during the period and will serve as the basis for the meeting

discussion. It is available on the NRC web site at: 

http://www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/LETTERS/wat_2002q4.pdf

“Overall, Waterford 3 operated in a manner that preserved public health and safety and fully

met all cornerstone objectives,” the letter says. However, “the staff has identified a substantive

crosscutting issue in the area of problem identification and resolution.” 

“Specifically, although some long-standing degraded conditions were identified by your staff

during this assessment period, the extent of condition was not always fully addressed,” the letter says. 

“Also, in some cases, symptomatic conditions existed for extended periods of time before the causes

were identified and corrected, and some degraded conditions were not effectively evaluated and

corrected.” In response, NRC plans to closely monitor the effectiveness of the licensee’s actions

within this area.
In addition, the letter notes: “As you are aware, since the terrorist attacks of September 11,

2001, the NRC has issued several Orders and threat advisories to enhance security capabilities and

improve guard force readiness. We have conducted inspections to review your implementation of

these requirements and have monitored your actions in response to changing threat conditions. For

calendar year 2003, we plan to continue these inspections and conduct portions of the security baseline

inspection program, as well as perform additional inspections to evaluate your compliance with new

requirements that may be ordered.”

Current performance information for Waterford 3 is available on the NRC web site at:

http://www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/WAT3/wat3_chart.html

###
Cite as 2017 Ark. App. 566

ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS

DIVISION II 

No. CR-17-45 

CRAIG ALLEN PLEDGER

APPELLANT

V.

STATE OF ARKANSAS

APPELLEE

Opinion Delivered: November 1, 2017

APPEAL FROM THE FRANKLIN

COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT, 

NORTHERN DISTRICT 

[NO. 24OCR-16-16] 

HONORABLE WILLIAM M. 

PEARSON, JUDGE 

AFFIRMED

RITA W. GRUBER, Chief Judge

A jury found appellant, Craig Allen Pledger, guilty of commercial burglary, breaking 

or entering, and theft of property. His sole point on appeal is that the circuit court abused 

its discretion in denying his motion in limine and ruling that the State could impeach him 

with his prior felony conviction for failing to register as a sex offender. We hold that 

appellant’s argument is not preserved for appellate review, and therefore we affirm his 

conviction. 

At the close of the State’s case, appellant’s counsel made a motion in limine to 

prohibit the State from introducing a prior conviction for failing to register as a sex offender. 

The State argued that the conviction was admissible as a crime of “dishonesty or false 

statement” under Arkansas Rule of Evidence 609(a)(2) for the purpose of impeaching 

appellant’s credibility. The court found that the conviction went “to credibility” and was 
Cite as 2017 Ark. App. 566

2 

admissible for impeachment purposes under Rule 609, and it denied appellant’s motion.1

 

Appellant did not take the stand, and therefore the evidence was not admitted to impeach 

him.

On appeal, appellant contends that the trial court erred in finding that failing to 

register as a sex offender constitutes a conviction regarding “dishonesty or false statement” 

pursuant to Rule 609(a)(2). He contends that he did not testify at trial because of the court’s 

erroneous ruling. We do not address appellant’s argument because the point on appeal is 

not preserved. Our supreme court has held that in order to raise and preserve for review a 

claim of improper impeachment with a prior conviction, a defendant must testify. Harris v. 

State, 322 Ark. 167, 171–72, 907 S.W.2d 729, 731–32 (1995); Smith v. State, 300 Ark. 330, 

336–37, 778 S.W.3d 947, 950 (1989); see also Vance v. State, 2011 Ark. App. 231. That 

precedent controls our decision in this case. Consequently, we affirm appellant’s conviction.

Affirmed. 

HIXSON AND MURPHY, JJ., agree. 

Lisa-Marie Norris, for appellant.

Leslie Rutledge, Att’y Gen., by: Vada Berger, Ass’t Att’y Gen., for appellee. 

 1

Although the State’s argument for allowing the conviction was pursuant to Rule 

609(a)(2), we cannot tell from the court’s oral ruling whether it found the conviction to be 

admissible under 609(a)(1), (a)(2), or both.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 22-0739

CHARLES HENRY PINNER,

Petitioner and Appellant, 

v. 

STATE OF MONTANA,

Respondent and Appellee.

ORDER

Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, 

and good cause appearing,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension 

of time to and including March 29, 2024, within which to prepare, file, 

and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

February 20 2024

02/20/2024

Case Number: DA 22-0739
NRC NEWS

UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

OFFICE OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS, REGION II

61 Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta GA 30303

Web Site: www.nrc.gov

No. II-03-001 January 15, 2003

CONTACT: Ken Clark (404)562-4416 E-mail: opa2@nrc.gov

Roger Hannah (404)562-4417

NRC STAFF TO HOLD PUBLIC MEETING TO DISCUSS RECENT EXTRA

INSPECTION OF OCONEE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT

Officials of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission will meet with Duke Energy Corporation

officials at 1:00 p.m. Thursday, January 23, in the World of Energy Center, 7800 Rochester Highway,

in Seneca, South Carolina. The purpose of the meeting is to discuss the results of an NRC

supplemental inspection performed at the Oconee nuclear plant near Seneca to assess the company’s

corrective actions associated with inadequate reactor building containment closure procedures and the

unavailability of an emergency feedwater pump. 

The NRC’s inspection was completed in early November and included a thorough review of the

issues and the plant staff’s response, evaluation and corrective actions. The inspection report was

issued in early December. 

The meeting is between the NRC and Duke Energy, but is open to observation by interested

members of the public. NRC officials will also be available prior to its conclusion to answer any

questions observers may have.

During the fall 2000 refueling outage of Oconee Unit 1, the NRC identified that if certain

accident situations occurred while the reactor building containment was open, operators would not

have had adequate instructions or procedures to ensure the containment was closed, and that finding

was designated as White. In addition, there was a White performance indicator at the plant related to

the unavailability of an emergency feedwater pump. Under its safety significance determination

process, NRC officials classify certain conditions at nuclear power plants as being one of four colors

which delineate increasing levels of safety significance, progressing from green to white to yellow to

red. The White inspection finding means that particular issue was of low to moderate safety

significance, and the White performance indicator indicates that performance was outside of the

expected range but still met the safety objectives.

Duke Energy has taken steps to address both issues and the NRC staff is satisfied with the steps

the company has taken. Both the supplemental inspection and public meeting are requirements of the

NRC oversight program based on the plant’s performance level.

###
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Postal Service

# AGENCY:

                        Postal ServiceTM.                    

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.

# DATES:

*Date of required notice:*                         December 17, 2018.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Elizabeth Reed, 202-268-3179.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    The United States Postal Service® hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on December 11, 2018, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a                     *USPS Request to Add Priority Mail Contract 491 to Competitive Product List.*                     Documents are available at                     *www.prc.gov,*                     Docket Nos. MC2019-42, CP2019-45.                

Elizabeth Reed,

Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.

[FR Doc. 2018-27188 Filed 12-14-18; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
### §903. Field offices

(a) The Secretary of Labor shall establish and operate such field offices as may be necessary to assist miners and survivors of miners in the filing and processing of claims under this subchapter. Such field offices shall, to the extent feasible, be reasonably accessible to such miners and survivors. The Secretary, in connection with the establishment and operation of field offices, may enter into arrangements with other Federal departments and agencies, and with State agencies, for the use of existing facilities operated by such departments and agencies. Where the establishment of separate facilities is not feasible the Secretary may enter into such arrangements as he deems necessary with the heads of Federal departments, agencies, and instrumentalities and with State agencies for the use of existing facilities and personnel under their control.

(b) There are authorized to be appropriated for the purposes of subsection (a) such sums as may be necessary.

(Pub. L. 95–239, §18, Mar. 1, 1978, 92 Stat. 105.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section was enacted as part of the Black Lung Benefits Reform Act of 1977, and not as part of the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977 which comprises this chapter or the Black Lung Benefits Act which comprises this subchapter.

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

#### Effective Date

Section effective Mar. 1, 1978, see section 20(a) of Pub. L. 95–239, set out as an Effective Date of 1978 Amendment note under section 901 of this title.
§ 10001.5 Administrative appeals. ( a ) *Appeal procedures.* ( 1 ) You may appeal any decision by the Council to deny, in whole or in part, your request under § 10001.3 no later than 60 days after the decision is rendered.
( 2 ) Your appeal must be in writing, sent to the General Counsel at the address specified in § 10001.3(b) and contain the following information: ( i ) Your name;
( ii ) Description of the record(s) at issue;
( iii ) The system of records in which the record(s) is contained;
( iv ) A statement of why your request should be granted.
( 3 ) The General Counsel shall determine whether to uphold or reverse the initial determination within 30 working days of our receipt of your appeal. The General Counsel shall notify you of his or her decision, including a brief statement of the reasons for the decision, in writing. The General Counsel's decision will be the final action of the Council.
( b ) *Statement of disagreement.* If your appeal of our determination related to your request for amendment or correction is denied in whole or in part, you may file a Statement of Disagreement that states the basis for your disagreement with the denial. Statements of Disagreement must be concise and must clearly identify each part of any record that is disputed. The Privacy Act Officer will place your Statement of Disagreement in the system of records in which the disputed record is maintained and shall mark the disputed record to indicate that a Statement of Disagreement has been filed and where it may be found.
( c ) *Notification of amendment, correction, or disagreement.* Within 30 working days of the amendment or correction of a record, the Privacy Act Officer shall notify all persons, organizations, or agencies to which the Council previously disclosed the record, if an accounting of that disclosure was made, that the record has been corrected or amended. If you filed a Statement of Disagreement, the Privacy Act Officer shall append a copy of it to the disputed record whenever it is disclosed and also may append a concise statement of its reason(s) for denying the request to amend or correct the record.