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

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND> This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from
the Financial Statements of Tice Technology, Inc. and is qualified in its
entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                         MAR-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                            JUL-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                              SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                      1,077,740
<SECURITIES>                                        0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  56,875
<ALLOWANCES>                                        0
<INVENTORY>                                   513,283
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            1,663,295
<PP&E>                                        836,088
<DEPRECIATION>                                600,564
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              2,137,444
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                         346,457
<BONDS>                                     1,343,469
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                               0
<PREFERRED>                                         0
<COMMON>                                      106,119
<OTHER-SE>                                    341,399
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                2,137,444
<SALES>                                        66,095
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               87,687
<CGS>                                         122,057
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                 122,057
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                              217,876
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             31,511
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             (287,145)
<INCOME-TAX>                                    2,159
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                         (287,145)
<DISCONTINUED>                                      0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                     0
<CHANGES>                                           0
<NET-INCOME>                                (289,304)
<EPS-BASIC>                                    (0.03)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (0.03)


</TABLE>
### §3742. Transferred

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section 3742 was editorially reclassified as section 10142 of Title 34, Crime Control and Law Enforcement.

#### Prior Provisions

For prior sections 3742 of this title, see note set out preceding section 3741 of this title.
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING HEARING ON MOTION TO QUASH OR FOR A PROTECTIVE ORDER 

[CASE NO. C 08-04692 MMC (JL)] 

1

Daniel Feinberg – CA State Bar No. 135983 

Nina Wasow – CA State Bar No. 242047 

LEWIS, FEINBERG, LEE, RENAKER & JACKSON, P.C. 

1330 Broadway, Suite 1800 

Oakland, CA 94612 

Telephone: (510) 839-6824 

Facsimile: (510) 839-7839 

Email: dfeinberg@lewisfeinberg.com 

Email: nwasow@lewisfeinberg.com 

Attorneys for Plaintiff

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION 

GORDON ERSPAMER, 

 Plaintiff, 

 vs. 

MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP LONG 

TERM DISABILITY PLAN, 

 Defendant. 

 .

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

Case No. C 08-04692 MMC (JL) 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] 

ORDER REGARDING HEARING ON 

PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO QUASH 

OR FOR A PROTECTIVE ORDER 

AND DISCOVERY CUT-OFF

 WHEREAS, counsel for Plaintiff are unavailable on July 28, 2010, the date currently set 

for hearing on Plaintiff’s Motion to Quash or for a Protective Order; 

WHEREAS, counsel for Defendant have no objection to postponing the hearing by one 

week, to August 4, 2010; 

 WHEREAS, counsel for Defendant have requested additional time to complete discovery 

and Plaintiff has agreed; 

 IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND REQUESTED by the undersigned counsel that 

Magistrate Judge Larson re-set the hearing on Plaintiff’s Motion to Quash or for a Protective 

Case 3:08-cv-04692-MMC Document 112 Filed 07/27/10 Page 1 of 2 Case3:08-cv-04692-MMC Document111 Filed07/23/10 Page1 of 2
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING HEARING ON MOTION TO QUASH OR FOR A PROTECTIVE ORDER 

[CASE NO. C 08-04692 MMC (JL)] 

2

Order to August 4, 2010, and extend the discovery cut-off from September 17, 2010 to October 

22, 2010. 

Dated: July 23, 2010 LEWIS, FEINBERG, LEE, 

 RENAKER & JACKSON, P.C. 

 By: /s/ Daniel Feinberg _

 Daniel Feinberg 

 Nina Wasow 

 Attorneys for Plaintiff 

Dated: July 23, 2010 GORDON & REES LLP 

 By: __/s/ Tad Devlin________________ 

 Tad Devlin 

 Shannon Ross 

 Attorneys for Defendant 

[PROPOSED] ORDER 

 Pursuant to the stipulation, and for good cause showing, IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: ________________ _______________________________ 

 The Honorable James Larson 

 United States Magistrate Judge 

Case 3:08-cv-04692-MMC Document 112 Filed 07/27/10 Page 2 of 2 Case3:08-cv-04692-MMC Document111 Filed07/23/10 Page2 of 2
#### The People of the State of New York ex rel. Bernard Elm, Appellant, against W. Cecil Johnston, as Director of Dannemora State Hospital, Respondent.

Appeal from an order denying an application for a writ of habeas corpus on the grounds it was without merit. The petitioner in his brief does not question his insanity when he was transferred to Dannemora State Hospital "even though the original petition appears to contest the right of transfer. On this appeal it appears his claim is directed to a right to a jury trial to determine if he is insane at the present time. The maximum of his sentence has not expired and he is being detained by virtue of a valid commitment. His detention at the hospital is subject to the provisions of section 386 of the Correction Law. Order unanimously affirmed. Present — Bergan, P. J., Coon, Gibson, Herlihy and Reynolds, JJ.
### §418a. Voluntary agreements for coverage of Indian tribal council members

#### (a) Purpose of agreement

(1) The Commissioner of Social Security shall, at the request of any Indian tribe, enter into an agreement with such Indian tribe for the purpose of extending the insurance system established by this subchapter to services performed by individuals as members of such Indian tribe's tribal council. Any agreement with an Indian tribe under this section applies to all members of the tribal council, and shall include all services performed by individuals in their capacity as council members.

(2) Notwithstanding section 410(a) of this title, for the purposes of this subchapter, the term "employment" includes any service included under an agreement entered into under this section.

#### (b) Definitions

For the purposes of this section:

(1) The term "member" means, with respect to a tribal council, an individual appointed or elected to serve as a member or the head of the tribal council.

(2) The term "tribal council" means the appointed or elected governing body of a federally recognized Indian tribe.

#### (c) Effective date of agreement

(1) Any agreement under this section shall be effective with respect to services performed after an effective date specified in such agreement, provided that such date may not be earlier than the first day of the next calendar month after the month in which the agreement is executed by both parties.

(2) At the request of the Indian tribe at the time of the agreement, such agreement may apply with respect to services performed before such effective date for which there were timely paid in good faith (and not subsequently refunded) to the Secretary of the Treasury amounts equivalent to the sum of the taxes which would have been imposed by sections 3101 and 3111 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 had such services constituted employment for purposes of chapter 21 of such Code. No agreement under this section may require payment to be made after the effective date specified in such agreement of any taxes with respect to services performed before such effective date.

#### (d) Duration of agreement

No agreement under this section may be terminated on or after the effective date of the agreement.

(Aug. 14, 1935, ch. 531, title II, §218A, as added Pub. L. 115–243, §2(a), Sept. 20, 2018, 132 Stat. 2894.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

The Internal Revenue Code of 1986, referred to in subsec. (c)(2), is classified generally to Title 26, Internal Revenue Code.

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

#### Construction

Nothing in enactment of this section by Pub. L. 115–243 to be construed to affect application of any Federal income tax withholding requirements under Title 26, Internal Revenue Code, see section 2(c) of Pub. L. 115–243, set out as a Construction of 2018 Amendment note under section 3121 of Title 26.
###### Editorial Note on Part 66

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 66 appear at 64 FR 54540, Oct. 7, 1999.

#### § 66.7 Limitation of exemptions.

FOIA does not authorize withholding of information or limit the availability of NED records to the public except as specifically stated in this part. Nor is authority granted to withhold information from Congress.
#### The People of the State of New York, Appellant, v. Charles Trudeau, Respondent.

Motion granted to prosecute appeal on original and five typed copies of judgment roll, original stenographic minutes of trial, five typed copies of appellant’s and respondent’s briefs and case added to May 1962 Calendar.
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2598 Introduced in House (IH)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2598

      To suspend temporarily the duty on steel leaf spring leaves.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 24, 2005

 Mr. Reichert introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
      To suspend temporarily the duty on steel leaf spring leaves.

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

SECTION 1. STEEL LEAF SPRING LEAVES.

    (a) In General.--Subchapter II of chapter 99 of the Harmonized 
Tariff Schedule of the United States is amended by inserting in 
numerical sequence the following new heading:

``      9902.73.21       Leaf spring        Free         No change        No change        On or before 12/  ''.
                         leaves of alloy                                                    31/2009
                         steel of grades
                         SAE5160, SAE5160H
                         or SAE51B60H,
                         each measuring
                         from 132 cm to
                         163 cm in length
                         and approximately
                         10.2 cm in width
                         (provided for in
                         subheading
                         7320.10.60), the
                         foregoing for
                         multi-leaf or
                         taper-leaf
                         construction
                         units, each leaf
                         weighing from
                         40.8 kg to 113.4
                         kg and designed
                         for use in Class
                         7 and 8 trucks
                         only.............

    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or 
after the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
#### Omer Feizi v. Alexander C. Castriotis and Others.

Motion to dismiss appeal denied, with ten dollars costs. Present — Clarke, P. J., Dowling, Smith, Page and Greenbaum, J J.
**AD Economic Evaluation**

Docket No . FAA - 2014 - 0758 Directorate ID : 2013 - SW - 062 - AD Helicopter Model: Kaman Aerospace Corporation Model K- 1200 Helicopters Number of Helicopters (U.S. Operators): 11 Helicopters in the US Registry . Reason : The actions of this AD are intended to detect a crack in the main rotor blades (MRBs), which could lead to failure of the MRB and subsequent loss of control of the helicopter. Costs : Parts per Helicopter $ 2,000 per pair per inspection cycle $15,000 to repair a cracked MRB $495,000 to replace the MRB set Labor per Helicopter ( 160 work - hour x $ 8 5 /work - hour for the MRB inspection) (335 work - hour x $85/work- hour for the MRB repair) (4 work - hour x $85/work hour for the MRB set replacement) $ 13,600 per pair per inspection cyc le $28,475 $340 Other (Explain) Total Cost per Helicopter $ 31,200 per set per inspection cycle $43,470 to repair a cracked MRB $495,340 to replace the MRB set Executive Order 12866 : Could the AD be considered a “significant regulatory action ?” Yes ( ) No (  ) DOT Regulatory

Policies and Procedures : Is the AD significant? Yes ( ) Explain Below No (  ) Regulatory

Flexibility

Act : Will the AD have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities? Yes ( ) No (  ) Project Engineer : Nicholas Faust
#### In the Matter of the Claim of Arthur L. Walker, Jr., Respondent, against American Overseas Airlines, Inc., et al., Appellants. Workmen’s Compensation Board, Respondent.

*975Present — Foster, P. J., Heffernan, Brewster, Deyo and Bergan, JJ.
Editorial Note on Part 40
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 40 appear at 71 FR 34520 and 34521, June 15, 2006.

§ 40.5 Limitations on the use of National Crime Information Center (NCIC) criminal history information. ( a ) *Authorized access.* The FBI's National Crime Information Center (NCIC) criminal history records are law enforcement sensitive and can only be accessed by authorized consular personnel with visa processing responsibilities.
( b ) *Use of information.* NCIC criminal history record information shall be used solely to determine whether or not to issue a visa to an alien or to admit an alien to the United States. All third party requests for access to NCIC criminal history record information shall be referred to the FBI.
( c ) *Confidentiality and protection of records.* To protect applicants' privacy, authorized Department personnel must secure all NCIC criminal history records, automated or otherwise, to prevent access by unauthorized persons. Such criminal history records must be destroyed, deleted or overwritten upon receipt of updated versions.
[67 FR 8478, Feb. 25, 2002]
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                         942,696
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  348,673
<ALLOWANCES>                                  (90,137)
<INVENTORY>                                    171,315
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,543,537
<PP&E>                                       1,008,525
<DEPRECIATION>                               (353,517)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               4,781,392
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        3,375,047
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                     15,500
<COMMON>                                        37,097
<OTHER-SE>                                   1,060,706
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 4,781,392
<SALES>                                        306,954
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               306,954
<CGS>                                          316,948
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,606,630
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              69,859
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (1,356,369)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (1,356,369)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (1,356,369)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.38)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.38)
        

</TABLE>
#### Gloria A. Guerin, Respondent, v. Eric O. Guerin, Appellant.

Motion by appellant to withdraw appeal granted. Cross motion by respondent for a counsel fee for legal services rendered on the appeal, denied. Nolan, P. J., Beldock, Ughetta, Kleinfeld and Christ, JJ., concur.
#### Peggy A. Snyder, an Infant, by Her Guardian ad Litem, Henry Snyder, Plaintiff, v. General Mills, Inc., Appellant, and Becker Market, *733Inc., Respondent. Henry Snyder, Plaintiff, v. General Mills, Inc., Appellant, and Becker Market, Inc., Respondent.

Order unanimously affirmed, with $25 costs and disbursements. Memorandum: The cross claim of defendant, Becker Market, Inc., might be construed as one seeking recovery over based upon breach of warranty as well as negligence. Upon argument of the appeal, however, Becker Market, Inc., in substance has made the claim more definite and certain by a concession that it was not intended to allege a cause of action for recovery over based upon the theory of any breach of warranty by defendant, General Mills, Inc. There remains a claimed right to recover over for certain alleged negligent acts of defendant, General Mills, Inc. Examined in the light of the allegations in the complaint, we find the cross claim to be sufficient. (Appeal from order of Monroe Special Term denying motion by General Mills, Inc., for a dismissal of the cross claim of defendant Becker Market, Inc.) Present — Williams, P. J., Bastow, Goldman, McClusky and Henry, JJ.
#### Stanley Harvey DAVIS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 06-7657.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: April 9, 2007.

Decided: May 7, 2007.

Stanley Harvey Davis, Appellant Pro Se. Rudolf A. Renfer, Jr., Assistant United States Attorney, Michelle T. Fuseyamore, Office of the United States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Before NIEMEYER and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Stanley Harvey Davis appeals the district court’s order granting summary judgment to Defendant and dismissing Davis’ complaint brought under the Federal Tort Claims Act. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. *Davis v. United States,*No. 5:05-ct-00718 (E.D.N.C. Aug. 31, 2006). We grant Davis’ motion for leave to present additional information. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*AFFIRMED.*
### §3796dd–7. Transferred

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section 3796dd–7 was editorially reclassified as section 10388 of Title 34, Crime Control and Law Enforcement.
### §300x–58. Technical assistance and provision of supplies and services in lieu of grant funds

#### (a) Technical assistance

The Secretary shall, without charge to a State receiving a grant under section 300x or 300x–21 of this title, provide to the State (or to any public or nonprofit private entity within the State) technical assistance with respect to the planning, development, and operation of any program or service carried out pursuant to the program involved. The Secretary may provide such technical assistance directly, through contract, or through grants.

#### (b) Provision of supplies and services in lieu of grant funds

#### (1) In general

Upon the request of a State receiving a grant under section 300x or 300x–21 of this title, the Secretary may, subject to paragraph (2), provide supplies, equipment, and services for the purpose of aiding the State in carrying out the program involved and, for such purpose, may detail to the State any officer or employee of the Department of Health and Human Services.

#### (2) Corresponding reduction in payments

With respect to a request described in paragraph (1), the Secretary shall reduce the amount of payments under the program involved to the State by an amount equal to the costs of detailing personnel and the fair market value of any supplies, equipment, or services provided by the Secretary. The Secretary shall, for the payment of expenses incurred in complying with such request, expend the amounts withheld.

(July 1, 1944, ch. 373, title XIX, §1948, as added Pub. L. 102–321, title II, §203(a), July 10, 1992, 106 Stat. 408.)
[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 242 (Friday, December 17, 2004)]
[Notices]
[Page 75599]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-27627]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Surface Transportation Board

[STB Finance Docket No. 34611]


Alabama & Tennessee River Railway, LLC--Lease and Operation 
Exemption--CSX Transportation, Inc.

    Alabama & Tennessee River Railway, LLC (ATN), a noncarrier, has 
filed a verified notice of exemption under 49 CFR 1150.31 to lease from 
CSX Transportation, Inc. (CSXT) and operate approximately 122 miles of 
rail lines in Alabama as follows: (1) Between milepost SG 737.1 of the 
Belt Connecting Track at Birmingham and milepost 0AG 85.2 at 
Guntersville; and (2) the Ivalee Branch, between milepost 0LE 443.0 
near Moragne and milepost 0LE 447.9 at Moragne.
    This transaction is related to STB Finance Docket No. 34615, 
Patrick D. Broe and OmniTRAX, Inc.--Continuance in Control Exemption--
Alabama & Tennessee River Railway, LLC, wherein Patrick D. Broe and 
OmniTRAX, Inc., seek to continue in control of ATN upon ATN's becoming 
a Class III rail carrier.
    ATN certifies that its projected revenues as a result of this 
transaction will not result in ATN becoming a Class II or Class I rail 
carrier. But, because ATN's projected annual revenues will exceed $5 
million, ATN certified to the Board on November 1, 2004, that, on that 
date, it sent the required notice of the transaction to the national 
offices of all labor unions representing employees on the affected 
lines and posted a copy of the notice at the workplace of the employees 
on the affected lines. See 49 CFR 1150.32(e).
    The transaction is expected to be consummated on or shortly after 
December 31, 2004 (which is 60 days or more after ATN's certification 
to the Board that it had complied with the Board's regulation at 49 CFR 
1150.32(e)).
    If the notice contains false or misleading information, the 
exemption is void ab initio. Petitions to revoke the exemption under 49 
U.S.C. 10502(d) may be filed at any time. The filing of a petition to 
revoke will not automatically stay the transaction.
    An original and 10 copies of all pleadings, referring to STB 
Finance Docket No. 34611, must be filed with the Surface Transportation 
Board, 1925 K Street, NW., Washington, DC 20423-0001. In addition, one 
copy of each pleading must be served on Karl Morell, Suite 225, 1455 F 
St., NW., Washington, DC 20005.
    Board decisions and notices are available on our Web site at http://WWW.STB.DOT.GOV.

    Decided: December 9, 2004.
    By the Board, David M. Konschnik, Director, Office of 
Proceedings.
Vernon A. Williams,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 04-27627 Filed 12-16-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-01-P