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

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-28-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-29-1996
<CASH>                                         104,818
<SECURITIES>                                     2,500
<RECEIVABLES>                                    1,865
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                      2,841
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               113,433
<PP&E>                                         260,290
<DEPRECIATION>                                 129,297
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 258,659
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           39,814
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           204
<OTHER-SE>                                     204,996
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   258,659
<SALES>                                        319,315
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               329,488
<CGS>                                           68,668
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  163,835
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 60,306
<INCOME-TAX>                                    22,916
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             37,390
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    37,390
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    $1.84
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    $1.84


</TABLE>
**Exhibit No. 32.2**

**Certification of CFO Pursuant to18 U.S.C. Section 1350,As Adopted Pursuant toSection 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**

In connection withthe Quarterly Report of DRS Technologies, Inc. on Form 10-Q forthe quarter ended September 30, 2005 as filed with the Securities andExchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Richard A. Schneider,Chief Financial Officer of DRS Technologies, Inc., certify, pursuant to 18U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:

(1)         The Report fully complieswith the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and

(2)         Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and result of operations of DRS Technologies, Inc.

| November 9,  2005 | /s/ RICHARD A. SCHNEIDER   |
|------------------------|----------------------------|
|                   | Richard A.  Schneider      |
|                   | *Chief  Financial Officer* |

 

A SIGNED ORIGINAL OF THIS WRITTEN STATEMENT REQUIREDBY SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 HAS BEEN PROVIDEDTO DRS TECHNOLOGIES, INC. AND WILL BE RETAINED BY DRSTECHNOLOGIES, INC. AND FURNISHED TO THE SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSIONOR ITS STAFF UPON REQUEST.

----
#### George C. Harper *vs.*East Side Syndicate.

April 23, 1889.

Res Judicata — Recitals in Foreclosure Decree — Second Mortgagee not a Farty. — T. and M., trustees, were named as mortgagees in two sev- . eral mortgages executed by the same party. A suit brought in the name of third parties, plaintiffs, against the mortgagor as sole defendant, to foreclose the first mortgage, proceeded to judgment. There was no evidence in this case that the plaintiffs in that action had succeeded to the rights of the mortgagees, except a recital in such judgment. *Held,*that the mortgagees, being strangers to the record, are not bound by such recital or foreclosure; and the second mortgage, not appearing to be barred by the statute, is still in force, and a cloud upon the plaintiff’s title to the mortgaged premises, and equity will not, therefore, enforce a contract for the sale thereof in 1ns favor, against unwilling purchasers.

Appeal by plaintiff from a judgment of the district court for Ramsey county, where the action was tried by *Brill,*J.

*C. D. c& Thos. D. O’Brien,*for appellant.

*Merrill é Willett,*for respondent.

Vanderburgh, *J.*

This action is brought to enforce specific performance of a contract for the sale o'f lands against the purchasers. The defence is that the plaintiff is unable to give a good title to the land agreed to be conveyed. He claims title under the Lake Superior & Mississippi Railroad Company, and the latter is admitted to have been the owner; but prior to the date of its conveyance to the plaintiff, the corporation had executed two several mortgages to secure its bonds to a large amount, running to J. Edgar Thompson *382and William G. Moorhead, trustees, covering this and other lands. A suit in equity had been instituted in ike United States circuit court, in which George Philler and Stephen A. Caldwell were plaintiffs, and the'railroad company was sole defendant, to foreclose the mortgage first executed, in which a judgment of foreclosure was entered on March 8, 1877. On March 10th following, the company conveyed the land in question to A. E. Kiefer and Adam Heck, and on the same day Philler and Caldwell also executed to them an instrument releasing the same from the mortgage, and thereafter Kiefer and Heck conveyed to plaintiff. Upon May 1, 1877, the premises were sold in pursuance of the judgment to one Eh awn. The judgment contained a recital that Philler and Caldwell had been appointed trustees in place of Thompson and Moorhead, and this the court.finds to be all the evidence there is that Philler and Caldwell succeeded to the title of Thompson and Moorhead, as trustees. And the second mortgage does not appear to have been foreclosed, satisfied, or barred. Thompson and Moorhead, not being parties to the suit, are not bound by the recitals in the judgment. The plaintiffs are not, therefore, shown to have a good or clear title to the premises, and a court of equity will not compel the purchaser to accept it, and complete the contract.

Judgment affirmed.
### §6105. Closing of Executive departments

An Executive department may not be closed as a mark to the memory of a deceased former official of the United States.

(Pub. L. 89–554, Sept. 6, 1966, 80 Stat. 516.)

| Derivation | U.S. Code | Revised Statutes and Statutes at Large |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | 5 U.S.C. 28. | Mar. 3, 1893, ch. 211, §4, 27 Stat. 715. |

Statutes at Large

Standard changes are made to conform with the definitions applicable and the style of this title as outlined in the preface to the report.
### SUBCHAPTER VII—AIR TRAFFIC CONTROLLERS
#### § 1803.41 Right of further appeal.

A right of further appeal is available to the ISCAP established pursuant to § 5.4 of this Order. Action by that Panel will be the subject of rules to be promulgated by the Information Security Oversight Office (ISOO).
# C_2023256EN.01000601.xml

| 21.7.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 256/6 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

21.7.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 256/6

---

Notice for the attention of the persons subject to the restrictive measures provided for in Council Decision (CFSP) 2020/1999, as amended by Council Decision (CFSP) 2023/1504 and in Council Regulation (EU) 2020/1998, as implemented by Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2023/1499 concerning restrictive measures against serious human rights violations and abuses

(2023/C 256/04)

The following information is brought to the attention of the persons that appear in the Annex to Council Decision (CFSP) 2020/1999 (1), as amended by Council Decision (CFSP) 2023/1504 (2), and in Annex I to Council Regulation (EU) 2020/1998 (3) as implemented by Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2023/1499 (4), concerning restrictive measures against serious human rights violations and abuses.

The Council of the European Union has decided that those persons should be included on the list of natural and legal persons, entities, and bodies subject to restrictive measures provided for in Decision (CFSP) 2020/1999 and Regulation (EU) 2020/1998. The grounds for designations of those persons appear in the relevant entries in those Annexes.

The attention of the persons concerned is drawn to the possibility of making an application to the competent authorities of the relevant Member State(s) as indicated in the websites in Annex II to Regulation (EU) 2020/1998, in order to obtain an authorisation to use frozen funds for basic needs or specific payments (cf. Article 4 of the Regulation).

The persons and entities concerned may submit a request to the Council before 28 July 2023, together with supporting documentation that the decision to include them on the above-mentioned list should be reconsidered, to the following address:

| Council of the European Union |
| --- |
| General Secretariat |
| RELEX.1 |
| Rue de la Loi/Wetstraat 175 |
| 1048 Bruxelles/Brussel |
| BELGIQUE/BELGIË |
| Email: sanctions@consilium.europa.eu |

Council of the European Union

General Secretariat

RELEX.1

Rue de la Loi/Wetstraat 175

1048 Bruxelles/Brussel

BELGIQUE/BELGIË

Email: sanctions@consilium.europa.eu

Any observations received will be taken into account for the purpose of the Council's periodic review, pursuant to Article 10 of Decision (CFSP) 2020/1999.

---

(1)  OJ L 410 I, 7.12.2020, p. 13.

(2)  OJ L 183 I, 20.7.2023, p. 60.

(3)  OJ L 410 I, 7.12.2020, p. 1.

(4)  OJ L 183 I, 20.7.2023, p. 30.

---
### §4304. Responsibilities of the Office of Personnel Management

(a) The Office of Personnel Management shall make technical assistance available to agencies in the development of performance appraisal systems.

(b)(1) The Office shall review each performance appraisal system developed by any agency under this section and determine whether the performance appraisal system meets the requirements of this subchapter.

(2) The Comptroller General shall from time to time review on a selected basis performance appraisal systems established under this subchapter to determine the extent to which any such system meets the requirements of this subchapter and shall periodically report its findings to the Office and to the Congress.

(3) If the Office determines that a system does not meet the requirements of this subchapter (including regulations prescribed under section 4305), the Office shall direct the agency to implement an appropriate system or to correct operations under the system, and any such agency shall take any action so required.

(Pub. L. 89–554, Sept. 6, 1966, 80 Stat. 440; Pub. L. 95–454, title II, §203(a), Oct. 13, 1978, 92 Stat. 1134.)

| Derivation | U.S. Code | Revised Statutes and Statutes at Large |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | 5 U.S.C. 2005. | Sept. 30, 1950, ch. 1123, §6, 64 Stat. 1099. |

Statutes at Large

In subsection (a)(1), the words "corresponding to an efficiency rating of 'good' under the Veterans' Preference Act of 1944, as amended, and under laws superseded by this chapter" in clause (1) of former section 2005 are omitted, but are carried into section 3502.

Standard changes are made to conform with the definitions applicable and the style of this title as outlined in the preface to the report.

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

1978—Pub. L. 95–454 substituted "Responsibilities of the Office of Personnel Management" for "Ratings for performance" in section catchline and in text substituted provisions relating to the responsibilities of the Office of Personnel Management under this subchapter, for provisions relating to ratings for performance.

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

#### Effective Date of 1978 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 95–454 effective 90 days after Oct. 13, 1978, see section 907 of Pub. L. 95–454, set out as a note under section 1101 of this title.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-1720

RODEL R. TURNER, JR.

 Plaintiff – Appellant,

v.

UNITED STATES MARSHALS OFFICE,

 Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of 

Maryland, at Baltimore. Ellen L. Hollander, District Judge. 

(1:14-cv-01486-ELH)

Submitted: November 14, 2014 Decided: December 2, 2014

Before NIEMEYER, GREGORY, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Rodel R. Turner, Jr., Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Rodel R. Turner, Jr., appeals the district court’s 

order dismissing this action alleging that the Defendant 

violated his civil rights by failing to effect service of 

process on a defendant in a separate action. We have reviewed 

the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm 

for the reasons stated by the district court. Turner v. United 

States Marshals Office, No. 1:14-cv-01486-ELH (D. Md. May 9, 

2014). We grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis and 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.

AFFIRMED
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 1 9 - 0 618 STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee,
v. TROY ALLAN NELSON ,

Defendant and Appellant.

ORDER Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an ext ension of time to and including June 5 , 20 20 , within which to prepare, file, and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

April 29 2020

04/29/2020

Case Number: DA 19-0618
§ 1909.10 Final CIA decision. ( a ) Upon receipt of a recommendation by the ARP concerning whether or not to grant access to classified CIA information under this part, the Senior Agency Official may, in his sole discretion, waive the need-to-know requirement and approve such access only if he or she: ( 1 ) Determines in writing that access is consistent with the interests of national security;
( 2 ) Takes appropriate steps to protect classified information from unauthorized disclosure or compromise and ensures that the information is safeguarded in a manner consistent with Executive Order 13526; and,
( 3 ) Limits any access granted to former Presidential or Vice Presidential appointees and designees (or any research associate they select) to the items that the former Presidential or Vice Presidential appointee or designee originated, reviewed, signed, or received while serving in that capacity.
( b ) The Director of the Central Intelligence Agency reserves the authority to make a superseding decision concerning whether or not to waive the need-to-know requirement and to grant access to classified CIA information under this part in any case only if he or she: ( 1 ) Determines in writing that access is consistent with the interests of national security;
( 2 ) Takes appropriate steps to protect classified information from unauthorized disclosure or compromise, and ensures that the information is safeguarded in a manner consistent with Executive Order 13526; and,
( 3 ) Limits any historical access granted to former Presidential or Vice Presidential appointees and designees (or any research associate they select) to the items that the former Presidential or Vice Presidential appointee or designee originated, reviewed, signed, or received while serving in that capacity.
( c ) The Senior Agency Official also may make a determination that a successive request for historical access falls within the scope of an earlier waiver of the “need-to-know” criterion under section 4.4 of the Order, so long as the extant waiver is no more than two years old.
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

April 1, 2014

No. 04-14-00086-CV

IN THE INTEREST OF Y.G.B., A CHILD,

From the 285th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2013-PA-00166

Honorable Charles E. Montemayor, Judge Presiding

O R D E R

On January 21, 2014, the trial court signed an order terminating Appellant’s rights to his 

child Y.G.B. On February 4, 2014, Appellant filed a pro se notice of appeal. On February 7, 

2014, court-appointed counsel Joe K. Bohac also filed a notice of appeal.

On March 26, 2014, Appellant filed a letter asking this court for help with his appeal.

Appellant has court-appointed counsel to assist him with his appeal. Counsel’s contact 

information is as follows:

The Law Office of Joe K. Bohac

111 Soledad Street, Suite 300

San Antonio, Texas 78205

210-308-0600

210-308-0678 (Fax)

joe@bohac.net

_________________________________

Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 1st day of April, 2014.

___________________________________

Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court
FREMONT

CARBON

SWEETWATER

ALBANY

NATRONA

SUBLETTE

LINCOLN

CONVERSE

CROOK

UINTA

LARAMIE

WESTON

PLATTE

GOSHEN

NIOBRARA

§ ̈¦25

§ ̈¦80

§ ̈¦80

§ ̈¦80

§ ̈¦25

§ ̈¦90

Bridger-Teton

Thunder 

Basin

Medicine-Bow

Medicine-Bow

Rawlins

Casper

Rock Springs

Kemmerer

Pinedale

Yellowstone Newcastle

National Park

Lusk

Yoder

Hanna

Baggs

Afton

Hulett

Glendo

Casper

Douglas

Bairoil

Rawlins

Laramie

Superior

Sundance

Saratoga

La Barge Guernsey

Pinedale

Kemmerer

Evanston

Cheyenne

Wheatland

Wamsutter

Cokeville

Chugwater

Big Piney

Newcastle

Torrington

Rock River

Pine Bluffs

Green River

Medicine Bow

Fort Laramie

Elk Mountain

Rock Springs

Grand Encampment

0 25 50 100

Miles

0 25 50 100

Kilometers

Wyoming Sage-Grouse 

Land Use Plan Amendments

o

NO WARRANTY IS MADE BY THE BLM FOR USE OF 

THE DATA FOR PURPOSES NOT INTENDED BY BLM.

LUP Amendments Planning Area

BLM Field Office Boundary

Forest Service Planning Unit Boundary

Parturition Areas

Crucial Severe Winter Relief

Crucial Winter

Crucial Winter/Yearlong

Spring/Summer/Fall

Winter

Winter/Yearlong

Yearlong

Counties

Water

Interstate

State / US Hwy

Cities

Map 3-29: Elk Habitat Locations
## In The Court of Appeals Seventh District of Texas at Amarillo

No. 07 - 20 - 00042 - CV RORY CALHOUN , APPELLANT

V. METROPLEX HOMES , LLC , APPELLEE On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 1

Tarrant County , Texas Trial Court No. 2019 - 008620 - 1 , Honorable Don Pierson , Presiding



### May 5 , 2020 MEMORANDUM OPINION Before QUINN , C.J. , and PARKER and DOSS , JJ. Appellant Rory Calhoun appeals from the trial court ’ s judgment in favor of appellee Metroplex Homes , LLC. Calhoun ’ s brief was originally due on April 6 , 2020 , b ut was not filed. By letter of April 14 , 2020 , we notified Calhoun that the appeal would be di smissed for want of prosecution if his brief was not received by April 24 , 2020 . To date , we have not received a brief , a motion to extend the deadline for filing same , or any further communication from Calhoun.2

Accordingly , we dismiss the appeal for want of pr osecution. 1 T EX . R. A PP . P. 38.8(a)(1). Per Curiam

1 On April 2 , 2020 , Metroplex Homes filed a motion to dismiss the appeal. The motion is rendered moot.
# C_2008022EN.01000201.xml

| 26.1.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 22/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.1.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 22/2

---

Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 6 December 2007 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale Amministrativo Regionale per la Lombardia (Italy) — Federconsumatori, Adiconsum, ADOC, Ercole Pietro Zucca (C-463/04) and Associazione Azionariato Diffuso dell'AEM SpA, Filippo Cuccia, Giacomo Fragapane, Pietro Angelo Puggioni, Annamaria Sanchirico, Sandro Sartorio (C-464/04) v Comune di Milano

(Joined Cases C-463/04 and C-464/04) (1)

1

(Article 56 EC - Free movement of capital - Restrictions - Privatised undertakings - National provision under which the Articles of association of a company limited by shares may confer on the State or a public body holding shares in that company the power to appoint directly one or more directors to the board)

(2008/C 22/02)

Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Tribunale amministrativo regionale per la Lombardia

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicants: Federconsumatori, Adiconsum, ADOC, Ercole Pietro Zucca (C-463/04) and Associazione Azionariato Diffuso dell'AEM SpA, Filippo Cuccia, Giacomo Fragapane, Pietro Angelo Puggioni, Annamaria Sanchirico, Sandro Sartorio (C-464/04),

Applicants:

Defendant: Comune di Milano

Defendant:

Interested parties: AEM SpA (C-463/04 and C-464/04), Edison SpA (C-463/04)

Interested parties

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Tribunale amministrativo regionale per la Lombardia — Interpretation of Article 56 EC — National law allowing public entities to appoint directors or auditors in privatised undertakings — Application by a territorial entity which retains a substantial holding in the privatised undertaking.

Operative part of the judgment

Article 56 EC must be interpreted as precluding a national provision, such as Article 2449 of the Italian Civil Code, under which the Articles of association of a company limited by shares may confer on the State or a public body with a shareholding in that company the power to appoint directly one or more directors which, on its own or, as in the main proceedings, in conjunction with a provision such as Article 4 of Decree Law No 332 of 31 May 1994, which became, after amendment, Law No 474 of 30 July 1994, as amended by Law No 350 of 24 December 2003, which grants that State or public body the right to participate in the election on the basis of lists of the directors it has not appointed directly, is such as to enable that State or public body to obtain a power of control which is disproportionate to its shareholding in that company.

---

(1)  OJ C 249, 14.10.2006.

1

---
§ 822.13 Monitoring. ( a ) A monitoring system shall be installed, maintained, and operated by the permittee on all alluvial valley floors during surface coal mining and reclamation operations and continued until all bonds are released in accordance with Subchapter J of this chapter. The monitoring system shall provide sufficient information to allow the regulatory authority to determine that— ( 1 ) The essential hydrologic functions of alluvial valley floors are being preserved outside the permit area or reestablished within the permit area throughout the mining and reclamation process in accordance with § 822.11;
( 2 ) Farming on lands protected under § 822.12 is not being interrupted, discontinued, or precluded; and
( 3 ) The operation is not causing material damage to the quantity or quality of water in the surface or underground systems that supply alluvial valley floors protected under § 822.12.
( b ) Monitoring shall be conducted at adequate frequencies to indicate long-term trends that could affect compliance with §§ 822.11 and 822.12.
( c ) All monitoring data collected and analyses thereof shall routinely be made available to the regulatory authority.