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

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997             DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997             JUN-30-1996
<CASH>                                         258,250                 140,950
<SECURITIES>                                 2,217,316               2,357,163
<RECEIVABLES>                                  735,608                 627,120
<ALLOWANCES>                                  (167,793)                (27,747)
<INVENTORY>                                          0                       0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0                       0
<PP&E>                                          78,195                  78,195
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (43,885)                (35,885)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               3,077,691               3,139,796
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           39,307                  24,079
<BONDS>                                              0                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0                       0
<PREFERRED>                                     50,511                  50,511
<COMMON>                                       128,307                 128,307
<OTHER-SE>                                   2,859,566               2,936,899
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 3,077,691               3,139,796
<SALES>                                         92,067                  99,358
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                92,067                  99,358
<CGS>                                           84,534                  78,368
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   84,534                  78,468
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0                       0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0                       0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  7,532                  20,990
<INCOME-TAX>                                     1,800                   5,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              5,732                  15,990
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0                       0
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                     5,732                  15,990
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0                       0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0                       0
        

</TABLE>
### §3311. Preference eligibles; examinations; crediting experience

In examinations for the competitive service in which experience is an element of qualification, a preference eligible is entitled to credit—

(1) for service in the armed forces when his employment in a similar vocation to that for which examined was interrupted by the service; and

(2) for all experience material to the position for which examined, including experience gained in religious, civic, welfare, service, and organizational activities, regardless of whether he received pay therefor.

(Pub. L. 89–554, Sept. 6, 1966, 80 Stat. 420.)

| Derivation | U.S. Code | Revised Statutes and Statutes at Large |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | 5 U.S.C. 853. | June 27, 1944, ch. 287, §4, 58 Stat. 388. |

Statutes at Large

The words "for the competitive service" are added after "examinations" for clarity. Application of this section to the excepted service in the executive branch and to the government of the District of Columbia, as provided in former section 858, is carried into section 3320.

In paragraph (1), the words "service in the armed forces" are substituted for "in the military or naval service of the United States" on authority of the Act of July 26, 1947, ch. 343, §305(a), 61 Stat. 508. The word "actual" is omitted as surplusage.

In paragraph (2), the words "material to the position for which examined" are substituted for "valuable" for clarity.

Standard changes are made to conform with the definitions applicable and the style of this title as outlined in the preface to the report.
### §806. Applicability; severability

(a) This chapter shall apply notwithstanding any other provision of law.

(b) If any provision of this chapter or the application of any provision of this chapter to any person or circumstance, is held invalid, the application of such provision to other persons or circumstances, and the remainder of this chapter, shall not be affected thereby.

(Added Pub. L. 104–121, title II, §251, Mar. 29, 1996, 110 Stat. 873.)
### §300320. Undertaking

In this division, the term "undertaking" means a project, activity, or program funded in whole or in part under the direct or indirect jurisdiction of a Federal agency, including—

(1) those carried out by or on behalf of the Federal agency;

(2) those carried out with Federal financial assistance;

(3) those requiring a Federal permit, license, or approval; and

(4) those subject to State or local regulation administered pursuant to a delegation or approval by a Federal agency.

(Pub. L. 113–287, §3, Dec. 19, 2014, 128 Stat. 3191.)

| Revised Section | Source (U.S. Code) | Source (Statutes at Large) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 300320 | 16 U.S.C. 470w(7). | Pub. L. 89–665, title III, §301(7), as added Pub. L. 96–515, title V, §501, Dec. 12, 1980, 94 Stat. 3001; Pub. L. 102–575, title XL, §4019(a)(5), Oct. 30, 1992, 106 Stat. 4764. |

Section
# C_2008142EN.01003802.xml

| 7.6.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 142/38 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.6.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 142/38

---

Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (First Chamber) of 23 April 2008 — Bain and Others v Commission

(Case F-112/05) (1)

1

(Staff case - Officials - Remuneration - Correction coefficients - Transfer of part of remuneration out of the country of employment - Pensions - Default proceedings - Temporal application of the Tribunal's Rules of Procedure - Pay slips - Plea of illegality)

(2008/C 142/71)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicants:
  Neil Bain (Brussels, Belgium), Obhijit Chatterjee (Brussels, Belgium), Richard Fordham (Bergen, Netherlands), Roger Hurst (Bergen, Netherlands), (represented by: N. Lhoëst, lawyer)

Applicants:

Neil Bain

Obhijit Chatterjee

Richard Fordham

Roger Hurst

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: V. Joris and D. Martin, Agents)

Defendant:

Re:

Annulment of the applicants' pay slips for the months of February, March and April 2005, and of all subsequent pay slips, in so far as they apply the allegedly unlawful provisions of Regulation No 723/2004 amending the Staff Regulations of Officials, concerning the transfer of part of remuneration to the official's country of origin (formerly Case T-419/05).

Operative part of the judgment

The Tribunal:

| 1. | Dismisses the action as inadmissible; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action as inadmissible;

| 2. | Orders the parties to bear their own costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders the parties to bear their own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 48 of 25.2.2006, p. 36 (Case originally registered at the Court of First Instance of the European Communities under number T-419/05 and transferred to the European Union Civil Service Tribunal by order of 15 December 2005).

1

---
### §305504. Matching grants to Committee

The Secretary shall provide matching grants to the Committee for its programs related to historic preservation. The Committee shall match the grants in such a manner and with such funds and services as shall be satisfactory to the Secretary, except that not more than $500,000 may be provided to the Committee in any one fiscal year.

(Pub. L. 113–287, §3, Dec. 19, 2014, 128 Stat. 3224.)

| Revised Section | Source (U.S. Code) | Source (Statutes at Large) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 305504 | 16 U.S.C. 470w–5(c). | Pub. L. 89–665, title III, §306(c), Pub. L. 96–515, title V, §501, Dec. 12, 1980, 94 Stat. 3003. |

Section

The word "grant" is substituted for "grants-in-aid" for clarity and consistency in the revised division. See page 48 of H. Rept. 96–1457 (96th Cong., 2d Sess., 1980).
#### § 879.5 Definitions.

As used in this part—

*Reclamation plan* or *State reclamation plan* means a plan that a State or Indian tribe submitted and that we approved under section 405 of SMCRA and part 884 of this chapter.

[73 FR 67641, Nov. 14, 2008]
### §8523. Dissemination of information

(a) When designated by the Secretary of Labor, an agency of the United States shall make available to the appropriate State agency or to the Secretary, as the case may be, such information, including findings in the form and manner prescribed by regulations of the Secretary, as the Secretary considers practicable and necessary for the determination of the entitlement of an individual to compensation under this subchapter.

(b) Subject to correction of errors and omissions as prescribed by regulations of the Secretary, the following are final and conclusive for the purpose of sections 8502(d) and 8503(c) of this title:

(1) Findings by an agency of the United States made in accordance with subsection (a) of this section with respect to—

(A) whether or not an individual has met any condition specified by section 8521(a)(1) of this title;

(B) the periods of Federal service; and

(C) the pay grade of the individual at the time of his latest discharge or release from Federal service.

(2) The schedules of pay and allowances prescribed by the Secretary under section 8521(a)(2) of this title.

(Pub. L. 89–554, Sept. 6, 1966, 80 Stat. 591.)

| Derivation | U.S. Code | Revised Statutes and Statutes at Large |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | 42 U.S.C. 1371(d). | Aug. 28, 1958, Pub. L. 85–848, §3 "Sec. 1511(d)", 72 Stat. 1088. |

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.
**Judgment of the Court of First Instance (Fifth Chamber) of 14 February 2008 – Orsay v OHIM – Jiménez Arellano (O orsay)**

**(Case T-39/04)**

Community trade mark – Opposition procedure – Application for the word and figurative trade mark O orsay – Earlier national word and figurative trade mark D’ORSAY – Ground for refusal – Risk of confusion – Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94

Community trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the Community trade mark – Relative grounds for refusal – Opposition by the proprietor of an earlier identical or similar mark registered for identical or similar goods or services
– Likelihood of confusion with the earlier mark (Council Regulation No 40/94, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paras 49, 52-55)

**Re:**

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | ACTION brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 3 November 2003 (Case R 394/2002-4) concerning an opposition procedure between José Jiménez Arellano S.A. and Orsay GmbH. |

**Information relating to the case**

| | |
| --- | --- |
| Applicant for the Community trade mark: | Orsay GmbH |
| Community trade mark sought: | Word and figurative mark O orsay for goods in Classes 23, 24 and 25 – Application No 1042613 |
| Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: | José Jiménez Arellano SA |
| Mark or sign cited in opposition: | Spanish and Portuguese figurative mark D’ORSAY, for goods primarily in Class 25 |
| Decision of the Opposition Division: | Application for trade mark dismissed for goods (clothing; boots, shoes and slippers; headgear). Opposition dismissed as to the remainder. |
| Decision of the Board of Appeal: | Appeal dismissed |

**Operative part**

The Court:

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 1. | | Dismisses the action; |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 2. | | Orders Orsay GmbH to pay the costs. |
<PAGE>
<PAGE>
                                                    EXHIBIT 12
                          AMOCO COMPANY

         STATEMENT SETTING FORTH COMPUTATION OF RATIO OF
                    EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES
              (millions of dollars, except ratios)

                                                                
                                    Year Ended December 31,
                                     
                              1997     1996     1995     1994     1993
Determination of Income:                                        
 Consolidated earnings                                          
  before income taxes                                           
  and minority interest..   $3,235   $3,351   $2,425   $2,688   $2,427
Fixed charges expensed by                                       
 consolidated companies..      282      251      233      140      193
Adjustments for certain                                         
 companies accounted for                                        
 by the equity method...        50       76       10        7        9
Adjusted earnings plus                                          
 fixed charges...........   $3,567   $3,678   $2,668   $2,835   $2,629
                                                                
Determination of Fixed Charges:                                         
Consolidated interest on                                        
 indebtedness (including                                        
 interest capitalized)...   $  212   $  164   $  152   $  127   $  162
Consolidated rental                                             
 expense representative                                         
 of an interest factor...       84       88       71        7       31
Adjustments for certain                                         
 companies accounted for                                        
 by the equity method....        7        8        6        5        6
Total fixed charges......   $  303   $  260   $  229   $  139   $  199
                                                                
Ratio of earnings to                                            
 fixed charges...........     11.8*    14.2*    11.6*    20.4     13.2
                                                                

_____________
*Based  on  outstanding public debt obligations.  Including  debt
with affiliates, the ratio would have been 5.0 as of December 31,
1997,  5.5  as  of December 31, 1996, and 4.4 as of December  31,
1995.
§ 147.14 Guideline L—Outside activities. ( a ) *The concern.* Involvement in certain types of outside employment or activities is of security concern if it poses a conflict with an individual's security responsibilities and could create an increased risk of unauthorized disclosure of classified information.
( b ) *Conditions that could raise a security concern and may be disqualifying include any service, whether compensated, volunteer, or employment with:* ( 1 ) A foreign country;
( 2 ) Any foreign national;
( 3 ) A representative of any foreign interest;
( 4 ) Any foreign, domestic, or international organization or person engaged in analysis, discussion, or publication of material on intelligence, defense, foreign affairs, or protected technology.
( c ) *Conditions that could mitigate security concerns include:* ( 1 ) Evaluation of the outside employment or activity indicates that it does not pose a conflict with an individual's security responsibilities;
( 2 ) The individual terminates the employment or discontinues the activity upon being notified that it is in conflict with his or her security responsibilities.
Editorial Note on Part 817
Editorial Note: At 82 FR 54999, Nov. 17, 2017, as required by the Congressional Review Act and Public Law 115-5, the Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement removed all amendments to part 817 made effective on Jan. 19, 2017, at 81 FR 93418, Dec. 20, 2016.

§ 817.200 Interpretative rules related to general performance standards. The following interpretations of rules promulgated in part 817 of this chapter have been adopted by the Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement. ( a ) - ( b ) [Reserved]
( c ) Interpretation of § 816.22(e)—Topsoil Removal. ( 1 ) Results of physical and chemical analyses of overburden and topsoil to demonstrate that the resulting soil medium is equal to or more suitable for sustaining revegetation than the available topsoil, provided that trials, and tests are certified by an approved laboratory in accordance with 30 CFR 816.22(e)(1)(ii), may be obtained from any one or a combination of the following sources: ( i ) U.S. Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service published data based on established soil series;
( ii ) U.S. Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service Technical Guides;
( iii ) State agricultural agency, university, Tennessee Valley Authority, Bureau of Land Management or U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service published data based on soil series properties and behavior, or
( iv ) Results of physical and chemical analyses, field site trials, or greenhouse tests of the topsoil and overburden materials (soil series) from the permit area.
( 2 ) If the operator demonstrates through soil survey or other data that the topsoil and unconsolidated material are insufficient and substitute materials will be used, only the substitute materials must be analyzed in accordance with 30 CFR 816.22(e)(1)(i).
( d ) *Interpretation of § 817.133 : Postmining land use.* ( 1 ) The requirements of 30 CFR 784.15(a)(2), for approval of an alternative postmining land use, may be met by requesting approval through the permit revision procedures of 30 CFR 774.13 rather than requesting such approval through the permit application. The original permit application, however, must demonstrate that the land will be returned to its premining land use capability as required by 30 CFR 817.133(a). An application for a permit revision of this type, (i) must be submitted in accordance with the filing deadlines of 30 CFR 774.13, (ii) shall constitute a significant alteration from the mining operations contemplated by the original permit, and (iii) shall be subject to the requirements of 30 CFR part 773 and 775.
( 2 ) [Reserved]
[45 FR 26000, Apr. 16, 1980, as amended at 45 FR 39447, June 10, 1980; 45 FR 64908, Oct. 1, 1980; 45 FR 73946, Nov. 7, 1980; 48 FR 44781, Sept. 30, 1983; 81 FR 93418, Dec. 20, 2016; 82 FR 54999, Nov. 17, 2017]
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

**Certification PursuantTo 18 U.S.C. 1350,As Adopted Pursuant toSection 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**

 

Inconnection with the Annual Report of Cyanotech Corporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-K/Afor the period ended March 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities andExchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Andrew Jacobson,Chief Executive Officer of the Company certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,that:

 

1)      The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o (d)); and

 

2)      The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in allmaterial aspects, the financial condition and results of operations of theCompany.

 
| Date:    September 30, 2008 |     | /s/ Andrew Jacobson                     |
|--------------------------------------------|----------|-----------------------------------------|
|                                       |     | Andrew Jacobson,                        |
|                                       | * * | *President and Chief Executive Officer* |
|                                       | * * | *and Director*                          |

 

----
#### Martin Albert, Respondent, v. Sybil Wender, Appellant.

In an action to recover upon a promissory note alleged to have been indorsed by tin-defendant, in which judgment was entered against her based on a confession alleged to have -been signed by her, the defendant appeals: (I) from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated March 28, 1963, which denied her motion to vacate the judgment; and (2) from so much of an order of said court, made May 7, 1963, as, upon l-eargument, adhered to the original decision. Appeal from order of March 28, 1963 dismissed as academic; that order was superseded by the later order granting reargument. Order of May 7, 1963, insofar as appealed from, reversed, with $10 costs and disbursements to the defendant, and matter remitted to the Special Term for the purpose of taking-proof on the issue of whether defendant’s signature upon the confession was a forgery; and for further proceedings not inconsistent herewith. Defendant contends that she never signed the confession of judgment. A confession may be attacked 'by motion where the basis of the attack is that the signature to the confession is a forgery. If the affidavits are conflicting, proof should he taken and the motion should be decided on the basis of the evidence adduced; a plenary action is not necessary *(King*v. *Shaw,*3 Johns. 142; *Sehomaker*v. *Dean,*201 Pa. 439; *Kaier*v. *O’Brien,*202 Pa. 153; *Feltington*v. *liongetti,*337 111. App. 383; *Livingstone,*v. *Repinan,*169 Ohio St. 109). Beldock, P. <L, Kleinfeld, Christ, Rabin and Hopkins, JJ., concur.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Bridget M. McCormack

,

Chief Justice

David F. Viviano,

Chief Justice Pro Tem

Stephen J. Markman

Brian K. Zahra

Richard H. Bernstein

Elizabeth T. Clement

Megan K. Cavanagh,

Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, 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.

September 18 , 2020 

# Order

Clerk September 18 , 2020

1 6 1 597 (29)

EARL L

. SULLIVAN

,

Plaintiff

- Appell ant

, SC: 161 597

v COA: 352985

MICHIGAN REFORMATORY WARDEN

,

Defendant

- Appell ee

.

_______ ______________________________ _ /

On order of the Chief Justice, the motion of plaintiff

- appellant for reconsideration

of the August 17, 2020 order that administrative ly closed this case is GRANTED. Plaintiff

appellant shall have 28 days from the date of this order to file a motion for the temporary

waiver of fees and a certificate of prisoner account activity for the past twelve months . If

those documents are timely filed, the case will be re

- opened to give plaintiff

- appellant the

opportunity to comply with the requirements of MCL 600.2963 and proceed to a decision

on the merits of his application

.