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

<ARTICLE> UT
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the WICOR,
Inc. FORM 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1996 and is qualified in its
entirety by reference to such financial statements and the related footnotes.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<BOOK-VALUE>                                  PER-BOOK
<TOTAL-NET-UTILITY-PLANT>                      377,335
<OTHER-PROPERTY-AND-INVEST>                     64,073
<TOTAL-CURRENT-ASSETS>                         372,705
<TOTAL-DEFERRED-CHARGES>                       243,539
<OTHER-ASSETS>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,057,652
<COMMON>                                        18,407
<CAPITAL-SURPLUS-PAID-IN>                      224,041
<RETAINED-EARNINGS>                            129,777
<TOTAL-COMMON-STOCKHOLDERS-EQ>                 372,225
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-NET>                           174,713
<SHORT-TERM-NOTES>                              27,000
<LONG-TERM-NOTES-PAYABLE>                      150,000
<COMMERCIAL-PAPER-OBLIGATIONS>                  68,600
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-CURRENT-PORT>                    4,061
<PREFERRED-STOCK-CURRENT>                            0
<CAPITAL-LEASE-OBLIGATIONS>                        342
<LEASES-CURRENT>                                     0
<OTHER-ITEMS-CAPITAL-AND-LIAB>                 410,711
<TOT-CAPITALIZATION-AND-LIAB>                1,057,652
<GROSS-OPERATING-REVENUE>                    1,012,601
<INCOME-TAX-EXPENSE>                            26,705
<OTHER-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                     921,890
<TOTAL-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                     948,595
<OPERATING-INCOME-LOSS>                         64,006
<OTHER-INCOME-NET>                               1,114
<INCOME-BEFORE-INTEREST-EXPEN>                  65,120
<TOTAL-INTEREST-EXPENSE>                        18,349
<NET-INCOME>                                    46,771
<PREFERRED-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                          0
<EARNINGS-AVAILABLE-FOR-COMM>                   46,771
<COMMON-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                        30,485
<TOTAL-INTEREST-ON-BONDS>                          694
<CASH-FLOW-OPERATIONS>                          74,416
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     2.55
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     2.55
        

</TABLE>
#### Joseph W. Littman v. Harry Grossman et al., Doing Business as Grossman & Grossman.

Motion for leave to dispense with printing granted only insofar as to dispense with the printing in the record on appeal of the exhibits, on condition that the originals thereof are filed with the clerk of this court on or before the Wednesday preceding the first day of the term for which the appeal is noticed for argument. Concur — Botein, P. J., Breitel, Stevens, Eager and Noonan, JJ.
THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

13-16-00193-CR

STEFAN KYLE BONIABY

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS

On Appeal from the

180th District Court of Harris County, Texas

Trial Cause No. 144830001010

JUDGMENT

THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, having considered this cause on 

appeal, concludes the appeal should be dismissed. The Court orders the appeal 

DISMISSED in accordance with its opinion.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.

June 9, 2016
##### 



1.
    
    I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Erie Family Life Insurance
Company;2.
    
    Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a
material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made,
in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading
with respect to the period covered by this report;3.
    
    Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information
included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial
condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the
periods presented in this report;4.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing
and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules
13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:
 a.
    
    Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such
disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to
ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its
consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities,
particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;b.
    
    Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls
and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the
effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the
period covered by this report based on such evaluation; andc.
    
    Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal
control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most
recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to
materially affect, the registrants internal control over financial reporting;
and
 5.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most
recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants
auditors and the audit committee of registrants board of directors:
 a.
    
    All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or
operation of internal control over financial reporting, which are reasonably
likely to adversely affect the registrants ability to record, process,
summarize and report financial information; andb.
    
    Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the registrants internal control over
financial reporting.
  /s/ Jeffrey A. LudrofJeffrey A. Ludrof, President & CEO 34
### **CHAPTER 116—NATIONAL BIO AND AGRO-DEFENSE FACILITY**

Sec.
9201.
Definitions.
9202.
National Bio and Agro-Defense Facility.
9203.
Evaluation and research plan.
9204.
Availability of data and congressional briefings.
9205.
Budget and report.
9206.
Effect on other authorities.
#### § 516.57 Purpose.

This subpart delineates the policies, procedures, and responsibilities for reporting and resolving allegations of procurement fraud or irregularities (PFI) within DA. It implements DOD Directive 7050.5. (See appendix D to this part.)
### -81 -80 -79 -78 -77 -76 -75

37 38 39 40


## ★

▲ ▲ ▲ ▲



## ★ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ 

### 500 1000 1500 100 18 12 06 00 08/07 

## NOAA HYSPLIT MODEL 

# Backward trajectory ending at 2300 UTC 07 Aug 07

EDAS Meteorological DataSource★at 38.77 N 77.11 WMeters AGL 

## ★ ■ ■ ■



## ★ ■ ■ ■ ■ 

## ★ ● ● ● ●



## ★ ● ● ● ●
§ 21.325 Do acquisition regulations also apply to DoD grants and agreements? Unless the DoDGARs specify that they apply, policies and procedures in the following acquisition regulations that apply to procurement contracts do not apply to grants, cooperative agreements, technology investment agreements, or to other assistance or nonprocurement awards: ( a ) The Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR)(48 CFR parts 1-53).
( b ) The Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS)(48 CFR parts 201-270).
( c ) DoD Component supplements to the FAR and DFARS.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
 
<ARTICLE> UT
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<BOOK-VALUE>                                  PER-BOOK
<TOTAL-NET-UTILITY-PLANT>                    2,640,423
<OTHER-PROPERTY-AND-INVEST>                    162,464
<TOTAL-CURRENT-ASSETS>                         461,559
<TOTAL-DEFERRED-CHARGES>                       640,154
<OTHER-ASSETS>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               3,904,600
<COMMON>                                             0
<CAPITAL-SURPLUS-PAID-IN>                      829,494
<RETAINED-EARNINGS>                            168,001
<TOTAL-COMMON-STOCKHOLDERS-EQ>                 997,495
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                            3,000
<PREFERRED>                                    221,896<F1>
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-NET>                         1,200,043
<SHORT-TERM-NOTES>                                   0
<LONG-TERM-NOTES-PAYABLE>                            0
<COMMERCIAL-PAPER-OBLIGATIONS>                       0
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-CURRENT-PORT>                  120,000
<PREFERRED-STOCK-CURRENT>                            0
<CAPITAL-LEASE-OBLIGATIONS>                     30,496
<LEASES-CURRENT>                                21,148
<OTHER-ITEMS-CAPITAL-AND-LIAB>               1,310,522
<TOT-CAPITALIZATION-AND-LIAB>                3,904,600
<GROSS-OPERATING-REVENUE>                      878,123
<INCOME-TAX-EXPENSE>                            64,012
<OTHER-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                     649,005
<TOTAL-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                     713,017
<OPERATING-INCOME-LOSS>                        165,106
<OTHER-INCOME-NET>                              18,460
<INCOME-BEFORE-INTEREST-EXPEN>                 183,566
<TOTAL-INTEREST-EXPENSE>                        73,921<F2>
<NET-INCOME>                                   109,645
<PREFERRED-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                      3,020
<EARNINGS-AVAILABLE-FOR-COMM>                  106,625
<COMMON-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                       103,000
<TOTAL-INTEREST-ON-BONDS>                       65,784
<CASH-FLOW-OPERATIONS>                         289,822
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
<FN>
<F1>Includes $11,287 of Preference Stock
<F2>Includes $9,422 of Monthly Income Preferred Securities Dividend Requirements
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
Record of Ex Parte Contacts

Docket No. FAA-2011- Directorate Identifier: 2011-NE-31-AD

With whom outside the FAA has this AD action been discussed (i.e., Design Approval 

Holder, manufacturer, ATA, NBAA, RAA, AOPA, ALPA, GAMA, etc)? (You might need to 

submit a separate record to the Rules Docket. The AD Manual defines “Ex Parte Contacts.”)

ORGANIZATION PERSON 

CONTACTED

DATE RESPONSE

 

Timken

480-606-3010

Cyrus Ghassemi Sept 9, 2011 Concur.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Other/Additional Information:
#### In the Matter of Nathan Willner, Petitioner.

Motion for an order granting petitioner leave to file his application for admission to the Bar of the State of New York, *de novo,*denied. Concur—Botein, P. J., Breitel, Rabin, Valente and McNally, JJ.
EATON CORPORATION
THIRD QUARTER 2008 REPORT ON FORM 10-Q
ITEM 6
EXHIBIT 12
RATIO OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES
 Nine monthsendedSeptember 30,
    
    
    Year ended December 312008
    
    
    2007
    
    
    2006
    
    
    2005
    
    
    2004
    
    
    2003Income from continuing operations
before income taxes
    
    $
    994
    
    
    $
    1,041
    
    
    $
    969
    
    
    $
    964
    
    
    $
    749
    
    
    $
    463AdjustmentsMinority interest in consolidated
subsidiaries
    
    
    10
    
    
    
    14
    
    
    
    10
    
    
    
    5
    
    
    
    7
    
    
    
    12(Income) losses of equity investees
    
    
    (8
    )
    
    
    (6
    )
    
    
    1
    
    
    
    1
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    (3
    )Interest expensed
    
    
    147
    
    
    
    193
    
    
    
    139
    
    
    
    109
    
    
    
    88
    
    
    
    93Amortization of debt issuance costs
    
    
    2
    
    
    
    1
    
    
    
    1
    
    
    
    1
    
    
    
    1
    
    
    
    2Estimated portion of rent expense
representing interest
    
    
    39
    
    
    
    44
    
    
    
    41
    
    
    
    38
    
    
    
    37
    
    
    
    38Amortization of capitalized interest
    
    
    10
    
    
    
    12
    
    
    
    12
    
    
    
    12
    
    
    
    17
    
    
    
    13Distributed income of equity
investees
    
    
    
    
    
    
    1
    
    
    
    1
    
    
    
    4
    
    
    
    3Adjusted income from continuing
operations before income taxes
    
    $
    1,194
    
    
    $
    1,300
    
    
    $
    1,174
    
    
    $
    1,134
    
    
    $
    902
    
    
    $
    618Fixed chargesInterest expensed
    
    $
    147
    
    
    $
    193
    
    
    $
    139
    
    
    $
    109
    
    
    $
    88
    
    
    $
    93Interest capitalized
    
    
    10
    
    
    
    14
    
    
    
    14
    
    
    
    13
    
    
    
    7
    
    
    
    7Amortization of debt issuance costs
    
    
    2
    
    
    
    1
    
    
    
    1
    
    
    
    1
    
    
    
    1
    
    
    
    2Estimated portion of rent expense
representing interest
    
    
    39
    
    
    
    44
    
    
    
    41
    
    
    
    38
    
    
    
    37
    
    
    
    38Total fixed charges
    
    $
    198
    
    
    $
    252
    
    
    $
    195
    
    
    $
    161
    
    
    $
    133
    
    
    $
    140Ratio of earnings to fixed charges
    
    
    6.03
    
    
    
    5.16
    
    
    
    6.02
    
    
    
    7.04
    
    
    
    6.78
    
    
    
    4.41
 Page 27
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

EASTERN DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

JAMES E. FRANKS,

Petitioner :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 192 EAL 2017

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from

the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 8th day of August, 2017

, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is

DENIED

.
steam_record - Re: Request for extension for Dayton Power and Light, JM Stuart Station for 

USEPA ICR received on June 18, 2010 

 

Greetings, 

This e-mail is a confirmation that your extension request for the steam electric effluent 

guidelines questionnaire was received. Extension requests will be evaluated on a case-by-case 

basis. Please be aware that submittal of an extension request to EPA does not alter the due date

of your questionnaire unless and until EPA agrees to the extension and establishes a new date.

Sincerely, 

-----"McCann, Harry" <Harry.McCann@DPLINC.com> wrote: ----- 

To: Jezebele Alicea/DC/USEPA/US@EPA 

From: "McCann, Harry" <Harry.McCann@DPLINC.com> 

From: <Alicea.Jezebele@epamail.epa.gov>

To: "McCann, Harry" <Harry.McCann@DPLINC.com>

Date: 7/14/2010 6:08 AM

Subject: Re: Request for extension for Dayton Power and Light, JM Stuart Station for USEPA 

ICR received on June 18, 2010

Attachments: img-713132643-0001.pdf

Page 1 of 2

file://C:\Documents and Settings\TMedley\Local Settings\Temp\XPgrpwise\4C3D5461DO... 8/22/2011
Date: 07/13/2010 01:32PM 

Subject: Request for extension for Dayton Power and Light, JM Stuart Station for USEPA ICR 

received on June 18, 2010 

Good Afternoon, 

Please read the attached letter requesting an additional 45 days to enable my team 

to accurately complete the assigned ICR for Dayton Power & Light's JM Stuart 

Station in Aberdeen, Ohio. 

Contact me with any questions. 

Thanks, 

Harry K. McCann 

937-549-2641, x5809 

Cell-937-213-2170 

-----Original Message----- 

From: Harry.McCann@DPLINC.com [mailto:Harry.McCann@DPLINC.com] 

Sent: Tuesday, July 13, 2010 1:27 PM 

To: McCann, Harry 

Subject: Scan from a Xerox WorkCentre 

Please open the attached document. It was scanned and sent to you using a Xerox 

WorkCentre. 

Sent by: [Harry.McCann@DPLINC.com] 

Number of Images: 2 

Attachment File Type: PDF 

Device Name: WorkCentre 7328 

Device Location: 

For more information on Xerox products and solutions, please visit 

http://www.xerox.com/

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

*** CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE *** 

This electronic mail message and any attachments to this electronic mail message 

contain confidential information belonging to the originator, and may be attorney 

client privileged or constitute inside information. It is intended only for the 

use of the individual(s) listed as the recipient(s). If you are not one of the 

intended recipient(s), you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, 

distribution, or the taking of any action in reliance on the contents of the 

electronically mailed information is strictly prohibited. If you have received 

this electronic mail message in error, please forward the electronic mail message 

to security@dplinc.com and then remove all traces of the electronic mail message 

from your system. 

*** DPL, Inc. *** 

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

Page 2 of 2

file://C:\Documents and Settings\TMedley\Local Settings\Temp\XPgrpwise\4C3D5461DO... 8/22/2011
#### In the Matter of Joseph Braffman, Appellant, v New York State Board of Parole et al., Respondents.

In an article 78 proceeding, inter *alia,*to review a determination by the respondents which revoked the petitioner’s conditional release, the appeal is from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, entered June 26, 1978, which dismissed the petition. Judgment affirmed, without costs or disbursements. Although petitioner did not have the opportunity to confront every possible witness, the testimony of the witness whom he did confront was sufficient to sustain the determination to revoke his conditional release. In any event, the uncontested charge that petitioner failed to inform his parole officer that he had been questioned by the Port Authority police, was itself sufficient to sustain the revocation of his conditional release. Martuscello, J. P., Titone, Shapiro and O’Connor, JJ., concur.
# C o u rt o f

A p p ea ls

o f t h e S t a te o f

G eo rg ia

ATLANTA,_

_ _ __ _ _ __ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ __ _
Th e Co u rt

o f Ap p ea l s h er eb y p a s s es t h e f

o ll owi n g o r der :

A1 5 D0 08 8 . KASHKA SCOTT, et a l . v . RES-GA TW O, LLC.

So u t h s i d e Green s p ace In i t i at i v e, Sco t t an d So n s H o l d in g s , LLC, Sh i el d s Sco t t , Kas hk a Sco t t , an d Jero m e Sco t t s eek t o ap p eal t h e g ran t o f RES-GA Two
, LLC’ s

m o ti o n fo r OCGA § 9 -1 5 -1 4 at t o rn ey fees

. Th e co u rt ’ s o rd er d en y i n g t h e m o t i o n was

en t ered Sep t em

b er 2
, 2 0 1 4

. Th e ap p l i c a n t s f i l ed th ei r ap p l i cat i o n 3 4 d ay s l at er o n Oct o b er 6
, 2 0 1 4

. A n ap p l i cat i o n fo r d i s cret io n ary ap p eal m u s t b e fi l ed w i t hi n 3 0 day s

o f t h e o rd er ap p eal ed fro m

. OCGA § 5-6 -3 5 (d ). Becau s e t h i s ap p l i cat i o n i s un t i m el y , we l ack ju ri s d i ct i on t o co n s i d er i t , an d i t i s t herefo re DIS MIS S ED.

C o u r t o f A p p e a l s o f t h e S t a t e o

f G e o r g ia C le r k ’ s O f f i c e , A t la n t a ,

_

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ I c e r ti f y t h a t t h e a b o v e i s a t r u e e x t r a c t f r o m

t h e m i n u t e s o

f t h e C o u r t o

f A p p e a l s o f G e o r g i a

. W i t n e s s m y s ig n a t u r e a n d t h e s e a l o f s a i d c o u r t
h e r e t o a f f i x e d t h e d a y a n d y e a r l a s t a b o v e w r i t t e n

.

, C l e r k

. 10/27/2014 October 27, 2014
# C_2010037EN.01003101.xml

| 13.2.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 37/31 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.2.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 37/31

---

Judgment of the General Court of 17 December 2009 — Solvay v Commission

(Case T-57/01) (1)

1

(Competition - Abuse of a dominant position - Market in soda ash in the Community (with the exception of the United Kingdom and Ireland) - Decision finding an infringement of Article 82 EC - Supply agreements for an excessively long period - Fidelity rebate - Expiry of limitation period applicable to Commission power to impose fines or sanctions - Reasonable time - Essential procedural requirements - Relevant geographic market - Existence of a dominant position - Abuse of a dominant position - Right of access to the file - Fine - Gravity and duration of the infringement - Aggravating circumstances - Repetition of infringement - Mitigating circumstances)

2010/C 37/38

Language of the case: French

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Solvay SA (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: L. Simont, P.-A. Foriers, G. Block, F. Louis and A. Vallery, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: P. Oliver and J. Currall, Agents, assisted by N. Coutrelis, lawyer)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

First, application for annulment of Commission Decision 2003/6/EC of 13 December 2000 relating to a proceeding pursuant to Article 82 [EC] (Case COMP/33.133 — C: Soda ash — Solvay) (OJ 2003 L 10, p. 10) and, in the alternative, application for annulment or reduction of the fine imposed on the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Fixes the fine imposed on Solvay SA in Article 2 of Commission Decision 2003/6/EC of 13 December 2000 relating to a proceeding pursuant to Article 82 [EC] (Case COMP/33.133 — C: Soda ash — Solvay) at EUR 19 million; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Fixes the fine imposed on Solvay SA in Article 2 of Commission Decision 2003/6/EC of 13 December 2000 relating to a proceeding pursuant to Article 82 [EC] (Case COMP/33.133 — C: Soda ash — Solvay) at EUR 19 million;

| 2. | Dismisses the action as to the remainder. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Dismisses the action as to the remainder.

---

(1)  OJ C 161, 2.6.2001.

1

---