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

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK>     0000318245
<NAME>     Yournet, Inc.
<MULTIPLIER>     1

<CAPTION>
<S>                                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                           YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                       DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                          JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                            DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                           0
<SECURITIES>                                     0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    0
<ALLOWANCES>                                     0
<INVENTORY>                                      0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 0
<PP&E>                                           0
<DEPRECIATION>                                   0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   0
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        30438
<BONDS>                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                            0
<PREFERRED>                                      0
<COMMON>                                     20456
<OTHER-SE>                                       0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                (30438)
<SALES>                                          0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 0
<CGS>                                            0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            393112
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  0
<INCOME-TAX>                                     0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              0
<DISCONTINUED>                                   0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                  0
<CHANGES>                                        0
<NET-INCOME>                                     0
<EPS-BASIC>                                 (.12)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                 (.12)


</TABLE>
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

EASTERN DIVISION

JOSEPH ABRUSCATO and TIMOTHY )

WILSON, on behalf of themselves and )

others similarly situated, )

) Case No. 12-cv-00322

Plaintiffs, )

v. ) Judge James B. Zagel

) Magistrate Judge Maria Valdez

MEDICAL BUSINESS BUREAU, LLC; )

EQUIFAX INFORMATION SERVICES, LLC, ) 

)

Defendants. )

NOTICE OF SETTLEMENT

Plaintiffs Joseph Abruscato and Timothy Wilson, through their attorneys, hereby

inform this Court that plaintiffs Abruscato and Wilson and defendant Medical Business Bureau, LLC

have reached a settlement on an individual basis. Plaintiffs will file a stipulation of dismissal,

dismissing their claims against Medical Business Bureau, LLC with prejudice and the claims of the

members of the putative class against Medical Business Bureau, LLC without prejudice, once the

settlement is consummated.

Respectfully submitted,

s/Tara L. Goodwin

Tara L. Goodwin

Daniel A. Edelman

Cathleen M. Combs

James O. Latturner

Tara L. Goodwin

Rupali R. Shah

EDELMAN, COMBS, LATTURNER

& GOODWIN, LLC

120 S. LaSalle Street, 18th Floor

Chicago, Illinois 60603

(312) 739-4200

(312) 419-0379 (FAX)

1

Case: 1:12-cv-00322 Document #: 74 Filed: 08/15/12 Page 1 of 2 PageID #:418
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I, Tara L. Goodwin, hereby certify that on August 15, 2012, I caused to be electronically

filed the foregoing with the Clerk of the Court using the CM/ECF system, which will send notice

to the following:

Nicholas D. O'Conner

noconner@hinshawlaw.com

Corinne C. Heggie

cheggie@hinshawlaw.com

David M. Schultz

dschultz@hinshawlaw.com

Lewis P. Perling

lperling@kslaw.com

Barry Goheen

bgoheen@kslaw.com

David M. Schultz

dschultz@hinshawlaw.com

Jeremy S. Unruh

junruh@polsinelli.com

Michael D. Douglas

mdouglas@kslaw.com

Rodney Lewis

rodneylewis@polsinelli.com

s/Tara L. Goodwin

Tara L. Goodwin

2

Case: 1:12-cv-00322 Document #: 74 Filed: 08/15/12 Page 2 of 2 PageID #:419
Exhibit 32



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906

OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



We hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Form 10-Q of Reliability Incorporated (the Issuer) for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2004 (the Periodic Report):



| | 1. | Fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 2. | The information contained in the Periodic Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Issuer.
| | -- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                                      |  |                                        
|------------------------------------- |  | ---------------------------------------
|/s/ Larry Edwards                     |  | /s/ Carl V. Schmidt                    
|Larry Edwards Chief Executive Officer |  | Carl V. Schmidt Chief Financial
Officer
|August 12, 2004                       |  | August 12, 2004
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Thomas Chew, Appellant.

[834 NYS2d 605]—

Appeal from a judgment of the Niagara County Court (Sara S. Sperrazza, J.), rendered September 28, 2004. Defendant was convicted, upon his plea of guilty, of attempted sexual abuse in the first degree and criminal sexual act in the second degree.

It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him upon his plea of guilty of attempted sexual abuse in the first degree (Penal Law §§ 110.00, 130.65 [3]) and criminal sexual act in the second degree (§ 130.45 [1]). Defendant contends that County Court imposed an illegal sentence because he did not have a qualifying predicate conviction under the second child sexual assault felony offender statute (§ 70.07). We reject that contention. Defendant stated at the time of the plea that he was “a second time felony offender for sexual abuse,” and the statement filed by the People pursuant to CPL 400.19 set forth that defendant was convicted in 1987 of sodomy in the third degree. When defendant appeared in court for sentencing, *1196the People noted on the record that the statement filed indicated that the victim who was the subject of the predicate conviction was under the age of seven and that it was the actual age of the child that was controlling, not the age referenced in the statute.

Penal Law § 70.07, which provides for a sentence of imprisonment for second child sexual assault felony offenders, states in relevant part that an essential element of a “sexual assault against a child” is “the commission or attempted commission of sexual conduct” against a child less than 15 years old (§70.07 [2]). A necessary element of the former crime of sodomy in the third degree (former § 130.40 [2]), defendant’s predicate conviction, was that the victim be under the age of 17. Nevertheless, the record establishes, and defendant does not dispute, that the victim of the prior sexual assault was in fact less than 15 years old.

The sentence is not unduly harsh or severe. Present—Gorski, J.P, Martoche, Centra, Lunn and Green, JJ.
ESSA Public Input Meeting

U.S. Department of Education

400 Maryland Avenue SW, Barnard Auditorium

Washington, DC 20202

January 11, 2016 | 9:00 AM – 5:00 PM

Name Organization

MaryLee Allen Children's Defense Fund

Tim Boals WIDA at the Wisconsin Center for Education Research

Vito Borrello National Association for Family, School, and Community Engagement

Julie Borst NA

Jamy Brice-Hyde NA

Katherine Burdick Juvenile Law Center

Alice Cain Teach Plus

Brenda Calderon National Council of La Raza

Darren Cambridge National Council of Teachers of English

Jenny Collier Robert F. Kennedy Juvenile Justice Collaborative

Sarah Davis NA

Elizabeth Davis Washington DC Teachers Union

Sandra Davis Baltimore Teachers Union

Curtis Decker National Disability Rights Network

Daniel Domenech AASA: The School Superintendents Association

Amanda Fenton National Association of Charter School Authorizers

Lily Eskelsen Garcia National Education Association

Thomas J. Gentzel National School Boards Association

Janel George NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund

Irene Holtzman Focus DC

Kim Hymes National Center for Learning Disabilities

Harold Jordan ACLU of Pennsylvania

Marla Kilfoyle NA

Liz King Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights

Kathy Lally Communities in Schools, Inc. 

Dane Linn Business Roundtable

MenSa Ankh Maa Teach for America - DC Region

Denise Marshall Council of Parent Attorneys and Advocates

Fernando Martinez NA

Maura McInerney Education Law Center

Kim Musheno Consortium for Citizens with Disabilities Education Task Force

Heather Noonan League of American Orchestras

Joyce Parker Citizens for a Better Greenville

Stephen Parker National Governors Association

Dimple Patel National Indian Education Association

Delia Pompa Migration Policy Institute

Mary Kingston Roche Coalition for Community Schools

Narric Rome Americans for the Arts

Page 1 of 2
ESSA Public Input Meeting

U.S. Department of Education

400 Maryland Avenue SW, Barnard Auditorium

Washington, DC 20202

January 11, 2016 | 9:00 AM – 5:00 PM

Yolanda Rondon American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee 

Susie Saavedra National Urban League

Zakiya Sankara-Jabar Dignity in Schools Campaign

Scott Sargrad Center for American Progress

Tommy Sheridan National Head Start Association

Jeff Simering Council of Great City Schools

Kelly Vaillancourt Strobach National Association of School Psychologists

Marlyn Tillman Gwinnett STOPP

Melissa Tomlinson Students with Disabilities

Lynn Tuttle National Association for Music Education

Randi Weingarten American Federation of Teachers

Dan Weisberg TNTP

Gov. Bob Wise Alliance for Excellent Education

Christine Wolfe National Alliance for Public Charter Schools

Peter Zamora Council of Chief State School Officers

*NA denotes an individual, such as a parent or teacher, who is not representing an organization. 

Page 2 of 2
EXHIBIT D

Case: 1:12-cv-01122 Document #: 42-10 Filed: 07/16/12 Page 1 of 5 PageID #:315
Case: 1:12-cv-01122 Document #: 42-10 Filed: 07/16/12 Page 2 of 5 PageID #:316
Case: 1:12-cv-01122 Document #: 42-10 Filed: 07/16/12 Page 3 of 5 PageID #:317
Case: 1:12-cv-01122 Document #: 42-10 Filed: 07/16/12 Page 4 of 5 PageID #:318
Case: 1:12-cv-01122 Document #: 42-10 Filed: 07/16/12 Page 5 of 5 PageID #:319
#### Murray Yellon, Respondent, v. Lawrence Kessler, Appellant.

In an action to recover damages for injuries to person and property, defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated July 26, 1960, which grants plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment. Order reversed, with $10 costs and disbursements, and motion denied. The record presents issues of fact which should be resolved after trial. Nolan, P. J., Beldock, Christ, Pette and Brennan, JJ., concur.
#### 1436.602 Selection of firms for architect-engineer contracts.
#### 1216.603-4 Contract clauses.

The contracting officer shall insert the clause at 1252.216-74, Settlement of Letter Contract, in all definitized letter contracts.
- Skip to main content
- About Us
- Contact Us
- FAQs
-  Language Assistance ****   - English
  - español
  - 中文: 繁體版
  - Việt-ngữ
  - 한국어
  - Tagalog
  - Русский

U.S. Department of Education

U.S. Department of Education

            - Student Loans
            - Grants
            - Laws
            - Data

HelpSITE CONTENTS
EION KELLY

,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA

,

Appellee

. IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D 15

- 1615

_____________ ________________/

Opinion filed July 2, 2015.

An appeal from an order of the Circuit Court for Columbia County

. Wesley R. Douglas , Judge

.

Nancy A. Daniels, Public Defender, and Steven L. Seliger, Assistant Public

Defender, Tallahassee , for Appellant.

P amela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee , for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

ROWE, SWANSON, and BILBREY, JJ., CONCUR.
<PAGE>

                                                                 EXHIBIT 99(c)

                                TXU GAS COMPANY

                      Certificate Pursuant to Section 906
                        of Sarbanes - Oxley Act of 2002


     The undersigned,  Scott Longhurst,  Principal  Financial Officer of TXU Gas
Company (the "Company"), DOES HEREBY CERTIFY that:

1. The  Company's  Quarterly  Report  on Form  10-Q for the  quarter  ended
   September  30, 2002 (the  "Report")  fully  complies  with the  requirements
   of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended;
   and

2. Information  contained in the Report fairly  presents,  in all material
   respects, the financial condition and results of operation of the Company.

     IN WITNESS  WHEREOF,  the  undersigned  has caused  this  instrument  to be
executed this 14th day of November, 2002.

                                    /s/ Scott Longhurst
                                  ------------------------------------
                                  Name:   Scott Longhurst
                                  Title:  Principal Financial Officer
#### 1331.101 Objectives.

The designee authorized to approve individual deviations concerning cost principles is set forth in CAM 1301.70.
WARNING: THE EDGAR SYSTEM ENCOUNTERED ERROR(S) WHILE PROCESSING THIS SCHEDULE.

<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             OCT-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                           5,849
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    7,185
<ALLOWANCES>                                       137
<INVENTORY>                                     14,072
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                68,459
<PP&E>                                          60,215
<DEPRECIATION>                                  33,294
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  97,232
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           23,042
<BONDS>                                         20,674
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           794
<OTHER-SE>                                      51,288
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    97,232
<SALES>                                         23,619
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                23,619
<CGS>                                           21,123
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   21,123
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   222
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     2
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 467
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (1,885)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     (236)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (1,649)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (1,649)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.21)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.21)
        

</TABLE>
#### Sullivan County National Bank of Liberty, Respondent, v Irving Mason et al., Defendants, and Foxcroft Village, Inc., et al., Appellants.

— Appeal from an order of the County Court of Sullivan County at Special Term, entered November 8, 1978, which granted a motion by plaintiff for summary judgment. On December 12, 1975, a mortgage was executed by Irving Mason and Gussie Mason, doing business as Mason Management Company, a partnership. Also on this date, a lease, wherein the mortgagors leased the mortgaged premises to Foxcroft Village, Inc., was assigned to plaintiff, the mortgagee, as collateral security. The lease was subordinated to the lien of plaintiff’s mortgage. On November 7, 1977, the lease, after default by appellants, was reassigned to the Mason Management Company. Dispossess proceedings were thereafter commenced against Fox-croft Village, Inc., and a final order of eviction was granted against the lessee. Subsequently, this action was commenced to foreclose the mortgage. In their answer, appellants Foxcroft Village, Inc., and Wolpo alleged as a defense and counterclaim that plaintiff and certain of the defendants entered into a conspiracy to evict the lessee from the leased premises and in furtherance of said conspiracy the plaintiff reassigned the lease to Mason Management Company on November 7, 1977. Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment was granted and defendants’ answers were stricken. This appeal ensued. In our view, plaintiff had made out a prima facie case and it was incumbent on appellants to assemble, lay bare and reveal their proofs in order to show that their defense was real and capable of being established upon trial *(Thrift Credit Corp. v American Overseas Trading Corp.,*54 AD2d 994). The assertion of a counterclaim, unsupported by proof that it is meritorious, does not bar summary judgment for a plaintiff who is otherwise entitled to it and appellants were required to reveal their proof in support of the alleged counterclaim *(M & S Mercury Air Conditioning Corp. v Rodolitz,*24 AD2d 873, affd 17 NY2d 909). Upon consideration of the record, it is the opinion of this court that appellants failed to meet their burden and, therefore, summary judgment in favor of plaintiff was properly granted. Order affirmed, with costs. Mahoney, P. J., Greenblott, Sweeney, Kane and Main, JJ., concur.
Thi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by 9th C i r . R . 36- 3.

The pane l unani m ous l y c onc l ude s thi s c a s e i s s ui t abl e f orde c i s i on ** w ith o u t o r a l a r g u m e n t. See F ed . R . A p p . P . 3 4 (a) (2). NOT F OR P UB L I CA T I ON UN I TE D STATE S COURT OF APPE ALS FOR THE NINTH CI RCUI T M AR VIN F L E M ING , P la in tiff

- A p p e llan t, v. U N I T E D S T A T E S O F A M E R I C A ; e ta l., D efend an t s - A p p el l ees. N o. 10- 15148 D. C . No . 1 : 0 7 - c v - 0 0 4 6 1 - OW W WMW M E M OR AN DU M *

A p p eal fr o m th e U n i t edS t at es D i stri ctC o u rt fo r th e E a s te rn D is tric t o f C a lifo rn ia O l i ve rW . W ange r , D i s tr i c tJudge , Pr e s i di ng Subm i tt e d D e c e m be r14, 2010 ** B efore: G O O D W IN , W A L L A C E , an dW . F L E T C H E R , C i rcuitJu d g es. M arvin F l em i n g , a federal pri so n er, ap p eal s p ro se from th e d i stri ctco u rt ’s j u d g m en ti n h i s act i o n b rou g h tu n d er Bi v e ns v . Si xU nknow n N

am e d Agent

s of FederalB ureau o

f N arcot i cs , 40 3 U . S . 38 8 (197 1), al l egi ng del i ber at e i nd i f f er ence to s e r io u s m e d ic a l n e e d s . W e h av e ju r is d ic ti o n u n d e r2 8 U .S .C . § 1 2 9 1 . W e 

# FI L ED DEC 27 2010 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLER K U . S. C O U R T O F AP PE ALS10- 15148 2 r e v ie w d e n o v o th e d is tr ic t c o u rt’ s d is m is s a l u n d e r2 8 U .S .C . § 1 9 1 5 ( e ) ( 2 ) , B arre n v . H arr i ngton , 1 5 2 F. 3 d1 1 9 3 , 1 1 9 4 ( 9 th Ci r . 1 9 9 8 ) ( o r d e r ) , an d2 8 U. S. C. § 1 9 1 5 A , R es ni ck

v. H ayes , 2 1 3 F . 3 d4 4 3 , 4 4 7 ( 9 th Ci r . 2 0 0 0 ) . W e a f f i rm. The di s tr i c tc ourtpr ope r l y c onc l ude d tha tFl e m i ng f a i l e d t o s t a t e ac l a i m f

or d e li b e r a te in d if

f e r e n c e w ith r e g ar dto th e tr e a tm e n t h e r e c e iv e df o rh is e y e in

ju ry . Se e Toguchiv . Chung , 391 F. 3d 1051, 1057 ( 9th C i r . 2004) ( apr i s on de f e ndant a c t s w i th de l i be r a t e i ndi f f e r e nc e onl y i f

he know s of

and di s r e gar ds an e xc e s s i ve r i sk t o i nm at e hea l th andsa f ety). I nadequ at e tr eatm entdu e t o m alpra ct i ce , or e ven g r o s s n e g li g e n c e , d o e s n o t a m o u n t t o ac o n s ti tu ti o n a l v io la ti o n . Se e id. a t 1 0 6 0 . W e do n otconsi derm att er s notspec i f i ca l l y and di st i nct l y ra i se d and ar gu ed in th e o p e n in g b r ie f

. Se e Padgettv . W

r ight , 5 8 7 F . 3 d9 8 3 , 9 8 5 n . 2 (9th C i r. 2 0 0 9 ). F l em i ng ’ s r em ai ni ng cont ent i on s ar e unp er suas i ve. AF F I RM E D.
### §950bb–4. Outdated broadband systems

#### (a) In general

Except as provided in subsection (b), the Secretary shall consider any portion of a service territory that is subject to an outstanding grant agreement between the Secretary and a broadband provider to be unserved for the purposes of all broadband assistance programs under this chapter, if the broadband service in that portion of a service territory is less than 10 Mbps downstream transmission capacity or less than 1 Mbps upstream transmission capacity.

#### (b) Exception

The Secretary shall not consider a portion of a service territory described in subsection (a) to be unserved if the broadband service provider has constructed or begun to construct broadband facilities that meet the minimum acceptable level of service established under section 950bb(e) of this title, in that portion of the service territory.

(May 20, 1936, ch. 432, title VI, §605, as added Pub. L. 115–334, title VI, §6205(a), Dec. 20, 2018, 132 Stat. 4739.)

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

#### Effective Date

Pub. L. 115–334, title VI, §6205(b), Dec. 20, 2018, 132 Stat. 4739, provided that: "The amendment made by this section [enacting this section] shall not take effect until October 1, 2020."
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Lawrence Kluger, Appellant.

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Rockland County, rendered June 15, 1978, convicting him of grand larceny in the second degree, upon his plea of guilty, and sentencing him to a term of imprisonment of one year. Judgment modified, as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice, by reducing the sentence to a period of imprisonment of 60 days and probation for an additional 4 years and 10 months (see Penal Law, § 60.01, subd 2, par [d]). As so modified, judgment affirmed and case remitted to the Supreme Court, Rockland County, to fix the terms and conditions of probation and for further proceedings pursuant to CPL 460.50 (subd 5). Under all of the circumstances of this case, the sentence was excessive to the extent indicated herein. We have considered appellant’s other contentions and have found them to be without merit. Martuscello, J. P., Titone, Hawkins and O’Connor, JJ., concur.