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

<ARTICLE>  UT
<CIK>   0000105860
<NAME>  WEST TEXAS UTILITIES COMPANY
<SUBSIDIARY>
<NUMBER> 009
<NAME>  WEST TEXAS UTILITIES COMPANY
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                                 <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                       3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                           DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                MAR-31-1999
<BOOK-VALUE>                                   PER-BOOK
<TOTAL-NET-UTILITY-PLANT>                       678,092
<OTHER-PROPERTY-AND-INVEST>                       1,023
<TOTAL-CURRENT-ASSETS>                           71,631
<TOTAL-DEFERRED-CHARGES>                          6,406
<OTHER-ASSETS>                                   66,301
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  823,453
<COMMON>                                        137,214
<CAPITAL-SURPLUS-PAID-IN>                         2,236
<RETAINED-EARNINGS>                             111,470
<TOTAL-COMMON-STOCKHOLDERS-EQ>                  250,920
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                 0
<PREFERRED>                                       2,482
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-NET>                            303,561
<SHORT-TERM-NOTES>                               18,634
<LONG-TERM-NOTES-PAYABLE>                             0
<COMMERCIAL-PAPER-OBLIGATIONS>                        0
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-CURRENT-PORT>                         0
<PREFERRED-STOCK-CURRENT>                             0
<CAPITAL-LEASE-OBLIGATIONS>                           0
<LEASES-CURRENT>                                      0
<OTHER-ITEMS-CAPITAL-AND-LIAB>                  247,856
<TOT-CAPITALIZATION-AND-LIAB>                   823,453
<GROSS-OPERATING-REVENUE>                        81,052
<INCOME-TAX-EXPENSE>                               (247)
<OTHER-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                       74,001
<TOTAL-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                       73,754
<OPERATING-INCOME-LOSS>                           7,298
<OTHER-INCOME-NET>                                  116
<INCOME-BEFORE-INTEREST-EXPEN>                    7,414
<TOTAL-INTEREST-EXPENSE>                          6,107
<NET-INCOME>                                      1,307
<PREFERRED-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                          26
<EARNINGS-AVAILABLE-FOR-COMM>                     1,281
<COMMON-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                          7,000
<TOTAL-INTEREST-ON-BONDS>                         5,088
<CASH-FLOW-OPERATIONS>                            8,094
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                         0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                         0
        

</TABLE>
## FY 2020

Total FY 2020 Combined TPSID and TPSID-CC Programs Appropriation: $11.8 million dollarsTPSID:                            $9,702,000TPSID-CC:                      $2,000,000 Total Number of FY 2020 TPSID Program Awards:        22Total Number of FY 2020 TPSID-CC Program Awards:   1 

## FY 2019

No new awards this fiscal year.

## FY 2018

No new awards this fiscal year.

## FY 2017

No new awards this fiscal year.

## FY 2016

No new funding this fiscal year. Since FY 2015, only non-competing continuation (NCC) awards have been made.Funding for NCCs:  $2,000,000

## FY 2015

$2,000,000 for one new award

## FY 2014

No new funding this fiscal year. Since FY 2010, only non-competing continuation (NCC) awards have been made.Funding for NCCs:  $311,520

## FY 2013

No new funding this fiscal year. Since FY 2010, only non-competing continuation (NCC) awards have been made.Funding for NCCs:  $311,524

## FY 2012

No new funding this fiscal year.  Since FY 2010, only non-competing continuation (NCC) awards have been made.Funding for NCCs:  $328,718

## FY 2011

None. FY 2011 funds supported continuations only.Funding for NCCs:  $308,682

## FY 2010

- Available Funds:  $330,000
- Average Award:  $330,000 (one grantee)

Institutional Service Home
## Key Staff

**Division Director:**James Laws, (202) 453-7348

**Program Officer:**Lead Program Officer - Pearson Owens, (202) 453-7997pearson.owens@ed.gov

**Mailing address:**U.S. Department of Education, OPEDigital Learning Infrastructure and IT Modernization Pilot400 Maryland Avenue, S.W., 2nd FloorWashington, DC 20202

FIPSE Home
1

Abstract 

Red Lake Nation College Student Success & Business Office 

Red Lake Nation College, 15480 Migizi Drive, Red Lake, Minnesota 

The Red Lake Nation is applying to Title III, Part F, Federal grant program. Red Lake Nation 

College received candidacy for accreditation through the Higher Learning Commission in 

November 2016 and is functioning as an independent institution. This was a major institutional 

accomplishment achieved after six years of focused work from 2010 through 2016. The Red 

Lake Nation College is prepared to fulfill the mandates of a fully accredited institution. Including 

continual administrative monitoring and implementation for continual improvement of academic 

programs by employing experienced staff and faculty to persistently meet the Higher Learning 

Commission standards. Red Lake Nation College is positioned for long-term success. 

Red Lake, like most reservations in Indian country, is plagued by high rates of poverty 

(approximately three times the national average) and significant unemployment rates (up to 66% 

unemployment rates based on reservation surveys held in recent years). The intense needs on the 

Red Lake Indian Reservation are diverse, complicated, and differ from the needs of more typical 

rural areas. The most significant need in the Red Lake community is that of economic 

opportunity. While jobs are scarce, employers also convey that potential employees often lack 

job experience and proper education. Lack of access to higher education institutions is the 

primary reason the sustainability of the Red Lake Nation College is vital to the Red Lake 

community. 

Providing an accessible higher education option on the Red Lake reservation has not only offered 

a degree option locally but has instilled hope and pride in the community. The hope and pride 

instilled by the Red Lake Nation College is our most crucial accomplishment. 

Encouraging all Tribal Members to strive for additional education will ensure that key 

community positions will be filled by tribal members whenever possible. 

The Red Lake Nation College goals and activities that will be implemented over the next 

academic year include the following: 

 Student Success 

o Providing students the counseling, support, and assistance to meet the challenges 

they face in balancing academics, family, and unexpected 

 Business Office 

o Administering the funds and managing the financial resources of the college to 

support the efficient and effective use of funds and for operational effectiveness 

and improved decision making.
Third District Court of Appeal

State of Florida 

Opinion filed January 4, 2023.

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

________________

No. 3D22-18

Lower Tribunal No. 18-38119

________________

Airam Bulte,

Appellant,

vs.

Dollar Tree Stores, Inc., etc.,

Appellee.

An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Mark 

Blumstein, Judge.

Schwed, Adams & McGinley, P.A., and Paul M. Adams (Palm Beach 

Gardens); Burlington & Rockenbach, P.A., Bard D. Rockenbach and 

Nichole J. Segal (West Palm Beach), for appellant.

Cole, Scott & Kissane, P.A., and Adrianna de la Cruz-Muñoz, 

Michael A. Rosenberg and David Herrero (Plantation), for appellee.

Before HENDON, GORDO and BOKOR, JJ. 

GORDO, J. 
2

Airam Bulte (“Bulte”) appeals the final judgment entered against 

Dollar Tree Stores Inc. (“Dollar Tree”) pursuant to a jury verdict awarding 

Bulte $36,000 in damages for past and future medical expenses and pain 

and suffering. We have jurisdiction. See Fla. R. App. P. 9.030(b)(1)(A). 

During jury selection, Bulte sought to use her peremptory strike as to 

a Hispanic woman juror. Dollar Tree sought a Melbourne challenge and 

asked for a race-neutral and gender-neutral reason. The trial court 

conducted a Melbourne analysis and concluded the grounds articulated by 

Bulte were not genuine and disallowed the use of the peremptory as to that 

juror.

“Where a peremptory strike is alleged to have been exercised in a 

racially discriminatory manner, we review a trial court’s ruling ‘to determine 

whether it was clearly erroneous or an abuse of discretion.’” West v. State, 

168 So. 3d 1282, 1284 (Fla. 4th DCA 2015) (quoting Cook v. State, 104 

So. 3d 1187, 1189 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012)). Relevant to this appeal is step 

three of a Melbourne analysis which provides in part: “The court’s focus in 

step 3 is not on the reasonableness of the explanation [for the preemptory 

strike] but rather its genuineness.” Melbourne v. State, 679 So. 2d 759, 

764 (Fla. 1996) (emphasis added).
3

We find the trial court did not abuse its discretion or commit clear 

error by concluding the proffered reason was not genuine. See Dabbs v. 

State, 330 So. 3d 50, 54 (Fla. 4th DCA 2021) (“Because the trial court 

conducted a proper genuineness inquiry, we must give appropriate 

deference to its determination.”); Hialeah Hosp., Inc. v. Hayes-Boursiquot, 

316 So. 3d 754, 758 (Fla. 3d DCA 2021) (affirming and finding the trial 

court properly exercised its discretion in sustaining a Melbourne challenge 

as “there is sufficient record evidence to support the trial court’s credibility 

assessments such that they may not be disturbed under the clearlyerroneous standard.”); King v. Byrd, 716 So. 2d 831, 834 (Fla. 4th DCA 

1998) (holding the trial court’s determination of genuineness must be 

respected because it was able to “see the expressions, hear the tones of 

voices, [and] observe the general dynamics of the courtroom.”).

Affirmed.
# C_2017009EN.01000102.xml

| 12.1.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 9/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.1.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 9/1

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.8211 — Marubeni/Toho Gas/Galp Energia/GGND)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2017/C 9/02)

On 13 October 2016, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

1

| — | in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32016M8211. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32016M8211. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

1

---
# C_2017382EN.01000101.xml

| 13.11.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 382/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.11.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 382/1

---

Last publications of the Court of Justice of the European Union in the Official Journal of the European Union

Official Journal of the European Union

(2017/C 382/01)

Last publication

Last publication

OJ C 374, 6.11.2017

Past publications

Past publications

OJ C 369, 30.10.2017

OJ C 357, 23.10.2017

OJ C 347, 16.10.2017

OJ C 338, 9.10.2017

OJ C 330, 2.10.2017

OJ C 318, 25.9.2017

These texts are available on:

EUR-Lex: http://eur-lex.europa.eu

---
**FY 2018 Title III, Part A, TCCU Discretionary New Award Funding Slate**

**FY 2018 Title III, Part F, TCCU Mandatory New Award Funding Slate**
# C_2017123EN.01000101.xml

| 20.4.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 123/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.4.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 123/1

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.8413 — Engie/Omnes Capital/Prédica/Engie PV Besse/Engie PV Sanguinet)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2017/C 123/01)

On 10 April 2017, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

1

| — | in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32017M8413. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32017M8413. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

1

---
April 18, 1975.

M. P. No. 75-26.

#### In re Gunning, LaFazia, Gnys & Selya, Inc.

The petitioners here are two attorneys, Bruce M. Selya and Anthony G. Iannuccillo. As shareholders of the above-entitled professional service corporation, they ask this court to appoint a board of appraisers to determine the fair market value of their respective shares of stock. The petition is filed pursuant to the provisions of G. L. 1956 (1969 Reenactment) §7-5.1-5. The respondents who are the remaining shareholders have filed a motion to dismiss the instant petition on the basis that the corporate bylaws provide that if a shareholder leaves *947the corporation to compete in the practice of law within the State of Rhode Island such a shareholder waives “his right to any accounting and any other remedies, legal or equitable.” The petitioners, who on December 5, 1974 withdrew from the corporation and entered into a partnership devoted to the practice of law, have filed an answer to the motion in which they deny the existence of any bylaw or any agreement which would bar them from invoking the provisions of §7-5.1-5. Oral argument on this petition, the motion to dismiss and the answer produced nothing but further disagreement between the parties.

It is obvious that before resort can be had to the statute, there is a factual determination to be made. Accordingly, it is hereby ordered and decreed that:

1. Retired Associate Justice William E. Powers is hereby appointed as a master to hear and determine all questions of fact relating to the adoption of any corporate bylaw or the entering into of any agreement whereby either petitioner might be deemed to have waived any right to invoke the provisions of §7-5.1-5.

2. The master shall forthwith schedule a meeting with the parties and their counsel. He shall have the authority to compel the production of books, records, and papers, to summon witnesses and to hear evidence upon all issues relevant to the matter referred to him in this controversy. A stenographic transcript will be kept of all hearings held by the master.

3. The master shall, with all due dispatch, resolve the factual issues presented to him and make a report to this court of his findings. He will transmit copies of his report to the parties or their counsel.

4. The parties shall file any objections to the report within 10 days after its receipt.

5. The expenses incurred by the master, including his fee, shall be borne by the parties. One half shall be paid *948by the petitioners with the other half -being paid by the respondents. Each payment will be made within 15 days of the master’s report.

*Bruce M. Selya,*pro se, *Anthony G. Iannuccillo,*pro se, petitioners. *Melvin A. Chernick,*for respondents.

Entered as the -order of this court this 18th day of April, 1975.
IN THE SUPREME COURT

STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA

2020 ND 244

State of North Dakota, Plaintiff and Appellee

v.

Warren James Wilkinson, Sr., Defendant and Appellant

No. 20200117

Appeal from the District Court of Grand Forks County, Northeast Central

Judicial District, the Honorable John A. Thelen, Judge.

AFFIRMED.

Per Curiam.

Andrew C. Eyre, Assistant State’s Attorney, Grand Forks, N.D., for plaintiff 

and appellee; submitted on brief.

Laura C. Ringsak, Bismarck, N.D., for defendant and appellant; submitted on 

brief.

20200117 

FILED 

IN THE OFFICE OF THE 

CLERK OF SUPREME COURT 

NOVEMBER 19, 2020 

STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA
1

State v. Wilkinson

No. 20200117

Per Curiam.

[¶1] Warren Wilkinson appeals from a criminal judgment entered after a jury 

convicted him of gross sexual imposition. He argues the evidence presented at 

trial is insufficient to support the jury’s verdict. After reviewing the record, we 

conclude substantial evidence supports the verdict. We summarily affirm 

under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(3).

[¶2] Jon J. Jensen, C.J.

Gerald W. VandeWalle

Daniel J. Crothers

Lisa Fair McEvers

Jerod E. Tufte
- 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

About EDOFFICES
|                                        |
|----------------------------------------|
|                                        | PurposeFunding StatusEligibilityLaws, Regs, & GuidanceApplicant InfoResourcesAwardsFAQsPerformanceContacts |  |
| Office of Postsecondary Education Home |
|                                        |

**Who May Apply: (by category)**  Institutions of Higher Education (IHEs)

An institution of higher education is eligible to receive a grant under this program if the total amount of all Federal Pell grant funds awarded to students enrolled at the institution of higher education for the preceding fiscal year equals or exceeds $350,000.

**Participant Eligibility:**  Low-income parents who are eligible to receive a Federal Pell grant.

Student Service Home

|        |
|--------|
|   | Printable view |
|        |

## How Do I Find...

          - Student loans, forgiveness
          - College accreditation
          - Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA)
          - FERPA
          - FAFSA
          - 1098, tax forms

More >

## Information About...

          - Transforming Teaching
          - Family and Community Engagement
          - Early Learning

 

|  |
|--|
|  |
|  | Higher Education Policy |  |
|  |

----

*Our mission*

Student Loans
Repaying LoansDefaulted LoansLoan ForgivenessLoan Servicers

Grants & Programs
Apply for Pell GrantsGrants ForecastApply for a GrantEligibility for Grants

Laws & Guidance
Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA)FERPACivil RightsNew IDEA Website

Data & Research
Education StatisticsPostsecondary Education DataED Data ExpressNation's Report CardWhat Works Clearinghouse

About Us
Contact UsED OfficesJobsPress ReleasesFAQsRecursos en españolBudget, PerformancePrivacy ProgramSubscribe to E-Mail Updates

----

          - Notices
          - FOIA
          - Privacy Policy
          - Accessibility
          - Security
          - Information quality
          - Inspector General
          - Whitehouse.gov
          - USA.gov
          - Benefits.gov
          - Regulations.gov
# C_2017018EN.01002201.xml

| 19.1.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 18/22 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.1.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 18/22

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.8204 — Barloworld South Africa/Baywa/JV)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2017/C 18/05)

On 9 January 2017, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

1

| — | in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32017M8204. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32017M8204. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

1

---