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

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM CHATTEM,
INC.'S UNAUDITED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          NOV-30-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             DEC-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               MAY-31-1997
<CASH>                                           13449
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    27350
<ALLOWANCES>                                       400
<INVENTORY>                                      10340
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 54268
<PP&E>                                           26860
<DEPRECIATION>                                   17164
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  152647
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            25124
<BONDS>                                         125668
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                          1867
<OTHER-SE>                                      (5865)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    152647
<SALES>                                          67124
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 67124
<CGS>                                            19282
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    55575
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                7633
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   4929
<INCOME-TAX>                                      1736
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               3193
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                      3193
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .36
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .36
        

</TABLE>
#### Hannah Segal et al., Appellants, v. Cab Transportation Corp. et al., Respondents, et al., Defendant.

In an action by plaintiff wife, a passenger in a taxicab owned by defendant Cab Transportation Corp. and operated by defendant August Gruglimelli, to recover damages for personal injuries sustained when the taxicab was in a collision with an automobile owned and operated by defendant Philip Weisbrout; and by her husband to recover damages for the loss of her services and for medical expenses, the plaintiffs appeal: (1) from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated June 1, 1961, which vacated a preference theretofore granted by another Judge on March 30, 1960, pursuant to rule 9 of the Kings County Supreme Court Rules; and (2) from an order of the same court, dated November 15, 1961, which in effect denied plaintiffs’ application to resettle the order of June 1, 1961, which again vacated the preference, and which recited the court’s finding that the plaintiff wife’s injuries “ were not serious, prolonged or permanent”. Order of June 1, 1961, and order of November 15, 1961, affirmed, with one bill of $10 costs and disbursements. No opinion. Beldock, P. J., Ughetta, Christ, Hill and Hopkins, JJ., concur.
- 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

|                                               |
|-----------------------------------------------|
|                                               | PurposeFunding StatusEligibilityLaws, Regs, & GuidanceApplicant InfoResourcesAwardsFAQsPerformanceContacts |  |
| Office of Vocational and Adult Education Home |
|                                               |

**Who May Apply: (by category)** Other Organizations and/or Agencies

**Who May Apply: (specifically)** Federally recognized Indian tribes, tribal organizations, Alaska Native entities, and consortia of anyof the previously mentioned entities.   Printable view  Last Modified: 03/21/2013How Do I Find...- Student loans, forgiveness
- Higher Education Rulemaking
- College accreditation
- Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA)
- FERPA
- FAFSA
- 1098, tax forms

More >
Information About...- Elevating Teaching
- Early Learning
- Engage Every Student
- Unlocking Career Success
- Cybersecurity

 
*Our mission* is to promote student achievement and preparation for global competitiveness by fostering educational excellence and ensuring equal access.
Student Loans
Repaying LoansDefaulted LoansLoan ForgivenessLoan Servicers
Grants & Programs
Apply for Pell GrantsGrants ForecastApply for a Grant
Laws & Guidance
Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA)FERPACivil RightsNew IDEA Website
Data & Research
Education StatisticsPostsecondary Education DataED Data ExpressNation's Report CardWhat Works ClearinghouseOpen Data PlatformCOVID Relief Data
About Us
Contact UsED OfficesJobsPress ReleasesFAQsRecursos en españolBudget, PerformancePrivacy Program- Notices
- FOIA
- Privacy Policy
- Accessibility
- Security
- Information quality
- Inspector General
- Whitehouse.gov
- USA.gov
- Benefits.gov
- Regulations.gov
- vote.gov
32.607 Installment payments and deferment of collection. ( a ) The contracting officer shall not approve or deny a contractor's request for installment payments or deferment of collections. The office designated in agency procedures is responsible for approving or denying requests for installment payments or deferment of collections.
( b ) If a contractor has not appealed the debt or filed an action under the Disputes clause of the contract and the contractor has submitted a proposal for debt deferment or installment payments— ( 1 ) The office designated in agency procedures may arrange for deferment/installment payments if the contractor is unable to pay at once in full or the contractor's operations under national defense contracts would be seriously impaired. The arrangement shall include appropriate covenants and securities and should be limited to the shortest practicable maturity; and
( 2 ) The deferment/installment agreement shall include a specific schedule or plan for payment. It should permit the Government to make periodic financial reviews of the contractor and to require payments earlier than required by the agreement if the Government considers the contractor's ability to pay improved. It should also provide for required stated or measurable payments on the occurrence of specific events or contingencies that improve the contractor's ability to pay.
( c ) If not already applicable under the contract terms, interest on contract debt shall be made an element of any agreement entered into for installment payments or deferment of collection.
#### 2842.703 General.
**Title III Part B, Historically Black Colleges and Universities Program**

**FY 2015 Noncompeting Continuation Awards**

9/18/2015
326.607-2 Receipt of Challenge. ( a ) An interested party must file any challenges against an offeror's representation with the cognizant CO.
( b ) The challenge must be in writing and must contain the basis for the challenge with accurate, complete, specific and detailed evidence. The evidence must support the allegation that the offeror fails to meet the definition of Indian Economic Enterprise or Indian Small Business Economic Enterprise as defined in HHSAR 326.601 or is otherwise ineligible. The CO will dismiss any challenge that is deemed frivolous or that does not meet the conditions in this section.
( c ) To be considered timely, a challenge must be received by the CO no later than 10 calendar days after the basis of challenge is known or should have been known, whichever is earlier. ( 1 ) A challenge may be made orally if it is confirmed in writing within the 10-day period after the basis of challenge is known or should have been known, whichever is earlier.
( 2 ) A written challenge may be delivered by hand, email, or letter postmarked within the 10-day period after the basis of challenge is known or should have been known, whichever is earlier.
( 3 ) A CO's challenge to a certification is always considered timely, whether filed before or after award.
( d ) Upon receiving a timely challenge, the CO must: ( 1 ) Notify the challenger of the date it was received, and that the representation of the enterprise being challenged is under consideration; and
( 2 ) Furnish to the offeror (whose representation is being challenged) a request to provide detailed information on its eligibility by certified mail, return receipt requested or email.
( e ) Within 3 calendar days after receiving a copy of the challenge and the CO's request for detailed information, the challenged offeror must file, as specified at (d)(2), with the CO a complete statement answering the allegations in the challenge and furnish evidence to support its position on representation. If the offeror does not submit the required material within the 3 calendar days, or another period of time granted by the CO, the CO may assume that the offeror does not intend to dispute the challenge and must not award to the challenged offeror.
( f ) Within 10 calendar days after receiving a challenge, the challenged offeror's response, and any other pertinent information, the CO must determine the representation status of the challenged offeror and notify the challenger and the challenged offeror of the decision by certified mail, return receipt requested or email, and make known to all parties the option to appeal the determination to IHS DAP.
( g ) If the representation accompanying an offer is challenged and subsequently upheld by DAP, the written notification of this action must state the reason(s).
3.701 Purpose. This subpart provides— ( a ) An administrative remedy with respect to contracts in relation to which there has been— ( 1 ) A final conviction for bribery, conflict of interest, disclosure or receipt of contractor bid or proposal information or source selection information in exchange for a thing of value or to give anyone a competitive advantage in the award of a Federal agency procurement contract, or similar misconduct; or
( 2 ) An agency head determination that contractor bid or proposal information or source selection information has been disclosed or received in exchange for a thing of value, or for the purpose of obtaining or giving anyone a competitive advantage in the award of a Federal agency procurement contract; and
( b ) A means to deter similar misconduct in the future by those who are involved in the award, performance, and administration of Government contracts.
[62 FR 232, Jan. 2, 1997]
#### 2901.105-1 Publication and code arrangement.

The DOLAR is published in the CFR, as chapter 29 of title 48.
124 STAT. 1268 PUBLIC LAW 111–183—JUNE 9, 2010 

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY—H.R. 4095: 

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 156 (2010): 

Jan. 20, considered and passed House. 

May 25, considered and passed Senate. 

Æ 

Public Law 111–183 

111th Congress 

An Act 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 9727 Antioch 

Road in Overland Park, Kansas, as the ‘‘Congresswoman Jan Meyers Post Office 

Building’’. 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 

the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

SECTION 1. CONGRESSWOMAN JAN MEYERS POST OFFICE BUILDING. 

(a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States Postal 

Service located at 9727 Antioch Road in Overland Park, Kansas, 

shall be known and designated as the ‘‘Congresswoman Jan Meyers 

Post Office Building’’. 

(b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, regulation, 

document, paper, or other record of the United States to the facility 

referred to in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference 

to the ‘‘Congresswoman Jan Meyers Post Office Building’’. 

Approved June 9, 2010. 

June 9, 2010 

[H.R. 4095] 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with PUBLIC LAWS
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION

PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

The undersigned, Donald C. Wood, the President and Chief Executive Officer of Federal Realty Investment Trust (the Company), has executed this certification in connection with the filing with the Securities and Exchange
Commission of the Companys Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2007 (the Report). The undersigned hereby certifies that:

(1) the Report 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 Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



|            |  |                                                                                             
|----------- |  | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|            |  | /s/ DONALD C. WOOD                                                                          
|May 2, 2007 |  | Donald C. Wood, President, Chief Executive Officer and Trustee (Principal Executive
Officer)
#### Utilities and Industries Management Corp., Appellant, v. Barton Distilling Company, Respondent.

Order and judgment entered thereon dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, with $50 costs to defendant-respondent. This is not an action to procure a judgment excluding the defendant from an interest in or lien upon specific personal property within the State within the meaning of former sections 232 and 235 of the Civil Practice Act, and the court did not acquire jurisdiction over the defendant by the service on August 15, 1963 of a summons and complaint upon its officer at Chicago, Illinois. The provisions of CPLR 302 and 313, in effect on September 1, 1963, may not be applied to validate the “attempted service of process which was jurisdictionally defective when made” *(Simonson*v. *International Bank,*14 N Y 2d 281, 290). The defendant, however, in the service of its answer following the taking of effect of CPLR, properly utilized the procedure therein prescribed for the raising of the objection of lack of jurisdiction (CPLR 10003). Thus, the defendant properly asserted such objection by way of answer and properly moved to dismiss on this ground (.CPLR 320, subd. [c]; 3211, subd. [a], par. 8). The dismissal of the action is sustainable on the ground of lack of jurisdiction of the person of the defendant and we do not reach the question as to the sufficiency of the first alleged cause of action for a declaratory judgment. Concur—Botein, P. J., Breitel, Rabin, Eager and Steuer, JJ.
#### 233.170 Briefing requirement for protested acquisitions valued at $1 billion or more.

Follow the procedures at PGI 233.170 for briefing protested acquisitions valued at $1 billion or more.

[76 FR 3537, Jan. 20, 2011]
# CA2017257EN.01000101.xml

| 8.8.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CA 257/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.8.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CA 257/1

---

RESERVE LISTS (1)

1

Open competition EPSO/AST-SC/05/16

Accreditation Officers/Receptionists (SC 1/SC 2)

(2017/C 257 A/01)

Grade SC 1

Grade SC 1

| ABATI | Valentina |
| --- | --- |
| AYALA | Elena |
| BROZ HAFNER | Maja |
| BURNET | Aurélie |
| CAPPELLAZZO | Claudio |
| CASTELLANI | Simona |
| CIPRIANI | Silvia |
| D’ALESSIO | Maria Cristina |
| D’ELIA | Sara |
| DE RYCK | Liesbet |
| DI MARZIO | Antony |
| DOSOLINI | Consuelo |
| ENACHE | Marius Ion |
| GALLETTI | Michel |
| GLAVAS | Monika |
| GORGORIS | Spyridon |
| GRABNAR | Marko |
| GREKULA | Hanna |
| HERNÁNDEZ MARTÍN | África María |
| KROLZIK | Kristin |
| LEIRA | Alba |
| LIODAKIS | Antonios |
| LODEWYCKX | Angelique |
| LORUSSO | Rita |
| MARTINEZ SALVADOR | Alonso |
| MASCIOTRA | Nicola |
| MIAZGA | Ewelina Amelia |
| MONGE COSIN | Jose Luis |
| NAAS | Catherine |
| NADOLU | Adrian Marius |
| PERUCCONI | Chiara |
| PORON | Davy |
| ROSSETTI | Melissa |
| RUSSO | Flavia |
| SANDOR ANTUNES | Ivett |
| SAVIC | Radojka |
| SCARCIA | Giuseppe |
| SEDIĆ | Slađana |
| STOIAN | Valeria |
| STOIMIRSKA | Dimitrina |
| TELEIONI | Dafni |
| TERMINI | Daiana |
| TSORTANIDOU | Olga |
| VEDRIŠ | Vedran |
| VILA FLOR | Carlos |
| XAPELLI BRU | Sonia |
| ZANIN DE MELO | Thais Helena |

ABATI

Valentina

AYALA

Elena

BROZ HAFNER

Maja

BURNET

Aurélie

CAPPELLAZZO

Claudio

CASTELLANI

Simona

CIPRIANI

Silvia

D’ALESSIO

Maria Cristina

D’ELIA

Sara

DE RYCK

Liesbet

DI MARZIO

Antony

DOSOLINI

Consuelo

ENACHE

Marius Ion

GALLETTI

Michel

GLAVAS

Monika

GORGORIS

Spyridon

GRABNAR

Marko

GREKULA

Hanna

HERNÁNDEZ MARTÍN

África María

KROLZIK

Kristin

LEIRA

Alba

LIODAKIS

Antonios

LODEWYCKX

Angelique

LORUSSO

Rita

MARTINEZ SALVADOR

Alonso

MASCIOTRA

Nicola

MIAZGA

Ewelina Amelia

MONGE COSIN

Jose Luis

NAAS

Catherine

NADOLU

Adrian Marius

PERUCCONI

Chiara

PORON

Davy

ROSSETTI

Melissa

RUSSO

Flavia

SANDOR ANTUNES

Ivett

SAVIC

Radojka

SCARCIA

Giuseppe

SEDIĆ

Slađana

STOIAN

Valeria

STOIMIRSKA

Dimitrina

TELEIONI

Dafni

TERMINI

Daiana

TSORTANIDOU

Olga

VEDRIŠ

Vedran

VILA FLOR

Carlos

XAPELLI BRU

Sonia

ZANIN DE MELO

Thais Helena

Grade SC 2

Grade SC 2

| BERLEMONT | Aurélie Louise Anna |
| --- | --- |
| CINAR | Nevin |
| CUPERTINO | Giacomo |
| DAHNKE | Martina |
| DI LORENZO | Massimo |
| DIAZ GAMBOA | Paul Edward |
| FASSARI | Angelo |
| POLIDORI | Silvia |
| RODRIGUEZ BLOCH | Maria Noelia |
| SEPPÄLÄ | Jari-Pekka |
| VAN DEN BERGHE | Françoise |
| VASILOPOULOU | Panagiota |

BERLEMONT

Aurélie Louise Anna

CINAR

Nevin

CUPERTINO

Giacomo

DAHNKE

Martina

DI LORENZO

Massimo

DIAZ GAMBOA

Paul Edward

FASSARI

Angelo

POLIDORI

Silvia

RODRIGUEZ BLOCH

Maria Noelia

SEPPÄLÄ

Jari-Pekka

VAN DEN BERGHE

Françoise

VASILOPOULOU

Panagiota

The reserve lists will be valid until 31 December 2020.

31 December 2020

---

(1)  One or more successful candidates may explicitly have requested that their name not be published.

1

---
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0000701345
<NAME> USAIR GROUP, INC.
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1995
<CASH>                                         881,854
<SECURITIES>                                    19,831
<RECEIVABLES>                                  322,122<F1>
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0<F1>
<INVENTORY>                                    248,144
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,583,082
<PP&E>                                       6,342,488
<DEPRECIATION>                               2,301,059
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               6,955,008
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        2,484,696
<BONDS>                                      2,717,085
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          758,719
<PREFERRED>                                    213,153
<COMMON>                                        63,449
<OTHER-SE>                                 (1,112,390)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 6,955,008
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             7,474,348
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                7,152,661
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             302,593
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                128,272
<INCOME-TAX>                                     8,985
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            119,287
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   119,287
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.55
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0<F2>
<FN>
<F1>Receivables are presented net of allowances.
<F2>Fully diluted EPS are anti-dilutive and therefore not presented.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
* Pursuant to Local Rule 47.5, the court has determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in Local Rule 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

__________________ No. 96-40009 Summary Calendar

__________________ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus DEXTER BROWN, Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas USDC No. 6:95-CR-4-1
- - - - - - - - - - June 13, 1996 Before HIGGINBOTHAM, DUHÉ, and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Dexter Brown appeals from the denial of his motion to suppress. He argues that the district court erred by refusing to suppress crack cocaine discovered in his vehicle, in a bag inside his passenger's purse, during a traffic stop. He contends that neither the initial traffic stop nor the subsequent prolonged detention were reasonable under the Fourth Amendment. He also challenges the warrantless search of his passenger's purse. The government does not question Brown’s standing to challenge theNo. 96-40009 -2- search of his passenger’s purse, and thereby waives what would appear to be a determinative issue. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. See Ornelas v. United States , ___ U.S. ___, 1996 WL 276414 (U.S. May 28, 1996). Accordingly, we AFFIRM the judgment for essentially the reasons given by the district court. AFFIRMED.
#### George W. Cregier, Appellant, v. The Mayor, Aldermen and Commonalty of the City of New York, Respondent.

(Argued June 4, 1883;

decided June 12, 1883.)

*Nelson J. Waterbury*for appellant.

*D. J, Dean*for respondent.

Agree to affirm; no opinion.

All concur, except Rapallo, J., not voting.

Judgment affirmed.
Exhibit 32.1
                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Annual Report of MB Software  Corporation on Form 10-KSB,
as amended, for the period ending December 31, 2004 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof, I, Scott A. Haire,  Chief Executive
Officer and principal financial officer of the Company,  certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C.  ss. 1350, as adopted  pursuant to ss. 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of
2002, that:

1. The Report  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 Report  fairly  presents,  in all material
respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.



 /s/ Scott A. Haire
-------------------
Scott A. Haire,
Chairman of the Board,
(Chief Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer)


December 20, 2005