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

<ARTICLE> UT
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
related Form 10-Q financial statements for FirstEnergy Corp. and is
qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
(Amounts in 1,000's, except earnings per share.)
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0001031296
<NAME> FIRSTENERGY CORP.
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<BOOK-VALUE>                                  PER-BOOK
<TOTAL-NET-UTILITY-PLANT>                    9,224,174
<OTHER-PROPERTY-AND-INVEST>                  2,417,962
<TOTAL-CURRENT-ASSETS>                       1,411,430
<TOTAL-DEFERRED-CHARGES>                     5,329,618
<OTHER-ASSETS>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              18,383,184
<COMMON>                                        23,449
<CAPITAL-SURPLUS-PAID-IN>                    3,640,771
<RETAINED-EARNINGS>                            809,017
<TOTAL-COMMON-STOCKHOLDERS-EQ>               4,473,237
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          280,996
<PREFERRED>                                    648,395
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-NET>                         6,142,847
<SHORT-TERM-NOTES>                             108,787
<LONG-TERM-NOTES-PAYABLE>                            0
<COMMERCIAL-PAPER-OBLIGATIONS>                 119,982
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-CURRENT-PORT>                1,096,185
<PREFERRED-STOCK-CURRENT>                       44,264
<CAPITAL-LEASE-OBLIGATIONS>                          0
<LEASES-CURRENT>                                60,796
<OTHER-ITEMS-CAPITAL-AND-LIAB>               5,407,695
<TOT-CAPITALIZATION-AND-LIAB>               18,383,184
<GROSS-OPERATING-REVENUE>                    2,941,291
<INCOME-TAX-EXPENSE>                           194,342
<OTHER-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                   2,191,467
<TOTAL-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                   2,385,809
<OPERATING-INCOME-LOSS>                        555,482
<OTHER-INCOME-NET>                                   0
<INCOME-BEFORE-INTEREST-EXPEN>                 555,482
<TOTAL-INTEREST-EXPENSE>                       293,439
<NET-INCOME>                                   262,043
<PREFERRED-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                          0
<EARNINGS-AVAILABLE-FOR-COMM>                        0
<COMMON-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                       171,436
<TOTAL-INTEREST-ON-BONDS>                      514,463
<CASH-FLOW-OPERATIONS>                         485,411
<EPS-BASIC>                                       1.15
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.15


</TABLE>
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent *

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision **

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

NORMA SILVA-GARCIA, a.k.a. Priya

Chuwdry,

 Petitioner,

 v.

ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,

 Respondent.

No. 08-71997

Agency No. A077-318-938

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted March 8, 2011** 

Before: FARRIS, O’SCANNLAIN, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.

Norma Silva-Garcia, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of

the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing her appeal from an

immigration judge’s decision denying her application for asylum, withholding of

removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have

FILED

MAR 28 2011

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 08-71997

jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence factual

findings. Zehatye v. Gonzales, 453 F.3d 1182, 1184-85 (9th Cir. 2006). We deny

the petition for review.

Silva-Garcia contends that Muslims are persecuted in Mexico and that she

has a well-founded fear of persecution due to her conversion to Islam, her marriage

to a Muslim, and her use of a head covering. Substantial evidence supports the

agency’s determination that Silva-Garcia failed to establish a well-founded fear of

persecution because she failed to establish an objective basis for fearing harm in

Mexico. See Cuadras v. INS, 910 F.2d 567, 571 (9th Cir. 1990); Wakkary v.

Holder, 558 F.3d 1049, 1060-62 (9th Cir. 2009) (record did not compel a finding

of a pattern or practice of persecution). Accordingly, we reject her asylum claim.

Because Silva-Garcia failed to meet the lower standard of proof for asylum,

her claim for withholding of removal necessarily fails. See Zehatye, 453 F.3d at

1190.

Finally, substantial evidence supports the agency’s denial of CAT relief

because Silva-Garcia failed to establish it is more likely than not she would be

tortured if removed to Mexico. See Wakkary v. Holder, 558 F.3d 1049, 1067-68

(9th Cir. 2009).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
#### Carole Crosby, Respondent, v Blance Wineski, Appellant.

— In an action to recover damages for personal injuries sustained by plaintiff due to the alleged negligence of defendant in the control of her dog, defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated November 5, 1977, which denied her motion for a change of venue from Kings County to Richmond County. Order reversed, with $50 costs and disbursements, and motion granted. Plaintiff was bitten by defendant’s dog near the latter’s then residence in Staten Island. Although the record is clear that at the time of the occurrence plaintiff was a resident of Kings County, her own affidavit establishes that prior to the commencement of this action she moved to Staten Island and took up residence there. Since plaintiff did not reside in Kings County when the action was commenced, venue was improperly laid in that county and the motion to change the place of trial should have been granted (see CPLR 503, subd [a]). Hopkins, J. P., Titone, O’Connor and Cohalan, JJ., concur.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Marilyn Kelly

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, 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. 

 _________________________________________ 

 Clerk

April 25, 2011 

p0418 

Order 

 

April 25, 2011 

142231 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 142231 

 COA: 300302 

Saginaw CC: 09-033063-FH 

ARMANDO GONZALES, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the October 29, 2010 

order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the question presented should be reviewed by this Court.
#### Kathleen Morrissey, an Infant, by Her Guardian ad Litem, John Morrissey, et al., Respondents, v. Vincent Antonellis et al., Appellants.

In a negligence action to recover damages for personal injuries, medical expenses and loss of services, defendants appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, entered June 28, 1961 upon the decision of the court, after a non jury trial, in favor of the infant plaintiff for $8,134.50, and in favor of the plaintiff father for $2,000. The plaintiffs cross-appealed from the said judgment on the ground of inadequacy, but such cross appeal has been discontinued. Judgment affirmed, with costs. In our opinion, there was sufficient factual proof to support an inference that (a) defendants’ ear swerved or ran off the road and collided with the car in which the injured plaintiff was seated, while the latter car was parked off the travelled part of the roadway; and (b) that defendant Antonellis was negligent in the operation of the defendant Cichette’s ear. Beldoek, P. J., Kleinfeld, Christ, Brennan and Rabin, JJ., concur.
**Exhibit 32-6****Certificate Pursuant to Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 United States Code**     The undersigned officer hereby certifies, as to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q ofPECO Energy Company for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2005, that (i) the reportfully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities ExchangeAct of 1934, and (ii) the information contained in the report fairly presents, in allmaterial respects, the financial condition and results of operations of PECO Energy Company.        Date: October 26, 2005 /s/ John L. Skolds   John L. Skolds   PresidentExelon Energy Delivery
EXHIBIT 32.2


                            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 Twin Lakes  Delaware,  Inc. ( (the
"Company") on Form 10-KSB for the period ending  December 31, 2007 as filed with
the Securities  and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),  I,
Kirk M. Warshaw, Chief 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 fully  complies with the  requirements  of section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

      (2) The  information  contained  in the  Report  fairly  presents,  in all
material  respects,  the  financial  condition  and result of  operations of the
Company.

Dated: March 17, 2008


/s/ Kirk M. Warshaw
-------------------
Kirk M. Warshaw
Chief Financial Officer
(Principal Financial Officer)


A signed  original of this  certification  has been  provided to the Company and
will be retained by the Company and  furnished  to the  Securities  and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.
##### 



Written Statement of the Chief Executive Officer
of CNA Financial Corporation
Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350
(As adopted by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002)
  
    
    the Companys Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2008 filed
on the date hereof with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report) fully complies
with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;
and
    
    the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
 Dated: April 25, 2008/s/ Stephen W. LilienthalStephen W. LilienthalChief Executive Officer
#### In the Matter of Thomas A. Goepel, Appellant, v Board of Trustees of New York City Fire Department, Article 1-B Pension Fund, et al., Respondents.

[776 NYS2d 858]

In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, inter alia, to review a determination of the Board of Trustees of the New York City Fire Department, Article 1-B Pension Fund, dated April 18, 2000, denying the petitioner’s application for accidental disability retirement benefits, the petitioner appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Hall, J.), dated May 22, 2001, which denied the petition.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

The determination of the Board of Trustees of the New York City Fire Department, Article 1-B Pension Fund, awarding the petitioner only ordinary disability retirement benefits pursuant to a tie vote, was based on credible evidence showing that the petitioner’s disability was caused by a long-term degenerative condition. The petitioner failed to show, as a matter of law, that the disability was the result of a service-related injury *(see Matter of Meyer v Board of Trustees of N.Y. City Fire Dept., Art. 1-B Pension Fund,*90 NY2d 139 [1997]; *Matter of Ryan v Board of Trustees of N.Y. City Fire Dept., Art. 1-B Pension Fund,*247 AD2d 480 [1998]).

Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly denied the petition. Ritter, J.P., Townes, Mastro and Skelos, JJ., concur.
#### In the Matter of the Estate of Lena Novie, Deceased. In the Matter of the Estate of Sam Novie, Deceased. Al Novie et al., Appellants; Frances Bergman, Respondent.

Third Department,

January 12, 1965.

*332*Oppenheim & Oppenheim (Stephen L. Oppenheim*of counsel), for appellants.

*Goldstein & Goldstein (Carl P. Goldstein*and *Benjamin M. Goldstein*of counsel), for respondent.

Reynolds, J.

This is an appeal from an order of the Surrogate’s Court of Sullivan County consolidating the proceedings in ¡the estates of Sam and Lena Novie, husband and wife, and authorizing the issuance of letters of - temporary administration in .the proceedings so consolidated.

In 1958 Lena and Sam Novie executed a joint will. Lena Novie died September 30, 1963 and a proceeding to probate the will was instituted, which was contested by appellants. Before .this contest had progressed beyond the preliminary .stages, Sam Novie died on April 20, 1964. A proceeding was then filed to probate the will on his behalf and again appellants contested the proceeding. Respondent, who was named the executrix of both estates, petitioned for the appointment of a temporary administrator in both estates and .subsequently moved also to consolidate both probate proceedings. The Surrogate found that although the application for letters of temporary administration was technically defective because the title referred to both estates rather than each one separately, the requested consolidation should be granted *nunc pro tunc*as of May 19, 1964 thus curing the defect. The crucial issue is thus whether consolidation was properly ordered. Section 65 ¡of ,the Surrogate’s Court Act permits the Surrogate “when two or more proceedings are pending involving in whole, or in part, the same matters * * * in his discretion [to] consolidate such proceedings upon such terms as shall appear to him to be equitable and just”. The granting of consolidation is thus clearly discretionary with the Surrogate, and our review of his determination is therefore limited as with any discretionary determination. We can find no reported cases which deal with the specific situation here involved, and we are aware that *333many cogent arguments can be raised for denying consolidation in cases of this general type (see *Matter of Pinkney,*117 Misc. 262; *Matter of Jones,*50 N. Y. S. 2d 697). However, in the instant case, we find no reason to disturb the Surrogate’s judgment. *Matter of Stacer*(10 A D 2d 810) is factually inapposite.

The order should be affirmed, with costs to respondent, payable out of the estate.

Gibson, P. J., Herlihy, Taylor and Hamm, JJ., concur.

Order affirmed, with costs' to respondent payable from the estate.
#### 8.801 Definitions.

As used in this subpart—

*Government printing* means printing, binding, and blankbook work for the use of an executive department, independent agency, or establishment of the Government.

*Related supplies,* means supplies that are used and equipment that is usable in printing and binding operations.

[48 FR 42129, Sept. 19, 1983, as amended at 52 FR 9037, Mar. 20, 1987; 66 FR 2128, Jan. 10, 2001]
#### 970.5223-3 Agreement regarding Workplace Substance Abuse Programs at DOE sites.

As prescribed in 970.2305-4(a), the contracting officer shall insert the following provision:

# Agreement Regarding Workplace Substance Abuse Programs at DOE Sites (DEC 2010)

(a) Any contract awarded as a result of this solicitation will be subject to the policies, criteria, and procedures of 10 CFR part 707, Workplace Substance Abuse Programs at DOE Sites.

(b) By submission of its offer, the officer agrees to provide to the Contracting Officer, within 30 days after notification of selection for award, or award of a contract, whichever occurs first, pursuant to this solicitation, its written workplace substance abuse program consistent with the requirements of 10 CFR part 707. DOE may grant an extension to the notification or implementation period if necessary as per 10 CFR 707.5(g).

(c) Failure of the offeror to agree to the condition of responsibility set forth in paragraph (b) of this provision, renders the offeror unqualified and ineligible for award.

(End of provision)

[65 FR 81009, Dec. 22, 2000, as amended at 74 FR 36380, July 22, 2009; 75 FR 68220, Nov. 5, 2010]
Featured Grant OpportunitySchool Emergency Response to Violence (Project SERV) (Funding Opportunity) 

Featured Grant OpportunityShare with Youth: NOAA Student Opportunities Database

Featured Grant OpportunityShort Courses in Social Determinants of Health for Research Education in Nursing Research (Funding...

Featured Grant OpportunityResearch on Law Enforcement Responses to Opioid Overdoses (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityComprehensive Partnerships to Advance Cancer Health Equity (CPACHE) Program (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityRisk and Protective Factors of Family Health and Family Level Interventions (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityPersonnel Development to Improve Services and Results for Children with Disabilities--Doctoral...

Featured Grant OpportunityStanding Announcement for Tribal Title IV-E Plan Development Grants (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityProviding Research Education Experiences to Enhance Inclusivity for a Diverse Substance Use and...

Featured Grant OpportunityFY 2024 Research on School-Based Hate Crimes (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityChallenge America (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityResearch and Evaluation on Firearm Violence and Mass Shootings (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityNational Juvenile Court Data Archive (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityGraduate Research Fellowship (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityCommunity Programs for Outreach and Intervention with Youth and Young Adults at Clinical High Risk...

Featured Grant OpportunityPrint and Disseminate Child Victims and Witnesses Support Materials (Funding Opportunity)

## Breadcrumb

            -           Young Native Americans Share School Culture Experiences with Secretary Duncan      

# Young Native Americans Share School Culture Experiences with Secretary Duncan

Secretary of Education Arne Duncan recently invited 15 young Native Americans to attend a Student Voices Session, during which they discussed their experiences in school and expressed their needs for cultural and personal support from the school community.

https://blog.ed.gov/2015/02/young-native-americans-share-school-culture-experiences-with-secretary-duncan/
### Stedman, Deana (FAA) From: 

### Sent: To: 

### Subject: Jacquet, Daniel (FAA) Thursday, September 03, 2015 11 :28 AM Stedman, Deana (FAA) FW: Gulfstream Petition for Exemption from 14 CFR 25
.813(e)

From: kip
.wiltse @gulfstream.com [mailto:kip.wiltse @gulfstream.com] 

### Sent: Thursday, June 18, 2015 5:43 AM 

### To: Wendler, Carla (FAA); Jacquet, Daniel (FAA) 

### Cc: jeff.kreide @gulfstream.com; Knut.Pedersen @gulfstream.com; bill
.whitton @gulfstream.com 

### Subject: Gulfstream Petition for Exemption from 14 CFR 25.813(e) Carla 

### I Dan , Based on our discussion yesterday afternoon we have reviewed of 14 CFR 25
.813 and respectfully request our petition for exemption (G-ODA-15-0454) be modified to include subparagraph (d). Our petition should now be for the exemption from 14 CFR 25.813(d)(e) based upon the factors contained within our petition letter G-ODA-15-0454 dated June 11 , 2015. Thank you for your consideration of this additional subparagraph
. Please let me know ifyou have any questions or concerns. Best Regards, Kip Wiltse, Director Gulfstream Enterprise ODA Program Administrator, STC 

### I MRA 

### I PMA Office: 912-395-8575 Fax: 912-965-2900 Cell : 912-658-6308 "Be the FAA's foremost delegated organization by using industry-leading processes to certify, produce, and support the safest civil aviation products and services" This e-mail message, including all attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain Personal Information under General Dynamics policy CP 07-105 and/or legally privileged and confidential information
. Any Personal Information can be accessed only by authorized personnel of General Dynamics and its approved service providers and may be used only as permitted by General Dynamics and its policies. Contractual restrictions apply to third parties
. Ifyou are not an intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you have either received this message in error or through interception , and that any review, use, distribution , copying or disclosure ofthis message or its attachments is strictly prohibited and is subject to criminal and civil penalties
. All personal messages express solely the sender's views and not those of Gulfstream Aerospace Corporation. Ifyou received this message in error, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies ofthe original message.

1
[if !vml]>[endif]>

[if !vml]>[endif]>

You have reached the FederalDepository Library Program Electronic Collection (FDLP/EC) Archive. Thisarchive assures ongoing access to publications in the FDLP/EC. Access topublications in the archive is available through GPO's suite of cataloging andlocator services, including the Catalog of U.S. Government Publications(CGP).  Archived copies of publications are retrieved in the event thatpublications are no longer available from the original publishing agency site. 
**Title: Geologyof the High Climb pegmatite, Custer County, South Dakota**
 
Report | Plate 1-1
 
SuDoc Number:
Item Number:
CGP systemNumber:
 
May 15, 2018