alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan 

November 29, 2007 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

134929 Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman,

 Justices 

v SC: 134929 

 COA: 268491 

Kent CC: 04-011522-FC 

ERIC DEMOND ANDERSON, 

 Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the August 21, 2007 

judgment 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. 

l1119 

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. 

November 29, 2007 

 Clerk
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                       2,815,122
<SECURITIES>                                 1,454,038
<RECEIVABLES>                                5,864,049
<ALLOWANCES>                                   159,689
<INVENTORY>                                  6,822,656
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            18,080,430
<PP&E>                                      29,267,858
<DEPRECIATION>                              15,670,372
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              31,677,916
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        5,482,642
<BONDS>                                      4,050,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     1,155,596
<OTHER-SE>                                  19,663,516
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                31,677,916
<SALES>                                     22,304,724
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            22,495,480   
<CGS>                                       15,899,457
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               15,899,457
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             3,823,236   
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                15,000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             208,547
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              2,727,744
<INCOME-TAX>                                 1,029,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          1,698,744
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 1,698,744
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.46
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.46
        

</TABLE>
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 01-2407

WILBERT HATCHER FREELAND, Individually;

CHRISTINE EVADNEY FREELAND, Individually;

MASSIEKA HOLNESS, Individually, daughter of

Christine E. Freeland and stepdaughter of

Wilbert H. Freeland; DEJOURNE FREELAND, a

minor by Wilbert Hatcher Freeland, Christine

Evadney Freeland, her father and mother;

MONICA FFRENCH, Individually, mother of

Christine E. Freeland, grandmother of Massieka

H. Holness and Dejourne Freeland, mother in

law of Wilbert H. Freeland,

Plaintiffs - Appellants,

versus

FRANCIS B. CHILDRESS, Trooper First Class,

Individually and as a State Police, Bureau of

Drug and Criminal Enforcement, Westminster

Barracks,

Defendant - Appellee,

and

MARYLAND STATE POLICE; OFFICE OF THE MAYOR AND

TOWN COUNCIL; SUPERINTENDENT, of the Maryland

State Police,

Defendants.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

Maryland, at Baltimore. William M. Nickerson, District Judge.

(CA-99-3552-WMN)
2

Submitted: March 20, 2002 Decided: April 8, 2002

Before LUTTIG and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Wilbert Hatcher Freeland, Christine Evadney Freeland, Massieka

Holness, Dejourne Freeland, Monica Ffrench, Appellants Pro Se.

Mark Holdsworth Bowen, Assistant Attorney General, Pikesville,

Maryland, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM:

Appellants appeal the district court’s order denying relief on

their 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp. 2001) complaint. We have

reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no

reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the

district court. See Freeland v. Childress, No. CA-99-3552-WMN (D.

Md. Oct. 22, 2001). We dispense with oral argument because the

facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the

materials before the court and argument would not aid the

decisional process.

AFFIRMED
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 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

            -           Weather Alerts      

# Weather Alerts

Regular updates and alerts from the National Weather Service.

http://www.nws.noaa.gov/
489292 O ~59 (In pocket)

BULLETIN 1028 PLATE 48

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
a GEOLOGICAL SURVEY EXPLANATION be ,
3000' 5 aad 3000
al Qco a
a =] ja— Vv ~
Alluvium Cinder cone deposits
Bedded Plagioclase basalt flows
of cones C and D
Qep ,
a Vent pl + 2000
2000'— sols Early postcaldera pyroclastic
precaldera rocks
=
1560-foot level (later stage) Sore. = 1560-foot level (later stage)
4 ee ae inet Came se ‘ = = r
1350-foot level (earl RE MODI) PIII th CAUUTNTTTNATTIA__1350-foot level (early stage)
a et ey ta Le RC
Z GEILE EL CG =~N SEA ASSS 1140., 1120. and 1100-foot
Li LOA ACI ICA LLGIESSS SS SSSA SESS levels (very late stages)
SS SISA SS :
» 4 = > alanine ESD Le LAST
1000' = a
Qep-and precaldera rocks Ey Qep and precaldera rocks
=|
Z|
=
= t
4 =|
1000 ty) 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 Feet =|
L 1 L L in 1 J i
=
z=
=
Sea lever Sea level

SECTION THROUGH CONES C AND D SHOWING DIFFERENT LAKE LEVELS AND RELATIONS BETWEEN ROCKS CONTEMPORANEOUS WITH CALDERA LAKE,UMNAK ISLAND, ALEUTIAN ISLANDS , ALASKA
#### *R. and J. Plummer vs. Crain.*

Petition & SuMMOKS.

Case 82.

Error to the Fleming Circuit; William P. Roper, Judge'.

October 2.

*Pleading. Appearance. Parties.*

.One not named in the process, nor in the declaration as defendant, is not made parly, by entering an appearance to the action, and, therefore, no judgment can be afterwards entered against him by default.

*J\P*Connell, for plaintiffs.

Chief Justice Bibb

delivered the Opinion of the Court.

Crain sued by petition and summons, claiming a debt of Reuben Plummer; the petition states he holds a note on Reuben Plummer, “and on John Plummer who is not sued;” the summons is against Reuben only, and was executed on him. The record states that John Plummer came into court and entered his appearance; at a subsequent term judgment by default was entered .against Reuben and John.

John was not sued; no process was prayed against him, none taken against him; his voluntary appearance in court did not make him a party; it did not alter the plaintiff's petition, and process, nor authorize a judgment against him.

It is therefore considered by the court that the judgment be reversed, and the cause remanded for farther proceedings against Reuben Plummer.

Plaintiffs to recover their costs in this court,
#### Elliston C. Ashby, Respondent, v Long Island Rail Road Company et al., Appellants.

[777 NYS2d 177]

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendants appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Bárbaro, J.), dated February 13, 2003, as denied that branch of their motion which was for summary judgment dismissing the complaint as time-barred.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The plaintiff was hired by the defendant Long Island Rail Road Company (hereinafter the LIRR) in 1980. On or about February 20, 1998, the plaintiff commenced this action under the Federal Employers Liability Act (45 USC §§ 51-60, hereinafter FELA) against the LIRR and the defendant Metropolitan Transportation Authority, seeking damages for “binaural sensory-neural hearing loss” and other personal injuries allegedly sustained as a result of his long-term exposure to harmful levels of noise during his course of employment. The defendants moved for summary judgment, arguing, inter alia, that the plaintiffs claims for hearing loss were barred by the applicable three-year statute of limitations *(see*45 USC § 56).

Contrary to the defendants’ contention, the Supreme Court properly denied that branch of their motion which was for summary judgment dismissing the complaint as time-barred since they failed to submit sufficient evidence to establish that the action was barred by the statute of limitations *(see Guiher v South Buffalo Ry. Co.,*190 AD2d 997, 998 [1993]). The plaintiffs cause of action accrued when he knew or should have known of his hearing loss and its cause *(see Urie v Thompson,*337 US 163, *652170 [1949]; *United States v Kubrick,*444 US 111, 122-125 [1979]). The plaintiff was diagnosed with permanent hearing loss on June 20, 1995. Although he testified that he experienced ringing in his ears before the statute’s accrual date, he also testified that the ringing was temporary, and that he was unaware that he was suffering from progressive hearing loss until June 1995. Since the defendants failed to establish that the plaintiff’s cause of action accrued before June 20, 1995, the Supreme Court properly denied that branch of their motion which was for summary judgment dismissing the complaint as time-barred *(see Urie v Thompson, supra; United States v Kubrick, supra; Mix v Delaware & Hudson Ry. Co.,*345 F3d 82 [2003], *cert denied*— US —, 124 S Ct 1423 [2004]; *Pagano v Long Is. R.R. Co., 5*AD3d 451 [2004]). Ritter, J.P., S. Miller, Adams and Cozier, JJ., concur.
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 YaSheng Group (the “Company”) on Form 10-K/A for the period ended December 31, 2012 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), the undersigned, in the capacities and on the date indicated below, hereby certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of his knowledge:
 
 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 operation of the Company.
 
 Date: March 28, 2013By: /s/ Zhou Chang ShengZhou Chang ShengChief Executive Officer

(Principal Executive Officer)
REGULATORY EVALUATION

Directorate Identifier: 2012

- NM

- 200

- AD

Executive Order 12866:

Could the AD be considered a “significant regulatory action”?

YES ( ) explain NO (X)

DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures:

Is the AD significant?

YES ( ) explain NO (X)

Regulatory Flexibility Act:

Will the AD have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities?

YES ( ) explain NO (X)

Intrastate Aviation in Alaska:

This AD could affect intrastate aviation in Alaska. Is it appropriate t o include specific

requirements for aircraft operated in Alaska, where aviation might be the only mode of

transportation?

YES ( ) explain NO (X)
§ 1.424 Motions and requests. ( a ) *General.* All motions and requests shall be filed with the Hearing Clerk, and served upon all the parties except motions and requests made on the record during the oral hearing.
( b ) *Motions entertained.* No dispositive motions, including motions to dismiss on the pleadings and motions for summary judgment, shall be entertained unless specifically mentioned herein or allowed in the discretion of the Judge.
( c ) *Contents.* All written motions and requests shall state the particular order, ruling, or action desired and the grounds therefore.
( d ) *Response to motions and requests.* Within 5 days after service of any written motion or request, or within such shorter or longer period as may be fixed by the Judge, an opposing party may file a response to the motion or request. The other party shall have no right to reply to the response.
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

            -           The Revolution of Responsibility      

# The Revolution of Responsibility

4-H is encouraging young people to give a voice to the dedication and commitment they’ve shown in addressing challenges in their communities and creating lasting, positive change. Read the stories of 4-H youth who joined the Revolution of Responsibility by using creative ideas to address issues in their community. 

http://www.4-h.org/about/revolution/
#### § 1005.41 [Reserved]
§ 1032.71 Payments to the producer-settlement fund. Each handler shall make payment to the producer-settlement fund in a manner that provides receipt of the funds by the market administrator no later than the 14th day after the end of the month (except as provided in § 1000.90). Payment shall be the amount, if any, by which the amount specified in paragraph (a) of this section exceeds the amount specified in paragraph (b) of this section: ( a ) The total value of milk to the handler for the month as determined pursuant to § 1032.60.
( b ) The sum of: ( 1 ) An amount obtained by multiplying the total hundredweight of producer milk as determined pursuant to § 1000.44(c) by the producer price differential as adjusted pursuant to § 1032.75;
( 2 ) An amount obtained by multiplying the total pounds of protein, other solids, and butterfat contained in producer milk by the protein, other solids, and butterfat prices respectively;
( 3 ) The total value of the somatic cell adjustment to producer milk; and
( 4 ) An amount obtained by multiplying the pounds of skim milk and butterfat for which a value was computed pursuant to § 1032.60(i) by the producer price differential as adjusted pursuant to § 1032.75 for the location of the plant from which received.
[64 FR 47985, Sept. 1, 1999, as amended at 65 FR 82838, Dec. 28, 2000; 68 FR 7067, Feb. 12, 2003]
9904.409-40 Fundamental requirement. ( a ) The depreciable cost of a tangible capital asset (or group of assets) shall be assigned to cost accounting periods in accordance with the following criteria: ( 1 ) The depreciable cost of a tangible capital asset shall be its capitalized cost less its estimated residual value.
( 2 ) The estimated service life of a tangible capital asset (or group of assets) shall be used to determine the cost accounting periods to which the depreciable cost will be assigned.
( 3 ) The method of depreciation selected for assigning the depreciable cost of a tangible capital asset (or group of assets) to the cost accounting periods representing its estimated service life shall reflect the pattern of consumption of services over the life of the asset.
( 4 ) The gain or loss which is recognized upon disposition of a tangible capital asset shall be assigned to the cost accounting period in which the disposition occurs.
( b ) The annual depreciation cost of a tangible capital asset (or group of assets) shall be allocated to cost objectives for which it provides service in accordance with the following criteria: ( 1 ) Depreciation cost may be charged directly to cost objectives only if such charges are made on the basis of usage and only if depreciation costs of all like assets used for similar purposes are charged in the same manner.
( 2 ) Where tangible capital assets are part of, or function as, an organizational unit whose costs are charged to other cost objectives based on measurement of the services provided by the organizational unit, the depreciation cost of such assets shall be included as part of the cost of the organizational unit.
( 3 ) Depreciation costs which are not allocated in accordance with paragraph (b) (1) or (2) of this subsection, shall be included in appropriate indirect cost pools.
( 4 ) The gain or loss which is recognized upon disposition of a tangible capital asset, where material in amount, shall be allocated in the same manner as the depreciation cost of the asset has been or would have been allocated for the cost accounting period in which the disposition occurs. Where such gain or loss is not material, the amount may be included in an appropriate indirect cost pool.
Form of Waiver of Registration Rights


EXHIBIT 10.1




[Aspen Letterhead]







May 9, 2017




[Investor Address]







Re: Waiver of Registration Rights

Dear _______: 




This letter agreement documents our understanding regarding the waiver of your registration rights under that certain Registration Rights Agreement (the “Agreement”) between each of the Purchasers (as defined therein) and Aspen Group, Inc. (the “Company”).  In accordance with Section 6(f) of the Agreement, the Agreement may be amended and the obligations and rights may be waived if Holders of more than 67% or more of the securities issued in the April 17, 2017 offering (the “April Offering”) agree in writing to such amendment or waiver.  




In consideration for the payment to me by the Company of 1.5% of my investment in the April Offering and other good and valuable consideration which is hereby acknowledged, I hereby agree to waive all registration rights with respect to the securities I purchased in the April Offering subject to the Company obtaining identical waivers by Holders (inclusive of the securities held by me) of more than 67% of the securities issued in the April Offering.  After receipt of the payment and the requisite waivers, I hereby acknowledge that I will have no further rights under the Agreement.  




If you agree to the foregoing, please sign below.  




 

		
	 
	ASPEN GROUP, INC. 


	 
	 

	 
	 

	 
	Michael Mathews, Chief Financial Officer







I hereby agree to the foregoing.  







__________________________________

__________________________________
[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 40 (Wednesday, March 3, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Page 12510]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-04390]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

[Disaster Declaration #16876 and #16877; Texas Disaster Number TX-
00591]


Presidential Declaration Amendment of a Major Disaster for the 
State of Texas

AGENCY: U.S. Small Business Administration.

ACTION: Amendment 2.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This is an amendment of the Presidential declaration of a 
major disaster for the State of Texas (FEMA-4586-DR), dated 02/19/2021.
    Incident: Severe Winter Storms.
    Incident Period: 02/11/2021 and continuing.

DATES: Issued on 02/25/2021.
    Physical Loan Application Deadline Date: 04/20/2021.
    Economic Injury (EIDL) Loan Application Deadline Date: 11/19/2021.

ADDRESSES: Submit completed loan applications to: U.S. Small Business 
Administration, Processing and Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport 
Road, Fort Worth, TX 76155.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: A. Escobar, Office of Disaster 
Assistance, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street SW, 
Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416, (202) 205-6734.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice of the President's major disaster 
declaration for the State of TEXAS, dated 02/19/2021, is hereby amended 
to include the following areas as adversely affected by the disaster:
Primary Counties (Physical Damage and Economic Injury Loans): Atascosa, 
Bandera, Brooks, Duval, Eastland, Ector, Goliad, Howard, Jim Hogg, 
Karnes, Kleberg, Leon, Llano, Newton, Robertson, Trinity, Webb, Willacy
Contiguous Counties/Parishes (Economic Injury Loans Only):
    Texas: Andrews, Crane, Dawson, Glasscock, La Salle, Martin, 
McMullen, Midland, Real, Upton, Ward, Winkler, Zapata.
    Louisiana: Beauregard, Vernon.
    All other information in the original declaration remains 
unchanged.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number 59008)

Cynthia Pitts,
Acting Associate Administrator for Disaster Assistance.
[FR Doc. 2021-04390 Filed 3-2-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8026-03-P