alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
9904.413-64 Transition method. ( a ) To be acceptable, any method of transition from compliance with Standard 9904.413 in effect prior to March 30, 1995, to compliance with Standard 9904.413 in effect as of March 30, 1995, must follow the equitable principle that costs, which have been previously provided for, shall not be redundantly provided for under revised methods. Conversely, costs that have not previously been provided for must be provided for under the revised method. This transition subsection is not intended to qualify for purposes of assignment or allocation, pension costs which have previously been disallowed for reasons other than ERISA funding limitations.
( b ) The sum of all portions of unfunded actuarial liability identified pursuant to Standard 9904.413, effective March 30, 1995, including such portions of unfunded actuarial liability determined for transition purposes, is subject to the requirements for assignment of 9904.412-40(c).
( c ) Furthermore, this Standard, effective March 30, 1995, clarifies, but is not intended to create, rights of the contracting parties, and specifies techniques for determining adjustments pursuant to 9904.413-50(c)(12). These rights and techniques should be used to resolve outstanding issues that will affect pension costs of contracts subject to this Standard.
( d ) The method, or methods, employed to achieve an equitable transition shall be consistent with the provisions of this Standard and shall be approved by the contracting officer.
( e ) All adjustments shall be prospective only. However, costs/prices of prior and existing contracts not subject to price adjustment may be considered in determining the appropriate transition method or adjustment amount for the computation of costs/prices of contracts subject to this Standard.
[60 FR 16557, Mar. 30, 1995]
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

            -  Announcements 
            -           Report: Take Action for Adolescents: A Call to Action for Adolescent Health and Well-Being      

# Report: Take Action for Adolescents: A Call to Action for Adolescent Health and Well-Being

This report (PDF, 35 pages) outlines eight goals and aligned initial action steps that various populations can take to help create the coordinated systems, services, and supports young people need to thrive. The eight goals are: 
                  -  Eliminate disparities to advance health equity  
                  -  Increase youth agency and youth engagement  
                  -  Ensure access to safe and supportive environments  
                  -  Increase coordination and collaboration within and across systems  
                  -  Expand access to health care and human services  
                  -  Strengthen training and support for caring adults  
                  -  Improve health information and health literacy  
                  -  Support, translate, and disseminate research.   

This report includes examples of federal programs and resources that focus on improving and supporting adolescent health and well-being. **Learn more** (PDF, 35 pages).
#### § 1051.8 Nonpool plant.

See § 1000.8.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>             5
<LEGEND>
This  schedule  contains  summary  financial   information  extracted  from  the
Company's  Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended  December 31, 1998 and is qualified
in its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>

<S>                                      <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                            3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                        MAR-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                                           OCT-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                             DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                                      $161,269
<SECURITIES>                                                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                                                393,578
<ALLOWANCES>                                                  40,000
<INVENTORY>                                                        0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                           1,882,287
<PP&E>                                                     6,346,320
<DEPRECIATION>                                             4,241,256
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                             1,974,585
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                      5,536,205
<BONDS>                                                            0
<COMMON>                                                           0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                         33,133
<PREFERRED>                                               (3,483,412)
<OTHER-SE>                                                 4,342,534
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                                       0
<SALES>                                                    1,944,354
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                             201,705
<CGS>                                                              0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                              1,770,290
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                                   0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                                   0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                           134,180
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                              241,590
<INCOME-TAX>                                                  18,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                                0
<DISCONTINUED>                                                     0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                                    0
<CHANGES>                                                          0
<NET-INCOME>                                                 223,590
<EPS-BASIC>                                                   0.07
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                   0.07


</TABLE>
# U nit edSta tes C ou rt o f A pp eal s For t h e Firs t C ircu it

No. 08-2393 MARILYN KUNELIUS, Plaintiff, Appellant,

v . TOWN OF STOW; THE TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND; CRAIG A. MACDONNELL, in his individual capacity,

Defendants, Appellees, A PARTNERSHIP OF UNKNOWN NAME BETWEEN TOWN OF STOW AND THE TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND,

Defendant.

ERRATA SHEET The opinion of this Court issued on November 9, 2009, is amended as follows: The correct spelling of the Defendant-Appellee's last name is "MacDonnell." The sentence at page 10, line 11 should read " . . . most of the forest acres . . . ." At page 12, line 17, the "a" before "realized" is deleted. At page 12, footnote 2, "2009" is replaced by "2003." At page 41, line 23, "of" is replaced by "off."
#### Hulda Engels, Appellant, v City of New York et al., Respondents, et al., Defendants.

[776 NYS2d 837]

*662In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals, as limited by her brief, from so much of (1) an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Flug, J.), entered February 5, 2003, as granted those branches of the motion of the defendant City of New York and the separate motion of the defendants Colton Condominium, MPJ Realty, Inc., and Leonard Jacobs, which were for summary judgment dismissing the causes of action to recover damages pursuant to Labor Law § 240 (1) and § 241 (6) insofar as asserted against them, and (2) a judgment of the same court entered March 13, 2003, as, upon the order, dismissed those causes of action insofar as asserted against those defendants.

Ordered that the appeal from the order is dismissed; and it is further,

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed; and it is further,

Ordered that one bill of costs is awarded to the respondents appearing separately and filing separate briefs.

The appeal from the intermediate order must be dismissed because the right of direct appeal therefrom terminated with the entry of judgment in the action *(see Matter of Aho,*39 NY2d 241, 248 [1976]). The issues raised on appeal from the order are brought up for review and have been considered on the appeal from the judgment *(see*CPLR 5501 [a] [1]).

The causes of action based on Labor Law § 240 (1) and § 241 (6) were properly dismissed insofar as asserted against the respondents since the plaintiff was not involved in the construction or alteration of a structure or building at the time of her fall *(see Joblon v Solow,*91 NY2d 457 [1998]; *Rogala v Van Bourgondien,*263 AD2d 535, 536-537 [1999]; *Luthi v Long Is. Resource Corp.,*251 AD2d 554 [1998]; *Tanzer v Terzi Prods.,*244 AD2d 224 [1997]).

In light of our determination, we need not reach the parties’ remaining contentions. Florio, J.P., Krausman, Cozier and Rivera, JJ., concur.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

, Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Stephen J. Markman

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano

, 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 March 20, 2013

t0313 

# Order

March 20, 2013

146115

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff

- Appellee,

v SC: 146115

COA: 298385

St Joseph CC: 09

- 015639

- FC

MARSHA ANNE SPRINGER,

Defendant

- Appellant.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the September 13, 2012

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

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
<PAGE>

                                                   Exhibit (23)-1
                                                   Unicom Corporation
                                                   Form 10-Q  File No. 1-11375



                   CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
                   -----------------------------------------



     As independent public accountants, we hereby consent to the incorporation
by reference of our report in this Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended
September 30, 1999, into Unicom Corporation's previously filed prospectuses
dated March 18, 1994, constituting part of Form S-4 Registration Statement File
No. 33-52109, as amended (relating to Common Stock of Unicom Corporation), as
further amended by Post-Effective Amendment No. 1 on Form S-8 (relating to
Commonwealth Edison Company's Employee Savings and Investment Plan) and Post-
Effective Amendment No. 2 on Form S-8 (relating to Unicom Corporation's Employee
Stock Purchase Plan), Form S-8 Registration Statement File No. 33-56991
(relating to Unicom Corporation's Long-Term Incentive Plan), Form S-4
Registration Statement File No. 333-01003 (relating to Unicom Corporation's
Common Stock), Form S-8 Registration Statement File No. 333-04749 (relating to
Unicom Corporation's 1996 Directors' Fee Plan), Form S-8 Registration Statements
File Nos. 333-10613 and 333-26779 (relating to Commonwealth Edison Company's
Employee Savings and Investment Plan) and Form S-8 Registration Statement File
No. 333-39677 (relating to the Unicom Corporation's Management Deferred
Compensation Plan).


                                    Arthur Andersen LLP


Chicago, Illinois
November 15, 1999
`POWER OF ATTORNEY FOR EXECUTING FORMS 3 4 AND 5





 Know all by these present, that the undersigned hereby constitutes

and appoints each of Andrew B. Nace, Jane R. Grimm, M. Paige Savage,

and Clarence B. Brown, signing singly, his/her true and lawful attorney-

in-fact to:



1. execute for and on behalf of the undersigned Forms 3, 4 and 5 in

accordance with Section 16(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as

amended (the "Act"), and the rules thereunder;



2.  do and perform any and all acts for an on behalf of the undersigned that

may be necessary or desirable to complete the execution of any such Forms

3, 4 or 5 and the timely filing of such form with the United States

Securities and Exchange Commission and any other authority; and



3.  take any other action of any type whatsoever in connection with the

foregoing that in the opinion of such attorney-in-fact, may be of benefit

to, in the best interest of, or legally required by, the undersigned, it

being understood that the documents executed by such attorney-in-fact on

behalf of the undersigned pursuant to this Power of Attorney shall be in

such form and shall contain such terms and conditions as such attorney-

in-fact may approve in his/her discretion.



 The undersigned hereby grants to each such attorney-in-fact full

power and authority to do and perform all and every act and thing

whatsoever requisite, necessary and proper to be done in the exercise of

any of the rights and powers herein granted, as fully to all intents and

purposes as the undersigned might or could do if personally present, with

full power of substitution or revocation, hereby ratifying and confirming

all that such attorney-in-fact, or his/her substitute or substitutes,

shall lawfully do or cause to be done by virtue of this Power of Attorney

and the rights and powers herein granted.  The undersigned acknowledges

that the foregoing attorneys-in-fact, in serving in such capacity at the

request of the undersigned, are not assuming any of the undersigned's

responsibilities to comply with Section 16 of the Act.





EXECUTED as of this 30th day of May, 2019.



/s/ Patty S. Brinda Signature



Patty S. Brinda Printed Name`
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-7743

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

RICHARD LEE BUTLER,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

South Carolina, at Charleston. Patrick Michael Duffy, District

Judge. (2:02-cr-00823-PMD-2; 2:06-cv-01182-PMD)

Submitted: April 19, 2007 Decided: April 23, 2007

Before NIEMEYER, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Richard Lee Butler, Appellant Pro Se. Robert Hayden Bickerton,

Assistant United States Attorney, Charleston, South Carolina, for

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Richard Lee Butler seeks to appeal the district court’s

order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion. The

order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a

certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). A

certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial

showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C.

§ 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by

demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that any

assessment of the constitutional claims by the district court is

debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by

the district court is likewise debatable. Miller-El v. Cockrell,

537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484

(2000); Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th Cir. 2001). We have

independently reviewed the record and conclude that Butler has not

made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of

appealability and dismiss the appeal. 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.

DISMISSED
179 So. 306

#### STATE v. TABOR et al.

No. 34687.

Feb. 7, 1938.

Carroll Montet, of Thibodaux, for relators.

C. A. Morvant, Acting Dist. Atty., of Thibodaux, for respondents.

Milling, GodchauX, Saal & Milling and Lawrence K. Benson, all of New Orleans, amici curiae.

HIGGINS, Justice.

The defendants were convicted of violating Act No. 130 of 1936, in having trapped fur-bearing animals, upon swamplands of others, without their consent, and were each sentenced by the trial judge to pay a fine of $50 and costs, and ten days in jail, and, in default of payment of the fine and costs, to serve an additional sixty days in jail. They reserved a bill of exception when the trial court overruled their motions in arrest of judgment, predicated on the ground that the conviction and sentence were null and void, as Act No. 130 of 1936 was unconstitutional, being in violation of clause 18 of section 4 of article 4 and section 6 of article '4 of the Constitution of 1921.

After sentence was imposed upon them, defendants applied ’to this court for writs of certiorari, prohibition, mandamus, and habeas corpus, which were granted.

Section 6 of article 4 of the Constitution of 1921, prohibits the Legislature from passing any local or special law “not enumerated in Section 4 of this article, unless notice *255of the intention to apply therefor shall have been published, without cost to the State, in the locality where the matter or things to be affected may be situated.”

In the case of State of Louisiana v. Herman Clement, *188*La. 923, *178*So. 493, the defendants attack the constitutionality of Act No. 130 of 1936 on this identical ground. We held that since the statute contained a provision which limited its application to lands situated less than 150 miles from the shore line of the Gulf of Mexico, it was a local or special law and not a general one, and that, therefore, since notice of intention to apply therefor had not been published in accordance with the provisions of section 6, article 4 of the Constitution, the statute was clearly unconstitutional.

For the reasons assigned, it is ordered, adjudged, and decreed that Act No. 130 of 1936 is declared unconstitutional, null, and void, the motions in arrest of judgment are sustained, the convictions and sentences are set aside, and the defendants are discharged.
#### PEOPLE ex rel. SELLEW, Appellant, v. HAYES, Com’r, Respondent.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

March 23, 1906.)

Proceeding by the people of the state of New York, on the relation of Edward Sellew, against Nicholas J. Hayes, as commissioner.

A. S. Gilbert, for appellant.

W. B. Crowell, for respondent.

No opinion. Order affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. Order filed.
**Exhibit 21.1**

**Subsidiaries of the Registrant**

Warner Instruments LLC (United States) 

Hoefer, Inc. (United States) 

KD Scientific, Inc. (United States) 

Biochrom US, Inc. (United States) 

Cartesian Technologies (United States) 

Harvard Apparatus, Ltd. (United Kingdom) 

Biochrom Ltd. (United Kingdom) 

Scie-Plas Ltd. (United Kingdom) 

International Market Supply Limited (UK) 

Walden Precision Apparatus Ltd. (UK) 

Harvard Apparatus, SARL (France) 

Asys Hitech GmbH (Austria) 

Hugo Sachs Elektronik Harvard Apparatus GmbH (Germany)

Ealing Scientific Ltd. Canada (doing business as Harvard Apparatus, Canada) (Canada) 

Panlab s.l. (Spain) 

FKA GSI US, Inc. (formerly Genomic Solutions, Inc.) (United States) 

FKA GSI UK LTD. (formerly Genomic Solutions,Ltd.) (United Kingdom) 

FKA GSAL LTD. (formerly Genomic Solutions Acquisitions, Ltd.) (United Kingdom) 

FKA UBI, Inc. (formerly Union Biometrica, Inc.) (United States) 

Genomic Solutions Canada Inc. (United States)
#### 53.209 Contractor qualifications.
#### The Illinois Central Railroad Co. *v.*Carl Wodrig, and Same *v.*George Bertrum.

*Opinion filed June 18, 1898.*

These cases are controlled by the decision in *Illinois Central Railroad Co.v. Wakefield, [ante,*p. 504.)

Appeal from the Circuit Court of McLean county; the Hon. Colostin D. Myers, Judge, presiding.

Williams & Capen, (C. V. Gwin, of counsel,) for appellant.

Thompson & Donahue, for appellees.

Per Curiam:

These cases are in all essential respects similar to the case of *Illinois Central Railroad Co.*v. *Wakefield, (ante,*p. 564,) except that in these cases the railroad company derived its right of way from private owners and not by grant from the State. For the reasons given in that case, and the cases referred to there, the judgments in these cases are affirmed.

*Judgment affirmed.*
#### § 1032.17 [Reserved]