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

<ARTICLE>                                   5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the annual
report on Form 10-K and is qualified in its entirety by reference to such
financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<CURRENCY>                                  Canadian dollars
       
<S>                                         <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                               12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                           AUG-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                              SEP-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                                AUG-31-1997
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                             1.3885
<CASH>                                      2,421,797
<SECURITIES>                                1,705,014
<RECEIVABLES>                               1,598,395
<ALLOWANCES>                                51,000
<INVENTORY>                                 624,828
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            6,718,877
<PP&E>                                      6,056,380
<DEPRECIATION>                              1,302,207
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              14,287,602
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       3,219,015
<BONDS>                                     0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                       0
<PREFERRED>                                 11,523
<COMMON>                                    150,211
<OTHER-SE>                                  9,326,914
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                14,287,602
<SALES>                                     2,422,516
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            10,351,689
<CGS>                                       3,395,898
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               5,771,211
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                            48,284
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                          109,834
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             1,026,462
<INCOME-TAX>                                433,900
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                         609,387
<DISCONTINUED>                              0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                             0
<CHANGES>                                   0
<NET-INCOME>                                609,387
<EPS-PRIMARY>                               0.23
<EPS-DILUTED>                               0.21
        


</TABLE>
Amended Schedule 2.1 of Deferred Compensation and Benefits Trust Agreement



 Exhibit 10.2 
 Schedule 2.1 to the Deferred Compensation and Benefits Trust Agreement 
 Benefit Plans and Other
Arrangements Subject to Trust 
 (1)    Sunoco, Inc. Executive Retirement Plan (“SERP”); 
 (2)    Sunoco, Inc. Deferred Compensation Plan; 
 (3)    Sunoco, Inc. Pension Restoration Plan; 
 (4)    Sunoco, Inc.
Savings Restoration Plan. 
 (5)    Sunoco, Inc. Special Executive Severance Plan; 
 (6)    The funding of the Sunoco, Inc. Special Employee Severance Plan necessary to provide benefits in accordance with the terms of
such Plan to only those employees then in grades 11 through 13. 
 (7)    The entire funding for all the Indemnification
Agreements with the executives set forth below shall be Five Million Dollars ($5,000,000) in the aggregate: 
  

					
	 (a)    Michael J. Colavita
	  	 (m)   Michael J. McGoldrick
	  	
	 (b)    John F. Carroll
	  	 (n)    Ann C. Mulé
	  	
	 (c)    Terence P. Delaney
	  	 (o)    Paul A. Mulholland 6
	  	
	 (d)    Michael H. R. Dingus 1
	  	 (p)    Rolf D. Naku 7

	  	
	 (e)    John G. Drosdick 3
	  	 (q)    Marie A. Natoli
	  	
	 (f)     Lynn L. Elsenhans
	  	 (r)     Robert W. Owens
	  	
	 (g)    Bruce G. Fisher
	  	 (s)    Alan J. Rothman 8
	  	
	 (h)    Peter J. Gvazdauskas
	  	 (t)     Bruce D. Rubin
	  	
	 (i)     Thomas W. Hofmann 5
	  	 (u)    Michael J. Thomson
	  	
	 (j)     Joseph P. Krott
	  	 (v)    Charles K. Valutas 4
	  	
	 (k)    Michael S. Kuritzkes
	  	 (w)   Dennis Zeleny
	  	
	 (l)     Joel H. Maness 2
	  		  	
		
	 	  	

 NOTES: 

	 	1.	Mr. Dingus retired as a Senior Vice President of Sunoco, Inc., effective June 1, 2008. 


	 	2.	Mr. Maness stepped down as an Executive Vice President of Sunoco, Inc., effective July 9, 2007. He continued on a part-time basis as Strategic Advisor on refining and
supply issues reporting directly to the Company’s President, until his retirement from the Company, effective January 1, 2008. 


	 	3.	Mr. Drosdick retired as Chief Executive Officer and President of Sunoco, Inc., effective August 8, 2008. 


	 	4.	Mr. Valutas retired as a Senior Vice President of Sunoco, Inc., effective September 1, 2008. 


	 	5.	Mr. Hofmann retired as Chief Financial Officer and Senior Vice President of Sunoco, Inc., effective December 1, 2008. 


	 	6.	Mr. Mulholland retired as Treasurer of Sunoco, Inc., effective December 1, 2008. 


	 	7.	Mr. Naku retired as a Senior Vice President of Sunoco, Inc., effective December 1, 2008. 


	 	8.	Mr. Rothman retired as a manager of Sunoco, Inc., effective April 30, 2009.
2006-0761.

#### State ex rel. Anderson v. Common Pleas Court of Lake County.

In Mandamus. On motion to dismiss. Motion to dismiss granted. Cause dismissed.

Moyer, C.J., Resnick, Pfeifer, Lundberg Stratton, O’Connor, O’Donnell and Lanzinger, JJ., concur.
§ 3560.573 Rental assistance. ( a ) Rental assistance may be provided to income eligible tenants living in off-farm labor housing in accordance with subpart F of this part. The requirements established in § 3560.252 apply to all tenants receiving rental assistance.
( b ) For dormitory style facilities operating on a per bed basis, rental assistance will be made available to the housing on a per unit basis, but may be pro-rated to tenants on a per bed basis. However, total rent charged for a unit must not exceed conventional rent for comparable units in the area or a similar area and per bed rents must be comparable to per bed rents in the market.
In The Court of Appeals Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

_____________________ _____ 09
- 17
- 00097
- CR

__________________________

_________________________________________________ ________________

On Appeal from the 9th District Court of Montgomery County, Texas Trial Cause No. 16
- 07
- 07908
- CR

_________________________________________________________________ ORDER Appellant’s counsel filed a motion to withdraw supported by a brief concluding that the instant appeal is frivolous. See Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738, 744 (1967). Appellant’s counsel certified that counsel provided copies of the motion and brief to Appellant, advised Appellant of Appellant’s right to examine
th e appellate record and file a pro se response, and supplied Appellant with a form motion for pro se access to the appellate record. See Kelly v. State , 436 S.W.3d 313, 319

- 20 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014).

Steven Jennings Ormsbee, Appellant

V. The State of Texas, AppelleeAppellant requested access to the appellate record with this Court. We

hereby direct the clerk of the trial court to provide access to a paper copy of the reporter’s record and clerk’s record to appellant, and to provide written verification to this Court of the date and manner in which the appellate record was provided, on
or before Wednesday, January 1 7 , 2018

. See id. , 436 S.W.3d at 321

- 22

. ORDER ENTERED January 4, 2018

.

PER CURIAM

Before McKeithen, C.J., Kre ger and Horton, JJ.
# L_2021040EN.01000201.xml

| 4.2.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 40/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.2.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 40/2

---

COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) 2021/126

of 28 January 2021

entering a name in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications ‘Rudarska greblica’ (PGI)

THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

Having regard to Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 November 2012 on quality schemes for agricultural products and foodstuffs (1), and in particular Article 52(2) thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | Pursuant to Article 50(2)(a) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012, Croatia’s application to register the name ‘Rudarska greblica’ was published in the Official Journal of the European Union (2). |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Pursuant to Article 50(2)(a) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012, Croatia’s application to register the name ‘Rudarska greblica’ was published in the Official Journal of the European Union (2).

| (2) | As no statement of opposition under Article 51 of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 has been received by the Commission, the name ‘Rudarska greblica’ should therefore be entered in the register, |
| --- | --- |

(2)

As no statement of opposition under Article 51 of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 has been received by the Commission, the name ‘Rudarska greblica’ should therefore be entered in the register,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

The name ‘Rudarska greblica’ (PGI) is hereby entered in the register.

The name specified in the first paragraph denotes a product in Class 2.3. bread, pastry, cakes, confectionery, biscuits and other baker’s wares, as listed in Annex XI to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 668/2014 (3).

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on the twentieth day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 28 January 2021.

For the Commission,

On behalf of the President,

Janusz WOJCIECHOWSKI

Member of the Commission

---

(1)  
  OJ L 343, 14.12.2012, p. 1.

1

(2)  
  OJ C 309, 18.9.2020, p. 17.

2

(3)  Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 668/2014 of 13 June 2014 laying down rules for the application of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council on quality schemes for agricultural products and foodstuffs (OJ L 179, 19.6.2014, p. 36).

3

---
#             Subcontracting and Other Partnerships          

There are multiple ways to partner with other contractors to maximize your chances of selling to GSA. OSDBU provides guidance on the process of forming a partnership but does not provide direct oversight.
                        - Subcontracting
                        - Joint Venture
                        - Contractor Team Arrangement

## Subcontracting

Subcontracting allows small businesses to sell to the government by partnering with a large business prime contractor. Use GSA’s Subcontracting Directory and the GSA eLibrary to find potential large business prime contractors. Small businesses must contact prime contractors directly.

If you need more information about opportunities listed in the directory, reach out to your local OSDBU small business advocate. For more information on subcontracting, visit the SBA website.

The subcontracting directory is currently unavailable. Please download the source file from data.gov.

## Other Partnerships

### Joint Venture

A joint venture is formed for the sole purpose of pooling resources of separate businesses to support the mission of a government agency successfully and cost-effectively. It is considered a new legal entity that requires approval by the Small Business Administration (SBA), a separate federal identification number, and a new SAM user account. OSDBU does not oversee any part of the joint venture process. For further details on joint ventures, refer to the SBA website.

### Contractor Team Arrangement (CTA)

Under a CTA, two or more GSA Schedule contractors work together to meet the needs of an ordering activity (e.g., those agencies and organizations that can order from GSA Schedules). A CTA is an arrangement between the two companies, not the formation of a new company. For further details on CTAs, refer to the CTA page.

Print PageEmail Page

Top

-  Small business-  Overview 
-  Request a speaker for small business events 
-  Forecast of contracting opportunities 
-  Small business goals and performance 
-  Small business resources 
-  Register your business    -  Subcontracting and Other Partnerships 
  -   Explore business models 
  -  Research the federal market
#### §§ 4280.64-4280.99 [Reserved]
3.503-1 Policy.

10 U.S.C. 4655 and 41 U.S.C. 4704 require that subcontractors not be unreasonably precluded from

making direct sales to the Government of any supplies or services made or furnished under a

contract. However, this does not preclude contractors from asserting rights that are otherwise

authorized by law or regulation.

Parent topic: 3.503 Unreasonable restrictions on subcontractor sales.
Case 3:20-cr-00060-MCR Document 55 Filed 07/27/21 Page 1 of 7
Case 3:20-cr-00060-MCR Document 55 Filed 07/27/21 Page 2 of 7
Case 3:20-cr-00060-MCR Document 55 Filed 07/27/21 Page 3 of 7
Case 3:20-cr-00060-MCR Document 55 Filed 07/27/21 Page 4 of 7
Case 3:20-cr-00060-MCR Document 55 Filed 07/27/21 Page 5 of 7
Case 3:20-cr-00060-MCR Document 55 Filed 07/27/21 Page 6 of 7
Case 3:20-cr-00060-MCR Document 55 Filed 07/27/21 Page 7 of 7
#### § 29.33 Official sample.

A sample selected, tagged, and signed by an inspector or sampler under the Act.
# 9.109-3 Exception.

The prohibition in 9.109-2 does not apply to contracts for the *procurement* of *products* or services along a major route of supply to a zone of active combat or major *contingency operation*, as specified in statute or by the cognizant *Combatant Commander*, in consultation with the *Chief of Mission*. As of *May* 10, 2018, countries along the major route of supply to support operations in Afghanistan are Afghanistan, Georgia, the Kyrgyz Republic, Pakistan, the Republic of Armenia, the Republic of Azerbaijan, the Republic of Kazakhstan, the Republic of Tajikistan, the Republic of Uzbekistan, and Turkmenistan.

**Parent topic:**9.109 Prohibition on contracting with an entity involved in activities that violate arms control treaties or agreements with the United States.
#### §§ 4279.188-4279.189 [Reserved]
§ 3550.113 Rates and terms (loans only). ( a ) *Interest rate.* The interest rate for all section 504 loans will be 1 percent.
( b ) *Loan term.* The repayment period for all section 504 loans will be 20 years.
[61 FR 59779, Nov. 22, 1996, as amended at 87 FR 6773, Feb. 7, 2022]
Editorial Note on Part 4290
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 4290 appear at 85 FR 16522, Mar. 24, 2020.

§ 4290.100 Business form. ( a ) *Newly-formed for-profit.* An Applicant for a RBIC license must be a newly formed for-profit entity or, subject to § 4290.150, a newly formed for-profit subsidiary of an existing entity. It must be organized under the law of a State. An Applicant may be organized as a corporation (“Corporate RBIC”), a limited partnership (“Partnership RBIC”), or a limited liability company (“LLC RBIC”).
( b ) *Purpose.* An Applicant must be organized solely for the purpose of performing the functions and conducting the activities contemplated under the Act: making Developmental Capital investments and providing Operational Assistance to eligible Smaller Enterprises.
( c ) *Articles.* The RBIC's Articles— ( 1 ) Must specify in general terms: ( i ) The purposes for which the RBIC is formed;
( ii ) The name of the RBIC;
( iii ) The Rural Area or Areas in which it will operate;
( iv ) The place where the RBIC's headquarters will be located; and
( v ) The amount and classes of the RBIC's ownership interests.
( 2 ) May contain any other provisions consistent with the Act that the RBIC may determine is appropriate to adopt to regulate its business and the conduct of its affairs.
( 3 ) Are subject to the Agency's approval.
( d ) *Duration* — ( 1 ) *Partnership RBICs.* If you are a Partnership RBIC: ( i ) You must have a minimum duration of 10 years, or two years following the maturity of your last-maturing Leverage security, whichever is longer. After 10 years, if all Leverage has been repaid or redeemed and all amounts due the Agency, its agent, or Trustee have been paid, the Partnership RBIC may be terminated by a vote of your partners;
( ii ) None of your general partner(s) may be removed or replaced by your limited partners without prior written approval of the Agency;
( iii ) Any transferee of, or successor in interest to, your general partner shall have only the rights and liabilities of a limited partner prior to the Agency's written approval of such transfer or succession; and
( iv ) You must incorporate all the provisions in this paragraph (d) in your limited partnership agreement.
( 2 ) *LLC RBICs.* If you are a LLC RBIC, you must have a minimum duration of 10 years, or two years following the maturity of your last-maturing Leverage security, whichever is longer. After 10 years, if all Leverage has been repaid or redeemed and all amounts due the Agency, its agent, or Trustee have been paid, the LLC RBIC may be terminated by a vote of your members.
( 3 ) *Corporate RBICs.* If you are a Corporate RBIC, you must have a duration of not less than 30 years unless earlier dissolved by the shareholders, except that the Corporate RBIC must not dissolve until at least two years following the maturity of your last-maturing Leverage security.
Exhibit 99.2

                          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 Westerbeke Corporation (the
"Company") on Form 10-K for the year ended January 23, 2003, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
I, Gregory Haidemenos, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer of the
Company, certify, 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 my
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 operations
      of the Company.

                                       By: /s/ Gregory Haidemenos
                                           ----------------------
                                           Gregory Haidemenos
                                           Chief Financial Officer and
                                           Treasurer

January 23, 2003
#### § 29.3005 Burley, Type 31.

That type of air-cured tobacco, commonly known as Burley, produced principally in Kentucky, Tennessee, Virginia, North Carolina, Ohio, Indiana, West Virginia, and Missouri.
#### § 3601.6 Appeals.

Any person whose request is denied shall have the right to appeal such denial. Appeals shall be made in accordance with § 1.13 of this title and should be addressed as follows: Administrator, NASS, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, DC 20250.
Case 4:99-cv-00242-RH Document 66 Filed 01/30/01 Page 1 of 3
Case 4:99-cv-00242-RH Document 66 Filed 01/30/01 Page 2 of 3
Case 4:99-cv-00242-RH Document 66 Filed 01/30/01 Page 3 of 3
#### §§ 4287.108-4287.111 [Reserved]
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

VS CASE NOS.3:97cr81-01/RV; 3:97cr92/RV and

3:97cr103/RV

CHRISTOPHER SUMMERS

REFERRAL AND ORDER

Referred to Senior Judge Roger Vinson on May 1, 2007

Motion/Pleadings: MOTION to void Judgment, Order or Proceeding, under Title 28 U.S.C.

Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 60(b)(4)(5)(6) et seq. 

Filed by Defendant on 3/30/2007 Doc.# 51; 31; 30

RESPONSES:

 None on Doc.# 

on Doc.#

Stipulated Joint Pldg.

 Unopposed Consented

WILLIAM M. McCOOL, CLERK OF COURT

 s/Jerry Marbut

LC (1 OR 2) Deputy Clerk: Jerry Marbut

ORDER

Upon consideration of the foregoing, it is ORDERED this 1st day of

 May , 2007, that:

(a) The relief requested is DENIED.

(b) 

 /s/ Roger Vinson

ROGER VINSON

Senior United States District Judge

Case 3:97-cr-00081-RV-CJK Document 52 Filed 05/01/07 Page 1 of 1
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 Clearfield, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form
10-K for the period ending September 30, 2008, as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Cheryl Beranek
Podzimek, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
§ 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the
best of my knowledge that:




1.
            The
      Report fully complies with the requirements of Sections 13(a) or 15(d) of
      the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;
and




2.
            The
      information contained in the Report fairly represents, in all material
      respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
      Company.






/s/ Cheryl Beranek PodzimekCheryl Beranek PodzimekChief Executive Officer






64
Page 1 of 3

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

FROMON D. JENRETTE,

Plaintiff,

v. Case No. 4:20-cv-275-TKW-MAF

SERGEANT BARTELL and

OFFICER PUMPHREY,

Defendants.

/

ORDER

This case is before the Court based on the magistrate judge’s Report and 

Recommendation. (Doc. 54). No objections were filed. 

Upon due consideration of the Report and Recommendation and the case file, 

the Court agrees with the magistrate judge’s determination that there are genuine 

disputes of material fact that preclude entry of summary judgment. However, the 

Court disagrees with magistrate judge’s conclusory recommendation that counsel be 

appointed for Plaintiff.

It is well established that the appointment of counsel in a civil case is justified

“only in exceptional circumstances, ‘such as where the facts and legal issues are so 

novel or complex as to require the assistance of a trained practitioner,’” McDaniels 

v. Lee, 405 F. App'x 456, 457 (11th Cir. 2010) (quoting Fowler v. Jones, 899 F.2d 

Case 4:20-cv-00275-TKW-MAF Document 55 Filed 11/12/21 Page 1 of 3
Page 2 of 3

1088, 1096 (11th Cir.1990)), and here, the facts in dispute are simple and the legal 

issues involved are straightforward. The fact that the case survived summary 

judgment is not enough in and of itself to justify the appointment of counsel, and 

although Plaintiff (and the Court) might benefit from the involvement of counsel in 

this case, the Court is not persuaded that this is one of those exceptional cases in 

which counsel should be appointed because (1) the case only involves matters 

personally witnessed by Plaintiff, cf. Smith v. Fla. Dep’t of Corrections, 713 F.3d 

1059, 1065 (11th Cir. 2013), (2) the case does not involve expert witnesses or 

complex technical matters, (3) Plaintiff has shown through his filings that he is 

capable of presenting the merits of his position to the Court, and (4) the crux of 

Defendants defense is that they were unaware of the risk to Plaintiff, not that their 

acts and omissions would have been justified (or that they would have been protected 

by qualified immunity or some other complex legal doctrine) if they had been aware 

of the risk. 

Accordingly, it is ORDERED that:

1. The Report and Recommendation is adopted and incorporated by 

reference in this Order, except as stated above.

2. Defendants’ motion for summary judgment (Doc. 39) is DENIED.

3. Plaintiff’s motion for appointment of counsel (Doc. 52) is DENIED.

Case 4:20-cv-00275-TKW-MAF Document 55 Filed 11/12/21 Page 2 of 3
Page 3 of 3

4. The Clerk shall return this case to the magistrate judge for further 

pretrial proceedings, including at the magistrate judge’s discretion a 

settlement conference and publication of notice to the Bar regarding the 

opportunity to provide pro bono representation to Plaintiff.

DONE and ORDERED this 12th day of November, 2021.

T. Kent Wetherell, II 

T. KENT WETHERELL, II

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 4:20-cv-00275-TKW-MAF Document 55 Filed 11/12/21 Page 3 of 3