alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### § 29.2284 No grade.

A designation applied to a lot of tobacco classified as nested, offtype, rework, semicured, or premature primings; tobacco that is damaged 20 percent or more, abnormally dirty, extremely wet or watered, contains foreign matter, or has an odor foreign to the type. (See Rule 22, § 29.2413.)
WARNING: THE EDGAR SYSTEM ENCOUNTERED ERROR(S) WHILE PROCESSING THIS SCHEDULE.

<TABLE> <S> <C>

<LEGEND>

                                                  EXHIBIT 27.1

                          FINANCIAL DATA SCHEDULE
                    COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL COMPANIES
                        ARTICLE 5 OF REGULATION S-X

          This schedule contains summary financial information extracted
from the Consolidated Statements of Operations and Consolidated Balance
Sheets of King World Productions, Inc. and its Subsidiaries and is quali-
fied in its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                                   <C>
<MULTIPLIER>                          1,000
<CURRENCY>                            U.S. DOLLARS
<PERIOD-TYPE>                         YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                     08/31/97
<PERIOD-START>                        03/01/97
<PERIOD-END>                          05/31/97
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                       1
<CASH>                                $509,775
<SECURITIES>                          $0
<RECEIVABLES>                         $70,489
<ALLOWANCES>                          $4,101
<INVENTORY>                           $0
<CURRENT ASSETS>                      $658,015
<PP&E>                                $20,967
<DEPRECIATION>                       $(11,750)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                        $861,683
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                 $109,895
<BONDS>                               $0
<COMMON>                              $509
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                 $0
<PREFERRED>                           $0
<OTHER-SE>                            $751,788
<PAGE 2>
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>          $861,683
<SALES>                               $0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                      $166,751
<CGS>                                 $0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                         $97,745
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                      $22,385
<LOSS-PROVISION>                      $0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                    $0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                       $54,890
<INCOME-TAX>                          $19,185
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                   $35,705
<DISCONTINUED>                        $0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                       $0
<CHANGES>                             $0
<NET-INCOME>                          $35,705
<EPS-PRIMARY>                         $0.95
<EPS-DILUTED>                         $0.95


        

</TABLE>
#### § 51.1412 Fairly well developed.

*Fairly well developed* means that the kernel is full-meated in over 50 percent of its width and length.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
 
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
COMPANY'S FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE NINE MONTHS ENDED JANUARY 31, 1998 AND
JANUARY 31, 1997 WITH THE EPS INFORMATION FOR THE NINE MONTHS ENDED JANUARY 31,
1997 RESTATED TO BE IN CONFORMITY WITH FASB 128 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY
BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                                        <C>              <C>                
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                    9-MOS            9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          APR-30-1998      APR-30-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             MAY-01-1997      MAY-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               JAN-31-1998      JAN-31-1997  
<CASH>                                      40,822,014       28,168,373 
<SECURITIES>                                         0                0
<RECEIVABLES>                               39,186,603       41,758,953
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0                0
<INVENTORY>                                 63,625,882       49,296,802
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                           146,092,055      120,534,394
<PP&E>                                     172,907,920      113,694,325
<DEPRECIATION>                            (16,374,455)      (8,151,832)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             323,586,983      248,201,779
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       47,038,227       44,451,675         
<BONDS>                                    124,489,624      124,906,667
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0                0
<COMMON>                                       259,394          210,742
<OTHER-SE>                                 146,324,361       73,072,869
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               323,586,983      248,201,779
<SALES>                                              0                0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                         1,477,980,875      811,476,612
<CGS>                                                0                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                            1,462,673,799      804,419,995
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0                0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0                0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           5,223,727        2,647,990
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             11,295,058        6,355,540
<INCOME-TAX>                                 4,170,000          450,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          7,125,058        5,905,540
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0                0 
<CHANGES>                                            0                0
<NET-INCOME>                                 7,125,058        5,905,540
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .28              .28
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .27              .27
        

</TABLE>
Case 5:20-cv-00164-TKW-MJF Document 1 Filed 06/10/20 Page 1 of 12
Case 5:20-cv-00164-TKW-MJF Document 1 Filed 06/10/20 Page 2 of 12
Case 5:20-cv-00164-TKW-MJF Document 1 Filed 06/10/20 Page 3 of 12
Case 5:20-cv-00164-TKW-MJF Document 1 Filed 06/10/20 Page 4 of 12
Case 5:20-cv-00164-TKW-MJF Document 1 Filed 06/10/20 Page 5 of 12
Case 5:20-cv-00164-TKW-MJF Document 1 Filed 06/10/20 Page 6 of 12
Case 5:20-cv-00164-TKW-MJF Document 1 Filed 06/10/20 Page 7 of 12
Case 5:20-cv-00164-TKW-MJF Document 1 Filed 06/10/20 Page 8 of 12
Case 5:20-cv-00164-TKW-MJF Document 1 Filed 06/10/20 Page 9 of 12
Case 5:20-cv-00164-TKW-MJF Document 1 Filed 06/10/20 Page 10 of 12
Case 5:20-cv-00164-TKW-MJF Document 1 Filed 06/10/20 Page 11 of 12
Case 5:20-cv-00164-TKW-MJF Document 1 Filed 06/10/20 Page 12 of 12
Dismissed and Mem orandum Opinion filed December 16 , 2014.

In The 

## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14

- 14

- 00775

- CV

IN THE INTEREST OF L .T.H., A CHILD

On Appeal from the 309th District Court Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 2012

- 70308



### MEMORA NDUM OPINION

Appellant, Alecia Lynn Howe, filed a notice of appeal on September 25, 2014, to appeal an order signed August 27, 2014. According to information provided to this court, it appears that appellant is attempt ing to appeal from an interlocutory o rder granting temporary relief. This court is unable to determine our jurisdiction, however, because no clerk’s record has been filed.

The record in this appeal was due October 27, 2014. On November 19, 2014, the Harris County District Clerk’s office noti fied this court that appellant has not paid for preparation of the record. The same day, the official court reporter for the 309th District Court notified this court that appellant has not made arrangements to2 pay for preparation of the reporter’s record.

In addition, our records show that appellant has not paid the $19 5.00 appellate filing fee. See Tex. R. App. P. 5 (requiring payment of fees in civil cases unless indigent); see also Order Regarding Fees Charged in Civil Cases in the Supreme Court and the Courts of Appeals and Before the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation, Misc. Docket No. 13

- 9127 (Tex. Aug. 16 , 20 13 ) (listing fees in court of appeals); Tex. Gov’t Code ' 51.207 (same). On October 8 , 2014, this court notified appellant that the fili ng fee was past due and the appeal was subject to dismissal unless appe llant paid the fee by October 20 , 2014. No response

was filed.

On November 20 , 20 14 , notification was transmitted to all parties of the court’s intention to dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution unless, within fifteen days, appellant paid or made arrangements to pay for the record and provided this court with proof of payme nt. See Tex. R. App. P. 37.3(b). Appellant has not provided this court with proof of payment for the record or filed any other response to the court’s notice.

Accordingly, the appeal is ordered dismissed.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Christopher, Donovan, and Wise.
15.000 Scope of part.

This part prescribes policies and procedures governing competitive and noncompetitive negotiated

acquisitions. A contract awarded using other than sealed bidding procedures is a negotiated

contract (see 14.101).

Parent topic: Part 15 - Contracting by Negotiation
158 So.2d 613.

#### Mary GATHRIGHT, Tutrix of her minor children on their behalf v. LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY.

No. 47013.

Dec. 16, 1963.

The application is denied. According to the facts of the case as found to be by the Court of Appeal, the judgment complained of is correct.
Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

JEREMIAH VINCENT ISAAC,

D.O.C. #Y49695,

Plaintiff,

v. 4:20cv465–WS/MAF

FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF

CORRECTIONS, and LIBERTY

CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION,

Defendants.

 

ORDER ADOPTING THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

Before the court is the magistrate judge's report and recommendation (ECF

No. 8) docketed November 10, 2020. The magistrate judge recommends that this

case be dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute and failure to comply

with a court order. Plaintiff has filed no objections to the report and

recommendation. 

Upon review of the record, this court has determined that the report and

recommendation should be adopted.

Case 4:20-cv-00465-WS-MAF Document 9 Filed 12/14/20 Page 1 of 2
Page 2 of 2

Accordingly, it is ORDERED:

1. The magistrate judge's report and recommendation (ECF No. 8) is adopted

and incorporated by reference in this order of the court.

2. Plaintiff’s complaint and this action are hereby DISMISSED without

prejudice for failure to comply with a court order and failure to prosecute the case.

3. The clerk is directed to enter judgment, stating: "All claims are dismissed

without prejudice."

DONE AND ORDERED this 14th day of December , 2020.

s/ William Stafford 

WILLIAM STAFFORD

SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 4:20-cv-00465-WS-MAF Document 9 Filed 12/14/20 Page 2 of 2
NO. 07-04-0444-CR

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

AT AMARILLO

PANEL C

MARCH 8, 2005

______________________________

JUAN ISRAEL RAMOS, APPELLANT

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, APPELLEE

_________________________________

FROM THE 251ST DISTRICT COURT OF POTTER COUNTY;

NO. 47346-C; HONORABLE PATRICK A. PIRTLE, JUDGE

_______________________________

Before JOHNSON, C.J., and QUINN and REAVIS, JJ.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant, Juan Israel Ramos, appeals from a conviction and sentence for

possession of a controlled substance in a drug-free zone. 

On November 4, 2004, this court directed the clerk of the trial court to file any and

all documents in the court’s file referencing or filed in connection with any affidavits of

indigence filed by appellant. After receiving and reviewing this supplemental clerk’s record,
-2-

this court concluded that no affidavit of indigency, which complied with Tex. R. App. P.

20.2, had been filed in this case. As a result, on January 14, 2005, this court directed

appellant to certify that he had paid for the record, had made arrangements to pay for the

record, or that other cause existed to preclude dismissal of this appeal for failure to file the

appellate record. We directed appellant to file this certification or response by February 7,

2005. Having received no response from appellant, we now dismiss this appeal. See Tex.

R. App. P. 37.3(b), 43.2(f). 

Phil Johnson

Chief Justice

Do not publish.
32.412 Contract clause.

(a) The contracting officer shall insert the clause at 52.232-12, Advance Payments, in solicitations

and contracts under which the Government will provide advance payments, except as provided in

32.412(b).

(b) If the agency desires to waive the countersignature requirement because of the contractor’s

financial strength, good performance record, and favorable experience concerning cost

disallowances, the contracting officer shall use the clause with its Alternate I.

(c) If a cost-reimbursement contract is contemplated, the contracting officer shall use the clause

with its AlternateII.

(d) If the agency considers a more rapid liquidation appropriate, the contracting officer shall use the

clause with its AlternateIII.

(e) If the agency provides advance payments under the contract at no interest to the prime

contractor, the contracting officer shall use the clause with its AlternateIV.

(f) If the requirement for a special account is eliminated in accordance with 32.409-3(e) or (g), the

contracting officer shall insert in the solicitation or contract the clause set forth in Alternate V of

52.232-12, Advance Payments, instead of the basic clause.

Parent topic: Subpart 32.4 - Advance Payments for Other Than Commercial Acquisitions
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

EASTERN DISTRICT

**JAMES C. MARKOVSKY, EXECUTOR OF THE ESTATE OF JAMES MARKOVSKY,** 

**DECEASED**

**v.**

**CROWN CORK & SEAL CO., PENN**

**CENTRAL CORPORATION AND**

**CONSOLIDATED RAIL CORPORATION**

**PETITION OF: JAMES C. MARKOVSKY :** 

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**: No. 162 EAL 2015** 

**Petition for Allowance of Appeal from the Order of the Superior Court** 

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW **, this 29th day of September, 2015, the Petition for Allowance of** 

**Appeal is** DENIED

**.**
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

KIMBERLY GRIPPA, 

Plaintiff, 

v. Case No.: 4:20cv457-MW/MAF 

RONALD RUBIN, 

Defendant. 

______________________________/

DEFENDANT’S NOTICE OF FILING 

EXHIBITS IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

Defendant, Ronald Rubin provides notice of filing the following exhibits in 

support of his Motion for Summary Judgment: 

1. Ronald Rubin Declaration 

2. James Kauffman Declaration

3. June 21, 2019, Letter from Tein to DeSantis

4. June 21, 2019, Letter from Tein to Miguel 

5. Peter Penrod E-mail Approving Grippa Salary Increase (Rubin_Fed031898)

6. Peter Penrod Offer Letter to Kimberly Grippa (Rubin_Fed003652)

7. Kimberly Grippa Email Rejecting Position (Rubin_Fed025644)

8. Kimberly Grippa Deposition Testimony Excerpts

9. Peter Penrod Deposition Testimony Excerpts

Dated this 14th day of February 2022.

RONALD RUBIN,

Defendant,

By Counsel,

Case 4:20-cv-00457-MW-MAF Document 109 Filed 02/14/22 Page 1 of 2
2

/s/ James L. Kauffman

James L. Kauffman (FL # 012915) 

Bailey & Glasser LLP

1055 Thomas Jefferson Street NW

Suite 540

Washington DC 20007

T: 202.463.2101

F: 202.463.2103

jkauffman@baileyglasser.com

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I certify that on February 14, 2022, I electronically filed the foregoing document 

with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document 

is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the EM/ECF and 

transmitted in accordance with CM/ECF requirements.

/s/ James L. Kauffman

JAMES L. KAUFFMAN

Case 4:20-cv-00457-MW-MAF Document 109 Filed 02/14/22 Page 2 of 2
22.103-5 Contract clauses.

(a) The contracting officer shall insert the clause at 52.222-1, Notice to the Government of Labor

Disputes, in solicitations and contracts that involve programs or requirements that have been

designated under 22.101-1(e).

(b) The contracting officer shall include the clause at 52.222-2, Payment for Overtime Premiums, in

solicitations and contracts when a cost-reimbursement contract is contemplated and the contract

amount is expected to exceed the simplified acquisition threshold; unless-

(1) A cost-reimbursement contract for operation of vessels is contemplated; or

(2) A cost-plus- incentive-fee contract that will provide a swing from the target fee of at least plus or

minus 3 percent and a contractor’s share of at least 10 percent is contemplated.

Parent topic: 22.103 Overtime.
Page 1 of 3

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PANAMA CITY DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

et al.,

Plaintiffs,

vs. CASE NO. 5:01-CV-085-SPM

NICON, INC., et al.,

Defendants.

__________________________________/

AMERICAN SAFETY CASUALTY INS. CO.,

Third-Party Plaintiff,

vs.

NICON ABATEMENT, INC., et al.,

Third-Party Defendants.

__________________________________/

ORDER ON DEFENDANT RUSSELL ALONZO’S BANKRUPTCY

THIS CAUSE comes before the Court upon the “Periodic Status Report”

(doc. 183) filed May 2, 2005, in which defendant Russell Alonzo’s counsel

advises that on April 20, 2005, Alonzo received a discharge in bankruptcy case

8:03-BK-07212-PMG in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Middle

Case 5:01-cv-00085-SPM-AK Document 185 Filed 05/16/05 Page 1 of 3
Page 2 of 3

District of Florida (Alonzo filed his suggestion of bankruptcy on November 5,

2004; see doc. 171). A discharge order under the Bankruptcy Code “does not

extinguish the debt itself, but merely releases the debtor from personal liability for

the debt.” Hall v. Nat’l Gypsum Co., 105 F.3d 225, 229 (5th Cir. 1997).

Pursuant to the applicable provisions of the Bankruptcy Code, it is

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows:

1. The discharge in bankruptcy case 8:03-BK-07212-PMG in the

United States Bankruptcy Court for the Middle District of Florida is

acknowledged.

2. Defendant Russell Alonzo is released from all personal liability in

the instant case.

3. Creditor parties are enjoined from proceeding against Alonzo or

attempting in any manner to collect debt owed them by Alonzo

related to this case.

DONE AND ORDERED this sixteenth day of May, 2005.

 s/ Stephan P. Mickle 

Stephan P. Mickle

United States District Judge

/pao

Case 5:01-cv-00085-SPM-AK Document 185 Filed 05/16/05 Page 2 of 3
Page 3 of 3

Case 5:01-cv-00085-SPM-AK Document 185 Filed 05/16/05 Page 3 of 3
#### § 51.1871 Damage.

*Damage* means any specific defect described in § 51.1877, table II; or an equally objectionable variation of any one of these defects, any other defect, or any combination of defects, which materially detracts from the appearance, or the edible or marketing quality of the tomato.
Subpart 3.2 - Contractor Gratuities to

Government Personnel

Parent topic: Part 3 - Improper Business Practices and Personal Conflicts of Interest

3.201 Applicability.

This subpart applies to all executive agencies, except that coverage concerning exemplary damages

applies only to the Department of Defense (10 U.S.C. 4651).

3.202 Contract clause.

The contracting officer shall insert the clause at 52.203-3, Gratuities, in solicitations and contracts

with a value exceeding the simplified acquisition threshold, except those for personal services and

those between military departments or defense agencies and foreign governments that do not

obligate any funds appropriated to the Department of Defense.

3.203 Reporting suspected violations of the Gratuities

clause.

Agency personnel shall report suspected violations of the Gratuities clause to the contracting officer

or other designated official in accordance with agency procedures. The agency reporting procedures

shall be published as an implementation of this section 3.203 and shall clearly specify-

(a) What to report and how to report it; and

(b) The channels through which reports must pass, including the function and authority of each

official designated to review them.

3.204 Treatment of violations.

(a) Before taking any action against a contractor, the agency head or a designee shall determine,

after notice and hearing under agency procedures, whether the contractor, its agent, or another

representative, under a contract containing the Gratuities clause-

(1) Offered or gave a gratuity (e.g., an entertainment or gift) to an officer, official, or employee of the

Government; and

(2) Intended by the gratuity to obtain a contract or favorable treatment under a contract (intent

generally must be inferred).

(b) Agency procedures shall afford the contractor an opportunity to appear with counsel, submit
documentary evidence, present witnesses, and confront any person the agency presents. The

procedures should be as informal as practicable, consistent with principles of fundamental fairness.

(c) When the agency head or designee determines that a violation has occurred, the Government

may-

(1) Terminate the contractor’s right to proceed;

(2) Initiate debarment or suspension measures as set forth in subpart 9.4; and

(3) Assess exemplary damages, if the contract uses money appropriated to the Department of

Defense.
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk's Office, Atlanta, January 02, 2018.

I certify that the above is a true extract from the minutes 

of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court hereto 

affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

Court of Appeals 

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA, January 02, 2018

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order

A18I0084. HOMER NELSON et al. v. RREF II CER CO ACQUISITIONS, LLC.

Upon consideration of the Application for Interlocutory Appeal, it is ordered that it be 

hereby GRANTED. The Appellant may file a Notice of Appeal within 10 days of the date of 

this order. The Clerk of Superior Court is directed to include a copy of this order in the record 

transmitted to the Court of Appeals.

LC NUMBERS:

17CI680
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Curtis Anderson, Appellant.

Judgment of resentence, Supreme Court, New York County, rendered on January 16, 1980, unanimously affirmed; judgment of said court rendered on June 27, 1978, vacated by reason of resentence and it is from the judgment of resentence only that an appeal lies. No opinion. Concur — Kupferman, J. P., Bims, Fein, Ross and Bloom, JJ.
Editorial Note on Part 4290
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 4290 appear at 85 FR 16522, Mar. 24, 2020.

§ 4290.300 When and how to apply for a RBIC License. ( a ) *Notice of Funds Availability (“NOFA”).* The Agency will publish a NOFA in the Federal Register advising potential applicants of the availability of funds for the RBIC program and inviting the submission of applications. The NOFA may specify limitations, special rules, procedures, and restrictions for a particular funding round. When submitting its application, an Applicant must comply with both this part 4290 and any requirements specified in the NOFA, including the opening and closing dates for submission of an application.
( b ) *Application form.* An Applicant must apply for a RBIC license using an appropriate application packet provided by the Agency. Upon receipt of a completed application packet, the Agency may request clarifying or technical information on the materials submitted as part of the application.
[69 FR 32204, June 8, 2004, as amended at 76 FR 80222, Dec. 23, 2011]