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

<PAGE>
 
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                         DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                            JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                              MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                      4,862,200
<SECURITIES>                                        0         
<RECEIVABLES>                                   4,300
<ALLOWANCES>                                        0
<INVENTORY>                                         0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            4,866,500 
<PP&E>                                              0
<DEPRECIATION>                                      0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              4,885,500
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          29,400
<BONDS>                                             0
<COMMON>                                            0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                               0
<PREFERRED>                                         0
<OTHER-SE>                                  4,852,800
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                4,885,500
<SALES>                                             0 
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                              147,800
<CGS>                                               0         
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   4,900 
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                2,700
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               140,200
<INCOME-TAX>                                        0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           140,200
<DISCONTINUED>                                      0 
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                     0
<CHANGES>                                           0 
<NET-INCOME>                                  140,200
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    3.03
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    3.03
        


</TABLE>
S. 252

One Hundred Ninth Congress

of the

United States of America

AT THE FIRST SESSION

Begun and held at the City of Washington on Tuesday,

the fourth day of January, two thousand and five

An Act

To direct the Secretary of the Interior to convey certain land in Washoe County,

Nevada, to the Board of Regents of the University and Community College System

of Nevada.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of

the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Dandini Research Park Conveyance Act’’.

SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS.

In this Act:

(1) BOARD OF REGENTS.—The term ‘‘Board of Regents’’

means the Board of Regents of the University and Community

College System of Nevada.

(2) SECRETARY.—The term ‘‘Secretary’’ means the Secretary

of the Interior.

SEC. 3. CONVEYANCE TO THE UNIVERSITY AND COMMUNITY COLLEGE

SYSTEM OF NEVADA.

(a) CONVEYANCE.—

(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall convey to the Board

of Regents, without consideration, all right, title, and interest

of the United States in and to the approximately 467 acres

of land located in Washoe County, Nevada, patented to the

University of Nevada under the Act of June 14, 1926 (commonly

known as the ‘‘Recreation and Public Purposes Act’’) (43 U.S.C.

869 et seq.), and described in paragraph (2).

(2) DESCRIPTION OF LAND.—The land referred to in paragraph (1) is—

(A) the parcel of land consisting of approximately

309.11 acres and more particularly described as T. 20 N.,

R. 19 E., Sec. 25, lots 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 11, SE1⁄4NW1⁄4,

NE1⁄4SW1⁄4, Mount Diablo Meridian, Nevada; and

(B) the parcel of land consisting of approximately

158.22 acres and more particularly described as T. 20 N.,

R. 19 E., Sec. 25, lots 6 and 7, SW1⁄4NE1⁄4, NW1⁄4SE1⁄4,

Mount Diablo Meridian, Nevada.

(b) COSTS.—The Board of Regents shall pay to the United

States an amount equal to the costs of the Secretary associated

with the conveyance under subsection (a)(1).

(c) CONDITIONS.—If the Board of Regents sells any portion

of the land conveyed to the Board of Regents under subsection

(a)(1)—
S. 252—2

(1) the amount of consideration for the sale shall reflect

fair market value, as determined by an appraisal; and

(2) the Board of Regents shall pay to the Secretary an

amount equal to the net proceeds of the sale, for use by the

Director of the Bureau of Land Management in the State of

Nevada, without further appropriation.

Speaker of the House of Representatives.

Vice President of the United States and

President of the Senate.
Food

Planning

during the

Coronavirus

Pandemic

For more information about

the Food and Nutrition Service

FNS.USDA.GOV/CORONAVIRUS

May 2020

response to COVID-19, please visit
Stock your freezer and pantry 

with items you can eat in the second week and beyond. 

What should I make? While everyone is home together, 

interesting. For others, sticking to simple or familiar foods 

and tastes provides comfort.

Access food while school is closed. Many school districts 

continue to provide meals to students in need during closures. 

Contact your school to see if meals may be available 

through pop-up food systems, grab-and-go meal pickups, 

or school bus routes.

First check your refrigerator, freezer, and pantry—and 

expiration dates and best by dates. This can help you plan 

meals using what you have, and help you limit trips to the 

grocery store.

Make a shopping list to stay focused in the store. List 

general items like “fruit” or “bread” since stores may not 

Explore your shopping options, such as pickup or delivery, 

as well as third-party delivery options. If you’re older, check if 

your store has early shopping hours just for older Americans.

Buy what you and your family need at this time, and resist 

the urge to buy in much larger quantities. Prepare a shopping 

list that will cover everyone in your household for 2 weeks.

Choose a mix of shelf-stable, frozen, and fresh foods. 

Shelf-stable examples: pastas, rice, beans, nut butters, and 

dried and canned goods. Frozen examples: breads, meats, 

vegetables, fruits, even milk. With fresh foods, buy a 

variety in quantities that you usually buy.

For an expanded version of this tip card, including 

resources on food planning and activities for families 

at home, go to MYPLATE.GOV/CORONAVIRUS.

For more information on COVID-19, please visit

CORONAVIRUS.GOV.

USDA is an equal opportunity provider, employer, and lender. 

Tips on food planning—including what to buy, how much to buy, and meal prep
#### Jacqualyn Seip, Respondent, v George Esposito, Defendant, and Roberto Frick, Appellant.

In a negligence action to recover damages for personal injuries, defendant Roberto Frick appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, „ Nassau County, dated Hay 5, 1980, which denied his motion to amend his answer so as to include as an affirmative defense in mitigation of damages the plaintiff’s failure to install seat belts in her car (in which she was riding as a passenger at the time of the accident) and/or her failure to use a seat belt restraint at the time of the accident. Order reversed, with $50 costs and disbursements, and motion granted (see *Karras v County of Westchester,*71 AD2d 878). The amended answer, in the form annexed to the moving papers is deemed served. Titone, J. P., Hangano, Hartuscello and Weinstein, JJ., concur.
Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

KEVIN BURNS,

Plaintiff,

v. 4:20cv541-WS/HTC

KILOLO KIJAKAZI, Commissioner

of Social Security,

Defendant.

 

ORDER ADOPTING THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

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

No. 48) docketed January 3, 2022. The magistrate judge recommends that the

Commissioner's decision to deny the plaintiff's application for child disability

insurance benefits be affirmed. The plaintiff has filed objections (ECF Nos. 49 &

52) to the report and recommendation. 

 The undersigned having reviewed the magistrate judge’s report and

recommendation in light of the plaintiff’s objections, it is ORDERED:

Case 4:20-cv-00541-WS-HTC Document 53 Filed 03/14/22 Page 1 of 2
Page 2 of 2

1. The court ADOPTS and incorporates by reference into this order the

magistrate judge's report and recommendation (ECF No. 48).

2. Plaintiff’s motion to amend (ECF No. 47) is DENIED.

3. The Commissioner's decision to deny the plaintiff's application for child

disability insurance benefits is AFFIRMED.

4. The clerk shall enter judgment stating: "The decision of the Commissioner

is AFFIRMED."

DONE AND ORDERED this 14th day of March , 2022.

s/ William Stafford 

WILLIAM STAFFORD

SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 4:20-cv-00541-WS-HTC Document 53 Filed 03/14/22 Page 2 of 2
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 99-6766

DAVID A. DAVIS,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

HERBERT NUSBAUM, Officer, Commanding Officer

II; RALPH BRADLE, Officer, Commanding Officer

II, PAUL SHELTON, Officer, Commanding Officer

II; M. KAETZEL, Officer, Commanding Officer

II; BRIAN W. CUSTER, Officer, Commanding Officer I; JOSEPH P. SACCTEH, Warden; DONALD

HORNING, Warden; RODERICK R. SOWERS, Chief,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

Maryland, at Baltimore. Frederic N. Smalkin, District Judge. (CA98-3777-S)

Submitted: September 9, 1999 Decided: September 15, 1999

Before ERVIN, WILKINS, and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

David A. Davis, Appellant Pro Se. Stephanie Judith Lane-Weber,

Assistant Attorney General, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.
2

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM:

David A. Davis appeals the district court’s order denying

relief on his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp. 1999) complaint. We

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

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

district court. See Davis v. Nusbaum, No. CA-98-3777-S (D. Md. May

26, 1999). 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
Case 3:06-cv-00622-WKW-SRW Document 16 Filed 08/31/2006 Page 1 of 1
#### In the Matter of Board of Trustees of the Village of Scotia, Petitioner, v. Town Board of the Town of Glenville, Respondent, and Marion E. Kolakowski et al., Intervenors-Respondents.

*Per Curiam.*

Application by petitioner to confirm report of Referees and for judgment that the proposed annexation of certain territory in the Town of Glenville to the Village of Scotia is in the over-all public interest. Application granted, without costs. We approve and confirm the Referees’ report, findings and conclusions (except the finding of respondent’s request No. 2, which we reverse) and determine that the proposed annexation is in the over-all public interest. The territory here involved, being uninhabited, may be annexed without compliance with section 713 of the General Municipal Law. (See *Matter of Common Council of City of Middletown*v. *Town Bd. of Town of Wallkill,*29 A D 2d 561.) Application granted, without costs. Gibson, P. J., Reynolds, Staley, Jr., Cooke and Greenblott, JJ., concur in memorandum *Per Cwriam.*
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 Essex Rental Corp. (the "Company") on Form
10-K for the period ended December 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on March 30, 2009 (the "Report"), the undersigned, in the
capacity 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:




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




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




Date:
March 30, 2009





/s/
      Martin Kroll----------------------------------------------Martin
      KrollChief
      Financial
Officer
§ 75.2 Terms defined. For the purpose of these regulations unless the context otherwise requires, the following terms shall be construed, respectively, as follows: ( a ) *Act* means the Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946, as amended (7 U.S.C. 1621 *et seq.*).
( b ) *Regulations* means the regulations in this part.
( c ) *Department* means the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA).
( d ) *Secretary* means the Secretary of the United States Department of Agriculture, or any officer or employee of the Department to whom authority has been delegated to act in the Secretary's stead.
( e ) *Administrator* means the Administrator of the Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) of the Department, or any other officer or employee of AMS to whom authority has been delegated to act in the Administrator's stead.
( f ) *Division* means the Warehouse and Seed Division (WSD), AMS.
( g ) *Director* means the Director of the Division or any other officer or employee of the Division to whom authority has been delegated to act in the Director's stead.
( h ) *Person* means any individual, partnership, association, business trust, corporation, entity, or any other organized group of persons, whether incorporated or not.
( i ) *Seed* means any agricultural or vegetable seed.
( j ) *Interested Party* means any person financially interested in a transaction involving seed.
( k ) *Applicant* means an interested party who requests any inspection service with respect to seed.
( l ) *Authorized agent* means an agent to whom authority to represent a person or government agency has been given by that person or government agency through delegation, contract or cooperative agreement, or other means.
( m ) *Memorandum of Understanding* means a written plan between AMS and a State for carrying out their separate activities in a project of mutual interest to the parties involved.
( n ) *Inspector* means a licensed employee of a State authorized pursuant to a Memorandum of Understanding or an employee of the Department authorized by the Director, to draw samples of seeds, seal containers, inspect records, test seeds for quality, issue certificates and reports, and bill for services.
( o ) *Inspection* means sampling seeds, sealing containers, testing seeds for quality and reviewing records.
( p ) *Appeal inspector* means an inspector or other person designated or authorized by the Division to perform appeal inspections under the Act and regulations in this subpart.
( q ) *Certificate* means a certificate issued under the Act and the regulations in this subpart.
First Department,

December, 1966

(December 1, 1966)

#### Anita Manville, Respondent, v. Thomas F. Manville, Jr., et al., Appellants.

Order, entered on May 2, 1966, denying defendants’ motion to dismiss the complaint unanimously affirmed, without costs or disbursements to any party, but without prejudice to a new motion on proper papers. Defendants may move anew on the basis of the prior Nevada judgment, upon the pleading of the applicable affirmative defense. Concur-—Breitel, J. P., McNally, Stevens, Steuer and Capozzoli, JJ.
§ 7.12 Composition of a county committee. ( a ) A committee established under this part will consist of not fewer than 3 nor more than 11 elected members.
( b ) Committee members must be fairly representative of the farmers and ranchers within their respective LAA from which they are elected.
( c ) The county committee must select a secretary who must be the county executive director or other employee of the county committee. The secretary cannot be a county committee member.
( d ) The county committee must select a chairperson and vice-chairperson.
52.247-49 Destination Unknown.

As prescribed in 47.305-5(b)(2), insert the following provision in solicitations when destinations are

tentative and only for the purpose of evaluating offers:

Destination Unknown (Apr 1984)

For the purpose of evaluating offers and for no other purpose, the final destination(s) for the

supplies will be considered to be as follows: __________________________

(End of clause)

Parent topic: 52.247 [Reserved]
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2939 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

109th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 2939

            To suspend temporarily the duty on Yellow 1189.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              May 23, 2006

  Mr. Carper introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
                  referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
            To suspend temporarily the duty on Yellow 1189.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. YELLOW 1189.

    (a) In General.--Subchapter II of chapter 99 of the Harmonized 
Tariff Schedule of the United States is amended by inserting in 
numerical sequence the following new heading:

``      9902.32.08      Yellow 1189         Free         No change        No change        On or before 12/  ''.
                         (provided for in                                                   31/2009
                         subheading
                         3215.19.00)......

    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or 
after the 15th day after the date of enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
EXHIBIT 32.1
**Certification of Principal Executive Officer pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**
I, William J. Gervais, Chief Executive Officer of Qualstar Corporation (the“Company”), certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:
(1) the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the fiscal quarterended March 31, 2004 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirementsof Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15U.S.C. 78m or 780(d)); and (2) the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all materialrespects, the financial condition and results of operations of theCompany.   Dated: May 10, 2004   /s/ WILLIAM J. GERVAIS  **William J. Gervais** **Chief Executive Officer**
21
# 46.303 Cost-reimbursement supply contracts.

The *contracting officer**shall* insert the clause at 52.246-3, *Inspection* of *Supplies*-Cost-Reimbursement, in *solicitations* and contracts for *supplies*, or services that involve the furnishing of *supplies*, when a cost-reimbursement contract is contemplated.

**Parent topic:**Subpart 46.3 - Contract Clauses
#### PEOPLE, Respondent, v. McALLISTER, Appellant.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department.

May 23, 1906.)

Proceedings by the people of the state of New York against Edward McAllister.

No opinion. Judgment reversed, and new trial ordered. *Held,*that the reception of evidence of sales of liquor other than that charged in the indictment was improper, and constituted reversible error.
§ 614.4 Decisions not subject to informal appeal procedures. ( a ) Decisions that are not appealable under this part include: ( 1 ) Any general program provision, program policy, or any statutory or regulatory requirement that is applicable to all similarly situated participants, such as: ( i ) Program application ranking criteria;
( ii ) Program application screening criteria;
( iii ) Published soil surveys; or
( iv ) Conservation practice technical standards included in the local field office technical guide or the electronic FOTG (eFOTG).
( 2 ) Mathematical or scientific formulas established under a statute or program regulation and a program decision or technical determination based solely on the application of those formulas;
( 3 ) Decisions made pursuant to statutory provisions or implementing regulations that expressly make agency program decisions or technical determinations final;
( 4 ) Decisions that are based on technical information provided by another Federal or State agency, e.g., lists of endangered and threatened species;
( 5 ) Corrections by NRCS of errors in data entered on program contracts, easement documents, loan agreements, and other program documents; or
( 6 ) Decisions issued by the Office of the General Counsel, in the exercise of authority delegated to it by the Attorney General, concerning the application of real property title standards issued by the Attorney General.
( b ) Complaints involving discrimination in program delivery are not appealable under this part and are handled under the existing USDA civil rights rules and regulations.
( c ) Appeals related to contractual issues that are subject to the jurisdiction of the Civilian Board of Contract Appeals are not appealable under the procedures within this part.
( d ) Where NRCS is unable to fund an application for program participation due to a lack of funds. The agency may not deny appeal of the underlying computations used to rank and prioritize the application.
Case 2:06-cv-00623-MEF-SRW Document 43 Filed 10/11/2007 Page 1 of 1
# 228.370 Ground and flight                   risk.

- 228.370-1 Definitions. 
- 228.370-2 General. 
- 228.370-3 Aircraft not owned by or to be delivered to the Government. 

**Parent topic:**Subpart 228.3 - INSURANCE
Exhibit



Exhibit 10.24





FORMULA FOR DETERMINING 2018 TARGET PERFORMANCE SHARE UNIT ("PSU")
AND RESTRICTED STOCK UNIT ("RSU") AWARDS TO BE ISSUED TO NAMED EXECUTIVE OFFICERS
The target number of PSUs and RSUs to be issued to each Named Executive Officer listed below for 2018 will be determined in accordance with the following formula:


	
					
	2018 Target Number PSU Awards
	=
	Base Salary 
as of 1/1/18
	x Long‐Term Incentive Target listed below
	x 70%

	Thirty-trading day average closing price of Ameren Corporation Common Stock on The New York Stock Exchange prior to the date of grant






	
					
	2018 Target Number RSU Awards
	=
	Base Salary 
as of 1/1/18
	x Long‐Term Incentive Target listed below
	x 30%

	Thirty-trading day average closing price of Ameren Corporation Common Stock on The New York Stock Exchange prior to the date of grant






	
		
	NAMED EXECUTIVE OFFICER
	LONG-TERM INCENTIVE 
TARGET AS PERCENT OF BASE SALARY

	Baxter
	400%

	Lyons
	195%

	Nelson
	160%

	Moehn
	180%

	Mark
	170%

	Diya
	150%

	Steinke
	100%
#### In the Matter of the Claim of Dorothy V. Kilday, as Executrix of Elroi Levy, Deceased, Appellant, v. 35 E. 75th St. Corp. et al., Respondents. Workmen’s Compensation Board, Respondent.

Greenblott, J.

Appeal from that part of a decision of the Workmen’s Compensation Board, filed August 3, 1967, which denied payment to the estate of Elroi Levy of a posthumous schedule award for the loss of use of the right arm. Decedent sustained an injury to his right arm and died two days later from unrelated causes. After his death a posthumous schedule award in the amount of $2,550.60 was made on the basis of a 15% loss of the arm. Since decedent left no person entitled to compensation within the meaning of section 15 (subd. 4, par. d) of the Workmen’s Compensation Law, the board properly awarded the estate funeral expenses only, in the amount of $366.50. Decision affirmed, without costs. Gibson, P. J., Herlihy, Reynolds, Aulisi and Greenblott, JJ., concur in memorandum by Greenblott, J.
Case 3:06-cv-00622-WKW-SRW Document 5 Filed 07/28/2006 Page 1 of 1