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

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM FORM
10-QSB FOR THE QUARTERLY PERIOD ENDED MARCH 31, 1997 AND IS QUALIFIED IN
ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                          96,056
<SECURITIES>                                 1,095,570
<RECEIVABLES>                                   13,906
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               109,962
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,205,532
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           11,721
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        29,211
<OTHER-SE>                                   1,164,600
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,205,532
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               (4,952)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  4,952
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              4,952
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     4,952
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
#### § 993.53 Above parity situations.

The minimum standards, the minimum sizes, including the minimum undersized regulation in § 933.49(c), and the provisions of this part relating to administration shall continue in effect irrespective of whether the estimated season average price for prunes is in excess of the parity level specified in section 2(1) of the act.

[46 FR 61637, Dec. 18, 1981]
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE

MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA, NORTHERN DIVISION

JAMES KUCZMASKI, etc., )

et al., )

)

Plaintiffs, )

) CIVIL ACTION NO.

v. ) 2:06cv731-MHT

) 

US FOODSERVICE, )

)

Defendant. )

ORDER

It is ORDERED that the joint motion for leave to file

agreements under seal (Doc. No. 40) is granted.

DONE, this the 11th day of September, 2007.

 /s/ Myron H. Thompson 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 2:06-cv-00731-MHT-SRW Document 42 Filed 09/11/2007 Page 1 of 1
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          FEB-29-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             MAR-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               AUG-31-1999
<CASH>                                      29,991,542
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                               97,496,356
<ALLOWANCES>                               (7,827,154)
<INVENTORY>                                 29,968,832
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                           170,178,411
<PP&E>                                      68,070,379
<DEPRECIATION>                              27,796,994
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             322,001,456
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       65,489,967
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        15,993
<OTHER-SE>                                  95,179,955
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               322,001,456
<SALES>                                    119,936,937
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                           119,936,937
<CGS>                                       63,226,082
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               63,226,082
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                             4,963,054
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           2,873,228
<INCOME-PRETAX>                           (28,938,877)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   901,300
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                       (29,840,177)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                              (29,840,177)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (1.03)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (1.03)


</TABLE>
<PAGE>

                                  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 Quarterly Report of Intervoice, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended August 31, 2003, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, David
W. Brandenburg, Chief Executive Officer and Chairman 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:

         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.

Date: October 14, 2003

                                            /s/ David W. Brandenburg
                                            ------------------------
                                            David W. Brandenburg
                                            Chief Executive Officer and Chairman
#### § 11.16 Cancellation of request for special nuclear material access authorization.

When a request for an individual's access authorization is withdrawn or canceled, the licensee shall notify the Chief, Personnel Security Branch, NRC Division of Facilities and Security immediately, by telephone, so that the investigation may be discontinued. The caller shall provide the full name and date of birth of the individual, the date of request, and the type of access authorization originally requested (“U” or “R”). The licensee shall promptly submit written confirmation of the telephone notification to the Personnel Security Branch, NRC Division of Facilities and Security. A portion of the fee for the “U” special nuclear material access authorization may be refunded depending upon the status of the Tier 5 investigation at the time of withdrawal or cancellation.

[64 FR 15647, Apr. 1, 1999, as amended at 87 FR 45241, July 28, 2022]
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR

THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

EASTERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA )

)

v. ) CASE NO. 3:06-cr-208-MEF

)

JASON EDWARD COFIELD )

O R D E R

It is hereby ORDERED that the criminal term of court set for March 12, 2007 is

continued to March 26, 2007. Jury selection will begin at 10:00 A.M. at the United States

Courthouse, One Church Street, Courtroom 2A, Montgomery, Alabama.

DONE this 7th day of March, 2007.

 /s/ Mark E. Fuller 

CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:06-cr-00208-MEF-CSC Document 50 Filed 03/07/2007 Page 1 of 1
§ 1016.12 Termination of security facility approval. ( a ) Security facility approval will be terminated when: ( 1 ) There is no longer a need to use, process, store, reproduce, transmit, or handle Restricted Data at the facility; or
( 2 ) The DOE makes a determination that continued security facility approval is not in the interest of common defense and security.
( b ) The permittee will be notified in writing of a determination to terminate facility approval, and the procedures outlined in § 1016.27 will apply.
[82 FR 41506, Sept. 1, 2017]
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE

MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA, SOUTHERN DIVISION

CHRISTINE BENNETT, )

)

Plaintiff, )

) CIVIL ACTION NO.

v. ) 1:06cv723MHT

) 

ARMY FLEET SUPPORT LLC, )

)

Defendant. )

 RULE 26(F) ORDER

The parties are reminded of the obligation, imposed

by Rule 26(f) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, to

confer and to develop a proposed discovery plan.

Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the Rule 26(f) report

containing the discovery plan shall be filed as soon as

practicable but not later than October 18, 2006.

The longstanding practice in this district is that

dispositive motions shall be filed no later than 90 days

prior to the pretrial date. If the parties seek to vary

from that schedule, they should present, in the plan,

Case 1:06-cv-00723-MHT-CSC Document 16 Filed 09/27/2006 Page 1 of 3
2

specific case-related reasons for the requested variance.

In their Rule 26(f) report, however, the parties should

assume that the 90-day requirement will apply.

This case will be set for trial before the

undersigned judge during one of that judge's regularly

scheduled civil trial terms, within 7 to 10 months of

this order if a term is available and, if not available,

then as soon as possible thereafter. The pretrial date

is normally set within four to six weeks of a scheduled

trial term. The dates of each judge's civil trial terms

are available on the court's website located at

<http://almd.uscourts.gov> in the civil case information

section.

The court may or may not hold a scheduling conference

before issuing a scheduling order. If the court holds a

scheduling conference, counsel may participate in the

scheduling conference by conference call.

The scheduling order entered by the court will follow

the form of the Uniform Scheduling Order adopted by the

Case 1:06-cv-00723-MHT-CSC Document 16 Filed 09/27/2006 Page 2 of 3
judges of this court. The Uniform Scheduling Order is

also available on the court's website.

The report of the parties should comply with Form 35

of the Appendix of Forms to the Federal Rules of Civil

Procedure.

DONE, this the 27th day of September, 2006.

 /s/ Myron H. Thompson 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:06-cv-00723-MHT-CSC Document 16 Filed 09/27/2006 Page 3 of 3
#### Joan T. Kells, Respondent, v. New England Mutual Life Insurance Company, Appellant, et al., Defendant.

Order entered January 8, 1970, denying pretrial summary judgment to defendant on the second cause of action unanimously reversed, on the law, with $50 costs and disbursements to the appellant, and defendant-appellant’s motion for partial summary judgment dismissing the second cause of action granted. The action is on a policy of life insurance. The second cause of action seeks recovery for accidental death. The policy specifically excludes coverage for death resulting from medical or surgical treatment. The facts have been fully developed through pretrial procedures. The deceased underwent an operation at a hospital for the correction of an unstable lumbrosaeral mechanism. There was a failure of the blood clotting mechanism resulting in excessive bleeding and, following surgical efforts to alleviate the condition, deceased suffered a cardiac arrest to which he succumbed. Clearly death resulted from causes excluded from coverage. Concur—Eager, J. P., Markewich, McNally and Steuer, JJ.
NotesFAQContact Us

Collection

Thesaurus
AdvancedSearch Tips

Collection

Thesaurus
BrowseThesaurus

 Download full text

**ERIC Number:**

**Record Type:**

**Publication Date:**

**Pages:**

**Abstractor:**

**ISBN:**

**ISSN:**

**EISSN:**

Elementary Secondary EducationField Experience ProgramsHigher EducationPreservice Teacher EducationStudent TeachersTeaching Methods

**Publication Type:**

**Education Level:**

**Audience:**

**Language:**

**Sponsor:**

**Authoring Institution:**

**Grant or Contract Numbers:**

PrivacyCopyrightContact UsSelection PolicyAPI
JournalsNon-JournalsDownloadSubmitMultimediaWidget
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 112 Engrossed in House (EH)]

                 In the House of Representatives, U.S.,

                                                     February 16, 2005.
    Resolved, That the following Member be, and is hereby, elected to the 
following standing committee of the House of Representatives:
    Committee on Resources: Mrs. Musgrave.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

EASTERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA )

)

v ) CR. NO. 3:06cr191-MHT

) 

SPRING M. DAWSON )

ORDER

Now pending before the court is the defendant’s motion to continue the arraignment

presently set for September 27, 2006. Upon consideration of the motion, and for good cause,

it is

ORDERED that arraignment presently set for September 27, 2006 be and is hereby

RESET to December 27, 2006, at 10:00 a.m. in Courtroom 4B, Frank M. Johnson, Jr. Federal

Building and United States Courthouse Complex, One Church Street, Montgomery,

Alabama.

Done this 26 day of September, 2006. th

 /s/Charles S. Coody 

CHARLES S. COODY

CHIEF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 3:06-cr-00191-MHT-CSC Document 11 Filed 09/26/2006 Page 1 of 1
159 So.2d 286

#### Kenneth W. SHINGLEDECKER et al. v. L. Clay SPENCER et al.

No. 47039.

Jan. 20, 1964.

In re: Gilbert J. Fortier, Jr., et al. applying for certiorari or writ of review to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, Parish ■of Orleans. 157 So.2d 622;

Writ refused. The judgment complained of is correct.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Darnell Tomlin, Appellant.

Submitted January 7, 2008;

decided January 10, 2008

Reported below, 41 AD3d 620.

Motion for an extension of the time within which to apply for permission to appeal pursuant to CPL 460.20 granted and motion papers treated as a timely CPL 460.20 application.
# Subparts 706.1–706.2 [Reserved]

**Parent topic:**PART 706—COMPETITION REQUIREMENTS
Exhibit 4.3


 


Consent of Independent Registered
Public Accounting Firm


We have issued our
report dated March 13, 2018, with respect to the financial statement of Smart Trust 370 contained in Amendment No. 1 to the Registration
Statement on Form S-6 (File No. 333-222459) and related Prospectus. We consent to the use of the aforementioned report in the Registration
Statement and Prospectus, and to the use of our name as it appears under the caption “Independent Registered Public Accounting
Firm”.


 


/s/ Grant
Thornton LLP


 


Chicago, Illinois


March 13, 2018
#### § 983.28 Secretary.

*Secretary* means the Secretary of Agriculture of the United States or any officer or employee of the United States Department of Agriculture who is, or who may hereafter be, authorized to act in his/her stead.

[69 FR 17850, Apr. 4, 2004. Redesignated at 74 FR 56539, Nov. 2, 2009]
#### § 993.506 Lot.

*Lot* for the purposes of this subpart shall have the same meaning as defined in § 993.104(b) of the Subpart—Administrative Rules and Regulations.
(4910-13-U] DEP ARTMENT OF TRANSPORT ATION Fcdcr-al Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 (Docket No. FAA-2010-XXXXXj [)irectorate Identifier 201O-SW-078-ADj Amendment 39-XXXX; AD 2010-18-52] RIN 2120-AA64 Ainvorthiness Directivesj MD Helicopters, Inc. Model MD900 Helicopters AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT. ACTION: Final rule; request for comments. SUMMARY: This document supersedes AD 2010-18-51 and publishes inthe Federal Register an amendment adopting Emergency Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2010-18-52 which was sent previously to all known owners and operators ofMD Helicopters, Inc. (MDH!) Model MD900 helicopters by individual letters. This AD requires visually inspecting the main rotor hub (hub) for acrack. Ifacrack is found, this AD requires, before further night, replacing the unairworthy hub with an airworthy hub. Additionally, ifacracked hub is found, this AD requires reporting the finding to the Los Angeles Aircraft Certification OfTice within 10days of finding the crack. This AD isprompted by two reports ofcracks detected in the hub inthe area near the flex beam bolt hole locations during maintenance on two MDHI Model MD900 helicopters. 'fhe actions specified by this AD are intended to detect acrack inthe hub and prevent failure ofthe hub and subsequent loss ofcontrol of the helicopter. DATES: Effective [insert date 15 days after date ofpublication inthe Fedentl Registcr), to all persons except those persons to whom itwas made immediately effective by Emergency AD 2010-18-52, issued on August 23, 20I0, which contained the requirements of this amendment. Comments for inclusion in the Rules Docket must be received on or before [insert date 60 days after date ofpublication inthe Federal Register]. ~ONCCRP.f!\CE5 Ol.'Tl:-.iG SY\I!~'}l ACO Egr



### IdoL :'lIn \I.,~~l', 

# £5cwi~

'.\11: 

## Cj- ;;l7-/D

-.If t.',\.', "'I'~ 

## ?D,L~('/'() 

# "r/Z-r/to
157 So.2d 236

#### Betty Judd LEVERT, wife of Robert Louis Levert, Jr. v. Robert Louis LEVERT, Jr.

No. 46987.

Nov. 12, 1963.

Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit.

156 So.2d 284.

It is ordered that the writ of review issue; that the Court of Appeal send up the record in duplicate of the case; and that counsel for plaintiff and defendant be notified.
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE

MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA, EASTERN DIVISION

CINCINNATI INSURANCE )

COMPANY, )

)

Plaintiff, )

) CIVIL ACTION NO.

v. ) 3:06cv733-MHT

) 

JOSEPH DONALD PRATHER )

and LINDA PRATHER, )

)

Defendants. )

ORDER

It is ORDERED that the motion to dismiss (doc. no. 4)

is set for submission, without oral argument, on

September 25, 2006, with all briefs due by said date.

DONE, this the 13th day of September, 2006.

 /s/ Myron H. Thompson 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:06-cv-00733-MHT-TFM Document 6 Filed 09/13/2006 Page 1 of 1
### 10 Record of Discussion

Docket No. FAA

- Directorate Identifier:

- AD

With whom outside the FAA has this AD action been discussed (i.e., Design Approval Holder,

manufacturer, ATA, NBAA, R AA, AOPA, ALPA, GAMA, etc)?

ORGANIZATION PERSON CONTACTED DATE TOPICS DISCUSSED



### Lockheed Martin Ralph Sykes 6/4/2014 Concur.



### Lockheed Martin Eric Jones 6/4/201 4 Concur.

Other/Additional Information:
Case 2:06-cv-00717-ID-SRW Document 95 Filed 10/23/2007 Page 1 of 4
Case 2:06-cv-00717-ID-SRW Document 95 Filed 10/23/2007 Page 2 of 4
Case 2:06-cv-00717-ID-SRW Document 95 Filed 10/23/2007 Page 3 of 4
Case 2:06-cv-00717-ID-SRW Document 95 Filed 10/23/2007 Page 4 of 4
AeroUAVs LLC 11523 Palmbrush Trail Suite 353 Lakewood Ranch, FL 34202

August 6, 2015

U.S. Department of Transportation 

Docket Management System 

1200 New Jersey Ave., SE 

Washington, DC 20590 

Re: Request for review of restrictions to Exemption No. 12153, Regulatory Docket No. FAA–2015–1641 

under Section 333 of the FAA Reform Act and Part 11 of the Federal Aviation Regulations. 

Dear Sir or Madam: 

Pursuant to Section 333 of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (the “Reform Act”) and 14 

C.F.R. Part 11, AeroUAVs, LLC (AeroUAVs), seeks to request an amendment to exemption No. 12153, 

Regulatory Docket No. FAA–2015–1641; Submitted by AeroUAVs for review April 20, 2015 and 

subsequently granted by the FAA on July 27, 2015. 

The original exemption made a request to allow operations for:

 Aerial Photography and Videography for the real estate, construction, and utilities industries 

 Agricultural Surveying and Application 

 sUAS Operator Training 

 Product Demonstrations 

 Research and Development

In granting the exemption, the FAA included the following restriction:

“The petitioner also requested authority to conduct UAS training. At this time, the FAA is unable 

to authorize UAS operations for training until a further assessment is completed. When the FAA 

completes its review, we will proceed accordingly and no further action will be required by the 

petitioner. However, the petitioner is permitted to train its own pilot in commands and visual 

observers in accordance with condition no. 14 and the other conditions and limitations in this 

exemption.”

Training of sUAS operators other than AeroUAVs pilots is an essential part of our business plan and we 

respectfully request that the restriction be removed from exemption 12153. In reviewing current 

exemptions, it appears that the FAA began adding the restriction to approvals sometime in mid-June 

2015. Exemption requests that included requests for Training Approvals were granted prior to that time. 

Namely the following Exemptions for sUAS training have been granted: 11311, 11888, 11789, 11663, 

11668, 11625, 11552, 11570, 11588, 11493, 11430, 11301, and 11265.

We believe that our Manual submission has included Procedures and Training Standards of at least a 

quality and safety standard equal to or greater than any of the above approvals. The requested 

exemption would not set a precedent, and any delay in acting on this petition would be detrimental to 
AeroUAVs LLC 11523 Palmbrush Trail Suite 353 Lakewood Ranch, FL 34202

AeroUAVs. We therefore request the Removal of the Training restriction form Exemption 12153

AeroUAVs will gladly provide any additional information requested by the FAA to expedite this approval 

process. 

Regards,

Timothy Ford

President and CEO

AeroUAVs, LLC

11523 Palmbrush Trail Suite 353

Lakewood Ranch, FL 34202

(314) 397-1110
Case 3:06-cv-00687-WHA-DRB Document 10 Filed 09/07/2006 Page 1 of 1
5137.9101 Policy.    (a) Contracting officers shall ensure that the requirement to report contractor manpower is included in all contracts, task/delivery orders and modifications. The cognizant contracting officer shall include a separate line item in Section B of the contract to allow for payment in compliance with this requirement.       (b) The list of contracts for which reporting is not applicable is located on the Assistant Secretary of the Army Manpower and Reserve Affairs (ASA(M&RA)) website at https://www.army.mil/asamra#org-resources.       (c) The Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition & Sustainment established services contractor reporting in www.SAM.gov on October 15, 2020. It provides most of the source data for compliance with section 2330a of Title 10, United States Code.       (d) Enter data into the www.SAM.gov system at any time during the contract’s period of performance. However, data must be accurate and complete and entered into www.SAM.gov not later than October 31 after the completion of each fiscal year or part of a fiscal year for which such contract is active.       (e) The Contractor Manpower Reporting application is available at https://www.SAM.gov. **Parent topic:** Subpart 5137.91 - Accounting for Contract Services
Second Department,

February, 1967*

(February 1, 1967)

#### In the Matter of William Willingham, Petitioner, v. Criminal Term of the Supreme Court of the County of Queens et al., Respondents.

*

Not published with other decisions of February, 1967, 27 A D 2d 732.— [Rep.

Proceeding by petitioner pursuant to CPLR article 78 to prohibit respondents from retrying him on indictment No. 384/66 and to direct that he be discharged insofar as he is held under that indictment. Proceeding dismissed, without costs. Petitioner was not placed in jeopardy, since the jury was dismissed prior to the introduction of evidence. Two motions, each by a separate respondent, to dismiss the proceeding. Motions dismissed as academic, in the light of the determination in [above] motion decided herewith. Ughetta, Acting P. J., Christ, Rabin, Benjamin and Munder, JJ., concur.