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



<ARTICLE>                                           7
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                   DEC-31-1998
<DEBT-HELD-FOR-SALE>                           18,161
<DEBT-CARRYING-VALUE>                          0
<DEBT-MARKET-VALUE>                            0
<EQUITIES>                                     2,722
<MORTGAGE>                                     0
<REAL-ESTATE>                                  0
<TOTAL-INVEST>                                 21,987
<CASH>                                         258
<RECOVER-REINSURE>                             3,915
<DEFERRED-ACQUISITION>                         1,203
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 35,047
<POLICY-LOSSES>                                19,787
<UNEARNED-PREMIUMS>                            2,165
<POLICY-OTHER>                                 0
<POLICY-HOLDER-FUNDS>                          1,487
<NOTES-PAYABLE>                                557
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    150
<COMMON>                                       5
<OTHER-SE>                                     5,865
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   35,047
<PREMIUMS>                                     5,635
<INVESTMENT-INCOME>                            985
<INVESTMENT-GAINS>                             432
<OTHER-INCOME>                                 151
<BENEFITS>                                     4,103
<UNDERWRITING-AMORTIZATION>                    1,357
<UNDERWRITING-OTHER>                           588
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                1,070
<INCOME-TAX>                                   291
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            779
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   779
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  0
<RESERVE-OPEN>                                 9,114
<PROVISION-CURRENT>                            3,286
<PROVISION-PRIOR>                              (126)
<PAYMENTS-CURRENT>                             1,074
<PAYMENTS-PRIOR>                               2,176
<RESERVE-CLOSE>                                12,495
<CUMULATIVE-DEFICIENCY>                        (16)
        

</TABLE>
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 40 (Tuesday, March 2, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 9421-9422]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-4210]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Center on Minority Health and Health Disparities; Notice 
of Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of the following 
meeting.
    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the 
provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 
U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could 
disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as 
patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals 
associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would 
constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Center on Minority Health and Health 
Disparities Special Emphasis Panel; Loan Repayment Program for 
Health Disparities Research--Panel 1.
    Date: March 18, 2010.
    Time: 8 a.m. to 5 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: National Institutes of Health, Two Democracy Plaza, 6707 
Democracy Boulevard 800, Bethesda, MD 20892 (Virtual Meeting).
    Contact Person: Prabha L. Atreya, PhD, Chief, Office of 
Scientific Review, National Center on Minority Health and Health 
Disparities, 6707 Democracy Boulevard, Suite 800, Bethesda, MD 
20892, (301) 594-8696, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#aacbded8cfd3cbdad8eac7cbc3c684c4c3c284cdc5dc"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="6e0f1a1c0b170f1e1c2e030f07024000070640090118">[email protected]</span></a>.


[[Page 9422]]


    Dated: February 23, 2010.
Jennifer Spaeth,
Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 2010-4210 Filed 3-1-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-M


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
# C_2019082EN.01002602.xml

| 4.3.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 82/26 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.3.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 82/26

---

Judgment of the General Court of 12 December 2018 — Mylan Laboratories and Mylan v Commission

(Case T-682/14) (1)

((Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - Market for perindopril, a medicinal product intended for the treatment of cardiovascular diseases, in its originator and generic versions - Decision finding an infringement of Article 101 TFEU - Patent dispute settlement agreement - Potential competition - Restriction of competition by object - Balance between competition law and patent law - Imputation of the unlawful conduct - Fines))

(2019/C 82/29)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicants: Mylan Laboratories Ltd (Hyderabad, India) and Mylan, Inc. (Canonsburg, Pennsylvania, United States) (represented by S. Kon, C. Firth and C. Humpe, Solicitors)

Defendant: European Commission (represented initially by F. Castilla Contreras, T. Vecchi, and B. Mongin and subsequently by F. Castilla Contreras, B. Mongin and C. Vollrath, acting as Agents, and by S. Kingston, Barrister-at-law)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU for annulment of Commission Decision C(2014) 4955 final of 9 July 2014 relating to a proceeding under Article 101 and Article 102 TFEU [Case AT.39612 — Perindopril (Servier)] in so far as it concerns the applicants and, in the alternative, for annulment or reduction of the fine imposed on the applicants by that decision.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Mylan Laboratories Ltd and Mylan, Inc. to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Mylan Laboratories Ltd and Mylan, Inc. to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 431, 1.12.2014.

---
# C_2015026EN.01004502.xml

| 26.1.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 26/45 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.1.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 26/45

---

Action brought on 9 October 2014 — ZZ v Commission

(Case F-106/14)

(2015/C 026/59)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Parties

Applicant: ZZ (represented by: M. Velardo, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Commission

Defendant:

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

The annulment of the Commission’s decision, pursuant to Article 7 of Annex V to the Staff Regulations of Officials, as amended by Regulation No 1023/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 October 2013 amending the Staff Regulations of Officials, to allocate the applicant, from 1 January 2014, only 2.5 days of additional leave in respect of ‘home leave’ instead of granting him ‘travelling time’ of 5 days, to which he was previously entitled.

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Tribunal should:

| — | Annul the Commission’s decision resulting from the ‘Rights’ page of the SYSPER site and confirmed by Commission Decision No R/396/14 of 2 July 2014 rejecting a complaint, to allocate the applicant, from 1 January 2014, 2.5 days of additional leave in respect of ‘home leave’ instead of 5 days ‘travelling time’, to which he was entitled previously, on the basis of the first paragraph of Article 7 of Annex V to the Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Union, as amended by Regulation No 1023/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 October 2013 amending the Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Union and the Conditions of Employment of Other Servants of the European Union; |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the Commission’s decision resulting from the ‘Rights’ page of the SYSPER site and confirmed by Commission Decision No R/396/14 of 2 July 2014 rejecting a complaint, to allocate the applicant, from 1 January 2014, 2.5 days of additional leave in respect of ‘home leave’ instead of 5 days ‘travelling time’, to which he was entitled previously, on the basis of the first paragraph of Article 7 of Annex V to the Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Union, as amended by Regulation No 1023/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 October 2013 amending the Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Union and the Conditions of Employment of Other Servants of the European Union;

‘Rights’

| — | Order the European Commission to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

Order the European Commission to pay the costs.

---
§ 582.5458 Manganese hypophosphite. ( a ) *Product.* Manganese hypophosphite.
( b ) *Conditions of use.* This substance is generally recognized as safe when used in accordance with good manufacturing or feeding practice.
<PAGE>   1


                                                                      EXHIBIT 15
                                                                      ----------

INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS' AWARENESS LETTER


May 12, 1999

The Shareholders and Board of Directors
Essef Corporation and Subsidiaries
220 Park Drive
Chardon, Ohio


We have made a review, in accordance with standards established by the American
Institute of Certified Public Accountants, of the unaudited interim financial
information of Essef Corporation and Subsidiaries for the periods ended March
31, 1999 and 1998, as indicated in our report dated April 20, 1999; because we
did not do an audit, we expressed no opinion on that information.

We are aware that our report referred to above, which is included in your
Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 1999, is
incorporated by reference in Registration Statement No. 33-17758 on Form S-8.

We also are aware that the aforementioned report, pursuant to Rule 436(c) under
the Securities Act of 1933, is not considered a part of the Registration
Statement prepared or certified by an accountant or a report prepared or
certified by an accountant within the meaning of Sections 7 and 11 of that Act.




DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP

Cleveland, Ohio




                                  Page 18 of 18
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          FEB-28-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             MAR-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               NOV-30-1996
<CASH>                                       3,521,121
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,826,208
<ALLOWANCES>                                    39,388
<INVENTORY>                                  5,445,463
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            11,098,810
<PP&E>                                       8,646,536
<DEPRECIATION>                               5,042,347
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              14,934,459
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        6,315,464
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         5,700
<OTHER-SE>                                   7,295,717
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                14,934,459
<SALES>                                      9,402,551
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             9,402,551
<CGS>                                        7,781,102
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,621,449
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             1,622,070
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             300,642
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (301,263)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (301,263)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.18)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
§ 556.670 Sulfamethazine. ( a ) [Reserved]
( b ) *Tolerances.* The tolerances for sulfamethazine are: ( 1 ) *Cattle.* Edible tissues (excluding milk): 0.1 ppm.
( 2 ) *Chickens and turkeys.* Edible tissues (excluding eggs): 0.1 ppm.
( 3 ) *Swine.* Edible tissues: 0.1 ppm.
( c ) *Related conditions of use.* See §§ 520.445, 520.2218, 520.2260a, 520.2260b, 520.2260c, 520.2261a, 520.2261b, 522.2260, 558.140, and 558.630 of this chapter.
[84 FR 32993, July 11, 2019, as amended at 85 FR 18121, Apr. 1, 2020; 86 FR 13188, Mar. 8, 2021]
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1995
<CASH>                                       7,870,912
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                2,921,756
<ALLOWANCES>                               (2,660,445)
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                      39,889,872
<DEPRECIATION>                            (14,268,869)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              34,561,973
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                              0
<COMMON>                                             0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                  23,018,757
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                34,561,973
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             7,415,893
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                6,358,007
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               134,934
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           1,087,453
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (164,501)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                              2,006,309
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 1,841,808
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 31.2

CERTIFICATION

SECTION 302 CERTIFICATION OF OUR CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

I, Denis Gallant, certify that:



1.    I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB of Smart-tek Solutions, Inc.;



2.

Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of

material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements

made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made,

not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;



3.    Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial

information included in this report, fairly present in all material

respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of

the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;



4.    The registrant's other certifying officer and I are responsible for

establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as

defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant

and have:



(a)   Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such

disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our

supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the

registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known

to us by others within those entities, particularly during the

period in which this report is being prepared;



(b)   Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls

and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about

the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of

the end of the period covered by this report based on such

evaluation; and



(c)   Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal

control over financial reporting that occurred during the

registrant's most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant's fourth

quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially

affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the

registrant's internal control over financial reporting; and



5.    The registrant's other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on

our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting,

to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of the registrant's

board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):



(a)   All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design

or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are

reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to

record, process, summarize and report financial information; and



(b)   Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or

other employees who have a significant role in the registrant's

internal control over financial reporting.



/s/ Denis Gallant

------------------------------

Denis Gallant

Chief Financial Officer



October 11, 2006
Exhibit 10.38
 EVERGREEN SOLAR, INC.
 AMENDED AND RESTATED
CHANGE OF CONTROL SEVERANCE AGREEMENT
  RECITALS
     AGREEMENT
  Term of Agreement
 At-Will Employment




---



##### 



Acceleration of Vesting on Change of Control
 Severance Benefits
 Termination without Cause or Resignation for Good Reason in Connection with a Change
of Control
 Accrued Compensation
 Severance Payment
 Continued Employee Benefits
  2




---



##### 



Voluntary Resignation; Termination for Cause
 Disability; Death
 Exclusive Remedy
 Code Section 409A
 Distributions
 3




---



##### 



Amendment
 Excise Tax Gross-Up
 Definition of Terms
 Affiliate
 Benefit Plans
 4




---



##### 



Cause
       Change of Control
   5




---



##### 



Disability
 Good Reason
      Involuntary Separation Pay Limit
 6




---



##### 



Successors
 The Companys Successors
 Executives Successors
 Notice
 General
 Notice of Termination
 Arbitration
 7




---



##### 



The
Company and Executive hereby agree to waive their right to have any dispute with the other party
resolved in a court of law by a judge or jury.
 Miscellaneous Provisions
 No Duty to Mitigate
 Waiver
 Headings
 Entire Agreement
 Choice of Law
 Severability
 8




---



##### 



Withholding
 Counterparts
 Remainder of page intentionally left blank
 9




---



##### 



COMPANY
    EVERGREEN SOLAR, INC.By:Title:EXECUTIVERichard M. FeldtDATE
    December 31, 2008 10
#### § 58.61 Equipment design.

Equipment used in the generation, measurement, or assessment of data and equipment used for facility environmental control shall be of appropriate design and adequate capacity to function according to the protocol and shall be suitably located for operation, inspection, cleaning, and maintenance.

[52 FR 33780, Sept. 4, 1987]
#### Maskel Construction Company, Inc. *v.*The American Masons’ Supply Company The American Masons’ Supply Company *v.*Maskel Construction Company, Inc.

King, C. J., Alcorn, House, Thim and Ryan, Js.

Argued October 15

decided November 6, 1969

*459
      *Walter R. Dudek,*with whom, on the brief, was *Walter W. Arthur,*for the appellant (plaintiff in the first case and defendant in the second case).

*Richard M. Feingold,*with whom was *Catherine J. Petersen,*for the appellee (defendant in the first case and plaintiff in the second case).

Thim, J.

These cases were consolidated and tried together. Both of them arose from a sale and delivery in May, 1960, of “slipseal” pipe by The American Masons’ Supply Company, hereinafter referred to as American, to the Maskel Construction Company, Inc., hereinafter referred to as Maskel. The pipe was made of vitrified clay to which bituminous collars had been moulded, and, by applying a special solvent at the job site prior to assembly, a tight seal would theoretically be formed upon joining the pipes. The pipe was used by Maskel in the construction and installation of a sanitary sewer line on Hyde Road in West Hartford. During and after the installation of the sewer line, water infiltrated into the line. To eliminate the infiltration, Maskel was required to make substantial repairs to the sewer line.

In the first case, Maskel sought recovery of its expenses in repairing the line. Its claim was that American sold defective pipe which had been expressly and impliedly warranted as pipe of very high quality and fit for use as a sewer line. In support of its claim that American impliedly warranted the quality of the pipe, Maskel relied on § 42-14 of the *460General Statutes (Rev. 1958) (see General Statutes [Rev. to 1962] §§ 42a-2-314, 42a-2~315, effective October 1, 1961), which, provides for implied warranties of quality in contracts to sell and in sales.

In the second ease, American sought to recover from Maskel the value of the pipe sold together with money owing on account. Maskel pleaded a counterclaim containing the same allegations as those which appear in its complaint against American.

The court concluded that Maskel failed to prove (1) that the pipe was not fit for the purpose for which it was intended, (2) that the pipe was not of merchantable quality, and (3) that the pipe was defective.

In the first case judgment was rendered for the defendant American. In the second ease judgment was rendered for American on the complaint and on the counterclaim. Maskel appealed from the judgment in each case and the appeals have been combined in a single record.

The Maskel Construction Company, Inc., is not entitled to the additions to the finding which it seeks. Its brief and appendix disclose nothing to show that any of these facts material to the case were, at the trial, admitted or undisputed. *National Broadcasting Co.*v. *Rose,*153 Conn. 219, 223, 215 A.2d 123.

The conclusions which the court reached find adequate support in the subordinate facts. *Kobryn*v. *Kobryn,*156 Conn. 638, 639, 244 A.2d 411.

There is no error in either case.

In this opinion the other judges concurred.