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

<ARTICLE>     5
<LEGEND>  THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED
  FROM THE CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AS OF SEPTEMBER 28, 1996 AND THE
  CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS FOR THE NINE MONTHS ENDED 
  SEPTEMBER 28, 1996 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH 
  FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
<MULTIPLIER>  1,000
       
<S>                                    <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                          9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                      DEC-28-1996
<PERIOD-END>                           SEP-28-1996
<CASH>                                   60,129
<SECURITIES>                              7,000
<RECEIVABLES>                            71,842
<ALLOWANCES>                              7,371
<INVENTORY>                              56,493
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                        207,895
<PP&E>                                  101,156
<DEPRECIATION>                           57,682 
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                          263,619
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                    58,987
<BONDS>                                       0
<COMMON>                                     22
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                         0
<PREFERRED>                                   0
<OTHER-SE>                              201,024
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>            263,619
<SALES>                                 277,023 
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                        277,023
<CGS>                                   199,998
<TOTAL-COSTS>                           199,998
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                              0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                         10,938
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                          393
<INCOME-PRETAX>                          16,668
<INCOME-TAX>                              6,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                      10,668 
<DISCONTINUED>                                0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                               0
<CHANGES>                                     0
<NET-INCOME>                             10,668
<EPS-PRIMARY>                              0.48
<EPS-DILUTED>                              0.48  
        

</TABLE>
Editorial Note on Part 890
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 890 appear at 73 FR 35341, June 23, 2008.

§ 890.5740 Powered heating pad. ( a ) *Identification.* A powered heating pad is an electrical device intended for medical purposes that provides dry heat therapy for body surfaces. It is capable of maintaining an elevated temperature during use.
( b ) *Classification.* Class II (special controls). The device is exempt from the premarket notification procedures in subpart E part 807 of this chapter subject to § 890.9.
[48 FR 53047, Nov. 23, 1983, as amended at 63 FR 59231, Nov. 3, 1998]
# C_2021252EN.01003503.xml

| 28.6.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 252/35 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.6.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 252/35

---

Order of the General Court of 5 May 2021 — Medilab v Commission and ECB

(Case T-152/14) (1)

(2021/C 252/49)

Language of the case: English

The President of the First Chamber, Extended Composition has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

---

(1)  OJ C 159, 26.5.2014.

---
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 7990 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 7990

To extend the authorization for a large-scale water recycling and reuse 
                 grant program, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 15, 2024

Mrs. Napolitano (for herself, Mr. Grijalva, Mr. Huffman, and Ms. Lee of 
   Nevada) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                     Committee on Natural Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To extend the authorization for a large-scale water recycling and reuse 
                 grant program, and for other purposes.

    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 ``Large-Scale Water Recycling 
Reauthorization and Investment Act of 2024''.

SEC. 2. AMENDMENTS TO INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENT AND JOBS ACT.

    The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (Public Law 117-58) is 
amended--
            (1) in section 40901(4)(B), by striking ``$450,000,000'' 
        and inserting ``$1,000,000,000''; and
            (2) in section 40905--
                    (A) in subsection (c)(2), by striking 
                ``$500,000,000'' and inserting ``$1,000,000,000''; and
                    (B) in subsection (k), by striking ``5 years after 
                the date of enactment of this Act'' and inserting ``6 
                years after the date of enactment of the Large-Scale 
                Water Recycling Reauthorization and Investment Act of 
                2024''.
                                 <all>
```
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                       4,005,142
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                     370,827,055
<DEPRECIATION>                              15,523,819
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             363,285,115<F1>
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                   281,961,091
<OTHER-SE>                                (24,706,085)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               363,285,115<F1>
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            15,023,222<F2>
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               10,088,188
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           1,316,464
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              4,001,740
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          4,001,740
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 4,001,740
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.14
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
<FN>
<F1>Current Assets and Current Liabilities are not separated to conform
with industry standards.
<F2>Income is from rental income. There are no Sales or Cost of Goods Sold.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
Editorial Note on Part 872
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 872 appear at 73 FR 35341, June 23, 2008.

§ 872.6250 Dental chair and accessories. ( a ) *Identification.* A dental chair and accessories is a device, usually AC-powered, in which a patient sits. The device is intended to properly position a patient to perform dental procedures. A dental operative unit may be attached.
( b ) *Classification.* Class I. The dental chair without the operative unit device is exempt from the premarket notification procedures in subpart E of part 807 of this chapter.
[55 FR 48439, Nov. 20, 1990, as amended at 59 FR 63009, Dec. 7, 1994]
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 97-20775 Summary Calendar

VARSHA SHAH, M.D., Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS SYSTEM, MEDICAL FOUNDATION; THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS HEALTH SCIENCE CENTER, AT HOUSTON MEDICAL SCHOOL; SAN JACINTO METHODIST HOSPITAL; MADELYN POLLOCK, M.D. Program Director; HAMILTON W. KILPATRICK, M.D., Chairman of Family Practice Program; DAN GANZHORN, M.D., Defendants-Appellees.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. H-96-CV-1150

- - - - - - - - - - August 7, 1998 Before JONES, SMITH, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Varsha Shah appeals the district court’s opinions and orders granting summary judgment to defendants on Shah’s claims that the defendants canceled her third-year medical residency contract and subsequently terminated her from a medical residency programNo. 97-20775 -2- without due process of law in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Shah also claims that the actions were in retaliation for her exercise of rights under the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA), 29 U.S.C. § 2601 et
. seq . Shah did not bring a § 1983 claim against the state defendants -- University of Texas System, Medical Foundation (UTSF) or the University of Texas Health Science Center, at Houston Medical School (UTHS). Shah’s § 1983 claim against the remaining private defendants fails for lack of state action. See Wong v. Stripling , 881 F.2d 200 (5th Cir. 1989); Albright v. Longview Police Dept. , 884 F.2d 835, 838 (5th Cir. 1989). Shah’s FMLA claims fail. Assuming, arguendo, that the state defendants could be held liable under a theory of respondeat superior and that Shah could make out a prima facie case of violation of the FMLA, Shah has failed to present competent summary judgment evidence showing that the defendants’ stated reason for dismissing her was pretextual. See Hypes on Behalf of Hypes v. First Commerce Corp. , 134 F.3d 721 (5th Cir. 1998), ( citing Oswalt v. Sara Lee Corp ., 889 F. Supp. 253, 259 (N.D. Miss. 1995)(applying McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green , 411 U.S. 792 (1973)); cf. Walton v. Bisco Industries, Inc. , 119 F.3d 368, 371 (5th Cir. 1997) (Title VII case); Ross v. University of Texas at San Antonio , 139 F.3d 521, 526-27 (5th Cir. 1998)(AEDA case).
AFFIRMED.
EXHIBIT 31.2



Certification of the Chief Financial Officer

Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002



I, Sharon M. Glickman, certify that:



1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K/A of SportsLine.com, Inc.;



2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a 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; and



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.



|                       |  |  |  |                                                                         
|---------------------- |  |  |  | ------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                       |  | 
|Date: November 8, 2004 |  |  |  | /S/    SHARON M.
GLICKMAN                                               
|                       |  |  |  | Sharon M. Glickman Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial Officer)
§ 582.5159 Biotin. ( a ) *Product.* Biotin.
( b ) *Conditions of use.* This substance is generally recognized as safe when used in accordance with good manufacturing or feeding practice.
Editorial Note on Part 872
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 872 appear at 73 FR 35341, June 23, 2008.

§ 872.3240 Dental bur. ( a ) *Identification.* A dental bur is a rotary cutting device made from carbon steel or tungsten carbide intended to cut hard structures in the mouth, such as teeth or bone. It is also intended to cut hard metals, plastics, porcelains, and similar materials intended for use in the fabrication of dental devices.
( b ) *Classification.* Class I (general controls). The device is exempt from the premarket notification procedures in subpart E of part 807 of this chapter subject to the limitations in § 872.9.
[52 FR 30097, Aug. 12, 1987, as amended at 59 FR 63008, Dec. 7, 1994; 66 FR 38798, July 25, 2001]
# C_2016027EN.01005501.xml

| 25.1.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 27/55 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.1.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 27/55

---

Order of the General Court of 13 November 2015 — Švyturys-Utenos Alus v OHIM — Nordbrand Nordhausen (KISS)

(Case T-360/14) (1)

1

((Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Withdrawal of the opposition - No need to adjudicate))

(2016/C 027/70)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Švyturys-Utenos Alus UAB (Utena, Lithuania) (represented by: R. Žabolienė and I. Lukauskienė, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: M. Rajh, acting as Agent)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervener before the General Court: Nordbrand Nordhausen GmbH (Nordhausen, Germany) (represented by: C. Düchs, lawyer)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervener before the General Court:

Re:

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 17 March 2014 (Case R 1302/2013-4) concerning opposition proceedings between Nordbrand Nordhausen GmbH and Švyturys-Utenos Alus UAB.

Operative part of the order

Operative part of the order

| 1. | There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the action. |
| --- | --- |

1.

There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the action.

| 2. | Švyturys-Utenos Alus UAB and Nordbrand Nordhausen GmbH shall bear their own costs and shall each pay half of those incurred by the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM). |
| --- | --- |

2.

Švyturys-Utenos Alus UAB and Nordbrand Nordhausen GmbH shall bear their own costs and shall each pay half of those incurred by the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM).

---

(1)  OJ C 253, 4.8.2014.

1

---
Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed February 14 , 2019

.

In The 

## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14- 18 -00901- CV

LOYD LANDON SORROW, SR., Appellant

V. HARRIS COUNTY SHERIFF, UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS SCIENCE CENTER OF HOUSTON, AND MEDICAL DOCTOR SE AL , Appellees

On Appeal from the 334th District Court

Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 2017-33383

MEMORANDUM OPINION

This is an attempted appeal from an order signed August 24, 2018

. The order appellant attempts to appeal is an order granting summary judgment and dismissing the suit filed against the Harris County Sheriff. The order does not dispose of the remaining parties. Generally, appeals may be taken only from final judgments. Lehmann v. Har-Con Corp. , 39 S.W.3d 191, 195 (Tex. 2001). When orders do not dispose of all pending parties and claims, the orders remain interlocutory and2

unappealable until final judgment is rendered unless a statutory exception applies. Bally Total Fitness Corp. v. Jackson , 53 S.W.3d 352, 352 (Tex. 2001); Jack B. Anglin Co., Inc. v. Tipps , 842 S.W.2d 266, 272 (Tex. 1992) (orig. proceeding).
On January 24, 2019, notification was transmitted to the parties of this court’s intention to dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction unless appellant filed a response demonstrating grounds for continuing the appeal on or before February 4,
2019

. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(a). On February 7, 2019 appellant filed a response in which he argues the merits of the trial court’s partial summary judgment order. Appellant’s response fails to demonstrate that this court has jurisdiction over the appeal.
Accordingly, the appeal is ordered dismissed.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Christopher, Hassan, and Poissant.
# C_2016007EN.01002801.xml

| 11.1.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 7/28 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

11.1.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 7/28

---

Judgment of the General Court of 18 November 2015 — Liu v OHIM — DSN Marketing (Case for a portable computer)

(Case T-813/14) (1)

1

((Community design - Invalidity proceedings - Registered Community design representing a case for a portable computer - Identical earlier designs - Ground for invalidity - Lack of novelty within the meaning of Article 5(1) of Regulation (EC) No 6/2002 - Disclosure of earlier designs prior to the priority date - Article 7(1) and (2) of Regulation No 6/2002))

(2016/C 007/38)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Min Liu (Guangzhou, China) (represented initially by R. Bailly, S. Zhang and Y. Zhang, and subsequently by Y. Zhang, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: A. Folliard-Monguiral, acting as Agent)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: DSN Marketing Ltd (Crawley, United Kingdom)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM:

Re:

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Third Board of Appeal of OHIM of 7 October 2014 (Case R 1864/2013-3), relating to invalidity proceedings between DSN Marketing Ltd and Mr Min Liu.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

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

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Mr Min Liu to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Mr Min Liu to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 65, 23.2.2015.

1

---
[if !vml]>[endif]>

[if !vml]>[endif]>

You have reached the FederalDepository Library Program Electronic Collection (FDLP/EC) Archive. Thisarchive assures ongoing access to publications in the FDLP/EC. Access topublications in the archive is available through GPO's suite of cataloging andlocator services, including the Catalog of U.S. Government Publications(CGP).  Archived copies of publications are retrieved in the event thatpublications are no longer available from the original publishing agency site. 
**Title:****Pediatric, Adolescent, andMaternal AIDS Branch, NICHD, report to the NACHHD Council [electronicresource].**
 
2003 | 2007
 
SuDoc Number:HE 20.3352:P 34/
Item Number:0506-D-02 (online)
CGP systemNumber:000794561
 
August 14, 2019
# C_2015429EN.01002501.xml

| 21.12.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 429/25 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

21.12.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 429/25

---

Order of the General Court of 27 October 2015 — Belgium v Commission

(Case T-721/14) (1)

1

((Action for annulment - Online gambling services - Protection of consumers and players and prevention of minors from gambling online - Commission Recommendation - Act not subject to review - Inadmissibility))

(2015/C 429/32)

Language of the case: Dutch

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Kingdom of Belgium (represented by: L. Van den Broeck and M. Jacobs, acting as Agents, and P. Vlaemminck and B. Van Vooren, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: H. Tserepa-Lacombe and F. Wilman, acting as Agents)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Application for annulment of Commission Recommendation 2014/478/EU of 14 July 2014 on principles for the protection of consumers and players of online gambling services and for the prevention of minors from gambling online (OJ 2014 L 214, p. 38).

Operative part of the order

Operative part of the order

| 1. | The action is dismissed as inadmissible. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The action is dismissed as inadmissible.

| 2. | There is no need to adjudicate on the applications for leave to intervene made by the Hellenic Republic and the Portuguese Republic. |
| --- | --- |

2.

There is no need to adjudicate on the applications for leave to intervene made by the Hellenic Republic and the Portuguese Republic.

| 3. | The Kingdom of Belgium shall bear its own costs and pay those incurred by the European Commission. |
| --- | --- |

3.

The Kingdom of Belgium shall bear its own costs and pay those incurred by the European Commission.

| 4. | The Kingdom of Belgium, the Hellenic Republic, the Portuguese Republic and the European Commission shall each bear their own costs of the applications for leave to intervene. |
| --- | --- |

4.

The Kingdom of Belgium, the Hellenic Republic, the Portuguese Republic and the European Commission shall each bear their own costs of the applications for leave to intervene.

---

(1)  OJ C 431, 1.12.2014.

1

---
Exhibit 34.18



LOGO

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

To the Board of Directors, PNC Financial Services Group, Inc.:

We have examined managements assertion, included in the accompanying Report on Assessment of Compliance with Regulation AB Servicing Criteria, that
Midland Loan Services, a division of PNC Bank, National Association (Midland or the Company) complied with the servicing criteria set forth in Item 1122(d) of the Securities and Exchange Commissions Regulation AB for
all transactions serviced on the Enterprise!Loan Management System (the Platform), as of December 31, 2016 and for the year then ended, excluding criteria 1122(d)(1)(iii), 1122(d)(3)(i)(B), 1122(d)(3)(i)(C),
1122(d)(3)(i)(D), 1122(d)(3)(ii), 1122(d)(3)(iii), 1122(d)(3)(iv), and 1122(d)(4)(xv), which the Company has determined are not applicable to the servicing activities performed by it with respect to the Platform. Management is responsible for the
Companys compliance with the servicing criteria. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on managements assertion based on our examination.

Our examination was conducted in accordance with attestation standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) and, accordingly,
included examining, on a test basis, evidence about the Companys compliance with the applicable servicing criteria and performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. Our examination included testing of
selected asset-backed transactions and securities that comprise the Platform, testing of selected servicing activities related to the Platform, and determining whether the Company processed those selected transactions and performed those selected
activities in compliance with the applicable servicing criteria. Our procedures were limited to the selected transactions and servicing activities performed by the Company during the period covered by this report. Our procedures were not designed to
detect noncompliance arising from errors that may have occurred prior to or subsequent to our tests that may have affected the balances or amounts calculated or reported by the Company during the period covered by this report. We believe that our
examination provides a reasonable basis for our opinion. Our examination does not provide a legal determination on the Companys compliance with the servicing criteria.

In our opinion, managements assertion that Midland complied with the aforementioned applicable servicing criteria as of and for the year ended
December 31, 2016 for the Platform is fairly stated, in all material respects.



LOGO

February 17, 2017



PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, 1100
Walnut Street, Suite 1300, Kansas City, MO 64106

T: (816) 472 7921, F: (816) 218 1890www.pwc.com/us