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


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from Swift Energy
Managed Pension Assets Partnership 1989-C, Ltd.'s balance sheet and statement of
operations  contained in its Form 10-Q for the quarter ended  September 30, 1998
and is qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                   SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                         134,553
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  49,355
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               183,908
<PP&E>                                         2,308,230
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (2,012,481)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 479,657
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          5,080
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       0
<OTHER-SE>                                     474,577
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   479,657
<SALES>                                        65,837
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               73,279
<CGS>                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  39,376<F1>
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                596
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            596
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   596
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  0
<FN>
<F1>Includes  lease  operating  expenses,  production  taxes  and  depreciation,
depletion and  amortization  expense.  Excludes general and  administrative  and
interest expense.
</FN>

        

</TABLE>
The following abbreviations, when used
in the inscription on the face of this certificate, shall be construed as though they were written out in full according to applicable
laws or regulations:


 





	TEN COM	–    as tenants in common	UNIF GIFT MIN ACT–________________Custodian____________
	 	 	                                                             (Cust)                                            (Minor)      
	TEN ENT	–    as tenants by the entireties	                                         under Uniform Gifts to Minors
	 	 	 
	JT TEN	–    as joint tenants with right of survivorship and not as tenants
    in common	
                                                 Act__________________________________

                                                 (State)

	 	 	 


Additional abbreviations may also be used though
not in the above list.


 


For value received,
____________________ hereby sell, assign and transfer unto


 








	PLEASE INSERT SOCIAL SECURITY OR OTHER	 
	IDENTIFYING NUMBER OF ASSIGNEE	 
	 	 
	 	 
	 	 
	 	 
	


PLEASE
PRINT OR TYPEWRITE NAME AND ADDRESS INCLUDING POSTAL ZIP CODE OF ASSIGNEE 


 





	 	 







 





	 	 







 


_______________________________________________________________________________________________Shares
of the Common Stock            represented by the within Certificate, and do hereby


 


irrevocably constitute and appoint ________________________________________________________________________


 


________________________________________________________________________________________________ 


 


Attorney


to transfer the said stock on the books of the within-named
Trust with full power of substitution in the premises. 





 





	Dated, ___________________ 	 	 	 
	 	 	NOTICE: 	SIGNATURE TO THIS ASSIGNMENT MUST CORRESPOND
    WITH THE NAME AS WRITTEN UPON THE FACE OF THE CERTIFICATE IN EVERY PARTICULAR, WITHOUT ALTERATION OR ENLARGEMENT OR ANY CHANGE
    WHATEVER.





 


SIGNATURE(S) GUARANTEED: 


 









	 	 
	THE
    SIGNATURE(S) MUST BE GUARANTEED BY AN ELIGIBLE GUARANTOR INSTITUTION (BANKS, STOCKBROKERS, SAVINGS AND LOAN ASSOCIATIONS AND
    CREDIT UNIONS WITH MEMBERSHIP IN AN APPROVED SIGNATURE GUARANTEE MEDALLION PROGRAM), PURSUANT TO S.E.C. RULE 17Ad-15.
#### Maureen Scofield, Appellant, et al., Plaintiff, v Douglas B. Moreland, M.D., et al., Respondents, et al., Defendant.

(Appeal No. 2.)

[804 NYS2d 207]

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Niagara County (Amy J. Fricano, J.), entered July 21, 2004. The judgment, inter alia, dismissed the complaint upon a jury verdict of no cause of action.

It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed without costs.

Memorandum: Maureen Scofield (plaintiff) appeals from a judgment entered upon a jury verdict rendered in favor of defendants in this medical malpractice action arising from spinal fusion surgery performed by Douglas B. Moreland, M.D. (defendant). According to the testimony of defendant at trial, the two “Ray cages” placed in the space between plaintiffs L-5 vertebra and S-l vertebra became dislodged during the surgery. Defendant testified that he chose one of several alternatives available to him to correct the dislodgement and that, when he examined plaintiff approximately three months after the surgery, he determined that the cages were positioned properly. According to plaintiff, however, she continued to experience pain.

Contrary to plaintiffs contention, Supreme Court properly gave an “error of judgment” charge based upon the testimony of defendant that he exercised his professional judgment in determining which of several available alternatives was appropriate to correct the dislodgement and the testimony of plaintiffs’ expert that there were medically acceptable alternatives to correct the dislodgement *(see generally Nestorowich v Ricotta,*97 NY2d 393, 398-400 [2002]; *Martin v Lattimore Rd. Surgicenter,*281 AD2d 866 [2001]). Also contrary to plaintiffs contention, the court properly refused to include the language proposed by plaintiffs concerning the definition of medical malpractice. Rather, the court’s charge on malpractice was in accor*1083dance with PJI3d 2:150 (2005) and accurately reflects the proper standard of care *(see Toth v Community Hosp. at Glen Cove,*22 NY2d 255, 262-263 [1968]; *Wilson v Mary Imogene Bassett Hosp.,*307 AD2d 748, 755 [2003]). Finally, we conclude that the verdict is not against the weight of the evidence *(see generally Lolik v Big V Supermarkets,*86 NY2d 744, 746 [1995]). Present—Scudder, J.P., Martoche, Pine, Lawton and Hayes, JJ.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Myrna Josephine Holt WILSON, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 02-6549.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted June 13, 2002.

Decided June 19, 2002.

Myra Josephine Holt Wilson, Appellant Pro Se. Sharon Burnham, Office of the *667United States Attorney, Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellee.

Before WIDENER, LUTTIG, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

PER CURIAM.

Myra Josephine Holt Wilson seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying her motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp.2001). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. *United States v. Wilson,*Nos. CR-98-91; CA-00-428-7 (W.D.Va. Jan. 25, 2002). 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.

*DISMISSED.*
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 84 / Friday, May 1, 2015 / Notices 25009 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Office of the Secretary 

Applications of Eastern Air Lines 

Group, Inc. for Certificate Authority 

AGENCY: Department of Transportation. 

ACTION: Notice of Order to Show Cause 

(Order 2015–4–16); Dockets DOT–OST– 

2014–0012 and DOT–OST–2014–0013. 

SUMMARY: The Department of 

Transportation is directing all interested 

persons to show cause why it should 

not issue orders finding Eastern Air 

Lines Group, Inc. fit, willing, and able, 

and awarding it certificates of public 

convenience and necessity authorizing 

it to engage in interstate and foreign 

charter air transportation of persons, 

property, and mail. 

DATES: Persons wishing to file 

objections should do so no later than 

April 27, 2015. 

ADDRESSES: Objections and answers to 

objections should be filed in Dockets 

DOT–OST–2014–0012 and DOT–OST– 

2014–0013 and addressed to the 

Department of Transportation, Docket 

Operations, 1200 New Jersey Avenue 

SE., West Building Ground Floor, Room 

W12–140, Washington, DC and should 

be served upon the parties listed in 

Attachment A to the order. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Catherine O’Toole, Air Carrier Fitness 

Division, (X–56, Office W86–469), U.S. 

Department of Transportation, 1200 

New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, 

DC 20590, (202) 366–9721. 

Dated: April 20, 2015. 

Brandon M. Belford, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Aviation and 

International Affairs. 

[FR Doc. 2015–09683 Filed 4–30–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE P 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Vladymir Campos, Appellant.

[803 NYS2d 437]

Application by the appellant for a writ of error coram nobis to vacate, on the ground of ineffective assistance of appellate counsel, a decision and order of this Court dated March 26, 2001 *(People v Campos,*281 AD2d 638 [2001]), affirming a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County, rendered November 4, 1998.

Ordered that the application is denied.

The appellant has failed to establish that he was denied the effective assistance of appellate counsel *(see Jones v Barnes,*463 US 745 [1983]; *People v Stultz,*2 NY3d 277 [2004]). Prudenti, P.J., Florio, H. Miller and Krausman, JJ., concur.
§ 7.48-1 Election to have investment credit for movie and television films determined in accordance with previous litigation. ( a ) *Generally.* Under section 804(c)(3) of the Tax Reform Act of 1976 (Pub. L. 94-455, 90 Stat. 1595), any taxpayer who filed an action in any court of competent jurisdiction before January 1, 1976, for a determination of such taxpayer's rights to investment credit under section 38 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954 with respect to any film placed in service in any taxable year beginning before January 1, 1975, may elect to have investment credit on all films placed in service in taxable years beginning before January 1, 1975, (except those subject to an election under section 804(e)(2) of the Act), determined as though section 804 of the Act (except section 804(c)(3) of the Act) had not been enacted.
( b ) *Manner of making the election.* The election allowed by section 804(c)(3) of the Act may be made by a notification in the form of a letter signed by the taxpayer or an authorized representative of the taxpayer stating: ( 1 ) The taxpayer's name, address, and identification number;
( 2 ) The taxable years in which the films were placed in service with respect to which the election shall apply; and
( 3 ) The court in which the litigation was commenced and information adequate to identify the particular litigation, for example, the names of the litigants, the date the suit was commenced, and the court case or docket number of the litigation. The letter should be sent to the Deputy Commissioner of Internal Revenue, Attention: CC:RL:Br2, Room 4617, 1111 Constitution Avenue, N.W., Washington, DC 20224.
( c ) *Time for making the election.* The election under section 804(c)(3) of the Act must be made not later than January 3, 1977. If mailed, the cover containing the notification of such election must be postmarked not later than January 3, 1977.
( d ) *Revocation of election.* An election under section 804(c)(3) of the Act, once made, shall be irrevocable.
[T.D. 7449, 41 FR 56629, Dec. 29, 1976]
<PAGE>   1

                                                                  Exhibit 11.1

                     PETE'S BREWING COMPANY AND SUBSIDIARY

                      COMPUTATION OF NET INCOME PER SHARE
              IN ACCORDANCE WITH INTERPRETIVE RELEASE No. 34-9083
                    (in thousands, except per-share amounts)

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                        For the three               For the nine
                                                        months ended                months ended
                                                        September 30,              September 30,   
                                                     -------------------        -------------------

                                                      1996         1995          1996          1995 
                                                     ------        ----          ----         ------
<S>                                                  <C>           <C>          <C>            <C>
Weighted average common shares
    outstanding for the period  . . . . . . . .       10,686        4,347        10,661        4,223

Preferred stock . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .           --        3,305            --        3,305

Common equivalent shares assuming
    conversion of stock options and
    warrants under the treasury stock
    method  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .          101          399           195          525
                                                     -------       ------        ------        -----
Shares used in per share calculation  . . . . .       10,787        8,051        10,856        8,053

Net income  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .      $   330       $  607        $1,677        $ 844
                                                     =======       ======        ======        =====
Net income per share  . . . . . . . . . . . . .      $  0.03       $ 0.08        $ 0.15        $0.10
                                                     =======       ======        ======        =====
</TABLE>
Presidential Documents

Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 17 / Wednesday, January 28, 2009 / Presidential Documents 4905 

Memorandum of January 26, 2009 

State of California Request for Waiver Under 42 U.S.C. 

7543(b), the Clean Air Act 

Memorandum for the Administrator of the Environmental Protection 

Agency 

Under the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7401–7671q), the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) sets emissions standards for new motor vehicles. California 

may also adopt standards for new motor vehicles if the Administrator of 

the EPA, based on criteria set out in the statute, waives the general statutory 

prohibition on State adoption or enforcement of emissions standards. Other 

States may adopt emissions standards for new motor vehicles if they are 

identical to the California standards for which a waiver has been granted 

and comply with other statutory criteria. 

For decades, the EPA has granted the State of California such waivers. 

The EPA’s final decision to deny California’s application for a waiver permitting the State to adopt limitations on greenhouse gas emissions from motor 

vehicles was published in the Federal Register on March 6, 2008. 

In order to ensure that the EPA carries out its responsibilities for improving 

air quality, you are hereby requested to assess whether the EPA’s decision 

to deny a waiver based on California’s application was appropriate in light 

of the Clean Air Act. I further request that, based on that assessment, 

the EPA initiate any appropriate action. 

This memorandum is not intended to, and does not, create any right or 

benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any 

party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its 

officers, employees, or agents, or any other person. 


yshivers on PROD1PC62 with MISCELLANEOUS
4906 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 17 / Wednesday, January 28, 2009 / Presidential Documents 

You are hereby authorized and directed to publish this memorandum in 

the Federal Register. 

THE WHITE HOUSE, 

Washington, January 26, 2009 

[FR Doc. E9–1939 

Filed 1–27–09; 8:45 am] 

Billing code 6560–50–P 


yshivers on PROD1PC62 with MISCELLANEOUSOB#1.EPS</GPH>
###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter II

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to subchapter A appear at 78 FR 60697, Oct. 2, 2013.

#### § 203.9 Scope of the subpart.

This subpart prescribes the rules that financial institutions must follow when they process electronic Federal tax payment transactions. A financial institution is not required to be designated as a TT&L depositary in order to process electronic Federal tax payments. In addition, a financial institution does not become a TT&L depositary by processing electronic Federal tax payments under this subpart and may not represent itself as a TT&L depositary because it does so.
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 157 (Monday, August 17, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 41463]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-19746]


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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION


Sunshine Federal Register Notice

AGENCY HOLDING THE MEETINGS:  Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

DATES: Week of August 10, 2009.

PLACE:  Commissioners' Conference Room, 11555 Rockville Pike, 
Rockville, Maryland.

STATUS:  Public and closed.
    Additional Items to be considered:

Week of August 10, 2009

Thursday, August 13, 2009

1:25 p.m.
    Affirmation Session (Public Meeting) (Tentative).
    Pa'ina Hawaii, LLC (Materials License Application)--Applicant's 
Motion to Transfer Case to the Commission (Tentative).
    *The schedule for Commission meetings is subject to change on short 
notice. To verify the status of meetings, call (recording)--(301) 415-
1292. Contact person for more information: Rochelle Bavol, (301) 415-
1651.

Additional Information

    By a vote of 3-0 on August 11, 2009, the Commission determined 
pursuant to U.S.C. 552b(e) and Sec.  9.107(a) of the Commission's rules 
that Affirmation of Pa'ina Hawaii, LLC (Materials License 
Application)--Applicant's Motion to Transfer Case to the Commission 
(Tentative) be held August 13, 2009, and on less than one week's notice 
to the public.
    The NRC Commission Meeting Schedule can be found on the Internet 
at: http://www.nrc.gov/about-nrc/policy-making/schedule.html.
    The NRC provides reasonable accommodation to individuals with 
disabilities where appropriate. If you need a reasonable accommodation 
to participate in these public meetings, or need this meeting notice or 
the transcript or other information from the public meetings in another 
format (e.g., braille, large print), please notify the NRC's Disability 
Program Coordinator, Rohn Brown, at 301-492-2279, TDD: 301-415-2100, or 
by e-mail at <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#80f2efe8eeaee2f2eff7eec0eef2e3aee7eff6"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="41332e292f6f23332e362f012f33226f262e37">[email protected]</span></a>. Determinations on requests for 
reasonable accommodation will be made on a case-by-case basis.
    This notice is distributed electronically to subscribers. If you no 
longer wish to receive it, or would like to be added to the 
distribution, please contact the Office of the Secretary, Washington, 
DC 20555 (301-415-1969), or send an e-mail to <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#365257445a5358531841445f515e427658445518515940"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="93f7f2e1fff6fdf6bde4e1faf4fbe7d3fde1f0bdf4fce5">[email protected]</span></a>.

    Dated: August 12, 2009.
Rochelle C. Bavol,
Office of the Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-19746 Filed 8-13-09; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
§ 16.39 Appeal to authority head. ( a ) Any defendant who has filed a timely answer and who is determined in an initial decision to be liable for a civil penalty or assessment may appeal such decision to the authority head by filing a notice of appeal with the authority head in accordance with this section.
( b ) ( 1 ) No notice of appeal may be filed until the time period for filing a motion for reconsideration under § 16.38 has expired.
( 2 ) If a motion for reconsideration is timely filed, a notice of appeal must be filed within 30 days after the ALJ denies the motion or issues a revised initial decision, whichever applies.
( 3 ) If no motion for reconsideration is timely filed, a notice of appeal must be filed within 30 days after the ALJ issues the initial decision.
( 4 ) The authority head may extend the initial 30 days period for an additional 30 days if the defendant files with the authority head a request for extension within the initial 30 days period and shows good cause.
( c ) If the defendant files a timely notice of appeal with the authority head, the ALJ shall forward the notice of appeal and record of the proceeding to the authority head.
( d ) A notice of appeal shall be accompanied by a written brief specifying exceptions to the initial decision and reasons supporting the exceptions.
( e ) The representative for the agency may file a brief in opposition to exceptions within 30 days of receiving the notice of appeal and accompanying brief.
( f ) There is no right to appear personally before the authority head.
( g ) There is right to appeal any interlocutory ruling by the ALJ.
( h ) In reviewing the initial decision, the authority head shall not consider any objection that was not raised before the ALJ unless a demonstration is made of extraordinary circumstances causing the failure to raise the objection.
( i ) If any party demonstrates to the satisfaction of the authority head, prior to the issuance of the authority head's decision that additional evidence not presented at such hearing is material and that there were reasonable grounds for the failure to present such evidence at the hearing, the authority head shall remand the matter to the ALJ for consideration of such additional evidence.
( j ) The authority head may affirm, reduce, reverse, compromise, remand, or settle any penalty or assessment, determined by the ALJ in any initial decision.
( k ) The authority head shall promptly serve each party to the appeal to the ALJ with a copy of the decision of the authority head. At the same time the authority head shall serve the defendant with a statement describing the defendant's right to seek judicial review.
( l ) Unless a petition for judicial review is filed as provided in 31 U.S.C. 3805 after a defendant has exhausted all administrative remedies under this part and within 60 days after the date on which the authority head serves the defendant with a copy of the authority head's decision, a determination that a defendant is liable under § 16.3 is final and is not subject to judicial review.