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

<ARTICLE> BD
<MULTIPLIER> 1
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                       6,904,000
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,361,000
<SECURITIES-RESALE>                                  0
<SECURITIES-BORROWED>                                0
<INSTRUMENTS-OWNED>                          5,768,000
<PP&E>                                       6,809,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              28,969,000
<SHORT-TERM>                                38,875,000
<PAYABLES>                                  10,719,000
<REPOS-SOLD>                                         0
<SECURITIES-LOANED>                                  0
<INSTRUMENTS-SOLD>                             897,000
<LONG-TERM>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       598,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                (21,522,000)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                28,969,000
<TRADING-REVENUE>                            2,037,000
<INTEREST-DIVIDENDS>                           282,000
<COMMISSIONS>                                3,572,000
<INVESTMENT-BANKING-REVENUES>                  661,000
<FEE-REVENUE>                                        0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           1,086,000
<COMPENSATION>                               6,213,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (9,643,000)
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                 (9,643,000)
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (9,643,000)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (1.45)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (1.45)
        

</TABLE>
From: <Alicea.Jezebele@epamail.epa.gov>

To: "Tossas, Yvette" <Yvette.Tossas@us.ngrid.com>

Date: 7/20/2010 10:41 AM

Subject: Re: EPA Survey Extension Request

Attachments: pic13784.jpg

Greetings,

This e-mail is a confirmation that your extension request for the steam

electric effluent guidelines questionnaire was received. Extension

requests will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. Please be aware that

submittal of an extension request to EPA does not alter the due date of

your questionnaire unless and until EPA agrees to the extension and

establishes a new date.

Sincerely,

(Embedded image moved to file: pic13784.jpg)

 

 From: "Tossas, Yvette" <Yvette.Tossas@us.ngrid.com> 

 To: Jezebele Alicea/DC/USEPA/US@EPA 

 Cc: "Crocker, Douglas M." <Douglas.Crocker@us.ngrid.com>, "Curt, Timothy P." 

<Timothy.Curt@us.ngrid.com>

 

 Date: 07/20/2010 10:27 AM 

 Subject: EPA Survey Extension Request 

Dear Ms. Alicea,

We at National Grid request an extension to submit EPA Survey data for

the Port Jefferson (2517) and Far Rockaway (2513).

Thanks

Yvette Tossas

National Grid Generation LLC

Lead Analyst

516-545-4728

********************************************************************************
This e-mail and any files transmitted with it, are confidential to

National Grid and are intended solely for the use of the individual or

entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this e-mail in

error, please reply to this message and let the sender know.
II

Calendar No. 577

104TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H.R. 3378

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

SEPTEMBER 5, 1996

Received; read twice and placed on the calendar

AN ACT

To amend the Indian Health Care Improvement Act to extend the demonstration program for direct billing of

Medicare, Medicaid, and other third party payors.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
2

HR 3378 PCS

1 SECTION 1. EXTENSION OF CERTAIN DEMONSTRATION

2 PROGRAM.

3 Section 405(c)(2) of the Indian Health Care Improve4 ment Act (25 U.S.C. 1645(c)(2)) is amended by striking

5 ‘‘September 30, 1996’’ and inserting in lieu thereof ‘‘Sep6 tember 30, 1998’’.

Passed the House of Representatives September 4,

1996.

Attest: ROBIN H. CARLE,

Clerk.

Calendar No. 577

104TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 3378

AN ACT

To amend the Indian Health Care Improvement

third party payors.rect billing of Medicare, Medicaid, and otherAct to extend the demonstration program for diSEPTEMBER 5, 1996

Received; read twice and placed on the calendar
**EXHIBIT 31.2**

 

**CERTIFICATION**

 

I, C. Neil Lyons certifythat:

 

1.                                            Ihave reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K/A of RegeneRxBiopharmaceuticals, Inc.;

 

2.                                            Basedon my knowledge, this annual report does not contain any untrue statement of amaterial fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statementsmade, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, notmisleading with respect to the period covered by this annual report;

 

 

Date:   April 4,2008

 

 
|   | /s/C. Neil Lyons                                                   |
|--------|--------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   | C. Neil Lyons                                                      |
|   | Chief Financial Officer  and Treasurer                             |
|   | (Principal Financial  Officer and Principal   Accounting  Officer) |

 

----
#### JENNINGS CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION and Ann Spinella, Petitioners, v. Rhea Pincus GROSSMAN, Judge of Circuit Court, Eleventh Judicial Circuit, Dade County, Respondent.

No. 81-1289.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

July 21, 1981.

*1057Bartel, Shuford & Dubitsky and Bill Shu-ford, Jr., Miami, for petitioners.

Robert A. Ginsburg, County Atty. and Roy Wood, Asst. County Atty., for respondent.

Before HUBBART, C. J., and HENDRY and DANIEL S. PEARSON, JJ.

DANIEL S. PEARSON, Judge.

This petition for writ of prohibition calls for more than a one-word denial.

Petitioners’ counsel have attempted to bootstrap our disqualification of the respondent in *Management Corporation of America, Inc. v. Grossman,*396 So.2d 1169 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981), into a disqualification in the present case. Their petition states that we granted prohibition in *Management Corporation of America*“upon a finding that Judge Grossman ‘ was *prejudiced against counsel’*in the law firm.” That is plainly not so. The words — “was prejudiced against” — appear in our opinion in this context:

> “Our ruling is predicated on the singular fact so obviously reflected in the respondent’s ten-page order denying the motion (attached to which are twenty-two exhibits consisting of hundreds of pages), that the respondent went to great lengths to refute the charge that she *was prejudiced against counsel*for the petitioners. This effort by the respondent, as understandable as it may have been, makes her disqualified to further preside in the case below.” 396 So.2d 1169 (emphasis supplied).

As should be clear to any reader of that opinion, our holding in *Management Corporation of America*was not based on a finding that Judge Grossman was prejudiced, but rather on the impropriety of her efforts to show that she was not. Moreover, we did not there hold that the petitioners’ suggestion of disqualification was legally sufficient.

In the present case, the respondent simply entered an order denying, as insufficient, the suggestion of disqualification and made no effort to refute the charges of prejudice. Therefore, the discrete holdings of *Management Corporation of America*and *Bundy v. Rudd,*366 So.2d 440 (Fla. 1978), upon which we solely relied in *Management,*are totally inapposite.

The petition for writ of prohibition is denied.
I

104TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 3433

To prohibit the Secretary of Defense from authorizing payment under defense

contracts for restructuring costs of a merger or acquisition.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

MAY 10, 1996

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey introduced the following bill; which was referred

to the Committee on National Security

A BILL

To prohibit the Secretary of Defense from authorizing payment under defense contracts for restructuring costs of

a merger or acquisition.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. PROHIBITION ON AUTHORIZATION OF PAY4 MENT OF COSTS UNDER DEFENSE CON5 TRACTS FOR RESTRUCTURING COSTS OF A

6 MERGER OR ACQUISITION.

7 (a) PROHIBITION.—The Secretary of Defense may

8 not authorize payment of any restructuring costs associ9 ated with a merger or acquisition that are incurred by a
2

•HR 3433 IH

1 contractor under contract with the Department of De2 fense.

3 (b) REPEAL.—Section 818 of the National Defense

4 Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1995 (Public Law 103–

5 337; 108 Stat. 2821; 10 U.S.C. 2324 note) is amended—

6 (1) by striking out subsections (a), (b), (c), and

7 (d); and

8 (2) by redesignating subsections (e), (f), and

9 (g) as subsections (a), (b), and (c), respectively.

10 (c) APPLICABILITY.—(1) Subject to paragraph (2),

11 the prohibition in subsection (a) applies with respect to

12 restructuring costs associated with a merger or acquisition

13 that are incurred before, on, or after the date of the enact14 ment of this Act.

15 (2) The prohibition in subsection (a) does not apply

16 with respect to restructuring costs associated with a merg17 er or acquisition that were paid by the Secretary of De18 fense before the date of the enactment of this Act.

Æ
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>      5
<LEGEND>
The schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
September 30, 1996 financial statements and is qualified in its entirety by
reference to such financial statements.
<MULTIPLIER>   1
       
<S>                                         <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                               12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                           SEP-30-1996
<PERIOD-END>                                SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                       12,303,000
<SECURITIES>                                          0
<RECEIVABLES>                                78,751,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                  1,590,000
<INVENTORY>                                           0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             99,672,000
<PP&E>                                       57,210,000
<DEPRECIATION>                               21,988,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              163,259,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        32,283,000
<BONDS>                                      31,590,000
<COMMON>                                        152,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                 0
<PREFERRED>                                           0
<OTHER-SE>                                   96,644,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                163,259,000
<SALES>                                     214,569,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            215,258,000
<CGS>                                       142,984,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               196,905,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                      0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                      0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                            2,350,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              16,003,000
<INCOME-TAX>                                  6,884,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           9,119,000
<DISCONTINUED>                                        0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                       0
<CHANGES>                                             0
<NET-INCOME>                                  9,119,000
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      0.62
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      0.61
        

</TABLE>
-86 -84 -82 -80 -78 -76 -74 -72

 34

 36

 38

 40

 42

★

▲

▲

▲

▲

★ ▲ ▲ ▲

▲

 500

 1000

 1500

 500

18 12 06 00

07/11

NOAA HYSPLIT MODEL

 Backward trajectory ending at 2300 UTC 11 Jul 06

 EDAS Meteorological Data

Source

★ at 39.41 N 76.30 W Meters AGL
Exhibit 99.2


         CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO TITLE 18,
            UNITED STATES CODE, SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Dennis J. Curtin, Senior Vice President - Chief Financial Officer of E-Z-EM,
Inc. (the "Company"), certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that, to the best of my knowledge:

      1.    the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarter
            ended August 31, 2002 (the "Report") fully complies with the
            requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange
            Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d); 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 15, 2002                     /s/ Dennis J. Curtin
      ----------------                     ------------------------------------
                                           Dennis J. Curtin, Senior Vice
                                           President - Chief Financial Officer


                                    -28-
#### Ex Parte Leslie Leroy CARTEE (Re: Leslie Leroy Cartee v. State of Alabama).

80-29.

Supreme Court of Alabama.

Dec. 19, 1980.

JONES, Justice.

WRIT DENIED-NO OPINION.

TORBERT, C. J., and MADDOX, SHORES and BEATTY, JJ., concur.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5

       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                  9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              JUL-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                                 AUG-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                   APR-30-1998
<CASH>                                         16,785
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  2,640
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               19,774
<PP&E>                                         1,705,651
<DEPRECIATION>                                 348,736
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 1,391,356
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          75,121
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       16,078
<OTHER-SE>                                     0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   1,391,356
<SALES>                                        0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               630
<CGS>                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  339,777
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               292,675
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (631,822)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   1,204
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (633,026)
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (633,026)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  (0.04)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  0
        


</TABLE>
**MEMORANDUM**

DATE: November 21, 2014 TO: Carbon Power Plan for Existing Power Plants; Docket Id: OAR

–2013
- 0602 FROM: Region 7 , EPA SUBJECT: June 25 , 2014 , Session at 4

- State Environmental Director Meeting on Proposed

Carbon Power Plan for Existing Power Plants
**SUMMARY** A special session was held between EPA and the attendees listed below on June 25 , 2014 , as part of the semi

- annual 4

- State Environmental Directors meeting, to discuss the proposed Carbon Power Plan for Existing Power Plants
. The majority of the discussion centered on how goals were e stablished for the states in Region 7 : Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, and Nebraska
. The Carbon Power Plan for Existing Power Plants was proposed on June 2 , 2014
. **ATTENDEES** EPA Region 7: Rebecca Weber Josh Tapp Mark A. Smith Ward Burns Iowa Department of Natural Resources Chuck Gipp Bill Ehm Catharine Fitzsimmons Kansas Department of Health and Environment John Mitchell Leo Henning Rick Brunetti Missouri Department of Natural Resources Sara Parker Pauley Ky ra Moore Nebraska Department of Environmental Quality Pat Rice Tom Lamberson Jay Ringenburg Shelly Schneider
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE

FIRST DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON

ORDER

Appellate case name: John Acosta v. The State of Texas 

Appellate case number: 01-12-00151-CR

Trial court case number: 1243560

Trial court: 178th District Court of Harris County

The Court has determined that additional briefing may be appropriate for 

resolution of this case. The Court requests that the parties file supplemental briefs 

addressing Okonkwo v. State, No. PD-0207-12 (Tex. Crim. App. May 15, 2013), and its 

application to the above-referenced case.

Each party’s supplemental brief shall not exceed five pages in length. The 

supplemental briefs are due no later than Friday, May 31, 2013.

It is so ORDERED.

Judge’s signature: s/Harvey Brown

 X Acting individually ☐ Acting for the Court

Date: May 15, 2013
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 174 (Thursday, September 10, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 46592]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-21793]



[[Page 46592]]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM


Notice of Proposals to Engage in Permissible Nonbanking 
Activities or to Acquire Companies that are Engaged in Permissible 
Nonbanking Activities

    The companies listed in this notice have given notice under section 
4 of the Bank Holding Company Act (12 U.S.C. 1843) (BHC Act) and 
Regulation Y (12 CFR Part 225) to engage de novo, or to acquire or 
control voting securities or assets of a company, including the 
companies listed below, that engages either directly or through a 
subsidiary or other company, in a nonbanking activity that is listed in 
Sec. [thinsp]225.28 of Regulation Y (12 CFR 225.28) or that the Board 
has determined by Order to be closely related to banking and 
permissible for bank holding companies. Unless otherwise noted, these 
activities will be conducted throughout the United States.
    Each notice is available for inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank 
indicated. The notice also will be available for inspection at the 
offices of the Board of Governors. Interested persons may express their 
views in writing on the question whether the proposal complies with the 
standards of section 4 of the BHC Act. Additional information on all 
bank holding companies may be obtained from the National Information 
Center website at www.ffiec.gov/nic/.
    Unless otherwise noted, comments regarding the applications must be 
received at the Reserve Bank indicated or the offices of the Board of 
Governors not later than September 24, 2009.
    A. Federal Reserve Bank of New York (Ivan Hurwitz, Bank 
Applications Officer) 33 Liberty Street, New York, New York 10045-0001:
    1. The Sumitomo Trust & Banking Co., Ltd., Osaka, Japan; to acquire 
Nikko Asset Management Co., Ltd., Tokyo, Japan, and thereby indirectly 
acquire Nikko Asset Management Americas, Inc., New York, New York, and 
engage in investment advisory activities, pursuant to Section 
225.28(b)(6) of Regulation Y.

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, September 4, 
2009.
Robert deV. Frierson,
Deputy Secretary of the Board.
[FR Doc. E9-21793 Filed 9-9-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6210-01-S
#### STATE of Louisiana v. Michael A. FOOTE.

No. 63981.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Feb. 14, 1979.

In re Michael A. Foote, applying for writs of certiorari, prohibition, mandamus and for a stay order. Parish of East Baton Rouge.

Denied.
----

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.4142 — Time Warner/CBS/JV)

(2006/C 77/03)

(Text with EEA relevance)

On 22 March 2006, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

----
Exhibit 23.1



                          Independent Auditors' Consent



The Board of Directors
Alfacell Corporation:


We consent to  incorporation  by reference in the  registration  statements (No.
33-81308) on Form S-8 and (Nos. 333-29313 and 333-48975) on Form S-3 of Alfacell
Corporation of our report dated October 7, 1998,  relating to the balance sheets
of Alfacell Corporation as of July 31, 1998 and 1997, and the related statements
of operations, stockholders' equity (deficiency), and cash flows for each of the
years in the  three-year  period  ended July 31, 1998 and the period from August
24, 1981 (date of inception) to July 31, 1998,  which report appears in the July
31, 1998 annual report on Form 10-K of Alfacell Corporation.

Our report dated October 7, 1998 contains an  explanatory  paragraph that states
that the Company has suffered  recurring  losses from operations and has limited
liquid resources which raise  substantial doubt about its ability to continue as
a going concern.  The financial  statements do not include any adjustments  that
might result from the outcome of that uncertainty.

Our report dated October 7, 1998, as it relates to the financial  statements for
the period from August 24, 1981 (date of  inception)  to July 31, 1998, is based
on the report of other  auditors  as to the  amounts  included  therein  for the
period from August 24, 1981 (date of inception) to July 31, 1992.



                                                       /s/ KPMG PEAT MARWICK LLP
                                                       KPMG Peat Marwick LLP

Short Hills, New Jersey
October 29, 1998