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

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM
ELECTRONIC RETAILING SYSTEMS INTERNATIONAL, INC. CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AT AND FOR THE TWELVE MONTHS
ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1996 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                                        <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                              12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                           8,198
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    1,151
<ALLOWANCES>                                      (90)
<INVENTORY>                                        821
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                10,312
<PP&E>                                           2,444
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (1,798)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  12,260
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            1,548
<BONDS>                                          4,989
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           210
<OTHER-SE>                                       5,513
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    12,260
<SALES>                                          4,106
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 5,002
<CGS>                                            5,238
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    6,204
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   169
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               (382)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (9,412)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (9,412)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (9,412)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.60)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
National Advisory Council for

Environmental Policy and Technology

Agenda 

August 2-3, 2012

U.S. EPA

1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW

Ariel Rios South Building, Room 2138

Washington, DC 20460

Thursday, August 2, 2012

8:00 am Registration

8:30 am Welcome, Introductions, and Overview of Agenda

 Mark Joyce

Associate Director and NACEPT Acting Designated Federal Officer

EPA Office of Federal Advisory Committee Management and Outreach

 Cynthia Jones-Jackson

Acting Director

EPA Office of Federal Advisory Committee Management and Outreach

 

NACEPT Chair

9:00 am Opening Remarks

 

 Bob Perciasepe 

EPA Deputy Administrator

9:30 am Overview and Discussion of EPA’s Internal Sustainability Initiatives

 Craig E. Hooks

 Assistant Administrator

 EPA Office of Administration and Resources Management 

10:15 am Break
10:30 am Overview and Discussion of EPA’s External Sustainability Initiatives: 

Response to the NAS Green Book “Sustainability and the U.S. EPA”

 Bicky Corman

 Deputy Associate Administrator

 EPA Office of Policy

11:15 am Overview of the Office of Research and Development’s 

Realignment Around Sustainability

 Dr. Robert Kavlock

 Deputy Assistant Administrator for Science

 EPA Office of Research and Development

12:00 pm Public Comments

12:30 pm Lunch 

1:30 pm Perspectives on the Development of Sustainability Metrics

Dr. Ronald Meissen

Senior Director of Sustainability

Baxter International

 Sara Kendall 

 Vice President 

 Corporate Affairs, Sustainability & EHS

 Weyerhaeuser Company

 

 Alison Taylor 

 Vice President

 Sustainability-America

 Siemens Corporation 

 

 Bridgett Luther

 President

 Cradle to Cradle Products Innovation Institute 

 

 Bill Ross

 Visiting Professor of Environmental Sciences and Policy

 Duke University

3:30 pm Break
3:45 pm Sustainability Workgroups meet in separate, concurrent sessions.

5:45 pm Adjourn

Friday, August 3, 2012

8:30 am Discussion of Draft Advice Letter from the

NACEPT Breakthrough Workgroup

Dr. Olufemi Osidele

Senior Research Engineer

Southwest Research Institute 

9:45 am Discussion of Draft Advice Letter from the NACEPT Strengths Workgroup

 Dr. Ronald Meissen

 Senior Director of Sustainability

 Baxter International

11:00 am Public Comments

11:30 am Action Items

12:00 pm Sustainability Workgroups meet in separate, concurrent sessions.

2:00 pm ADJOURN
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT STACEY L. SALTERS, Plaintiff-Appellant,

v. No. 98-2717 DECIPHER, INCORPORATED; STEVE CARPER, Manager, Defendants-Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Henry C. Morgan, Jr., District Judge. (CA-97-1178-2) Submitted: May 13, 1999 Decided: May 21, 1999 Before WIDENER and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge.

_________________________________________________________________ Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

_________________________________________________________________ COUNSEL Stacey L. Salters, Appellant Pro Se. Robert Jon Barry, Lisa Elizabeth Halleck, KAUFMAN & CANOLES, Norfolk, Virginia; David Nash Payne, WILLIAMS, KELLY & GREER, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellees.

_________________________________________________________________Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

_________________________________________________________________ OPINION PER CURIAM:Salters appeals the district court's orders dismissing without prejudice Salters' claims against Defendant Carper and granting Defendant Decipher, Inc.'s motion for judgment as a matter of law in Salters' employment discrimination case. The district court properly dismissed Salters' claims against Carper because Salters failed to exhaust his administrative remedies. See United Air Lines v. Evans , 431 U.S. 553, 558 (1977); Alvarado v. Board of Trustees of Montgomery Community College , 848 F.2d 457 (4th Cir. 1988). Therefore, we affirm the order of dismissal on the reasoning of the district court. Salters v. Decipher, Inc. , No. CA-97- 1178-2 (E.D. Va. Oct. 27, 1998). The standard of review for the grant of a motion for judgment as a matter of law is whether the evidence is so substantial or conclusive that any contrary verdict would necessarily be based upon speculation or conjecture. See Gairola v. Virginia Dep't of Gen. Servs. , 753 F.2d 1281, 1285 (4th Cir. 1985). We review de novo the grant or denial of a motion for judgment as a matter of law. See id. In considering such a motion, we construe the evidence in the light most favorable to the party against whom the motion was made. See Garraghty v. Jordon , 830 F.2d 1295, 1302 (4th Cir. 1987). We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Salters v. Decipher, Inc. , No. CA-97-1178-2 (E.D. Va. Nov. 24, 1998). Although we conclude that the district court's grant of judgment as a matter of law was proper, we note that because trial proceedingswere conducted before the court, the appropriate authority for granting the motion was Fed. R. Civ. P. 52(c), not Fed. R. Civ. P. 50(a), as stated in the court's order and opinion.
2We 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.
AFFIRMED 3
Faulk, Scott (OST) 

From: 

Sent: 

To: 

Cc: 

Subject: 

Greg Campbell <gcampbell@flyshd.com> 

Sunday, April 22, 2012 5:04 PM 

Devany, Dennis (OST); mbowman@gosilver.com; EAS (OST) 

Faulk, Scott (OST); drichardson@gosilver.com 

RE: SHD Extension Request 

Dennis, 

We are ok with the extension. 

Thank you. 

Greg Campbell 

SHD 

"Dennis.DeVanv@dot.gov" wrote: 

Thx, Mickey. 

Greg, 

Are you OK with our granting the extension? 

Dennis 

cr 

From: Mickey Bowman rmailto:mbowman(a)qosilver.com1 

Sent: Sunday, April 22, 2012 1:02 Pi^l 

To: EAS (OST) 

Cc: Greg Campbell; Devany, Dennis (OST); Faulk, Scott (OST); Darrell Richardson 

Subject: SHD Extension Request 

Importance: High 

Please find attached Silver Airways request for an extension on Essential Air Service submissions for the community of 

Staunton, Virginia. 

Best Regards, 

Mickey Bowman
**Important legal notice**

*|*

# 12004V444

**Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe - PART IV — GENERAL AND FINAL PROVISIONS - Article IV-444***Official Journal 310 , 16/12/2004 P. 0190 - 0190*

Article IV-444

Simplified revision procedure

1. Where Part III provides for the Council to act by unanimity in a given area or case, the European Council may adopt a European decision authorising the Council to act by a qualified majority in that area or in that case.

This paragraph shall not apply to decisions with military implications or those in the area of defence.

2. Where Part III provides for European laws and framework laws to be adopted by the Council in accordance with a special legislative procedure, the European Council may adopt a European decision allowing for the adoption of such European laws or framework laws in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure.

3. Any initiative taken by the European Council on the basis of paragraphs 1 or 2 shall be notified to the national Parliaments. If a national Parliament makes known its opposition within six months of the date of such notification, the European decision referred to in paragraphs 1 or 2 shall not be adopted. In the absence of opposition, the European Council may adopt the decision.

For the adoption of the European decisions referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2, the European Council shall act by unanimity after obtaining the consent of the European Parliament, which shall be given by a majority of its component members.

--------------------------------------------------
#### Edmund T. Oldham, Appellant, *v.*Frederick S. Pinkus, Respondent.

Appeal from a judgment of the Municipal Court of the city of New York, first district, borough of Manhattan.

Edmund "T. Oldham, for appellant.

Miller & Harteorn, for respondent.

*Per Guriam.*

The plaintiff rested upon the admission of the answer and was entitled to judgment unless it appeared that the agreement was void under the Statute of Frauds.

There is nothing to show that the statute was applicable, as the record does not disclose whether the agreement was in writing or not. Had it appeared that the agreement was not in writing the judgment would have been affirmed. Such an agreement as the letter of January twelfth has reference to does not constitute novation.

Judgment reversed and a new trial ordered, with costs to appellant to abide the event.

Present: Tbuax, P. J., Scott and Dugbo, JJ.

Judgment reversed and new trial ordered, with costs to appellant to abide event.
#### § 1008.309 Absence of liability for good-faith administration.

The Bureau or any organization serving as the administrator of the Nationwide Mortgage Licensing System and Registry or a system established by the Bureau under 12 U.S.C. 5108 and in accordance with subpart C, or any officer or employee of the Bureau or the Bureau's designee, shall not be subject to any civil action or proceeding for monetary damages by reason of the good-faith action or omission of any officer or employee of any such entity, while acting within the scope of office or employment, relating to the collection, furnishing, or dissemination of information concerning persons who are loan originators or are applying for licensing or registration as loan originators.
TREATIES AND OTHER INTERNATIONAL ACTS SERIES 06-512 

________________________________________________________________________ 

DEFENSE 

 Agreement Between 

the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

and CANADA 

Signed at Ottawa April 28, 2006 

 
 NOTE BY THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE 

 Pursuant to Public Law 89—497, approved July 8, 1966 

(80 Stat. 271; 1 U.S.C. 113)—

“. . .the Treaties and Other International Acts Series issued 

under the authority of the Secretary of State shall be competent 

 evidence . . . of the treaties, international agreements other than 

treaties, and proclamations by the President of such treaties and 

international agreements other than treaties, as the case may be, 

therein contained, in all the courts of law and equity and of maritime 

jurisdiction, and in all the tribunals and public offices of the 

United States, and of the several States, without any further proof 

or authentication thereof.” 
CANADA 

Defense 

 Agreement signed at Ottawa April 28, 2006; 

 Entered into force May 12, 2006.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 22-0205

STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee,

v.

MICHAEL ANTHONY GOMEZ, 

Defendant and Appellant.

ORDER

Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, 

and good cause appearing,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension 

of time to and including April 24, 2023, within which to prepare, file, 

and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

March 15 2023

03/15/2023

Case Number: DA 22-0205
42434.

#### KEENE v. STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY et al.

Deen, Judge.

1. This is a garnishment proceeding against the insurer by the mother of the insured on a contract of automobile liability insurance who had previously obtained a judgment against her son for personal injuries sustained in a collision due to his negligence. The defendant relies on the exclusion in the clause of coverage for bodily injuries “to any member of the family of the insured residing in the same household as the insured.” The proof showed that at the time of the collision and for some years previously the insured, an unmarried adult 40 years of age, had most of the time given his mother’s residence as his mailing address; that he ate either with his mother and other persons staying at the house, or in restaurants, or occasionally at the home of *626a sister; that there was a small one-room structure on the property separate from the house which contained a bed and that he had the privilege of sleeping there or in a room within the house; that when on the premises he usually used the separate structure for sleeping, but as it had no toilet or bathing facilities he used the bathroom in the house for that purpose. As to why he slept there if there was a room for him within the house, he stated: “They give me the room, but I used the little house more than I did it on account she was keeping young-uns, I would go out there so they wouldn’t make so much fuss in there.” He paid his mother enough to take care of the extra expenses caused by his presence. The jury trying the traverse to the garnishment found for the defendant.

Submitted November 7, 1966

Decided November 15, 1966.

*Cowart, Sapp, Alaimo & Gale, G. B. Cowart,*for appellant.

*Conyers, Fendig, Dickey & Harris, Chris Conyers,*for appellees.

2. Black’s Law Dictionary defines a household as “a family living together,” and family as “a collective body of persons who live in one house or within the same curtilage and under one head or management.” *Varnadoe v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co.,*112 Ga. App. 366 (145 SE2d 104) held that single adults living together may constitute a household and that, in the case of an adult child living with parents, the relationship might be ended by intent no longer to continue as a member of the household coupled with some action on the part of the person removing himself therefrom. Indubitably, the evidence here is sufficient to show that the insured was a member of the mother’s household within the meaning of these definitions, and would not demand a conclusion that his action in sleeping in the detached structure located within the same curtilage was the expression of an intent to sever the household connection.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*Nichols, F. J., and Hall, J., concur.*
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS 

AUSTIN . 

GROVER SELLERS 

A,TORNEV GLNEUAL 

Po:loroblo CoorFe N. Shcppurd _ 

Coqtroller 4f r’ubllo Acoounts o- (347 _ 

,lustJn, Texas 

opinion doted Dece.%bor 29, 

letter rr0s SiTA H. C1888, h 

ror Siorris County, fron 

rm on !.:ok;lnney . . . . 

block huvln& church bulldinr:s upon it. 

'CO chanfo in octuol us0 Of the cntlro half’ 

block as a ~p’looe ol” rel.l~lous :rwshlp by the Church 

has ocourred. The doclslon to tox the lown Erew out 

of tin aFree-mut betmen the 3hurch end ‘:r. Ccorp 5. 

Cohen of !;oueton , entored into in Eebruury, 133, s 

. 
Iionoreblo C~ori;o I!. 3!%ppnrd, pa@ 2 

aopy of nhlch Is aert attached. You will note 

. thut thla 6Froer;nnt provided ths t Llr. .Zohen my 

mi;c csrtoin poymmts. Ilo hs:s aotually !ade the 

in?tlal. poymnt of .%70,OCG,GG, end four amual 

paymnts thereafter of $75,OGC.Gir each, an sgcrep,ete of .~675,OOG.CG 

*Our cltestlon thorarorn, is ussumlnf. thnt the 

lawn Is a part of the property ect%lly used for 

rolI(2Ious purposc8, Is It orsnpt 03% taxation?” 

The attsohed CO:ltrrrot is ose prcntlne to 5ohon an 

option to purohzoe the ontico half block for the price of 

~l,E50.OOG, .$37C,GGG.00 hnvlnf bean ;ald upon exeoution of 

the oofitreot, rnd roqulrinc tte poyzcmt of :75,CCG.G0 each 

year Sor ao cxtuncsion Gf the cption for an addltlofial year. 

The riGht or tha Ckuroh to c5zit imc its ~38 srid occupenoy 

of thn property untjl the tlze of’ the oxocutioa of a deed 

to Cohen Is yresorvod. 

Yoor rcqucst eroludoe fron our consbicrc~ion any 

cucstion of !~hethm the progorty Is a&mll.y used for religious 

purposm, or vihother suah use haa been abandoned, OP rhether 

tha property lnquirnd about I8 roosoanbly necessary for tho 

USC cod eujoyxsnt of the bolsEce of the :Icli block es 8 place 

of rcllelous worship. Therefore, tbia orlnioc shall In no 

*ioy bo oonstrued us psosing on thsse mesfIcns, 

Under Art lo13 BIff, Section 2 oi tt:: Texie Coz3titctlon, 

sad Artiole 7150, .S;cction 1, ‘c’. 5., tho use 3n;l owierehip oi property Control the q#?stion ot exuzption,~l non. Thl3 gu?opnrty 

Is mncd by the First Fresbytorlsn Cimrch, and tte lettor of 

.‘jE !:. Class re?uIres that 1+3 essix.0 for fho purposes of the 

oglnion thet seic! land Is actually &trip used by tke Church 

for rall~lous xorshlp. On t!lD bEl16 Of such e%uzqtIon, ue 

cm ooncl.udc only thst tP.s property is exsz;t fron tzxetion. 

TruStinF that the forapo?np fully enswors your in-
EXHIBIT 32.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Candela Corporation (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 29, 2008 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Robert E. Quinn, Principal Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350,
as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



|Date: May 8, 2008 |  | /s/ROBERT E. QUINNRobert E. Quinn
(Treasurer, Corporate Controller and Principal Financial Officer)
|----------------- |  | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

---



QuickLinks
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Health and Human Services

In accordance with section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463), the President's Advisory Council for Faith-based and Neighborhood Partnerships announces the following meeting:

*Name:*                         President's Advisory Council for Faith-based and Neighborhood Partnerships Council Meeting.                              ( print page 49877)    

*Time and Date:*                         Tuesday, October 13th, 9 a.m.-1 p.m. and 2 p.m.-6 p.m. Eastern.                    

*Place:*                         Meetings will be held in person. Location TBD.                    

*Status:*                         Open to the public, limited only by the space available. Conference call line will be available.                    

*Purpose:*                         The Council brings together leaders and experts in fields related to the work of faith-based and neighborhood organizations in order to: Identify best practices and successful modes of delivering social services; evaluate the need for improvements in the implementation and coordination of public policies relating to faith- based and other neighborhood organizations; and make recommendations for changes in policies, programs, and practices.                    

*Contact Person for Additional Information:*                         Mara Vanderslice, 202-260-1931,                         *mara.vanderslice@hhs.gov.*

*Supplementary Information:*                         Please contact Mara Vanderslice for more information about how to attend the meeting or join via conference call line.                    

*Agenda:*                         Topics to be discussed include deliberation on draft recommendations for Council report.                    

Dated: September 24, 2009.

Mara Vanderslice,

Special Assistant.

[FR Doc. E9-23483 Filed 9-28-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4154-07-P
null

583.7624
Order entered May 20 , 2015

In The 

## Court of Appeals **Fifth District of Texas at Dallas**
No. 05
- 15
- 00210
- CV
TIMOTHY G. MARTIN AN D ALL OTHER OCCUPANT S OF 608 MEADOW LANE , ALLEN, TEXAS 75002, Appellant s V. FEDERAL NATIONAL MOR TGAGE ASSOCIATION, A /K/A FAN NIE MAE, Appellee On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 3 Collin County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 003
- 00897
- 2013 

### O RDER
T he reporter’s record in this case is overdue. By postcard dated March 24, 2015, we notified the official court reporter for County Court at Law No. 3 that the reporter’s record was overdue. We directed the court reporter to file the record within thirty days. To date, we have not received any response. Accordingly, we ORDER Court Reporter Denise Condran to file, within FIFT EEN DAYS of the date of this order, either (1) the reporter’s record; (2) written verification that no hearings were recorded; or (3) written verification that appellants have not requested or made payment arrangements for the record. We notify appellants that if we receive verification the reporter’s record has not been requested, paid for, or arrangements have not been made to payfor the reporter’s record, we will order the appeal submitted without the reporter’s record. See
T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 37.3(c).
/ s/ CAROLYN WRIGHT CHIEF JUSTICE