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

<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
THIS  SCHEDULE  CONTAINS  FINANCIAL   INFORMATION   EXTRACTED  FROM ALBERTSON'S
QUARTERLY REPORT TO STOCKHOLDERS FOR THE 39 WEEKS ENDED OCTOBER 28, 1999,AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>                                             1,000

<S>                                                        <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                            9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                  FEB-03-2000
<PERIOD-START>                                     JAN-29-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                       OCT-28-1999
<CASH>                                                 219,177
<SECURITIES>                                                 0
<RECEIVABLES>                                          554,869
<ALLOWANCES>                                            23,580
<INVENTORY>                                          3,524,131
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     4,655,174
<PP&E>                                              13,518,361
<DEPRECIATION>                                       4,877,385
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                      15,578,766
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                4,163,473
<BONDS>                                              4,960,735
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                        0
<PREFERRED>                                                  0
<COMMON>                                               423,642
<OTHER-SE>                                           5,087,088
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                        15,578,766
<SALES>                                             27,579,183
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                    27,579,183
<CGS>                                               20,055,827
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                       20,055,827
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                             0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                             0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                     244,035
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                        460,089
<INCOME-TAX>                                           296,532
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                    163,557
<DISCONTINUED>                                               0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                         23,272
<CHANGES>                                                    0
<NET-INCOME>                                           140,285
<EPS-BASIC>                                             0.33
<EPS-DILUTED>                                             0.33



</TABLE>
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4884 Referred in Senate (RFS)]

  2d Session
                                H. R. 4884

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           September 7, 2000

  Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Governmental 
                                Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
To redesignate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
  at 200 West 2nd Street in Royal Oak, Michigan, as the ``William S. 
                   Broomfield Post Office Building''.

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

SECTION 1. REDESIGNATION.

    The facility of the United States Postal Service located at 200 
West 2nd Street in Royal Oak, Michigan, and known as the Royal Oak Post 
Office, shall be known and designated as the ``William S. Broomfield 
Post Office Building''.

SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

    Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper, or other 
record of the United States to the facility referred to in section 1 
shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``William S. Broomfield Post 
Office Building''.

            Passed the House of Representatives September 6, 2000.

            Attest:

                                                 JEFF TRANDAHL,

                                                                 Clerk.
```
106TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 5362

AN ACT

To increase the amount of fees charged to employers who are petitioners for the employment of H–

1B non-immigrant workers, and for other purposes.

106TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 5362

AN ACT

To increase the amount of fees charged to employers who

are petitioners for the employment of H–1B non-immigrant workers, and for other purposes.

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

•HR 5362 EH

1 SECTION 1. AUTHORITIES RELATING TO THE IMPOSITION

2 OF FEES.

3 Section 214(c)(9) of the Immigration and Nationality

4 Act (8 U.S.C. 1184(c)(9)) is amended—

5 (1) in subparagraph (A), by striking ‘‘(exclud6 ing’’ and all that follows through ‘‘2001)’’ and in7 serting ‘‘(excluding any employer that is a primary

8 or secondary education institution, an institution of

9 higher education, as defined in section 101(a) of the

10 Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1001(a),

11 a nonprofit entity related to or affiliated with any

12 such institution, a nonprofit entity which engages in

13 established curriculum-related clinical training of

14 students registered at any such institution, a non15 profit research organization, or a governmental re16 search organization) filing before October 1, 2003’’;

17 and

18 (2) in subparagraph (B), by striking ‘‘$500’’

19 and inserting ‘‘$1000’’.
3

•HR 5362 EH

1 SEC. 2. EFFECTIVE DATE.

2 The amendment made by section 1(2) shall apply

3 only to petitions that are filed on or after the date that

4 is 2 months after the date of the enactment of this Act.

Passed the House of Representatives October 6,

2000.

Attest:

Clerk.
### The Coalinga, California, earthquake of May 2, 1983

Edited by: Michael J. RymerWilliam L. Ellsworth

                            https://doi.org/10.3133/pp1487

#### Links

- More information:  **National Geologic Map Database Index Page**                            (html)
-                                                                                                                             Document:                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  **Report**                                                                                                     (pdf)                                                                                                                                     
- Plates:                               - **Plate 1**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 2**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 3**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 4**                            (pdf) 
- Download citation as:  RIS                         |                         Dublin                            Core

#### Abstract

At 2342 G.m.t. May 2, 1983, a magnitude (ML) 6.7 earthquake occurred about 12 km northeast of the town of Coalinga, approximately halfway between Los Angeles and San Francisco. The shock was felt from Los Angeles to 200 km north of Sacramento and as far east as Las Vegas. Unlike other well-documented, major earthquakes in California in the 20th century, this event was not associated with any previously known or suspected active fault. Comprehensive geologic and geophysical investigations begun soon after the event have demonstrated the absence of a near-surface fault responsible for the earthquake. Instead, the earthquake was closely associated with a fault zone concealed beneath folds developed along the structural boundary between the Coast (Diablo) Ranges and the San Joaquin Valley.

Part or all of this report is presented in Portable Document Format                        (PDF). For best results viewing and printing PDF documents, it is recommended that you download                        the documents to your computer and open them with Adobe Reader. PDF documents opened from your                        browser may not display or print as intended. Download the latest version of Adobe Reader, free of charge. More information                        about viewing, downloading, and printing report files can be found at the common download problems FAQ.
EHIBIT 31.1

           CERTIFICATION BY PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL AND ACCOUNTING OFFICER
           PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002.

I, James N L Chow, certify that:
1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of China Ventures Limited
(registrant];
2. Based on my knowledge, this annnual 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 annual
report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this annual 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 annual report; 4. As
sole officer of the registrant, I am responsible for establishing and
maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules
13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and we have: a) designed such disclosure
controls and procedures to ensure that material information relating to the
registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by
others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this
annual report is being prepared; b) evaluated the effectiveness of the
registrant's disclosure controls and procedures as of a date within 90 days
prior to the filing date of this annual report (the "Evaluation Date"); and
      c) presented in this annual report our conclusions about the
effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our evaluation
as of the Evaluation Date; 5. I have disclosed, based on my most recent
evaluation, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of registrant's
board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent function): a) all
significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal controls which
could adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process, summarize
and report financial data and have identified for the registrant's auditors any
material weaknesses in internal controls; and b) any fraud, whether or not
material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant
role in the registrant's internal controls; and 6. The registrant's other
certifying officer and I have indicated in this quarterly report whether or not
there were significant changes in internal controls or in other factors that
could significantly affect internal controls subsequent to the date of our most
recent evaluation, including any corrective actions with regard to significant
deficiencies and material weaknesses.

      February 13, 2004



     [Signature]
/s/ James N L Chow
-------------------
    James N L Chow
President and Principal Financial and Accounting Officer
§ 964.14 Proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law. ( a ) Each party to a proceeding, except one who fails to answer the Petition or, having answered, either fails to appear at the hearing or indicates in the answer that he does not desire to appear, may, unless at the discretion of the presiding officer such is not appropriate, submit proposed findings of fact, conclusions of law, orders and supporting reasons either in oral or written form in the discretion of the presiding officer. The presiding officer may also require parties to submit proposed findings of fact, conclusions of law, orders, and supporting reasons. Unless given orally, the date set for filing of proposed findings of fact, conclusions of law, orders and supporting reasons shall be within 15 days after the delivery of the official transcript to the Recorder who shall notify both parties of the date of its receipt. The filing date for proposed findings of fact, conclusions of law, orders and supporting reasons shall be the same for both parties. If not submitted by such date, unless extension of time for the filing thereof is granted, they will not be included in the record or given consideration.
( b ) Except when presented orally before the close of the hearing, proposed findings of fact shall be set forth in serially numbered paragraphs and shall state with particularity all evidentiary facts in the record with appropriate citations to the transcript or exhibits supporting the proposed finding. Each proposed conclusion shall be separately stated.
#### § 954.25 Public information.

The Librarian of the Postal Service maintains for public inspection in the Library copies of all initial and final Agency decisions. The Recorder of the Postal Service maintains a complete official record of every proceeding. A person may examine a record upon authorization by the Judicial Officer.

[36 FR 11567, June 16, 1971, as amended at 62 FR 66998, Dec. 23, 1997]
#### § 49.10-5 Payment of moneys due.

Upon the appointment of a trustee or trustees to receive moneys due an incompetent, the authorized certifying officer having custody of that person's pay record shall be advised. After such notification, payments of moneys due the incompetent may be made by the appropriate officer in accordance with procedure prescribed by the Commandant. All such payments so made, however, shall be made to the designated trustee or trustees.
§ 958.10 Prehearing conferences. ( a ) At a reasonable time after issuing the Notice of Docketing and Hearing, and with adequate notice to the parties, the Presiding Officer may conduct, in person or by telephone, one or more prehearing conferences to discuss the following: ( 1 ) Simplification of the issues;
( 2 ) The necessity or desirability of amendments to the pleadings, including the need for a more definite statement;
( 3 ) Stipulations or admissions of fact or as to the contents and authenticity of documents;
( 4 ) Limitation of the number of witnesses;
( 5 ) Exchange of witness lists, copies of prior statements of witnesses, and copies of hearing exhibits;
( 6 ) Scheduling dates for the exchange of witness lists and of proposed exhibits;
( 7 ) Discovery;
( 8 ) Possible changes in the scheduled oral hearing date, time or site, if requested; and
( 9 ) Any other matters related to the proceeding.
( b ) Within a reasonable time after the completion of a prehearing conference, the Presiding Officer shall issue an order detailing all matters agreed upon by the parties, or ordered by the Presiding Officer, at such conference.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM ALASKA
AIRLINES INC THIRD QUARTER 1999 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                           76200
<SECURITIES>                                    170100
<RECEIVABLES>                                    92500
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                      28200
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 46300
<PP&E>                                         1661700
<DEPRECIATION>                                  450900
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 1769800
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           673700
<BONDS>                                         153900
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             1
<OTHER-SE>                                      653599
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   1769800
<SALES>                                        1276600
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               1276600
<CGS>                                          1119100
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  1119100
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               11100
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 171500
<INCOME-TAX>                                     67400
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             104100
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    104100
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
## United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 97-3881

___________ Richard Ladavid Brown, Jr., * * Appellant, * * v. * * Steve Stroup; Phillip Burrell; * Appeal from the United States Unknown Defendant Responsible for * District Court for the Training of the Aforementioned; * Southern District of Iowa. Unknown Entity of Whom the Above * Are Employed by Being Either Polk * [UNPUBLISHED] County Jail or Polk County Sheriff & s * Dept., * * Appellees. *

___________ Submitted: February 3, 2000 Filed: February 8, 2000

___________ Before LOKEN, FAGG, and HANSEN, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM.1 The HONORABLE CELESTE BREMER, United States Magistrate Judge for

the Southern District of Iowa, to whom the case was referred for final disposition by consent of the parties pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c). -2- RichardL. Brown appeals from the district court’s 1 adverse judgment following a bench trial in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action which alleged defendants beat him while he was a pretrial detainee at Polk County Jail. Following de novo review of the record andthe parties’ submissions, we conclude the court did not clearly err in its factual findings and correctly entered judgment for defendants. See Estate of Davis v. Delo , 115 F.3d 1388, 1393-94 (8th cir. 1997) (standard of review); Putnam v. Gerloff , 639 F.2d 415, 420 (8th Cir. 1981) (under due process clause, inquiry focuses on need for application of force, relationship between need and amount of force used, extent of injury inflicted, and whether force was applied in good faith effort to maintain or res tore discipline or maliciously and sadistically to cause harm). Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is affirmed. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. A true copy.
Attest: CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

IN RE APPLICATION OF DAILANE 

INVESTMENTS LIMITED AND 

MICHAEL MAILLIS FOR JUDICIAL 

ASSISTANCE PURSUANT TO

28 U.S.C. § 1782 

Case No. 

APPLICATION FOR JUDICIAL ASSISTANCE PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C. § 1782

Applicants Dailane Investments Limited (“Dailane”) and Mr. Michael Maillis hereby apply for an 

order of judicial assistance, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1782, appointing Elizabeth Velez, Esq. as a 

Commissioner of the Court to facilitate the issuance of subpoenas for the gathering of documentary 

evidence from H.I.G. Capital, LLC, and testamentary evidence from two of its employees, Sami 

Mnaymneh and Anthony Tamer, all of which “reside in” or are “found in” the Southern District 

of Florida. The requested relief is for the purpose of obtaining limited, but critical, discovery for 

use in connection with an imminent legal proceeding by the Petitioners in the Commercial 

Chambers of the Luxembourg District Court. The grounds for this Application are set forth in the 

accompanying Memorandum of Law in Support of the Application for Judicial Assistance 

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1782 and the Declarations of Richard Ledain Santiago, Paul Ferguson, 

and Tara Plochocki and the Exhibits thereto. 

Respectfully submitted, 

Dated: November 4, 2022 LEWIS BAACH KAUFMANN

MIDDLEMISS PLLC 

 /s/ Elizabeth Velez

Elizabeth Velez

Florida Bar No. 73614

405 Lexington Avenue, 64th Floor 

New York, New York 10174 

Case 1:22-mc-23619-RKA Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/04/2022 Page 1 of 2
2

Tel: (212) 826-7001 

Elizabeth.velez@lbkmlaw.com

Tara J. Plochocki

(pro hac vice application forthcoming) 

1101 New York Avenue NW

Suite 1000

Washington, D.C. 20005

Tel: (202) 659-7217

tara.plochocki@lbkmlaw.com 

Respondent to be served by process server.

H.I.G. Capital, LLC

c/o C.T. Corporation System

1200 South Pine Island Road

Plantation, FL 33324

Case 1:22-mc-23619-RKA Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/04/2022 Page 2 of 2
```

[Federal Register: April 21, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 76)]
[Rules and Regulations]               
[Page 20774]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr21ap10-4]                         

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2009-0061; Airspace Docket No. 09-ASO-10]

 
Establishment of Class E Airspace; Mountain City, TN

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Direct final rule; confirmation of effective date.

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

SUMMARY: This action confirms the effective date of a direct final rule 
published in the Federal Register December 7, 2009 that establishes 
Class E airspace at Johnson County Airport, Mountain City, TN.

DATES: Effective Date: 0901 UTC, April 21, 2010.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Melinda Giddens, Operations Support 
Group, Eastern Service Center, Federal Aviation Administration, P.O. 
Box 20636, Atlanta, Georgia 30320; telephone (404) 305-5610.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Confirmation of Effective Date

    The FAA published this direct final rule with a request for 
comments in the Federal Register on December 7, 2009 (74 FR 63976), 
Docket No. FAA-2009-0061; Airspace Docket No. 09-ASO-10. The FAA uses 
the direct final rulemaking procedure for a non-controversial rule 
where the FAA believes that there will be no adverse public comment. 
This direct final rule advised the public that no adverse comments were 
anticipated, and that unless a written adverse comment, or a written 
notice of intent to submit such an adverse comment, were received 
within the comment period, the regulation would become effective on 
February 11, 2010. No adverse comments were received, and thus this 
notice confirms that effective date.

    Issued in College Park, Georgia, on April 9, 2010.
Myron A. Jenkins,
Acting Manager, Operations Support Group, Eastern Service Center, Air 
Traffic Organization.
[FR Doc. 2010-8840 Filed 4-20-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
```