alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE> <S> <C>
                                              
<ARTICLE>                                          5
<LEGEND>                                           Yes
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL  INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM ALBERTSON'S
QUARTERLY  REPORT TO  STOCKHOLDERS  FOR THE 26 WEEKS ENDED JULY 30, 1998, AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIREETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>                                     
<MULTIPLIER>                                                 1,000
                                                    
<S>                                                  <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                                6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                      JAN-28-1999
<PERIOD-START>                                         JAN-30-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                           JUL-30-1998
<CASH>                                                      50,462
<SECURITIES>                                                     0
<RECEIVABLES>                                              124,952
<ALLOWANCES>                                                 1,200
<INVENTORY>                                              1,295,697
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                         1,579,726
<PP&E>                                                   5,632,035
<DEPRECIATION>                                           2,000,714
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                           5,553,042
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                    1,194,048
<BONDS>                                                  1,410,761
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                            0
<PREFERRED>                                                      0
<COMMON>                                                   245,508
<OTHER-SE>                                               2,315,593
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                             5,553,042
<SALES>                                                  7,843,305
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                         7,843,305
<CGS>                                                    5,749,491
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                            5,749,491
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                                 0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                                 0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                          51,110
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                            382,431
<INCOME-TAX>                                               143,412
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                        239,019
<DISCONTINUED>                                                   0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                                  0
<CHANGES>                                                        0
<NET-INCOME>                                               239,019
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                                 0.97
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                 0.97
        

</TABLE>
#### § 105-8.170-2 Employment complaints.

The agency shall process complaints alleging violations of section 504 with respect to employment according to the procedures established by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission in 29 CFR part 1613 pursuant to section 501 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (29 U.S.C. 791).
§ 102-38.105 Under what conditions may we negotiate sales of personal property? You may negotiate sales of personal property when— ( a ) The personal property has an estimated fair market value that does not exceed $15,000;
( b ) The disposal will be to a State, territory, possession, political subdivision thereof, or tax-supported agency therein, and the estimated fair market value of the property and other satisfactory terms of disposal are obtained by negotiation;
( c ) Bid prices after advertising are not reasonable and re-advertising would serve no useful purpose;
( d ) Public exigency does not permit any delay such as that caused by the time required to advertise a sale;
( e ) The sale promotes public health, safety, or national security;
( f ) The sale is in the public interest under a national emergency declared by the President or the Congress. This authority may be used only with specific lot(s) of property or for categories determined by the Administrator of General Services for a designated period but not in excess of three months;
( g ) Selling the property competitively would have an adverse impact on the national economy, provided that the estimated fair market value of the property and other satisfactory terms of disposal can be obtained by negotiation, e.g., sale of large quantities of an agricultural product that impact domestic markets; or
( h ) Otherwise authorized by Title 40 of the U.S. Code or other law.
Exhibit 4.8
 AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO THE SECOND AMENDED AND RESTATED  REGISTRATION RIGHTS AGREEMENT
 Amendment Company Exhibit A Exhibit A Stockholders
 RECITALS
 Registration Rights
Agreement
 Purchase Agreement Promissory Notes 2010 Warrants




---



##### 



1. Amendment.
 Warrants 2009 Warrants
  2010 Warrants
 Warrants
  Registrable Common Stock provided, however
 2. Effective Time and Remainder of Agreement.
 3. Miscellaneous.
   2




---



##### 



[Signature Pages Follow]
  3




---



##### 



VIA PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.By:
    
    /s/ Lawrence K. Cohen

Name: Lawrence K. CohenTitle: President and Chief Executive Officer
 [Signature Page to Amendment No. 1 to the Second Amended and Restated Registration Rights Agreement]




---



##### 



BAY CITY CAPITAL FUND IV, L.P.By:
    
    Bay City Capital Management IV LLCIts:
    
    General PartnerBy:
    
    Bay City Capital LLC, its managerBy:
    
    /s/ Fred Craves

Name: Fred CravesTitle: Manager and Managing DirectorBAY CITY CAPITAL FUND IVCO-INVESTMENT FUND, L.P.By:
    
    Bay City Capital Management IV LLCIts:
    
    General PartnerBy:
    
    Bay City Capital LLC, its managerBy:
    
    /s/ Fred Craves

Name: Fred CravesTitle: Manager and Managing Director
 [Signature Page to Amendment No. 1 to the Second Amended and Restated Registration Rights Agreement]




---



##### 



/s/ Lawrence K. CohenLawrence Cohen
 [Signature Page to Amendment No. 1 to the Second Amended and Restated Registration Rights Agreement]




---



##### 



Exhibit A
 STOCKHOLDERS
 Name/Address:
 750 Battery Street  Suite 400  San Francisco, CA 94111
 810 Lathrop Drive  Stanford, CA 94305
 125 Hopewell-Wertsville Road  Hopewell, NJ 08525
 133 Burns Avenue  Atherton, CA 94027
 10065 Broadway Terrace  Oakland, CA 94611
 2150 Sterling Avenue  Menlo Park, CA 94025
# Fourth Court of Appeals **San Antonio, Texas**
MEMORANDUM OPINION
No. 04

- 20

- 00053

- CR
IN RE Deagobeto OSEGUERA
- GARCIA Original Mandamus Proceeding 1
PER CURIAM Sitting: Sandee Bryan Marion, Chief Justice Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice Beth Watkins, Justice Delivered and Filed: February 5, 2020
PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS DISMISSED FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION On June 4, 2019, the trial court signed an “Order Designating Issues,” pursuant to Texas Code of Criminal Procedure article 11.07, section 3( d )

. See T EX
. C ODE C RIM
. P ROC

. art. 11.07, § 3( d ) (“ If the convicting court decides that there are controverted, pr eviously unresolved facts which are material to the legality of the applicant ’ s confinement, it shall enter an order within 20 days of the expiration of the time allowed for the state to reply, designating the issues of fact to be resolved. ”). Also on Jun e 4, 2019 , the trial court ordered attorneys Larry Bloomquist and Raymond Deleon to file affidavits on or before June 28, 2019, addressing the issues of fact to be resolved. See id. ( “ To resolve those issues the court may order affidavits . . . .”). Mr. Bloomquist and Mr. Deleon were also ordered to provide copies of their affidavit to relator and the Bexar

1 This proceeding arises out of Cause No. 2011

- CR

- 1453

- W1, styled Ex Parte Deagobeto Oseguera

- Garcia , pending in the 226th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas, the Honorable Velia J. Meza presiding.04

- 20

- 00053

- CR

- 2

- County Conviction Integrity Un i t . On January 27, 2020, relator filed his petition for writ of mandamus asking this court to direct the trial court to order the attorneys to file their affidavits. After relator filed his petition, this court contacted the Bexar County Conviction Integrity Unit to ascertain whether it had received copies of the affidavits. We were informed no affidavits had been filed. Although it appears Mr. Bloomquist and Mr. Deleon may be in violation of a trial court order, we do not have jurisdiction to consider relator’s complaint. The substance of the relief sought by relator in his petition is habeas corpus relief following a f inal felony conviction. A rticle 11.07 provides the exclusive means to challenge a final felony conviction. Bd

. of Pardons & Paroles ex rel. Keene v. Court of Appeals for Eighth Dist. , 910 S.W.2d 481, 483 (Tex. Crim. App. 1995) (orig. proceeding) (per curiam). Jurisdiction to grant post

- conviction habeas corpus relief on a final felony conviction rests exclusively with the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. Keene , 910 S.W.2d at 483 ; T E X
. C ODE C RIM
. P ROC

. art. 11.07 , § 3(a)

. Because the relief sought in relator ’ s petition relates to post

- conviction relief from an otherwise final felony conviction, we are without jurisdiction to consider his petition for writ of mandamus. Therefore, we must dismiss relator ’ s petition for writ of mandamus for lack of jurisdiction.
PER CURIAM Do not publish
**Arizona Permitting Jurisdiction and Rule Applicability**
**– Related CAA and CFR SIP Requirements** 

CAA section 110(a)(2)(E) “(2)... Each such plan shall... (E) provide (i) necessary assurances that the State (or, except where the Administrator deems inappropriate, the general purpose local government or governments, or a regional agency designated by the State or general purpose local governments for such purpose) will have adequate personnel, funding, and authority under State (and, as appropriate, local) law to carry out such implementation plan (and is not prohibited by any provision of Federal or State law from carrying out such implementation plan or portion thereof), ” 40 CFR 51.240 (“General plan requirements”) “Each State implementation plan must identify org anizations, by official title, that will participate in developing, implementing, and enforcing the plan and the responsibilities of such organizations. The plan shall include any related agreements or memoranda of understanding among the organizations.
40 CFR 51.162 (“Identification of responsible agency”) “Each plan must identify the State or local agency which will be responsible for meeting the requirements of this subpart in each area of the State. Where such responsibility rests with an agency other t han an air pollution control agency, such agency will consult with the appropriate State or local air pollution control agency in carrying out the provisions of this subpart.”
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 121 (Thursday, June 22, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Pages 38885-38886]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-15802]


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

DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS


Advisory Committee on Structural Safety of Department of Veterans 
Affairs Facilities, Notice of Meeting

    The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), in accordance with Public 
Law 92-463, gives notice that a meeting of the Advisory Committee on 
Structural Safety of Department of Veterans Affairs Facilities 
(Committee) will be held on:

Thursday, June 22, 2000: 10 a.m. to 5 p.m.
Friday, June 23, 2000: 9 a.m. to 12 p.m.

    The location of the meeting will be 811 Vermont Avenue, NW., 
Washington, DC, Room 460 on June 22, 2000, and Room 442 on June 23, 
2000.
    The purpose of the Committee is to advise the Secretary on matters 
of structural safety in the construction and remodeling of VA 
facilities and to recommend standards for use by VA in the construction 
and alteration of facilities as prescribed under Section 8105 of Title 
38, United States Code.
    On June 22, the Committee will review the developments in the field 
of

[[Page 38886]]

structural design, as they relate to seismic safety of buildings, and 
fire safety issues. On June 23, the Committee will vote on structural 
and fire safety issues for inclusion in VA's standards.
    Both meetings will be open to the public. It will be necessary for 
those wishing to attend to contact Krishna K. Banga, Senior Structural 
Engineer, Facilities Quality Service, Office of Facilities Management, 
Department of Veterans Affairs Central Office (phone 202-565-9370) 
prior to the meeting.

    Dated: June 12, 2000.

    By Direction of the Secretary.
Marvin R. Eason,
Committee Management Officer.
[FR Doc. 00-15802 Filed 6-21-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8320-01-M
- All
            - Title
            - Author
            - Subject
            - Date
            - Full-Text

            -                              Explore                            ******                - Educational Resources
              - Archival Collections
              -                                      Themes                                    ******                  - Economic Data
                - Federal Reserve
                - View all 
              - Timelines 
            -                              Browse                            ******                - Titles
              - Authors
              - Subjects
              - Dates 
            -                              About                            ******                - About FRASER
              - FAQ
              - Contact Us
              -                                      FRASER API                                    ******                  - REST API
                - OAI-PMH 
            - Inside FRASER Blog

            - **

Home                 > Browse by Title > Salaries of Office Workers in Selected Large Cities

              																	Mohn, Kermit B.					 and 	United States. Bureau of Labor Statistics. 						*Salaries of Office Workers in Selected Large Cities : Bulletin of the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics, No. 943*,										1948,									https://fraser.stlouisfed.org/title/4371,			accessed on September 22, 2024.						    

        - **FRASER**
        - About
        - FAQ
        - Legal and Privacy
        - FRASER API

          -                              @FedFRASER 
          - ** Contact Us
          -  **  What's New  
          -  **  Inside FRASER
#### § 105-53.116 General regulations.

Regulations of the General Services Administration and its components are codified in the Code of Federal Regulations in title 1, chapters I and II; title 32, chapter XX; title 41, chapters 1, 5, 101, 105, and 201; and title 48, chapters 1 and 5. Titles 1, 32, 41, and 48 of the Code of Federal Regulations are available for review at most legal and depository libraries and at the General Services Administration Central Office and regional offices. Copies may be purchased from the Superintendent of Documents, Government Printing Office, Washington, DC 20402.

[49 FR 24995, June 19, 1984]
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 07-6620
VICTOR CALDERON, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus CORRECTIONAL OFFICER FOSTER; UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at Beckley. Thomas E. Johnston, District Judge. (5:05-cv-00696) Submitted: February 6, 2008 Decided: February 15, 2008 Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Victor Calderon, Appellant Pro Se. Stephen Michael Horn, Assistant United States Attorney, Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.- 2 - PER CURIAM: Victor Calderon appeals the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and granting Defendants’ motion for summary judgment on Calderon’s complaint filed pursuant to Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Fed. Bureau of Narcotics , 403 U.S. 388 (1971), and the Federal Tort Claims Act, 28 U.S.C.A. §§ 1346, 2671-2680 (West 2006 & Supp. 2007). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Calderon v. Foster , No. 5:05-cv-00696 (S.D. W. Va. Mar. 30, 2007). 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.

AFFIRMED
From: "Kudlinski James F (Jim)" <Jim.Kudlinski@srpnet.com> 

 

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

 Date: 07/07/2010 10:43 AM 

 Subject: SRP Request for Time Extension 

Ms. Alicea:

Attached as a PDF file is SRP’s request for a time extension for

completing the CWA Section 308 Information Collection Request that was

received at our Coronado, Desert Basin, Kyrene, Navajo and Santan

Generating Stations. If you have any questions regarding this request,

please feel free to contact me at your convenience. An original

signature copy will follow via U.S. Mail.

Thank you.

Jim Kudlinski

Salt River Project

Phoenix, AZ

602-236-2351

 (See attached file: SRP ICR Extension Request.pdf)
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### A PPEAL 

### O F 

### T HE 

### S TATE 

### O F 

### F LORIDA

F OURTH D ISTRICT

IRA WENZEL and NICOLE WENZEL, Appellants,

v.

HOMEOWNERS CHOICE PROPERTY & CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY,

Appellee.

No. 4D 202 3

- 0088

[ April 24, 2024 ]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm Beach County; James Nutt, Judge; L.T. Case No. 502018CA001703.

George A. Vaka and Robert C. Hubbard of Vaka Law Group, P.L., Tampa, and Chase Florin and Hal S. Weitzenfeld of Florin Roebig, Palm

Harbo r, for appellants.

Andrew A. Labbe of Groelle & Salmon, P.A., Tampa, for appellee.

P ER C URIAM

.

After a jury trial, the circuit court granted the insurer’s motion for judgment in accordance with a prior motion for directed verdict. Specifically, the ci rcuit court concluded that the insured failed to provide the insurer with prompt notice of the loss. We agree with the insured that

the trial court erred in directing a verdict for the insurer.

In Restoration Construction, LLC v. SafePoint Insurance Co. , 308 So. 3d 649 (Fla. 4th DCA 2020), we explained that “the issue of whether an insured provided ‘prompt’ notice generally presents an issue of fact.” Id. at 652 (emphasis added) (quoting Himmel v. Avatar Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co. , 257 So. 3d 488, 492 (Fla. 4th DCA 2018)). However, because “[i]n some cases [even] a five

- day delay could clearly prejudice an insurer’s evaluation of a claim[,]” we declined to “create a bright line rule for when notice to a n insurer is no longer ‘prompt’ [as a matter of law].” Id. ; cf. Kroener v. Fla.

Ins. Guar. Ass’n , 63 So. 3d 914, 916 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011) (holding that notice of loss provided over two years after the date of loss did not constitute “prompt” notice as a ma tter of law).2 “A trial court may direct a verdict only when the evidence and all reasonable inferences fail to prove a plaintiff ’ s case.” Martinolich v. Golden Leaf Mgmt., Inc. , 786 So. 2d 613, 614 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001) (citation omitted). “ W here evidence i s conflicting, or will admit of different reasonable inferences, the issue should be submitted to the jury as a question of fact, and not passed upon by the judge as a matter of law.” Id. at 615 (quoting Level v. Getelman , 444 So. 2d 1027, 1028 (Fla. 3d D CA 1984)). Here, the evidence submitted to the jury was susceptible to “different reasonable inferences” as to whether the insurer was prejudiced by the delay in providing notice of the loss. Thus, the trial court incorrectly set aside the jury’s verdict when it granted the insurer’s motion for judgment in accordance with the earlier motion for directed verdict.

Accordingly, we reverse the trial court’s order directing verdict for the insurer and remand with instructions to reinstate the jury’s verdict.

Reversed and remanded

.

C ONNER

, K UNTZ and A RTAU

, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
##### 



Exhibit 12


AT&T Corp.


Computation of Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges


(Unaudited)


(Dollars in millions)


|                                                     |  |                     |       | 
|---------------------------------------------------- |  | ------------------- | ----- | 
|                                                     |  | For the Six Months  |      
|                                                     |  | Ended June 30, 2005 |      
|                                                     |  |                     |      
|Income before income taxes                           |  | $                   | 1,394 | 
|Add: fixed charges, excluding capitalized interest   |  |                     | 442   | 
|                                                     |  |                     |      
|Total earnings before income taxes and fixed charges |  | $                   | 1,836 | 
|                                                     |  |                     |      
|Fixed Charges:                                       |  |                     |       | 
|Total interest expense                               |  | $                   | 372   | 
|Capitalized interest                                 |  |                     | 10    | 
|Interest portion of rental expense                   |  |                     | 70    | 
|                                                     |  |                     |      
|Total fixed charges                                  |  | $                   | 452   | 
|                                                     |  |                     |      
|Ratio of earnings to fixed charges                   |  |                     | 4.1   |
#### § 102-38.300 What happens to sales proceeds that neither we nor the holding agency are authorized to retain, or that are unused?

Any sales proceeds that are not retained pursuant to the authorities in § 102-38.295 must be deposited as miscellaneous receipts in the U.S. Treasury.
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 559 Introduced in House (IH)]

106th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 559

     To provide for the continuation of the United States Advisory 
                    Commission on Public Diplomacy.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            February 3, 1999

  Mr. Roemer (for himself and Mr. Houghton) introduced the following 
  bill; which was referred to the Committee on International Relations

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
     To provide for the continuation of the United States Advisory 
                    Commission on Public Diplomacy.

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

SECTION 1. CONTINUATION OF THE UNITED STATES ADVISORY COMMISSION ON 
              PUBLIC DIPLOMACY.

    Section 1334 of the Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act of 
1998 (Division G of Public Law 105-277) is repealed.
                                 <all>
```
#### § 102-76.30 What seismic safety standards must Federal agencies follow in the design and construction of Federal facilities?

Federal agencies must follow the seismic safety standards identified in § 102-80.45 of this chapter.