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

<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
THE SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED  FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF SUPERIOR SERVICES,  INC. AS OF AND FOR THE
NINE  MONTHS  ENDED  DECEMBER  31,  1996 AND IS  QUALIFIED  IN ITS  ENTIRETY  BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<RESTATED>
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                                   SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                         24,024
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  26,623
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (887)
<INVENTORY>                                    782
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               54,630
<PP&E>                                         230,626
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (87,957)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 242,463
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          37,197
<BONDS>                                        16,868
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       258
<OTHER-SE>                                     125,042
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   242,463
<SALES>                                        0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               129,931
<CGS>                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  88,250
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               1,142
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             1,935
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                19,297
<INCOME-TAX>                                   7,057
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            12,240
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   12,240
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  .49
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  .49
        

</TABLE>
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

ANTHONY EDWARD CIAVONE,

Plaintiff, Civil Action No. 2:14-13133

v. HONORABLE VICTORIA A. ROBERTS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 

MARK T. SLAVENS, et. al., 

Defendants,

 /

OPINION AND ORDER DENYING THE MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION

On September 8, 2014, the Court summarily dismissed Plaintiff’s civil rights

complaint which had been brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1983 because it failed to state a

claim upon which relief could be granted and on the basis of immunity. Ciavone v.

Slavens, No. 2:14-CV-13133, 2014 WL 4414504 (E.D. Mich. September 8, 2014).

Plaintiff filed a motion for reconsideration. For the reasons stated below, the

motion for reconsideration is denied.

U.S. Dist.Ct. Rules, E.D. Mich. 7.1 (h) allows a party to file a motion for

reconsideration. However, a motion for reconsideration which presents the same issues

already ruled upon by the court, either expressly or by reasonable implication, will not be

granted. Michigan Regional Council of Carpenters v. Holcroft L.L.C. 195 F. Supp. 2d

908, 911 (E.D. Mich. 2002)(citing to U.S. Dist.Ct. Rules, E.D. Mich. 7.1 (g)(3)). A

motion for reconsideration should be granted if the movant demonstrates a palpable

defect by which the court and the parties have been misled and that a different disposition

1

2:14-cv-13133-VAR-PJK Doc # 8 Filed 10/02/14 Pg 1 of 2 Pg ID 60
of the case must result from a correction thereof. Id. A palpable defect is a defect that is

obvious, clear, unmistakable, manifest, or plain. Witzke v. Hiller, 972 F. Supp. 426, 427

(E.D. Mich. 1997). 

Plaintiff alleges that this Court erred in summarily dismissing his complaint. 

Plaintiff argues that this Court erred in concluding that his right to the access to the courts

did not extend to filing a legal malpractice action against his criminal defense attorney.

Plaintiff also contends that this Court erred in ruling that the defendants were immune

from suit based upon the Eleventh Amendment to the federal constitution and the doctrine

of judicial immunity. 

Plaintiff failed to show that this Court erred in summarily dismissing his § 1983

complaint. Plaintiff’s motion for reconsideration will therefore be denied, because

Plaintiff is merely presenting issues which were already ruled upon by this Court, either

expressly or by reasonable implication, when the Court summarily dismissed Plaintiff’s

civil rights complaint. Hence v. Smith, 49 F. Supp. 2d 549, 553 (E.D. Mich. 1999).

ORDER

Based upon the foregoing, IT IS ORDERED that the motion for reconsideration

[dkt. # 7] is DENIED.

S/Victoria A. Roberts

Dated: 10/2/2014 United States District Judge

2

2:14-cv-13133-VAR-PJK Doc # 8 Filed 10/02/14 Pg 2 of 2 Pg ID 61
#### § 614.1 General rule.

Except as otherwise provided in these regulations, every portion of every meeting of the National Science Board will be open to public observation.
###### Editorial Note on Part 85

#### Editorial Note:

At the request of the Department of Health and Human Services, the “Section-by-Section Analysis” portion of the preamble of the document published at 53 FR 25595, July 8, 1988, as corrected at 53 FR 26559, July 13, 1988, appears at the end of part 85.

#### § 85.31 Employment.

No qualified individuals with handicaps shall, on the basis of handicap, be subjected to discrimination in employment under any program or activity conducted by the agency. The definitions, requirements, and procedures of section 501 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (9 U.S.C. 791), as established by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission in 9 CFR part 1613, shall apply to employment in federally conducted programs and activities.
§ 80.6 Compliance information. ( a ) *Cooperation and assistance.* The responsible Department official shall to the fullest extent practicable seek the cooperation of recipients in obtaining compliance with this part and shall provide assistance and guidance to recipients to help them comply voluntarily with this part.
( b ) *Compliance reports.* Each recipient shall keep such records and submit to the responsible Department official or his designee timely, complete and accurate compliance reports at such times, and in such form and containing such information, as the responsible Department official or his designee may determine to be necessary to enable him to ascertain whether the recipient has complied or is complying with this part. For example, recipients should have available for the Department racial and ethnic data showing the extent to which members of minority groups are beneficiaries of and participants in federally-assisted programs. In the case in which a primary recipient extends Federal financial assistance to any other recipient, such other recipient shall also submit such compliance reports to the primary recipient as may be necessary to enable the primary recipient to carry out its obligations under this part.
( c ) *Access to sources of information.* Each recipient shall permit access by the responsible Department official or his designee during normal business hours to such of its books, records, accounts, and other sources of information, and its facilities as may be pertinent to ascertain compliance with this part. Where any information required of a recipient is in the exclusive possession of any other agency, institution or person and this agency, institution or person shall fail or refuse to furnish this information the recipient shall so certify in its report and shall set forth what efforts it has made to obtain the information. Asserted considerations of privacy or confidentiality may not operate to bar the Department from evaluating or seeking to enforce compliance with this part. Information of a confidential nature obtained in connection with compliance evaluation or enforcement shall not be disclosed except where necessary in formal enforcement proceedings or where otherwise required by law.
( d ) *Information to beneficiaries and participants.* Each recipient shall make available to participants, beneficiaries, and other interested persons such information regarding the provisions of this regulation and its applicability to the program for which the recipient receives Federal financial assistance, and make such information available to them in such manner, as the responsible Department official finds necessary to apprise such persons of the protections against discrimination assured them by the Act and this regulation.
(Secs. 601, 602, Civil Rights Act of 1964, 78 Stat. 252 (42 U.S.C. 2000d, 2000d-1))
[29 FR 16298, Dec. 4, 1964, as amended at 32 FR 14555, Oct. 19, 1967; 38 FR 17981, 17982, July 5, 1973; 70 FR 24318, May 9, 2005]
-81 -80 -79 -78 -77 -76 -75

 38

 39

 40

 41

★

▲

▲

▲

▲

★

▲ ▲ ▲

▲

 500

 1000

 1500

 1000

18 12 06 00

07/16

NOAA HYSPLIT MODEL

 Backward trajectory ending at 2300 UTC 16 Jul 07

 EDAS Meteorological Data

Source

★ at 38.81 N 76.74 W Meters AGL
SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

EXECUTIVE CALENDAR

PREPARED UNDER THE DIRECTION OF JULIE E. ADAMS,

SECRETARY OF THE SENATE

By Jennifer A. Gorham, Executive Clerk

ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS

Thursday, March 30, 2017

FIRST SESSION {

SECOND SESSION {

Issue No. 49

CONVENED JANUARY 3, 2017

http://www.senate.gov/ExecutiveCalendar

RESOLUTIONS

CALENDAR

NO.

S. RES.

NO.

SUBJECT REPORTED

BY

1
TREATIES

CALENDAR

NO.

TREATY

DOC. NO.

SUBJECT REPORTED

BY

2
* Signifies nominee’s commitment to respond to requests to appear and testify before any duly constituted committee of the Senate

NOMINATIONS

CALENDAR

NO.

MESSAGE

NO.

NOMINEE, OFFICE, AND PREDECESSOR REPORTED

BY

3

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY

* 24 59 Elaine C. Duke, of Virginia, to be Deputy 

Secretary of Homeland Security, vice 

Alejandro Nicholas Mayorkas.

Mar 15, 2017 Reported by Mr. 

Johnson, Committee on 

Homeland Security and 

Governmental Affairs, 

without printed report.
* Signifies nominee’s commitment to respond to requests to appear and testify before any duly constituted committee of the Senate

NOMINATIONS PLACED ON THE SECRETARY’S DESK

4
* Committee of jurisdiction has requested appropriate biographical and financial information on this nominee

** Committee of jurisdiction has received the necessary biographical and financial information on this nominee; nominee will remain in this 

section for 10 session days

PRIVILEGED NOMINATIONS

MESSAGE

NO.

DATE

RECEIVED

NOMINEE AND POSITION * INFORMATION 

REQUESTED BY 

COMMITTEE

5

** REQUESTED 

INFORMATION 

RECEIVED

SENATOR REQUESTED REFERRAL TO 

COMMITTEE OF JURISDICTION 

Pursuant to S. Res. 116, 112th Congress, nominations in this section of the Executive Calendar are entitled to expedited procedures.
NOTICE OF INTENT TO OBJECT

MESSAGE

NO.

NOMINEE AND OFFICE DATE AND SENATOR

6

When a notice of intent to object is given to the appropriate leader, or their designee, and such notice is submitted for inclusion in 

the Congressional Record and the Senate Executive Calendar, or following the objection to a unanimous consent to proceeding to, 

and, or disposition of, matters relating to nominations and treaties on their behalf, it shall be placed in the section of the Senate 

Executive Calendar entitled “Notice of Intent to Object”. (S. Res. 28, 112th Congress)
MOTIONS FOR RECONSIDERATION

DATE SUBJECT

7

 After an action taken by the Senate, any Senator voting with the prevailing side or who has not voted may, on the same day or on 

either of the next two days of actual session thereafter, either enter a motion for reconsideration or move a reconsideration. This section 

contains such motions not yet acted on as so provided by Rule XIII, Paragraph 1.
**Exhibit 10.21**

 

**GENSYM CORPORATION**

 

**Description of Compensation Arrangements with Non-Employee Directors**

 

Directors of the Company who are also Company employees receive no additional or special compensation for serving asdirectors. 

 

Following is a description of the compensationarrangements for the Company’s non-employee directors. 

 

The Company pays, and after March 31, 2006 will continue to pay, its non-employee directors $12,000 annually, plus $1,000 for physical attendance at each meeting of the board of directors or $500 forparticipation in a board meeting telephonically. Non-employee directors also receive a $2,500 quarterly retainer for each committee on which the director serves. Non-employee directors are also eligible to receive stock options. 

 

Prior to March 31, 2006, each of the Company’snon-employee directors is required to receive 10%, and may elect to receive up to 100%, of his board compensation in shares of the Company’s common stock in lieu of cash. Each director must make his election in increments of 10% and may onlychange his election effective as of two specified times each year. Effective March 31, 2006, all non-employee director fees will be paid solely in cash, and Company common stock will no longer be issued in lieu of cash for any portion ofdirector compensation (retainers or meeting fees). 

 

Additionally, since January 1, 2005, upon initial election as a director, each non-employee director has been entitled to receive a nonstatuory option to purchase 10,000 shares of the Company’s common stock and on the first day ofeach calendar quarter each non-employee director has been entitled to receive an option to purchase 2,500 shares. All options granted to directors are granted at an exercise price equal to the fair market value of the Company’s common stock onthe date of the grant, are immediately exercisable and are exercisable for up to 10 years from the date of grant. Effective March 31, 2006, options will no longer be granted to any non-employee director (1) who owns 5% or more of theCompany’s outstanding common stock or (2) if and to the extent the grant would cause the total number of shares subject to options ever granted by the Company to the non-employee director to exceed 100,000 (subject to adjustment forstock-splits, dividends and similar events).
From:       Richard Krock <rkrock@vinylinfo.org>                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                                
  To:         Jodi Howard/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                                
  Cc:         Mary Bachynsky <mbachynsky@fpcusa.com>, Mark Garza <mgarza@shin-tech.com>, James Bell <jbell@shin-tech.com>, "Kevin Bloomer       
              (kbloomer@westlake.com)" <kbloomer@westlake.com>, "'Sistrunk, Otis J. (PED)'" <Otis.Sistrunk@polyone.com>,                        
              "Barry_H._Christensen@oxy.com" <Barry_H._Christensen@oxy.com>, JC Walker <walker@khlaw.com>                                       
                                                                                                                                                
  Date:       10/30/2009 11:51 AM                                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                                
  Subject:    PVC MACT Survey Questions from VI Members                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                                





Dear Ms. Howard,

The attached file contains our second set of questions that The Vinyl
Institute members have compiled in order to clarify some of the
information requested in the subject survey.  Please review the
questions and return your responses to those copied on this e-mail.  If
you post the answers at a designated EPA portal, please forward the
pathway to us.  Your quick clarification to our questions is appreciated
so that those compiling the significant amount of data can successfully
complete the preparation of the survey for the quickly approaching
November 30, 2009 deadline.  Please do not hesitate to contact me with
any questions or comments.  Thank you.






*Please note our new contact information*

Richard Krock
Technical Director


The Vinyl Institute
1737 King Street Suite 390
Alexandria, VA 22314
Direct: 571.970.3392
Mobile: 571.216.4474
Fax: 571.970.3271
Email: rkrock@vinylinfo.org 
http://www.vinylinfo.org 
http://www.vinylindesign.com 

(See attached file: VI PVC MACT Survey Questions Rollup as of
10-30-09.doc)(Embedded image moved to file: pic18281.jpg)VI Logo
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1713 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

        H.R.1713

                      One Hundred Eleventh Congress

                                 of the

                        United States of America

                          AT THE FIRST SESSION

          Begun and held at the City of Washington on Tuesday,
             the sixth day of January, two thousand and nine

                                 An Act

 
   To name the South Central Agricultural Research Laboratory of the 
  Department of Agriculture in Lane, Oklahoma, and the facility of the 
   United States Postal Service located at 310 North Perry Street in 
  Bennington, Oklahoma, in honor of former Congressman Wesley ``Wes'' 
                                Watkins.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. REDESIGNATION OF SOUTH CENTRAL AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH 
LABORATORY, LANE, OKLAHOMA.
    (a) Redesignation.--The South Central Agricultural Research 
Laboratory of the Department of Agriculture in Lane, Oklahoma, shall be 
known and redesignated as the ``Wes Watkins Agricultural Research 
Laboratory''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the South Central 
Agricultural Research Laboratory shall be deemed to be a reference to 
the ``Wes Watkins Agricultural Research Laboratory''.
SEC. 2. DESIGNATION OF WES WATKINS POST OFFICE, BENNINGTON, OKLAHOMA.
    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 310 North Perry Street in Bennington, Oklahoma, shall be 
known and designated as the ``Wes Watkins Post Office''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referred to 
in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Wes 
Watkins Post Office''.

                               Speaker of the House of Representatives.

                            Vice President of the United States and    
                                               President of the Senate.
```
EXHIBIT 32.1

                                    CERTIFICATION


In connection with the Annual Report of Euro Group of Companies, Inc. (formerly
ICT Technologies, Inc.) (the "Company") on Form 10-K for the period ended
December 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the
date hereof (the "Report"), I, Vasilios Koutsobinas, Chief Executive Officer of
the Company, certify, pursuant to 8 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to my knowledge:

     (1)  The Report of the Compny fully complies with the requirements of
          section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act; and

     (2)  The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
          material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of
          the Company.


                                            /s/  Vasilios Koutsobinas
                                            -----------------------------------
                                                 Vasilios Koutsobinas
                                                 Chief Executive Officer


November 13, 2009
#### Joseph E. McCormick *v.*The City of Syracuse.

Motion for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals granted, on the ground that the case involves a question of law which ought to be reviewed by that court.
150°0'0"W

150°0'0"W

151°0'0"W

151°0'0"W

61°0'0"N

61°0'0"N

Hope

Salamatof

Skilak Lake

C o o k

I n l e t

Scenic Lake

Pepper Lake

Gene Lake

Unnamed Lake in

T. 6 N., R. 5 W., Sec. 11

Swanson Lake

Sterling Highway

Figure 6. Alternative A - Current

Airplane Access to Lakes in Designated

Wilderness North of the Sterling Highway

Produced in the Division of Realty

and Natural Resources

Anchorage, Alaska

Current to: February 28, 2008

Kenai

NWR

Anchorage

Map

Extent

0 2.5 5 10

Miles

08-0041 JGB

Note: This map does not address land ownership.

0 3.5 7 14

Kilometers

Open

Early Access

Ice Fishing Only

Dave Spencer Wilderness Area

Andrew Simons Wilderness Area

Mystery Creek Wilderness Area

Refuge Boundary

Cook Lake Sandpiper Lake

Vogel Lake

Bird Lake Tangerra Lake

Taiga Lake

Norak Lake

Bedlam Lake

Mull Lake

Shoepac Lake

Nekutak Lake

Wilderness Lake

King Lake

Grouse Lake

Snowshoe Lake

Kenai Sterling

Soldotna

Chickaloon Bay

Turnagain Arm
#### In the Matter of the Transfer Tax on the Estate of Maria B. Chapman, Deceased; The Comptroller of the State of New York, Appellant; Edwin N. Chapman et al., as Executors, Respondents.

*Matter of Chapman,*133 App. Div. 337, appeal dismissed.

(Submitted November 9, 1909;

decided November 16, 1909.)

Appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the second judicial department, entered July 17, 1909, which affirmed an order of the Kings County Surrogate’s Court reversing a prior order assessing a transfer tax upon certain property passing by virtue of the exercise of a power of appointment on the part of the decedent herein.

*William*IF". *Wingate*for appellant.

*James Allison Kelly*and *Fritz W. Uoeninghaus*for respondents.

Appeal dismissed, with costs ; no opinion.

Concur: Cullen, Oh. J., Haight, Vann, Werner, Willard Bartlett, Hisgock and Chase, JJ.