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

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF WORLD ACCESS, INC. FOR THE NINE MONTHS ENDED SEPTEMBER
30, 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>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                         107,841
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  131,415
<ALLOWANCES>                                     8,353
<INVENTORY>                                     40,437
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               326,406
<PP&E>                                          72,692
<DEPRECIATION>                                   9,302
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 727,909
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          136,745
<BONDS>                                        115,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          1
<COMMON>                                           450
<OTHER-SE>                                     441,453
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   727,909
<SALES>                                        524,290
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               524,290
<CGS>                                          416,270
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  416,270
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                66,102
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 2,840
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               7,394
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 43,017
<INCOME-TAX>                                    20,370
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             22,647
<DISCONTINUED>                                 (14,364)
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     8,283
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.20
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.20


</TABLE>
Exhibit 10.1

SECOND AMENDMENT TO

EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT

The Employment Agreement effective as of January 1, 2004, by and between SUSQUEHANNA BANCSHARES, INC., a Pennsylvania corporation (the
Company), and VALLEY FORGE ASSET MANAGEMENT CORP., a Pennsylvania corporation, a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company (VFAM), on the one side, and BERNARD A. FRANCIS, JR., an adult individual (the
Employee), on the other side, is hereby amended as follows:

1. A new subparagraph 10.6(e) is added and shall read as follows:

(e) Notwithstanding the foregoing, if the imposition of a Code §4999 excise tax could be avoided by a reduction of the payments due to the
Employee (determined before the application of subparagraph 10.6(a)) by an amount of 10% or less, then the total of all such payments will be reduced to an amount one dollar ($1.00) below the amount that would cause a Code §4999 excise tax to
be imposed, and subparagraph 10.6(a) will not apply.

2. As so amended, said Employment Agreement is hereby ratified and confirmed.

IN WITNESS HEREOF, and intending to be legally bound, the parties have executed this Second Amendment on this 26th day of February, 2007.



|        |  |                    |  |  |  |                                     |  |                             |  | 
|------- |  | ------------------ |  |  |  | ----------------------------------- |  | --------------------------- |  | 
|        |  |                    |  |  |  | SUSQUEHANNA BANCSHARES, INC.        |  |                            
|        |  |                    |  |  | 
|Attest: |  | /s/ Lisa M. Cavage |  |  |  | By:                                 |  | /s/ Edward Balderston, Jr.  |  | 
|        |  | Secretary          |  |  |  |                                     |  |                             |  | 
|        |  |                    |  | 
|        |  |                    |  |  |  | VALLEY FORGE ASSET MANAGEMENT CORP. |  |                            
|        |  |                    |  |  | 
|Attest: |  | /s/ James Vogt     |  |  |  | By:                                 |  | /s/ Michael Swallow         |  | 
|        |  |                    |  |  |  |                                     |  | SVP, CFO & CCO              |  | 
|        |  |                    |  | 
|        |  |                    |  |  |  | EMPLOYEE                            |  |                            
|        |  |                    |  |  | 
|Attest: |  | /s/ James Vogt     |  |  |  | By:                                 |  | /s/ Bernard A. Francis, Jr. |  |
#### § 5.51 Construction of regulations.

The regulations in this part shall be construed so as to obtain a just, speedy, and economical determination of the issues presented.
# C_2013344EN.01002402.xml

| 23.11.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 344/24 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.11.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 344/24

---

Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 3 October 2013 — Bernhard Rintisch v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs), Bariatrix Europe Inc. SAS

(Case C-120/12 P) (1)

1

(Appeal - Community trade mark - Regulation (EC) No 40/94 - Article 74(2) - Regulation (EC) No 2868/95 - First and third subparagraphs of Rule 50(1) - Opposition by the proprietor of an earlier trade mark - Existence of the mark - Evidence submitted in support of the opposition after the expiry of the period set for that purpose - Failure to take account thereof - Discretion of the Board of Appeal - Provision to the contrary - Circumstances precluding additional or supplementary evidence from being taken into account)

2013/C 344/40

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Appellant: Bernhard Rintisch (represented by: A. Dreyer, Rechtsanwalt)

Appellant:

Other parties to the proceedings: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: G. Schneider, Agent), Bariatrix Europe Inc. SAS

Other parties to the proceedings:

Re:

Re:

Appeal brought against the judgment of the General Court (Seventh Chamber) of 16 December 2011 in Case T-62/09 Rintisch v OHIM by which the General Court dismissed an action for annulment brought by the proprietor of national word and figurative marks ‘PROTI’, ‘PROTIPOWER’ and ‘PROTIPLUS’ for goods in Classes 29 and 32, and the national trade name ‘PROTITOP’ for goods in Classes 29, 30 and 32, against decision R 740/2008-4 of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (OHIM) of 15 December 2008, dismissing the appeal against the decision of the Opposition Division rejecting the opposition filed by the applicant in respect of registration of the word mark ‘PROTI SNACK’ for goods in Classes 5, 29, 30 and 32 — Late submission of documents — Discretion conferred by Article 74(2) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Article 76(2) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)

Rintisch

OHIM

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the appeal; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the appeal;

| 2. | Orders Mr Bernhard Rintisch to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Mr Bernhard Rintisch to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 165, 9.6.2012.

1

---
10/112015 Matrice100-DJIIntelligent Fli{tlt Battery Functions- DJI Wiki 

# Matrice 100-DJI Intelligent Flight Battery Functions
FromDllWiki 

### 1. Battery Level Display: LEDs display the current battery level. 2. Battery Life Display: LEDs display the currentbattery life. 3. Auto-discharging Function: The battery automatically discharges to below 65% oftotal power when 

### itis left idle (pressing the powerbutton will cause the battery to exitidle state) for more than 10 days to prevent swelling. Ittakes about two days to discharge thebattery from 100% to 65%,and it is normal to feel moderate heat emitting from the battery during the discharge process. The discharge thresholds canbe adjusted in the Dll Pilot app. 4. Balanced Charging: Automatically balances the voltage ofeachbattery cell when charging. 

### 5. Overcharge Protection: Automatically stops charging the battery when it is fully charged. 6. Temperature Detection: Thebattery will only charge when its temperature is between 0°C (32°F)and 40°C (104°F). 7. Overcurrent Protection: Thebattery stops charging when the maximum current oflOA is exceeded. 8. Over-Discharge Protection: The battery stops discharging whenthe battery voltage reaches 18V to prevent damage from over-discharge. 9. Short Circuit Protection: Automatically cuts the power supply when a short circuit is detected. 10. Battery Cell Damage Detection: The DJI Pilot app shows a warning message ifa damagedbattery cell is detected. 11. Battery Log: Showthe last 32 entries ofbattery information including the warning messages. 12. Sleep Mode: The battery enters sleep mode after 10 minutes ofinactivity to save power. 13. Communication: Thebattery voltage, capacity, current, and otherrelevant information is sent to the flight controller. Note: Readthe Disclaimer and Safety Guidelines and Intelligent FlightBattery Safety Guidelines before use. Users take full responsibility for all operations andusage. Retrieved from "http://wiki.dji.com/en/index.php?title=Matrice _100- Dll _Intelligent_ Flight_ Battery _Functions&oldid=23197"
http://wiki.dji.com/eMrdex.phpiMatrice_100-DJI_Intelligent_Fii{tlt_Ballery_Functioos 1/21011/2015 Matrica 100-DJIIntelligant FligrtBattery Functioos- DJI Wiki
• This page was last modified on 19 July 2015, at 23:26. • This page has been accessed 245 times.

http://wiki .dji.oom/en/inclex.phptMatrice_100-DJI_Intell igent_Fiigrt_Battery_Functions 2/2
2:15-cr-20382-VAR-MKM Doc # 6 Filed 09/18/15 Pg 1 of 1 Pg ID 16
# C_2014093EN.01000501.xml

| 29.3.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 93/5 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

29.3.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 93/5

---

Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 13 February 2014 (requests for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale amministrativo regionale per il Lazio (Italy)) — Airport Shuttle Express scarl (C-162/12), Giovanni Panarisi (C-162/12), Società Cooperativa Autonoleggio Piccola arl (C-163/12) and Gianpaolo Vivani (C-163/12) v Comune di Grottaferrata

(Joined Cases C-162/12 and C-163/12) (1)

1

(Requests for a preliminary ruling - Articles 49 TFEU, 101 TFEU and 102 TFEU - Regulation (EEC) No 2454/92 - Regulation (EC) No 12/98 - Car and driver hire services - National and regional legislation - Authorisation issued by municipalities - Conditions - Purely internal situations - Jurisdiction of the Court - Whether the requests are admissible)

2014/C 93/07

Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Referring court

Tribunale amministrativo regionale per il Lazio

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicants: Airport Shuttle Express scarl (C-162/12), Giovanni Panarisi (C-162/12), Società Cooperativa Autonoleggio Piccola arl (C-163/12) and Gianpaolo Vivani (C-163/12)

Applicants:

Defendant: Comune di Grottaferrata

Defendant:

In the presence of: Federnoleggio

In the presence of:

Re:

Re:

Requests for a preliminary ruling — Tribunale amministrativo regionale del Lazio — Interpretation of Articles 26 TFEU, 49 TFEU and 90 TFEU; Article 3 TEU, read in conjunction with Article 4(3) TEU and Articles 3 TFEU, 4 TFEU, 5 TFEU and 6 TFEU; Articles 101 and 102 TFEU; Council Regulation (EEC) No 2454/92 of 23 July 1992 laying down the conditions under which non-resident carriers may operate national road passenger transport services within a Member State (OJ 1992 L 251, p. 1); and Council Regulation (EC) No 12/98 of 11 December 1997 laying down the conditions under which non-resident carriers may operate national road passenger transport services within a Member State (OJ 1998 L 4, p. 10) — Car and driver hire service — National legislation making the provision of that service conditional upon possession of an authorisation issued by the municipal authorities and requiring anyone holding such an authorisation to have the normal base for their vehicle(s) located in the territory of the municipality which issued the authorisation, and to begin and end the hire in that territory.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court of Justice of the European Union does not have jurisdiction to answer the requests from the Tribunale amministrativo regionale per il Lazio (Italy) for a preliminary ruling, made by decisions of 19 October 2011 and 1 December 2011 in Joined Cases C-162/12 and C-163/12, to the extent that those requests concern the interpretation of Article 49 TFEU. Those requests are inadmissible to the extent that they concern the interpretation of other provisions of EU law.

---

(1)  OJ C 165, 9.6.2012.

1

---
§ 32.50-35 Remote manual shutdown for internal combustion engine driven cargo pump on tank vessels—TB/ALL. ( a ) Any tank vessel which is equipped with an internal combustion engine driven cargo pump on the weather deck shall be provided with a minimum of one remote manual shutdown station, conspicuously marked, and located at the midpoint of such vessel, or 100 feet from the engine, whichever is the more practical. The remote quick acting manual shutdown shall be installed on the engine so as to provide a quick and effective means of stopping the engine (such as by cutting off the intake air).
( b ) This regulation applies to all installations of this type on tank vessels, but for such installations now on existing tankships at the date of next biennial inspection or October 1, 1963, whichever occurs later.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN 

SOUTHERN DIVISION 

RUSSEL DOTSON, PERSONAL 

REPRESENTATIVE OF THE 

ESTATE OF DONALD DOTSON, 

DECEASED, 

 Plaintiff, 

v. 

COUNTY OF LENAWEE, et al., 

 Defendants. 

 

Case No. 2:15-cv-11850 

District Judge Gerald E. Rosen 

Magistrate Judge Anthony P. Patti 

___________________________________/ 

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR QUALIFIED 

PROTECTIVE ORDER (DE 46) 

 Defendant filed a motion for qualified protective order and authorization 

pursuant to Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (“HIPAA”) on 

June 16, 2016. (DE 46.) On the same day, Judge Rosen referred the matter to me 

under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A). (DE 47.) Pursuant to the Eastern District of 

Michigan Local Rules, any response in opposition must have been filed within 14 

days after service of the motion. E.D. Mich. LR 7.1(e)(2)(B). Plaintiff’s response, 

therefore, was due on or before Friday, July 1, 2016. To date, no response has 

been filed. Accordingly, Defendants’ motion will be considered unopposed. 

 Plaintiff brings this action on behalf of Donald Dotson, who is deceased, 

pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging that Defendants deprived Donald Dotson of 

2:15-cv-11850-LJM-APP Doc # 49 Filed 07/14/16 Pg 1 of 2 Pg ID 279
2

his rights under the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States 

Constitution by failing to attend to his serious medical needs. (DE 1 at ¶¶ 19-34, 

39.) In the instant motion, Defendants seek a qualified protective order allowing 

them to conduct ex parte meetings with Plaintiff’s medical providers based on the 

nature of his claims that he was denied appropriate medical treatment. The Court 

has reviewed Defendants’ motion and the relevant case law, and agrees that a 

qualified protective order would be appropriate in this matter. Accordingly, 

Defendants’ motion is GRANTED as unopposed. (DE 46.) 

 IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: July 14, 2016 s/Anthony P. Patti 

 Anthony P. Patti 

 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 

I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing order was sent to parties of record on 

July 14, 2016, electronically and/or by U.S. Mail. 

 s/Michael Williams 

 Case Manager for the 

Honorable Anthony P. Patti 

 

2:15-cv-11850-LJM-APP Doc # 49 Filed 07/14/16 Pg 2 of 2 Pg ID 280
EXHIBIT 99.8
 CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
   
    
    our auditors report dated February 12, 2009 on the consolidated balance sheets of Cameco
Corporation (the Corporation) as at December 31, 2008 and 2007, and the consolidated
statements of earnings, shareholders equity, comprehensive income and cash flows for each of
the years in the 2-year period ended December 31, 2008,

    
    our Comments by Auditors for US Readers on Canada-US Reporting Differences, dated February
12, 2009,
    
    our auditors report on reconciliation to United States GAAP dated February 12, 2009, and

    
    our Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm dated February 12, 2009 on the
Corporations internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2008,
   /s/  KPMG LLP

Chartered AccountantsSaskatoon, Canada
EX-31.1

CERTIFICATION

I, Mel Wyman, certify that:

1.  I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Pop N Go, Inc.

2.  Based on my knowledge, this quarterly 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 quarterly
report;

3.  Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this quarterly 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 quarterly report;

4.  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 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 me by others within those entities, particularly during the
period in which this quarterly 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
quarterly report (the  "Evaluation Date"); and

        c)  presented in this quarterly report my conclusions about the
        effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on my
        evaluation as of the Evaluation Date;

5.  I have disclosed, my most recent evaluation, to the registrant's auditors
and the audit committee of the registrant's board of directors (or persons
performing the equivalent functions):

        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.  I have indicated in this quarterly report whether there were significant
changes in internal controls or in other factors that could significantly affect
internal controls subsequent to the date of my most recent evaluation, including
any corrective actions with regard to significant deficiencies and material
weaknesses.

Date: March 09, 2004

 /s/Mel Wyman
-------------
Mel Wyman
Chairman, and Chief Financial Officer
           (Principle Financial )
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

JEFFREY AARON,

Plaintiff,

Case No.: 15-11014

v.

HONORABLE VICTORIA A. ROBERTS

JACKIE DYER, et al.,

Defendant.

 /

ORDER:

1. GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT; AND

2. GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO DISMISS

Before the Court are Defendant Ryan’s motion for summary judgment (Doc. #28)

and Plaintiff’s motion to dismiss. (Doc. 29).

Defendant Ryan’s motion for summary judgment is GRANTED. Plaintiff concurs

in the motion.

Plaintiff’s Motion to Dismiss Defendants Hartnagel and Artis is GRANTED. 

Defendants concur in the motion.

Judgment will enter in favor of Ryan, Hartnagel and Atis, only.

The case continues against Defendants Dryer, Funches, Holden, and Cady.

IT IS ORDERED.

 /s/ Victoria A. Roberts 

Victoria A. Roberts

United States District Judge

Dated: November 12, 2015

1

2:15-cv-11014-VAR-DRG Doc # 33 Filed 11/12/15 Pg 1 of 2 Pg ID 455
The undersigned certifies that a copy of this

document was served on the attorneys of record

and Jeffery Aaron by electronic means or U.S.

Mail on November 12, 2015.

s/Linda Vertriest 

Deputy Clerk

2

2:15-cv-11014-VAR-DRG Doc # 33 Filed 11/12/15 Pg 2 of 2 Pg ID 456
# C_2012006EN.01002702.xml

| 7.1.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 6/27 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.1.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 6/27

---

Action brought on 24 October 2011 — ZZ v Commission

(Case F-112/11)

2012/C 6/51

Language of the case: French

Parties

Parties

Applicant: ZZ (represented by: C. Mourato, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Commission

Defendant:

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Application for annulment of the applicant’s salary statement for February 2011 and the salary statements for the following months applying the new correction coefficient for the town of Varese in accordance with Council Regulation (EU) No 1239/2010 of 20 December 2010.

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

| — | Annul the salary statement for February 2011 and the salary statements for the following months in that those statements apply a correction coefficient of 92.3 on the basis of Council Regulation (EC) No 1239/2010 of 20 December 2010, while preserving the effect of those statements until the adoption of fresh statements applying a lawful correction coefficient; |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the salary statement for February 2011 and the salary statements for the following months in that those statements apply a correction coefficient of 92.3 on the basis of Council Regulation (EC) No 1239/2010 of 20 December 2010, while preserving the effect of those statements until the adoption of fresh statements applying a lawful correction coefficient;

| — | Annul the decision of the appointing authority of 12 July 2011 providing a negative response to complaint 328/11 lodged by the applicant in so far as that decision refuses, inter alia, to grant the applicant access to detailed statistical data concerning economic parity between Brussels and Varese in respect of a number of basic headings, including electricity, gas, solid and liquid heating fuel, health and accommodation; |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the decision of the appointing authority of 12 July 2011 providing a negative response to complaint 328/11 lodged by the applicant in so far as that decision refuses, inter alia, to grant the applicant access to detailed statistical data concerning economic parity between Brussels and Varese in respect of a number of basic headings, including electricity, gas, solid and liquid heating fuel, health and accommodation;

| — | Order the Commission to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

Order the Commission to pay the costs.

---