alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EX 11.1


             CHESAPEAKE CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
       COMPUTATION OF NET INCOME PER SHARE OF COMMON STOCK
           for the three years ended December 31, 1998

           (Share amounts in thousands, dollar amounts
           in millions, except for per share amounts)

                                         1998     1997     1996
                                         ----      ----    ----
Basic:
   Weighted average number of common
     shares outstanding                21,202    23,149  23,528
                                       ======    ======  ======
   Income before extraordinary item    $ 34.0    $ 50.9 $ 30.1
   Extraordinary item                    13.3      (2.3)      -
                                       ------    ------  ------
     Net income                        $ 47.3    $ 48.6  $ 30.1
                                       ======    ======  ======
Per share amount:
   Earnings before extraordinary item  $ 1.60    $ 2.20  $ 1.28
   Extraordinary item                     .63     (.10)       -
                                       ------    ------  ------
                                       $ 2.23    $ 2.10  $ 1.28
                                       ======    ======  ======
Diluted:
   Weighted average number of common
     shares outstanding                21,203    23,149  23,528
   Net additional common shares
     issuable upon exercise of
     dilutive options, determined
     by treasury stock method using
     the average price                    365       211     117
                                       ------    ------  ------
   Common shares, equivalents, and
     other potentially dilutive
     securities                        21,568    23,360  23,645
                                       ======    ======  ======
   Income before extraordinary item    $ 34.0    $ 50.9  $ 30.1
   Extraordinary item                    13.3      (2.3)      -
                                       ------    ------  ------
     Net income                        $ 47.3    $ 48.6  $ 30.1
                                       ======    ======  ======
   Per share amount:
     Earnings before extraordinary
       item                            $ 1.57    $ 2.18  $ 1.27
     Extraordinary item                   .62     (.10)       -
                                       ------    ------  ------
     Earnings                          $ 2.19    $ 2.08  $ 1.27
                                       ======    ======  ======
Materials Not Included in

Airworthiness Directive (AD) Docket

Docket Number: FAA- 2012-1220

Directorate Identifier: 2012NM208AD

MOM 12-0838-01B(R1) --- 11/14/12

MOM 12-0838-01B --- 11/11/12

Name/Description of Item(s) Not Included in FDMS Docket and Maintained in the 

Supplemental AD Docket

MAY BE VIEWED AT: Federal Aviation Administration

Transport Airplane Directorate

Rules Docket

1601 Lind Ave. SW.,

Renton, WA 98057

425.227.1221

DURING THE HOURS OF: 9 a.m. and 3 p.m., Monday through Friday,

except Federal holidays.

Form Date: 03/05/2008
UN PUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 17
- 6512

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee ,

v. ANTONIO MCNEELY , Defendant

- Appellant

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland , at Baltimore

. Catherine C. Blake , Chief District Judge. ( 1:11

- cr
- 00114

- CCB

- 21 )

Submitted : August 24, 2017 Decided: August 29, 2017

Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and SHEDD and DIAZ , Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

.
Antonio McNeely, Appellant Pro Se. Benjamin M. Block, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Debra Lynn Dwyer, Assistant United States Attorney, Michael Clayton Hanlon, Assistant United States Attorney, Christopher M. Mason, Special Assistant United States Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Antonio McNeely appeals the district court’s order granting reconsideration of the court’s prior order denying McNeely ’s 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2012) motion and reducing McNeely’s sentence pursuant to Amendment 782 to the U.S. Sentencing
Guidelines Manual

. * We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order. See United States v. McNeely , No. 1:11

- cr
- 00114

- CCB

- 21 (D. Md. Mar. 23, 2017). We deny McNeely’s motion for the appointment of counsel. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before t he court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED

* Although the district court ultimately granted McNeely’s § 3582(c )(2) motion, the reduction granted by the court did not reduce McNeely’s sentence to the full extent he requested.
# EUR-Lex - 52004AP0387 - EN

Important legal notice

*|*

# 52004AP0387

**European Parliament decision on the nomination of Igors Ludboržs for the office of Member of the Court of Auditors (C5-0200/2004 — 2004/0809C(CNS)) **

*
Official Journal 085 E , 07/04/2005 P. 0052 - 0052 *

P5_TA(2004)0387

Appointment of Igors Ludboržs as a Member of the European Court of Auditors

European Parliament decision on the nomination of Igors Ludboržs for the office of Member of the Court of Auditors (C5-0200/2004 — 2004/0809C(CNS))

The European Parliament,

- having regard to Article 247(3) of the EC Treaty, and Article 160b(3) of the EAEC Treaty, pursuant to which the Council consulted Parliament (C5-0200/2004),

- whereas at its meeting on 6 April 2004 the Committee on Budgetary Control heard the Council's nominee for the office of Member of the Court of Auditors, and at its meeting on 3 May 2004 considered the nominee's qualifications in the light of the criteria laid down by Articles 45b of the ECSC Treaty, 247(2) of the EC Treaty and 160b of the EAEC Treaty,

- having regard to Rule 35 of its Rules of Procedure,

- having regard to the report of the Committee on Budgetary Control (A5-0283/2004),

1. Delivers a favourable opinion on the appointment of Igors Ludboržs as a Member of the Court of Auditors;

2. Instructs its President to forward this decision to the Council and, for information, to the Court of Auditors, the other institutions of the European Communities and the Audit Offices of the Member States.

--------------------------------------------------
§ 178.345-11 Tank outlets. ( a ) *General.* As used in this section, “loading/unloading outlet” means any opening in the cargo tank wall used for loading or unloading of lading, as distinguished from outlets such as manhole covers, vents, vapor recovery devices, and similar closures. Cargo tank outlets, closures and associated piping must be protected in accordance with § 178.345-8.
( b ) Each cargo tank loading/unloading outlet must be equipped with an internal self-closing stop-valve, or alternatively, with an external stop-valve located as close as practicable to the cargo tank wall. Each cargo tank loading/unloading outlet must be in accordance with the following provisions: ( 1 ) Each loading/unloading outlet must be fitted with a self-closing system capable of closing all such outlets in an emergency within 30 seconds of actuation. During normal operations the outlets may be closed manually. The self-closing system must be designed according to the following: ( i ) Each self-closing system must include a remotely actuated means of closure located more than 10 feet from the loading/unloading outlet where vehicle length allows, or on the end of the cargo tank farthest away from the loading/unloading outlet. The actuating mechanism must be corrosion-resistant and effective in all types of environment and weather.
( ii ) If the actuating system is accidentally damaged or sheared off during transportation, each loading/unloading outlet must remain securely closed and capable of retaining lading.
( iii ) When required by part 173 of this subchapter for materials which are flammable, pyrophoric, oxidizing, or Division 6.1 (poisonous liquid) materials, the remote means of closure must be capable of thermal activation. The means by which the self-closing system is thermally activated must be located as close as practicable to the primary loading/unloading connection and must actuate the system at a temperature not over 250 °F. In addition, outlets on these cargo tanks must be capable of being remotely closed manually or mechanically.
( 2 ) Bottom loading outlets which discharge lading into the cargo tank through fixed internal piping above the maximum liquid level of the cargo tank need not be equipped with a self-closing system.
( c ) Any loading/unloading outlet extending beyond an internal self-closing stop-valve, or beyond the innermost external stop-valve which is part of a self-closing system, must be fitted with another stop-valve or other leak-tight closure at the end of such connection.
( d ) Each cargo tank outlet that is not a loading/unloading outlet must be equipped with a stop-valve or other leak-tight closure located as close as practicable to the cargo tank outlet. Any connection extending beyond this closure must be fitted with another stop-valve or other leak-tight closure at the end of such connection.
[Amdt. 178-89, 56 FR 27877, June 17, 1991, as amended by Amdt. 178-97, 57 FR 45465, Oct. 1, 1992; Amdt. 178-118, 61 FR 51341, Oct. 1, 1996]
MEMORANDUM

DATE: August 7, 2013

SUBJECT: Omissions in the document titled “PLUME INTERCEPTION BY A STREAM 

AND CONTAMINANT CONCENTRATIONS AT RECEPTOR WELLS 

LOCATED DOWNGRADIENT FROM THE STREAM.”

FROM: Steve Souders

Materials Recovery and Waste Management Division

Office of Resource Conservation and Recovery

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

TO: Hazardous and Solid Waste Management System: Identification and Listing of 

Special Wastes; Disposal of Coal Combustion Residuals from Electric Utilities, 

Notice of Data Availability and Request for Comment Docket

Docket No. EPA-HQ-RCRA-2012-0028

Formulas intended to be in the document titled “PLUME INTERCEPTION BY A 

STREAM AND CONTAMINANT CONCENTRATIONS AT RECEPTOR WELLS LOCATED 

DOWNGRADIENT FROM THE STREAM,” (document ID EPA-HQ-RCRA-2012-0028-0005) 

do not appear in the document submitted to the docket. The attachment to this memorandum is 

the same document which includes the formulas.
-----Original Message----- 

From: rsodol57@aol.com [mailto:rsodol57@aol.com] 

Sent: Tuesday, April 27, 2010 8:47 PM 

To: EBSA, E-OHPSCA - EBSA 

Subject: Comment in support of RIN 1210-AB30 

April 27, 2010 

I am writing to support the interim final rule under the Paul Wellstone and 

Pete Domenici Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act of 2008 (RIN 

1210-AB30). 

I support the strong rule that would forbid insurance companies from charging 

higher copayments, deductibles, and other out-of-pocket expenses for mental 

health treatment than they would for other physical health care. Thank you 

for ensuring that mental health care and physical health care coverage are 

included in a single deductible. 

Sincerely, 

Ruthann Sodolski 

24 Alfred Lane, Apt. D 

Bloomfield, NJ 07003
-----Original Message----- 

From: topher@alum.mit.edu [mailto:topher@alum.mit.edu] 

Sent: Monday, April 26, 2010 10:16 AM 

To: EBSA, E-OHPSCA - EBSA 

Subject: Comment in support of RIN 1210-AB30 

April 26, 2010 

I am writing to support the interim final rule under the Paul Wellstone 

and Pete Domenici Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act of 2008 

(RIN 1210-AB30). 

I support the strong rule that would forbid insurance companies from 

charging higher copayments, deductibles, and other out-of-pocket 

expenses for mental health treatment than they would for other physical 

health care. Thank you for ensuring that mental health care and 

physical health care coverage are included in a single deductible. 

Sincerely, 

Topher Heigham 

82 Richfield Rd 

Arlington, MA 02474
```

[Journal of the House of Representatives, 1995]
[Wednesday, September 27, 1995 (121), Para 121.14 Subpoena]
[Page 1454]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]

para.121.14  subpoena

  The SPEAKER pro tempore, Mr. EVERETT, laid before the House a 
communication, which was read as follows:

                                         House of Representatives,

                                 Chief Administrative Officer,

                               Washington, DC, September 22, 1995.
     Re: Searcy et al. and U.S., ex rel. Bortner v. Philips 
         Electronics, et al.
     Hon. Newt Gingrich,
     Speaker, House of Representatives
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Mr. Speaker: This is to formally notify you pursuant 
     to Rule L (50) of the Rules of the House that my Office has 
     been served with a subpoena issued by the United States 
     District Court for the District of Columbia.
       After consultation with the General Counsel, I have 
     determined that compliance with the subpoena is consistent 
     with the privileges and precedents of the House.
           Sincerely,
                                                 Scot M. Faulkner,
                                     Chief Administrative Officer.
```
§ 218.25 Workers on a main track. When workers are on, under, or between rolling equipment on a main track: ( a ) A blue signal must be displayed at each end of the rolling equipment; and
( b ) If the rolling equipment to be protected includes one or more locomotives, a blue signal must be attached to the controlling locomotive at a location where it is readily visible to the engineman or operator at the controls of that locomotive.
( c ) When emergency repair work is to be done on, under, or between a locomotive or one or more cars coupled to a locomotive, and blue signals are not available, the engineman or operator must be notified and effective measures must be taken to protect the workers making the repairs.
[44 FR 2175, Jan. 10, 1979, as amended at 48 FR 6123, Feb. 10, 1983]
EXHIBIT 32.1

                           CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                 SECTIONS 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Repro-Med Systems, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending November 30, 2010 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report"), I,
Andrew I. Sealfon, Chief Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer of
the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge
and belief:

    (1) the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
        15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

    (2) the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
        respects, the financial condition and results

Date: January 14, 2011

/s/ Andrew I. Sealfon
Andrew I. Sealfon
Chief Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer
§ 199.7 Stand-down waivers. ( a ) Each operator who seeks a waiver under § 40.21 of this title from the stand-down restriction must submit an application for waiver in duplicate to the Associate Administrator for Pipeline Safety, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
( b ) Each application must— ( 1 ) Identify § 40.21 of this title as the rule from which the waiver is sought;
( 2 ) Explain why the waiver is requested and describe the employees to be covered by the waiver;
( 3 ) Contain the information required by § 40.21 of this title and any other information or arguments available to support the waiver requested; and
( 4 ) Unless good cause is shown in the application, be submitted at least 60 days before the proposed effective date of the waiver.
( c ) No public hearing or other proceeding is held directly on an application before its disposition under this section. If the Associate Administrator determines that the application contains adequate justification, he or she grants the waiver. If the Associate Administrator determines that the application does not justify granting the waiver, he or she denies the application. The Associate Administrator notifies each applicant of the decision to grant or deny an application.
[Amdt. 199-19, 66 FR 47118, Sept. 11, 2001, as amended at 70 FR 11140, Mar. 8, 2005; 74 FR 2894, Jan. 16, 2009]
###### Editorial Note on Part 190

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 190 appear at 78 FR 58908, Sept. 25, 2013.

#### § 190.311 General.

Unless the Administrator, for good cause, finds that notice is impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest, and incorporates that finding and a brief statement of the reasons for it in the rule, a notice of proposed rulemaking is issued and interested persons are invited to participate in the rulemaking proceedings with respect to each substantive rule.
```

[Journal of the House of Representatives, 1995]
[Wednesday, September 20, 1995 (118), Para 118.36 Public Bills and Resolutions]
[Page 1427]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]

para.118.36  public bills and resolutions

  Under clause 5 of rule X and clause 4 of rule XXII, public bills and 
resolutions were introduced and severally referred as follows:

           By Mr. DOOLITTLE (for himself, Mr. Stump, Mr. Bryant of 
             Tennessee, Mr. Hayworth, Mr. Boehner, Mr. Dornan, Mr. 
             Bartlett of Maryland, Mr. Skeen, Mr. Emerson, Mr. 
             Underwood, and Mr. Shadegg):
       H.R. 2367. A bill to amend the Clean Air Act to further 
     protect and enhance the public interest by ensuring an 
     orderly transition from chlorofluorocarbons [CFC's] and 
     halons to substitute compounds, and for other purposes; to 
     the Committee on Commerce, and in addition to the Committee 
     on Ways and Means, for a period to be subsequently determined 
     by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such 
     provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee 
     concerned.
           By Mr. LaFALCE:
       H.R. 2368. A bill to establish audit authority in the U.S. 
     General Accounting Office over the Niagara Falls Bridge 
     Commission; to the Committee on Transportation and 
     Infrastructure.
           By Mr. UNDERWOOD (for himself and Mr. Faleomavaega):
       H.R. 2369. A bill to provide for the development of the 
     fishery resource within the exclusive economic zone of the 
     insular areas of the United States, and for other purposes; 
     to the Committee on Resources.
           By Mr. STOCKMAN:
       H.J. Res. 107. Joint resolution proposing an amendment to 
     the Constitution of the United States regarding congressional 
     pay and pensions; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
           By Mr. PORTER (for himself, Mr. Lantos, Mr. Smith of 
             New Jersey, Mr. Hamilton, Mr. Hyde, and Mr. Hoyer):
       H. Con. Res. 102. Concurrent resolution concerning the 
     emancipation of the Iranian Baha'i community; to the 
     Committee on International Relations.
```
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-6728
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus HENRY CLIFFORD BYRD, SR., Defendant - Appellant.
No. 98-6828
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus HENRY CLIFFORD BYRD, SR., Defendant - Appellant.
No. 98-6935
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee,2 versus HENRY CLIFFORD BYRD, SR., Defendant - Appellant.Appeals from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Winston-Salem. Frank W. Bullock, Jr., Chief District Judge. (CR-83-52, CA-98-62-1, CA-97-1047-1) Submitted: August 27, 1998 Decided: September 17, 1998 Before NIEMEYER and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed in part and affirmed in part by unpublished per curiam opinion. Henry Clifford Byrd, Sr., Appellant Pro Se. Benjamin H. White, Jr., Assistant United States Attorney, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).3 PER CURIAM: In Nos. 98-6728 and 98-6828, Henry Clifford Byrd, Sr., appeals the district court’s orders dismissing without prejudice his motions filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West 1994 & Supp. 1998). In No. 98-6935, Byrd appeals from the district court’s order denying his “motion for due process.” Our review of the record and thedistrict court’s opinions discloses no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny certificates of appealability and dismiss in appealNos. 98-6728 and 98-6828, and affirm in no. 98-6935, on the reasoning of the district court. United States v. Byrd , Nos. CR-83-52; CA-97-1047-1; CA-98-62-1 (M.D.N.C. Apr. 24, May 28 & June 11, 1998). 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.

DISMISSED IN PART, AFFIRMED IN PART
DA 20-0340

STATE OF MONTANA, ex rel., TIM 

FOX,

 Plaintiff and Appellee,

 v.

PHILIP MORRIS, INC., et al.,

 Defendants and Appellants.

ORDER OF MEDIATOR APPOINTMENT

This appeal being subject to M.R.App.P. 7, and the parties having failed to jointly and timely select a 

mediator under M.R.App.P., 7(4),(c),

IT IS ORDERED THAT Annie M. Goodwin, P.O. Box 1131, Helena, MT 59624, (406)458-1199, 

anniegoodwinlaw@gmail.com, whose name appears next on the list of attorneys desiring appointment as 

mediators for Money Judgments appeals which is maintained pursuant to M.R.App.P., 7(4)(e), is hereby 

appointed to conduct the mediation process required by M.R.App.P., 7(5), and 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the time periods set forth in M.R.App.P., 7(5)(d) shall run from the 

date of this order of appointment.

A true copy of this order is being mailed to counsel of record for the parties, or to the parties 

individually if not represented by counsel, on the date hereof.

DATED this July 29, 2020.

Bowen Greenwood, Clerk of the Supreme Court

c: Sean M. Morris, Nicholas J. Lofing, Robert J. Phillips, Charles E. Hansberry, Jenny M. Jourdonnais, 

Christopher David Abbott, David Robert Paoli, Mark W. Mattioli, Anne Winfield Yates, Paul M. Leisher, W.

Scott Mitchell, John David Sullivan, Mark A. Loyd, A. Lauren Russow Nichols, Mark Baker, Alexander 

Shaknes, Elli Leibenstein, Thomas E. Dutton, Gregory E. Ostfeld, Robert J. Brookhiser, Carey Busen, Annie M. 

Goodwin

I

07/29/2020

Case Number: DA 20-0340