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

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET, AND THE RELATED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF INCOME
AND STOCKHOLDERS' EQUITY, AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                             651
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    3,711
<ALLOWANCES>                                        44
<INVENTORY>                                      5,934
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                12,246
<PP&E>                                           5,805
<DEPRECIATION>                                   3,294
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  21,956
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            9,381
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            21
<OTHER-SE>                                       9,513
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    21,956
<SALES>                                         16,223
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                16,223
<CGS>                                           14,623
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   17,075
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                  (238)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                (334)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   (730)
<INCOME-TAX>                                      (250)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               (480)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                      (480)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.070)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.070)
        

</TABLE>
No. 58287.

protest 224097-K (New York).

#### Lehmann Imports, Inc. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

At the trial it was stipulated that the merchandise, issues, and facts herein are similar in all material respects to those involved in *United States*v. *Browne Vintners Co., Inc.*(34 C. C. P. A. 112, C. A. D. 351) and that the one case of whisky reported by the inspector as manifested, not found, was not in fact received by the importer. In accordance with stipulation of counsel and following the decision cited it was held that duty and internal revenue tax are not assessable upon such portions of the merchandise as were reported by the inspector as manifested, not found. The protest was sustained to this extent.
#### Eddie Dean MEEKS, Petitioner-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Respondent-Appellee.

No. 01-6154.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted June 21, 2001.

Decided June 28, 2001.

Eddie Dean Meeks, pro se.

Before WIDENER and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit J.

PER CURIAM.

Eddie Dean Meeks seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (1994) petition. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. *Meeks v. United States,*No. CA-00-932-5-BR (E.D .N.C. Jan. 2, 2001). 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.*
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Small Business Administration

          - [Disaster Declaration #18147 and #18148; GEORGIA Disaster Number GA-00161]

# AGENCY:

U.S. Small Business Administration.

# ACTION:

Amendment 1.

# SUMMARY:

This is an amendment of the Presidential declaration of a major disaster for Public Assistance Only for the State of Georgia (FEMA-4738-DR), dated 09/09/2023.

*Incident:*                         Hurricane Idalia.                    

*Incident Period:*                         08/30/2023.                    

# DATES:

Issued on 10/02/2023.

*Physical Loan Application Deadline Date:*                         11/08/2023.                    

*Economic Injury (EIDL) Loan Application Deadline Date:*                         06/10/2024.                    

# ADDRESSES:

Submit completed loan applications to: U.S. Small Business Administration, Processing and Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport Road, Fort Worth, TX 76155.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Alan Escobar, Office of Disaster Recovery & Resilience, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street SW, Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416, (202) 205-6734.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The notice of the President's major disaster declaration for Private Non-Profit organizations in the State of Georgia, dated 09/09/2023, is hereby amended to include the following areas as adversely affected by the disaster.

*Primary Counties:*                     Burke, Montgomery, Toombs, Treutlen.                

All other information in the original declaration remains unchanged.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number 59008)

Francisco Sánchez, Jr.,

Associate Administrator, Office of Disaster Recovery & Resilience.

[FR Doc. 2023-22391 Filed 10-6-23; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8026-09-P
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING

MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

OF FLORIDA

SECOND DISTRICT

NATALIE WILLIAMSON, )

)

Appellant, )

)

v. ) Case No. 2D17-487

)

FRANKLIN WILLIAMSON, )

)

Appellee. )

)

Opinion filed August 24, 2018

Appeal pursuant to Fla. R. App. P. 9.130 

from the Circuit Court for Hillsborough 

County; Ralph C. Stoddard, Judge.

Natalie Williamson, pro se.

No appearance for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Dismissed as moot. 

LaROSE, C.J., and BLACK and SALARIO, JJ., Concur.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Ulises G. POMEL, also known as Ulises Pomiel-Garcia, also known as Ulises G. Pomiel-Garcia, Appellant.

No. 00-3193WM.

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.

Submitted June 27, 2001.

Filed July 13, 2001.

Before HANSEN, RICHARD S. ARNOLD, and BYE, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Ulises G. Pomel pleaded guilty to conspiring to distribute cocaine base, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) and (b)(l)(A)(iii), and possessing a firearm after having been convicted of a felony, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). At sentencing the District Court1 granted the government’s motion for a substantial-assistance departure, departing downward from Pomel’s Guidelines imprisonment range by approximately five years, and sentenced him to concurrent terms of sixteen years and eight months (200 months) imprisonment and five years supervised release on the drug charge and ten years (120 months) imprisonment and three years supervised release on the firearm charge. On appeal, counsel has filed a brief and moved to withdraw pursuant to *Anders v. California,*386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), challenging only the extent of the Court’s departure. Although we granted Pomel permission to file a pro se supplemental brief, he has not done so.

The extent of the District Court’s departure is unreviewable. See *United States v. Dutcher, 8*F.3d 11, 12 (8th Cir.1993). Additionally, we have reviewed the record pursuant to *Penson v. Ohio,*488 U.S. 75, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), and have found no non-frivolous issues.

Accordingly, we grant counsel’s motion and affirm.

1

. The Honorable Gary A. Fenner, United States District Judge for the Western District of Missouri.
From: "Latimer, Gary" <Gary.Latimer@carotek.com> To: 'Dan - Tam Nguyen' <Dan - Tam.Nguyen@erg.com> CC: "McIntosh, Damon" <damon.mcintosh@carotek.com> Date: 7/8/2011 10:43 AM Subject: Waste water Heat Exchangers Attachments: Wasterwater100GPM.rtf; Wasterwater500GPM.rtf; Wastewater1500GPM.rtf Dan - Tam, Per ITT, They believe 20,000 mg/l(ppm) to be extremely high for SS, especially since the plates are usually .019" thick. Chlo rides in high concentrations will attack SS or lea d to stress cracking. We have made some selections for you. Please note that we have made some assumptions (10 psi pressure drop, cooling water at 75% of wastewater flow). So consider this budget especially since you have assumed th e water temp. Below are Titanium plates/ titanium connections. Since there are unknowns, we have assumed water/water properties and have included 10% excess surface area. Eventually, you may not consider excess surface area as plates may always be added at a later date. 100 GP M Model P14 - 25 - TMTL - 42 - $ 5,000.00 500 GPM Model P21 - 85 - TM - $ 11,000.00 1500 GPM - Model P65 - 93 - TK - $ 26,000.00** ** In lieu of 75% cooling water rate - 1125 GPM cooling water), we tried 60% or 900 GPM cooling water - the appx net adder would b e appx 18%. Thus, the above budget may increase or decrease dependent upon cooling water rate and/or pressure drop allowed. Titanium plates may take up to 20 weeks depending upon model. Thanks, Gary Latimer - Applications Specialist [cid:image001.png@01CC3D5A.B1730D40]<http://www.carotek.com/> 700 Sam Newell Road, PO Box 1395, Matthews, NC 28106 Email: gary.latimer@carotek.com | http://www.carotek.com Office: 704 - 844 - 1100 | Fax: 704 - 844 - 8432
RESPONDED ON NOVEMBER 30, 2009 7:33 AM 

### Rep. John L. 

### Mica, R-Fla., Ranking Member, House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure

IfSecretary LaHood's Federal Advisory Committee is to be effective, here are five issues I believe mustbe considered: 1.)Aviationis a globalindustry. According to a June 2009 Oxford Economics report, a total of2.5 billion passengers are flown worldwide annually; as of200735% of the value oftrade in manufactured goods was transportedby air; and over 5.5 million workers are employed directly in the industryworldwide. Efforts to restrain globalization by limiting investment and puttingbilateral agreements at risk representbackwards thinking. What we need is a forward-thinking, globally-oriented approach. We must come to terms with the fact thatthis is a global industry. 2.) The needto pass an FAAreauthorizationthatincludesthe right level of regulatoryoversight. Since deregulation the aviation industry hasbecome more and more regulated everyyear. Certainlythe federal government has an absolute responsibility to oversee the safety ofthe industry. However, regulatory mandates and security directives mustbe carefully considered andthe right balance must be found between safety oversight and costly and unnecessary government intervention. 3.) Competition is good for the consumer. While this is often stated, it isjust as often undermined. Prior to deregulation, the federal government regulated all aspects of the airline industry, including the number ofair carriers, routes flown, and airfares. Therefore, prices were high and very few people could afford to fly. Since deregulation, new carriers have entered the market, new routes and communities are being served, and ticket prices have decreased drastically. Unfortunately, there are a number oflaws thatprevent the market from working. Airlines in other parts ofthe world are able to make a profit, butinthe United States investment and consolidation are severely limited. This is not a healthy situation. 4.) NextGen is not the sole answerto the aviation industry'S woes. The FAA is forecasting a 27% increase in domestic flights and a 70% growth in international operations by 2016. Ifair traffic grows as forecasted, delays in the U.S. will increase 62% between 2004 and 2014. Modernizing air traffic control will allow more airplanes in the sky, butifairport congestion is not addressed and alternate transportation systemsdeveloped we will achieve nothing. After years ofwork, we are no closer to understanding what "NextGen" will be able to achieve when completed. To address these issues, we need a national transportation strategythatlooks atthe transportation system as a whole. We also need someone in charge and with authority to meet specific milestones and make key NextGen decisions. 5.) Go backto the basics.Aviation is a service-based industry. Airlines need to be able to adaptto markets and profitable business models.
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

ORDER - 1 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT SEATTLE

DR. MAURICIO LEON.,

Plaintiff,

v.

IDX SYSTEMS CORP., 

Defendant.

No. C02-2263MJP

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S

MOTION FOR STAY

The Court having jurisdiction over the subject matter and the parties and having considered

the Plaintiffs’ Motion for Stay of Proceedings (Dkt., No. 31), Defendant’s Response and Plaintiff’s

Reply, as well as having considered oral argument in this matter, the Court has decided to DENY

Plaintiff’s Motion to Stay Proceedings. The parties are directed to submit their Joint Status Report

on October 24, 2005, as previously directed by the Court.

The Clerk of the Court shall direct a copy of this order be sent to all counsel of record.

Dated: October 11th , 2005.

A

Marsha J. Pechman

United States District Judge

Case 2:02-cv-02263-MJP Document 45 Filed 10/11/05 Page 1 of 1
No. 57480.

#### Ferry-Morse Seed Co. and Hoyt, Shepston *&*Sciaroni et al. *v.*United States,

protests 203020-K, etc. (San Francisco).

Opinion by

Ekwall, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of bird’s-foot trefoil seed *(Lotus corniculatus)*similar in all material respects to that the subject of *Transcontinental Seed, Inc. (Alltransport, Incorporated)*v. *United States*(29 Cust. Ct. 163, C. D. 1462), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
EX-34.7
(logo) PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS


PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
350 S. Grand Ave.
Los Angeles CA 90071
Telephone (213) 356 6000
Facsimile (813) 637 4444
www.pwc.com


Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm


To the Board of Directors
Newport Management Corporation:

We have examined management's assertion, included in the accompanying
Management's Report on Assessment of Compliance with Applicable Servicing
Criteria, that Newport Management Corporation (the Company) complied with the
servicing criteria set forth in Item 1122(d)(4)(xi) of the Securities and
Exchange Commission's Regulation AB for the pools of loans which Aurora Loan
Services, LLC acted as the servicer pursuant to the applicable transaction
agreements, underlying publicly and/or privately-issued residential
mortgage-backed securities that were issued on or after January 1, 2006, on
which escrow payments were disbursed in 2008 (the Platform), as of December 31,
2008 and for the year then ended. The Company has determined that the remainder
of the servicing criteria is not applicable to the activities it performs with
respect to the Platform as of and for the year ended December 31, 2008. Schedule
A to management's assertion identifies the individual asset-backed transactions
and securities defined by management as constituting the Platform. Management is
responsible for the Company's compliance with the servicing criteria. Our
responsibility is to express an opinion on management's assertion based on our
examination.

Our examination was conducted in accordance with standards of the Public Company
Accounting Oversight Board (United States) and, accordingly, included examining,
on a test basis, evidence about the Company's compliance with the applicable
servicing criteria and performing such other procedures as we considered
necessary in the circumstances. Our examination included testing of selected
asset-backed transactions and securities that comprise the Platform, testing of
selected servicing activities related to the Platform, and determining whether
the Company processed those selected transactions and performed those selected
activities in compliance with the applicable servicing criteria. Our procedures
were limited to the selected transactions and servicing activities performed by
the Company during the period covered by this report. Our procedures were not
designed to detect noncompliance arising from errors that may have occurred
prior to or subsequent to our tests that may have affected the balances or
amounts calculated or reported by the Company during the period covered by this
report. We believe that our examination provides a reasonable basis for our
opinion. Our examination does not provide a legal determination on the Company's
compliance with the servicing criteria.

In our opinion, management's assertion that the Company complied with the
aforementioned applicable servicing criteria as of and for the year ended
December 31, 2008 for the Platform is fairly stated, in all material respects.


/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
February 26, 2009
# C_2018436EN.01004001.xml

| 3.12.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 436/40 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

3.12.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 436/40

---

Judgment of the General Court of 16 October 2018 — Proof IT v EIGE

(Case T-10/17) (1)

((Public service contracts - Tender procedure - Request for services that were split into two lots - Website services - Rejection of the tender submitted by a tenderer - Award criteria - Transparency - Equal treatment - Manifest error of assessment - Non-contractual liability))

(2018/C 436/55)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Proof IT SIA (Riga, Latvia) (represented by: J. Jerņeva and D. Pāvila, lawyers)

Defendant: European Institute for Gender Equality (represented by: J. Stuyck, V. Ost and M. Vanderstraeten, lawyers)

Re:

Application, first, under Article 263 TFEU for annulment of EIGE’s decision rejecting the tender submitted by the applicant in the context of Lot 1 relating to invitation to tender EIGE/2016/OPER/03 entitled ‘Framework contract for online services’, and awarding the framework contract to another tenderer, and, second, under Article 268 TFEU seeking compensation for the damage allegedly suffered by the applicant on account of loss of opportunity or loss of the contract itself.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Proof IT SIA to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Proof IT SIA to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 78, 13.3.2017.

---
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
UNAUDITED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE PERIOD ENDED JUNE 30, 2000 THAT WERE
FILED WITH THE COMPANY'S REPORT ON FORM 10-QSB AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY
BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1
<CURRENCY> US DOLLARS

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JUN-30-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                  1.000
<CASH>                                          13,517
<SECURITIES>                                   239,643
<RECEIVABLES>                                   30,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                43,517
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               2,383,160
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        2,737,066
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                        330
<COMMON>                                        63,986
<OTHER-SE>                                 (3,808,906)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 2,383,160
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             1,440,928
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              39,394
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (856,894)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (856,894)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (856,894)
<EPS-BASIC>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
# Official Journal L 45/15 F

| | ISSN 1725-2555 |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | L 45 |
| | |
| English edition | Legislation | Volume 4915 February 2006 |

ISSN 1725-2555

Official Journal

of the European Union

L 45

English edition

Legislation

Volume 4915 February 2006

---

| Contents | | II   Acts whose publication is not obligatory | page |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | Commission |
| | * | Decision No 3/2005 of the EC-Switzerland Joint Committee of 15 December 2005 amending Protocol 3 to the Agreement, concerning the definition of the concept of ‘originating products’ and methods of administrative cooperation | 1 |

Contents

II   Acts whose publication is not obligatory

page

Commission

*

Decision No 3/2005 of the EC-Switzerland Joint Committee of 15 December 2005 amending Protocol 3 to the Agreement, concerning the definition of the concept of ‘originating products’ and methods of administrative cooperation

1

| EN | Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.
  The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk. |
| --- | --- |

EN

Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.

The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk.