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

<ARTICLE> 9
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                                   <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                               9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                     DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                          SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                     16,851
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                          0
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                            6,049
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>               240,541
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                          0
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                            0
<LOANS>                                   388,277
<ALLOWANCE>                                 3,999
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                            685,962
<DEPOSITS>                                492,826
<SHORT-TERM>                              138,572
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                         6,290
<LONG-TERM>                                     0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                           0
<PREFERRED>                                     0
<COMMON>                                       16
<OTHER-SE>                                 48,258
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>            685,962
<INTEREST-LOAN>                            21,880
<INTEREST-INVEST>                          13,124
<INTEREST-OTHER>                              795
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                           35,799
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                         14,009
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                         21,008
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                      14,791
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                 256
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                             77
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                            14,014
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             3,451
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                  2,309
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                 0
<CHANGES>                                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                2,309
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                1.38
<EPS-DILUTED>                                1.38
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                               7.74
<LOANS-NON>                                 2,662
<LOANS-PAST>                                  348
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                 0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                            3,696
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                 399
<RECOVERIES>                                  446
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                           3,999
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                        3,999
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                             0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                         0
        

</TABLE>
IN I T I A L REV I EW ENG I N EER I NG REPORT PMN : 15 - 0502 Focus Ready Draft 6/22/2015 ENG I N EER : Macek \ 

# -SAT (conce r ns) Re l ated Ana l ogs : 

# • (06/ 1 2/20 1 5) : M

i gra ti on t o groundwater : Neg l ig i ble P BT rat i ng : P3 B 1 T 1 Degradat i on produ ct : H ea l t h 2 , P 3B 1 T2 . H

ea l t h : 1 - 2 Derma l, Dr i nking Water, I nhalat i o n, XB T es t ing (Testi n g des i red) E co : 1 No r e l eases to waterOCCUPATI ONAL EXPOSURE RATING : l C NO TES & K E Y



# •IN I T I A L REV I EW ENG I N EERI NG REPOR T PMN : 15 - 0502 

# ·- -· -

# -IN I T I A L REV I EW ENG I N EERI NG REPOR T PMN : 15 - 0502 

# ·- -· -

# -IN I T I A L REV I EW ENG I N EERI NG REPOR T PMN : 15 - 0502



# -- -

# -
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-7781

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus RAYMOND STEPHEN FRANKLIN, Defendant - Appellant.Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Winston-Salem. Frank W. Bullock, Jr., Chief District Judge. (CR-93-74, CA-98-155-1) Submitted: May 13, 1999 Decided: May 19, 1999Before WIDENER and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Raymond Stephen Franklin, 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).2 PER CURIAM: Raymond Stephen Franklin seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West 1994 & Supp. 1998). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistratejudge and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. See United States v. Franklin , Nos. CR-93-74;CA-98-155-1 (M.D.N.C. Oct. 8, 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
<PAGE>

                                                       EXHIBIT 10(l)

Richard H. Brown
Chairman of the Board and
Chief Executive Officer



February 22, 1999


Mr. James E. Daley

Dear Jim:

It is my pleasure to extend to you an offer of employment with EDS (the
"Company"), upon the terms set forth in the attached term sheet. This offer will
remain open for your acceptance no later than 11 a.m., Eastern time, February
23, 1999. Please signify your acceptance of such employment by signing as
indicated below and return to my office. It is planned for your employment to
commence on March 8, 1999. This letter agreement may be executed in
counterparts.

Jim, I am very pleased and proud to have you join our senior executive team.
Please contact me with any questions.  If I am unavailable, please contact Jay
Salem, our Director of Global Human Resources Administration, at (972) 605-7337.



     /S/ RICHARD H. BROWN
     --------------------
     Richard H. Brown
     Chairman of the Board
     Chief Executive Officer


Accepted by:  /S/ JAMES E. DALEY      Date:  2/23/99
              ------------------             -------
                James E. Daley
<PAGE>

             Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer

                           Hiring Package Valuation

                             At Current Cash Value
                               ($ in thousands)



Base                               $  500

Bonus at Target                    $  400

Additional Pension Benefits
(lump sum value at age 63)

Signing Bonus
     Cash                          $  150

     Stock Options                 $3,833
     (b/s value/250,000 shares)
     (1/3 share price)

     Restricted Stock Units        $1,150
     (FMV/25,000 shares)
     ($46 per share)
<PAGE>

             Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer

                           Hiring Package Valuation

                             At Current Cash Value
                               ($ in thousands)


Base                                     $  500

Bonus at Target                          $  400

Pension Benefit After 5-Years            $2,200*
(includes SERP and qualified plan)
(estimated lump sum value at age 63)

Signing Bonus
     Cash                                $  150

     Stock Options                       $3,833
     (b/s value/250,000 shares)
     (15.33 share price)

     Restricted Stock Units              $1,150
     (FMV/25,000 shares)
     ($46 per share)


TOTAL                                    $8,233

* Estimated lump sum value at age 63: $200,000 annual for life commencing at age
63 with 22 year life expectancy.
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

_______________

N

o

 00-20992

_______________

JOHN M. O’QUINN; JULIE O’QUINN;

JOHN O’QUINN, P.C., A TEXAS PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION;

LORI HINTON, INDEPENDENT EXECUTRIX OF THE ESTATE OF ROBERT HINTON;

HINTON & COX; CARL D. SHAW; DEBORA HUSID; DENNIS REICH; CINDY REICH;

REICH & BINSTOCK, A TEXAS PARTNERSHIP;

STEPHANIE SHAPIRO, A SINGLE WOMAN;

SHAPIRO & WATSON, A TEXAS PARTNERSHIP,

Plaintiffs-Appellees,

VERSUS

WALTER L. HARVEY; DELORES HARVEY,

Defendants-Appellants.

_________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

m H-99-CV-1959

_________________________

November 27, 2001
2

Before SMITH and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit

Judges, and CUMMINGS, District Judge.*

PER CURIAM:**

The defendants, Walter L. Harvey and Dolores Harvey, contend on appeal that the district court, sitting in Texas, erred in (1) refusing to dismiss or stay the action there pending resolution by a district court in Arizona

(and now by the Ninth Circuit) of defendants’

motion to vacate the arbitration award

confirmed by the Texas court; (2) granting

summary judgment confirming the arbitration

award; (3) finding that the arbitration

agreement provided for a mandatory forum

selection clause; and (4) utilizing information

outside the record. We have reviewed the

briefs and applicable portions ofthe record and

have heard the arguments of counsel. 

We see no reversible error, so the summary

judgment is AFFIRMED, primarilyfor the reasons given by the district court in its comprehensive order entered on September 22, 2000.

As that court convincingly noted, defendants

had agreed to arbitrate in Texas and did not

object, in the Texas court, to the arbitration

award. There is no injustice in this case; the

parties got essentiallywhat they had bargained

for.

* District Judge of the Northern District of Texas,

sitting by designation.

** Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has

determined that this opinion should not be published

and is not precedent except under the limited

circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.
**Exhibit  32.1**

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Par Pharmaceutical Companies, Inc. (the “Company”) for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Patrick G. LePore, Chairman, President and Chief Executive 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 my knowledge:

(1)

The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) 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 result of operations of the Company.

*This certification accompanies the Report and shall not be deemed filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission and shall not be incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company under the Securities Act of 1933 or Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (whether made before or after the date of the Report), irrespective of any general incorporation language contained in such filing.*

/s/ Patrick G. LePore

Patrick G. LePore

Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer

August 4, 2010
# L_2022030EN.01011501.xml

| 11.2.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 30/115 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

11.2.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 30/115

---

COUNCIL IMPLEMENTING DECISION (CFSP) 2022/189

of 10 February 2022

implementing Decision (CFSP) 2015/1333 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Libya

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on European Union, and in particular Article 31(2) thereof,

Having regard to Council Decision (CFSP) 2015/1333 of 31 July 2015 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Libya, and repealing Decision 2011/137/CFSP (1), and in particular Article 12(1) thereof,

Having regard to the proposal from the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy,

Whereas:

| (1) | On 31 July 2015, the Council adopted Decision (CFSP) 2015/1333. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

On 31 July 2015, the Council adopted Decision (CFSP) 2015/1333.

| (2) | On 28 January 2022, the United Nations Security Council (‘UNSC’) Committee established pursuant to UNSC Resolution 1970 (2011) amended the listing for one person subject to restrictive measures. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

On 28 January 2022, the United Nations Security Council (‘UNSC’) Committee established pursuant to UNSC Resolution 1970 (2011) amended the listing for one person subject to restrictive measures.

| (3) | Annexes I and III to Decision (CFSP) 2015/1333 should therefore be amended accordingly, |
| --- | --- |

(3)

Annexes I and III to Decision (CFSP) 2015/1333 should therefore be amended accordingly,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

Annexes I and III to Decision (CFSP) 2015/1333 are hereby amended as set out in the Annex to this Decision.

Article 2

This Decision shall enter into force on the day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.

Done at Brussels, 10 February 2022.

For the Council

The President

J.-Y. LE DRIAN

---

(1)  
  OJ L 206, 1.8.2015, p. 34.

1

---

ANNEX

In Annex I and Annex III to Decision (CFSP) 2015/1333, entry 15 is replaced by the following:

‘15.   Name: 1: SAADI 2: QADHAFI 3: na 4: na

Title: na Designation: Commander Special Forces DOB: a)
  27 May 1973
  b)
  1 Jan. 1975
  POB: Tripoli, Libya Good quality a.k.a.: na Low quality a.k.a.: na Nationality: na Passport no: a) 014797 b) 524521 c) Libya number AA862825, issued on 19 May 2021, issued in Tripoli (expires 18 May 2029) National identification no: na Address: Libya (in custody) Listed on:
  26 Feb. 2011 (amended on 28 Jan. 2022, 26 Mar. 2015, 2 Apr. 2012, 14 Mar. 2012) Other information: Listed pursuant to paragraph 15 of resolution 1970 (Travel Ban). Listed on 17 March 2011 pursuant to paragraph 17 of resolution 1970 (Asset Freeze).’

---
(Reap. Dec. 10848)

#### Elof Hansson, Inc. *v.*United States

Entry No. 840095, etc.

(Decided November 10, 1964)

*Sharp & Bogan*for the plaintiff:.

*John W. Douglas,*Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Rao, Judge:

The appeals for reappraisement listed in schedule A, annexed to this decision and made a part hereof, have been submitted for decision upon the following stipulation:

> IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by the undersigned, subject to the approval of the Court:

> 1. That the subject merchandise consists of hardboard exported from Sweden as to which the Secretary of the Treasury issued a finding of dumping, published in 89 TD 197, TD 53567, made pursuant to the Antidumping Act of 1921 (19 U.S.C., 160, et seq.).

> 2. That pursuant to Section 168 of said Antidumping Act, the appraiser reported the purchase price (Sec. 162) and the foreign market value (Sec. 164) as to the merchandise listed on Schedule A attached hereto and made a part hereof.

> 3. That pursuant to Sections 500 and 402 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, the appraiser appraised all of the merchandise in the appeals for appraisement enumerated on Schedule A for regular duty purposes.

> 4. That the plaintiff duly filed appeals for reappraisement as to the values referred to in the above paragraphs Nos. 2 and 3.

> 5. That at the times relevant herein the purchase price and the foreign market value under the said Antidumping Act are as specified in the aforesaid Schedule A attached hereto.

> 6. That as to all other items of merchandise not identified on Schedule A, the appraiser’s reports of purchase price and of foreign market value are correct.

> 7. That the appraiser’s findings of value under the provisions of Section 402 of the Tariff Act of 1930 as amended, are correct.

> 8. That said appeals are submitted for decision upon this stipulation and said Schedule A.

Upon the agreed facts, I find foreign market value, as defined in section 164 of the Antidumping Act of 1921 (19 U.S.C. § 164), for the merchandise described in said schedule A, and the purchase price thereof, within section 162 of said act (19 U.S.C. §162), to be as indicated in said schedule. As to all other items of merchandise not identified in schedule A, I find the foreign market values and purchase prices to be as reported by the appraiser. In all other respects, the values of all merchandise are as returned by the appraiser.

Judgment will be entered accordingly.
EXHIBIT 31.1 - SECTION 302 CERTIFICATION

                             CERTIFICATION

I, Kenneth A. McCullum, certify that:

1.   I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K and all reports on Form
     8-K required to be filed in respect of the period covered by this
     report on Form 10-K of Hartford Life Global Funding Trust 2005-078
     (the "Exchange Act periodic reports");

2.   Based on my knowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as a
     whole, do not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit
     to state a material fact necessary in order 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 report;

3.   Based on my knowledge, all of the distribution, servicing and other
     information required to be provided under Form 8-K for the period
     covered by this report is included in the Exchange Act periodic
     reports;

4.   Based on my knowledge and the servicer compliance statement required
     in this report under Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as
     disclosed in the Exchange Act periodic reports, the servicer has
     fulfilled its obligations under the servicing agreement in all material
     respects;

5.   All of the reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria
     for asset-backed securities and their related attestation reports on
     assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed
     securities required to be included in this report in accordance with
     Item 1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange Act Rule 13a-18 and 15d-18 have
     been included as an exhibit to this report, except as otherwise
     disclosed in this report. Any material instances of noncompliance
     described in such reports have been disclosed in this report on Form
     10-K.

In giving the certification above, I have reasonably relied on information
provided to me by the following unaffiliated parties:

            JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A. and its officers and agents

Date:  August 29, 2006


/s/ Kenneth A. McCullum


Kenneth A. McCullum
Senior Vice President & Actuary
Hartford Life Insurance Company, as depositor
# L_2022156EN.01016101.xml

| 9.6.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 156/161 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

9.6.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 156/161

---

Corrigendum to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021/2325 of 16 December 2021 establishing, pursuant to Regulation (EU) 2018/848 of the European Parliament and of the Council, the list of third countries and the list of control authorities and control bodies that have been recognised under Article 33(2) and (3) of Council Regulation (EC) No 834/2007 for the purpose of importing organic products into the Union

(
  Official Journal of the European Union L 465 of 29 December 2021
  )

On pages 30 and 31, in Annex II, point 3 of the entry for ‘A CERT European Organization for Certification S.A.’, in all rows of column ‘F’ under ‘Category of products’ of the table:

A CERT European Organization for Certification S.A.

for:

‘
  ’,

read:

‘—’.

On page 38, in Annex II, point 3 of the entry for ‘Bioagricert s.r.l.’
  , in the row regarding Cameroon of column ‘F’ under ‘Category of products’ of the table:

Bioagricert s.r.l.’

for:

‘
  ’,

read:

‘—’.

On page 41, in Annex II, point 3 of the entry for ‘Bio.inspecta AG’
  , in the row regarding Azerbaijan of column ‘B’ under ‘Category of products’ and in the row regarding Thailand of the column ‘F’ under ‘Category of products’ of the table:

Bio.inspecta AG’

for:

‘
  ’,

read:

‘—’.

On page 59, in Annex II, point 5 of the entry for ‘Ecocert SA’:

Ecocert SA

for:

‘Duration of inclusion: until 30 June 2024
  ’,

read:

‘Duration of inclusion: until 31 December 2024
  ’.

On page 71, in Annex II, point 3 of the entry for ‘LACON GmbH’
  , regarding the digits in the code number in the row for Iran of the first column of the table

LACON GmbH’

for:

‘161’,

read:

‘134’.

On page 79, in Annex II, point 3 of the entry for ‘Organización Internacional Agropecuaria’
  , in the row regarding China of the columns ‘B’, ‘C’, ‘E’ and ‘F’ under ‘Category of products’ of the table:

Organización Internacional Agropecuaria’

for:

‘
  ’,

read:

‘—’.

On page 81, in Annex II, point 3 of the entry for ‘ORSER’
  , in the rows regarding Moldova, Serbia, Russia, Ukraine and Uzbekistan of the column ‘B’ under ‘Category of products’ of the table:

ORSER’

for:

‘
  ’,

read:

‘—’.

On page 85, in Annex II, point 3 of the entry for ‘SRS Certification GmbH’, regarding the digits in the code number in the row for Cameroon of the first column of the table:

SRS Certification GmbH

for:

‘154’,

read:

‘195’.

On page 87, in Annex II, point 3 of the entry for ‘TÜV Nord Integra’
  , in the row regarding Gambia of the columns ‘B’, ‘C’, ‘E’ and ‘F’ under ‘Category of products’ of the table:

TÜV Nord Integra’

for:

‘
  ’,

read:

‘—’.

---
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

1

Pursuant to Rules 26(a)(1)(E)(iii) and 26(f) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, no

conference of parties is required in this matter because Plaintiff, an inmate in state custody, brings

this action pro se. 

ORDER DENYING MOTION TO COMPEL

PARTICIPATION IN DISCOVERY 

Page - 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT SEATTLE

PATRICK L. GUILLLORY, )

)

Plaintiff, ) CASE NO. C06-747-MJP-MJB

)

v. )

)

SNOHOMISH COUNTY JAIL, et al., ) ORDER DENYING MOTION

) TO COMPEL PARTICIPATION

Defendants. ) IN DISCOVERY

_________________________________ )

This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiff’s motion for the court to compel

Defendants’ attorney to participate in discovery and be included in conferences1

. 

Having reviewed Plaintiff’s motion, Defendants’ response thereto, and the balance of the

record, the Court hereby finds and ORDERS:

(1) Plaintiff’s motion for order compelling participation in discovery (Dkt.

#32) is DENIED. When Plaintiff filed this motion on December 15, 2006, it was

premature in that his prior motion for request for admissions from defendants, which this

Court construed as interrogatories to parties, had just been served by mail to Defendants

on December 5, 2006 (see Dkt. #31), and, under Fed. R. Civ. P. 33(b)(3), the answers to
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 DENYING MOTION TO COMPEL

PARTICIPATION IN DISCOVERY 

Page - 2

those interrogatories were due within 30 days after the service, i.e. by January 4, 2007. 

To date, only one of the four defendants to whom Plaintiff’s interrogatories were

directed has timely filed his answers and objections. (Dkt. #41). However, a motion for

order compelling discovery “must include a certification that the movant has in good

faith conferred or attempted to confer with the party not making the disclosure in an

effort to secure the disclosure without court action.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(a)(2)(B). 

Plaintiff’s current motion to compel defendants participation in discovery is deficient

because it does not contain any certification that Plaintiff has conferred or attempted to

confer with the three defendants who have not responded to his interrogatories.

(2) The Clerk shall send copies of this Order to Plaintiff, to all counsel of

record, and to the Honorable Marsha J. Pechman.

DATED this 10th day of January, 2007.

AMONICA J. BENTON

United States Magistrate Judge