alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
-1-

SUBSTITUTION OF ATTORNEYS AND ORDER THEREON

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

27

28

BRUCE A. KILDAY, SBN 066415 

SUSAN A. DeNARDO, SBN 235166 (SPACE BELOW FOR FILING STAMP ONLY)

ANGELO, KILDAY & KILDUFF 

Attorneys at Law 

601 University Ave. Suite 150 

Sacramento, CA 95825 

Telephone: (916) 564-6100 

Telecopier: (916) 564-6263 

Attorneys for Defendant TERRY DICKINSON 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

EARNEST C. WOODS, 

 Plaintiff, 

vs. 

TOM L. CAREY, WARDEN OF SOLANO 

STATE PRISON, et al., 

Defendants. 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

Case No.: CIV.S-04-1225 LKK GGH P 

SUBSTITUTION OF ATTORNEYS AND 

ORDER THEREON 

Defendant TERRY DICKINSON hereby substitutes the law offices of Angelo, Kilday & 

Kilduff, 601 University Avenue, Suite 150, Sacramento, California 95825, telephone (916) 564-

6100, facsimile (916) 564-6263 as attorneys of record for Defendant TERRY DICKINSON, 

individually and in his official capacity, in the place and stead of the law office of Longyear, 

O’Dea & Lavra, LLP and its attorneys. 

I consent to this substitution. 

Dated: _ __________ 

_________________________ 

 TERRY DICKINSON 

 Defendant 

Case 2:04-cv-01225-MCE-AC Document 88 Filed 04/20/06 Page 1 of 2
-2-

SUBSTITUTION OF ATTORNEYS AND ORDER THEREON

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

27

28

We agree to this substitution. 

Dated: ___March 2, 2006__________ VAN LONGYEAR 

JENNIFER MARQUEZ 

Longyear, O’dea & Lavra, LLP 

3600 American River Drive, Suite 230 

Sacramento, CA 95864 

By:______/S/ JENNIFER MARQUEZ____ 

 JENNIFER MARQUEZ 

Attorneys for Defendants 

We accept this substitution. 

Dated: ____March 9, 2006__________ ANGELO, KILDAY & KILDUFF 

601 University Avenue, Suite 150 

Sacramento, CA 95825 

By:_______/S/ SUSAN A. DeNARDO___ 

SUSAN A. DeNARDO 

BRUCE A. KILDAY 

 Attorneys for Defendant 

O R D E R 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

 /s/Lawrence K. Karlton

 HONORABLE LAWRENCE K. KARLTON 

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 

Case 2:04-cv-01225-MCE-AC Document 88 Filed 04/20/06 Page 2 of 2
Dear Mr

. Gibbons :

This letter is to inform you that the following information is missing from your petition (Docket No. FAA−2015

− 2868 )

. This information is necessary for the Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA) to process your petition.

 Provide a copy of the Motion Picture and Television Operations Manual (MPTOM) which is required by Order 8900.1, Volume 3, Chapter 8, Section 1. If you wish for us to

proce ed without this manual and remove closed

- set filming from your proposed operation please inform of us of your intention by the requested response date listed below.

Please submit the additional information (non

- proprietary) to your docket at www.regulations.gov and submit any proprietary information to the FAA Headquarters or electronically via email to 333exemptions@faa.gov

. If you want us to process your request any further, we must receive the infor mation described above by 11/11/15 . I f we do not receive the
information

, we will close the dock et without notifying you further.

If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at (202) 267

- 4549.

Sincerely,
/s/
Michael J. Cameron Program Analyst
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### A PPEAL 

### O F 

### T HE 

### S TATE 

### O F 

### F LORIDA
F OURTH D ISTRICT

JAQUAN LEWIS , Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA , Appellee

.

No. 4D 13

- 1228

[June 24, 2015 ]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County ; Cynthia Gelmine Imperato , Judge; L.T. Case No. 07

- 634 CF 10B

.
Carey Haughwout, Public Defender, and Paul E. Petillo, Assistant Public Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Nancy Jack, Assistant Attorney Gen eral, West Palm Beach, for appellee.

P ER C URIAM

.
We reverse the trial court’s order denying appellant’s motion for postconviction relief and remand this matter for further proceedings consistent with Falcon v. State , 40 Fla. L. Weekly S151 (Fla. Mar. 19

, 2015), and Horsley v. State , 160 So. 3d 393 (Fla. 2015).

D AMOORGIAN , C

. J., S TEVENSON and C ONNER , JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
EXHIBIT 99.3

U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
450 Fifth Street, N.W.
Judiciary Plaza
Washington, D.C. 20549

Ladies and Gentlemen:

In a letter dated March 25, 2002, our independent public
accountants, Arthur Andersen LLP ("Andersen"), represented to us
that their audit of the consolidated financial statements of
Wisconsin Power and Light Company and subsidiaries as of
December 31, 2001 and for the year then ended was subject to
Andersen's quality control system for the U.S. accounting and
auditing practice to provide reasonable assurance that their
engagement was conducted in compliance with professional
standards and that there was appropriate continuity of Andersen
personnel working on the audit and availability of national
office consultation.  Availability of personnel at foreign
affiliates of Andersen is not relevant to this audit.




WISCONSIN POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY


By:      /s/ John E. Kratchmer
         ---------------------
Name:        John E. Kratchmer
Title:       Corporate Controller and Chief Accounting Officer


March 25, 2002
<TABLE> <S> <C>

        <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the December
31, 1998 Financial Statements included in the Company's Form 10-K and is
qualified in its entirety by reference to such Form 10-K.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                            5100
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    83689
<ALLOWANCES>                                      3534
<INVENTORY>                                     136575
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                231395
<PP&E>                                          308751
<DEPRECIATION>                                  186829
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  396892
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            55500
<BONDS>                                          30750
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         69674
<OTHER-SE>                                      222894
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    396892
<SALES>                                         454811
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                454811
<CGS>                                           289591
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   289591
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                  1349
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                1800
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  41081
<INCOME-TAX>                                     14539
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              26542
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     26542
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.01
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.00
        

        

</TABLE>
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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

GREGORY A. HALL,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-04-1275 MCE CMK P

vs.

T. FELKER, et al.,

Defendants. ORDER

 /

On July 29, 2005, plaintiff filed a letter. This civil rights action was closed on

June 30, 2005. Plaintiff is advised that documents filed by plaintiff since the closing date will be

disregarded and no orders will issue in response to future filings. 

DATED: August 8, 2005.

______________________________________

CRAIG M. KELLISON

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 2:04-cv-01275-MCE -CMK Document 25 Filed 08/10/05 Page 1 of 1
**EXHIBIT
      32.2**




**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 of European Micro Holdings, Inc. (the
      “ Company ”)
      on
      Form 10-QSB for the fiscal quarter ended March 31, 2004 as filed with the
      Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “ Report ”),
      the
      undersigned, in the capacities and on the dates indicated below, hereby
      certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
      Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to his knowledge:




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




2.  The
      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
      the financial condition and results of operation of the Company.




Date: October 16,
              2006
            By:
            */s/
              Jay P. Nash*Name:Jay
                P. Nash
              Title:
                Chief Financial
                Officer




A
      signed
      original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document
      authentications, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears
      in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required
      by Section 906, has been provided to European Micro Holdings, Inc. and will
      be
      retained by European Micro Holdings, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and
      Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.1

                    Certification of Chief Executive Officer

      Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted by Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned officer of Getty Realty Corp. (the
"Company") hereby certifies, to such officer's knowledge, that:

      (i) the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarterly
period ended June 30, 2005 (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements
of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934, as amended; and

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

   Dated: August 9, 2005                BY: /s/ Leo Liebowitz
                                            -----------------
                                               (Signature)
                                            LEO LIEBOWITZ
                                            Chairman and Chief Executive Officer

   A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to Getty Realty Corp. and will be retained by Getty Realty Corp. and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

   The foregoing certification is being furnished solely to accompany the Report
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, and is not being filed for purposes of
Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and is not to be
incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company, whether made before or
after the date hereof, regardless of any general incorporation language in such
filing.
|   | Exhibit 23, Form 10-K |
|--------|-----------------------|

|   | Kansas City Life Insurance Company |
|--------|------------------------------------|

**Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm**

The Board of Directors and Stockholders

Kansas City Life Insurance Company:

We consent to the use of our reports dated February 28, 2007, with respect to the consolidated balance sheets of Kansas City Life Insurance Company and subsidiaries as of December 31, 2006 and 2005, and the related consolidated statements of income, stockholders’ equity, and cash flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 2006, and all related financial statement schedules, management’s assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2006, and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2006, included herein.  Our report dated February 28, 2007 on the consolidated financial statements also contains an explanatory paragraph that states that the Company adopted Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 158, *Employer’s Accounting forDefined Benefit Pension and Other Postretirement Plans,* effective December 31, 2006.

 

 

/s/KPMG LLP

KPMG LLP

Kansas City, MO

February 28, 2007
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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JAMES P. DeFAZIO,

Plaintiff,

v. NO. CIV. S-04-1358 LKK/GGH

HOLLISTER, INC., Plan 

Administrator; et al.,

Defendants.

 /

On May 31, 2006, plaintiff’s counsel in the abovecaptioned case, Scottlynn J. Hubbard, was ordered to show cause why

sanctions should not be imposed for failure to file an opposition

or a statement of non-opposition in accordance with Local Rule 78-

230. The court is in receipt of plaintiff’s counsel’s response.

No good cause being shown, counsel for plaintiff is SANCTIONED

in the amount of one hundred and fifty ($150.00) dollars. This sum

shall be paid to the Clerk of the Court no later than thirty (30)

days from the effective date of this order. Counsel shall file an

affidavit accompanying the payment of this sanction which states

Case 2:04-cv-01358-WBS-GGH Document 119 Filed 07/26/06 Page 1 of 2
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

2

that it is paid personally by counsel, out of personal funds, and

is not and will not be billed, directly or indirectly, to the

client or in any way made the responsibility of the client as

attorneys' fees or costs.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: July 25, 2006.

Case 2:04-cv-01358-WBS-GGH Document 119 Filed 07/26/06 Page 2 of 2
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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

BYRON CHAPMAN,

NO. CIV. S-04-1339 LKK/DAD

Plaintiff,

v.

O R D E R

PIER 1 IMPORTS, INC., et al

Defendants.

 /

The court is in receipt of the parties’ joint request to

continue the trial date in the above captioned case. The parties

represent to the court that they are in the process of settlement.

Accordingly, the court orders as follows:

1. The trial date currently set for April 17, 2007 is

hereby CONTINUED to June 26, 2007 at 10:30 a.m. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

DATED: April 2, 2007.

Case 2:04-cv-01339-MCE-AC Document 112 Filed 04/02/07 Page 1 of 1
Bureau of the Fiscal Service

1

OTCnet Printable Job Aid

Reprint a Paper Receipt

To reprint a paper receipt, complete the following steps.

1. From the Card Capture—Perform Card Transaction page, enter the pertinent card details to 

process a card payment.

2. Under Terminal Controls, click Print Receipt. An Approved Receipt prints for the approved 

transaction.

• Print Receipt remains enabled to allow you to print additional receipts.

• You have about 4-6 seconds to click Print Receipt.

• If Print Receipt is not clicked within the allotted time, it grays out.

• If Print Receipt is not clicked within the allotted time, it grays out. 

• If a receipt is still needed, access the Card Transaction Query function.

3. From the Card Transaction Query page, enter the pertinent card details to process a card 

payment.

4. The View Card Transaction History Details page displays. Click Print Sale Receipt to print a 

paper receipt. Click Return Home.

• Previous enables you to return to the previous page.

• Refund Transaction is also enabled. An Approved Receipt prints for the approved 

transaction.

• Print Sale Receipt remains enabled so that you can reprint additional receipts as 

needed.

Application Tips

Application Tips
FLETC All Website Data

A All Web Site Data nalytics Go to report 

FLETC.gov Search Performance Metrics May 1, 2023 - May 31, 2023

Visits to DHS.gov

47,006

%ofTotal: 100.00% (47,006)

Total Internal Searches

0

%ofTotal: 0.00% (0)

Total External Searches (Google)

32,448

%ofTotal: 69.03% (47,006)

Top Internal Searches by Search Term

Search Term Total Unique Searches Organic Searches

There is no data for this view.

Top External Searches (Google - as reported)

Page Title Sessions

Frontpage | Federal Law Enforcement Training Cent

ers

4,213

Training Catalog | Federal Law Enforcement Trainin

g Centers

1,504

Execution of a Search Warrant (I) (MP3) | Federal La

w Enforcement Training Centers

1,411

Glynco, Georgia | Federal Law Enforcement Training

Centers

1,401

FedBizOpps | Federal Law Enforcement Training Ce

nters

1,337

Criminal Investigator Training Program | Federal La

w Enforcement Training Centers

842

PEB Scores for Age and Gender | Federal Law Enfor

cement Training Centers

829

P.O.S.T. Certification | Federal Law Enforcement Tr

ning Centers

692

Federal Conspiracy Law (Mp3) | Federal Law Enforc

ement Training Centers

623

Use of Force - Part II | Federal Law Enforcement Tra

ining Centers

535

New vs. Returned Visitors

Avg. Visits per Visitor

New Visitor Returning Visitor

18.3%

81.7%

1 2 Other

14.1%

12.4%

73.5%

© 2023 Google

All Users

100.00% Sessions
FLETC All Website Data

A All Web Site Data nalytics Go to report 

FLETC.gov Web Performance Metrics May 1, 2023 - May 31, 2023

Total Visits

47,006

%ofTotal: 100.00% (47,006)

Avg. Visit Duration

00:01:55

Avg forView: 00:01:55 (0.00%)

Pageviews

125,237

%ofTotal: 100.00% (125,237)

Unique Visitors

37,595

%ofTotal: 100.00% (37,595)

Avg. Pages / Visit

2.66

Avg forView: 2.66 (0.00%)

Avg. Time on Page

00:01:09

Avg forView: 00:01:09 (0.00%)

Bounce Rate

52.57%

Avg forView: 52.57% (0.00%)

Top Pages

Page Title Pageviews

Bounce

Rate

Training Catalog | Federal Law Enforcement Traini

ng Centers

17,439 36.27%

Frontpage | Federal Law Enforcement Training Ce

nters

14,255 37.88%

Glynco, Georgia | Federal Law Enforcement Traini

ng Centers

7,349 52.78%

PEB Scores for Age and Gender | Federal Law Enf

orcement Training Centers

3,109 9.88%

Locations | Federal Law Enforcement Training Ce

nters

2,520 41.50%

Glynco Campus Life | Federal Law Enforcement Tr

aining Centers

2,337 39.69%

Site Search | Federal Law Enforcement Training C

enters

2,208 57.89%

Artesia, New Mexico | Federal Law Enforcement T

raining Centers

2,088 50.00%

Charleston, South Carolina | Federal Law Enforce

ment Training Centers

2,048 49.34%

Execution of a Search Warrant (I) (MP3) | Federal

Law Enforcement Training Centers

1,827 86.02%

Visits by Social Network

Social Network Sessions

Facebook 175

LinkedIn 28

Instagram 23

reddit 20

Twitter 11

YouTube 6

Instagram Stories 5

WordPress 1

Visits by Source

New vs. Returned Visitors

google (direct) bing dhs.gov

sass.fletc.dhs.gov Oth

8.2%

20.8%

61.9%

New Visitor Returning Visitor

18.3%

81.7%

© 2023 Google

All Users

100.00% Sessions
Further Improvements Needed in the 

Administration of RCRA Civil Penalties

TABLE OF CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

CHAPTERS 

1.INTRODUCTION

Background 

Scope and Methodology Prior Audit Coverage 

2.RECOVERING ECONOMIC BENEFITS OF NONCOMPLIANCE IS ESSENTIAL

Improvements Needed In Recovering Economic Benefits of Noncompliance 

Table: Review of Economic Benefit Calculations 

Penalty Amounts and Compliance Not Found Related 

More Guidance and Training Needed for Assessing Economic Benefits Recommendations 

3.STATES NEED MORE CONSISTENT RCRA PENALTIES AND BETTER DOCUMENTATION

State Penalty Policies Vary 

Gravity-Based Penalties Vary Among States 

EPA Penalties Have Been Significantly Higher 

Table: Average Final Penalty Amounts 

Conclusions 

Recommendations 

EPA Effectively Documenting Penalties, While Some States Need Improvement 

State Documentation Efforts Varied Depending on Penalty Policies 

Table: State Documentation of Penalty Calculations and Adjustments 

Conclusions

Recommendation 
APPENDIX I - Scope and Methodology

APPENDIX II - Prior Audit Coverage

APPENDIX III - Analysis of Penalties and Compliance

APPENDIX IV - Report Distribution
Searched for **https://www.ssa.gov/pubs/EN-05-10027.pdf**

 

19961997199819992000200120022003200420052006200720082009201020112012201320142015201620172018201920202021202220232024

*Note:* This calendar view maps the number of captures of **https://www.ssa.gov/pubs/EN-05-10027.pdf**, *not* how many times the site was actually updated.

Look Up URL in general Internet Archive web collection.
Appendix A. Respondents and Other AssumptionDescription NumberNotesPercent CAFOs in AK, ID, MA, NH, NM, and OK3.4%Percent CAFOs covered by General Permits 70.0%Annual CAFO inspection rate 20.0%Percent hearings for individual permits 12.0%%CAFOs where the permit authority require the NMP to be submitted w/the application? 71.51%%CAFOs in authorized states where the permit authority doescomprehensive technical review 42.40%Percent of NMP that would change enough to trigger review 11.00%45% of facilities would modify their permit once per permit cycle (5 years). 0-10% would modify their permit twice. (A. Wiedeman, EPA)Reduction in permit modifications due to the availability of the narrative rateapproach50%ICR: NPDES and ELG Regulatory Revisions for Concentrated Animal FeedingOperations (Final Rule) OMB Control Number: 2040-0250. EPA ICR: 1989.06.Authorized States for CAFOs 44EPA retains authority for NPDES discharge permits for agricultural facilities inOklahoma; thus, only 44 States are authorized to issue permits to CAFOs. EPAis not aware of any CAFOs in the U.S. Virgin Islands.Authorized States for CAAP 45Total Number of CAAP Permittees 245Flow Through and Recirculating Commercial Facilities 59Flow Through and Recirculating Non-Commercial Facilities 122Net Pen Facilities 19Total Number of CAAP Permittees in non-authorized states 5Information Collection Request for National Pollutant Discharge EliminationSystem (NPDES) Program (Renewal) OMB Control No. 2040-0004, EPA ICRNo. 0229.19Information Collection Request: Concentrated Aquatic Animal ProductionEffluent Guidelines. ICR No. 2087.03, OMB No. 2040-0258. September 2007ICR: NPDES and ELG Regulatory Revisions for Concentrated Animal FeedingOperations (Final Rule) OMB Control Number: 2040-0250. EPA ICR: 1989.06.
Exhibit 10.17


 


Director
Compensation Information


 


Employees of Rhino Resources, Inc. (the “Company”) who also serve
as directors of the Company will not receive additional compensation. Directors
who are not employees of the Company will receive (1) a $30,000 annual
cash retainer, (2) $1,500 for each board of directors or committee meeting
attended in person and (3) $750 for each telephonic board of directors or
committee meeting participated in.  The
chair of the audit committee of the board of directors of the Company will
receive an additional $10,000 annual cash retainer.  In addition, each director will be reimbursed
for out-of-pocket expenses in connection with attending meetings of the board
of directors or committees.  Each
director will be fully indemnified by the Company for actions associated with
being a director to the extent permitted under Delaware law.