alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
NRCS Chief Arlen Lancaster Visits Idaho 

On Tuesday, August 28, NRCS Chief Arlen Lancaster visited the Idaho NRCS state 

office as the first of many stops during his two-day tour of eastern Idaho. Chief 

Lancaster participated in a forum on conservation, visited a dairy farm with irrigation 

and composting practices and participated in a unique partnership tour with Trout 

Unlimited. 

NRCS employees in the state 

office and neighboring field 

offices had an opportunity to 

hear from the Chief early 

Tuesday morning. He 

highlighted his three main 

priorities for the agency: 

meeting new challenges, 

making conservation easier 

and showing accountability. 

For some employees, it was 

an opportunity to have their 

questions answered about 

various topics including CSP, the snow survey program, engineering practices and 

more. The Chief thanked everyone for their excellent level of service. He 

acknowledged that the employees were truly the most important part in the makeup 

of our agency and the reason for its success. 

Chief Lancaster had an opportunity to visit a 

dairy farm operated by the DeWinkle family 

later that afternoon. He learned about 

conservation practices installed with NRCS 

assistance on their operation. The Chief was 

accompanied U.S. Senator Mike Crapo’s Ag 

Director Don Dixon and Senior Policy Advisor, 

Staci Lancaster, along with NRCS field and 

state office staff. Participants learned 

how new irrigation systems resulted in water 

savings and a reduction in irrigation 

inefficiencies for the DeWinkles. The DeWinkle 

family is also planning to use the EQIP program to develop a composting facility and 

to plant windbreaks. 

On Wednesday, Trout Unlimited held a partnership celebration tour in which they 

praised the efforts of NRCS for their role in enhancing stream habitat for bull trout in 

the Little Lost River watershed. One of the problems preventing upstream migration 
of bull trout and other fish to the Little Lost River system was an irrigation diversion. 

Utilizing financial assistance from EQIP, the landowner was able to change the 

irrigation point of diversion from Badger Creek to the Little Lost River, install three 

center pivots and permanently remove the diversion structure from Badger Creek to 

allow bull trout access to spawning and rearing habitat. 

Chief Lancaster, along with USDA Under Secretary for Natural Resources and 

Environment, Mark Rey, and U.S. Senator Mike Crapo were special guests at the 

event. All commended the partnership efforts between the various federal, state and 

local agencies and private landowners to the success of this project. 

 

Top photo caption: NRCS Chief Lancaster addresses state and local field office 

employees during an early morning visit at the Idaho NRCS state office. 

 

Bottom photo caption: District Conservationist Jeff Bohr (far left) and family 

farmers, Mr. and Mrs. DeWinkle, show Chief Lancaster some of the cropland benefits 

from the new irrigation system.

 

'eNewsbytes' are archived online for viewing anytime. Visit 

http://www.id.nrcs.usda.gov/news/ebytes.html for more information.
#### In re: James Bronce HENDERSON, III, Debtor. James Bronce Henderson, III, Plaintiff-Counter-Defendant-Appellant, v. Van Buren Industrial Investors, L.L.C., Defendant-Counter-Claimant-Appellee.

No. 05-12464

Non-Argument Calendar.

D.C. Docket Nos. 03-00537-CV-FTM-33-SPC and 02-16887-9P1.

United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit.

Sept. 12, 2005.

Asher Rabinowitz, Ruden, Mcclosky, Smith et. ah, Tampa, FL, for Plaintiff-Counter-Defendant-Appellant.

*293Annette Marie Lang, Carlton Fields, P.A., Saint Petersburg, FL, Hywel Leonard, Tampa, FL, for Defendant-Counter-Claimant-Appellee.

Before BIRCH, DUBINA and BARKETT, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

DCT Incorporated, an automotive sub-component supplier, entered into a ten year lease with the appellee, Van Burén Industrial Investors, L.L.C. (‘Van Burén”), for a 345,000 square foot industrial building located in metropolitan Detroit, effective December 1, 1999. The debt- or/appellant, James Bronce Henderson, III, was DCT’s principal officer and guaranteed DCT’s obligations under the lease. In February 2002, DCT’s creditors placed the company in involuntary Chapter 7 bankruptcy, and DCT stopped paying rent for the building. In August 2002, Henderson filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy. Subsequently, Van Burén filed a claim (Claim No. 71) in Henderson’s bankruptcy proceedings for unpaid rent and other charges due under the lease as guarantor. The bankruptcy court allowed Van Buren’s claim, but applied the one year cap under 11 U.S.C. § 502(b)(6). The district court then affirmed. Henderson appeals, and we also affirm.

We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 158(d). “[W]e independently examine the factual and legal determinations of the bankruptcy court and employ the same standards of review as the district court.” *In re Int’l Admin. Servs., Inc.,*408 F.3d 689, 698 (11th Cir.2005). Specifically, we review the district court’s and bankruptcy court’s factual findings for clear error, *In re Cox,*338 F.3d 1238, 1241 (11th Cir.2003), and the legal conclusions de novo. *In re Int’l Admin. Servs., Inc.,*408 F.3d at 698.

After an evidentiary hearing, the bankruptcy court concluded that Henderson’s objections lacked merit and correctly found that: Henderson is bound by the plain terms of the lease and is liable to Van Burén as guarantor; the amount of rent specified in the lease provided evidence of the fair market value for the building space; Van Burén satisfied its duty to mitigate its damages caused by the breach; and judicial estoppel does not apply. Upon review, the district court agreed with these findings. We too have reviewed the record and find no clear error. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court, which affirms the judgment of the bankruptcy court.

AFFIRMED.
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 85 (Thursday, May 3, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Page 24598]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-8488]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management

[NM-920-1310-07; TXNM 115039]


Proposed Reinstatement of Terminated Oil and Gas Lease TXNM 
115039

AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, Interior.

ACTION: Notice of reinstatement of terminated oil and gas lease.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: Pursuant to the provisions of 43 CFR 3108.2-3(b)(2), Energy 
Equities, Inc. timely filed a petition for reinstatement of oil and gas 
lease TXNM 115039 for lands in Shelby County, Texas, and was 
accompanied by all required rentals and royalties accruing from 
December 1, 2006, the date of termination.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Becky C. Olivas, BLM, New Mexico State 
Office, (505) 438-7609.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: No valid lease has been issued affecting the 
lands. The lessee has agreed to new lease terms for rentals and 
royalties at rates of $10.00 per acre or fraction thereof and 16 2/3 
percent, respectively. The lessee has paid the required $500.00 
administrative fee and has reimbursed the Bureau of Land Management for 
the cost of this Federal Register notice. The lessee has met all the 
requirements for reinstatement of the lease as set out in Sections 
31(d) and (e) of the Mineral Leasing Act of 1920 (30 U.S.C. 188), and 
the Bureau of Land Management is proposing to reinstate the lease 
effective December 1, 2006, subject to the original terms and 
conditions of the lease and the increased rentals and royalty rates 
cited above.

    Dated: April 25, 2007.
Becky C. Olivas,
Land Law Examiner, Fluids Adjudication Team 1.
 [FR Doc. E7-8488 Filed 5-2-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-FB-P
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                                <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                      3-MOS                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>               DEC-31-1998             DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                    MAR-31-1998             DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                             487,972                  21,310
<SECURITIES>                             0                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                            0                       0
<ALLOWANCES>                             0                       0
<INVENTORY>                              0                       0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                 5,775,592               5,411,477
<PP&E>                                   0                       0
<DEPRECIATION>                           0                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                   5,775,592               5,411,477
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>              153,328                 129,114
<BONDS>                                  0                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                    0                       0
<PREFERRED>                              0                       0
<COMMON>                                 0                       0
<OTHER-SE>                       5,622,264               5,282,363
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>     5,775,592               5,411,477
<SALES>                                  0                       0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                     2,915                   2,438
<CGS>                                    0                       0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                            0                       0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                    24,983                  25,765
<LOSS-PROVISION>                         0                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                       0                       0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                    339,901                 295,682
<INCOME-TAX>                       339,901                 295,682
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                      0                       0
<DISCONTINUED>                           0                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                          0                       0
<CHANGES>                                0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                       339,901                 295,682
<EPS-PRIMARY>                            0                       0
<EPS-DILUTED>                            0                       0
        
</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 11 -  Computation of Earnings Per Share



Item 6(a)
Exhibit 11
Computation of Earnings per Share
United Industrial Corporation and Subsidiaries
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>



                                                THREE MONTHS ENDED MARCH 31

                                                           1998                1997
                                                         --------            --------


<S>                                               <C>                <C>       
              Net income                                $2,323,000         $1,763,000
                                                        ==========         ==========

              Basic earnings per share:
                           Weighted average shares       12,254,363         12,174,943
                                                         ==========         ==========

              Effect of dilutive securities:
                           Employee and non-employee
                           director stock options           344,542            109,152
                                                         ==========         ==========

              Diluted earnings per share:
                           Adjusted weighted-average
                           and assumed conversions      12,598,905          12,284,095
                                                        ==========          ==========

              Basic earnings per share                       $ .19               $ .14
                                                             =====               =====
              Diluted earnings per share                     $ .18               $ .14
                                                             =====               =====


</TABLE>

                                       10
#### IN RE: ACCELERATED CIVIL CASE LIST

700 S.W.2d 62

Court of Appeals of Arkansas En Banc

Opinion delivered November 27, 1985

Per Curiam.

In a per curiam opinion handed down July 5, 1984, *see*12 Ark. App. 415, we pointed out that criminal cases and certain civil cases are given preference by law as to the order in which they are submitted to the Arkansas Court of Appeals. In that opinion, we set out a procedure whereby the “other” civil cases could be placed on an accelerated civil list. Under Act 770 of 1985, criminal cases, child custody cases, appeals under the Workers’ Compensation Law and the Employment Security Law, and appeals from the Public Service Commission are now given preference over all “other” civil cases. Experience has convinced us that we should now modify the procedure adopted by our per curiam of July 5, 1984.

Therefore, effective today, if an attorney files a motion in this court asking that a civil case, which is not now entitled to preferential submission, be placed on an accelerated civil list and states the reason for the request, the court may grant that request if all the briefs have been filed in the case.

A copy of any such motion shall be given to opposing counsel and a certificate to that effect endorsed on the request.
(Reap. Dec. 8856)

#### Barnett Intl. Fders., Inc. *v.*United States

Entry No. 718426.

(Decided June 20, 1957)

*Siegel, Mqndell & Davidson*for the plaintiff.

*George Cochran Doub,*Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Mollison, Judge:

This appeal for reappraisement has been submitted for decision upon the following stipulation of counsel for the parties hereto:

> IT IS STIPULATED AND AGREED by and between the parties hereto, subject to the approval of the Court, that at the time of exportation of the merchandise embraced in the entry covered by the Appeal to Reappraisement noted above, there was no foreign value, export value or United States value, as defined in Section 402 (c) (d) (e) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, for such or similar merchandise;

> That cost of production is the proper basis of value;

> That the cost of production of said merchandise as defined in Section 402 (f) is equivalent to the invoice unit values, packed, and that there is no higher value;

> That the appeal to reappraisement herein may be submitted for decision on the foregoing stipulation.

On the agreed facts I find the cost of production, as that value is defined in section 402 (f) of the Tariff Act of 1930, to be the proper basis for the determination of the value of the merchandise here involved, and that such values were the invoice unit values, packed.

Judgment will be entered accordingly.
August 6, 1940

No. 44190.

Suit 4319.

#### United *States*v. *Cohn & Lewis.*

C. D. 314. Appeal dismissed June 21, 1940; not yet reported.
# C_2016392EN.01003401.xml

| 24.10.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 392/34 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.10.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 392/34

---

Judgment of the General Court of 13 September 2016 — Commission v Kakol

(Case T-152/15 P) (1)

1

((Appeal - Civil service - Officials - Open competition - Non-admission of a candidate - Non-recognition of a diploma - Admission to a previous competition - Conditions of similar competitions - Obligation to state reasons))

(2016/C 392/42)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Parties

Appellant: European Commission (represented by: initially F. Simonetti, J. Currall and G. Gattinara, then F. Simonetti and G. Gattinara, acting as Agents)

Appellant:

Other party to the proceedings: Danuta Kakol (Luxembourg, Luxembourg) (represented by: R. Duta, lawyer)

Other party to the proceedings:

Re:

Re:

Appeal brought against the judgment of the European Union Civil Service Tribunal (Second Chamber) of 22 January 2015, Kakol v Commission (F-1/14 and F-48/14, EU:F:2015:5), asking for annulment of that judgment.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1) | Annuls the judgment of the European Union Civil Service Tribunal (Second Chamber) of 22 January 2015, Kakol v Commission (F-1/14 and F-48/14, EU:F:2015:5), |
| --- | --- |

1)

Annuls the judgment of the European Union Civil Service Tribunal (Second Chamber) of 22 January 2015, Kakol v Commission (F-1/14 and F-48/14, EU:F:2015:5),

| 2) | Refers the case to a Chamber of the Court other than that which ruled on the present appeal; |
| --- | --- |

2)

Refers the case to a Chamber of the Court other than that which ruled on the present appeal;

| 3) | Reserves the costs. |
| --- | --- |

3)

Reserves the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 190, 8.6.2015.

1

---
No. 53190.

#### Popper Morson Co. et al. *v.*United States,

protests 115997-K, etc. (New York).

Opinion by

Ekwall, J.

For the reasons stated in *Austin, Nichols & Co., Inc.*v. *United States*(22 Cust. Ct. 33, C. D. 1155), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained. The protests were overruled in all other respects.
November 14, 2016

Mr. Jason Forte Sky

- Futures USA Inc 914 Main Street, Unit 2104 Houston, TX 77002

Re: FAA

- 2014

- 0641

Dear Mr. Forte :

This letter is to provide notification that we have reviewed your petition for exemption, and
have determined that we will cont inue to process your petition.

As referenced in the June 22 , 2016 , letter posted to your docket at www.regulations.gov

, we

are reviewing pending Section 333 petitions to determine if the recently

- issued regulation, Operation and Certification of Small Unmanned Aircraft Systems, Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 107 ( www.faa.gov/uas ) will satisfy your request. We have determined that your request requires further regulatory relief (Tier 3), and we will continue working on your petition for exemption.

We will advise you of the agency’s final decision on your petition as soon as possib le. If you have any questions regarding your petition, please contact me at 333exemptions@faa.gov

.

Sincerely,

/s/ Dan Ngo Program Analyst
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

ERIC GRAHAM,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

No. 4D22-1325

[May 25, 2023]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm 

Beach County; Scott Suskauer, Judge; L.T. Case No. 502019CF009838A.

Tim Bower Rodriguez, Tampa, for appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Heidi L. Bettendorf, 

Senior Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

CIKLIN, GERBER and KUNTZ, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
Exhibit 99.1 

 

**2002 NATIONAL COMMERCE FINANCIAL CORPORATION**

**PLAN FOR SEVERANCE COMPENSATION**

**AFTER A CHANGE IN CONTROL**

 

Amendment I 

 

Article II (Definitions and Construction) Section 2.1(f)(i) as it applies to Article IV (Severance Payments) Section 4.3(a)(i) is amended toread: 

 

(i) in the case of a Participant who is not compensatedin whole or in substantial part on the basis of commission earnings, the base monthly salary paid by an Employer as consideration for the Participant’s service during the last completed month ending prior to the date as of which Compensation isto be determined plus, if applicable, the greater of one-twelfth (1/12) of the average of the highest 2 out of the last 3 years annual bonus payments, or one-twelfth of the aggregate cash compensation received by the Participant for the previousyear under NCF’s short-term Management Bonus Plan**;**or one-twelfth (1/12) of the aggregate cash compensation received by the participant during the twelve (12) months immediately preceding the date as of which Compensation is to bedetermined under formal sales or productivity plans that are applicable to the Participant at the time of a Change in Control. 

 

Approved by 

The Board of Directors 

April 28, 2004
EXHIBIT 32.2
 
 
 CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
 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 United-Guardian, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the three-month period ended September 30, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), I, Robert S. Rubinger, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:
 
 (i) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
 
 (ii) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition of the Company as of the dates presented and results of operations of the Company for the periods presented.
 
 
 Date:  November 10, 2010                                                                                    By: /s/ Robert S. Rubinger
 Robert S. Rubinger
H. Con. Res. 279 Agreed to January 22, 2008 

One Hundred Tenth Congress 

of the 

United States of America 

AT THE SECOND SESSION 

Begun and held at the City of Washington on Thursday, 

the third day of January, two thousand and eight 

Concurrent Resolution 

Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), That when the House adjourns on the legislative day of 

Wednesday, January 23, 2008, on a motion offered pursuant to 

this concurrent resolution by its Majority Leader or his designee, 

it stand adjourned until 2 p.m. on Monday, January 28, 2008, 

or until the time of any reassembly pursuant to section 2 of this 

concurrent resolution, whichever occurs first; and that when the 

House adjourns on the legislative day of Tuesday, January 29, 

2008, on a motion offered pursuant to this concurrent resolution 

by its Majority Leader or his designee, it stand adjourned until 

2 p.m. on Wednesday, February 6, 2008, or until the time of any 

reassembly pursuant to section 2 of this concurrent resolution, 

whichever occurs first. 

SEC. 2. The Speaker or her designee, after consultation with 

the Minority Leader, shall notify the Members of the House to 

reassemble at such place and time as she may designate if, in 

her opinion, the public interest shall warrant it. 

Attest: 

Clerk of the House of Representatives. 

Attest: 

Secretary of the Senate.