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

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0001057412
<NAME> JWGENESIS FINANCIAL CORP.
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                          16,978
<SECURITIES>                                    13,746
<RECEIVABLES>                                      124
<ALLOWANCES>                                       426
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                           6,415
<DEPRECIATION>                                   3,029
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 180,394
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         6,000
<OTHER-SE>                                      50,263
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   180,397
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               118,890
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   56,909
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                45,540
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               5,418
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 11,053
<INCOME-TAX>                                     4,421
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              6,632
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     6,632
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.38
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.25
        

</TABLE>
# C_2013377EN.01002003.xml

| 21.12.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 377/20 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

21.12.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 377/20

---

Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (First Chamber) of 5 November 2013 — Schönberger v Court of Auditors

(Case F-14/12) (1)

1

(Civil Service - Officials - Promotion - 2011 promotion procedure - Reference multiplier rates)

2013/C 377/46

Language of the case: German

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Peter Schönberger (Luxembourg, Luxembourg) (represented by: O. Mader, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: Court of Auditors of the European Union (represented initially by: J.-M. Stenier and B. Schäfer, and subsequently by: B. Schäfer and Í. Ni Riágan Düro, acting as Agents)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Application for annulment of the defendant’s decision not to promote the applicant to grade AD 13 in the 2011 promotion procedure

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Tribunal:

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

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Mr Schönberger to bear his own costs and to pay the costs incurred by the Court of Auditors of the European Union. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Mr Schönberger to bear his own costs and to pay the costs incurred by the Court of Auditors of the European Union.

---

(1)  OJ C 138, 12.5.2012, p. 33.

1

---
EXHIBIT 10.9

AMENDMENT NUMBER 2  TO THE MASTER EQUIPMENT LEASE AGREEMENT

THIS AMENDMENT NUMBER 2, dated as of March 29, 2002 (the "Amendment") to the Master Equipment Lease Agreement, dated as of February 9, 2001 (as
amended or supplemented from time to time as permitted thereby, the "Head Lease Agreement"), by and between BRL Universal Compression Funding I, L.P. (the "Head Lessor") and UCO Compression LLC (the
"Head Lessee").

W I T N E S S E T H:

WHEREAS,
the Head Lessor and the Head Lessee have previously entered into the Head Lease and Amendment Number 1 thereto, dated as of February 8, 2002;

WHEREAS,
the parties desire to further amend the Head Lease in order to modify certain provisions of the Head Lease;

NOW
THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and mutual covenants herein contained, the parties hereto agree as follows:

SECTION
1.Defined Terms.Capitalized terms used in this Amendment and not otherwise defined herein shall have the meanings assigned in
the Head Lease.

SECTION
2.Full Force and Effect.Other than as specifically modified hereby, the Head Lease shall remain in full force and effect in
accordance with the terms and provisions thereof and is hereby ratified and confirmed by the parties hereto.

SECTION
3.Amendment to the Head Lease.Effective on the date hereof, following the execution and delivery hereof, the definition of
"Annual Appraisal Date" in Section 1 of the Head Lease is hereby amended to read in its entirety as follows:



SECTION
4.Effectiveness of Amendment.



SECTION
5.Execution in Counterparts.This Amendment may be executed by the parties hereto in separate counterparts, each of which shall
be deemed to be an original and all of which shall constitute together but one and the same agreement.

SECTION
6.Governing Law.THIS AMENDMENT SHALL BE CONSTRUED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK WITHOUT REGARD TO
CONFLICT OF LAW PRINCIPLES; PROVIDED THAT SECTIONS 5-1401 AND 5-1402 OF THE NEW YORK GENERAL OBLIGATIONS LAW SHALL APPLY, AND THE OBLIGATIONS, RIGHTS AND REMEDIES OF THE
PARTIES HEREUNDER SHALL BE DETERMINED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK.

[Signature
page follows.]

---

IN
WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed and delivered this Amendment on the date first above written.

| |  | BRL UNIVERSAL COMPRESSION
        FUNDING I, L.P., as Head Lessor
| |  | -----------------------------------------------------------------
| |  | By:                                                              
| |  |                                                                  
| |  |                                                                  
| |  |                                                                  
| |  | UCO COMPRESSION LLC, as Head Lessee                              
| |  | By:                                                              
| |  | Name:                                                            
| |  | Title:                                                           

2

---

QuickLinks
123 STAT. 3022 PUBLIC LAW 111–110—NOV. 30, 2009 

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY—S. 1211: 

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 155 (2009): 

Aug. 4, considered and passed Senate. 

Nov. 5, 6, considered and passed House. 

Æ 

Public Law 111–110 

111th Congress 

An Act 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 60 School 

Street, Orchard Park, New York, as the ‘‘Jack F. Kemp Post Office Building’’. 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 

the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

SECTION 1. JACK F. KEMP POST OFFICE BUILDING. 

(a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States Postal 

Service located at 60 School Street, Orchard Park, New York, shall 

be known and designated as the ‘‘Jack F. Kemp Post Office 

Building’’. 

(b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, regulation, 

document, paper, or other record of the United States to the facility 

referred to in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference 

to the ‘‘Jack F. Kemp Post Office Building’’. 

Approved November 30, 2009. 

Nov. 30, 2009 

[S. 1211] 


ccoleman on DSK8P6SHH1 with PUBLIC LAWS
No. 53281.

#### “21” Brands, Inc. *v.*United States,

protests 124136-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 plaintiff was sustained. The protests were overruled in all other respects.
No. 44345.

#### Protest 757862-G of W. Doshim (Boston).

*319Opinion by

Keefe, J.

On the authority of *Lamborn*v. *United States*(27 C. C. P. A. 46, C. A. D. 60) the protest was dismissed.
No. 45290.

#### Protests 777760-G, etc., of Ashcraft-Wilkinson Co. et al. (Baltimore, etc.).

Opinion by

Evans, J.

Following the authorities cited in Abstract 15400 the court dismissed the protests.
An official website of the United States government         Here's how you know         
**Official websites use .mil**
A **.mil** website belongs to an official U.S. Department of Defense organization in the United States.
**Secure .mil websites use HTTPS**
 A **lock (lock )** or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .mil website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Skip to main content (Press Enter).

Defense Logistics AgencyThe Nation's Combat Logistics Support Agency

Search
Search

Search

-  Home		 
-  What DLA Offers    -  Excess Property Disposal             
  -  Document Services             
  -  Products             
  -  Services             
  -  Programs 
-  Working With DLA    -  Applications             
  -  Small Business             
  -  Federal and International Cataloging             
  -  Defense Data Standards             
  -  Events             
  -  Procurement Policies             
  -  Government Programs             
  -  Forms 
-  Organizations    -  DLA Headquarters             
  -  DLA Aviation             
  -  DLA Disposition Services             
  -  DLA Distribution             
  -  DLA Energy             
  -  DLA Land and Maritime             
  -  DLA Troop Support             
  -  DLA CENTCOM & SOCOM             
  -  DLA Europe & Africa             
  -  DLA Indo-Pacific 
-  Customer Support    -  Self Help Tools             
  -  How to Order             
  -  Find Your Order             
  -  Customer Facing Offices             
  -  Training             
  -  Brochures             
  -  Warfighter Support             
  -  Customer Service Management 
-  Careers		 
-  About DLA    -  Contact Us             
  -  Locations             
  -  Leaders             
  -  News             
  -  History             
  -  Media Gallery             
  -  DLA Campaigns 

HomeAbout DLANewsNews Article View

# Chief Information Officer talks future of DLA IT

By Kristin MolinaroDLA Land and Maritime Public Affairs

                COLUMBUS, Ohio  –              

                Chief Information Officer talks future of DLA IT            

SHARE IMAGE:

Download Image

Image Details

Photo By: Jarod Hodge

VIRIN: 180827-D-IQ982-0042

**                    SHARE                

**                    PRINT                

DLA L&MAsk the CIOInformation Technology
No. 92-1168.

#### Harris *v.*Forklift Systems, Inc.

C. A. 6th Cir. [Certiorari granted, 507 U. S. 959.] Motion of the Acting Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as *amicus curiae*and for divided argument granted.
# C_2013079EN.01000802.xml

| 16.3.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 79/8 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.3.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 79/8

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Naczelny Sąd Administracyjny (Poland) lodged on 24 December 2012 — Welmory Sp. z o.o. v Dyrektor Izby Skarbowej w Gdańsku

(Case C-605/12)

2013/C 79/15

Language of the case: Polish

Requesting court

Requesting court

Naczelny Sąd Administracyjny

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellant: Welmory Sp. z o.o.

Appellant:

Respondent: Dyrektor Izby Skarbowej w Gdańsku

Respondent:

Question referred

Question referred

For the purposes of the taxation of services supplied by company A, which is established in Poland, to company B, which is established in another Member State of the European Union, in circumstances where company B carries out its economic activity by making use of company A’s infrastructure, is the fixed establishment within the meaning of Article 44 of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax (1) situated in the place in which company A is established?

1

---

(1)  OJ 2006 L 347, p. 1.

1

---
No. 54377.

#### Cane & Ingram, Inc., et al. *v.*United States,

protests 144335-K, etc. (New York).

Opinion by

Cole, J.

The protests were dismissed.
**Exhibit 23.1**

Consent of Independent Registered Certified Public Accounting Firm 

Answerthink, Inc. 

Miami, Florida 

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in theRegistration Statements on Form S-8 (Nos. 333-69951, 333-90635, and 333-39460), and in the Registration Statements on Form S-3 (Nos. 333-87749 and 333-32342) of Answerthink, Inc. of our reports dated March 13, 2007, relating to the consolidatedfinancial statements, financial statement schedule, and the effectiveness of Answerthink, Inc.’s internal control over financial reporting, which appear in this Form 10-K. 

/s/ BDO Seidman, LLP 

Miami, Florida 

March 13, 2007
No. 39188.

#### Protest 748247-G of Ying Chong Sing Co. (Los Angeles).

Opinion by

Evans, J.

It was held that the broken content of the milled rice in question is dutiable at five-eighths of 1 cent per pound under paragraph 727.
p. 1


# OAR Box 

# 1834 Prepped byKeeiaRichards



### Document

Number: 

# 34 ) IV-E-0 7 Docket Number: 

# A-90-0 7

Printed 11/10/20082:14:35PM

Sheet 34 of 61P. 2



## f*r% | - _W%\

UNITE D STATE S ENVIRONMENTA LPROTECTIO N AGENC Y ISgjfr£- « AN N ARBOR
. MICHIGA N 4810 5 

# %«*y OFFIC E O F AI R AN D RADIATIO N 

### JA N 

## 2 7199

4

MEMORANDU M SUBJECT : Phon e Conversation s wit hRepresentative s o f

Th e America nPetroleu mInstitut e (API ) an dTh e Chemica l Manufacturer s Associatio n(CMA ) Judit hGray , Senio r Projec t Manage r Specia l Regulator yProject s Branc h Glen nW . Passavant , Chie f Specia l Regulator yProject s Bra n EP AAi r Docke t A-90-0 7 

# ~*r
\ViM*< ro ^4

n e 24 , 1993 , I mad e separat e phon e call s t o Caro l Stac k IM Aan d t o Joh nSepes i o f th e API , t o discus s whethe r thei r i z . a t ion s woul d conside r takin g a leadershi p rol e i nbrokerin g ioipatio no f smal l companie s i nth e propose dgroupin g an d cos t sharin g provision s o f th e Fuel s an dFue l Additive s reg i tio nprogram .

o l Stac k sai d tha t i f a fe wsmal l companie s (a t thei r own initiative ) aske d t o joi nCMA' s groupin g activities , CMAwoul d probabl ytryt o accommodat e them . However , sh e sai dtha t CM Adoe s no t at thi s tim e inten d t o ac t a s broke r fo r th e industr ya s a whol e an d tha t th e participatio no f a larg e numbe r o f smal l companie s woul d b e a nadministrativ e headache .

roilarly , Joh nSepes i sai dtha t AP I ha dn o inten t a t thi s tin " i > solici t th e participatio no f smal l companie s i nAPI' s groupin g activities . H e said , i nfact , tha t i t woul dprobabl yb e les s expensiv e an d easie r fo r AP I t o allo wsmal l companie s t o mak e us e o f it s dat a fo r fre e tha nt o attemp t t o administe r a cos t sharin g arrangemen t tha t involve dperhap s hundred s o f smal l companies .
112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 188 

AN ACT 

To designate the United States courthouse under construction at 98 West First Street, Yuma, Arizona, as the 

‘‘John M. Roll United States Courthouse’’. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
2 

†S 188 ES

1 SECTION 1. JOHN M. ROLL UNITED STATES COURTHOUSE. 

2 (a) DESIGNATION.—The United States courthouse 

3 under construction, as of the date of enactment of this 

4 Act, at 98 West First Street, Yuma, Arizona, shall be 

5 known and designated as the ‘‘John M. Roll United States 

6 Courthouse’’. 

7 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg8 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

9 States to the United States courthouse referred to in sub10 section (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘John 

11 M. Roll United States Courthouse’’. 

Passed the Senate February 1, 2011. 

Attest: 

Secretary. 

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 188 

AN ACT 

To designate the United States courthouse under 

house’’. zona, as the ‘‘John M. Roll United States Courtconstruction at 98 West First Street, Yuma, Ari-
Exhibit 99.1

                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE 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 Advanced Technologies Group, Ltd.
(the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending July 31, 2001 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Alex Stelmak, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. ss.1350, as adopted pursuant to ss.906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that:

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

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

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this certification as of the
19th day of June 2003.


/s/ Alex Stelmak
-----------------------
Chief Executive Officer
An official website of the United States government         Here's how you know         
**Official websites use .mil**
A **.mil** website belongs to an official U.S. Department of Defense organization in the United States.
**Secure .mil websites use HTTPS**
 A **lock (lock )** or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .mil website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Skip to main content (Press Enter).

Defense Logistics AgencyThe Nation's Combat Logistics Support Agency

Search
Search

Search

-  Home		 
-  What DLA Offers    -  Excess Property Disposal             
  -  Document Services             
  -  Products             
  -  Services             
  -  Programs 
-  Working With DLA    -  Applications             
  -  Small Business             
  -  Federal and International Cataloging             
  -  Defense Data Standards             
  -  Events             
  -  Procurement Policies             
  -  Government Programs             
  -  Forms 
-  Organizations    -  DLA Headquarters             
  -  DLA Aviation             
  -  DLA Disposition Services             
  -  DLA Distribution             
  -  DLA Energy             
  -  DLA Land and Maritime             
  -  DLA Troop Support             
  -  DLA CENTCOM & SOCOM             
  -  DLA Europe & Africa             
  -  DLA Indo-Pacific 
-  Customer Support    -  Self Help Tools             
  -  How to Order             
  -  Find Your Order             
  -  Customer Facing Offices             
  -  Training             
  -  Brochures             
  -  Warfighter Support             
  -  Customer Service Management 
-  Careers		 
-  About DLA    -  Contact Us             
  -  Locations             
  -  Leaders             
  -  News             
  -  History             
  -  Media Gallery             
  -  DLA Campaigns 

HomeAbout DLANewsNews Article View

PHOTO INFORMATION

** Download

** Details

** Share

PHOTO INFORMATION

** Download

** Details

** Share

PHOTO INFORMATION

** Download

** Details

** Share

PHOTO INFORMATION

** Download

** Details

** Share

# ELRS “Loggies” provides the magic behind movements

By  Tech. Sgt. Darnell T. Cannady380th AEW/PA

                AL DHAFRA AIR BASE, United Arab Emirates  –              *Editor's note: The original story can be viewed on the 380th Air Expeditionary Wing website.*

**                    SHARE                

**                    PRINT                

380th Expeditionary Logistics Readiness SquadronAl Dhafra Air BaseAcquisition and Cross Servicing Agreementcargotransportation
Before the First Division,

February 25, 1942

No. 46980.

#### Protest 834259-G of S. & G. Gump Co., Inc. (San Francisco).

*472Opinion by

Tilson, J.

The manager of the oriental art department of the plaintiff testified, among other things, that he was familiar with the process of manufacture of such or similar merchandise as that under consideration and that he had seen it made in China. He then proceeded to describe the process. He further stated that he did not know what an ingrain rug was. A former examiner of merchandise for the Government also testified’in behalf of the plaintiff. He described the process of manufacture of an ingrain rug and said that the difference in appearance would be between the pile surface of an oriental rug and the woven surface of an ingrain rug. The court was of the opinion that the testimony offered by the plaintiff was not sufficient to establish a *prima facie*case and that a rug could be exactly what the evidence showed these rugs to be and still be properly classifiable under paragraph 1116 (a). The protest was therefore overruled.
October 9, 1967

No. 67-12.

#### James Henry Latney, Able-Bodied Seaman, U. S. Merchant Marine v Paul R. Ignatius, Secretary of the Navy; et al.

On consideration of the Application for Writ of Habeas Corpus Ad Subjiciendum and Writ of Mandamus, it appears that jurisdiction over the applicant depends upon the facts surrounding his contention and that of the Government regarding the power of the armed forces to try him, under the Uniform Code of Military Justice, Article 2, 10 USC *678802. Under such circumstances, we believe the matter can be better resolved at the trial of the case, in which evidence may be taken upon the issue, questions of fact resolved, and a complete record made regarding Latney’s status. See United States v Gale, 17 USCMA 40, 37 CMR 304.

It is, therefore, by the Court, this 9th day of October, 1967,

ORDERED that said application for Writ of Habeas Corpus and other relief be, and the same is, hereby denied without prejudice to renew the question at the trial of the case.
No. 44314.

#### Petition 5981-R of Ti Hang Lung & Co. (San Francisco).

Opinion by

Dallingeb, J.

It appeared that the difference in values was due to the fact that the entrant inadvertently failed to include in the entered value the cost of cases and packing. Being satisfied of the good faith of the petitioner and that the entry was made without intention to defraud the revenue, the court granted the petition.