alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### Quality of Delaware River water at Trenton, New Jersey

By: Leo T. McCarthy Jr.Walter B. Keighton

                            https://doi.org/10.3133/wsp1779X

#### Links

-                                                                                                                             Document:                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  **Report**                                                                                                     (pdf)                                                                                                                                     
- Plate:  **Plate 1**                            (pdf)
- Download citation as:  RIS                         |                         Dublin                            Core

#### Abstract

Part or all of this report is presented in Portable Document Format                        (PDF). For best results viewing and printing PDF documents, it is recommended that you download                        the documents to your computer and open them with Adobe Reader. PDF documents opened from your                        browser may not display or print as intended. Download the latest version of Adobe Reader, free of charge. More information                        about viewing, downloading, and printing report files can be found at the common download problems FAQ.
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 182 (Friday, September 19, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 49254]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-24984]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management
[ID-957-1430-00]


Idaho: Filing of Plats of Survey

    The supplemental plat of the following described land was 
officially filed in the Idaho State Office, Bureau of Land Management, 
Boise, Idaho, effective 9:00 a.m. September 10, 1997.
    The supplemental plat prepared to create lots 1 and 2 in tract 39, 
in unsurveyed T. 30 N., R. 7 E., Boise Meridian, Idaho, was accepted, 
September 10, 1997.
    This survey was executed to meet certain administrative needs of 
the USDA Forest Service. All inquiries concerning the survey of the 
above described land must be sent to the Chief, Cadastral Survey, Idaho 
State Office, Bureau of Land Management, 1387 South Vinnell Way, Boise, 
Idaho, 83709-1657.

    Dated: September 10, 1997.
Duane E. Olsen,
Chief Cadastral Surveyor for Idaho.
[FR Doc. 97-24984 Filed 9-18-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-GG-M
#### WINN-DIXIE STORES, INC., a Florida corporation, Appellant, v. Robert BURSE, Appellee.

No. 2414.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. Fourth District.

Nov. 12, 1969.

*267Leonard V. Wood, and B. C. Pyle, of Wittaker, Pyle & Wood, Orlando, for appellant.

William H. Roundtree, Cocoa, for ap-pellee.

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from a final judgment reflecting a jury decision to award damages to plaintiff in a slip and fall case.

Plaintiff, Robert Burse, while shopping in defendant’s Winn-Dixie store, was injured when he slipped and fell upon a plastic container top from a six pack of beer. Plaintiff received an award of $7,500 despite the defendant’s objection that the evidence was insufficient for the jury to impute constructive knowledge of the hazard to the store owner.

Defendant-appellant urges that the trial court should have granted their motion for a directed verdict at the conclusion of the plaintiff’s case, and failing to do that, upon reserving ruling on such motion, should have granted it subsequent to the jury’s verdict in behalf of the plaintiff. We disagree.

Fundamentally, the issue presented is one of fact. The record reveals that it was commonplace for persons to come into the store and purchase individual cans of beer which they broke out of six packs, which often resulted in the accumulation of excess plastic container tops on the beer shelf. It was also shown that there was no suitable container furnished in the vicinity where trash might be disposed of. Although the manager of the store testified that he was responsible for keeping the premises clean, he had not inspected the area nor where the plaintiff fell for an hour and a half before the accident. Further, an examination of the packaging container which the plaintiff slipped upon revealed that it was filthy and scuffed up. Under these circumstances, it is foreseeable that container tops might end up on the floor, and in the instant case the evidence leads to the reasonable inference that the container that was the cause of the plaintiff’s injury had been on the floor for a sufficient period of time so as to constitute notice. This accords with the principles announced in Jenkins v. Brackin, Fla.App.1965, 171 So.2d 589; Haley v. Harvey Building, Inc., Fla.App.1964, 168 So.2d 330; Food Fair Stores, Inc. v. Trusell, Fla.1961, 131 So.2d 730; Food Fair Stores of Florida, Inc. v. Patty, Fla.1959, 109 So.2d 5.

*268In our view the testimony on the plaintiff’s case taken as a whole is such that several inferences may be drawn, thus presenting a jury question, and that appellant has failed to meet his burden of demonstrating that the trial judge erred in denying the motion for directed verdict. McHargue v. Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Company, Inc., Fla.App.1968, 209 So.2d 283. Accordingly, we find no error and therefore,

Affirm.

WALDEN and McCAIN, JJ., and GONZALEZ, JOSE A., Associate Judge, concur.
EXHIBIT 32.2


                   CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO RULE 13a-14(b) OR

                      RULE 15d-14(b) and 18 U.S.C. ss.1350,

                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


In connection with the quarterly report of Pangea Petroleum Corporation (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ended September 30, 2005 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Scott Duncan, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. ss.1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 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 results of operations of the Company.


Date: November 11, 2005             By: /s/ Scott Duncan
                                        ----------------
                                    Scott Duncan
                                    Chief Financial Officer
THE**SPI~fT'** OFALASKA April30, 2012 Dockets - Dockets OST 96-1960 U.S. Department ofTransportation 400 Seventh Street, S.W. Room PL 401 Washington, D.C. 20590 RE: Peninsula Airways d/b/a PenAir operated in partnership with Alaska Airlines - Family Assistance Program 

### ·;. I ' (.• 0

Certain of PenAir's Part 121 operations are conducted in partnership with Alaska Airlines, Inc., under code-sharing or capacity purchase arrangements. The Alaska Airlines family assistance plan (which we understand is on filewith youroffice)will apply such flights; That plan-conta1ns the elements required underthe Aviation Disaster Family Assistance Act of 1996, as amended, and those specified in Vision 100. In the eventofan accident or incident involving an Alaska Airlines-coded, PenAir-operated flight, Empathia, Inc. (formerly EAS, Inc.) will provide next of kin notification and othersupport services. Please referto that plan foraQditional information. The Alaska Airlines Emergency Response plan outlines·responsibilities in addressing the airline victim support tasks within the Aviation Disaster Family Assistance Plan in greaterdetail. Should you have questions, please feel free to contact me at•••••orvia email at Brian.whilden@penair.com. Sincerely,

# ~ Vice President, Safety 

### I Compliance

1 

### info@penair.com 1 

### penair.com
No. 00-767.

#### Immigration and Naturalization Service *v.*St. Cyr.

C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari granted. Brief of petitioner is to be filed with the Clerk and served upon opposing counsel on or before 3 p.m., Monday, February 26, 2001. Brief of respondent is to be filed with the Clerk and served upon opposing counsel on or before 3 p.m., Wednesday, March 28, 2001. A reply brief, if any, is to be filed with the Clerk and served upon opposing counsel on or before 3 p.m., Monday, April 16, 2001. This Court’s Rule 29.2 is suspended in this case.
#### B & H SALES, INC., Appellant, v. JEWEL BUILDERS, INC., a Foreign Corporation authorized to do business in the State of Florida, Central Florida Water Systems, Inc., a Florida Corporation, Crow, Pope & Land of Florida, Inc. and Cotton States Mutual Insurance Company, Appellees.

No. 76-2686.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Dec. 28, 1977.

Rehearing Denied Jan. 26, 1978.

*654Robert G. Brightman and Robert D. Melton of Robert D. Melton, P.A., and H. James Brett, Orlando, for appellant.

Harold E. Morían, II and Monroe E. McDonald of Sanders, McEwan, Mims & McDonald, Orlando, for appellee Cotton States.

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from an order setting aside a jury verdict in a garnishment proceeding. The appellant, B & H Sales, Inc., secured a judgment against Central Florida Water Systems, Inc. Thereafter, a writ of garnishment was issued to Crow, Pope and Land of Florida, Inc. alleging that Crow owed Central Florida sufficient funds to satisfy the judgment. In an amended answer to the garnishment writ Pope admitted the indebtedness. The ap-pellee, Cotton States Mutual Insurance Company, filed a claim pursuant to Section 77.16 of the Florida Statutes, alleging that it had a superior claim to the funds held by Crow. A jury trial was held on Cotton States’ claim which resulted in a verdict in favor of B & H. The trial court then set aside the verdict and entered a judgment for Cotton States. A judgment contrary to a jury verdict may be entered only where no evidence is presented on which the jury could lawfully have returned its verdict. *Landry v. Sterling Apartments, Inc.,*231 So.2d 225 (Fla. 4th DCA 1969). Here, the disputed issues of fact submitted to the jury concerned the amount and propriety of certain payments made on a construction project. Those issues were submitted to the jury along with proper legal instructions. In his order setting aside the verdict the trial court concluded that only one result could be reached on the basis of the evidence presented. We disagree. The evidence presented consisted largely of the testimony of one witness. On cross examination the testimony of this witness was sufficiently challenged to create a factual dispute on the issues ultimately submitted to the jury. The jury’s verdict is not inconsistent with the proof presented.

Accordingly, the judgment of the trial court is hereby reversed with directions that a judgment be entered in accordance with the verdict of the jury.

REVERSED WITH DIRECTIONS.

DOWNEY, ANSTEAD and DAUKSCH, JJ., concur.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                         195,926
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  305,413
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                    423,511
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               942,085
<PP&E>                                         175,481
<DEPRECIATION>                                  69,840
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               7,277,828
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          710,418
<BONDS>                                        497,173
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                   5,721,824
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 7,277,828
<SALES>                                      1,823,860
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,823,860
<CGS>                                          997,550
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  997,550
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               599,969
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              29,726
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                287,215
<INCOME-TAX>                                     5,076
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            282,651
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   282,651
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
### Water for the growing needs of Harrison County, Mississippi

By: Roy Newcome Jr.Donald E. ShattlesCarney P. Humphreys Jr.

                            https://doi.org/10.3133/wsp1856

#### Links

-                                                                                                                             Document:                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  **Report**                                                                                                     (pdf)                                                                                                                                     
- Plates:                               - **Plate 1**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 2**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 3**                            (pdf) 
- Download citation as:  RIS                         |                         Dublin                            Core

#### Abstract

Part or all of this report is presented in Portable Document Format                        (PDF). For best results viewing and printing PDF documents, it is recommended that you download                        the documents to your computer and open them with Adobe Reader. PDF documents opened from your                        browser may not display or print as intended. Download the latest version of Adobe Reader, free of charge. More information                        about viewing, downloading, and printing report files can be found at the common download problems FAQ.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE  CONTAINS SUMMARY  FINANCIAL  INFORMATION  EXTRACTED FROM THE FORM
10-Q AT MARCH 31, 1999 AND IS  QUALIFIED  IN ITS  ENTIRETY BY  REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1999
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                       3,309,100
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                6,300,100
<ALLOWANCES>                                   150,000
<INVENTORY>                                  3,731,200
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            13,959,700
<PP&E>                                       4,826,500
<DEPRECIATION>                                 373,600
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              18,554,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        6,431,300
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        10,100
<OTHER-SE>                                   8,707,500
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                18,554,000
<SALES>                                     26,580,300
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            26,580,300
<CGS>                                       24,678,800
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               24,678,800
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             1,545,000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              65,600
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                344,400
<INCOME-TAX>                                   137,800
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            206,600
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   206,600
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .02
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .02
        

</TABLE>
Exhibit 21.1

Subsidiaries of the Company



|                                     |  |                               
|------------------------------------ |  | ------------------------------
|Entity Name                          |  | State/Country of Incorporation
|ASIC Design Service, Inc.            |  | Delaware                      
|TranSwitch S.A.                      |  | France                        
|Horizon Semiconductors, Inc.         |  | Virginia                      
|Opal Acquisition Corporation         |  | Delaware                      
|Systems On Silicon, Inc.             |  | New Jersey                    
|TranSwitch Asia PTE Ltd.             |  | Singapore                     
|TranSwitch Asia Ltd.                 |  | Hong Kong                     
|TranSwitch II Corp.                  |  | Delaware                      
|TranSwitch III, Inc.                 |  | Delaware                      
|TranSwitch Europe N.V./S.A.          |  | Belgium                       
|TranSwitch India Private Limited     |  | India                         
|TranSwitch International Corp.       |  | Delaware                      
|Lehman Silicon Solutions S.A.        |  | Switzerland                   
|TranSwitch Silicon Valley, Inc.      |  | California                    
|TranSwitch (Israel) Ltd              |  | Israel                        
|TranSwitch Technologies Canada, Inc. |  | Canada                        
|TX Holdings Inc.                     |  | Delaware
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA 

SAMUEL BLAUCH, : Civil No. 1:23-CV-1073 

 : 

 Plaintiff : 

 : 

 v. : (Magistrate Judge Carlson) 

 : 

MARTIN O’MALLEY,

1

 : 

Commissioner of Social Security, : 

 : 

 Defendant. : 

ORDER 

AND NOW, this 26th day of November 2024, in accordance with the 

accompanying Memorandum Opinion, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT: 

1. The Clerk shall enter final judgment AFFIRMING the decision of the 

Commissioner of Social Security; and, 

2. The Clerk of Court shall CLOSE this case. 

 s/Martin C. Carlson 

 Martin C. Carlson 

 United States Magistrate Judge 

1

 Martin O’Malley became the Commissioner of Social Security on 

December 20, 2023. Accordingly, pursuant to Rule 25(d) of the Federal Rules of 

Civil Procedure and 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), Martin O’Malley is substituted for Kilolo 

Kijakazi as the defendant in this suit. 

Case 3:23-cv-01073-MCC Document 16 Filed 11/26/24 Page 1 of 1
1Because Appellant does not contest the mootness of this action, I will not waste judicial

resources by remanding to the Bankruptcy Court for determinations surrounding the good faith of

the purchase. Although a finding of good faith is clearly for the Bankruptcy Court in the first

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

VICTOR MILKO, )

)

 Appellant, )

)

 -vs- )

 Civil Action No. 05-1339

)

MARY M. MILKO, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) Bankruptcy No. 04-35381 JKF

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY, FOREST )

COUNTY TAX CLAIM BUREAU and BOBBY ) Adversary No. 05-2610

JEAN CASTNER, )

)

 Appellees. )

AMBROSE, Chief District Judge.

MEMORANDUM ORDER

Under appeal is an Order of the Bankruptcy Court permitting the sale of

certain property in connection with Debtor’s bankruptcy. In particular, the

Bankruptcy Court permitted the sale of the so-called Forest County Property

pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 363(h), and allegedly did so improperly. Appellant argues that

he moved for stay of the sale pending appeal, and the Bankruptcy Court denied that

motion. Appellee does not challenge the substance of the appeal; instead, she

argues that the appeal is moot. Appellant did not file a reply brief, and therefore

does not contest Appellee’s contentions.

Even if Appellant had opposed those contentions, however, I see nothing in

the record presented to counteract a finding of statutory mootness.1

Case 05-02610-JKF Doc 40 Filed 03/28/06 Entered 03/28/06 08:15:07 Desc Main Case 2:05-cv-01339-DWA Document 4 Filed 03/28/2006 Page 1 of 2


Document Page 1 of 2
instance, as an aside, I note that neither the record presented on appeal nor the parties’

contentions would contradict such a finding.

The Bankruptcy Code provides as follows:

The reversal or modification on appeal of an authorization

under subsection (b) or (c) of this section of a sale or lease

of property does not affect the validity of a sale or lease

under such authorization to an entity that purchased or

leased such property in good faith, whether or not such

entity knew of the pendency of the appeal, unless such

authorization and such sale or lease were stayed pending

appeal.

11 U.S.C. § 363(m).

The United States Court of Appeals has formulated a two-prong test for

mootness under § 363(m): 1) whether the order was stayed pending appeal; and 2)

whether vacating the order would affect the validity of the sale. Cinicola v.

Scharffenberger, 248 F.3d 110, 128 (3d Cir. 2001). Here, the order was not stayed

pending appeal, and Appellant now seeks an order reversing the sale. I can fashion

no remedy that would leave the validity of the sale intact.

 Therefore, this 28th day of March, 2006, it is ORDERED that this matter is

dismissed as statutorily moot.

 

 BY THE COURT:

 /S/ Donetta W. Ambrose 

 Donetta W. Ambrose, 

 Chief U. S. District Judge

Case 05-02610-JKF Doc 40 Filed 03/28/06 Entered 03/28/06 08:15:07 Desc Main Case 2:05-cv-01339-DWA Document 4 Filed 03/28/2006 Page 2 of 2


Document Page 2 of 2