alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
STATE OF CONNECTICUT

DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

STATE OF CONNECTICUT

and

Ogden Martin Systems

ofBrislol, Inc.

TRADING AGREEMENT A:-:ID

ORDER NO. 8094 MODIFICATION

TRADING AGREEMENT AND ORDER MODJFICATION

in the matter of a Trading Agreement and Order between the Commissioner of Environme01al

Protection ("Commissioner") and Ogden Manin Systems of Bristol. Inc. ("Ogden).

WHEREAS, the Commissioner and Ogden, having agreed to the terms and conditions set

forth in Trading Agreement and Order No. 8094 issued on July 28, 1997, do now, by mutual

agreement, modify paragraph B. as follows:

I. Change the first date specified in paragraph B. from April 30, 1999 to

December 14, 1999 and change the second date specified in paragraph B. from

April 30, 1999 to December 14, 1999.

All other terms and conditions of Tracting Agreement and Order No. 8094 issued by the

Commissioner acting under Sections 22a·6: 22a-171, 22a-174, 22a· 176, 22a· 177 and 22a·1 78 of

the Connecticut General Statutes shall remain in effect.

Initials: ;\ M -{"r 'If\1

(Printed on Re~y~led Paptr)

79 Elm Suet! • HmfOld. CT 06106·5127

hll p:lldep. $111 e.el.U$

An Equal OpP0rlUltHY Employa

Dale:
Ogden Martin Systems

of Bristol, Inc.

2 TRADING AGREEMENT

AND ORDER NO. 8094

MODIFICATION

Ogden Martin Systems of Bristol, Inc. hereby consents to the entry of this modification to the

Trading Agreement and Order without further notice.

Ogden Martin Systems of Bristol, Inc.

Signature: --',-'-""'cQ3....-'A=~""'¥,·"'~=---- Type Name: TEd Hoefler

Type Title: V. P. Northeast Region

Date:

}\ ur J. Rocque, Jr.

ornmissioner

Entered as a modification of an Order of the Commissioner of Environmental Protection numbered

8094 this __...:::l----'-1__daY of --IjoJ-r-=.><.-__ 1999.

----"

CITY OF BRISTOL

LAND RECORDS

MAILED CERTIFlED MAIL,

RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED

Certified Document No.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
CONTINENTAL INFORMATION SYSTEMS CORPORATION AS OF AND FOR THE THREE MONTHS ENDED
AUGUST 31, 1998. (IN THOUSANDS, EXCEPT PER SHARE AMOUNTS)
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAY-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               AUG-31-1998
<CASH>                                           1,663
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   15,188
<ALLOWANCES>                                     (177)
<INVENTORY>                                      1,973
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                18,647
<PP&E>                                          25,039
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (7,831)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  41,893
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            6,193
<BONDS>                                          6,630
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            71
<OTHER-SE>                                      28,999
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    41,893
<SALES>                                          3,098
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 5,678
<CGS>                                            2,696
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    4,336
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   920
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    81
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 164
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    177
<INCOME-TAX>                                        67
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                110
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       110
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .02
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .02
        

</TABLE>
#### LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellant, v. Sophie KEENAN and Joseph Keenan et al., Appellees.

No. 73-870.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Nov. 27, 1973.

Appeal dismissed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                         494,562
<SECURITIES>                                   718,000
<RECEIVABLES>                                6,886,813
<ALLOWANCES>                                   211,906
<INVENTORY>                                  9,994,888
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            18,557,745
<PP&E>                                       5,448,339
<DEPRECIATION>                               3,371,507
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              25,572,909
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        4,533,419
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     4,909,132
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                25,572,909
<SALES>                                      1,155,557
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,155,557
<CGS>                                        1,306,657
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,808,866
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              69,282
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (2,029,248)
<INCOME-TAX>                                 (487,020)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (1,542,228)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (1,542,228)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.99)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.99)


</TABLE>
#### AMERICAN EMPLOYERS’ INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellant, v. The HOME INDEMNITY COMPANY, Appellee.

No. 69-620.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. Second District.

Jan. 16, 1970.

Appeal dismissed.
Treasury approves Utah’s plan to invest $7 million of CPF funding in multipurpose community facilities to improve resources for communities that 

enable work, education, and health monitoring.

Capital Projects Fund Award Fact Sheet

Utah

 

▪ Program Summary: $7 million for Multi-Purpose Community Facilities (5% of CPF

allocation)

▪ Program Description: The construction of a

community campus in Box Elder County that 

includes a family center, crisis shelter, and 

nonprofit community space. The facility will be 

used to provide educational opportunities, 

including academic remediation and tutoring, 

workforce skills classes for teens and adults, and health screenings.

▪ Key State Contact: Division of Child and Family Services of the Utah Department of

Health and Human Services

Utah Capital Projects Fund Program Overview

For More Information: 

For Media Inquiries: 

For General Inquiries:

Please visit www.treasury.gov/CPF

Please contact the U.S. Treasury Press Office at (202) 622-2960

Please email CapitalProjectsFund@treasury.gov for additional information

Utah estimates that the 

community campus will 

serve more than 3,500 

individuals annually.
#### Joseph Francis ZEREGA, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 70-240.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

April 28, 1971.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
# table 2022
#### Freeman COLLINS, Appellant, v. METROPOLITAN DADE COUNTY, Phillip Lee Shaffer and Florida Power & Light Company, Inc., Appellees.

No. 69-1022.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. Third District.

Jan. 7, 1970.

PER CURIAM.

Appeal dismissed.
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 10**  **- 7473** 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee ,
v. ANDRE FERNE SAINT

- JEAN, a/k/a Dre , Defendant

- Appellant
.

Appeal from the United States District Court f or the Western District of Virginia , at Harrisonburg
. Glen E. Conrad , Chief District Judge. ( 5:06

- cr - 00038

- gec - mfu

- 7 )

Submitted : February 10, 2011 Decided: February 18, 2011

Before WILKINSON and DAVIS , Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by un published per curiam opinion
.
Andre Ferne Saint

- Jean, Appellant Pro Se. Joseph W. H. Mott, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit
.2 PER CURIAM: Andre Ferne Saint

- Jean seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2010) motion. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the notice of appeal was not timely filed. When the United States or its officer or agency is a party, the notice of appeal must be filed no more than sixty days after the entry of the district court’s final judgment or order, Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(B), unless the district court extends the appeal period u nder Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(5), or reopens the appeal period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(6). “[T]he timely filing of a notice of appeal in a civil case is a jurisdictional requirement.” Bowles v. Russell , 551 U.S. 205, 214 (2007). The district court’s order was entered on the docket on February 17, 2010. The notice of appeal was filed on October 12, 2010. **∗**

**∗** For the purposes of this appeal, we assume that the date appearing on the notice of appeal is the earliest date it could have been properly delivered to prison officials for mailing to the court. Fed. R. App. P. 4(c); Houston v. Lack , 487 U.S. 266 (1988). Because Saint

- Jean failed to file a timely notice of appeal or to obtain an extension or reopening of the appeal period, we dismiss the appeal. We dispe nse with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented3 in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED
**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 Annual Report of ABC Acquisition Corp 1501 (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Nitin Amersey, Chief Financial Officer, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to my knowledge: 

(1)
The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) 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 as of the date and for the periods expressed in the Report.

/s/ Nitin Amersey
Nitin Amersey
Chief Financial Officer

April 6, 2010

The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document.**
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT AUDREY D. HARRIS, Petitioner,

v. C.F.S. Air Cargo; HARTFORD FIRE; No. 96-2684 DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS' COMPENSATION PROGRAMS, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, Respondents. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Benefits Review Board. (No. 95-751) Submitted: November 18, 1997 Decided: February 6, 1998 Before ERVIN and WILKINS, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge.

_________________________________________________________________ Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

_________________________________________________________________ COUNSEL Audrey D. Harris, Petitioner Pro Se. Gerard E. W. Voyer, TAYLOR & WALKER, P.C., Norfolk, Virginia, for Respondents.

_________________________________________________________________Unpublished opinions are not binding pr ecedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

_________________________________________________________________ OPINION PER CURIAM: Petitioner Audrey D. Harris, a longshoreman, injured her back, shoulder, and neck at work. An Administrative Law Judge ("ALJ") denied benefits, and Petitioner appealed to the Benefits Review Board (the "Board"). Because the Board failed to resolve the appeal (which had been pending for over one year) before September 12, 1996, the ALJ's decision was considered affirmed by the Board on that date for purposes of obtaining judicial review. See Omnibus Appropriations Act of 1996, Pub. L. No. 104-134, § 101(d), 110 Stat. 1321 (Apr. 26,1996). In her timely petition, Petitioner argues that substantial evidence does not support the ALJ's determination that she did not suffer a disability due to her injury and thus was not entitled to disability benefits. Because substantial evidence s upports the ALJ's decision, we affirm. The record discloses that Petitioner's treating doctors found no objective evidence to verify Petitioner's contentions of prolonged physical injury resulting from her work accident. Furthermore, twodoctors determined that Petitioner was capable of resuming her normal work activities shortly after her accident. Therefore, we find substantial evidence supports the ALJ's conclusion that Petitioner did not suffer a disability. The record further discloses that a doctor who treated Petitioner for over a year following her accident ascertainedno causal connection between Petitioner's work accident and her carpal tunnel syndrome. Accordingly, we find that substantial evidence supports the ALJ's determination that Petitioner was not entitled to compensation for medical expenses incurred to treat her carpal tunnel syndrome. We therefore affirm the ALJ's order and summary affirmance of the Board denying Petitioner relief under the Longshore and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act, 33 U.S.C.A. §§ 901-950 (West 1986 &
2Supp. 1997). We dispense with oral argument b ecause the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED 3
Not for Publication in West's Federal Reporter

Citation Limited Pursuant to 1st Cir. Loc. R. 32.3

United States Court of Appeals

For the First Circuit

No. 05-2529

MERSSI HEYDEMANS,

Petitioner,

v.

ALBERTO R. GONZALES, ATTORNEY GENERAL,

Respondent.

ON PETITION FOR REVIEW OF AN ORDER OF

THE BOARD OF IMMIGRATION APPEALS

Before

 Selya, Circuit Judge,

Campbell, Senior Circuit Judge,

and Lipez, Circuit Judge.

Merssi Heydemans on brief pro se.

Peter D. Keisler, Assistant Attorney General, Greg D. Mack,

Senior Litigation Counsel, and Jeffrey A. McLellan, Trial Attorney,

on brief for appellee.

August 31, 2006
-2-

Per Curiam. Merssi Heydemans seeks review of a Board of

Immigration Appeals (BIA) order affirming a decision by an

immigration judge (IJ) that found him ineligible to apply for

asylum and denied his application for withholding of removal and

protection under the Convention Against Torture. For the following

reasons, we deny his petition for review.

1. We lack jurisdiction to review the IJ's determination

that Heydemans is ineligible for asylum because his application

seeking asylum was untimely and he did not qualify for an

exception. Hayek v. Gonzales, 445 F.3d 501, 506-07 (1st Cir. 2006)

(per curiam).

2. In its decision dated September 15, 2005, the BIA

adopted and affirmed the IJ's decision dated April 14, 2004, and so

we review the reasoning in the IJ's decision. Id. at 506. The IJ

relied on the correct legal standards, and substantial evidence of

record supports her decision (she described that evidence in her

decision, and we do not repeat it here). Accordingly, the decision

to deny the application for withholding of removal and protection

under the Convention Against Torture must be upheld. Cf. Nikijuluw

v. Gonzalez, 427 F.3d 115, 122 (1st Cir. 2005) (sustaining the

denial of an asylum claim by an Indonesian Christian whose church

had been burned down because his church was being rebuilt, his

Christian family members continued to live safely in Indonesia, and
-3-

the country conditions report confirmed that anti-Christian

violence had declined significantly).

3. Heydemans offers new materials to support his

petition, but we may not consider them because our review is

limited to the materials in the appellate record. See 8 U.S.C. §

1252(b)(4)(A).

The petition for review is denied.
S:\CHARTS\1Q-REPORT.10.doc November 12, 2010 (10:21 AM)

Quarterly Report to Congress on International Monetary Fund Lending

April 1 – June 30, 2010

Board 

Approval Date Country Amount Type

U.S. 

Position Background

04/02/10 Grenada SDR 8.775 million

($13.3 million)

ECF Approve http://www.imf.org/external/

np/sec/pr/2010/pr10133.htm

05/07/10

Guinea-Bissau SDR 22.365 million

($33.3 million)

ECF Abstain http://www.imf.org/external/

np/sec/pr/2010/pr10185.htm

Colombia SDR 2.322 billion

($3.46 billion)

FCL Approve http://www.imf.org/external/

np/sec/pr/2010/pr10186.htm

05/09/10 Greece SDR 26.4 billion

(€30 billion)

SBA Approve http://www.imf.org/external/

np/sec/pr/2010/pr10187.htm
- 2 -

05/12/10 Uganda NCV PSI Approve http://www.imf.org/external/

np/sec/pr/2010/pr10195.htm

05/28/10 Nepal SDR 28.52 million

($42.05 million)

RCF Approve http://www.imf.org/external/

np/sec/pr/2010/pr10219.htm

06/02/10

Lesotho SDR 41.88 million

($61.4 million)

ECF Approve http://www.imf.org/external/

np/sec/pr/2010/pr10224.htm

Solomon Islands SDR 12.48 million

($18.3 million)

SCF Approve http://www.imf.org/external/

np/sec/pr/2010/pr10223.htm
- 3 -

06/04/10

Sierra Leone SDR 31.11 million

($45.4 million)

ECF Approve http://www.imf.org/external/

np/sec/pr/2010/pr10228.htm

Tanzania NCV PSI Approve http://www.imf.org/external/

np/sec/pr/2010/pr10227.htm

06/07/10

Tajikistan SDR 26.1 million

($38.1 million)

ECF 

Augmentation

Abstain http://www.imf.org/external/

np/sec/pr/2010/pr10230.htm

Antigua and Barbuda SDR 81 million

($117.8 million)

SBA Approve http://www.imf.org/external/

np/sec/pr/2010/pr10232.htm
- 4 -

06/14/10

Mozambique NCV PSI Approve http://www.imf.org/external/

np/sec/pr/2010/pr10242.htm

Burkina Faso SDR 46.154 million

($67.7 million)

ECF Approve http://www.imf.org/external/

np/sec/pr/2010/pr10241.htm

Benin SDR 74.28 million

($109 million)

ECF Abstain http://www.imf.org/external/

np/sec/pr/2010/pr10243.htm

06/16/10 Rwanda NCV PSI Approve http://www.imf.org/external/

np/sec/pr/2010/pr10247.htm

06/25/10 Togo SDR 11 million

($16.2 million)

ECF 

Augmentation

Abstain http://www.imf.org/external/

np/sec/pr/2010/pr10258.htm

06/28/10 Armenia SDR133.40 million

($197.4 million)

EFF Approve http://www.imf.org/external/

np/sec/pr/2010/pr10263.htm

SDR133.40 million

($197.4 million)

ECF
U.S. TREASURY FINANCING SCHEDULE FOR 4TH QUARTER 2003

BILLIONS OF DOLLARS

ANNOUNCEMENT AUCTION SETTLEMENT OFFERED MATURING NEW

ISSUE DATE DATE DATE AMOUNT AMOUNT MONEY

4-WK 3-MO 6-MO

4-WEEK AND 9/25 9/29 10/2 16.00 16.00 15.00 50.00 -3.00

3&6 MONTH BILLS 10/2 10/6 10/9 16.00 16.00 15.00 49.00 -2.00

10/9 10/13 10/16 12.00 17.00 15.00 42.00 2.00

10/16 10/20 10/23 18.00 18.00 16.00 47.00 5.00

10/23 10/27 10/30 20.00 18.00 16.00 48.00 6.00

10/30 11/3 11/6 20.00 18.00 16.00 47.00 7.00

11/6 11/10 11/13 20.00 17.00 17.00 42.00 12.00

11/13 11/17 11/20 22.00 17.00 17.00 50.00 6.00

11/20 11/24 11/28 22.00 16.00 17.00 52.00 3.00

11/27 12/1 12/4 18.00 16.00 17.00 54.00 -3.00

12/4 12/8 12/11 16.00 16.00 17.00 54.00 -5.00

12/11 12/15 12/18 12.00 15.00 16.00 56.00 -13.00

12/18 12/22 12/26 16.00 15.00 16.00 56.00 -9.00

653.00 647.00 6.00

CASH MANAGEMENT BILLS

12-Day Bill 12/1 12/2 12/3 20.00 20.00 0.00

 Matures 12/15

COUPONS

CHANGE

IN SIZE

5-Year Note 10/5 10/8 10/15 20.00

10-Year TIPS (R) 10/5 10/9 10/15 10.00 -1.00 0.00 30.00

2-Year Note 10/27 10/29 10/31 25.00 +1.00 18.78 6.22

3-Year Note 11/5 11/12 11/17 25.00

5-Year Note 11/5 11/13 11/17 20.00

10-Year Note 11/5 11/14 11/17 20.00 24.81 40.19

2-Year Note 11/24 11/26 12/1 25.00 19.97 5.03

5-Year Note 12/8 12/10 12/15 20.00

10-Year Note (R) 12/8 12/11 12/15 16.00 0.00 36.00

2-Year Note 12/19 12/23 12/31 25.00 22.17 2.83

206.00 85.73 120.27

R = Reopening NET CASH RAISED THIS QUARTER: 126.27

A = Announced

Treasury announced a Q4 

borrowing need of $126 

billion on 7/28/03
TBAC RECOMMENDED US TREASURY FINANCING SCHEDULE FOR 3rd QUARTER 2023*

BILLIONS OF DOLLARS

NEW

MONEY

Net BILLS Issuance for the quarter 554.55

SETTLEMENT OFFERED MATURING NEW

ISSUE DATE AMOUNT AMOUNT** MONEY

COUPONS

CHANGE^

3-Year Note 7/17 40.00 0.00

10-Year Note (r) 7/17 32.00 0.00

30-Year Bond (r) 7/17 18.00 0.00 84.40 5.60

10-Year TIPS 7/31 17.00 0.00

20-Year Bond (r) 7/31 12.00 0.00

2-Year Note 7/31 42.00 0.00

2-Year FRN 7/31 24.00 0.00

5-Year Note 7/31 43.00 0.00

7-Year Note 7/31 35.00 0.00 184.96 -11.96

3-Year Note 8/15 42.00 2.00

10-Year Note 8/15 37.00 2.00

30-Year Bond 8/15 23.00 2.00 84.03 17.97

2-Year FRN (r) 8/25 22.00 0.00 0.00 22.00

30-Year TIPS (r) 8/31 8.00 0.00

20-Year Bond 8/31 16.00 1.00

2-Year Note 8/31 44.00 2.00

5-Year Note 8/31 45.00 2.00

7-Year Note 8/31 36.00 1.00 104.01 44.99

3-Year Note 9/15 44.00 2.00

10-Year Note (r) 9/15 34.00 2.00

30-Year Bond (r) 9/15 20.00 2.00 35.14 62.86

10-Year TIPS (r) 9/29 15.00 0.00

2-Year FRN (r) 9/29 22.00 0.00 0.00 37.00

671.00 492.55 178.45

Estimates are italicized. r = Reopening

NET CASH RAISED THIS QUARTER: 733

* This Financing table is meant to be illustrative based on meeting discussions and does not indicate how Treasury will actually issue

debt in the future.

** Maturing amount is based on private holdings as of 04/28/2023 and subject to change based on Fed purchases.

^ Change is with respect to previous auction. For securities with reopenings, change from new cusip to new cusip, 1st reopening

 to 1st reopening, and etc.