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


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
     This  schedule  contains  summary  financial   information  extracted  from
financial  statements for the three month period ended February 28, 1995 and is
qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                         0000027850
<NAME>                        MARITIME TRANSPORT & TECHNOLOGY, INC.
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1
<CURRENCY>                                     $
       
<S>                                            <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                  3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              May-31-1995
<PERIOD-START>                                 Dec-01-1994
<PERIOD-END>                                   Feb-28-1995
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                1
<CASH>                                         0
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  0
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               0
<PP&E>                                         0
<DEPRECIATION>                                 0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 0
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          0
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       0
<OTHER-SE>                                     0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   0
<SALES>                                        0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               0
<CGS>                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                0
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            0
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   0
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  .00
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  .00
        



</TABLE>
p.1 

OAR Box 1828 

Prepped by Ollie Stewart 

Document Number: 

19) ll-K- (B) -7 

Docket Number: 

A-83-27 

Printed 11/12/2008 11:12:48 AM Sheet 19 of 325 
P.2 

CO) a * 

"-K-CBJ-7 

TABLE FOR MATERIAL UNIT COSTS BEING USED IN THE IFCAM 

MODEL. 

Letter from K.F. Held, EEA to J. Pratapas, EPA:EAB. 

July 30, 1979. 

THIS INFORMATION CAN BE FOUND IN DOCKET A-79-02, ITEM 

II-K-(B)-7
October 15, 2012Analyst Contact:Andrew Ziola918-588-7163Media Contact:Brad Borror918-588-7582





ONEOK and ONEOK Partners Schedule Third - quarter


2012 Earnings Conference Call and Webcast





TULSA, Okla. - Oct. 15, 2012 - ONEOK, Inc. (NYSE: OKE) and ONEOK Partners, L.P. (NYSE: OKS) will release their third-quarter 2012 earnings after the market closes on Oct. 30, 2012.





A joint conference call will be held the following day on Oct. 31, 2012, at 11 a.m. Eastern Daylight Time (10 a.m. Central Daylight Time).  The call also will be carried live on the ONEOK and ONEOK Partners websites.





Members of ONEOK's and ONEOK Partners' executive management team will participate in the call and webcast.





|      |                                                                                             
|----- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|What: | ONEOK, Inc. and ONEOK Partners, L.P. third-quarter 2012 earnings conference call and webcast




|      |                               
|----- | ------------------------------
|When: | 11 a.m. Eastern, Oct. 31, 2012

10 a.m. Central





|       |                                                         
|------ | --------------------------------------------------------
|Where: | 1) Phone conference call 800-946-0712, pass code 8481950

2) Log on to the webcast at www.oneok.com


3) Log on to the webcast at www.oneokpartners.com








If you are unable to participate in the conference call or the webcast, the replay will be available on ONEOK's website, www.oneok.com , and ONEOK Partners' website, www.oneokpartners.com , for 30 days.  A recording will be available by phone for seven days. The playback call may be accessed at 888-203-1112, pass code 8481950.











ONEOK, Inc. (pronounced ONE-OAK) (NYSE: OKE) is a diversified energy company. We are the general partner and own 43.4 percent of ONEOK Partners, L.P. (NYSE: OKS), one of the largest publicly traded master limited partnerships, which is a leader in the gathering, processing, storage and transportation of natural gas in the U.S.





---




ONEOK and ONEOK Partners Schedule Third-quarter


2012 Earnings Conference Call and Webcast





Page 2








and owns one of the nation's premier natural gas liquids (NGL) systems, connecting NGL supply in the Mid- Continent and Rocky Mountain regions with key market centers.  ONEOK is among the largest natural gas distributors in the United States, serving more than 2 million customers in Oklahoma, Kansas and Texas.  Our energy services operation focuses primarily on marketing natural gas and related services throughout the U.S. ONEOK is a FORTUNE 500 company and is included in Standard & Poor's (S&P) 500 Stock Index.





For more information, visit the websites at www.oneok.com or www.oneokpartners.com .





For the latest news about ONEOK and ONEOK Partners, follow us on Twitter @ONEOKNews and


@ONEOKPartners .





###
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent *

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision **

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

ANGEL MUNOZ MORALES and

ALEJANDRA MUNOZ,

 Petitioners,

 v.

ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,

 Respondent.

No. 07-71211

Agency Nos. A075-509-942

 A075-509-943

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted April 20, 2011** 

Before: RYMER, THOMAS, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.

Angel Munoz Morales and Alejandra Munoz, natives and citizens of

Mexico, petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order

denying their motion to reopen. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We

review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen, Mohammed v.

FILED

MAY 05 2011

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 07-71211

Gonzales, 400 F.3d 785, 791–92 (9th Cir. 2005), and we deny the petition for

review.

The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying as untimely petitioners’

motion to reopen because the motion was filed more than 90 days after the final

administrative order. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2); see also Cruz v. Mukasey, 532

F.3d 946, 949 (9th Cir. 2008) (per curiam) (“The pendency of a petition for review

of an order of removal does not toll the statutory time limit for the filing of a

motion to reopen with the BIA.”). 

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
#### Dorothy G. ROBINSON et al., Appellants, v. R & R INDUSTRIES, INC., etc., Appellees.

No. P-109.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

Oct. 21, 1971.

Rehearing Denied Nov. 23, 1971.

Stern & Bernardine, for appellants.

William C. Johnson, Jr., Holly Hill, for appellees.

PER CURIAM.

We have carefully reviewed the record on appeal and the briefs filed herein, and our consideration thereof requires a con-*44elusion that no error was committed in the trial court. Accordingly, the judgment herein is

Affirmed.

SPECTOR, C. J., and WIGGINTON and JOHNSON, JJ., concur.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Defense

###### Defense Acquisition Regulations System

          - 48 CFR Parts 222, 237, and 252
          - [Docket DARS-2018-0032]
          - RIN 0750-AJ66

# AGENCY:

Defense Acquisition Regulations System, Department of Defense (DoD).

# ACTION:

Final rule; correction.

# SUMMARY:

DoD is making a correction to the final rule published on May 30, 2018, which amended the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS) to remove a clause that is duplicative of an existing Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) clause. The document contained an incorrect RIN number.

# DATES:

Effective June 8, 2018.

Applicable beginning May 30, 2018.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Ms. Amy Williams, telephone 571-372-6106.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

In the final rule published at 83 FR 24892 on May 30, 2018, in the third column, the following correction is made to this rule:

The RIN number cited, RIN 0750-AJ54, is corrected to read RIN 0750-AJ66.

Amy G. Williams,

Deputy, Defense Acquisition Regulations System.

[FR Doc. 2018-12492 Filed 6-8-18; 8:45 am]

 BILLING CODE 5001-06-P
EXHIBIT 23.1
                                
                                
                CONSENT OF KPMG PEAT MARWICK LLP



The Board of Directors
Adams Golf, Inc.

We consent to the use of our report incorporated herein by
reference.



                              /s/  KPMG PEAT MARWICK LLP

Dallas, Texas
November 30, 1998
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

JOHN VETTER AND ASHLEY JONES,

Petitioners

v.

ANTHONY MILLER,

Respondent :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 234 MAL 2017

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from

the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 14th day of March, 2018

, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is

DENIED

.
Mr. Fred Grill 08 Apr 14

Aviation Safety Inspector Flight Standards District Office #25 Park 80 W est, Plaza One 250 Phele Avenue, Suite 003 Saddle Brook, NJ 07663
Dear Mr. Grill , Ref: Falcon 900EX EASy, N963RS, S/N 097 I am requesting u se of FAA exemption number 10971 (attached) which grants relief from 14 CFR 135.156(d)(4) which states that no aircraft flight data recording system may filter any parameter unless the certificate holder posse s ses tests and analytical procedures and test results have been approved by the FAA, and maintains that data as part of its required correlation documentation. This exemption applies only to the above mentioned Falcon 900EX EASy. I have read and understand the conditions and limitations listed in th e exemption. Should you have any questions or comment, please don’t hesitate to call me at 201 288 5 459 X233.
Sincerely,

Louis Ramm Director of Quality Assurance Meridian Air Charter attachment
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET OF FANSTEEL INC. AS OF MARCH 31, 1998 AND THE RELATED
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS FOR THE THREE MONTHS ENDED MARCH 31, 1998
AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO THE COMPANY'S FORM 10-Q FILING
FOR THE PERIOD ENDED MARCH 31, 1998.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                       7,490,943
<SECURITIES>                                 5,106,393
<RECEIVABLES>                               23,524,235
<ALLOWANCES>                                   272,184
<INVENTORY>                                 21,062,678
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            60,667,602
<PP&E>                                      64,017,722
<DEPRECIATION>                              49,355,570
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              93,096,457
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       25,221,992
<BONDS>                                      1,654,736
<COMMON>                                    21,497,145
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                  27,151,963
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                93,096,457
<SALES>                                     39,789,485
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            39,789,485
<CGS>                                       32,603,487
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               37,124,410
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             (100,613)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 7,200
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              21,025
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              2,765,688
<INCOME-TAX>                                 1,037,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          1,728,688
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 1,728,688
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.20
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.20
        

</TABLE>
No. 11027.

#### The State, ex rel. Village of McConnelsville, *v.*The County Auditor of Morgan County.

Decided June 23, 1908.

Error to Circuit Court of Morgan county.

*Messrs. Ivers & Danford,*for plaintiff in error.

*Mr. Alfred H. Mercer,*for defendant in error.

Judgment affirmed.

Price, C. J., Shauck, Crew, Spear and Davis, JJ., concur.
Exhibit 10(d)(d)(d)

 

NINTH AMENDMENT TO THE HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY

2005 EXECUTIVE DEFERRED COMPENSATION PLAN

(Amended and restated effective October 1, 2006)

 

The Hewlett-Packard Company 2005 Executive Deferred Compensation Plan, as amended and restated effective October 1, 2006, is hereby amended, effective as of the date executed below, to provide as follows:

 

1.                                      The definition of “Incentive Award” in Article I shall be amended in its entirety to read as follows:

 

“ ‘Incentive Award’ means an amount payable to an Eligible Employee under a cash bonus or incentive compensation plan of HP or an Affiliate that the Committee has deemed eligible for deferral, including bonuses paid under the EPfR Plan, the PfR Plan, the CPB Plan, the Hewlett-Packard Financial Services Incentive Compensation Plan, and the Shoreline Investment Management Company Performance Incentive Plan, and the annual bonus portion of the Hewlett-Packard Account Executive Pay for Performance Incentive Plan.  For the avoidance of doubt, the Hewlett-Packard Account Executive Pay for Performance Incentive Plan shall be considered an Incentive Award under this Plan beginning with the fiscal year 2014 payment.”

 

This Ninth Amendment to the Hewlett-Packard Company 2005 Executive Deferred Compensation Plan is hereby adopted this 15th day of January, 2014.

 

	
 
    	
HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
By:
    	
/s/ Tracy S. Keogh
    
	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    	
Tracy   S. Keogh
    
	
 
    	
 
    	
Executive   Vice President, Human Resources
### IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA DA 23

- 0288

_________________ PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF MONTANA, and SAMUEL DICKMAN, M.D., on behalf of themselves and their patients,

Plaintiffs and Appellees,

v. STATE OF MONTANA, by and through AUSTIN KNUDSEN, in his official capacity as Attorney General, the MONTANA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES, and CHARLIE BRERETON, in his official capacity as Director of the Department of Public Health and Human Services,

Defendants and Appellants. O R D E R

_________________ Upon consideration of Appellees ’ unopposed motion for an extension of time and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellees are granted an extension of time up to and including January 29, 2024, in which to prepare, file, and serve their answer brief in the captioned matter.

Electronically signed by: Beth Baker Justice, Montana Supreme Court November 3 2023

11/03/2023

Case Number: DA 23-0288
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 7622 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 7622

To permit each State to have 3 statues on display in the United States 
                                Capitol.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             July 16, 2020

  Mr. Cohen introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                   Committee on House Administration

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To permit each State to have 3 statues on display in the United States 
                                Capitol.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Share America's Diverse History in 
the Capitol Act''.

SEC. 2. PERMITTING STATES TO HAVE 3 STATUES ON DISPLAY IN CAPITOL.

    (a) In General.--Section 1814 of the Revised Statutes of the United 
States (2 U.S.C. 2131) is amended by striking ``not exceeding two in 
number'' and inserting ``not exceeding 3 in number''.
    (b) Conforming Amendment Regarding Procedures for Replacement of 
Statues.--Section 311(c) of the Legislative Branch Appropriations Act, 
2001 (2 U.S.C. 2132(c)), is amended by striking ``not more than two 
statues'' and inserting ``not more than 3 statues''.

SEC. 3. SENSE OF CONGRESS REGARDING OPPORTUNITY FOR PLACEMENT OF 
              STATUES OF WOMEN AND MINORITIES.

    It is the sense of Congress that, in light of the fact that statues 
of women and members of racial and ethnic minority groups are 
underrepresented in the United States Capitol, each State should use 
the opportunity provided by this Act to have an additional statue on 
display in the Capitol to furnish a statue depicting a woman or a 
member of a racial or ethnic minority group who is a notable figure in 
the State's history.
                                 <all>
```
This memorandum opinion was not selected for publication in the New Mexico Appellate Reports. Please see Rule 12-405 NMRA for restrictions on the citation of unpublished memorandum opinions. Please also note that this electronic memorandum opinion may contain computer-generated errors or other deviations from the official paper version filed by the Court of Appeals and does not include the filing date. IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO 1 DONALD RAY BISHOP, 2 Petitioner-Appellant, 3

v. NO. 32,597 4 LEA COUNTY COMMISSIONER, 5 DISTRICT 1, JOHN DOE I, 6 LEA COUNTY COMMISSIONER, 7 DISTRICT 2, JOHN DOE II, 8 LEA COUNTY COMMISSIONER, 9 DISTRICT 3, JOHN DOE III, 10 LEA COUNTY COMMISSIONER, 11 DISTRICT 4, JOHN DOE IV, 12 LEA COUNTY COMMISSIONER, 13 DISTRICT 5, JOHN DOE V, 14 Respondents-Appellees. 15
APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF LEA COUNTY 16 William G. W. Shoobridge, District Judge 17 Donald Ray Bishop 18 Las Cruces, NM 19 Pro se Appellant 20 Maddox, Holloman & Kirksey, P.C. 21Lee A. Kirksey 1 Hobbs, NM 2 for Appellees 3 MEMORANDUM OPINION 4 WECHSLER, Judge. 5 {1} Summary dismissal was proposed for the reasons stated in the notice of 6 proposed summary disposition. No memorandum opposing summary dismissal has 7 been filed and the time for doing so has expired. 8 {2} DISMISSED. 9 {3} IT IS SO ORDERED. 10

__________________________________ 11 JAMES J. WECHSLER, Judge 12 WE CONCUR: 13

_________________________________ 14 JONATHAN B. SUTIN, Judge 15

_________________________________ 16 J. MILES HANISEE, Judge 17
Preflight Risk Assesment

 Inspect for defects ____

 Propellers installed and tightened ____

 Check for obstructions/ Power lines, trees, buildings, etc. ____

 Clear weather conditions ____

 Take off area clear of people ____

 Clear distance from nearest airport ____

Pre Flight Checklist

 Phantom & R/C battery charged ____

 UAS Battery Inserted ____

 Tablet charged ____

 Propellers installed and tightened ____

 Gimbal not obstructed ____

 Gimbal locked and lens cap removed ____

 SD Card in camera/SD card formatted ____

 Phantom On ____

 Compass calibrated ____

 WIFI connection to monitor verified ____

 DJI Application connect to camera ____

 Satellite connections verified ____

 Charge Levels safe to flight ____

 Place UAS in clear and safe launch and recovery position if it returns home ____

 Area clear of people ____

 Inspect for defects ____

 Check rear LED flight indicators ____

 Video recording Start ____

 Take off ____

 Hover 10 feet above ground to confirm unit under control ____

 Verify all sticks operate correctly while in hover ____
Post Flight Checklist

 Turn off video recording ____

 Turn off/remove battery ____

 Power off remote controller ____

 Power off tablet ____

 Replace gimbal clamp and lens cap ____
SERVED JUNE 8, 2010 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 

IN THE MATTER OF 

HALLOCHEM PHARMA CO., LTD., 

Respondent. 

FAA DOCKET NO. CPlONEOOOl 

(Civil Penalty Proceeding) 

DMS NO. FAA-2010-0197 

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE'S ORDER DISMISSING 

PROCEEDING AND CANCELLING HEARING 

The parties have informed me that they have settled this case. They 

have filed a withdrawal of the complaint (on behalf of the Complainant) and 

a withdrawal of the Respondent's request for a hearing. 

In consideration of the foregoing, and pursuant to §13.215 of the 

Procedural Rules, this proceeding is hereby dismissed with prejudice. 

The hearing scheduled for July 20, 2010 is cancelled. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

'/L(LIsaac D. Benkin 

Administrative Law Judge 
FAA Docket No. CPlONEOOOl 

(Civil Penalty Action) 

SERVICE LIST 

ORIGINAL & ONE COPY 

Hearing Docket 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue, S.W. 

Washington, DC 20591 

Attention Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Wilbur Wright Building - Room 2014* 

ONE COPY 

He Xu, Respondent's Counsel 

Deheng Law Firm Shenzhen Office 

11/F, Tower B, Anlian Plaza, 4018 

Jintian Road, Futian District, Shenzhen 

Guangdong Province, China 

TEL: 86-755-88286488 

FAX: 86-755-88286499 

e-mail address: Shenzhen(a).dehenglaw.com 

Pallochem Pharma Co., Ltd., President 

17F, Venus Science Incubate Center 

No. 60 Xingguang Road, New North Zone 

Chongqing, China 401121 

TEL: 236-703-0808 

R. Bennett Sargent, Complainant's Counsel 

Federal Aviation Administration 

Office of the Regional Counsel 

12 New England Executive Park, ANE-7 

Burlington, MA 01803 

TEL: 781-238-7058 

FAX: 781-238-7055 

The Honorable Isaac D. Benkin 

Administrative Law Judge 

Office of Hearings, M-20 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. 

East Building Ground Floor, Room El2-320 

Washington, D.C. 20590 

TEL: Attorney 202-366-2139; Legal Assistant: 

202-366-5121 

FAX: 202-366-7536 

' Service was by U.S. Mail. For service in person or by expedited courier, use the following address: 

Hearing Docket, Federal Aviation Administration, 600 Independence Avenue, S. W., Wilbur Wright Building -

Room 2014, Washington, DC 20591, Attn: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430.