alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
U.S. flag
              An official website of the United States government





---

close


back button
 Belgium source
 Print Share
 Basic Facts Population
 People per sq. km
 Males per 100 females
 Children per woman
 Goods exported from U.S.
 Goods imported to U.S.
 Change in exports from U.S. for 2014 to 2023
 A Closer Look Source
 Comparisons
 Compared to the U.S.
 Compared to the World
 K = Thousands
                M = Millions
                B = Billions
  Merchandise Trade U.S. Trade in Manufactured Goods
 Top Exported Goods by U.S. State or Territory
 Population Current and Projected Population
 Population by Age and Sex
 Source and Notes Source: U.S. Census Bureau, International Database (demographic data) and USA Trade Online (trade data); Central Intelligence Agency, The World Fact Book (country reference maps). This application presents data for 228 countries and areas of the world with a 2024 population of 5,000 or more. For eleven of those countries and areas, only demographic data are presented. "Data not available" indicates that data are not available from this application.  In such instances, data may be available elsewhere at the census.gov website. Trade figures presented for France do not include data for overseas departments French Guiana, Guadeloupe, Martinique, Mayotte, and Reunion but do include data for dependencies Saint Barthelemy and Saint Martin.  Trade figures for the United Kingdom include data for crown dependencies Guernsey, Isle of Man, and Jersey. To learn more about world population projections, go to Notes on the World Population Clock. To learn more about international trade data, go to Guide to Foreign Trade Statistics. All trade figures are in U.S. dollars on a nominal basis.


CONNECT WITH US
 Information Quality
                    Data Linkage Infrastructure
                    Data Protection and Privacy Policy
                    Accessibility      
                    FOIA
                    Inspector General
                    No FEAR Act
                    U.S. Department of Commerce
                    USA.gov
  Measuring America's People, Places, and Economy
ex10a.htm
















Exhibit (10)(a)

















Consent of Ernst & Young LLP, Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm












We consent to the reference to our firm under the caption “Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm” in Post-Effective Amendment No. 7 to the 1933 Act Registration Statement (Form N-4 No. 333-193273) and Amendment No. 535 to the 1940 Act Registration Statement (Form N-4 No. 811-08517), and to the use therein of our reports dated (a) March 31, 2016, with respect to the consolidated financial statements of The Lincoln National Life Insurance Company and (b) April 12, 2016, with respect to the financial statements of Lincoln Life Variable Annuity Account N for the interests in a separate account under individual flexible payment deferred variable annuity contracts.







/s/ Ernst & Young LLP














Philadelphia, Pennsylvania


November 16, 2016
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
The schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the financial
statements and is qualified in its entirety by reference to such
financialstatements.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                                                <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                            9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                  MAR-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                       DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                                 353,465
<SECURITIES>                                                 0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        2,318,883
<ALLOWANCES>                                           (39,250)
<INVENTORY>                                          2,828,229
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     5,684,735
<PP&E>                                               2,372,702
<DEPRECIATION>                                         151,797
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                      10,750,491
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                5,727,946
<BONDS>                                                      0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                1,625,000
<PREFERRED>                                                  0
<COMMON>                                                31,067
<OTHER-SE>                                           1,885,510
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                        10,750,491
<SALES>                                             10,347,440
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                    11,431,375
<CGS>                                               10,551,980
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                       10,551,980
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                             0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                             0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                     111,629
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                        (51,474)
<INCOME-TAX>                                                 0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                    (51,474)
<DISCONTINUED>                                               0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                              0
<CHANGES>                                                    0
<NET-INCOME>                                           (51,474)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                            (0.02)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                            (0.02)
        

</TABLE>
#### ELLIS v. S & M FARMS, INC.

No. 36146.

Supreme Court of Florida.

March 1967.

Certiorari dismissed without opinion.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

EASTERN DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

BENDU MASSAQUOI,

Petitioner :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 532 EAL 2019

Petition for Allowance of Appeal

from the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 10th day of March, 2020

, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is

DENIED

.
#### Leo JENKINS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 76-139.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Sept. 6, 1977.

*1193Richard L. Jorandby, Public Defender, Henry Prettyman and Frank Kessler, Asst. Public Defenders, West Palm Beach, for appellant.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Paul H. Zacks, Asst. Atty. Gen., West Palm Beach, for appellee.

FOGLE, Judge.

The appellant, defendant below, was charged by information with possession of more than five grams of marijuana with intent to sell same. The information was filed on August 28,1974, and the defendant failed to appear for formal arraignment on September 23, 1974.

The appellant was re-arrested on January 23, 1975, and on January 27, 1975, he entered a plea of not guilty. On March 10, 1975, a motion to suppress the State’s physical evidence was filed and granted by the trial court. The State filed an interlocutory appeal to this Court from the Order granting the motion to suppress and this Court reversed the Order of the trial court, issuing its mandate on October 24, 1975.

At the time it filed the interlocutory appeal, the State sought, and was granted, an Order extending the time for speedy trial. The motion for same specifically requested a six month extension of the time and the Order granting same extended the time for six months, commencing on March 19,1975.

After this Court’s mandate issued, which was more than six months from the date of said Order, the defendant-appellant moved for discharge for failure to comply with the speedy trial rule. Appellant’s motion was denied and he thereafter entered a plea of nolo contendere, reserving his right to appeal the trial court’s denial of his motion for discharge and the cause is before us on appeal from that Order denying discharge.

The appellant cannot be denied his right to a speedy trial because of any “automatic” extension of time granted to the State or assumed by the State, simply because the State had an appeal pending. The State should have asked for an extension of time for a period equal to the time consumed by the appeal. *State v. Cannon,*
      *1194332 So.2d 127 (Fla. 4th DCA 1976); *Mallín v. State,*307 So.2d 829 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975).

Therefore the cause is reversed and remanded to the trial court with directions to discharge the defendant.

ANSTEAD, J., concurs.

DOWNEY, J., concurs specially.

DOWNEY, Judge,

concurring specially:

This court has previously held that Section 924.071(2), Florida Statutes (1975), does not automatically toll the time set forth in Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.191, for trying a defendant. *State v. Cannon,*332 So.2d 127 (Fla. 4th DCA 1976). Because I feel bound to follow the *Cannon*holding, I concur in the decision to reverse appellant’s judgment of conviction.

However, if the question of the effect of Section 924.071(2) were before us for the first time I would vote to affirm the judgment of conviction (and the underlying order denying appellant’s motion for discharge filed pursuant to Rule 3.191) on authority of the analysis of Section 924.071(2), contained in *State v. Pearce,*336 So.2d 1274 (Fla. 1st DCA 1976).
Agriuavs LLC 11523 Palmbrush Trail Suite 353 Lakewood Ranch, FL 34202 December 29
, 2 0 1 5

U.S. Department of Transportation Docket Management System 1200 New Jersey Ave., SE Washington, DC 20590

Re: Request for Amendment to Agriuavs request for Exemption , Regulatory Docket No. FAA

– 2015

– 7765 under Section 333 of the FAA Reform Act and Part 11 of the Federal Aviation Regulations.

Dear Sir or Madam:
Pursuant to Section 333 of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (the “Reform A ct”) and 14 C.F.R. Part 11, Complete UAS LLC ( CUAS ), seeks to amend exemption request , Regu latory Docket No. FAA

– 2015

– 7765 ; Submitted by AgriUAVs for review October 14 2015

. The original exemption made a request to allow operations of different Airframe models for:

 Aerial Photography and Videography for the real estate, construction, and utilities industries

 Agricultural Surveying and Application

 sUAS Operator Training

 Product Demonstrations

 Research and Development
There have been no changes in the request for exemption from specific regulations or conditions and reasons relative to public interest and safety.
This letter requests the addition of additional Airframe models for commercial use in the aforementioned service operations. We are petitionin g for exemption to enable Agriuavs to operate additional UAS platforms that have been previously approved by exemption. The Requested UAVs are listed in Proprietary/Confidential Appendix A which is filed separately.

All those s UAS all weigh less than 55 lb s, have a built

- in capability to limit the height flown above the ground, to limit the radius of the distance it flies from the operator and to exclude it from Class B, C and D airspace including a no fly zone feature. Each system also has the failsafe fu nction of the autopilot system, which means when the communication between the Main Controller and the transmitter is lost, the system will automatically trigger Return to Home and will land safely.
This submission does not include the Operating Manuals fo r models requested , as they have been reviewed by the Administrator in granting previous exemptions. Copies of all Operating Manuals for the individual models listed will be submitted on request.Agriuavs LLC 11523 Palmbrush Trail Suite 353 Lakewood Ranch, FL 34202

Accompanying this submission electronically via e

- mail are c op ies of the Operations Manual and Appendix A submitted to 333exemptions@faa.gov

.

Regards,

Timothy Ford President and CEO Agriuavs LLC 11523 Palmbrush Trail Suite 353 Lakewood Ranch, FL 34202 (314) 397

- 1110
#### Margit Gabelman LARSEN, Appellant, v. L. Monroe LARSEN, Appellee.

No. 73-385.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Dec. 11, 1973.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3110 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 3110

 To designate the United States courthouse and Federal building to be 
 constructed at the southeastern corner of Liberty and South Virginia 
   Streets in Reno, Nevada, as the ``Bruce R. Thompson United States 
                   Courthouse and Federal Building''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           September 21, 1993

 Mrs. Vucanovich introduced the following bill; which was referred to 
            the Committee on Public Works and Transportation

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To designate the United States courthouse and Federal building to be 
 constructed at the southeastern corner of Liberty and South Virginia 
   Streets in Reno, Nevada, as the ``Bruce R. Thompson United States 
                   Courthouse and Federal Building''.

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

SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

    The United States courthouse and Federal building to be constructed 
at the southeastern corner of Liberty and South Virginia Streets in 
Reno, Nevada, is designated as the ``Bruce R. Thompson United States 
Courthouse and Federal Building''.

SEC. 2. LEGAL REFERENCES.

    Any reference in any law, regulation, document, record, map, or 
other paper of the United States to the courthouse and Federal building 
referred to in section 1 is deemed to be a reference to the ``Bruce R. 
Thompson United States Courthouse and Federal Building''.

                                 <all>
```
# C_2013092EN.01000801.xml

| 28.3.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 92/8 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.3.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 92/8

---

Corrigendum to the call for applications for the selection of experts as members of the Commission Expert Group for Bio-based Products

(
  Official Journal of the European Union C 41 of 13 February 2013
  )

Official Journal of the European Union C 41 of 13 February 2013

2013/C 92/09

On page 6, point 4:

for:

‘The members will be appointed latest by 15 May 2013.’,

15 May 2013

read:

‘The members will be appointed at the latest by 12 June 2013.’;

12 June 2013

on page 6, point 5:

for:

‘A letter of motivation, together with the application form (Annex), duly signed by an authorised representative of the applicant legal entity, must be sent to the e-mail address: ENTR-EXPERT-BIOBASED@ec.europa.eu within six weeks following the publication of the call, as attested by a delivery notification.’,

read:

‘A letter of motivation, together with the application form (Annex), duly signed by an authorised representative of the applicant legal entity, must be sent to the e-mail address: ENTR-EXPERT-BIOBASED@ec.europa.eu within 10 weeks following the publication of the call (i.e. the new deadline for the submission of the applications is 24 April 2013), as attested by a delivery notification.’.

---
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.                  

###### Small Business Administration

Pursuant to the authority granted to the United States Small Business Administration under the Small Business Investment Act of 1958, as amended, under Section 309 of the Act and Section 107.1900 of the Small Business Administration Rules and Regulations (13 CFR 107.1900) to function as a small business investment company under the Small Business Investment Company License No. 02/02-0649 issued to Contemporary Healthcare Senior Lien Fund I, LP, said license is hereby declared null and void.

United States Small Business Administration.

Dated: June 13, 2018.

 A. Joseph Shepard,

Associate Administrator for Investment and Innovation.

[FR Doc. 2018-17580 Filed 8-14-18; 8:45 am]

 BILLING CODE P
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE

FIRST DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON

ORDER REINSTATING APPEAL

Appellate case name: Tika Anderson English v. The State of Texas

Appellate case numbers: 01-17-00598-CR; 01-17-00599-CR

Trial court case numbers:1477504; 1477505

Trial court: 178th District Court of Harris County

On April 10, 2018, after appellant’s appointed counsel failed to file 

appellant’s brief, these appeals were abated and remanded to the trial court to 

determine whether good cause exists to remove appellant’s appointed counsel and 

to appoint substitute counsel. Appellant’s counsel subsequently filed appellant’s 

brief on May 1, 2018. Because appellant’s brief has been filed, we reinstate the cases

on the Court’s active docket. 

It is so ORDERED.

Judge’s signature: /s/ Jane Bland

 Acting individually 

Date: May 17, 2018
EXHIBIT 10.63
                                   
                FIRST AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT
             BETWEEN THE REGISTRANT AND RICHARD W. PERSHING
                       DATED AS OF APRIL 1, 1998
                                   
                                   
     This First Amendment to Employment Agreement is entered into as
of April 1, 1998 by and between DATRON SYSTEMS INCORPORATED, a
Delaware corporation (the "Company") and RICHARD W. PERSHING (the
"Employee").

                               RECITALS
                                   
     The Company and Employee are parties to an Employment Agreement
dated as of May 1, 1990, which they desire to amend as provided
herein.

     NOW THEREFORE, the parties agree as follows:

     1.   Duties.  Section 1 of the Agreement is amended to read as
follows:

          "Employee is employed by Company in the position of
Assistant to the President for the term set forth in Section 5.
Employee shall work at Company's office located at 75-572 Debby Lane,
Indian Wells, California.  Employee shall perform such duties as may
be reasonably designated by Company."

     2.   Compensation.  Section 3 of the Agreement is amended to read
as follows:

          "During the term of the Agreement, Company shall pay
Employee a salary at the annual rate then in effect in equal
installments on a weekly basis; provided however, that the annual rate
will not be less than $12,000."

     3.   Termination.  Section 5, Subsections (a) and (c) of the
Agreement are amended to read as follows:

          At the end of Subsection (a) insert the following paragraph:

          "If Employee's employment is terminated by the Company under
Section 5(a), the annual rate specified in Section 3 shall increase to
$150,000 effective upon delivery of notice of termination.

          Subsection (c) is amended to read:

          "If Employee dies, Company shall continue to pay Employee's
salary and continue Employee's benefits for six months following the
date of death."

     4.   Continuation of Terms.  In all other respects the provisions
of the Agreement shall continue to be effective.

                    DATRON SYSTEMS INCORPORATED


                    By:  /s/  DAVID A. DERBY, President


/s/  RICHARD W.  PERSHING
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1990 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

113th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 1990

 To prohibit aliens who are not lawfully present in the United States 
 from being eligible for postsecondary education benefits that are not 
     available to all citizens and nationals of the United States.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            February 4, 2014

  Mr. Vitter introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
               referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To prohibit aliens who are not lawfully present in the United States 
 from being eligible for postsecondary education benefits that are not 
     available to all citizens and nationals of the United States.

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

SECTION 1. PROHIBITION OF PREFERENTIAL TREATMENT FOR ILLEGAL ALIENS.

    Section 505 of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant 
Responsibility Act of 1996 (8 U.S.C. 1623) is amended to read as 
follows:

``SEC. 505. INELIGIBILITY FOR ALIENS NOT LAWFULLY PRESENT IN THE UNITED 
              STATES TO RECEIVE PREFERENTIAL POSTSECONDARY EDUCATION 
              BENEFITS.

    ``(a) In General.--An alien who is not lawfully present in the 
United States shall not be eligible for any postsecondary education 
benefit unless every citizen and national of the United States is 
eligible to receive such a benefit (in no less an amount, duration, and 
scope).
    ``(b) Enforcement Through Civil Action.--
            ``(1) In general.--Any citizen or national of the United 
        States who is enrolled at a postsecondary educational 
        institution in the United States that is alleged to have 
        violated subsection (a) may petition the district court of the 
        United States in which such institution is located to enforce 
        the restriction described in such subsection by commencing a 
        civil action, on his or her own behalf, in such court against 
        any State official that oversees such institution.
            ``(2) Relief.--If the plaintiff in a civil action commenced 
        under paragraph (1) proves by a preponderance of the evidence 
        that the postsecondary educational institution in which the 
        plaintiff was enrolled violated subsection (a), the court 
        shall--
                    ``(A) provide all appropriate relief to the 
                plaintiff, including damages equal to the monetary 
                value of any benefit provided to an alien who is not 
                lawfully present in the United States that was denied 
                to the plaintiff; and
                    ``(B) award attorneys' fees and court costs to the 
                plaintiff.''.
                                 <all>
```