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

<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
THE SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED
FROM THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF BERGEN BRUNSWIG
CORPORATION FOR THE TWELVE MONTHS PERIOD ENDED SEPTEMBER 30,
1997 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>                         1000
<CURRENCY>                           U.S. DOLLARS
       
<S>                                                <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                      12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                  SEP-30-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                       SEP-30-1997
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                             1
<CASH>                                                 54,494
<SECURITIES>                                            2,786
<RECEIVABLES>                                         801,364
<ALLOWANCES>                                           29,022
<INVENTORY>                                         1,309,359
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                    2,155,475
<PP&E>                                                270,306
<DEPRECIATION>                                        131,944
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                      2,707,123
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                               1,624,306
<BONDS>                                               437,956
<COMMON>                                               83,805
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                       0
<PREFERRED>                                                 0
<OTHER-SE>                                            561,056
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                        2,707,123
<SALES>                                                     0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                   11,660,496
<CGS>                                              11,006,065
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                      11,491,264
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                            0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                            0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                     30,793
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                       138,439
<INCOME-TAX>                                           56,760
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                    81,679
<DISCONTINUED>                                              0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                             0
<CHANGES>                                                   0
<NET-INCOME>                                           81,679
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                            1.61
<EPS-DILUTED>                                            1.61
        

</TABLE>
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v James Marling, Appellant.

—Judgment unanimously reversed on the law and new trial granted. Memorandum: Defendant contends that the Trial Judge committed reversible error when he entered the jury room after deliberations had commenced and, in the absence of defendant or counsel, instructed the jury that they could not have a text of the crimes charged. We agree. By providing further instructions to the jury without defendant or counsel being present, the court violated defendant’s constitutional and statutory rights to be present during those instructions *(see,*US Const 6th Amend; NY Const, art I, § 6; CPL 310.30; *People v Cain,*76 NY2d 119; *People v Mehmedi,*69 NY2d 759; *People v Ciaccio,*47 NY2d 431). (Appeal from Judgment of Orleans County Court, Miles, J.—Burglary, 1st Degree.) Present—Doerr, J. P., Green, Pine, Balio and Lawton, JJ.
##### 



BRIDGFORD FOODS CORPORATION

EXHIBIT 21.1

SUBSIDIARIES OF REGISTRANT

|                                           |  |                            
|------------------------------------------ |  | ---------------------------
|Name of Subsidiary                         |  | State in which Incorporated
|                                           |  |                            
|Bridgford Marketing Company                |  | California                 
|Bridgford Meat Company                     |  | California                 
|Bridgford Food Processing Corporation      |  | California                 
|Bridgford Food Processing of Texas, L.P.** |  | Texas                      
|A.S.I. Corporation                         |  | California                 
|Bridgford Distributing Company of          |  |                            
|Delaware (inactive)                        |  | Delaware                   
|American Ham Processors, Inc.* (inactive)  |  | Delaware                   
|Bert Packing Company (inactive)            |  | Illinois                   
|Moriarty Meat Company (inactive)           |  | Illinois                   



|*  |  | - No shares have been issued.
|-- |  | -----------------------------
|** |  | - Limited Partnership.
Agricultural Quality Assessment Division G-109 Specification

Marketing 1400 Independence Avenue SW, Stop 0258 August 11, 2021

Service Washington, DC 20250 Page 1 of 2 

USDA is an equal opportunity provider, employer, and lender.

Iowa Best Beef Premier Midwest Black Angus Program

G-109 Specification

1 REQUIREMENTS

Beef carcasses certified under this specification shall meet the following requirements: 

a. Phenotypic requirements of the American Angus Association’s (AAA) Live Animal 

Specification; 

b. Classed as Steer or Heifer carcasses only1

; 

c. U.S. Prime or Choice and have a minimum marbling score of Modest 01

; 

d. Less than 30 months of age with lean color, texture, and firmness, meeting the requirements for 

A maturity in the U.S. grade it qualifies for1

; 

e. A yield grade of 4.9 or numerically lower1; 

f. Medium or fine marbling texture1,2; 

g. Moderately thick or thicker muscling and tend to be at least moderately wide and thick in 

relation to their length3; 

h. No hump exceeding 2 inches in height4; 

i. Practically free (not detracting from visual quality) of capillary rupture in the ribeye muscle; 

and 

j. Free of “dark cutting” characteristics.

2 CERTIFICATION

Carcasses to be examined for compliance with this specification shall be clearly identified and 

presented to an AMS grader for certification. Certification procedures for identification, the removal 

of preliminary identification marks (or other methods of control) from non-qualifying carcasses, and 

control of certified carcasses shall be in accordance with established Quality Assessment Division 

(QAD) procedures. 

3 LABELING

Labeling of products derived from certified carcasses must follow Food Safety and Inspection Service 

regulations and policy guidelines and QAD procedures. 

1 Determined in accordance with the “Official United States Standards for Grades of Carcass Beef.” 2 Evaluated using the USDA-AMS-LS-SB-02 Marbling Texture card (included in the Official USDA Marbling Photographs.) 3 Muscle thickness is evaluated by averaging the thickness of the various parts, considering not only the proportion of each part of the 

carcass but also the general value of each part. Superior muscle thickness implies a high proportion of meat to bone and a high 

proportion of the weight of the carcass in the more valuable parts.

4 Measured from a line formed by the extension of the top line (including the fat) and measuring the lean muscle (excluding the fat) 

perpendicular to that line in the center of the hump.
Agricultural Quality Assessment Division G-109 Specification

Marketing 1400 Independence Avenue SW, Stop 0258 August 11, 2021

Service Washington, DC 20250 Page 2 of 2

USDA is an equal opportunity provider, employer, and lender.

4 FEES

The costs of all grading and certification services performed by an AMS grader involving 

examinations, supervision, official documentation, and related services shall be borne by the person, 

group, or plant requesting the service.

___________________________________

Chad Nelson, National Meat Supervisor

Standards and Specifications Division

Livestock & Poultry Program
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-30941

Summary Calendar

ALFRED TREADWELL,

Plaintiff-Appellant

v.

ST. TAMMANY PARISH JAIL; GREGORY LONGINO, Major; RODNEY J. 

STRAIN, JR., Sheriff; R. DEMAREE INGLESE, Doctor,

Defendants-Appellees

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Louisiana

USDC No. 2:13-CV-5889

Before REAVLEY, DENNIS, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Alfred Treadwell, Louisiana prisoner # 94339, appeals the district court’s 

determination that his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint, in which he alleged that 

the defendants exhibited deliberate indifference to his serious medical needs 

and subjected him to unnecessary and wanton pain, was frivolous and failed to 

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not 

be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH 

CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

April 8, 2015

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 

 Case: 14-30941 Document: 00512997383 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/08/2015
No. 14-30941

state a claim for which relief may be granted. The district court concluded that 

the claims raised in the complaint were time barred.

Treadwell contends that the district court erred in concluding that his 

complaint was untimely. He suggests that the district court should not have 

applied the one-year statute of limitations that Louisiana applies to personal 

injuries but rather the three-year statute of limitations that applies to acts of 

malpractice involving cases of fraud. Treadwell further indicates that he was 

impeded from accessing the court to file his complaint. Our review is de novo. 

Geiger v. Jowers, 404 F.3d 371, 373 (5th Cir. 2005).

There is no federal statute of limitations for actions brought pursuant to 

§ 1983, and, thus, the applicable limitations period is determined by reference 

to the forum state’s statute regarding personal injury claims. See Wallace v. 

Kato, 549 U.S. 384, 387 (2007); Owens v. Okure, 488 U.S. 235, 249-50 (1989). 

In Louisiana, the applicable statute is Louisiana Civil Code article 3492, which 

provides for a one-year prescriptive period from the date of injury or damage; 

Louisiana has no other prescriptive period for personal injury claims. Elzy v. 

Roberson, 868 F.2d 793, 794-95 (5th Cir. 1989). Thus, Treadwell’s claim lacks 

merit. 

Treadwell’s assertion that he was unable to file a timely § 1983 complaint 

because he could not access the courts is also unavailing. His contention is 

conclusory; he does not explain the basis for his claim or identify any error in 

the district court’s determination that his various pleadings indicate that he, 

in fact, could access the courts. Thus, Treadwell has not briefed this claim with 

the requisite specificity or otherwise identified a basis for relief. See Yohey v. 

Collins, 985 F.2d 222, 224-25 (5th Cir. 1993); FED. R. APP. P. 28(a). 

Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

2

 Case: 14-30941 Document: 00512997383 Page: 2 Date Filed: 04/08/2015
<PAGE>


                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.2


                CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

This Certification is intended to accompany the Quarterly Report of Finlay
Enterprises, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended August 3,
2002 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
(the "Report"), and is given solely for the purpose of satisfying the
requirements of 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. The undersigned, in their respective capacities
as set forth below, hereby certify 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 operation of
          the Company.



     /s/ Arthur E. Reiner, Chief Executive Officer     Date:  September 13, 2002
     --------------------


     /s/ Bruce E. Zurlnick, Chief Financial Officer    Date:  September 13, 2002
     ---------------------
Court of Appeals

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A15A1380. MICHAEL O. WILDER v. OWB REO, LLC.

This case began as a dispossessory action in magistrate court. Following an

adverse ruling, defendant Michael O. Wilder filed a motion to set aside the

dispossessory judgment, which the magistrate court denied. Wilder then filed a

petition for writ of certiorari in the superior court. After the superior court dismissed

his petition, Wilder filed a direct appeal to this Court. We lack jurisdiction.

“[A]ppeals from decisions of the superior courts reviewing decisions of lower

courts by certiorari or de novo proceedings shall be by application for discretionary

appeal.” Bullock v. Sand, 260 Ga. App. 874, 875 (581 SE2d 333) (2003); see also

OCGA § 5-6-35 (a) (1). This provision applies even where the superior court

dismisses the certiorari petition. See Brewer v. Bd. of Zoning Adjustment of Atlanta,

170 Ga. App. 351 (317 SE2d 327) (1984). Because Wilder did not follow the proper

procedure for requesting appellate review in this case, we lack jurisdiction over this

appeal, which is hereby DISMISSED.

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________

I certify that the above is a true extract from

the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court

hereto affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

03/30/2015

March 30, 2015
LORI SCJ-f:MID 

Certifiea Sfiortfiana Reyorter 

Jfays County Cou-rt at Law 

712 S. Stagecoacfi T-raa; Suite 2292 

San :Marcos, Texas 78666 

512.393.7740 

Lo-ri.scfimia@co. fiays. tx.us 

{ ______________________________________ } 

Mr. Cln·is Knowles 

3 rd Court of Appeals 

Sent via e-mail 

September 29,2015 

IN RE: Appellate Cause No.: 03-15-00375-CV; Trial Court Cause No. 15-0173; Robert M. 

Zapata, Appellant v Bank of America, N.A., Appellee 

Dear Mr. Knowles: 

The Reporter's Record in the above·referenced case has just been ordered today and 

payment arrangements have been made but are still pending. 

I am hereby respectfully requesting a two·week extension to file the Reporter's 

Record with the Third Court of Appeals. 

Thank you. 

;z::~.WH"~ Lori Schmid 

Certified Shorthand Reporter 

I ! 

'
<PAGE>

                                EXHIBIT (10)(b)

                        OPINION AND CONSENT OF ACTUARY
<PAGE>

               [Transamerica Life Insurance Company Letterhead]

April 10, 2002


Transamerica Life Insurance Company
4333 Edgewood Road NE
Cedar Rapids, Iowa 52499-0001

Re:    Retirement Income Builder III
       Separate Account VA K
       Registration on Form N-4

Dear Sir/Madam:

With regard to the above registration statement, I have examined such documents
and made such inquiries as I have deemed necessary and appropriate, and on the
basis of such examination, have the following opinions:

Fees and charges deducted under the Retirement Income Builder III policies are
those deemed necessary to appropriately reflect:

(1)    the expenses incurred in the acquisition and distribution of the
       policies,

(2)    the expenses associated with the development and servicing of the
       policies,

(3)    the assumption of certain risks arising from the operation and management
       of the policies and/or riders to the policy and that provides for a
       reasonable margin of profit.

Fees and charges assessed against the policy values in the variable account
include:

(i)    Service Charge and Administrative Charge

(ii)   Mortality and Expense Risk Fee (M&E)

(iii)  Taxes (including premium and other taxes if applicable)

(iv)   Surrender Charges

(v)    Any applicable rider fees or charges
<PAGE>

Transamerica Life Insurance Company
April 10, 2002
Page 2



The magnitude of each of the individual charges listed above in (i) through (v)
is established in the pricing of the Retirement Income Builder III, to achieve a
reasonable Return on Investment (ROI), which is within the range of industry
practice with respect to comparable variable annuity products.

Except by coincidence, it is not expected that actual charges assessed in a
given year would exactly offset actual expenses incurred.  Acquisition expenses
(as well as major product and/or systems development expenses) are incurred "up
front" and recovered, with a reasonable profit margin, through future years'
charges.  In addition, the company cannot increase certain charges under the
policies in the pricing process.

Therefore, in my opinion, the fees and charges deducted under the policies, in
the aggregate, are reasonable in relation to the services rendered, the expenses
expected to be incurred, and the risks assumed by the company.

I hereby consent to the use of this opinion, which is included as an Exhibit to
the registration statement.



   /s/ R. Gene Hauser
--------------------------------------
R. Gene Hauser
Associate Actuary
Transamerica Life Insurance Company
Date: July 24, 2014 

Document Control Officer 

7407M 

RECEIVED 

OPPT CBIC 

2014 AUG -4 AM 10: 52 

Office of Pollution Prevention and T oxics 

Environmental Protection Agency 

1200 Pennsylvania Ave, NW 

Washington, DC 20460 

Attention: TSCA Section 4 

CFR 40.799 (Docket# EPA-HQ-OPPT-2009-0112) 

••• DyStar®/•• 

209 Watlington Industrial Drive 

Reidsville NC 27320 USA 

Tel: 336-342-6631/800-443-8814 

Fax: 336-634-3324 

CBIC Control Number 

361245 

This letter is to request exemption from testing requirements for the substance listed 

below as required under Docket EPA-HQ-OPPT-2009-0112. 

CAS number: 127-68-4 (Benzenesulfonic acid, 3-nitro-, sodium salt) 

Test requirements: A3, F2 

This material is not manufactured by DyStar nor is it used in any production 

processing. It is re-packed only (from bags to drums) as a sourced product. Projected 

amount to be re-packed is not expected to exceed 25,000 lbs per year. 

Sandy S. 

DyStar LP. 

' 

209 Watlington Industrial Dr. 

Reidsville, NC 27320 

336-342-6631 ext 398 

/} VI L} ;rvw o -I
```

[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 123 (Thursday, June 26, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Page 36303]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-15016]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

State Energy Advisory Board (STEAB)

AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Department of 
Energy.

ACTION: Notice of Open Teleconference.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces a teleconference call of the State 
Energy Advisory Board (STEAB). The Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. 
L. 92-463; 86 Stat. 770) requires that public notice of these meetings 
be announced in the Federal Register.

DATES: Thursday, July 17, 2014 from 3:30 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. (EDT). To 
receive the call-in number and passcode, please contact the Board's 
Designated Federal Officer (DFO) at the address or phone number listed 
below.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Julie Hughes, STEAB Designated Federal 
Officer, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and 
Renewable Energy, 1000 Independence Ave. SW., Washington, DC 20585. 
Phone number: 202-320-9703, and email: Julie.Hughes@ee.doe.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Purpose of the Board: To make recommendations to the Assistant 
Secretary for the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy 
regarding goals and objectives, programmatic and administrative 
policies, and to otherwise carry out the Board's responsibilities as 
designated in the State Energy Efficiency Programs Improvement Act of 
1990 (Pub. L. 101-440).
    Tentative Agenda: Receive STEAB Task Force updates, review of 
feedback from DOE and EERE with regards to recently submitted 
recommendations regarding the Lab Impact Initiative, the Weatherization 
Program and the Quadrennial Energy Review, discuss potential engagement 
with EERE staff on relevant issues related to the Engagement Plan, and 
look at agenda items and logistical needs regarding the upcoming August 
meeting.
    Public Participation: The meeting is open to the public. Written 
statements may be filed with the Board either before or after the 
meeting. Members of the public who wish to make oral statements 
pertaining to agenda items should contact Julie Hughes at the address 
or telephone number listed above. Requests to make oral comments must 
be received five days prior to the meeting; reasonable provision will 
be made to include requested topic(s) on the agenda. The Chair of the 
Board is empowered to conduct the meeting in a fashion that will 
facilitate the orderly conduct of business.
    Minutes: The minutes of the meeting will be available for public 
review and copying within 60 days on the STEAB Web site at: 
www.steab.org.

    Issued at Washington, DC, on June 20, 2014.
LaTanya R. Butler,
Deputy Committee Management Officer.
[FR Doc. 2014-15016 Filed 6-25-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
```
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 10.7

Computer Network Technology Corporation

CNT's 2002 Annual Bonus Plan

      The Annual Bonus Plan, is an incentive program which provides executives
and other employees with the opportunity to earn a cash bonus if we achieve
certain levels of key performance measurements, with the level of bonus payment
specifically tied to achievement of these measures. For 2001, the key
performance measurements were revenue growth and pre-tax profitability. For
2002, the key performance measurement is pre-tax profitability.

      The annual bonus for employees is determined by multiplying their eligible
base compensation by our Annual Bonus Plan factor and their individual annual
bonus participation rate. Our Annual Bonus Plan factor is based on a chart which
outlines payout percentages for achievement of defined levels of the key
performance measurements. The annual bonus participation rate for each employee
is based on the employee's expected level of contribution to our overall
financial performance.