alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 224 (Wednesday, November 22, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Page 81468]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-25864]


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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION


Sunshine Act Meetings

TIME AND DATE: 2:15 p.m. on Thursday, November 30, 2023.

PLACE: The meeting will be held via remote means and/or at the 
Commission's headquarters, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549.

STATUS: This meeting will be closed to the public.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: Commissioners, Counsel to the Commissioners, 
the Secretary to the Commission, and recording secretaries will attend 
the closed meeting. Certain staff members who have an interest in the 
matters also may be present.
    In the event that the time, date, or location of this meeting 
changes, an announcement of the change, along with the new time, date, 
and/or place of the meeting will be posted on the Commission's website 
at https://www.sec.gov.
    The General Counsel of the Commission, or her designee, has 
certified that, in her opinion, one or more of the exemptions set forth 
in 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(3), (5), (6), (7), (8), 9(B) and (10) and 17 CFR 
200.402(a)(3), (a)(5), (a)(6), (a)(7), (a)(8), (a)(9)(ii) and (a)(10), 
permit consideration of the scheduled matters at the closed meeting.
    The subject matter of the closed meeting will consist of the 
following topics:
    Institution and settlement of injunctive actions;
    Institution and settlement of administrative proceedings;
    Resolution of litigation claims;
    Matters related to litigation; and
    Other matters relating to examinations and enforcement proceedings.
    At times, changes in Commission priorities require alterations in 
the scheduling of meeting agenda items that may consist of 
adjudicatory, examination, litigation, or regulatory matters.

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: For further information; please 
contact Vanessa A. Countryman from the Office of the Secretary at (202) 
551-5400.
    Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552b.

    Dated: November 17, 2023.
Vanessa A. Countryman,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023-25864 Filed 11-17-23; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
EXHIBIT 11


                          GOODY'S FAMILY CLOTHING, INC.


                 STATEMENT RE COMPUTATION OF PER SHARE EARNINGS

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

                                                              Thirteen                   Twenty-six
                                                           Weeks Ended                  Weeks Ended               
                                                      August 1,      August 2,        August 1,        August 2,
                                                       1998            1997            1998              1997     
<S>                                                    <C>              <C>            <C>              <C>    

Net earnings for the period                          $ 8,658,000        $5,418,000    $16,426,000     $10,476,000    

Weighted average common shares                                                                        
   outstanding - Basic (a)                              33,538,000      32,496,000        33,384,000       32,421,000

Common equivalent shares for outstanding stock                                                        
options                                                  1,451,000       1,083,000         1,452,000          985,000
                                                     -----------------------------------------------------------------
Weighted average common shares                                                                        
  outstanding - Diluted (a)                             34,989,000      33,579,000        34,836,000       33,406,000
                                                     -----------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     -----------------------------------------------------------------

Earnings per common share (a)
  Basic                                                 $    0.26        $ 0.17         $ 0.49       $ 0.32
                                                     =================================================================
  Diluted                                               $    0.25        $ 0.16         $ 0.47       $ 0.31
                                                     =================================================================
</TABLE>


(a) The Company  adopted  Statement of Financial  Accounting  Standards No. 128,
"Earnings  per  Share"  as  required  in the  fourth  quarter  of  fiscal  1997.
Accordingly, earnings per share and related data for the periods ended August 2,
1997 have been restated to conform to this new standard.

Earnings  per share and related  data for the periods  ended August 2, 1997 have
also been restated to reflect a two-for-one stock split effected in July 1998.




<PAGE>
#### Joseph K. Parot et al., Appellants, v City of Buffalo et al., Respondents.

—Order unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: Plaintiff was injured when he fell while unloading street light standards from a flatbed trailer at a lot where they were to be stored for future use throughout the City of Buffalo. The court properly dismissed his Labor Law § 240 (1) cause of action because the delivery of the street light standards was not to a construction site but was merely for stockpiling for future use *(see, Cox v LaBarge Bros. Co.,*154 AD2d 947, 947-948, *lv dismissed*75 NY2d 808; *cf., Lewis-Moors v Contel of N. Y.,*167 AD2d 732; *Dedario v New York Tel. Co.,*162 AD2d 1001). Likewise, the court correctly dismissed plaintiff’s Labor Law § 241 (6) cause of action *(see, Sprague v Picciano,*100 AD2d 247, 249-250, *lv denied*62 NY2d 605). (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Erie County, Rath, Jr., J.—Summary Judgment.) Present—Callahan, J. P., Denman, Green, Pine and Lowery, JJ.
# C_2016202EN.01015301.xml

| 7.6.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 202/153 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.6.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 202/153

---

Article 238

(ex Article 205(1) and (2), TEC)

(ex Article 205(1) and (2), TEC)

1.   Where it is required to act by a simple majority, the Council shall act by a majority of its component members.

2.   By way of derogation from Article 16(4) of the Treaty on European Union, as from 1 November 2014 and subject to the provisions laid down in the Protocol on transitional provisions, where the Council does not act on a proposal from the Commission or from the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, the qualified majority shall be defined as at least 72 % of the members of the Council, representing Member States comprising at least 65 % of the population of the Union.

3.   As from 1 November 2014 and subject to the provisions laid down in the Protocol on transitional provisions, in cases where, under the Treaties, not all the members of the Council participate in voting, a qualified majority shall be defined as follows:

| (a) | A qualified majority shall be defined as at least 55 % of the members of the Council representing the participating Member States, comprising at least 65 % of the population of these States.
  A blocking minority must include at least the minimum number of Council members representing more than 35 % of the population of the participating Member States, plus one member, failing which the qualified majority shall be deemed attained; |
| --- | --- |

(a)

A qualified majority shall be defined as at least 55 % of the members of the Council representing the participating Member States, comprising at least 65 % of the population of these States.

A blocking minority must include at least the minimum number of Council members representing more than 35 % of the population of the participating Member States, plus one member, failing which the qualified majority shall be deemed attained;

| (b) | By way of derogation from point (a), where the Council does not act on a proposal from the Commission or from the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, the qualified majority shall be defined as at least 72 % of the members of the Council representing the participating Member States, comprising at least 65 % of the population of these States. |
| --- | --- |

(b)

By way of derogation from point (a), where the Council does not act on a proposal from the Commission or from the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, the qualified majority shall be defined as at least 72 % of the members of the Council representing the participating Member States, comprising at least 65 % of the population of these States.

4.   Abstentions by Members present in person or represented shall not prevent the adoption by the Council of acts which require unanimity.

---
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

May 3, 2017

No. 04-17-00071-CV

THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS HEALTH SCIENCE CENTER AT SAN ANTONIO,

Appellant

v.

Armando HERNANDEZ,

Appellee

From the 288th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2014-CI-14282

Honorable Rosie Alvarado, Judge Presiding

O R D E R

The appellant’s motion for leave to withdraw counsel is hereby GRANTED.

_________________________________

Irene Rios, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 3rd day of May, 2017.

___________________________________

Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court
#### Mattle COCHRANE, Doing Business as Independent Cold Storage & Packing Company, petitioner, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE.

No. 437.

Circuit Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.

Nov. 7, 1939.

Elias Berell and W. I. Farmer, both of Kansas City, Mo., for petitioner.

J. P. Wenchel, Chief Counsel, Bureau of Internal Revenue, and Raymond F. Brown and E. W. G. Huffman, Sp. Attys., Bureau of Internal Revenue, all of Washington, D. C., for respondent.

PER CURIAM.

Petition to review decision of United States Processing Tax Board of Review dismissed without the taxation of costs in favor of either of the parties in'this Court, on motions of petitioner and respondent.
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

EDWIN WETHERELL,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

No. 4D14-4629

[April 15, 2015]

Appeal of order denying rule 3.850 motion from the Circuit Court for 

the Nineteenth Judicial Circuit, St. Lucie County; Dan L. Vaughn, Judge; 

L.T. Case No. 562010CF000408A.

Edwin Wetherell, Milton, pro se.

No appearance required for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. See Sanders v. State, 946 So. 2d 953, 960 (Fla. 2006).

WARNER, STEVENSON and GROSS, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
# C_2016202EN.01005601.xml

| 7.6.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 202/56 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.6.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 202/56

---

Article 19

(ex Article 13 TEC)

(ex Article 13 TEC)

1.   Without prejudice to the other provisions of the Treaties and within the limits of the powers conferred by them upon the Union, the Council, acting unanimously in accordance with a special legislative procedure and after obtaining the consent of the European Parliament, may take appropriate action to combat discrimination based on sex, racial or ethnic origin, religion or belief, disability, age or sexual orientation.

2.   By way of derogation from paragraph 1, the European Parliament and the Council, acting in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure, may adopt the basic principles of Union incentive measures, excluding any harmonisation of the laws and regulations of the Member States, to support action taken by the Member States in order to contribute to the achievement of the objectives referred to in paragraph 1.

---
Exhibit 23.1


              Consent of Independent Public Accountants


As independent public accountants, we hereby consent to the
incorporation of our report included and incorporated by reference in
this Form 10-K/A, into the company's previously filed Form S-8
Registration Statements, File Numbers, 033-65256, 033-65254, 033-
65890, 333-07735, 333-46791, 333-46795, 333-46797, and 333-
46809.  It should be noted that we have not audited any financial
statements of the Company subsequent to April 30, 2000 or performed
any audit procedures on any financial statements of the Company
subsequent to the April 30, 2000 financial statements and subsequent
to date of our report.




WEAVER & MARTIN, LLC



Kansas City, Missouri,
September 15, 2000
* 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.

** Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Fed. Bureau of

Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971).

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 00-10299

Summary Calendar

 

GARY ANTHONY COLE,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

DON E. PEAVY, SR., Attorney,

Defendant-Appellee.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 4:98-CV-838

- - - - - - - - - -

August 10, 2000

Before REYNALDO G. GARZA, SMITH, and PARKER, Circuit Judges. 

PER CURIAM:*

Gary Anthony Cole, federal prisoner # 22707-077, appeals

from the district court’s dismissal of his Bivens** action. Cole

argued that his trial attorney, Don E. Peavy, Sr., failed to

assist him properly in his trial, failed to help him acquire

court records and transcripts, and conspired with federal

government officials (the district court judge, the United States
No. 00-10299

-2-

Attorney, and the court reporter) to produce a fake transcript of

his rearraignment. 

This court must examine the basis of its jurisdiction on its

own motion if necessary. Mosley v. Cozby, 813 F.2d 659, 660 (5th

Cir. 1987). A timely notice of appeal is a prerequisite to the

exercise of jurisdiction by this court. United States v. Carr,

979 F.2d 51, 55 (5th Cir. 1992). Pursuant to Fed. R. App. P.

4(a)(1)(A), in a civil case, the notice of appeal “must be filed

with the district clerk within 30 days after the judgment or

order appealed from is entered.” Rule 4(a)(1)(B) states: “When

the United States or its officer or agency is a party, the notice

of appeal may be filed by any party within 60 days after the

judgment or order appealed from is entered.” 

Cole brought suit solely against his attorney, a private

actor, not an officer or agent of the Government. Accordingly,

Rule 4(a)(1)(A), not Rule 4(a)(1)(B), is applicable to Cole’s

case, and he had only 30 days from the entry of the district

court’s final judgment within which to file his notice of appeal. 

Cole did not file his notice of appeal until some 58 days after

the entry of final judgment, making his notice untimely. 

Accordingly, Cole’s appeal is DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction.
# C_2012326EN.01004701.xml

| 26.10.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 326/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.10.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 326/1

---

CONSOLIDATED VERSION OF THE TREATY ON THE FUNCTIONING OF THE EUROPEAN UNION

CONSOLIDATED VERSION OF THE TREATY ON THE FUNCTIONING OF THE EUROPEAN UNION

PART THREE

UNION POLICIES AND INTERNAL ACTIONS

UNION POLICIES AND INTERNAL ACTIONS

TITLE VII

COMMON RULES ON COMPETITION, TAXATION AND APPROXIMATION OF LAWS

COMMON RULES ON COMPETITION, TAXATION AND APPROXIMATION OF LAWS

CHAPTER 3

APPROXIMATION OF LAWS

Article 115

(ex Article 94 TEC)

(ex Article 94 TEC)

Without prejudice to Article 114, the Council shall, acting unanimously in accordance with a special legislative procedure and after consulting the European Parliament and the Economic and Social Committee, issue directives for the approximation of such laws, regulations or administrative provisions of the Member States as directly affect the establishment or functioning of the internal market.

---
Exhibit
23





Consent
of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm





We
consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement (Form
S-8 No. 333-20169) pertaining to the Cal-Maine Foods, Inc. 1993 Stock Option
Plan, the Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-29940) pertaining to the
Cal-Maine Foods, Inc. 1999 Stock Option Plan, and the Registration Statement
(Form S-8 No. 333-130832) of Cal-Maine Foods, Inc. pertaining to the Cal-Maine
Foods, Inc. Incentive Stock Option Plan and to the Cal-Maine Foods, Inc. Stock
Appreciation Rights Plan of our reports dated August 10, 2009, with respect to
the consolidated financial statements and schedule of Cal-Maine Foods, Inc. and
Subsidiaries, and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting
of Cal-Maine Foods, Inc. and Subsidiaries included in the Annual Report (Form
10-K) for the year ended May 30, 2009.





FROST,
      PLLC /s/Certified
      Public Accountants





Little
Rock, Arkansas


August
10, 2009
# C_2016202EN.01014101.xml

| 7.6.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 202/141 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.6.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 202/141

---

Article 209

(ex Article 179 TEC)

(ex Article 179 TEC)

1.   The European Parliament and the Council, acting in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure, shall adopt the measures necessary for the implementation of development cooperation policy, which may relate to multiannual cooperation programmes with developing countries or programmes with a thematic approach.

2.   The Union may conclude with third countries and competent international organisations any agreement helping to achieve the objectives referred to in Article 21 of the Treaty on European Union and in Article 208 of this Treaty.

The first subparagraph shall be without prejudice to Member States' competence to negotiate in international bodies and to conclude agreements.

3.   The European Investment Bank shall contribute, under the terms laid down in its Statute, to the implementation of the measures referred to in paragraph 1.

---
#### In the Matter of Michael Edward Zadan, an Attorney, Respondent. Grievance Committee for the Second and Eleventh Judicial Districts, Petitioner.

Second Department,

December 16,1991

APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL

*Robert H. Straus (Robert J. Saltzman*of counsel), for petitioner.

*Michael Edward Zadan,*respondent *pro se.*

OPINION OF THE COURT

Per Curiam.

On May 13, 1991, the respondent was convicted, upon his *66guilty plea, in the United States District Court for the Southern District of California, of submission of a false document in violation of 18 USC § 1001, a felony.

We have previously held that 18 USC § 1001 is essentially similar to New York Penal Law § 175.35, offering a false instrument for filing in the first degree, a class E felony. *(Matter of Krup,*136 AD2d 351; *Matter of Mydanick,*78 AD2d 339, *lv denied*53 NY2d 604).

Pursuant to Judiciary Law § 90 (4), the respondent ceased to be an attorney and counselor-at-law upon his conviction of a felony.

Accordingly, the petitioner’s motion is granted and the respondent’s request for a hearing is denied. The respondent is disbarred and his name is stricken from the roll of attorneys and counselors-at-law, effective immediately.

Mangano, P. J., Thompson, Bracken, Kunzeman and Eiber, JJ., concur.

Ordered that pursuant to Judiciary Law §90, effective immediately, the respondent Michael Edward Zadan, is disbarred and his name is stricken from the roll of attorneys and counselors-at-law; and it is further,

Ordered that the respondent shall promptly comply with this court’s rules governing the conduct of disbarred, suspended and resigned attorneys (22 NYCRR 691.10); and it is further,

Ordered that pursuant to Judiciary Law § 90, effective immediately, the respondent Michael Edward Zadan is commanded to desist and refrain (1) from practicing law in any form, either as principal or as agent, clerk or employee of another, (2) from appearing as an attorney or counselor-at-law before any court, Judge, Justice, board, commission or other public authority, (3) from giving to another an opinion as to the law or its application or any advice in relation thereto, and (4) from holding himself out in any way as an attorney and counselor-at-law.
##### 



EXHIBIT 31.2 CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER
PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 I, Larry C. Miller, certify that: 1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K for the period ended
December 31, 2003 of Butler Manufacturing Company; 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of
a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the
statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were
made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects
the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant
as of, and for, the periods presented in this report; 4. The registrants other certifying officer and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and we have: a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such
disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision to
ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its
consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities,
particularly during the period in which this quarterly report is being
prepared; b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and
procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness
of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered
by this report based on such evaluation; and c) disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal
control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most
recent fiscal quarter (the registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an
annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to
materially affect, the registrants internal control over financial reporting;
and 5. The registrants other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our
most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the
registrants auditors and the audit committee of the registrants board of
directors (or persons performing the equivalent function): a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or
operation of internal controls over financial reporting which are reasonably
likely to adversely affect the registrants ability to record, process,
summarize and report financial information; and b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the registrants internal controls
over financial reporting. March 12, 2004
    
    /s/ Larry C. MillerDated
    
    Larry C. Miller
Vice President  Finance,
and Chief Financial Officer