alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
WARNING: THE EDGAR SYSTEM ENCOUNTERED ERROR(S) WHILE PROCESSING THIS SCHEDULE.

<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                                                                   5
<MULTIPLIER>                                                            1,000
<FISCAL YEAR-END>                                                 DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                                                    JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                                                      DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                                          12-MOS
<CASH>                                                                  2,493
<SECURITIES>                                                                0
<RECEIVABLES>                                                               0
<ALLOWANCES>                                                                0
<INVENTORY>                                                                 0
<CURRENT ASSETS>                                                       52,080
<PP&E>                                                                     15
<DEPRECIATION>                                                              0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                                         54,588
<CURRENT LIABILITIES>                                                   2,287
<BONDS>                                                                     0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                                       0
<PREFERRED>                                                                 0
<COMMON>                                                               68,090
<OTHER-SE>                                                            (15,789)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                                           54,588
<SALES>                                                                     0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                                           67
<CGS>                                                                       0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                                               0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                                        9,142
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                                            0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                                          0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                                       (9,075)
<INCOME-TAX>                                                                0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                                         0
<DISCONTINUED>                                                              0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                                             0
<CHANGES>                                                                   0
<NET-INCOME>                                                          (9,07,5)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                                          (2,610)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                          (3,360)


</TABLE>
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

IN RE:

ORDER AMENDING RULES 1.99, 2.1, 

2.4, 2.7, 2.8, 2.10, 3.3–3.6, 3.9–3.11, 3.14, 

7.2–7.4, AND 8.2 OF THE 

PENNSYLVANIA ORPHANS’ COURT 

RULES 

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

NO. 772

SUPREME COURT RULES DOCKET 

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 1

st day of June, 2018, upon the recommendation of the Orphans' 

Court Procedural Rules Committee; the proposal having been submitted without 

publication pursuant to Pa.R.J.A. No. 103(a)(3):

It is Ordered pursuant to Article V, Section 10 of the Constitution of Pennsylvania 

that Rules 1.99, 2.1, 2.4, 2.7, 2.8, 2.10, 3.3–3.6, 3.9–3.11, 3.14, 7.2–7.4, and 8.2 of the 

Pennsylvania Orphans’ Court Rules are amended in the attached form.

This Order shall be processed in accordance with Pa.R.J.A. No. 103(b), and shall 

be effective July 1, 2018. 

Additions to the rules are shown in bold and are underlined.

Deletions from the rules are shown in bold and brackets.
I 

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 128 

To direct the Secretary of Labor to revise regulations concerning the recording 

and reporting of occupational injuries and illnesses under the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 5, 2011 

Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas introduced the following bill; which was referred 

to the Committee on Education and the Workforce 

A BILL 

To direct the Secretary of Labor to revise regulations concerning the recording and reporting of occupational injuries and illnesses under the Occupational Safety and 

Health Act of 1970. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. RECORDING AND REPORTING OF OCCUPA4 TIONAL INJURIES AND ILLNESSES. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 180 days after the 

6 date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Labor shall 

7 revise the regulations in part 1904 of title 29, Code of 

8 Federal Regulations, concerning the recording and reportVerDate Mar 15 2010 00:48 Jan 11, 2011 Jkt 099200 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H128.IH H128

jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 128 IH

1 ing of occupational injuries and illnesses under the Occu2 pational Safety and Health Act of 1970 (29 U.S.C. 651 

3 et seq.), to require site-controlling employers to keep a site 

4 log for all recordable injuries and illnesses occurring 

5 among all employees on the particular site, whether such 

6 employees are employed directly by the site-controlling em7 ployer or are employed by contractors or temporary help 

8 or employee leasing services. 

9 (b) DEFINITION.—As used in this section, the term 

10 ‘‘site-controlling employer’’ means the employer that has 

11 primary control over the work on a particular work site 

12 and supervises the employees on a day-to-day basis on a 

13 particular work site. 

Æ 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS
EX-4.9



 Exhibit 4.9 

CERTIFICATE OF FORMATION 

OF 
 PENN VIRGINIA
OIL & GAS GP LLC 
 This CERTIFICATE OF FORMATION, dated
December 23, 2004, has been duly authorized and is filed pursuant to Sections 18-201 and 18-204 of the Delaware Limited Liability Company Act (the
“Act”) to form a limited liability company (the “Company”) under the Act. 
 1.
Name. The name of the Company is: 
 Penn Virginia Oil & Gas GP LLC 

2. Registered Office. The address of the registered office required to be maintained by Section 18-104 of the Act is: 
 Corporation Trust Center 

1209 Orange Street 
 Wilmington,
Delaware 19801 
 3. Registered Agent. The name and the address of the registered agent for service of process
required to be maintained by Section 18-104 of the Act are: 
 The Corporation Trust Company

 Corporation Trust Center 

1209 Orange Street 
 Wilmington,
Delaware 19801 
 EXECUTED as of the date first written above. 

 

			
	By:	 	 




  

		
	Name:	 	 H. Baird Whitehead

		 	Authorized Person


  

					
		  		  	State of Delaware
		  		  	Secretary of State
		  		  	Division of Corporations
		  		  	Delivered 02:16 PM 12/23/2004
		  		  	FILED 02:00 PM 12/23/2004
		  		  	SRV 040937114 – 3902250 FILE
D[PI OF TR^'^pORWi^ 

f ' • • ' "•• • 

SERVED: JANUARY 5, 2010 , , 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS 

WASHINGTON, DC 

IN THE MATTER OF 

WILLIAM A. LUKER, JR. 

FAA DOCKET NO. CP09SW0008 

(Civil Penalty Action) 

DMS NO. FAA-2009-1044 

NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT OF PROCEEDING 

This proceeding (heretofore designated as Case No. 2009SW700191) has been assigned to 

the undersigned. All fiiture pleadings and other communications regarding this proceeding shall 

be served on the Judge, the FAA Hearing Docket, and the other persons on the attached Service 

List. 

Ronnie A. Yoder 

Chief Administrative La 

Attachment - Service List 
FAA Docket No. CP09SW0008 

(Civil Penalty Action) 

SERVICE LIST 

ORIGINAL & ONE COPY 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue, S.W. 

Washington, DC 20591 

Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Wilbur Wright Building - Suite 2W1000' 

ONE COPY 

William A. Luker, Jr., Respondent 

11907 Winterthur Lane, Apt. PH3 

Reston,VA 20191-1937 

TEL: 571-271-2184 

Ellyn Ponton, Complainant's Counsel 

Attorney, Office of the Regional Counsel, ASW-7G5 

Federal Aviation Administration 

2601 Meacham Boulevard 

Fort Worth, TX 76137-4298 

TEL: 817-222-5089 

FAX: 817-222-5092 

The Honorable Ronnie A. Yoder, Chief Administrative Law Judge 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

Office of Hearings, M-20, Room E12-320 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. 

Washington, DC 20590 

TEL: 202-366r2142 

FAX: 202-366-7536 

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

Federal Aviation Administration, 600 Independence Avenue, S.W., Wilbur Wright Building - Suite 2W1000, 

Washington, DC 20591, Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430. 

-2-
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM
DM MORTGAGE INVESTORS, LLC FORM 10-Q FOR THE QUARTERLY PERIOD ENDED
SEPTEMBER 30, 2000 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO
SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                       5,849,950
<SECURITIES>                                   550,000
<RECEIVABLES>                                  138,020
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            19,803,420
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              19,803,420
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                              501
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                  19,759,978
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                19,803,420
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               125,722
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                    95
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                125,627
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            125,627
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   125,627
<EPS-BASIC>                                       .083
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     .083


</TABLE>
#### Jefferson D. GALAWAY, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee.

No. 34397.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

March 7, 1962.

No attorney for appellant of record on appeal.

Frank Briscoe, Dist. Atty., Samuel H. Robertson, Jr., Erwin G. Ernst, Assts. Dist. Atty., Houston, and Leon B. Douglas, State’s Atty., Austin, for the State.

*944DICE, Commissioner.

Appellant and his co-indictee, Alfred Arnold, were jointly charged by indictment with the offense of unlawfully possessing a narcotic drug, to-wit: marijuana.

Upon a severance being granted, appellant was separately tried and convicted upon his plea of guilty and the jury assessed his punishment at confinement in the penitentiary for a term of 25 years.

Upon the trial the State called Narcotic Officers Stringfellow and Gray of the Houston Police Department who testified that on the day in question they observed the appellant and Arnold seated in an automobile in the 2800 block of St. Charles Street, and that as they approached appellant threw seven white cigarettes from the car and Arnold dropped a tin foil package to the ground which contained thirteen cigarettes. Officer Stringfellow expressed his opinion that the seven cigarettes thrown from the car by appellant were marijuana cigarettes and it was stipulated that if Chemist Floyd McDonald were present to testify he would have testified that he ran tests on the cigarettes and that in his opinion they were marijuana.

Appellant testifying as a witness in his own behalf, admitted his possession of the seven marijuana cigarettes and testified that he had just purchased them from Arnold for his own use.

There are no formal bills of exception and no brief has been filed on behalf of appellant.

The informal bills of exception appearing in the record have been examined and do not present error.

The judgment is affirmed.

Opinion approved by the Court.
Exhibit 32.2

Certification of Chief Financial Officer pursuant to U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

In connection with this quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended December 31,
2010 (the Report) of OPNET Technologies, Inc. (the Company), I, Mel F. Wesley, Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



| | (1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and
| | --- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (2) | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                        |  |  |  |     |  |                                           
|----------------------- |  |  |  | --- |  | ------------------------------------------
|Dated: February 4, 2011 |  |  |  | By: |  | /S/     MEL F.
WESLEY                     
|                        |  |  |  |     |  | Mel F. Wesley                             
|                        |  |  |  |     |  | Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
I 

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 122 

To amend title 5, United States Code, to limit the circumstances in which 

official time may be used by a Federal employee. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 5, 2011 

Mr. GINGREY of Georgia (for himself, Mr. HARPER, Mrs. MCMORRIS RODGERS, Mr. WESTMORELAND, Mr. KINGSTON, Mr. ROSS of Florida, Mr. 

DUNCAN of Tennessee, Mr. BURTON of Indiana, Mr. CHAFFETZ, Mr. 

ROE of Tennessee, Mr. BARTON of Texas, Mr. AUSTIN SCOTT of Georgia, 

Mr. BROUN of Georgia, Mr. BARTLETT, Mr. MACK, Mr. LATTA, Mr. 

KLINE, Mr. RIBBLE, Mr. STEARNS, Mr. MILLER of Florida, Mr. GARY

G. MILLER of California, Mr. CRAWFORD, Mrs. BACHMANN, Mr. 

SCALISE, Mr. PITTS, Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas, Mr. KING of Iowa, 

and Mr. BRADY of Texas) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform 

A BILL 

To amend title 5, United States Code, to limit the circumstances in which official time may be used by a 

Federal employee. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Federal Employee Ac5 countability Act of 2011’’. 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 122 IH

1 SEC. 2. REPEAL OF CERTAIN PROVISIONS RELATING TO OF2 FICIAL TIME. 

3 Section 7131 of title 5, United States Code, is 

4 amended— 

5 (1) by striking subsections (a) and (c); 

6 (2) by redesignating subsections (b) and (d) as 

7 subsections (a) and (b), respectively; and 

8 (3) in subsection (b) (as so redesignated by 

9 paragraph (2)), by striking ‘‘Except as provided in 

10 the preceding subsections of this section—’’ and in11 serting ‘‘Except as provided in subsection (a)—’’. 

Æ 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS
`EXHIBIT 32

                                            SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATIONS

         In connection with the Annual Report of Security Capital Corporation (the "Company") on Form 10-K for
the period ended December 31, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), I, Frank West, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, to the best of my knowledge and belief,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes Oxley Act of 2002, 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 operations of the Company.

Date:    March 15, 2007


                                                              /s/ Frank West
                                                              ----------------------------------
                                                              Frank West
                                                              Chief Executive Officer



         In connection with the Annual Report of Security Capital Corporation (the "Company") on Form 10-K for
the period ended December 31, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), I, Connie Hawkins, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, to the best of my knowledge and
belief, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes Oxley Act of 2002, that:

         3)       The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
                  Exchange Act of 1934; and

         4)       The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
                  financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

Date:    March 15, 2007


                                                              /s/ Connie Hawkins
                                                              ----------------------------------
                                                              Connie Hawkins
                                                              Chief Financial Officer`
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 24

                                POWER OF ATTORNEY

     KNOW ALL PERSONS BY THESE PRESENTS, that each person whose signature
appears below constitutes and appoints Steven B. Schaver and David K. Moskowitz,
as his true and lawful attorneys-in-fact and agents, each acting alone, for him
and in his name, place and stead, in any and all capacities, to sign any annual,
quarterly, current and other reports of EchoStar Satellite Broadcasting
Corporation required to be filed under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and
to file the same, with all exhibits thereto, and other documents in connection
therewith, with the Securities and Exchange Commission, granting unto said
attorneys-in-fact and agents, each acting alone, with full powers and authority
to do all such other acts and execute all such other documents as he may deem
necessary or desirable in connection with the foregoing, as fully as if the
undersigned might or could do in person, hereby ratifying and confirming that
all such attorneys-in-fact and agents, each acting alone, may lawfully do or
cause to be done by virtue hereof.

     Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Act of 1934, as amended,
this Power of Attorney has been signed by the following persons in the
capacities indicated as of March 28, 1997.

       SIGNATURE                             TITLE 
       ---------                             ----- 


/s/ CHARLES W. ERGEN        President, Chief Executive Officer, Chairman
-------------------------   and Director (Principal Executive Officer) 
Charles W. Ergen            


/s/ JAMES DEFRANCO          Executive Vice President and Director
-------------------------   
James DeFranco


/s/ DAVID K. MOSKOWITZ      Senior Vice President, General Counsel,
-------------------------   Secretary and Director
David K. Moskowitz
#### T. D. TAYLOR, Appellant, v. Carl MARK, Appellee.

No. 4202.

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas. Waco.

March 12, 1964.

Rehearing Denied April 2, 1964.

*928Robert G. Carter, Marlin, for appellant.

Thomas Bartlett, Jr., Reagan & Welch, Marlin, for appellee.

WILSON, Justice.

Appellee, Mark, alleged he and appellant entered into an agreement that appellant would furnish material and appellee was to perform the labor to construct a dwelling. He pleaded that after he had done much work, appellant denied him access to the premises, completed the building himself, sold the house, and failed to pay appel-lee his damages for breach of the contract.

The damage issue submitted authorized the jury, in determining the value of labor and material furnished by appellee in constructing- the building, to consider the “reasonable value of materials paid for by Carl Mark and used in the construction of the house in question.”

Appellant’s sole point is that the court erred in submitting this instruction over his objections: (a) that the issue “allowed the jury to consider as an item of damages the value of material furnished by plaintiff when he did not seek to recover for the value of such material in his pleading”; and (b) there was no evidence as to the value, quantity or nature of materials paid for by appellee and used in the construction of the house.

Appellee’s petition itemized with particularity the items of damage sued for, including $7 paid by him for steel to reinforce the concrete foundation. He alleged a claim for the personal services, labor and material furnished, and prayed judgment for damages in the amounts pleaded. The pleading was sufficient.

Appellee testified he got from a wrecking yard and used in the building several hundred pounds of reinforcing steel to supplement eight bars which appellant furnished; that its value was $7. Appel-lee’s measure of damage is not contingent on his actual payment for the steel, notwithstanding the damage issue used the words, “paid for.” Austin Stone Industries, Inc. v. Capitol Power Co., Tex.Civ.App., 290 S.W.2d 689, 692, writ ref., n. r. e.; San Antonio & A. P. R. Co. v. Moore, 31 Tex.Civ.App. 371, 72 S.W. 226, writ ref.; Peacock v. Coltrane, Tex.Civ.App., 116 S.W. 389, 390. It is immaterial whether plaintiff proved that he had actually paid for the material previously, and the objection does not present reversible error. 25 C.J.S. Damages § 46, p. 525; 15 Am.Jur., Sec. 148, p. 556.

Affirmed.