alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE> <S> <C>
                                                         
<ARTICLE>                                 5                    
<LEGEND>                                                       
THE SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
COMPANY'S CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
</LEGEND>                                                      
<MULTIPLIER>                                     1,000    
                                                               
<S>                                        <C>            
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                    9-MOS                 
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAY-31-1997          
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-01-1997           
<CASH>                                          78,747            
<SECURITIES>                                         0            
<RECEIVABLES>                                  279,735            
<ALLOWANCES>                                     5,483             
<INVENTORY>                                    256,729             
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               665,356             
<PP&E>                                         683,510             
<DEPRECIATION>                                 359,034            
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,235,682             
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          254,784             
<BONDS>                                        151,475             
<COMMON>                                       215,700             
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0             
<PREFERRED>                                          0             
<OTHER-SE>                                     523,711             
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,235,682             
<SALES>                                              0             
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,396,167             
<CGS>                                                0             
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  799,900             
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0             
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0             
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              10,114             
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                114,607             
<INCOME-TAX>                                    36,674             
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             77,933            
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0             
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0             
<CHANGES>                                            0             
<NET-INCOME>                                    77,933             
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     2.37          
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     2.37             
                                                               

</TABLE>
#### BARRETT v. STATE.

No. 26834.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Feb. 17, 1954.

No attorney ,on appeal for appellant.

Wesley Dice, State’s Atty., Austin, for the State.

MORRISON, Judge.

The offense is the unlawful sale of whiskey in a dry area; the punishment, a fine of $300.

The record is before us without a statement of facts or bills of exceptions.

All the proceedings appearing regular and nothing being presented for our review, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
# AGENCY HOLDING THE MEETING:

 Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.

# DATE AND TIME:

 Tuesday, February 29, 2000 at 2:00 P.M. (Eastern Time). (This Meeting was rescheduled from Tuesday, January 25, 2000)

# PLACE:

 Conference Room on the Ninth Floor of the EEOC Office Building, 1801 “L” Street, NW, Washington, DC 20507.

# STATUS:

 The meeting will be closed to the public.

# MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED:

 

## Closed Session

Review of Pending Litigation. 

# Note:

                        Any matter not discussed or concluded may be carried over to a later meeting. (In addition to publishing notices on EEOC Commission meetings in the                         **Federal Register**                        , the Commission also provides a recorded announcement a full week in advance on future Commission sessions). Please telephone (202) 663-7100 (voice) and (202) 663-4074 (TTD) at any time for information on these meetings.                    

# CONTACT PERSON FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:

 Frances M. Hart, Executive Officer on (202) 663-4070.

Dated: February 2, 2000.

Frances M. Hart,

Executive Officer, Executive Secretariat.

[FR Doc. 00-2682  Filed 2-2-00; 1:39 pm]

BILLING CODE 6750-06-M
Exhibit 99.1  
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002  
In connection with the Quarterly Report of Sequa Corporation (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2003 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Norman E. Alexander, Chief Executive 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 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 result of operations of the Company.     
/s/  NORMAN E. ALEXANDER  
Norman E. Alexander  
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer  
May 14, 2003
#### The State, ex rel. Cline, *v.*Industrial Commission of Ohio.

(No. 27396

Decided November 15, 1939.)

*34
      *Mr. Franhlm G. Gepfert*and *Mr. John G. Fontana,*for relatrix.

*Mr. Thomas J. Herbert,*attorney general, and *Mr. E. P. Felker,*for respondent.

By the Court.

The relatrix predicates this mandamus proceeding upon that portion of Section 1465-90, General Code (117 Ohio Laws, 86), effective July 3,1937, which reads:

> “If the order of the commission does not state the ground or grounds on which the claim was denied, or if the order of the Industrial Commission is not definite in such regards, the claimant may jnaintain an action in mandamus against the commission in the Supreme Court of Ohio, and, if the final order in such proceedings directs the commission to state the'ground or grounds of its order or make the order definite as to the ground or grounds thereof, then there shall be taxed as part of the costs assessed against the commission an attorney fee in the amount of $250.”

Counsel agree that the second order of the commission denying additional compensation on January 26, 1939, definitely stated the grounds. Therefore, that issue is moot and the only question before this court is whether attorney fees should be taxed.

Counsel for the relatrix in their brief assert that the purposes of the General Assembly in amending Section 1465-90, General Code, were to avoid confusion *35in the court as to what ordérs were final and appeal-able, and to place a penalty upon the Industrial Commission. Counsel direct our attention to observations and admonitions by this court when reviewing orders of the Industrial Commission which were not definite in *State, ex rel. Randolph,*v. *Industrial Commission,*128 Ohio St., 27, 31, 190 N. E., 217; *State, ex rel. Depalo,*v. *Industrial Commission,*128 Ohio St., 410, 419, 191 N. E., 691; *Simmons*v. *Industrial Commission,*134 Ohio St., 456, 457, 17 N. E. (2d), 751.

Forfeitures and penalties are not favored in law or equity and statutory provisions therefor must be strictly construed. 19 Ohio Jurisprudence, 204, 215, Sections 4 and 17; 37 Ohio Jurisprudence, 752, Section 425.

Section 1465-90, General Code, provides for taxing an attorney fee only if the final order in the mandamus proceeding directs the commission to amplify its order in the respects named in the amended statute.

Strictly construing the penalty portion of that section, in connection with the admission that the order of the commission dated January 26, 1939, is definite, this court by virtue of the limited language of that section is not warranted in issuing a writ of mandamus.

*Writ denied.*

Weygandt, C. J., Williams, Matthias and Hart, JJ., concur.

Myers, J., not participating.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0000095779
<NAME> JEROLD R. KASSNER
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                                        <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                              3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                             570
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   28,465
<ALLOWANCES>                                     9,453
<INVENTORY>                                     35,401
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                63,154
<PP&E>                                          28,522
<DEPRECIATION>                                  22,862
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  76,825
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           34,538
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         1,690
<OTHER-SE>                                      30,308
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    76,825
<SALES>                                         35,974
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                35,974
<CGS>                                           23,084
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   23,084
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 1,400
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   349
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 392
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (2,702)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (1,081)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (1,599)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (1,599)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (.10)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.10)


</TABLE>
2/27/1012 Morongo Comment Letter - received 4/9/2012

Elizabeth Palma to: palma.elizabeth 04/10/2012 01:20 PM

Correspondence and Comment Letter for Docket No: EPA-HQ-OAR-2008-0476

Morongo Band of Mission Indians regarding intended designation of areas of Indian Country for the 2008 

Ozone NAAQS

From: Colleen McKaughan/R9/USEPA/US

To: Kristin Riha/R9/USEPA/US@EPA, Anita Lee/R9/USEPA/US@EPA, Gwen 

Yoshimura/R9/USEPA/US@EPA, JohnJ Kelly/R9/USEPA/US@EPA, Ken 

Israels/R9/USEPA/US@EPA

Date: 04/10/2012 10:58 AM

Subject: Fw: Morongo comment letter

We got the missing letter from Liz Bodanski of Morongo yesterday. This is the first time that we have 

seen it. Consequently, I would put her email and the attached letter in the record. The email documents 

that we received the letter from the tribe yesterday, not on February 27th. 

Colleen W. McKaughan

Associate Director, Air Division

USEPA, Region 9

(520) 498-0118

----- Forwarded by Colleen McKaughan/R9/USEPA/US on 04/10/2012 07:52 AM -----

From: Liz Bogdanski <LBogdanski@morongo-nsn.gov>

To: Colleen McKaughan/R9/USEPA/US@EPA

Cc: "Jeff R. Keohane" <jeff@gformanlaw.com>, JohnDunlap <john@dunlapgrp.com>, "Mark St. 

Angelo" <MStAngelo@morongo-nsn.gov>, Wienke Tax/R9/USEPA/US@EPA, Jefferson 

Wehling/R9/USEPA/US@EPA, James Payne <JPayne@morongo-nsn.gov>

Date: 04/09/2012 03:32 PM

Subject: Morongo comment letter

Hi Colleen,

Please find attached Morongo’s comment letter dated February 27, 2012 regarding EPA’s revised eight

hour ozone standards for your records.   

Liz Bogdanski, Director

Morongo Environmental Protection Department

12700 Pumarra Road

Banning, CA 92220

951‐755‐5271

951‐316‐1024 cell

http://morongonation.morongo.org
THEA~TORNEY GENERAL 

OF XAS 

April 10, 1962 

Honorable Earl C. Fitts Opinion No. W-1304 

County Attorney 

Montague County Re: Whether witness fees 

Montague, Texas may be paid to witnesses who reside in 

the county where a 

felony is tried, 

Dear Mr. Fltts: 

Your request for an opinion on the above question 

is as follows: 

"Is there any provision in the law 

for payment of fees to witnesses in 

felony cases that live in the county?" 

"The right of witnesses to 

for their attendance is statutory 

to such fees only as the statutes 

981. 

receive compensation 

and they are entitled 

provide." 44 Tex.Jur. 

In Attorney General's Opinion o-1567 there is the 

following language: "The State does not pay the fees of 

witnesses within the county in felony cases." Also'from 

Attorney General's Opinion No. 0-6456 we quote: "There 

is no provision for payment of fees in felony cases to 

witnesses who reside in the county of trial. 

It is therefore our opinion that there is no provision in the law for payment of fees in felony cases 

to witnesses who live in the county. 

SUMMARY 

There is no statutory authority for 
Honorable Earl C. Fitts Page 2 Opinion No. Ww-1304 

payment of fees in felony cases to 

witnesses who reside in the county of 

trial. 

Yours very truly, 

WILL WILSON 

Attorney General of Texas 

BY J-b.dJdL 

Irwin R. Saimanson 

Assistant Attorney General 

1RS:sh 

APPROVED: 

OPINION COMMITTEE: 

W. V. Geppert, Chairman 

William Hemphill 

Jack Price 

Bill Allen 

REVIEWED FOR THE ATTORNEY GENERAL 

BY: Houghton Brownlee, Jr.
**EXHIBIT 99.2
**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO**18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,****AS ADOPTEDPURSUANT TO**SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
         In connection with the Quarterly Report of Superior UniformGroup, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2002 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Andrew D. Demott, Jr., Chief Financial Officer of theCompany, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

         (1)      TheReport 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.
   /s/ ANDREW D. DEMOTT,JR.  **Andrew D. Demott, Jr.****Chief Financial Officer****November 8, 2002**    ********
Group 3 – Google’s Responsive Claim Construction Brief 

(Civil Case Nos. 6:20-cv-00573-ADA, 6:20-cv-00575-ADA, 

6:20-cv-00577-ADA, and 6:20-cv-00585-ADA) 

EXHIBIT #11

Case 6:20-cv-00573-ADA Document 34-11 Filed 02/12/21 Page 1 of 4
Case 6:20-cv-00573-ADA Document 34-11 Filed 02/12/21 Page 2 of 4
Case 6:20-cv-00573-ADA Document 34-11 Filed 02/12/21 Page 3 of 4
Case 6:20-cv-00573-ADA Document 34-11 Filed 02/12/21 Page 4 of 4
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 32.2

                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

In connection with the quarterly report of Tecumseh Products Company (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2008 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Form 10-Q"), I,
James S. Nicholson, 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, to my knowledge:

     (3)  the Form 10-Q fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
          15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

     (4)  the information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all
          material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
          of the Company.


Dated: November 6, 2008                 BY: /s/ JAMES S. NICHOLSON
                                            ------------------------------------
                                            James S. Nicholson
                                            Vice President, Treasurer and
                                            Chief Financial Officer
**Exhibit 4.1**

 

 

**Pathmark Stores, Inc.**

**200 Milik Street**

**Carteret, New Jersey 07008-1194**

**Telephone: (732) 499-3930**

**Telecopier: (732) 499-6891**

 

April 23, 2007

 

Mr. Allan Richards

The Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Company, Inc.

2 Paragon Drive

Montvale, NJ  07645

 

| **Re:** | **Agreement and Plan of Merger by and among****The Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Company, Inc.****and Sand Merger Corp. and Pathmark Stores, Inc.****(“Pathmark”) dated as of March 4, 2007 (the “Agreement”)** |
|---------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

Dear Allan:

 

This will confirm our understanding that notwithstanding anything in Section 6.1(e) of the Agreement to the contrary, the parties hereto agree that Pathmark may permit additional associates to participate in the Retention Pay Plan for Office Associates in Grade Levels L-26 through L-35, Assistant Vice Presidents, Vice Presidents and Senior Vice Presidents, and the Retention Pay Plan for Non-Exempt Office Associates and Exempt Office Associates Through Grade Level L-25, each dated as of March 4, 2007 (collectively, the “Plans”), as set forth in items 28 and 29 of Section 4.10(k) of the Company Disclosure Letter to the Agreement, or increase the amounts payable thereunder so long as the aggregate payments under the Plans do not exceed $9.1 million.

 

If you are in agreement, please sign below.

 

|   | Very truly yours,     |
|--------|-----------------------|
|   |                  |   |
|   | PATHMARK STORES, INC. |
|   |                  |   |
|   | By                    | /s/ Marc A. Strassler |
|   |                  | Marc A. Strassler |
|   |                  | Senior Vice President, |
|   |                  | Secretary and General Counsel |

 

Agreed to this 24thday of April, 2007

 

| By     | /s/ Allan Richards    |
|--------|-----------------------|
|   | Allan Richards        |
|   | Senior Vice President |
CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER



Exhibit 32.2


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


In connection with the Quarterly Report of The Stephan Co. (the "Company)
on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2004 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
David Spiegel, 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, to my knowledge:

(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.



/s/ David A. Spiegel
__________________________________
David A. Spiegel
Chief Financial Officer
July 25, 2005



This certification accompanies each Report pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company for
purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has
been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.
#### McKenzie, Appellant, *v.*Neville et al., Appellees.

(No. 27964

Decided January 24, 1940.)

*Mr. E. M. Wickham,*for appellant.

*Messrs. Hill & Neville,*for appellees.

It is ordered and adjudged that said appeal as of right be, and the same hereby is, dismissed for the reason no debatable constitutional question is involved in said cause.

*Appeal dismissed.*

Weygandt, C. J., Day, Zimmerman, Williams, Myers, Matthias and Hart, JJ., concur.
Document Headings

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

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Defense

###### Office of the Secretary of Defense

# AGENCY:

Advisory Group on Electron Devices, Department of Defense.

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

Working Group C (Electro-Optics) of the DoD Advisory Group on Electron Devices (AGED) announces a closed session meeting. The announcement of the meeting is being published in less than the 15-day requirement by law because of scheduling conflicts.

# DATES:

The meeting will be held at 0900, Wednesday, November 1, 2000.

# ADDRESSES:

The meeting will be held at Palisades Institute for Research Services, 1745 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 500, Arlington, VA 22202.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Elise Rabin, AGED Secretariat, 1745 Jefferson Davis Highway, Crystal Square Four, Suite 500, Arlington, Virginia 22202.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The mission of the Advisory Group is to provide advice to the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Technology, to the Director of Defense Research and Engineering (DDR&E), and through the DDR&E to the Director, Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency and the Military Departments in planning and managing an effective and economical research and development program in the area of electron devices.

The Working Group C meeting will be limited to review of research and development programs which the Military Departments propose to initiate with industry, universities or in their laboratories. This opto-electronic device area includes such programs as imaging device, infrared detectors and lasers. The review will include details of classified defense programs throughout.

                    In accordance with Section 10(d) of Pub. L. No. 92-463, as amended, (5 U.S.C. App. § 10(d) (1994)), it has been determined that this Advisory Group meeting concerns matters listed in 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(1) (1994), and that                           ( print page 63572)                        accordingly, this meeting will be closed to the public.                

Patricia L. Toppings,

Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.

[FR Doc. 00-27197  Filed 10-23-00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 5001-10-M
**EXHIBIT 23.2**
CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS
     We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the RegistrationStatements (No. 333-58649 and No. 333-58899) on Form S-8 of Midwest BancHoldings, Inc. of our report dated January 30, 2004, except fornote 27, as to which the date is March 12, 2004, on the consolidatedfinancial statements of Midwest Banc Holdings, Inc. as of and for the yearended December 31, 2003 which appears in this 2003 Annual Report on Form 10-K.
McGladrey & Pullen, LLP
Chicago, Illinois