alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
|                                                                          
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                          
|View History: Annual Download Data (XLS File)                            
|View History: Annual                                                      
|View History: Annual                                                      
|View History:                                                             
|                                                                          
|Alabama Number of Operable Refineries as of January 1 (Number of Elements)
|                                                                          
|                                                                          
|Alabama Number of Operable Refineries as of January 1 (Number of Elements)
|                                                                          

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|1980's                                                                                                                            |        |        | 6      | 6      | 5      | 4      | 4      | 5      | 6      | 5     
|1990's                                                                                                                            | 4      | 3      | 3      | 3      | 3      | 3      | NA     | 3      | NA     | 3     
|2000's                                                                                                                            | 3      | 3      | 3      | 3      | 3      | 3      | 4      | 4      | 3      | 3     
|2010's                                                                                                                            | 3      | 3      | 3      | 3      | 3      | 3      | 3      | 3      | 3      | 3     
|2020's                                                                                                                            | 3      | 3      | 3      | 3      | 3      |        |        |        |        |       
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 6/14/2024                                                                                                          
|Next Release Date: June 2025
Case 3:22-cr-00184-N Document 56 Filed 09/22/22 Page 1 of 1 PageID 121
# C_2011282EN.01003601.xml

| 24.9.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 282/36 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.9.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 282/36

---

Action brought on 26 July 2011 — Symfiliosi/FRA

(Case T-397/11)

2011/C 282/70

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Symfiliosi (Nicosia, Republic of Cyprus) (represented by: L. Christodoulou, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA)

Defendant:

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

| — | Annul the decision of the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights of 23 May 2011 to award the first framework contract under the tender procedure F/SE/10/03 — Lot 12 Cyprus to First Elements and the second framework contract to Symfiliosi; |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the decision of the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights of 23 May 2011 to award the first framework contract under the tender procedure F/SE/10/03 — Lot 12 Cyprus to First Elements and the second framework contract to Symfiliosi;

| — | Order the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

Order the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on one main plea in law, alleging that the Agency failed to provide reasons for its decision. It further contests the substance of the evaluation of tendering bids, alleging that the latter had been arbitrary, unreasonable and unlawful.

---
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

DALLAS DIVISION

RUBEN ALEXANDER GOMEZ, §

 Plaintiff, §

§

v. § No. 3:22-cv-01357-E (BT)

§

JOHNSON COUNTY, et al.,

 Defendants.

§

§

Consolidated with:

3:22-cv-01649-E (BT) 

ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND

RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

After reviewing all relevant matters of record in this case, including the Findings, 

Conclusions, and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge and any objections 

thereto, in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), the undersigned District Judge is of the 

opinion that the Findings and Conclusions of the Magistrate Judge are correct, and they are 

accepted as the Findings and Conclusions of the Court. By separate judgment, the plaintiff’s 

claims will be DISMISSED. 

SIGNED this 27th day of November, 2023

Case 3:22-cv-01357-E-BT Document 35 Filed 11/27/23 Page 1 of 1 PageID 107
1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

FORT WORTH DIVISION 

ROBERT (BOB) ROSS, § 

§ 

Plaintiff/Counterclaim Defendant, § 

§ 

v. § 

§ 

Civil Action No. 4:22-cv-00343-Y

ASSOCIATION OF PROFESSIONAL § 

FLIGHT ATTENDANTS, § 

MCGAUGHEY, REBER AND § 

ASSOCIATES, INC., JULIE § 

HEDRICK, AND ERIK HARRIS, § 

§ 

Defendants/Counterclaim Plaintiff. § 

CERTIFICATE OF INTERESTED PERSONS OF 

DEFENDANT COUNTERCLAIM PLAINTIFF ASSOCIATION OF 

PROFESSIONAL FLIGHT ATTENDANTS, AND DEFENDANTS 

JULIE HEDRICK AND ERIK HARRIS

Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 7.1 and LR 3.1(c), LR 3.2(e), LR 7.4, LR 81.1(a)(4)(D), and 

LR 81.2, Defendant McGaughey, Reber and Associates, Inc.( “Defendant”) provides the 

following information:

For a nongovernmental corporate party, the name(s) of its parent corporation and any 

publicly held corporation that owns 10% or more of its stock (if none, state “None”): 

None. 

A complete list of all persons, associations of persons, firms, partnerships, corporations, 

guarantors, insurers, affiliates, parent or subsidiary corporations, or other legal entities 

that are financially interested in the outcome of the case: 

1. Association of Professional Flight Attendants (“APFA”); 

2. Julie Hedrick, National President of APFA (“Hedrick”); 

3. Erik Harris, National Treasurer of APFA (“Harris”); 

Case 4:22-cv-00343-Y Document 24 Filed 06/28/22 Page 1 of 2 PageID 175
2

4. Robert (Bob) Ross, former National President of APFA; 

5. McGaughey, Reber and Associates, Inc., d/b/a Diversified Credit Systems; 

and 

6. Members of, and individuals represented by, the APFA.

Michael R. Rake

Michael R. Rake, Attorney at Law

P.O. Box 1556

Lake Dallas, TX 75065

Tel. & Fax: 940-498-2103

 E-mail: mrake1@mrakeattorney.com

Counsel for Defendant, McGaughey, Reber and 

Associates, Inc. d/b/a Diversified Credit Systems

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I certify that on this 28 day of June, 2022 a true and correct copy of the foregoing 

document was served on the below listed counsel of record for Plaintiff/Counterclaim Defendant 

Ross by a means permitted by Rule 5(b)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (“F.R.C.P.”). 

KERRI PHILLIPS 

K. D. Phillips Law Firm, PLLC 

5700 Tennyson Parkway, Suite 300 

Plano, Texas 75024 

Phone: (972) 327-5800 

Fax: (940) 400-0089 

Email: kerri@KDphillipslaw.com 

 Michael R. Rake

Date: June 28, 2022 

Michael R. Rake

Case 4:22-cv-00343-Y Document 24 Filed 06/28/22 Page 2 of 2 PageID 176
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 24-0116

STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee,

v.

JACOB TYLER POWELL,

Defendant and Appellant.

ORDER

Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, 

and good cause appearing,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension 

of time to and including November 25, 2024, within which to prepare, 

file, and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

October 3 2024

10/03/2024

Case Number: DA 24-0116
Case 2:22-cr-00013-Z-BR Document 35 Filed 07/26/22 Page 1 of 1 PageID 91
Exhibit
32.1





CERTIFICATION





The
undersigned, Mario A. Rivas, President and Chief Executive Officer of ANADIGICS,
Inc. (the "Company"), hereby certifies that the Quarterly Report of the Company
on Form 10-Q for the period ended April 4, 2009 fully complies with the
requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
and that the information contained in such report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.








Dated:
May 8, 2009




By:
            /s/
      Mario A. RivasMario
      A. RivasPresident
      and Chief Executive Officer





This
certification shall not be deemed to be “filed” for the purpose of Section 18 of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and will not be incorporated by
reference into any registration statement filed under the Securities Act of
1933, as amended, unless specifically identified therein as being incorporated
by reference.





A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document
authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears
in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required
by Section 906, has been provided to ANADIGICS, Inc. and will be retained by
ANADIGICS, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its
staff upon request.
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 State

          - [Public Notice No. 3467] 

The Shipping Coordinating Committee will conduct an open meeting at 9:30 a.m. on Thursday, December 14, 2000, in Room 6103 of the U.S. Coast Guard Headquarters, 2100 2nd Street SW, Washington, DC 20593-0001. The purpose of the meeting is to finalize preparations for the 32nd Session of the International Maritime Organization (IMO) Sub-Committee on Standards of Training and Watchkeeping, which is scheduled for January 22 to 26, 2001, at IMO Headquarters in London. At this meeting, papers received and the draft U.S. positions will be discussed. 

Among other things, the items of particular interest are: 

— Training and certification of maritime pilots 

                    — Unlawful practices associated with certificates of competency (                    *i.e.*, forged certificates)                 

— Standard Marine Communication Phrases 

— Training in the use of Electronic Chart Display and Information Systems 

— Guidance for training in ballast water management 

— Guidance for ships operating in ice-covered waters 

— Validation of an IMO model course on assessment of competence 

— Guidance associated with the International Convention on Standards of Training, 

Certification and Watchkeeping for Fishing Vessel Personnel Convention, as adopted by the 1995 conference; not yet ratified or in force. 

Members of the public may attend the meeting up to the seating capacity of the room. Interested persons may seek information by writing: LCDR Luke Harden, Commandant (G-MSO-1), U.S. Coast Guard Headquarters, Room 1210, 2100 2nd Street SW., Washington, DC 20593-0001 or by calling (202) 267-0229.

Dated: November 8, 2000.

Stephen Miller,

Executive Secretary Shipping Coordinating Committee. 

[FR Doc. 00-29245 Filed 11-14-00; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4210-07-P
#### In the Matter of Gail Kaplan, Also Known as Goldie Kaplan, Deceased. Wimpfheimer & Wimpfheimer, Respondent; Marshall G. Kaplan et al., Appellants.

In an accounting proceeding, the appeal is from an order of the Surrogate’s Court, Kings County (Bloom, S., on decision; Pizzuto, S., on order), entered June 1, 1989, which denied the appellants’ motion to dismiss the petition.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs payable by the appellants personally.

SCPA 2110 (1) provides: "At any time during the administration of an estate and irrespective of the pendency of a particular proceeding, the court is authorized to fix and determine the compensation of an attorney for services rendered to a fiduciary or to a devisee, legatee, distributee or any person interested or of an attorney who has rendered legal services in connection with the performance of his duties as a fiduciary or in proceedings to compel the delivery of papers or funds in the hands of an attorney”.

Rachel Kaplan allegedly benefited from the petitioner’s work within the meaning of SCPA 2110. Accepting the allegations of the petition as true, the petition states a cause of action for an accounting for services rendered on her behalf, and on behalf of the estate, in light of the Surrogate’s broad powers to administer justice in actions relating to and affecting the administration of estates and proceedings arising thereunder *(see, Matter of Piccione,*57 NY2d 278; *Matter of Kaplan,*141 AD2d 545). Lawrence, J. P., Kunzeman, Harwood and Rosenblatt, JJ., concur.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS FOR THE SIX MONTHS ENDED JUNE 30, 1998 AND
THE CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AS OF JUNE 30, 1998 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                          124535
<SECURITIES>                                    246018
<RECEIVABLES>                                    24273
<ALLOWANCES>                                      3434
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                548054
<PP&E>                                          243405
<DEPRECIATION>                                   71879
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  794774
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           132551
<BONDS>                                         659559
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                      28477
<COMMON>                                           513
<OTHER-SE>                                     (30098)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    794774
<SALES>                                          98182
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 98182
<CGS>                                            78609
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    78609
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 90445
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               19471
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (82695)
<INCOME-TAX>                                        29
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (82724)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (82724)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (1.76)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (1.76)
        

</TABLE>
Exhibit 10.24


 





AMENDMENT TO EXECUTIVE EMPLOYMENT
AGREEMENT


 


This Amendment To Executive Employment Agreement
(“Amendment”), dated June 30, 2015, hereby amends the Executive Employment Agreement (the “Agreement”)
dated the July 1, 2013 between Reprints Desk, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the “Company”), Research Solutions,
Inc., a Nevada corporation (“Research Solutions”), and Jan Peterson (“Executive”), an individual.


 


WHEREAS, the parties
have complied with the terms of the Agreement until the date hereof; and


 


WHEREAS, Reprints Desk
and Executive wish to amend the terms of the Agreement.


 


NOW THEREFORE, for
the mutual promises and other consideration described herein, the parties hereto agree as follows:


 


		1.	Section 1(d) Term is amended as follows:



 


Term. The term of employment of Executive by
the Company pursuant to this Employment Agreement shall be for the period commencing on the Commencement Date and ending on June
30, 2017, or such earlier date that Employee’s employment is terminated in accordance with the provisions of this Employment
Agreement.


 


		2.	Section 2(a) Base Salary is amended as follows:



 


Base Salary. In consideration of the services
to be rendered under this Agreement, the Company shall pay Executive a salary at the rate of One Hundred Eighty Eight Thousand
and Eighty Dollars ($188,080) per year (“Base Salary”). The Base Salary shall be paid in accordance with the
Company’s regularly established payroll practice. Executive’s Base Salary will be reviewed from time to time in accordance
with the established procedures of the Company for adjusting salaries for similarly situated employees and may be adjusted in the
sole discretion of the Company.


 


Except as expressly amended or modified
herein, all terms and conditions of the Agreement are hereby ratified, confirmed and approved and shall remain in full force and
effect. In the event of any conflict or inconsistency between this Amendment and the Agreement, this Amendment shall govern.


 


This Amendment and all acts and transactions
pursuant hereto and the rights and obligations of the parties hereto shall be governed, construed and interpreted in accordance
with the laws of the State of California, without giving effect to principles of conflicts of law.


 


This Amendment may be executed and delivered
by facsimile signature and in two or more counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, but all of which together shall
constitute one and the same instrument.


 


[Signature Page Follows]


 






     


     


    

 


 


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties
have duly executed this Amendment as of the date first written above.


 


REPRINTS DESK, INC.: 


 





	By:  ___________________________		Name and Title: Peter Derycz, CEO
	 	 	 
	 	 	 
	 	 	 
	RESEARCH SOLUTIONS, INC.: 	 
	 	 	 
	By:  ___________________________		Name and Title: Peter Derycz, CEO
	 	 	 
	 	 	 
	 	 	 
	EXECUTIVE:	 
	 	 	 
	 	 	 
	By:  ___________________________		Name: ______________________
	 	 	 
	 	 	 
	Address: ________________________________________________________________
EXHIBIT 35.1





SERVICER COMPLIANCE STATEMENT





I, Barrett E. Green, Vice President and Treasurer of Entergy New Orleans, LLC (the “Servicer”), certify that:





(a) A review of the Servicer's activities during the reporting period covered by this Report on Form 10-K and of its performance under that certain Storm Recovery Property Servicing Agreement dated as of July 22, 2015 between Entergy New Orleans Storm Recovery Funding I, L.L.C., as the Issuing Entity, and the Servicer (the “Servicing Agreement”) has been made under my supervision.





(b) To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Servicer has fulfilled all of its obligations under the Servicing Agreement in all material respects throughout the reporting period.





Date: March 22, 2024


Entergy New Orleans, LLC, as servicer


By /s/ Barrett E. Green


Name:  Barrett E. Green


Title:  Vice President and Treasurer
#### ALEXANDER v. ALEXANDER et al.

No. 10855.

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas. San Antonio.

May 21, 1941.

W. H. Lipscomb, of .San Angelo, and Herman Glosserman, of San Antonio, for appellant.

J. K. Baker, of Coleman, and Oscar Calloway, of Comanche, for appellees.

NORVELL, Justice.

This is an appeal from an order sustaining the plea of privilege filed by C. F. (John) Alexander and Ethyl Alexander. Ella G. Alexander, the appellant, has filed no brief in this Court.

Appellees have moved for an affirmance of the order appealed from, and, in the alternative, requested that the appeal be dismissed.

As the record discloses no fundamental error and this is an appeal from an interlocutory order, we are of the opinion that this cause should be affirmed in accordance with the primary prayer of appellees’ motion. McGraw v. Albracht, Tex.Civ.App., 16 S.W.2d 1112.

Appellees’ motion is granted and the order appealed from is affirmed.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

DALLAS DIVISION

LATOSHA MARSHALL, §

§

 Plaintiff, §

§

V. § No. 3:22-cv-1084-K-BN

§

FREEDOM MORTGAGE 

CORPORATION,

§

§

§

 Defendant. §

ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION 

OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

After making an independent review of the pleadings, files and records in this 

case, and the Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation of the United States 

Magistrate Judge dated October 3, 2022, the Court finds that the Findings and 

Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge are correct and they are accepted as the 

Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation of the Court.

IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that the Findings, Conclusions, and 

Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge are accepted as the findings of 

the Court. The Court GRANTS Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss [Dkt. No. 7] and 

dismisses Plaintiff’s claim for negligent misrepresentation with prejudice and Plaintiff’s 

claim for breach of contract and request for injunctive relief without prejudice.

Within 21 days from the date of this order, Plaintiff may file an amended 

complaint to replead her claim for breach of contract and request for injunctive relief, 

Case 3:22-cv-01084-K-BN Document 17 Filed 10/25/22 Page 1 of 2 PageID 138
if she can, consistent with this recommendation and the conclusions and findings of 

the U.S. Magistrate Judge. Failure to do so, will result in those claims will be dismissed 

with prejudice without further notice.

SO ORDERED.

Signed October 25th, 2022.

 _____________________________________

 ED KINKEADE

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:22-cv-01084-K-BN Document 17 Filed 10/25/22 Page 2 of 2 PageID 139