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

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND> THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL
         INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE JUNE 30,
         2000 BALANCE SHEET, STATEMENTS OF INCOME
         AND STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS, AND IS
         QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO
         SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
<MULTIPLIER> 1000
<PERIOD-TYPE> 6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END> DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END> JUN-30-2000

<S>                          <C>
<CASH>                          121
<SECURITIES>                      0
<RECEIVABLES>                 4,386
<ALLOWANCES>                     15
<INVENTORY>                  20,672
<CURRENT-ASSETS>              1,217
<PP&E>                       50,584
<DEPRECIATION>               12,274
<TOTAL-ASSETS>               65,411
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>         5,521
<BONDS>                      31,099
<COMMON>                     14,808
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>             0
<PREFERRED>                       0
<OTHER-SE>                    6,669
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY> 65,411
<SALES>                      14,453
<TOTAL-REVENUES>             14,453
<CGS>                         6,841
<TOTAL-COSTS>                 6,841
<OTHER-EXPENSES>              4,815
<LOSS-PROVISION>                  0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>            1,436
<INCOME-PRETAX>               1,415
<INCOME-TAX>                    570
<INCOME-CONTINUING>             845
<DISCONTINUED>                    0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                   0
<CHANGES>                         0
<NET-INCOME>                    845
<EPS-BASIC>                   .13
<EPS-DILUTED>                   .13


</TABLE>
U.S. Department of Transportation Office ofthe Secretary of Transportation GENERAL COUNSEL December 6, 2013 1200 NewJersey Avenue, SE Washington, DC 20590

• ..... ,

..;
Certified Mail- Return Receipt Requested and Electronic Mail David A. Berg Airlines for America 1301 PennsylvaniaAve, NW Suite 1100 Washington, DC 20004-1707
Re: DOT-OST-2013-0152; Response to A4A request for limited waiver of 14 CFR §259.4 Relatedto Runway Closure at LaGuardiaInternational Airport onJuly 22,2013
DearMr. Berg: This letter is in response to your letter dated August 8, 2013, in which Airlines for America (A4A) requested a waiver from the three-hour requirement ofthe Department's tarmac delay rule, 14 CFR 259.4(b)(1), withrespectto all flights that experienced tarmac delays ofthree hours or more at LaGuardia Airport (LGA) on July 22, 2013, due to the incident involving Southwest Airlines flight 345. On July 22, 2013, at approximately 5:45 p.m., Southwest Airlines flight 345 experienced a collapsed nose gear upon landing at LGA. Following the incident, the airport authority immediately closed LGA and it remained closed until 7:20 p.m. Twelve domestic flights experienced lengthy tarmac delays at LGA during the period of the airport closure. 1 We investigated the flight delays and have determined that each ofthe twelve flights initially pushed back from their respective gates prior to Southwest Airlines flight 345 landing at LGA. The twelve flights were either on the ramp or tarmac when the incident occurred and were unable to take offor deplane passengers by returning to the gate or through another methodbecause ofthe airport closure. Because ofthe extenuating circumstances surrounding the Southwest incident, including the airport closure, we have determined that each ofthe twelve flight delays falls within the safety- and air traffic control-related exceptions ofthe tarmac delay rule, 14 CFR 259.4(b)(1)(i)-(ii), and that none ofthe tarmac delays resulted in a violation ofour rules. As such, we have closed our investigation of each ofthe twelve flights. Accordingly, we find A4A's request for a waiver ofthe three-hourrequirement to be moot and will close the docket.

1 The A4A letter identifiedthetwelve domestic flights listed on the attached 'Schedule A' and one international flight. The international flight was delayed less than four hours and thereforepursuantto 14 CFR259.4(b)(2) was not a coveredtarmac delay.Thank you again for your time raising this issue. Ifyou have any questions about this matter, please contact Laura Jennings ofmy staff, or Kimberly Graber, Chief, Consumer Protection and CompetitionLawBranch, at (202) 366-9342.

# w~**~uel** Podberesky

# ~stant General Counsel Aviation Enforcement and Proceedings- ---'--- -- ----**------'-------~"'-'---~**

ScheduleA

AIR WISCONSIN 

# 1 3723 

# 1 LGA PIT 7/22/2013 Origin Airport I 195

AMERICAN 

### I 1467 

### I LGA MIA 7/22/2013 Or MHT 7/22/2013 Origin Airport I 184 IND 7/22/2013 Origin Airport 

# 1 217 13 Origin Airport 

### I 202 

### I DELTA 1619 LGA MSP EXPRESSJET 5432 LGA BNA 

# 1 7/22/2013 

# 1 Origin Airport I 181 745

241 1899 LGA CLT 7/22/2013 Origin Airport 210
#### State of Iowa, Appellant, v. H. Casebolt, Appellee.

INTOXICATING LIQUORS: Illegal Transportation — Scope of Statute. The statutory prohibition (See. 2058, Code of 1924) against the illegal transportation of intoxicating liquors is not now limited to common carriers, as was the ease under See. 2419, Oode of 1897.

Headnote 1: 33 C. J. p. 581.

*Appeal from Webster District Court.*— B. R. Beyson, Judge.

March 9, 1926.

The defendant was indicted and tried below upon a charge of unlawfully transporting intoxicating liquors through Webster County, and by direction of the court was acquitted. The State *appeals.*—

Reversed.

*Ben J.*Gibson, Attorney-general, *S. 8.*Faville, Assistant Attorney-general, and *James I. Dolliver,*County Attorney, .for appellant.

*Verner Gabrielson,*for appellee.

Stevens, J.

The verdict of “not guilty” was directed by the court upon the ground that the transportation of intoxicating liquors into and through a county of this state by a person by automobile is-not a violation of Section 2058 of the .Code of 1924. This section is as follows:

“Any person, firm, or corporation, and any agent or employee thereof, who engages in the transportation of intoxicating liquors shall for each act of transportation be fined in a sum not exceeding one thousand dollars or be imprisoned in the county jail not exceeding one year or be punished by both such fine and imprisonment and pay the cost of prosecution, including a reasonable attorney fee to be taxed by the court.”

The enactment of this section by the extra session of the fortieth general assembly amended Section 2419 of the Code of 1897. The former section provided that:

“If- any express or railway company, or any common carrier, or person, or anyone as the agent or employee thereof, *575shall transport or convey * * * any intoxicating liquors * * * shall, upon conviction, be fined * *

The evident purpose and intention o£ the legislature in the enactment of Section 2058 of the Code of 1924 in its amended form was to get away from the construction placed by this court in *State v. Wignall,*150 Iowa 650, upon Section 2419 of the Code of 1897. It was held by this court in the *Wignall*case that the word “person,” as used in Section 2419, took its meaning from the preceding language of the statute, and that it must be presumed that it embraced only things of the nature designated thereby. The language of Section 2058 is clear, unequivocal, and broadly inclusive. It applies to any person, firm, corporation, and any agent or employee thereof, who engages in the transportation of intoxicating liquors through any county of this state. Each act is made an offense. The sole purpose of the appeal by the State is to obtain an interpretation of this statute,, and a reversal will in no manner prejudice the defendant. We are of the opinion that the interpretation placed by the court below upon the statute that it applied only to common carriers is *erroneous.*— Reversed.

De GRAPE, C. J., and Faville and Albebt, JJ., concur.
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 209 (Tuesday, October 29, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Page 85989]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-25030]



[[Page 85989]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Bureau of Labor Statistics


Technical Advisory Committee; Notice of Meeting and Agenda; 
Correction

AGENCY: Bureau of Labor Statistics.

ACTION: Notice; correction.

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

SUMMARY: The Bureau of Labor Statistics published a document in the 
Federal Register on October 18, 2024, announcing the November 7, 2024 
Technical Advisory Committee meeting. The document contained an 
incorrect registration link.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Correction

    In the Federal Register Notice on page 83908 in the third column, 
correct https://blstac.beventbrite.com to read: Individuals planning to 
attend the meeting should register at https://blstac.eventbrite.com.

    Dated: October 23, 2024.
Leslie Bennett,
Chief, Division of Management Systems.
[FR Doc. 2024-25030 Filed 10-28-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-24-P
EXHIBIT 99.1

                      CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906
                        OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I,  Douglas  H.  Symons,  Chief  Executive  Officer  of  Goran Capital Inc. (the
"Company"),  certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
18  U.S.C.  Section  1350,  that  to  the  best  of  my  knowledge:

(1)the  Quarterly  Report  on  Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarterly period
ended  March  31,  2003  (the  "Report") fully complies with the requirements of
Section  13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or
78o(d));  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:     July  16,  2003                         By:  /s/  Douglas  H.  Symons
           ---------------                              ------------------------
                                                       Douglas  H.  Symons
                                                       Chief  Executive  Officer
11 TH COURT OF APPEALS

EASTLAND

, TEXAS

JUDGMENT

Jeremy Dalton Stambaugh, * From the 266 th District Court

of Erath County,

Trial Court No. CR14580

.

Vs. No. 11

- 16

- 00352

- CR * Jul y 2 0 , 2017

T he State of Texas, * Per Curiam Memorandum Opinion

(Panel consists of: Wright, C.J.,

Willson, J. , and Bailey, J. )

This court has inspected the record in this cause and concludes that the

appeal should be dismissed. Therefore, in accordance with this court ’ s

opinion, the appeal is dismissed.
<PAGE>
                                 EXHIBIT (23)-1

                         CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

         We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration
Statements on Form S-8 (No. 333-72747, No. 333-58170 and No. 333-70953) of The
Banc Corporation of our report dated March 15, 2005, relating to the
consolidated financial statements of The Banc Corporation and Subsidiaries as of
December 31, 2004 and for the year then ended appearing in the Company's Annual
Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004.

                                               /s/ Carr, Riggs & Ingram, LLC

Montgomery, Alabama
March 15, 2005
#### Markert, Appellant, vs. Truettner and another, Respondents.

*651For the appellant: *Hersh & Morse,*attorneys, and *Arthur B. Magidson*of counsel, all of Milwaukee.

For the respondents : *Doll & Kinzer*and *R. J. Schimmel,*all of Milwaukee.

*By the Court.*

Judgment affirmed.
#### Nefstead, Special Administratrix, Appellant, vs. Loehr and another, Respondents.

For the appellant: *Samuel J. Grossman,*attorney, and *Roy O. Conen*and *Nathaniel D. Rothstein*of counsel, all of Milwaukee.

For the respondent Louise Handt Loehr: *T. L. Doyle*of Fond du Lac.

For the respondent M. W. Thompson: *L.'J. Fellenz*of Fond du Lac.

*By the Court.*

Judgment affirmed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                           4,527
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   24,862
<ALLOWANCES>                                     (972)
<INVENTORY>                                     16,366
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                50,318
<PP&E>                                          68,617
<DEPRECIATION>                                (16,602)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 109,733
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           33,211
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            88
<OTHER-SE>                                      50,581
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   109,733
<SALES>                                         94,327
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                94,327
<CGS>                                           82,656
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   82,656
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                11,395
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             (1,424)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0
<INCOME-TAX>                                     (368)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (943)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.11)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.11)
        

</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                         321,000
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                6,660,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                 1,661,000
<INVENTORY>                                 19,554,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            25,924,000
<PP&E>                                       5,925,000
<DEPRECIATION>                               3,747,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              33,573,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       18,243,000
<BONDS>                                        190,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        51,000
<OTHER-SE>                                  15,089,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                22,992,000
<SALES>                                     14,056,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            14,056,000
<CGS>                                        7,668,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                7,547,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             332,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (1,491,000)
<INCOME-TAX>                                    29,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (1,520,000)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (1,520,000)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.30)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.30)
        

</TABLE>
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23-1

               CONSENT OF ERNST & YOUNG LLP, INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements
(Form S-8 No. 333-58170) pertaining to the Second Amended and Restated 1998
Stock Incentive Plan of The Banc Corporation and Commerce Bank of Alabama
Incentive Stock Compensation Plan and (Form S-8 No. 333-70953) pertaining to
The Banc Corporation 401(k) Plan of our report dated April 3, 2003 with respect
to the consolidated financial statements of The Banc Corporation and
Subsidiaries included in the Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended
December 31, 2002.

Birmingham, Alabama
April 11, 2003
##### 



Exhibit 10.25.2 AMERIGROUP OF FLORIDA, INC.
    
    Medicaid HMO Contract
 AHCA CONTRACT NO. FA523
AMENDMENT NO. 2 THIS CONTRACT, entered into between the STATE OF FLORIDA, AGENCY FOR HEALTH CARE
ADMINISTRATION, hereinafter referred to as the Agency and AMERIGROUP OF FLORIDA, INC.,
hereinafter referred to as the Vendor, is hereby amended as follows:  1.
    Attachment I, section 10.5, Optional Services, the first item, Dental Services, is hereby
amended to now read: Covered
    
    Not CoveredDental Services
    
    o
    
    þ
  2.
    This amendment shall begin on November 19, 2004, or the date on which the amendment has
been signed by both parties, whichever is later. All provisions in the Contract and any attachments thereto in conflict with this amendment
shall be and are hereby changed to conform with this amendment. All provisions not in conflict with this amendment are still in effect and are to be performed
at the level specified in the Contract. This amendment and all its attachments are hereby made a part of the Contract. This amendment cannot be executed unless all previous amendments to this Contract have been
fully executed. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this 1 page amendment (including all
attachments) to be executed by their officials thereunto duly authorized. AMERIGROUP OF FLORIDA, INC.
    
    STATE OF FLORIDA, AGENCY FORHEALTH CARE ADMINISTRATIONSIGNED
    
    
    SIGNEDBY:
    
    
    BY:NAME:
    
    
    NAME:
    Alan LevineTITLE:
    
    
    TITLE:
    SecretaryDATE:
    
    
    DATE:
 THE REMAINDER OF THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY AHCA Contract No. FA523, Amendment No. 2, Page 1 of 1
#### Dummler and others, Trustees, Appellants, vs. Land and others, Respondents.

For the appellants: *Lorin L. Kay*of Milwaukee.

For the respondents: *Sell & Mathiowets*of Milwaukee.

*By the Court.*

Order affirmed.
<Page>

                                                                    Exhibit 23.1

                         CONSENT OF ERNST & YOUNG LLP

We consent to the incorporation in the Registration Statement (Forms S-8 Nos.
333-83285 and 333-58826) pertaining to the 1998 Stock Option/Stock Issuance
Plan and Employee Stock Purchase Plan, of our report dated January 18, 2002,
with respect to the consolidated financial statements and schedule of Inet
Technologies, Inc. included in the Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year
ended December 31, 2001 filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission.



Dallas, Texas
February 27, 2002
Exhibit 99.4



LOGO

March 19, 2014

Consent of Independent Auditor

We hereby consent to the
incorporation by reference in this Annual Report on Form 40-F for the year ended December 31, 2013 of Denison Mines Corp. of our Auditors report dated March 6, 2014 relating to the consolidated financial statements of Denison Mines
Corp. as at December 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012 and for each of the two years ended December 31, 2013, and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting of Denison Mines Corp, which appears in an Exhibit
incorporated by reference in this Annual Report on Form 40-F.

(Signed) PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

Chartered Accountants, Licensed Public Accountants

Toronto, Ontario, Canada

PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

PwC Tower, 18 York Street, Suite 2600, Toronto, Ontario, Canada M5J 0B2

T: +1 416 863 1133, F: +1 416 365 8215, www.pwc.com/ca

PwC refers to PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, an Ontario limited liability partnership,
#### Phœbe A. Lindrum *et al.,*plaintiffs in error, *vs.*James A. Robson, defendant in error.

The certificate of the former owner of a judgment, given since its assignment, that she had, on due reflection, become satisfied that said judgment was wrong, and that she was mistaken when the case was pending in Court, cannot affect the rights of the assignee.

Judgment. Equity. Before Judge Robinson. Baldwin Superior Court. August Term, 1872.

For the facts of this case, see the decision.

William McKinley ; Crawford & Williamson, for plaintiffs in error.

No appearance for .defendant.

Warner, Chief Justice.

This was a bill filed by the complainant against the defendants to enjoin the collection of an execution, and to vacate the judgment on which it issued. On the trial of the case, the jury found a verdict against the defendants, vacating the judgment. A motion was made for a new trial on the ground that the verdict was contrary to the charge of the Court, contrary to law and the evidence, which was overruled, and the defendants excepted. The complainant alleges in his bill that one of the defendants, Mrs. Robson, obtained a judgment against him in the Superior Court of Baldwin county, on a due bill given by him to her, for $500 00, on the 29th of August, 1871, on which judgment an execution issued and was assigned and transferred to Mrs. Lindrum on the 9th of October, 1871, by the plaintiff therein. Afterwards, on the 5th of December, 1871, the complainant obtained a certificate from Mrs. Robson, in which she stated that since the assignment of said judgment and execution to Mrs. Lindrum, she had, on clue reflection, become satisfied that the said judgment was wrong, and that she was mistaken when the case was *45pending in Court. The defendant, Mrs. Robson, in her answer to the discovery prayed for in complainant’s bill, positively denies there was any error or mistake in said judgment, and that the recitals in said certificate are false and fraudulent, and that said paper was obtained from her by the complainant, fraudulently, and by threats of violence if she did not sign it. Mrs. Lindrum denies all knowledge of any error or mistake in the judgment at the time of the assignment thereof to her. The answer of Mrs. Robson as to the manner in which the paper was procured from her, was controverted by two witnesses. In our judgment, taking the allegations in the complainant’s bill to be true, as well as the evidence offered in support thereof at the trial, he was not entitled to the relief prayed for, especially, as against the assignee of the judgment, who could not be affected by the declarations of Mrs. Robson contained in the certificate, after the assignment of the judgment by her. The Court erred in overruling the motion for a new trial.

Let the judgment of the Court below be reversed.
Anadarko E&P Onshore LLC 

f/k/a Anadarko E&P Co. 

Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

April 17, 2014

No. 04-14-00152-CV

LIGHTNING OIL CO.,

Appellant

v.

ANADARKO E&P ONSHORE LLC F/K/A ANADARKO E&P CO. LP,

Appellee

From the 365th Judicial District Court, Dimmit County, Texas

Trial Court No. 14-01-12171-DCVAJA

Honorable Amado J. Abascal, III, Judge Presiding

O R D E R

Sitting: Karen Angelini, Justice

Sandee Bryan Marion, Justice

Marialyn Barnard, Justice

Appellant’s motion for temporary orders to preserve jurisdiction and rights pending 

appeal is DENIED.

_________________________________

Karen Angelini, Justice

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

court on this 17th day of April, 2014.

___________________________________

Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court