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

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0001003382
<NAME> 3-D GEOPHYSICAL, INC.
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                           2,304
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   27,978
<ALLOWANCES>                                     (111)
<INVENTORY>                                         29
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                32,616
<PP&E>                                          54,030
<DEPRECIATION>                                (11,842)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  84,037
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           23,567
<BONDS>                                          5,055
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           118
<OTHER-SE>                                      56,679
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    84,037
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                69,569
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   55,623
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                14,107
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,061
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   (39)
<INCOME-TAX>                                        67
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              (106)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (106)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.01)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.01)
        

</TABLE>
# C_2004239EN.01000802.xml

| 25.9.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 239/8 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.9.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 239/8

---

Action brought on 30 July 2004 by the Commission of the European Communities against the Republic of Austria

(Case C-335/04)

(2004/C 239/15)

An action against the Republic of Austria was brought before the Court of Justice of the European Communities on 30 July 2004 by the Commission of the European Communities, represented by Denis Martin, of its legal service and Horstpeter Kreppel, Judge of the Arbeitsgericht (Labour Court) seconded to the Commission's legal service as part of an exchange programme with national civil servants, with an address for service in Luxembourg.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| 1. | declare that, by failing to adopt the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary fully to comply with Council Directive 2000/43/EC of 29 June 2000 implementing the principle of equal treatment between persons irrespective of racial or ethnic origin (1), or to notify the Commission of any such provisions, the Republic of Austria has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive; |
| --- | --- |

1.

declare that, by failing to adopt the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary fully to comply with Council Directive 2000/43/EC of 29 June 2000 implementing the principle of equal treatment between persons irrespective of racial or ethnic origin (1), or to notify the Commission of any such provisions, the Republic of Austria has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive;

1

| 2. | order the Republic of Austria to pay the costs of the proceedings. |
| --- | --- |

2.

order the Republic of Austria to pay the costs of the proceedings.

Pleas in law and main arguments:

The period for transposition of Directive 2000/43/EC expired on 19 July 2003.

---

(1)  OJ L 180, 19.7.2000, p. 22.

1

---
**EXHIBIT 32.2**

 

CERTIFICATION OFOFFICERS

OF AMLCOMMUNICATIONS, INC.

PURSUANT TO 18 USC§ 1350

 

 

Pursuant to section 906of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsection (a) and (b) of Section 1350,Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code) each of the undersigned officers ofAML Communications, Inc. (the “Company”) does hereby certify, to such officer’sknowledge, that:

 

(c)           Thequarterly report on Form 10-QSB for the period ended December 31, 2005 of theCompany fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(b) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and

(d)          Informationcontained in such Form 10-QSB fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

 
| Dated: February 14, 2006 |   |
|--------------------------|--------|
|                     |   |
|                     |   |
| /S/: James M. Fornear    |   |   |
| By: James M. Fornear     |   |
| Chief Financial Officer  |   |
|                          |        |  |

 

----
#### Ness, Respondent, vs. Kuehne, Appellant.

For the appellant: *L. P. Fox*of Chilton.

For the respondent: *George C. Hume*of Chilton,

*By the Court.*

Judgment affirmed.
No. 90-494.

#### Blue Cross & Blue Shield of Alabama et al. *v.*Brown.

C. A. 11th Cir. Motion of American Council of Life Insurance et al. for leave to file a brief as *amici curiae*granted. Certiorari denied.
MESABA AIRliNES 

. ~ • ..7 

June 17,2010 

Dennis DeVany and Todd M. Homan 

EAS & Domestic Analysis Division, X-53 

Office of Aviation Analysis 

Department of Transportation 

Room 64171 

400 i h Street, S.W. 

Washington, DC 20590 

Re: Amendment 1 to Proposal for Mesaba's Essential Air ~rvice at GLH-MEM 

Greenville, Mississippi. Docket OST -2008-0209. V 

Dear Mr. DeVany and Mr. Homan: 

As you know, Mesaba Aviation, Inc., d/b/a Mesaba ("Me saba") is retiring its fleet of Saab 340 

Aircraft before the end of 2011, and therefore cannot commit to a rate agreement for the 

Department's standard 2-year period. Accordingly, Mesaba hereby amends its proposal to 

stipulate an end to the proposed subsidy rate on the earlier of October 1, 2011, or 180 days after 

Mesaba informs the Department of the retirement of the Saab aircraft used for this service. At 

the appropriate time, Mesaba intends to submit a new bid proposal based on the aircraft that are 

available in Mesaba's fleet. 

We look forward to the opportunity to continue providing essential air service to the Greenville 

community. 

(V:6SCed

, 

John G. Spanjers 

President 

1000 BLUE GENTIAN ROAD, SUITE 200, EAGAN, MN 55 121 

, ,,,,
<PAGE>

                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.3


                              Employment Agreement
                                     Between
                         The Southern Banc Company, Inc.
                            and James B. Little, Jr.

                                 2001 Amendment
                                 --------------

     WHEREAS, The Southern Banc Company, Inc. (the "Company") has entered into
an Employment Agreement (the "Agreement") and a Supplemental Executive
Retirement Agreement (the "SERA") with James B. Little Jr. (the "Employee"); and

     WHEREAS, the Board of Directors of the Company (the "Board") and the
Employee have determined that it is appropriate to amend the Agreement (i) to
redefine the Employee's position with the Company, (ii) and to provide for a
lump sum payment in satisfaction of the benefits to which the Employee is
entitled under his SERA.

     NOW, THEREFORE, the Agreement shall be amended as follows effective
immediately.

     1.   The first sentence in Section 1 shall be amended by replacing
          "President" with  "Investment Officer."

     2.   The second sentence of Section 1 shall be amended by adding the
          following at the end thereof:

                ; provided that the Employee shall not be required to perform
                services for the Bank and its holding company in excess of 20
                hours per week.

     3.   Nothing contained herein shall be held to alter, vary or otherwise
          affect any of the terms, provisions or conditions of the Agreement
          other than as stated above.

     WHEREFORE, on this 19th day of April, 2001, the undersigned hereby
     approve this  2001 Amendment to the Agreement.



                              THE SOUTHERN BANC COMPANY, INC.


                                   By _____________________________
                                      Its Secretary


                                      _____________________________
                                                 James B. Little Jr.
1 The Honorable Linda R. Reade, Chief J udge, United States District Court for the Northern District of Iowa. 

## United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 07-2937

___________ United States of America, * * Appellee, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * Northern District of Iowa. Antonio Watkins, * * [UNPUBLISHED] Appellant. *

___________ Submitted: October 23, 2008 Filed: October 30, 2008

___________ Before WOLLMAN, SMITH, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM. Antonio Watkins appeals the sentence the district court 1 imposed upon revoking his supervised release. After carefully re viewing the record and counsel’s brief, we affirm.
We first conclude that Watkins’s se ntence is not unreasonable because it was within the properly calculated advisory Guidelines range and it resulted from the court’s consideration of appropriate factors under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a). See United-2- States v. Nelson , 453 F.3d 1004, 1006 (8th Cir. 2006) (appellate court reviews revocation sentence to determine whether it is unreasonable in relation to, inter alia, advisory Guidelines range and § 3553(a) factors); United States v. Tyson , 413 F.3d 824, 825 (8th Cir. 2005) (per curiam) (re vocation sentences are reviewed for unreasonableness in accordance with United States v. Booker , 543 U.S. 220 (2005)).
We further conclude that the court did not abuse its discretion in ordering that Watkins’s revocation sentence run consecu tively to his state sentences. See United States v. Cotroneo , 89 F.3d 510, 512 (8th Cir. 1996) (decision to impose consecutive or concurrent sentence upon re vocation of supervised release is committed to court’s sound discretion); see also U.S.S.G. § 7B1.3(f) (term of imprisonment imposed upon revocation of supervised release shall be ordered to be served consecutively to any sentence of imprisonment defendant is serving). Finally, we conclude that the districtcourt did nothing improper in declining to recommend Watkins’s placement in a medical facility. See 18 U.S.C. § 3621(b) (Bureau of Prisons shall designate place of prisoner’s imprisonment). Accordingly, we affirm.

______________________________
----

Annual Report 2003

(2004/C 305/06)

The European Ombudsman has presented his Annual Report for the year 2003 to the European Parliament, in accordance with Article 195(1) of the Treaty establishing the European Community and Article 3(8) of the Decision of the European Parliament on the Regulations and General Conditions Governing the performance of the Ombudsman's Duties.

The Annual Report as well as a shorter version containing only the Executive Summary and the Statistics are available on the European Ombudsman's website in all 20 official languages at: http://www.euro-ombudsman.eu.int.

Paper copies of these publications can be requested free of charge from the European Ombudsman's office:

----
EXHIBIT 32.1





CERTIFICATION OF OFFICER


OF AML COMMUNICATIONS, INC.


PURSUANT TO 18 USC § 1350





Pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsection (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code) the undersigned officer of AML Communications, Inc. (the “Company”) does hereby certify, to such officer’s knowledge,
that:





(a)
The quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2009 of the Company fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and




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





Dated: August 14, 2009





/s/ Jacob Inbar


By: Jacob Inbar,


Chief Executive Officer


(Principal Executive Officer)
# Energy Efficient Lighting System (No.) (670) Conservation Practice Standard

## Breadcrumb

-  Home 
-  Resources 
-  Energy Efficient Lighting System (No.) (670) Conservation Practice Standard 

Download the national conservation practice standard document and supporting documents for Energy Efficient Lighting System (No.) (670).

## National Standard Document

NOTICE - National conservation practice standards should not be used to plan, design or install a conservation practice. To find these documents at the local level, visit our Field Office Technical Guide website.

Conservation Practice Name (Units) (Code) (Date Issued)

Energy Efficient Lighting System (No.) (670) (7/2021) Standard Document(866.45 KB)

###   Supporting Documents

Energy Efficient Lighting System (No.) (670) Overview(9.35 MB)

##   Additional Information

### Conservation Practice Standards

On this page find links to national conservation practice standards and supporting documents.
Learn More

### Conservation Practice Standards Information

Learn about the information provided in conservation practice standards and supporting documents, such as overviews, worksheets, and network effects diagrams.
Learn More
# C_2004300EN.01001302.xml

| 4.12.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 300/13 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.12.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 300/13

---

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Second Chamber)

of 7 October 2004

in Case C-402/02: Commission of the European Communities v French Republic (1)

1

(Failure by a Member State to fulfil its obligations - Directives 89/48/EEC and 92/51/EEC - Recognition of diplomas - Access to the profession of special needs teacher in the hospital public service and local public service - Definition of ‘regulated profession’ - Professional experience - Article 39 EC)

(2004/C 300/26)

Language of the case: French

In Case C-402/02: Commission of the European Communities (Agents: M. Patakia and D. Martin) v French Republic (Agents: G. de Bergues and A. Colomb) — action under Article 226 EC for failure to fulfil obligations, brought on 12 November 2002 — the Court (Second Chamber), composed of: C.W.A. Timmermans (Rapporteur), President of the Chamber, C. Gulmann, J.-P. Puissochet, J.N. Cunha Rodrigues and F. Macken, Judges; A. Tizzano, Advocate General; R. Grass, Registrar, has given a judgment on 7 October 2004, in which it:

| 1. | Declares that, by failing to put in place a procedure for the mutual recognition of diplomas as required by Council Directive 89/48/EEC of 21 December 1988 on a general system for the recognition of higher-education diplomas awarded on completion of professional education and training of at least three years' duration and Council Directive 92/51/EEC of 18 June 1992 on a second general system for the recognition of professional education and training to supplement Directive 89/48 for access to the profession of special needs teacher in the hospital public service and the local public service, and by allowing to remain in force a national law and the practice of the classification committee which fails to take into account the professional experience of migrant workers, the French Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under those directives and Article 39 EC. |
| --- | --- |

1.

Declares that, by failing to put in place a procedure for the mutual recognition of diplomas as required by Council Directive 89/48/EEC of 21 December 1988 on a general system for the recognition of higher-education diplomas awarded on completion of professional education and training of at least three years' duration and Council Directive 92/51/EEC of 18 June 1992 on a second general system for the recognition of professional education and training to supplement Directive 89/48 for access to the profession of special needs teacher in the hospital public service and the local public service, and by allowing to remain in force a national law and the practice of the classification committee which fails to take into account the professional experience of migrant workers, the French Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under those directives and Article 39 EC.

| 2. | Orders the French Republic to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders the French Republic to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 323 of 21.12.2002.

1

---
#### Bell, Plaintiff in error, vs. The State, Defendant in error.

March *7*

April *1, 1930.*

*433The cause was submitted for the plaintiff in error on the briefs of *Edward H. Ryan*and *J. G. McWilliams,*both of Janesville, . and for the defendant in error on that of *George S. Geffs,*special assistant district attorney for Rock county, the *Attorney General,*and /. *E. Messerschmidt,*assistant attorney general.

Rosenberry, C. J.

There are several assignments of error. Those of a substantial character raise the question of whether or not the evidence received upon the trial was sufficient to sustain the verdict of the jury.

The complaining witness was Adolph Helwig, a farmer who occupied a farm adjoining the farm occupied by the defendant. It was the contention of the State that the heifer in question crossed over onto the premises of the defendant; that the heifer was taken, confined in the barn of the defendant, and sold to a stock-buyer. The question turns upon the proof of identity of the heifer admittedly sold by the defendant to the stock-buyer, Dutcher. The complaining wit*434ness, his son Eddie Helwig, Douglas Smith, an employee of the defendant at the time in question, 'and Paul Taylor, part owner of the farm occupied by the defendant, testified to the facts upon which the State relies for a conviction. The defendant E. L. Bell, his son Frank Bell, the wife of the defendant Hazel Bell, and E. D. Dutcher, the stock-buyer, gave testimony which tends to contradict that given by the State’s witnesses.

We have carefully examined this testimony. No good purpose would be served by setting it out at length. The evidence as to the identity of the heifer purchased by Dutcher and lost by the complaining witness, Helwig, is not strong and depends mainly but not entirely upon the testimony given by the defendant’s hired man, Douglas Smith. He testifies on direct examination that the heifer sold by the defendant to Dutcher was the heifer which was lost by Helwig and that the heifer sold by the defendant to Dutcher had horns. This is denied by Dutcher, Bell and his wife, and Bell’s son. There are circumstances in the record which tend to support the version given by Douglas Smith. The trial court and the jury had the witnesses before them. The jury found the defendant guilty. Its verdict was sustained, upon motion for a new trial, by the trial court. It is considered that the evidence produced by the State, while far from conclusive, is sufficient if believed by the jury to sustain the verdict.

Other assigned errors do not require separate treatment.

*By the Court.*— Judgment affirmed.
FILED U.S. COURT OF AP P EALS E LEVEN T HC IRC UIT SEPTEMBER 20, 2007 THOMAS K. KAH

N CLERK [ DO NO T P UB L I S H] I N THE UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS F O R T H E E L E V E N T H C IR C U IT

________________________ N o. 07- 11751 N on -A rgum entC al endar

________________________ D . C . D o c k e tN o . 9 5 - 0 0 1 3 2 - C R - WS U N I T E D S T A T E S O F A M E R I C A , P la in tif f - A p p e lle e , v ersu s A B E L R O C A - O L M O S , D e f e n d a n t- A p p e llan t.

________________________ A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f o rth e So u th e rn D i s tr i c to f A l ab a ma

_________________________ ( S e p t e m b e r 20, 2007) B efo re D U B IN A , B L A C K an dC A RN E S , C i rcu i tJu d g es. P E R C U R I A M: W i l l i am G re go ryH ug hes, appo i nt ed coun se l for A bel R oca- O l m os, has f i l ed2

a m ot i on t o w i thd raw on appeal , supp ort ed by a bri ef prepare d p ursuantt o A nd er s v. C a l i f orni a , 386 U . S . 738, 87 S . C t . 1396, 18 L . E d. 2d 493 ( 1967) . O ur i nde pe nde ntr e vi e w of

the r e c or d c onf

i rm s c ouns e l ’ s a s s e s s m e ntof the r e l a t i ve m e r its o f th e ap p e a l. B e c au s e in d e p e n d e n t e x a m in a tio n o f th e e n tir e r e c o r dr e v e a ls n o i ssu e o f arg u ab l e m eri t , co u n sel ’ s m o t i o n t o w i th draw i s G R A N TED , a nd R oca’ s c on vi ct i on and sent ence ar e A FFI R M ED .
HomeRadioactive WasteHigh-Level Waste DisposalKey DocumentsDOE's License Application for a High-Level Waste Geologic Repository at Yucca Mountain

# References cited by U.S. Department of Energy for Yucca Mountain License Application

*This page includes links to files in non-HTML format. See Plugins, Viewers, and Other Tools for more information.*

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Tuesday, August 08, 2017
# Emergency Animal Mortality Management (No.) (368) Conservation Practice Standard

## Breadcrumb

-  Home 
-  Resources 
-  Emergency Animal Mortality Management (No.) (368) Conservation Practice Standard 

Download the national conservation practice standard document and supporting documents for Emergency Animal Mortality Management (No.) (368).

## National Standard Document

NOTICE - National conservation practice standards should not be used to plan, design or install a conservation practice. To find these documents at the local level, visit our Field Office Technical Guide website.

Conservation Practice Name (Units) (Code) (Date Issued)

Emergency Animal Mortality Management (No.) (368) (7/2022) Standard Document(2.58 MB)

###   Supporting Documents

Emergency Animal Mortality Management (No.) (368) Overview(299.95 KB)

Emergency Animal Mortality Management (No.) (368) Network Diagram(89.8 KB)

##   Additional Information

### Conservation Practice Standards

On this page find links to national conservation practice standards and supporting documents.
Learn More

### Conservation Practice Standards Information

Learn about the information provided in conservation practice standards and supporting documents, such as overviews, worksheets, and network effects diagrams.
Learn More
#### Duenkel (Fred), Plaintiff in error, vs. The State, Defendant in error.

*March 11*

April *5, 1932.*

*652
      *L. P. Fox*of Chilton, for the plaintiff in error.

For the defendant in error there was a brief by the *Attorney General*and *I. E. Messer schmidt,*assistant attorney general, and oral argument by *Mr. Messer schmidt.*

Fairchild, J.

The facts and questions of law in this case are identical with those considered in the case of *Leonard Duenkel v. State,*decided herewith *(ante,*p. 644, 242 N. W. 179), and are ruled by the decision there made, wherein it was held that the judgment was properly entered and the motion fór a new trial properly denied.

*By the Court.*— Judgment affirmed.