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

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK>                 0001004540
<NAME>                AIRPLANES U.S. TRUST
<MULTIPLIER>          1,000,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             OCT-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                               6
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        1
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     8
<PP&E>                                             562
<DEPRECIATION>                                     155
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                     415
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                               19
<BONDS>                                            401
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                       (133)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                       415
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                    16
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        9
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     1
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     1
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   9
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    (4)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                (4)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       (4)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
#### STATE v. EDITH SAUNDERS.

*Appeal.*

Appeals in criminal actions will be dismissed where the record fails to show there was a final judgment.

*(Stale*v. *Bailey,*65 N. C., 420; *State*v. *Keeter,*80 N. C., 472; *Stale*v. *Wise-man,*68 N. C., 203, cited and approved).

INDICTMENT for fornication and adultery, tried at Fall Term, 1883, of Watauga Superior Court, before *Graves,- J.*

The defendants Edith Saunders and Columbus Anderson were indicted lor fornication and adultery, and the defendant Edith was alone on trial. There was a verdict of guilty, and the de-*652fondant appealed. Motion by the state to dismiss the appeal upon the ground that the record does not show that judgment was pronounced.

*Attorney-General,*for the State.

No counsel for the defendant.

Ashe, J.

In looking into the record, we find there was no judgment rendered in the court below upon the finding of the jury. The appeal therefore cannot be sustained. It lias been repeatedly decided by this court that no appeal lies in a criminal action at the instance of either party, where there is no final judgment. *State*v. *Bailey,*65 N. C., 426; *State*v. *Keeter,*80 N. C., 472; *State v. Wiseman,*68 N. C., 203.

Lest, however, the case may be brought up again to this court upon the exception taken on the trial, we take occasion to say that upon a careful perusal of the record and statement of the case, even if there had been a judgment in the court below, there is no ground for a new trial.

Appeal dismissed.
## tv Department ofEnergy Energy Efficiency Programfor Commercial and Industrial Equipment: Efficiency Standardsfor Commercial HVAC and Water Heating Products

9:00 - 9:05 am 9:05 - 9: 15 am 9:15 - 9:30 am 9:30 - 10:15 am 10: 15 - 10:30 am 10:30 - 12:30noon

12:30 - 1:30pm

1:30 - 3:00pm

3:00 - 3: 15 pm 3:15 - 4:30pm 4:30 - 4:45 pm 4:45 - 5:00pm 5:00pm 

### Public Workshop Agenda July 11, 2000 Opening - Cyrus Nasseri Agenda Review and Overview - Doug Brookman DOE Process and Inclinations - Cyrus Nasseri BriefOpening Statements by Stakeholders Break Commercial Product Screening Analysis - Presentation byPNNL, Comments by Stakeholders, and Discussion • Methodology • Results and Interpretations • Product Categories not included in the Analysis Lunch - (on yourown) DOE Inclinations based on the Screening Analysis - Presentation by Cyrus Nasseri, Comments by Stakeholders, and Discussion • Adopt ASHRAE 90.1-1999 energy efficiency levels (20 products) • Conduct further analyses (9 products) • Suggest ASHRAE addenda (4 products) • Retain current EPCA energy efficiency levels (1 product) Break Future Analytical Issues Next Steps - Cyrus Nasseri Closing Adjourn
April 22, 2015

U.S. Department of Transportat ion

Docket Management System

1200 New Jersey Ave., SE

Washington, DC 20590

Re: Delivery of Dronair Solutions' Movie Production and Television Operations Manual

(MPTOM) [Docket No. FAA

- 2015

- 0648]

To Whom it May Concern:

As you are aware, this office represents Dronair Solutions ("Dronai r") regarding the above re ferenced

Petition for Exemption

, in which Dronair seeks regulatory relief to allow commercial operation of small

unmanned aerial vehicles. Please accept this letter as confirmation that the Petitioner submitted the Dronair

Movie Production and Television Operations Manual ( " MPTOM " ) as a proprietary and confidential document

to 333exemptions@faa.gov on April 22, 2015.

If you have any other questions, or need any additional information to process this exemption

request, please contact the undersigned or John McGraw at:

John McGraw Aero space Consulting, LLC

Phone: 540

- 219

- 1638

Email: john@jmacaerospace.aero

Very truly yours,

Matthew J. Clark

Mark E. McKinnon Albany

Atlanta

Brussels

Denver

Los Angeles

Miami

New York 1676 International Drive • Penthouse

McLean, VA 22102

Tel: 703.336.8800

mckennalong.com Northern Virginia

Orange County

Rancho Santa Fe

San Diego

San Francisco

Seoul

Washington, DC

Mark E. McKi nnon

703.336.8714

Matthew J. Clark

703.336.871 Email Address

mmckinnon@mckennalong.com

mclark@mckennalong.com
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    Exhibit 28.3

                     [Letterhead of KPMG Peat Marwick LLP]

                        Independent Accountants' Report

Mellon Bank Credit Card Master Trust
c/o The Bank of New York, as Trustee

Mellon Bank (DE), National Association, as Servicer

We have examined the accompanying assertion made by management on Mellon Bank
(DE), National Association's ("MBD") compliance, as Servicer, with Article IV,
Section 4.3, of the Pooling and Servicing Agreement for the Mellon Bank Credit
Card Master Trust, dated as of November 1, 1995, including the Supplement
(Series 1995-A) dated November 1, 1995 (collectively, the "Agreement") for the
year ended December 31, 1996. Management is responsible for MBD's compliance
with the aforementioned section of the Agreement. Our responsibility is to
express an opinion on management's assertion about MBD's compliance based upon
our examination.

Our examination was made in accordance with standards established by the
American Institute of Certified Public Accountants and, accordingly, included
examining, on a test basis, evidence about MBD's compliance with the
aforementioned section of the Agreement and performing such other procedures as
we considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our examination
provides a reasonable basis for our opinion. Our examination does not provide a
legal determination on MBD's compliance with the Agreement.

In our opinion, management's assertion that MBD was materially in compliance
with the aforementioned section of the Agreement for the year ended December
31, 1996, is fairly stated, in all material respects.

                                              KPMG PEAT MARWICK LLP

March 28, 1997


<PAGE>   2

                         (Mellon Bank (DE) Letterhead)

         Management Report on Mellon Bank (DE), National Association's
                  Compliance, as Servicer, with the Servicing
              Requirements of the Pooling and Servicing Agreement

Management of Mellon Bank (DE) National Association ("MBD"), as Servicer, is
responsible for compliance with the servicing requirements in Article IV,
Section 4.3, of the Pooling and Servicing Agreement for the Mellon Bank Credit
Card Master Trust, dated as of November 1, 1995, including the Supplement
(Series 1995-A) dated as of November 1, 1995 (collectively, the "Agreement").

Management has performed an evaluation of MBD's compliance with the
aforementioned section of the Agreement for the year ended December 31, 1996.
Based upon this evaluation, management believes that, for the year ended
December 31, 1996, MBD, as Servicer, was materially in compliance with the
aforementioned section of the Agreement.

DONNA M. COUGHEY                                     RAY DUGGINS
-------------------------                            --------------------------
Donna M. Coughey                                     Ray Duggins
Chairman and President                               Senior Vice President

March 28, 1997
1.a 16 I b., :Cfirlr14 January 1965

MEMORANDUM FOR RECORD

SUBJECT: NSAM 311 - KH-4, KH- verage of Cuba

The attached papers were prepared on 8-11 January at

Mr. Friedman's request. The KH-6 material presented a problem,

since I had no indication regarding Dr. McMillan's feelings on the

possibility of re-opening the KH-6 payload production line.

I was unable to see Dr. McMillan on 11 January to clear the

paper with him. Mr. Friedman asked for a copy on the evening of

11 January and I gave it to him with a cautionary note that it was a

working draft, had not been cleared with Dr. McMillan, and should

be held carefully until cleared.

On 12 January I briefed Dr. McMiilan on the matter. He

seemed to have no objection to considering KH-6 production, but

stated emphatically that he would have to see Mr. Vance on the

matter. I was to advise Mr. Friedman that this meeting would

take place "before the day is out" (11 January). I did so.

Later on 11 January, Mr. Friedman indicated that a conversation with Mr. McNaughton had brought out some caveat on disclosing KH-6.

PAINIt THMAN

Colonel, USAF

De

Handle 111.1411111 VIA TOO- CONVOI 111111111 MIMEO lity ---110PIEREr
NO. 07-04-0425-CR IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TE XAS

AT AMARILLO PANEL B FEBRUARY 10, 2005

______________________________ ROBERT L EE OCANA S, Appellant
v. THE STA

TE OF TEX

AS, Appellee

_________________________________ FROM THE 181ST DISTRICT COURT OF POTTE R COUNTY; NO. 47,903-B; HON. JOHN B. BOARD, PRESIDING

_______________________________ ON ABATEMENT AND REMAND

_______________________________ Before JOHNSON, C.J., and QUINN and CAMPBELL, JJ. Appellant

Robert Lee Ocanas appeals his conviction for conspiracy to commit murder. On Febru ary 7, 200 5, and in responseto a letter sent to the district judge and the trial court clerk, the clerk filed a requ est for an ex tension of time to

file theclerk’s record because she had “not recei ved [from t he trial court] the certification of defendant’s right of appeal a s of 2/4/0 5.”2

Applicable rule of procedure mandates that the trial court’s certification of the defendant’s right of appeal be included in the record, which certification may be added by amendmen t, supple ment, or o rder of th is court. T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 25.2(d). We, therefore, abate this appeal and remand the cause to the trial court and direct itto certify, through written order, whether appellant has the right of appeal. Furthermore, the trial court shall caus e the written order manifesting its decision to be incl uded in a supplement a l clerk’s record. If any hearing is held on the matter, it shall be transcribed, which transcription the trial court shall cause to be incl uded in a suppl em ental reporter’s record. So too is the trial court directed to cause b oth the supplemental clerk’s an d reporter’s records to be file d with th e Clerk of thi s Court on or before March 11, 2005. Should the trial court require more time to comply with the directions of this C ourt, it must request a n extens ion prio r to March 11, 2005

. Accordingly, the appeal is abated and the cause is remande d for further proceedings.

Per Curiam
Do not publish.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0000320431
<NAME> CERTIFIED GROCERS OF CALIFORNIA
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          AUG-30-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             SEP-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               MAY-31-1997
<CASH>                                          10,051
<SECURITIES>                                    27,317
<RECEIVABLES>                                   99,733
<ALLOWANCES>                                  (11,057)
<INVENTORY>                                    136,708
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               245,929
<PP&E>                                         166,201
<DEPRECIATION>                                (90,121)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 383,694
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          161,491
<BONDS>                                        108,636
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        58,860
<OTHER-SE>                                      12,544
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   383,694
<SALES>                                      1,445,497
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,445,497
<CGS>                                        1,319,840
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,422,383
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               9,782
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  3,120
<INCOME-TAX>                                     1,095
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              2,025
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     2,025
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
```

[Congressional Bills 115th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2113 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

115th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2113

   To require the Food and Drug Administration to expedite review of 
 pharmaceuticals that are approved for marketing in the European Union.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 20, 2017

Mr. Stivers (for himself and Mr. Ryan of Ohio) introduced the following 
    bill; which was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To require the Food and Drug Administration to expedite review of 
 pharmaceuticals that are approved for marketing in the European Union.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Speeding Access to Already Approved 
Pharmaceuticals Act of 2017''.

SEC. 2. EXPEDITED REVIEW OF EU-APPROVED PHARMACEUTICALS.

    Section 506 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 
356) is amended by adding at the end the following:
    ``(i) EU-Approved Pharmaceuticals.--
            ``(1) Expedited review.--Beginning not later than 90 days 
        after a new pharmaceutical is approved for marketing in the 
        European Union, the Secretary shall, at the request of the 
        sponsor of the pharmaceutical, facilitate the development and 
        expedite the review of such new pharmaceutical under section 
        505 or 515 of this Act or section 351 of the Public Health 
        Service Act, as appropriate.
            ``(2) Definition.--In this subsection, the term 
        `pharmaceutical' means a drug (including a biological product) 
        or a device.''.
                                 <all>
```
# Arkansas State Office

700 W Capitol Ave Ste 3416Little RockAR72201-3215

700 W Capitol Ave Ste 3416Little RockAR72201-3215

Arkansas

## Breadcrumb

-  Home 
-  Contact 
-  State Office Contacts 
-  Arkansas 
-  Arkansas State Office 

Listed below are NRCS Arkansas state office key contacts, leadership team members, and the complete employee directory. For local support, please contact your county level office or district conservationist.

## Welcome to NRCS in Arkansas!

### Michael Sullivan, State Conservationist

Arkansas NRCS, led by our State Conservationist and our State Leadership Team, XXXX

----

## Key Contacts

### Mike Sullivan

                -    (501) 301-3100 
                -    michael.sullivan2@usda.gov 

### Karen Thompson

                -    (501) 301-3137 
                -    karen.thompson2@usda.gov 

### Danielle Johnson

                -    (501) 301-3187 
                -    danielle.johnson3@usda.gov 

### Reginald Jackson

                -    (501) 301-3133 
                -    reginald.jackson@usda.gov 

----

##   Leadership Team

##   2022 Arkansas NRCS Employee Directory

2022_directory.pdf(4.27 MB)
# Saturated Buffer (Ft.) (604) Conservation Practice Standard

## Breadcrumb

-  Home 
-  Resources 
-  Saturated Buffer (Ft.) (604) Conservation Practice Standard 

Download the national conservation practice standard document and supporting documents for Saturated Buffer (Ft.) (604).

## 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)

Saturated Buffer (Ft.) (604) (9/2020) Standard Document(75.27 KB)

###   Supporting Documents

Saturated Buffer (Ft.) (604) Overview(311.96 KB)

Saturated Buffer (Ft.) (604) CPPE(51.56 KB)

Saturated Buffer (Ft.) (604) Network Effects Diagram(72.69 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
# C_2005106EN.01003601.xml

| 30.4.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 106/36 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.4.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 106/36

---

Action brought on 14 February 2005 by Alejandro Martín Magone against Commission of the European Communities

(Case T-73/05)

(2005/C 106/73)

Language of the case: French

An action against the Commission of the European Communities was brought before the Court of First Instance on 14 February 2005 by Alejandro Martín Magone, residing in Brussels, represented by Eric Boigelot, lawyer.

The applicant claims that the Court of First Instance should:

| — | annul the career development report drawn up in respect of the applicant's performance (ref. 2700, ECHO) between 1 January 2003 and 31 December 2003, including the appeal procedures and other decisions relating thereto; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the career development report drawn up in respect of the applicant's performance (ref. 2700, ECHO) between 1 January 2003 and 31 December 2003, including the appeal procedures and other decisions relating thereto;

| — | annul the decision of the appointing authority of 28 October 2004, received on 12 November 2004, rejecting the complaint lodged under Article 90(2) of the Staff Regulations of Officials on 26 July 2004; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the decision of the appointing authority of 28 October 2004, received on 12 November 2004, rejecting the complaint lodged under Article 90(2) of the Staff Regulations of Officials on 26 July 2004;

| — | hold that the applicant has been the victim of mental and professional harassment; |
| --- | --- |

—

hold that the applicant has been the victim of mental and professional harassment;

| — | award the applicant compensation for material and non-material damage assessed on an ex aequo et bono basis as EUR 39 169,67, or such greater sum as may be awarded in the proceedings; |
| --- | --- |

—

award the applicant compensation for material and non-material damage assessed on an ex aequo et bono basis as EUR 39 169,67, or such greater sum as may be awarded in the proceedings;

ex aequo et bono

| — | order the defendant to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the defendant to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of his application, the applicant alleges, first, a manifest error of assessment, defective procedure and abuse of power, in that the very negative and damaging marks awarded to him were based on matters that did not concern him during the period concerned.

Next, the applicant alleges that no reasons were given for the contested measure and claims that for years he was subjected to mental harassment by his superiors. According to the applicant, that was apparent from the remarks contained in the contested report.

Finally, the applicant claims that his special situation exposed him to serious psychological problems, a fact which was not taken into account by the defendant when the duties assigned to him were changed. Therefore, the defendant failed in its duty of care and infringed the principle of sound administration.

---
#### Bismarck (John R.), Respondent, vs. Dernehl, Appellant.

For the appellant: *Coleman & Barry*of Milwaukee.

For the respondent: *Fish, Marshutz &*Hoffman, attorneys, *Irving A. Fish*and *G. R. Hoffman*of counsel, all of Milwaukee.

*By the Court.*

Order affirmed.