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

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                           5,081
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   56,514
<ALLOWANCES>                                    11,223
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                52,127
<PP&E>                                       2,370,761
<DEPRECIATION>                               2,222,976
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 200,962
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          510,947
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       799,187
<OTHER-SE>                                 (1,154,693)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   200,962
<SALES>                                         21,051
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                41,571
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   18,288
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                38,838
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (15,555)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (15,555)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (15,555)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (002)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (002)
        

</TABLE>
Certification Statement

In compliance with requirements under 10 CFR 430.27, Samsung hereby certifies that all parties 

noted below have been provided with a copy of Samsung’s Petition for Waiver and Application 

for Interim Waiver.

The recipients of the notifications are as follows:

Gordon Stauffer

Sr. VP, Government Relations

AGA Marvel

1260 E. Van Deinse Street

P.O. Box 400

Greenville, MI 48838-1376

gstauffer@agamarvel.com

Marie Chassot

Market Research Manager

BSH Home Appliances Corporation

5551 McFadden Avenue

Huntington Beach, CA 92649

Marie.chassot@bshg.com

Greg Hall

Director of Product Development

Danby Products, Ltd.

ghall@danby.com

George E. Hawranko

Senior Associate General Counsel

Electrolux North America, Inc.

20445 Emerald Parkway, S.W., Suite 250

Cleveland, OH 44135

George.e.hawranko@electrolux.com

John Baldwin

Project Manager, Large Appliances

Fagor America, Inc. 

jbaldwin@fagoramerica.com

Scott Davies
Marketing Manager

Fisher & Paykel Appliances

27 Hubble Street

Irvine, CA 92618-4209

Scott.davies@fisherpaykel.com

Earl F. Jones

Senior Counsel

GE Consumer & Industrial

Appliance Park

AP2-225

Louisville, KY 40225

Earl.jones@ge.com

Shariff Kan

President

Haier America

1356 Broadway

New York, NY 10018

skan@haieramerica.com

Thorsten Platt

VP, North America

Liebherr Hausgerate

1015 Sutton Drive

Burlington, Ontario L7L5Z8

Canada

Thorsten.platt@liebherr.com

John Taylor

Vice President, Government Relations

LG Electronics USA, Inc.

1776 K Street NW

Washington, DC 20006

John.taylor@lge.com

Steve Polinski

Senior Manager, Regulatory Affairs

Meile, Inc.

Nine Independence Way

Princeton, NJ 08540

spolinski@mieleusa.com
Paul V. Sikir

Vice President of Design Engineering

Sub-Zero Freezer Company, Inc.

4717 Hammersley Road

Madison, WI 53711

Paul.sikir@subzero.com

Andrew Doberstein

Vice President of Operations

U-Line

8900 North 55th Street

Milwaukee, WI 53223

Andy@u-line.com

Bill Crump

VP, Governmental Affairs

Viking Range Corporation

111 Front Street

Greenwood, MS 38930

bcrump@vikingrange.com

Jeffrey Noel

Government Relations

Whirlpool Corporation

2000 M-63

Mail Drop 3005

Benton Harbor, MI 49022

D_jeffrey_noel@whirlpool.com

Joseph M. MGuire

President

Association of Home Appliance Manufacturers

1111 19th St. NW, Suite 402

Washington, DC 20036

jmguire@aham.org
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan 

October 31, 2006 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

131107 & (27) Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

Robert P. Young, Jr. PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Stephen J. Markman, Plaintiff-Appellee, Justices 

v SC: 131107 

 COA: 265441 
 Wayne CC: 96-004881-01 

MICHAEL WINBUSH,

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the April 21, 2006 order 

of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because the defendant has 

failed to meet the burden of establishing entitlement to relief under MCR 6.508(D). The 

motion to remand is DENIED. 

s1023 

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

October 31, 2006 

 Clerk
## COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 02

- 10

- 00346

- CV

HEALTHCORE SYSTEM

MANAGEMENT, LLC APPELLANT

V.

NHON NGUYEN MD, ANH NONG

MD, INC., NHON THI N GUYEN,

AND ANH THE NONG APPELLEES

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

FROM THE 342ND DISTRICT C OURT OF TARRANT COUNTY

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



### MEMORANDUM OPINION 1 

### AND JUDGMENT

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

On November 16, 2010 , we notified appellant that the trial court clerk

responsible for preparing the record in this appeal had informed this court that

arrangements had not been made to pay for the clerk = s record as required by

Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 35.3(a)(2). See Tex. R. App. P. 35.3(a)(2).

1 See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4.2

We stated that we would dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution unless

appellant, within fifteen days, made arrangemen ts to pay for the clerk = s record

and provided this court with proof of payment.

Because appellant has not made payment arrangements for the clerk = s

record, it is the opinion of the court that the appeal should be dismissed for want

of prosecution. Acco rdingly, we dismiss the appeal. See Tex. R. App. P.

37.3(b), 42.3(b).

Appellant shall pay all costs of the appeal, for which let execution issue.

PER CURIAM

PANEL: GABRIEL, J.; LIVINGSTON, C.J.; and DAUPHINOT, J.

DELIVERED: December 23 , 2010
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 Transportation

###### Office of the Secretary

The following Applications for Certificates of Public Convenience and Necessity and Foreign Air Carrier Permits were filed under Subpart B (formerly Subpart Q) of the Department of Transportation's Procedural Regulations (See 14 CFR 302. 201 et seq.). The due date for Answers, Conforming Applications, or Motions to Modify Scope are set forth below for each application. Following the Answer period DOT may process the application by expedited procedures. Such procedures may consist of the adoption of a show-cause order, a tentative order, or in appropriate cases a final order without further proceedings.

*Docket Number:*                     DOT-OST-2014-0209.                

*Date Filed:*                     November 26, 2014.                

*Due Date for Answers, Conforming Applications, or Motion To Modify Scope:*                    December 17, 2014.                

## Description

Application of Air Cargo Global, s.r.o. (“ACG”) requesting a foreign air carrier permit and exemption authority to enable ACG to engage in foreign scheduled and charter air transportation of property and mail between any point or points in the United States and any point or points outside the United States, and any other transportation authorized by additional rights made available to European Community carriers in the future.

 Barbara J. Hairston,

 Supervisory Dockets Officer, Docket Operations, Federal Register Liaison.

[FR Doc. 2015-03546 Filed 2-20-15; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-9X-P
Fact Sheet

The Quill experimental synthetic aperture radar (SAR) satellite was the 

world’s first imaging radar satellite.

System Names: 

 P-40: SAR proof-of-concept program

 QUILL: The satellite

Launch: 21 December 1964 at 11:08am PST from VAFB 

Re-entry: 11 January 1965 at 10:27 UTC 

SAR unit: 

 Designated KP-II: A modified AN/UPQ-102 pulsed-Doppler system

Achievements: 

 Azimuth Resolution: 7.5 feet

 Slant Range Resolution: Approximately 80 feet

 Coverage: Approximately 100,000 square miles 

 Useful Images: Nearly 80 percent of the area illuminated
NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 AUGUST 2015 SEET 

8 May 1964 

Report 214 

STOPPER - BIT Developments 

A meeting at 7DL, held on 7 May, had about 20 people 

present. One near decision was made--that AF would pay for long 

lead items that we had authorized, when they placed their production contract. Much briefing was done. 

On 8 May, Copley informed me that (a) it had been resolved 

that he had the production responsibility (b) that he wanted 

me to handle it, as I was handling all other productions in 

his EP series of projects. 

On 8 May, Copley informed me that they had (at least 

nearly) conflicting instructions. SSD had an instruction 

(a) to put a BIT on all "C" vehicles and (b) to put nothing 

on the next three vehicles except primary payloads. Two of 

the next three are "C"'s, one A. They are trying to resolve 

these instructions before they decide on a production order. 

Incidently, this order to put nothing on the next three 

bumps Long John IV. 

Harold has indicated that yoi would like a direct communication link within. I would -iednias this as the Air Force 

raises some detailed objection to each communication sent out--

wrong form, wrong word used, wrong man handled message to them, 

something always wrong. 

The only channel for material containing SI or TK is back 

through the channel that EDL gets its SI and TK through--namely 
NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 AUGUST 2015 er,i'r177.4 

2 

the ASA to Pentagon. (See Report 210 with question of what 

address to use). When communication concerns only material, 

it could also use this channel if you are satisfied. The only 

other channel I know is from STL, Los Angeles)

and I would 

have to hand carry it to Los Angeles--not very satisfactory, I 

fear. Do you have another path? We have a communication 

center at Moffet which is less than one mile from Lockheed and 

EDL, but the clearances do not exist for that channel, today! 

What is your pleasure? 

EDL has asked for help in getting TKZ reports. They should 

get them for the Firefly "vulnerability study" which is now 

starting in earnest (since I talked with Jess Lien on 1 April). -; 

They are not able to get these through ASA at present. ASA 

has them and would send them to EDL if ASA had a request that 

they could honor. Normally, EDL must have a contract with someone 

that requires TKZ material. We are the only contact at present 

that can make this claim. Can you justify to ASA that EDL 

needs copies of TKZ reports? I am informed by Bob Jossum, EDL, 

that ASA has the copies available but needs a need-to-know from 

someone. Can we help?
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
REGISTRANT'S FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AS OF AND FOR THE QUARTER ENDED MARCH
31, 1998, AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                             887
<SECURITIES>                                     7,111
<RECEIVABLES>                                   16,746
<ALLOWANCES>                                       200
<INVENTORY>                                     20,126
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                47,747
<PP&E>                                           6,899
<DEPRECIATION>                                   2,894
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  52,556
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           11,722
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            13
<OTHER-SE>                                      40,339
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    52,556
<SALES>                                         18,063
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                18,063
<CGS>                                           10,772
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   17,609
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    607
<INCOME-TAX>                                     (911)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              (304)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (304)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.02)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.02)
        

</TABLE>
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### A PPEAL 

### O F 

### T HE 

### S TATE 

### O F 

### F LORIDA

F OURTH D ISTRICT

GERALD F. CAREY
, Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA
, Appellee

.

No s . 4D 19

- 3753 and 4D19

- 3845

[ January 5, 2022 ]

Consolidated a ppeal s from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County ; Michael A. Usan , Judge; L.T. Case No s

. 10

- 18726 CF10A and 16

- 13280 CF10A

.

Carey Haughwout, Public Defender, and Mara C. Herbert, Assistant Public Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Allan R. Geesey, Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.

P ER C URIAM

.

Gerald F. Carey appeals his conviction s and sentences for violation of probation and second

- degree murder , and he raises two issues. We affirm with respect to the first issue without further discussion.

In the second issue, Carey asserts that the trial court erred by entering a written order sentencing him to fifteen years for the violation of probation after announcing at the sentencing hearing that he would be sentenced to ten years, and by denying his motion to correct this sentencing error. Indeed, “ a court ’ s oral pronouncement of sentence controls over the

written document.” Ashley v. State , 850 So. 2d 1265, 1268 (Fla. 2003).

The state concedes error.

Consequently, we reverse the sentence on the violation of probation and instruct that, on remand, the trial court shall enter a written order matching its oral pronouncement of ten years ’ imprisonment at the sentencing hearing.2 Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and rem anded with instructions

.

G ROSS
, D AMOORGIAN and C IKLIN
, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
### TEXA S C OU R T OF A PPEAL S, THIR D DIST R ICT , AT AU STIN NO. 03-06-00389- CV In re Ce ntroplex Autom obile Recove ry, Inc.

ORI GINAL PRO CEEDING FRO M TRAVIS CO UNTY M E M O R

A N D U M O P I N I O N Relator Centroplex Automobile Recovery , Inc. has f i led a pe tition for a writ of mandamus cha lleng ing the district court’s orde r g ranting Prime, Inc.’s motion to disqualify counsel date d M ay

23 , 2 00 6. Re lator

a lso fi le d a

mot ion to s e a l c e rt a in d oc ume nts . We g ra nt t he mot ion to seal a nd deny the petition for wr it of mandamus. Tex. R. App. P. 52.

Bob Pembe rton, J ustice Be fore Chief J ustice L aw, Justi ces Puryear and Pember

ton Filed: Jul y

13, 2006
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 9042]

# SUMMARY:

                        Notice is hereby given of the following determinations: Pursuant to the authority vested in me by the Act of October 19, 1965 (79 Stat. 985; 22 U.S.C. 2459), Executive Order 12047 of March 27, 1978, the Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act of 1998 (112 Stat. 2681,                         *et seq.;*22 U.S.C. 6501 note,                         *et seq.*), Delegation of Authority No. 234 of October 1, 1999, and Delegation of Authority No. 236-3 of August 28, 2000 (and, as appropriate, Delegation of Authority No. 257 of April 15, 2003), I hereby determine that the objects to be included in the exhibition “Ships, Clocks & Stars: The Quest for Longitude,” imported from abroad for temporary exhibition within the United States, are of cultural significance. The objects are imported pursuant to loan agreements with the foreign owners or custodians. I also determine that the exhibition or display of the exhibit objects at the Folger Shakespeare Library, Washington, DC, from on or about March 16, 2015, until on or about August 23, 2015, the Mystic Seaport Museum, Mystic, Connecticut, from on or about September 14, 2015, until on or about March 28, 2016, and at possible additional exhibitions or venues yet to be determined, is in the national interest. I have ordered that Public Notice of these Determinations be published in the                         **Federal Register**                        .                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

For further information, including a list of the imported objects, contact Paul W. Manning, Attorney-Adviser, Office of the Legal Adviser, U.S. Department of State (telephone: 202-632-6469). The mailing address is U.S. Department of State, SA-5, L/PD, Fifth Floor (Suite 5H03), Washington, DC 20522-0505.

Dated: February 11, 2015. 

Kelly Keiderling,

Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary, Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs, Department of State.

[FR Doc. 2015-03497 Filed 2-18-15; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4710-05-P
SUPPLEMENTAL BASIS STATEMENT 

CHAPTER 129 SURFACE COATING FACILITIES 

January 6, 2011 

Commenters 

1 . Anne Arnold 

Region 1 EPA 

Boston, Mass. 

2. Dave Darling 

American Coatings Association (ACA) 

Washington, DC 

General 

1 . Comment: Maine's proposed revisions to Chapter 129 are consistent with EPA's 

VOC content limits given in the Control Technique Guideline (CTG) for flat wood 

paneling and metal furniture coating operations issued in 2006 and 2007, respectively . 

However, Chapter 129 also includes emission limits for miscellaneous metal parts and 

products coating operations for which EPA issued an updated CTG in 2008. Therefore, 

Maine should also update the Chapter 129 miscellaneous metal and plastic parts coating 

emission limits to reflect the 2008 CTG. (commenter 1) 

Response: The Department is aware that Chapter 129 must be updated to incorporate 

the Miscellaneous Metal and Plastic Parts Coatings CTG limits . The Department 

expects the miscellaneous metal and plastics parts 2008 CTG will affect a larger group of 

sources and plans to incorporate this CTG at a later date when more time can be given to 

notifying stakeholders . 

Emission limits 

2. Comment: It appears that Maine is proposing more stringent limits in Table 1 and 

Table 2 for surface coating of metal furniture. Specifically, Maine is proposing limits 

lower than the EPA CTG for Metallic and Pretreatment Coatings (3 .0 lb/gal versus the 

EPA CTG 3 .51b/gal for baked and air dried coatings). In addition, 5 .1 lb/gal versus the 

CTG limit of 6 .7 lb/gal for baked and air dried coatings expressed in terms of mass of 

VOC per volume of solids applied. It is difficult to track each and every state surface 

coating rule, as such ACA has been asking States to adopt limits as consistent as possible 

to the EPA CTG. ACA requests Maine adopt the EPA CTG limits for the Metallic and 

Pretreatment Coatings . (commenter 2) 

Response: The Department accepts the commenter's suggestion to use the EPA CTG 

limits for Metallic and Pretreatment Coatings (3.5 lb/gal for baked and air dried coatings 
expressed in terms of VOC per volume of coating and 6.7 lb/gal for baked and air dried 

coatings expressed in terms of mass of VOC per volume of solids applied). The 

Department requested and received information from the American Coatings Association 

that estimates the general one component and general multi-component make up 

approximately 70% of the coatings used in metal furniture, with extreme high gloss and 

extreme performance combined for 10%, pretreatment 10%, metallic 5% and the 

remaining categories 5% of total coatings used. The Department agrees that the larger 

categories (one component and multi-component general use coatings) that are more 

stringent than the current rule more than off-set the relaxation in the specialty coatings.