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

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM FORM 10Q AND
IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                           4,051
<SECURITIES>                                    16,350
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                        780
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                22,319
<PP&E>                                          20,734
<DEPRECIATION>                                  10,208
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  33,491
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            3,207
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           305
<OTHER-SE>                                      12,207
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    33,491
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 1,618
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                15,134
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (13,516)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (13,516)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (.44)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.44)


</TABLE>
```

[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 61 (Friday, March 29, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Page 19354]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-07363]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Office of the Secretary

Certificates of Public Convenience and Necessity and Foreign Air 
Carrier Permits

    Notice of Applications for Certificates of Public Convenience and 
Necessity and Foreign Air Carrier Permits Filed Under Subpart B 
(formerly Subpart Q) during the Week Ending March 16, 2013. 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 301.201 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-2013-0049.
    Date Filed: March 11, 2013.
    Due Date for Answers, Conforming Applications, or Motion To Modify 
Scope: April 1, 2013.
    Description: Application of Air China Limited d/b/a Air China 
requesting an amendment of its foreign air carrier permit to include 
Houston, Texas as a coterminal point in the United States, together 
with the existing coterminal points authorized in its foreign air 
carrier permit.

    Docket Number: DOT-OST-2013-0053.
    Date Filed: March 14, 2013.
    Due Date for Answers, Conforming Applications, or Motion To Modify 
Scope: April 4, 2013.
    Description: Joint application of Delta Air Lines, Inc. (``Delta'') 
and Pinnacle Airlines, Inc. (``Pinnacle'') requesting a disclaimer of 
jurisdiction or, in the alternative, approval of the de facto transfer 
of certain international certificate and other authorities held by 
Pinnacle to Delta.

Barbara J. Hairston,
Acting Program Manager, Docket Operations, Federal Register Liaison.
[FR Doc. 2013-07363 Filed 3-28-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-9X-P
```
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 23
- 0017 STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee, v. DARREN CHARLES DEMARIE,

Defendant and Appellant
.

**ORDER** Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension of time to and including August 1 4, 2023 , within which to prepare, file, and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

July 9 2023

07/10/2023

Case Number: DA 23-0017
Introductions

Approval of agenda

Confirm previous decisions:

Restrooms

 60” turning circle

 Allow side approach to toilet

 Use Acela as model

 Power door, controls 12” minimum from inside corner

 For discussion: grab bars, toilet seat height, lav controls, etc.

Single–level dining car:

 Table space for two wheelchairs, transfer seats for two (storage?)

 Table top 34” max

 29” min under table, extending 17” min back from seating position edge

 32” min width

Sleeping compartment:

 Side transfer to toilet, shower chair

 60” turning circle in sleeping area with bed deployed

 Controls for all lights, HVAC, call button, etc., within reach ranges (allow duplicate 

controls)

 Positive door latch, openable from outside by train personnel

 Use VIA design as model

 Bed at wheelchair seat height (18”?)

 Table usable by wheelchair user: 34” max top height; 29” min under clearance to 17” 

from approach edge; 32” min width under approach edge

Lounge:

 Table space for 2, same as dining car

 Accessible restroom

 Discuss: Self-serve area meets ABA/ADA Guidelines for cafeteria?

What did I miss?

New Issues

Attachment
**EXHIBIT 23.01**

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

Caraco Pharmaceutical Laboratories, Ltd.            Detroit, Michigan

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement on Form S-8 of: the 1993 Stock Option Plan and the 1999 Equity Participation Plan (File No. 333-104429) and the 2008 Equity Participation Plan (File No. 333-158469) of our reports dated May 29, 2009, with respect to the financial statements of Caraco Pharmaceutical Laboratories, Ltd., and the effectiveness of its internal control            over financial reporting, included in this Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended March 31, 2009. 
|           |                    |
|----------------|-------------------------|
|           | /s/ Rehmann Robson P.C. |
|           |                    |
| Troy, Michigan |                    |
| May 29, 2009   |                    |

----
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1339 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

114th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1339

 To permanently authorize the special immigrant nonminister religious 
                            worker program.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              May 14, 2015

 Mr. Hatch (for himself and Mr. Cardin) introduced the following bill; 
  which was read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To permanently authorize the special immigrant nonminister religious 
                            worker program.

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

SECTION 1. SPECIAL IMMIGRANT NONMINISTER RELIGIOUS WORKER PROGRAM.

    Section 101(a)(27)(C)(ii) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 
U.S.C. 1101(a)(27)(C)(ii)) is amended--
            (1) in subclause (I), by striking the comma at the end and 
        inserting a semicolon;
            (2) by striking ``before September 30, 2015,'' each place 
        such phrase appears; and
            (3) in subclause (II), by striking ``, or'' and inserting 
        ``; or''.
                                 <all>
```
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<MULTIPLIER>                                     1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                               0
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   84,518
<ALLOWANCES>                                     9,370
<INVENTORY>                                     27,321
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               115,530
<PP&E>                                         291,687
<DEPRECIATION>                                 180,647
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 409,647
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           46,586
<BONDS>                                        561,849
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          131,676
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                    (347,380)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   409,647
<SALES>                                         28,925
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               166,979
<CGS>                                           22,589
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  140,814
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                  (465)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              40,768
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (14,138)
<INCOME-TAX>                                    (3,784)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (10,354)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (10,354)
<EPS-BASIC>                                   (22.51)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (22.51)




</TABLE>
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO RULE 13a-14(b) OR RULE 15d-14(b)

OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 AND 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the annual report on Form 10-K of Interactive Data Corporation (the Company) for the
year ended December 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the undersigned, Stuart J. Clark, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, that:

(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; 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: February 27, 2008 |  |  |  | /s/    STUART J. CLARK                                               
|                         |  |  |  | Stuart J. Clark Chief Executive Officer (principal executive officer)
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 42 (Wednesday, March 4, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Page 11682]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-04408]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


Center for Scientific Review; Amended Notice of Meeting

    Notice is hereby given of a change in the meeting of the Center for 
Scientific Review Special Emphasis Panel, March 05, 2015, 11:00 a.m. to 
March 05, 2015, 05:00 p.m., National Institutes of Health, 6701 
Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD, 20892 which was published in the Federal 
Register on February 24, 2015, 80 FR 9738.
    The meeting will be held on March 12, 2015. The meeting location 
and time remain the same. The meeting is closed to the public.

    Dated: February 25, 2015.
David Clary,
Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 2015-04408 Filed 3-3-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
SERVED: OCTOBER 31, 2012 

U.s·. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS 

WASHINGTON, DC 

IN THE MATTER OF 

MOUNTAIN AVIATION 

FAA DOCKET No. [TO BE ASSIGNED] 

(Civil Penalty Action) 

FDMS No. FAA-2012-0875 

lOIZ 

ORDER DENYING COMPLAINANT'S MOTION FOR DECISION 

Complainant Federal Aviation Administration ("Complainant") has filed under Rule 

13.218(f)(5) ofthe Rides ofPractice in FAA Civil Penalty Actions, 14 C.F.R. §13.218(f)(5), a 

Motion for Decision ("Motion"). It asserts that there are no material issues in dispute and that it 

is entitled to judgment as a matter oflaw. Complainant asks that the hearing be .limited to the 

issue of sanction. The Motion is opposed by Respondent Mountain Aviation ("Respondent"). 

The charges in this case involve whether Respondent used a flight check airman to 

administer flight checks when the airman was not qualified to do so. The Motion and response 

present mixed questions of. fact and law. These issues cannot be answered simply on the basis of 

the arguments of counsel and supporting affidavits. They can only be properly explored at a 

hearing on the merits. Complainant's Motion, I conclude, fails to demonstrate that no genuine 

issue of material fact exists and that it is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. 
2 

For the reasons stated, the Motion is DENIED. 

~~CJ;£J~.£P Richard C. Goodwin 

U.S. Administrative Law Judge 

Attachment - Service List· 
3 

SERVICE LIST 

ORIGINAL & ONE COPY 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue, S.W. 

Washington, DG20591 

Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2Wl 0001 

Kent S. Jackson, Respondent's Counsel 

Jackson & Wade, LLC 

2168 Midland Drive 

Shawnee, KS 66218 

TEL: 913-338-1700 

FAJ(: 913~338-1755 

ONE COPY 

Kyle E. Lomazow, Complainant's Counsel 

Attorney, Office of Regional Counsel 

Northwest Mountain Region, ANM-7 

Federal Aviation Administration 

1601 Lind Avenue, S.W. 

Renton, WA 98057 

TEL: 425-227-1847 

FAJ(: 425-227-1007 

The Honorable Richard C. Goodwin, Administrative Law Judge 

Office ofHearings, M-20 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. (E11-310) 

Washington, DC 20590 

TEL: 202-366-2139 Attorney-Advisor 

202-366-5121 Staff Assistant 

FAJ(: 202-366-7536 

FDMS No. FAA-2011-0875 

(Civil Penalty Action) 

1 Service was by U.S. Mail. For service in person or by expedited courier,. use the following address: Federal 

Aviation Administration, 600 Independence Avenue, S.W., Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2Wl000, Washington, 

DC 20591; Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-43~. 

-2-
#### Indiana Road Machine Company, Appellant, vs. Murphy, Respondent.

*December 6, 1910*—

January *10, 1911.*

*Sales: Statute of frauds: Delivery: Pleading: Evidence.*

In an action for the purchase price of goods, where the contract of sale was oral and the price more than $50, no part of which was paid, so that under sec. 2308, Stats. (1898), there must have been actual delivery and acceptance to constitute a valid sale, evidence tending to show that there was no such delivery or acceptance is admissible under an answer merely denying the sale.

*412Appeal from a judgment of the circuit court for Milwaukee county: Laweehce W. Halsey, Circuit Judge.

*Affirmed,*

Eor the appellant there was a brief by *Friedrich, Teall & JELaeldxm-th,*and oral argument by *F. A. Teall.*

*D. J.*Dalton> for the respondent.

Wiwslow, C. J.

This is an action to recover $700, the purchase price of a patent grading machine alleged to have been sold and delivered by the plaintiff to the defendant. 'The answer denied the sale.

The defendant’s evidence, admitted over objection, tended to show that the arrangement was that the plaintiff might ■ship the grader to defendant at Milwaukee, and that if the machine was properly set up and did satisfactory work he would take and pay for it; that it was shipped and received ■at Milwaukee, but never set up by the plaintiff for operation nor accepted by the defendant. 'The jury found by their verdict that there was no sale and no delivery, and judgment was rendered for the defendant.

The appellant’s contention is that the evidence above referred to was not admissible under an answer which merely denied the sale, but could only be received under an answer ■specifically setting forth the arrangement which was made.

We think the objection is overnice. The arrangement was eral and no part of the purchase money was paid. The price being more than $50, there must have been actual delivery and acceptance of the article before there could be a valid sale. Sec. 2308, Stats. (1898). The evidence referred to tended to show that there never was any delivery or acceptance of the property which was to be delivered, namely, a ■grader set up and ready for use. If this was the fact there was no sale, hence there was no error in admitting the evidence under an answer simply denying the sale. No other points require attention.

*By the Court.*— Judgment affirmed.
# Today in Energy February 17, 2012 

# Natural gas pipeline capacity additions in 2011

Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration. Notes: Capacity data only include interstate and intrastate tran smission projects. Storage capacity additions and other infrastructure such as gathering and distribution lines are not included. The U.S. Energy Information Administration estimates t hat U.S. natural gas pipeline companies added about 2, 400 miles of new pipe to the grid as part of over 25 projects in 2011. New pi peline projects entered service in parts of the U.S. natu ral gas grid that can be congested: California, Florida, and parts of the Northeast (see map above). Only a portion of this capacity serve s incremental natural gas use; most of these projects facilitate better linkages a cross the existing natural gas grid. By convention, the industry expresses annual capacity additions as the sum of the capacities of all the projects completed in that year. By this measure, the industry added 13.7 billion cubic fee t per day (Bcf/d) of new capacity to the grid in 2011. The six largest projects put into service in 2011 added 1,553 miles and about 8 .2 Bcf/d of new capacity to the system. Much of this new cap acity is for transporting natural gas between states rather than wit hin states. Golden Pass, Ruby Pipeline, FGT Phase VIII, Pascagoula Expansion, and Bison Pipeline projects added 6.1 Bcf/d, or about 80%, of new state-to-state capacity. Natural gas pipeline capacity additions in 2011 were we ll above the 10 Bcf/d levels typical from 2001-2006, roug hly the same as additions in 2007 and 2010, but significantly below add itions in 2008 and 2009 (see chart below). Capacity adde d in 2008 and 2009 reflected a mix of intrastate and interstate natural ga s pipeline expansions, related mostly to shale production, liquefied natural gas (LNG) terminals, and storage facilities. 

## http://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.cfm?id=5050

8/ 31/2015

### Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration. Notes: Capacity data only include interstate and intrastate tran smission projects. Storage capacity additions and other infrastructure such as gathering and distribution lines are not included. 

## http://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.cfm?id=5050

8/ 31/2015
STATE OF DELAWARE 

DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES 

& ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL 

DIVISION OF AIR & WASTE MANAGEMENT 

AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT 156 S. STATE STREET TELEPHONE: (302) 739 ­ 9402 

SECTION DOVER, DELAWARE 19901 FAX No.: (302) 739 ­ 3106 

CERTIFICAnON 

April 7, 2010 

I hereby certify that a public hearing was held January 5, 2010, on a revision to the State of 

Delaware State Implementation Plan for the Attainment and Maintenance of the National 

Ambient Air Quality Standards for Ozone, by amending Regulation No. 1125 ­

REQUIREMENTS FOR PRECONSTRUCnON REVIEW, Section 3.0 - Prevention of 

Significant Deterioration of Air Quality. This action amended 3.0 of7 DE Admin. Code 1125 to 

cite explicitly that nitrogen oxides (NOx) are a precursor to the fonnation of ground-level ozone 

EPA required this revision because they detennined the current regulatory language is not clear 

that NOx, in addition to volatile organic compounds, are a ground-level ozone precursor. This 

action has no immediate impact because all ofDelaware is classified as non-attainment of the 

ground-level ozone air quality standards, and regulated under 2.0 of7 DE Admin. Code 1125; 

and 2.0 clearly states that NOx is a precursor to the formation of ground-level ozone The 

effective date of these amendments is April 11, 2010. 

I further certify that the hearing was held in accordance with the notice required by Subsection 

51.102 of 40 CFR 51. 

PR:1NTED ON
 

RECYCl....ED PAPER
#### In re The Minnesota & Wisconsin Railroad Company.

*March 17*

May *16, 1899.*

*Appealable order: Jurisdiction.*

1. An appeal from *an*order of the circuit court denying a motion of the petitioner in condemnation proceedings to dismiss the petition, does not confer jurisdiction on this court, under sec. 3069, Stats. 1898.

3. Where the court is precluded from entertaining an appeal by lack of jurisdiction it cannot be conferred by consent of the parties.

Appeal from an order of tbe circuit court for Pierce-county: E. W. Helms, Circuit Judge.

*Appeal dismissed.*

Appeal from order of tbe circuit court denying tbe petitioner’s motion to dismiss tbe petition in condemnation proceedings.

For tbe appellant there was a brief by *Balcer c& Hmenr*attorneys, and *F. W. M. Cutcheon,*of counsel, and oral argument by *Mr. Ckoteheon.*

For tbe respondents there was a brief by *Qlapp ds Maea/rt~ ney,*and oral argument by *JF. H. Clapp.*

Tbe following opinion was filed April 4, 1899:

Hodge, J.

Tbe court has no jurisdiction to entertain an appeal from this order. Such jurisdiction cannot exist under-any of tbe subdivisions of sec. 3069, Stats. 1898,— not under subd. 1, because it does not in effect determine the action,, nor prevent a judgment from which an appeal can be taken nor under subd. 2, for tbe reason that it is not a final order, though made in a special proceeding. Subds. 3 and 4, of' course, have no application.

While both parties consent to and urge consideration of tbe merits of tbe order on this appeal, tbe court is precluded from acceding to such request by l^,ck of jurisdiction, which *192cannot be conferred by consent of parties. *Hyde v. German Nat. Bank,*96 Wis. 406, 410.

*By the*Oom±— The appeal is dismissed.

A motion for a rehearing was denied May 16, 1899.