alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# LARAMIE

June 26, 20I 2**··~** ' CITY OF LARAMIE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE P.O. Box C Laramie, Wyoming 82073

Dr. Michael Martin Transportation Industry Analyst Office ofAviation Analysis "US De'partment ofTransportation 400 Seventh Street, S.W. Washington, D.C. 20590

Re: US DOT Essential Air Service Bids for Laramie, Wyoming

Dear Mr. Martin, (307) 721-5226 FAX (307) 721-5211 TDD (307) 721-5295

I \vTite to you concerning the proposals that the Laramie Regional Airporthas received from Great Lakes Aviation (GLA) and from SkyWest Airlines to provide essential air service to our

### city.
As home to the State ofWyoming's only university it is absolutely critical that the community have access to high quality, reliable commuter service that connects to markets through Denver International Airpot1. It is our goal as a community to no longerrequire anEAS subsidy and with Sky West as our carrier, we believe we can increase boardings to achieve this goal. Laramie citizens have become increasingly**dis~nfranchised** over many yejll's with the current service provider. As City Manager, I routinely hear from citizens who choose to drive to Denverrather than patronize our local airport because ofnegative experiences they have had with the current provider.

Webelieve Sky\Vest Airlines is best positioned to provide the timely and consistent service our citizens require. Sky West has a documented history cfreliability, high-quality, and courteous customer service. I urge selection of the proposal from SkyWest and am ofthe opinionthat this carrier can ultimately rebuild the consumer confidence ofLaramie's citizenry and return their patronage to our local airport. This positivity, coupled with the reductions in airfares included in Sky\Vest's proposal, has the potential to strongly reposition our City economicallyto larger markets. E11icient .:md cost-effective connectedness is essential to recruiting newbusinesses, and keeping the University ofWyoming and our otherprominent businesses competitive in a fastpaced regional and global market.
The City ofLaramie strongly supports the selection ofSkyWest Airlines as the provider of essential air service to the Laramie area. Thank you for your consideration, and we look forward to the results ofyour evaluation. Please feel free to contact me ifi can be offurther assistance as you consider this matter.**~incer7ly ~,**  %' /

- /

### ~/r\_. 

# (

..**~** J;:mine Jordan City Manager

"Improving Our Quality ofLife"
xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?


C\_2015347EN.01001101.xml


| | | | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 20.10.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 347/11 |

---

Prior notification of a concentration

(Case M.7777 — Solvay/Cytec)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2015/C 347/07)

1.

On 13 October 2015, the Commission received a notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 [(1)](#ntr1-C_2015347EN.01001101-E0001) by which Solvay SA (‘Solvay’, Belgium) acquires within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation control of the whole of Cytec Industries Inc. (‘Cytec’, United States).

2.

The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:

—   for Solvay: research, development, production, marketing and sale of chemicals and plastics, including mining chemicals, globally,

—   for Cytec: supply of chemicals, composite materials and adhesives to a wide range of industries, such as aerospace, agriculture, defence and mining industry, globally.

3.

On preliminary examination, the Commission finds that the notified transaction could fall within the scope of the Merger Regulation. However, the final decision on this point is reserved.

4.

The Commission invites interested third parties to submit their possible observations on the proposed operation to the Commission.

Observations must reach the Commission not later than 10 days following the date of this publication. Observations can be sent to the Commission by fax (+32 22964301), by e-mail to COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu or by post, under reference Case M.7777 — Solvay/Cytec to the following address:

| |
| --- |
| European Commission |
| Directorate-General for Competition |
| Merger Registry |
| 1049 Bruxelles/Brussel |
| BELGIQUE/BELGIË |

---

[(1)](#ntc1-C_2015347EN.01001101-E0001)  
[OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1](http://publications.europa.eu/resource/oj/JOL_2004_024_R_TOC) (the ‘Merger Regulation’).

---
EPA TESTIMONY 

5-24-12 

Jerome A. Stone 

I am Jerome Stone, a former United Church of Christ minister, Professor Emeritus of 

Philosophy and former chair of the department of Philosophy at William Rainey Harper 

College in Palatine, Illinois where I taught Environmental Ethics. In fact I wrote the 

course description for Environmental Ethics for use in the community colleges in Illinois. 

I have three points to make. 

First, cost-benefit analysis is not the final analysis. I hold in my hands a calculator 

and a picture of my grandchildren. They could be your children or grandchildren. A 

calculator is useful in cost-benefit analysis. But the worth of children and their health 

cannot be determined by a calculator. We cannot ignore cost-benefit analysis, but, if life 

is sacred, we need more than a calculator. 

The second point is that the argument about job destruction is false. I listen to that 

argument very carefully. I used to be a minister in Danville, in east-central Illinois. The 

economy of the area is very close to my heart. But even more important, we need healthy 

workers, healthy children to grow into healthy workers, and healthy lives for our retired 

workers. Strip mining is what really displaces workers. If there is some displacement of 

workers from these regulations, there will also be new jobs from the pollution-curbing 

technologies. There will be time to adjust jobs and job training. We did it as the tobacco 

industry slowed down. We can do it in coal. The bottom line is, if we don't have our 

health, jobs won't matter. The economic argument is a red herring. 
' 

My third point is this. I have studied and taught the religions of the world. And I 

can tell you that if there is anything that all the religions agree on, it is that we must care 

for the earth and work for the alleviation of suffering now and for future generations. 

The worth of children and their health cannot be determined by a calculator. We 

cannot ignore cost-benefit analysis, but, if life is sacred, we need more than a calculator. 

Thus we need to have and to enforce strong standards of carbon emission. The 

EPA is to be applauded for its work. 

2
### IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA DA 22 - 0676

_________________ RITA M. BLADES, Temporary Guardian and Conservator for H.A.G.,

Plaintiff and Appellee, v. GARRY DOUGLAS SEAMAN,

Defendant and Appellant. O R D E R

_________________ Pursuant to the Internal Operating Rules of this Court, this cause is classified for submission on briefs to a five - justice panel of this Court. The Clerk is directed to provide a copy hereof to all counsel of record and to the Honorable Shane A. Vannatta, District Judge . For the Court,

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

August 2 2023

08/02/2023
Case Number: DA 22-0676
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE TWELVE MONTHS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1998
AND SUCH IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                           7,740
<SECURITIES>                                    92,220
<RECEIVABLES>                                   88,070<F1>
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                    478,940
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               734,740
<PP&E>                                         359,110<F1>
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,126,320
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          252,210
<BONDS>                                        200,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                     489,580
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,126,320
<SALES>                                      2,001,930
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             2,001,930
<CGS>                                        1,510,630
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,510,630
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                11,350
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              31,580
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 93,990
<INCOME-TAX>                                    23,450
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             70,540
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    70,540
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
<FN>
<F1>Receivables and property and equipment are presented net of allowances for
doubtful accounts and accumulated depreciation and amortization, respectively.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 10**  **- 6125** 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee ,
v. TYRONE NOBLE , Defendant

- Appellant
.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of So uth Carolina , at Columbia
. Joseph F. Anderson, Jr. , District Judge. ( 3:06

- cr - 00748

- JFA

- 9 )

Submitted : October 26, 2010 Decided: November 23 , 2010

Before GREGORY, AGEE, and KEENAN , Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion
. Tyrone Noble, Appellant Pro Se. Julius Ness Richardson, Assistant United States Attorney, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Tyrone Noble appeals from the district court’ s orders denying his 18 U.S.C. § 3582 (2006) motion for reduction of sentence and his motion for reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and the arguments of the parties, and we affirm the denial of Noble’s § 3582 motion for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Noble , No. 3:06

- cr - 00748

- JFA

- 9 (D.S.C. Dec. 2, 2009). Regarding Noble’s motion for reconsideration, although we affirm the district court’s denial of the motion, we conclude that the district court had no jurisdiction to consider Noble’s motion. See United States v. Goodwyn , 596 F.3d 233, 236 (4th Cir.), cert. denied , 130 S. Ct. 3530 (2010). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional
process.
AFFIRMED
Exhibit 10.6


 


ADDENDUM TO DIRECTOR SERVICES AGREEMENT


 


In accordance with the terms
of your Director Services Agreement dated December 31, 2020 and subject to Item 25. Changes to terms, Paragraph 25.2 subparagraph 25.2.1
we are providing you an update to Item 2. Duration of employment paragraph 2.1.


 


Item 2. Duration of employment paragraph 2.1.
shall be changed to read “Your term as a Director started on May 1, 2021 and will continue for a period of 60 months when it will
be reviewed further, unless and until it is ended under clause 21.”


 


This change is being made to assist the audit process
for the S-1 Registration Statement. Your signature below will acknowledge the acceptance of this change.


 


Thank you for your attention to this minor change.


 


	/s/ Erik Sävenstrand	 
	Signature	 
	 	 
	Erik Sävenstrand	 
	Printed Name	 
	 	 
	Dated this 30 day of May,
    2021
# C_2015221EN.01000101.xml

| 6.7.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 221/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.7.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 221/1

---

Last publications of the Court of Justice of the European Union in the Official Journal of the European Union

Official Journal of the European Union

(2015/C 221/01)

Last publication

Last publication

OJ C 213, 29.6.2015

Past publications

Past publications

OJ C 205, 22.6.2015

OJ C 198, 15.6.2015

OJ C 190, 8.6.2015

OJ C 178, 1.6.2015

OJ C 171, 26.5.2015

OJ C 155, 11.5.2015

These texts are available on:

EUR-Lex: http://eur-lex.europa.eu

---
**EXHIBIT23.2**

 

**March 15, 2005**

 

 

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENTPETROLEUM ENGINEERS**

** **

** **

We hereby consent to theincorporation by reference in the previously filed Registration Statements onForm S-8 No. 333-22571, No. 333-93209, No. 333-61890, No. 333-106484 and No. 333-113619and Registration Statement on Form S-3 No. 333-79759, No. 333-112462 and No.333-115692, each****of Edge Petroleum Corporation(the “Company”), of our summary report dated March 15, 2005 included as Exhibit99.1 to this Annual Report on Form 10-K in respect of our reserve reportrelating to the oil and gas reserves and revenues of certain interests of theCompany as of December 31, 2004 and of the data extracted from such reportsappearing in “Items 1 and 2.  “Businessand Properties” under the caption “Oil and Natural Gas Reserves” and inSupplementary Financial Information on Oil and Natural Gas Exploration,Development and Production Activities (unaudited) in such Annual Report on Form10-K.  We hereby consent to allreferences to such reports and/or this firm in such Annual Report on Form 10-Kand we hereby consent to all references to such reports and/or to this firm ineach such Registration Statement, and further consent to our being named as anexpert in each such Registration Statement and in each Prospectus to which anysuch Registration Statement relates.

 
|   | /S/    RYDER SCOTT COMPANY, L.P. |
|--------|------------------------------------------------------|
|   | PETROLEUM ENGINEERS                                  |   |

 

Houston, Texas

 

----
* Pursuant to 5TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit 

## FILED October 24, 2006 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 05-30680 Conference Calendar

ANTHONY JOSEPH WILLIAMS, Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus CURT WAINWRIGHT; JOSH OTWELL; ANGIE HUFF; RAY HANSON, Defendants-Appellees.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana

USDC No. 5:05-CV-34

-------------------- Before JOLLY, DeMOSS, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Anthony Joseph Williams, Louisiana prisoner # 397646, appeals the district court’s dismissal of his civil rights complaint as frivolous pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i). Williams argues that the district court misconstrued his complaint as seeking relief for a deprivation of property which occurred in November 2003, when in fact the complaint alleged claims arising out of a January 2005 incident of retaliation. The record shows that Williams submitted the complaint to prison authorities for mailing on December 26, 2004; thus, it isNo. 05-30680 -2- not possible that the complaint alleged claims arising out of an incident occurring in January 2005. Accordingly, the dismissal of the complaint was not an abuse of discretion. See Siglar v. Hightower , 112 F.3d 191, 193 (5th Cir. 1997). Williams’s appeal is without arguable merit and is therefore dismissed as frivolous. See Howard v. King , 707 F.2d 215, 219-20 (5th Cir. 1983); see 5TH C IR . R. 42.2. The district court’s dismissal of Williams’s complaint and this court’s dismissal of his appeal count as two strikes under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). See Adepegba v. Hammons , 103 F.3d 383, 387 (5th Cir. 1996). Williams is cautioned that if he accumulates three strikes, he may no longer proceed in forma pauperis in any civil action or appeal filed while he is incarcerated or detained in any facility unless he is under imminent danger of serious physical injury. See § 1915(g).
APPEAL DISMISSED; SANCTION WARNING ISSUED.
# C_2016037EN.01000201.xml

| 30.1.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 37/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.1.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 37/2

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

1

29 January 2016

(2016/C 37/03)

1 euro =

1 euro =

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,0920 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 132,25 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4628 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,76410 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 9,3483 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,1144 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 9,4845 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 27,026 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 312,03 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 4,4398 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 4,5352 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 3,2365 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,5388 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,5363 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 8,5101 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,6788 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 1,5550 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 318,60 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 17,4927 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 7,1810 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,6600 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 14 967,64 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,5296 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 52,082 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 82,8472 |
| THB | Thai baht | 38,973 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 4,4294 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 20,0054 |
| INR | Indian rupee | 74,1039 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,0920

JPY

Japanese yen

132,25

DKK

Danish krone

7,4628

GBP

Pound sterling

0,76410

SEK

Swedish krona

9,3483

CHF

Swiss franc

1,1144

ISK

Iceland króna

NOK

Norwegian krone

9,4845

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

27,026

HUF

Hungarian forint

312,03

PLN

Polish zloty

4,4398

RON

Romanian leu

4,5352

TRY

Turkish lira

3,2365

AUD

Australian dollar

1,5388

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,5363

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

8,5101

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,6788

SGD

Singapore dollar

1,5550

KRW

South Korean won

1 318,60

ZAR

South African rand

17,4927

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

7,1810

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,6600

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

14 967,64

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,5296

PHP

Philippine peso

52,082

RUB

Russian rouble

82,8472

THB

Thai baht

38,973

BRL

Brazilian real

4,4294

MXN

Mexican peso

20,0054

INR

Indian rupee

74,1039

---

(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

1

Source

---
# C_2015441EN.01000101.xml

| 31.12.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 441/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

31.12.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 441/1

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.7814 — Engie/Soper/La Compagnie du Vent/La Caisse des Dépôts et Consignations/CEOLCBH60/CEOLCHA51/CEOLAUX89)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2015/C 441/01)

On 22 December 2015, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in French language and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

1

| — | in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32015M7814. EUR-Lex is the online access to the European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32015M7814. EUR-Lex is the online access to the European law.

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

1

---
# C_2016182EN.01000101.xml

| 20.5.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 182/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.5.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 182/1

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.8009 — CPPIB/GIP/Pacific National Business of Asciano)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2016/C 182/01)

On 13 May 2016, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

1

| — | in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32016M8009. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32016M8009. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

1

---
_________________________________________ 

 

 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan 

September 10, 2007 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

132165(51) Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

HARVEY JONES, JR., Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman, Plaintiff-Appellee, Justices 

v SC: 132165 

 COA: 260040 
 Wayne CC: 97-738912-NI

ROBERT DUANE RIBBRON,

Defendant, 

and 

SECURA INSURANCE, 

 Garnishee Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the motion for reconsideration of this Court’s June 8, 2007 

order is considered, and it is DENIED, because it does not appear that the order was 

entered erroneously. 

MARKMAN, J., would grant the motion for reconsideration and grant leave to 

appeal. 

p0830 

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. 

September 10, 2007 

 Clerk