alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
2007 MOVESRunID 2

Sum of emissionQuant Column Labels Row Labels 2 5 3 - NOX(grams) 3 582,576,000.0 1,813,190,000.0 1 45,337,900.0 147,919,000.0 2 51,950,400.0 167,871,000.0 3 49,223,000.0 152,505,000.0 4 50,469,800.0 155,922,000.0 5 49,379,900.0 151,838,000.0 6 50,087,000.0 152,434,000.0 7 46,190,400.0 139,019,000.0 8 47,812,700.0 146,264,000.0 9 47,022,000.0 148,115,000.0 10 47,152,000.0 145,953,000.0 11 50,783,700.0 156,247,000.0 12 47,167,200.0 149,103,000.0 31 - SO2(grams) 31 4,445,720.0 13,855,390.0 1 319,713.0 1,047,730.0 2 367,046.0 1,190,570.0 3 360,355.0 1,116,690.0 4 376,316.0 1,163,250.0 5 375,213.0 1,157,440.0 6 405,218.0 1,237,600.0 7 393,087.0 1,184,210.0 8 397,741.0 1,222,240.0 9 376,475.0 1,192,320.0 10 364,371.0 1,128,920.0 11 368,937.0 1,134,440.0 12 341,248.0 1,079,980.0 91 - Total Energy Consumption 91 1,441,722.0 4,493,295.0110 - Primary Exhaust PM2.5- Total (grams) 110 18,452,180.0 58,181,840.0 1 1,564,670.0 5,179,240.0 2 1,835,160.0 6,039,680.0 3 1,510,690.0 4,742,560.0 4 1,583,890.0 4,948,900.0 5 1,443,990.0 4,489,840.0 6 1,503,550.0 4,618,830.0 7 1,461,690.0 4,426,670.0 8 1,435,440.0 4,430,240.0 9 1,422,010.0 4,532,440.0 10 1,456,260.0 4,551,760.0 11 1,654,790.0 5,168,260.0 12 1,580,040.0 5,053,420.0 111 - Primary PM2.5- Organic Carbon (grams) 111 6,830,547.0 21,793,700.0 112 - Primary PM2.5- Elemental Carbon (grams) 112 11,522,520.0 36,079,150.0 115 - Primary PM2.5- Sulfate Part. (grams) 115 99,119.4 308,983.2 116 - Primary PM2.5- Brakewear Part. (grams) 116 1,140,369.7 3,558,298.0 1 82,903.4 272,101.0 2 95,591.9 310,300.0 3 94,793.5 293,258.0 4 99,407.7 306,831.0 5 95,870.3 296,153.0 6 101,029.0 309,595.0 7 98,230.5 296,808.0 8 96,566.0 297,984.0 9 95,017.8 301,901.0 10 94,874.7 293,816.0 11 96,938.2 297,487.0 12 89,146.7 282,064.0 117 - Primary PM2.5- Tirewear Part. (grams) 117 312,359.4 974,657.1 1 22,708.1 74,531.6 2 26,183.7 84,994.6 3 25,965.0 80,326.5 4 27,228.9 84,044.5 5 26,259.9 81,119.8 6 27,672.9 84,801.6 7 26,906.3 81,298.9 8 26,450.4 81,621.0 9 26,026.4 82,693.8 10 25,987.2 80,479.4 11 26,552.4 81,484.8 12 24,418.2 77,260.6
**EXHIBIT 32.1**

 

**CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

Pursuantto, and solely for the purposes of, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350(Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002), each of the undersignedhereby certifies in the capacity and on the date indicated below that:

 

1.             The Annual Report of RafaellaApparel Group, Inc. on Form 10-K for the period ending June 30,2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof(the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements ofSection 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;and

 

2.             The information contained in theReport fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition andresults of operations of Rafaella Apparel Group, Inc.

 

 
| October 13,  2010 | By:    | /s/  Christa Michalaros                       |
|------------------------|--------|-----------------------------------------------|
|                   |   | Christa  Michalaros                           |
|                   |   | Chief  Executive Officer and Director         |
|                   |   | (Principal  Executive Officer)                |
|                   |   |                                          |
| October 13,  2010 | By:    | /s/  Lance D. Arneson                         |
|                   |   | Lance  D. Arneson                             |
|                   |   | Chief  Financial Officer                      |
|                   |   | (Principal  Financial and Accounting Officer) |

 

----
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 Health and Human Services

###### National Institutes of Health

Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, notice is hereby given of the following meeting.

The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

*Name of Committee:*                         National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases Special Emphasis Panel; NIDDK Data Coordinating Center.                    

*Date:*                         April 5, 2022.                    

*Time:*                         12:30 p.m. to 3:30 p.m.                    

*Agenda:*                         To review and evaluate grant applications.                    

*Place:*                         National Institutes of Health/NIDDK, 6707 Democracy Blvd., Bethesda, MD 20892 (Virtual Meeting).                    

*Contact Person:*                         Elena Sanovich, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Review Branch, DEA, NIDDK, National Institutes of Health, Room 7351, 6707 Democracy Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20892-2542, 301-594-8886,                         *sanoviche@mail.nih.gov.*

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.847, Diabetes, Endocrinology and Metabolic Research; 93.848, Digestive Diseases and Nutrition Research; 93.849, Kidney Diseases, Urology and Hematology Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

Dated: March 7, 2022.

Miguelina Perez,

Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. 2022-05135 Filed 3-10-22; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
·- r

May 8, 2014
Secretary Anthony Foxx U.S. Department ofTransportation 1200 NewJersey Avenue, SE Washington, DC 20590

RE: Docket DOT-OST-2008-0299

Dear Secretary Foxx, Iwrite to express my deep concerns with the Department ofTransportation's Tentative Order to terminate the Essential Air Service (EAS) program in El Centro, California located in Imperial County. I urge you to considerthe negative economic impacts that may occur as a result ofthe proposed termination ofthe program. The Imperial County Airport has atremendous track record ofsurpassing the EAS program requirements put forth by the government, as they have dramatically exceeded the enplanement minimum in four ofthe last five fiscal years. Unfortunately, in FY 2013, the Imperial County Airport barely fell belowthe ten enplanementthreshold, by reaching 9.5 enplanements forthe first time. As you know, the Essential Air Service was put into place to guarantee that small communities, including those within the Imperial County, continue to be served by certificated air carriers. Over the last several years, Imperial County has experienced the highest unemployment rate in thenation. Ourfederal government should encourage economic growth, and consider all factors before terminating a much-needed program in the region. As you prepare the Final Order, I urge you to consider the Imperial Valley's track record overthe last three fiscal years, and ask thatyou considerthevoid thatwill be left should the Department ofTransportation ultimately decide to terminate the much-needed Essential Air Service program currently in effect at the Imperial County Airport.

Thank you foryourtime and consideration of my request on behalfofthe entire County of Imperial.
Sincerely, Gregory Siota Chief Executive Officer Imperial Chamber ofCommerce
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS  SCHEDULE  CONTAINS  SUMMARY  FINANCIAL  INFORMATION  EXTRACTED  FROM MERIT
BEHAVIORAL CARE CORPORATION'S  CONSOLIDATED  FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE PERIOD
ENDED MARCH 31, 1996 AND IS  QUALIFIED  IN ITS  ENTIRETY BY  REFERENCE  TO MERIT
BEHAVIORAL CARE CORPORATION'S FORM 10-Q FOR SUCH PERIOD.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1996
<CASH>                                          46,000
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   28,669
<ALLOWANCES>                                     1,172
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                78,049
<PP&E>                                          77,176
<DEPRECIATION>                                  15,405
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 339,428
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           81,966
<BONDS>                                        246,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           284
<OTHER-SE>                                    (23,727)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   339,428
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               222,641
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  176,291
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                12,837
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              11,549
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (10,685)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (2,136)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (8,549)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                      (1,012)
<NET-INCOME>                                   (9,561)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
C OURT OF A PPEALS FOR THE
F IRST D ISTRICT OF T EXAS AT H OUSTON

O RDER

Appellate case name: Ex parte Matthew Leachman

Appellate case number: 01

- 22

- 00232

- CR

, 01

- 22

- 0023 3

- CR

, 01

- 22

- 0023 4

- CR

Trial court case number: 1756174 , 1756176, 1756173

Trial court: 2 48th District Cour t of Harris County

On March 25, 2022, Appellant Matthew L eachman filed notice s of appeal of the trial

court’s denial of h is application s for writ of habeas corpus in the above

- referenced cause numbers

. On May 19, 2022, this Court abated the appeals and remanded them to the trial court

to allow the trial cour t to supplement the appellate record with (1) a certification of A ppellant’s right to appeal the denial of h is writ s of habeas corpus
, (2) brief s Appellant fi led in support of

his hab eas application s , and (3) the transcript from a September 3, 2021 hearing referenced in Appellant ’ s habeas applications. The trial court clerk has since supplemented the appella t e record to include the requested materials. We thus lift the abatemen t and o rd er that the appeals be reinstate d and returned to this Court ’s active docket

.

Texas Rule of Appellate Proc edure 31.1

, applicable to appea ls from a jud gment or o r der

in a habeas cor p us proceeding, provides that when an appellate court receives the recor d, it may set the time for filing briefs. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 31.1. Pursuant to Rule 31.1, we o rder

A ppel lant t o file a brief within 3 0 days of the date of this order . The S tate’s brief will be due 3 0 days from the date A ppellant files his br i e f

.

I t is so ORD ERED.

Judge’s sig nature: /s/ Veronic a Rivas

- Mol loy

Acting individually

Date: J uly 7, 2022
#### Thomas Buono, Appellant, *v.*Stewart Motor Trucks, Inc., Respondent.

Submitted October 4, 1943;

decided October 14, 1943.

*Arthur K. Wing*for motion.

*Joseph M. Schwartz*for appellant.

Motion granted and appeal dismissed, with costs and ten dollars costs of motion, unless the appellant, on or before October 25, 1943, serves and files an undertaking and the case on appeal, in which event the motion is denied.
Exhibit 32.2
 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
 
 (1)
    
    The Funds Annual Report on Form 10-K for the period ended
December 31, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the Annual 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 Annual Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
of the Fund.
 /s/ Thomas J. Fernandes

Thomas J. FernandesChief Financial OfficerDate: March 15, 2010
WARNING: THE EDGAR SYSTEM ENCOUNTERED ERROR(S) WHILE PROCESSING THIS SCHEDULE.

<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
Exhibit 27

          Financial Data Schedule

 "This schedule contains summary financial information extracted
from June 30, 2000 10QSB and is qualified in its entirety by
reference to such financial statements."
</LEGEND>

<S>                                                     <C>
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                        6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                  JUNE-30-2000
<CASH>                                              67,557
<SECURITIES>                                             0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      380,122
<ALLOWANCES>                                             0
<INVENTORY>                                     12,229,016
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                         0
<PP&E>                                              49,937
<DEPRECIATION>                                      (1,388)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  11,221,114
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                    0
<BONDS>                                             16,300
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                    0
<PREFERRED>                                          1,562
<COMMON>                                            49,466
<OTHER-SE>                                      11,130,086
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    11,221,114
<SALES>                                                  0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                         0
<CGS>                                                    0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                       18,995
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                         0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                         0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                       0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                     71,302
<INCOME-TAX>                                             0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                 71,302
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                          0
<CHANGES>                                                0
<NET-INCOME>                                        71,302
<EPS-BASIC>                                         .000
<EPS-DILUTED>                                         .000


</TABLE>
4Q12 Exhibit 10.21


Exhibit 10.21


SUMMARY OF DIRECTOR COMPENSATION 


Directors who are not employees of Black Box Corporation (the “Company”) receive directors' fees of $35,000 per annum, paid quarterly, and an additional fee of $2,000 for each meeting of the Board of Directors attended in person and $1,000 for each meeting of the Board of Directors attended via telephone.  The Chairman of the Board also receives an annual fee of $75,000, paid quarterly.  Non-employee directors also are eligible to receive awards under the 2008 Long-Term Incentive Plan (the “2008 Plan”).  On May 15, 2012, each non-employee director received an immediately-vested restricted stock unit award with a value of $100,000 on such date (the same value utilized in 2010 and 2011).  Based on the closing price of the Company's common stock, par value $.001 per share (the “Common Stock”), on the date of grant (and rounding to the nearest ten shares), this grant resulted in a restricted stock unit award to each non-employee director for 4,530 shares of Common Stock which vested immediately upon grant.


To further achieve the objective of more closely aligning the interests of our non-employee directors with those of our stockholders, upon the recommendation of the Governance Committee after discussions with the Governance Committee's compensation consultants, our Board adopted stock retention guidelines for our non-employee directors requiring them to hold, until retirement, but subject to diversification at age 60, 50% of the net, after-tax shares of Common Stock issued to them pursuant to performance share awards and restricted stock awards/units.  All of our non-employee directors are in compliance with these ownership guidelines.


Members of the Audit Committee of the Board of Directors receive a fee of $1,500 for each meeting of the Audit Committee attended in person or by telephone, and members of each of the Compensation Committee, Nominating Committee and Governance Committee receive a fee of $1,000 for each meeting of the respective committee attended in person or by telephone.  The Chairman of each of the Audit Committee and Compensation Committee receives an annual fee of $15,000, paid quarterly, and the Chairman of each of the Nominating Committee and Governance Committee receives an annual fee of $7,500, paid quarterly.


Any director who is an employee of the Company does not receive additional compensation for service as a director of the Company.


In addition, the Company maintains directors' and officers' liability insurance.  Directors also are reimbursed customary expenses for attending meetings of the board of directors, board committees and stockholders.
EXHIBIT 10.3

                             SCHOOLWEB SYSTEMS INC.
                         #280-815 West Hastings Street
                            Vancouver, BC  V6C 1B4
                             Phone: (604) 608-2540
                             Fax: (604) 608-8775


July 17, 2001


Advanced Interactive Inc.
718-1350 East Flamingo Road
Las Vegas, Nevada  89119

Attention:  Karim Lakhani

-and-

Advanced Interactive Canada Inc.
2101-1177 West Hastings Street
Vancouver, BC  V6E 2K3

Attention:  Harry K. Davis

Dear Sirs:

Re: License Agreement dated January 1, 2001 (the "Agreement")

This letter is written to confirm as follows:

1.  The license agreement dated January 1, 2001 (the
"Agreement") between Advanced Interactive Inc. ("AII Nevada"),
Advanced Interactive Canada Inc. ("AII Canada") and SchoolWeb
Systems Inc. (formerly Alternet Systems Inc.) ("SchoolWeb")
states, in Schedule 1.0, Part II, that the Territory for which
rights are granted is:

     "The Territory for the SchoolWeb portion of the
      Licensed Technology is exclusive for USA and Canada.

     The Territory for the OfficeServer portion of the
     Licensed Technology is non-exclusive, worldwide."

2.  The Agreement is hereby amended such that the Territory for
which rights are granted is:

     "The Territory for the SchoolWeb portion of the
     Licensed Technology is exclusive for the USA, Canada and the
     Commonwealth of Jamaica.

     The Territory for the OfficeServer portion of the
     Licensed Technology is non-exclusive, worldwide."

3.  In all other ways, the Agreement remains in full force and effect.

If this accurately describes your understanding of our agreement,
please so indicate by signing below and returning a copy of this
letter to our offices at (604) 608-8775.

Upon execution hereof, this letter becomes an amendment to the
Agreement binding upon its terms.

Yours truly,

SCHOOLWEB SYSTEMS INC.

/s/ Patrick Fitzsimmons
Patrick Fitzsimmons, Director


The terms of the Agreement above are hereby read, understood,
acknowledged and accepted by the undersigned effective the 17th
day of July, 2001.


ADVANCED INTERACTIVE INC.
By Its Authorized Signatory

/s/ Karim Lakhani
Karim Lakhani, President and Director


ADVANCED INTERACTIVE CANADA INC.
By Its Authorized Signatory

/s/ Harry Davis
Harry Davis, President and Director
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

ERIC H. MOODY, AKA Abdul Wahid, 

Plaintiff-Appellant, 

 v. 

JIMMY CRUZEN, individually and in his 

official capacities as Correctional Officer; et 

al., 

Defendants-Appellees.

No. 17-16058 

D.C. No. 5:15-cv-02017-LHK 

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of California

Lucy H. Koh, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted December 18, 2017**

Before: WALLACE, SILVERMAN, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.

California state prisoner Eric H. Moody, AKA Abdul Wahid, appeals pro se 

from the district court’s summary judgment for failure to exhaust administrative 

remedies in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action related to congregational prayer. We have 

 

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent 

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision 

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

FILED

DEC 20 2017

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 17-16058 

jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo. Williams v. Paramo, 

775 F.3d 1182, 1191 (9th Cir. 2015). We affirm.

The district court properly granted summary judgment because Moody failed 

to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether he properly exhausted his 

administrative remedies, or whether there was “something in his particular case 

that made the existing and generally available administrative remedies effectively 

unavailable to him.” Albino v. Baca, 747 F.3d 1162, 1172 (9th Cir. 2014) (en 

banc); see also Woodford v. Ngo, 548 U.S. 81, 90 (2006) (requiring proper 

exhaustion, which means “using all steps that the agency holds out, and doing so 

properly (so that the agency addresses the issues on the merits)” (emphasis, 

citation, and internal quotation marks omitted)). Moody contends that he 

exhausted under a “continuing violation” theory, but even if this court were to 

adopt such a theory, it would not apply in this case.

AFFIRMED.