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


<ARTICLE>                     5


<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-mos
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>               DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                  JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                    DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                          481
<SECURITIES>                    0
<RECEIVABLES>                   0
<ALLOWANCES>                    0
<INVENTORY>                     0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                13,481
<PP&E>                          24,215,838
<DEPRECIATION>                  0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                  24,229,319
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>           18,745,898
<BONDS>                         0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>           0
<PREFERRED>                     103
<COMMON>                        9,680
<OTHER-SE>                      3,088,716
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>    24,229,319
<SALES>                         706,433
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                706,433
<CGS>                           0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                   0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                540,120
<LOSS-PROVISION>                0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>              0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                 166,313
<INCOME-TAX>                    0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>             165,663
<DISCONTINUED>                  0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                 0
<CHANGES>                       0
<NET-INCOME>                    165,663
<EPS-BASIC>                   .17
<EPS-DILUTED>                   .17



</TABLE>
No. 12-5068.

#### O’Neill *v.*Clarke, Director, Virginia Department of Corrections.

C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.
Richard K. Simon, Esq. 

1700 Decker School Lane 

Malibu, CA 90265 

(310) 503-7286 

rsimon3@verizon.net 

By Hand Delivery 

Office of the Chief Counsel 

RECEIVED 

JAN 6 2016 

PART 16 DOCKETS 

Attention: FAA Part 16 Airport Proceedings Docket 

AGC-610 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Ave. S.W. 

Washington, DC 20591 

Re: Docket Nos. 16-14-04/FAA-2014-0592 

january 6, 2016 

National Business Aviation Association, Krueger Aviation, Inc. Harrison 

Ford, justice Aviation, Kim Davidson Aviation, Inc., Aero Film, Yo uri Bujko, 

james Ross, Wonderful Citrus, LLC and Aircraft Owners and Pilots 

Association v. City of Santa Monica, California 

Reply to City of Santa Monica's Request for Hearing 

Complainants have received the City of Santa Monica's ("City") Request for 

Hearing dated December 23, 2015 - which asks for a discretionary hearing to 

review the Director's Determination in the above-captioned proceeding. To the 

extent necessary, Complainants seek leave to file this brief reply to that request. 

Complainants do not believe the City has presented grounds for the exercise 

of the Federal Aviation Administration's ("FAA") discretion in this matter. The 

Director's Determination dated December 4, 2015 is thorough, logical in its analysis, 

and based on materials which were known (or which should have been known) to 

the City. Likewise, the purported legal and factual issues which are cited in the 

City's request all were (or could have been) raised in the City's previous pleadings, 

and nonetheless already have been substantially considered, and do not now 

provide a justification for a hearing. Nor was the Director's Determination in any 

way exceptional or atypical, as the City suggests; e.g., as the FAA is well aware, the 

agency has the power to conduct its own investigation of a complaint and to 

supplement the record as necessary, as the FAA did in this case. 

In sum, a hearing under these circumstances would serve no purposes other 

than to create delay, and to impose additional expenses and substantial and 

unnecessary burdens on Complainants. Accordingly, the City's request should be 

denied. 
Richard K. Simon, Esq., 

1700 Decker School Lane 

Malibu, CA 90265 

310-503-7286 

CC (by electronic mail and first class mail): 

Rick Cole, City Manager, City of Santa Monica, 1685 Main Street, Room 209, Santa 

Monica, CA 90401, manager(msmgov.net 

Marsha Moutrie, City Attorney, joseph Lawrence, Lance Gams, and Ivan Campbell, 

City of Santa Monica, 1685 Main Street, Room 310, Santa Monica, CA 90401, 

marsha.moutrie@smgov.net, joseph.lawrence@smgov.net, Jance.gams@smgov.net, 

ivan.campbell@smgov.net 

Stelios Makrides, Airport Manager, City of Santa Monica, Airport Administration 

Building, 3223 Donald Douglas Loop South, Santa Monica, CA 90405, 

stel ios.m a krid es@smgov. net 

Martin Pastucha, Director of Public Works, City of Santa Monica, 1685 Main Street, 

Room 116, Santa Monica, CA 90401, martin.pastucha@smgov.net 

G. Brian Busey and Zane Gresham, Morrison & Foerster, LLP, 425 Market Street, San 

Francisco, CA 94105, gbusey@mofo.com, zgresham@mofo.com
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                          36,600
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                59,100
<PP&E>                                         510,987
<DEPRECIATION>                                 417,924
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 334,557
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        2,810,182
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       285,439
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   334,557
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,437,124
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              67,725
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (1,437,124)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (1,437,124)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.01)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.01)


</TABLE>
1 The Honorable James M. Rosenbaum, United States District Judge for the District of Minnesota. 

## United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 09-1777

___________ United States of America, * * Appellee, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * District of Minnesota. Raymond Damon Smith, * * [UNPUBLISHED] Appellant. *

___________ Submitted: October 19, 2009 Filed: October 26, 2009

___________ Before WOLLMAN, MURPHY, and BYE, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM. In 2003, Raymond Smith received a sentence of 400 months after he was found guilty of conspiracy to distribute a nd possession with intent to distribute approximately 1,912 grams of cocaine base (commonly known as "crack"). Smith brought a motion under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c) fo r a reduction in his sentence pursuant to a guidelines amendment (Amendment 706) which reduced the advisory base offense level for crack offenses by two leve ls. He also asked the district court 1 to appoint counsel and conduct a full resentencing in order to weigh all the factors set2 Smith also contends that the district court should have reduced his sentence to a level below the low end of the guidelines range. This argument is foreclosed by Starks , 551 F.3d at 840.
-2- forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) in support of a greater sentence reduction. The district court calculated an amended advisory guidelines range of 324-405 months, but declined to modify Smith's sentence, citi ng the scope and duration of Smith's criminal activities.
Smith appeals, arguing the district court had authority to conduct a full resentencing and erred by not doing so. He acknowledges his argument is foreclosed by United States v. Starks , 551 F.3d 839, 843 (8th Cir. 2009) (concluding district courts do not have authority, in resent encing proceedings resulting from the crack cocaine amendments, to conduct full rese ntencings or grant reductions beyond the two-level decrease authorized by the Sent encing Commission), but brings this appeal in order to preserve the issue for further review.
Smith further argues the district court abused its discretion in failing to modify Smith's sentence. 2The district court's decision not to reduce a sentence under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c) is reviewed for abuse of discretion. United States v. Wyatt , 115 F.3d 606, 609 (8th Cir. 1997). Smith concedes his 400-month sentence falls within the recalculated guidelines range, but nonethele ss argues the court abused its discretion. We disagree. The district court, in its order, based its decision on trial testimony showing Smith was spotted by police in his yard with a brick of cocaine and a pistol. Smith was arrested shortly thereafter in hi s residence, and the police seized a loaded gun, scales, cash, a bullet proof vest, and su rveillance cameras. Th e district court also considered Smith's prior conviction for unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor. Having reviewed the record, we conclude the district court did not abuse its discretion in declining to modify Smith's sentence.-3- We affirm the judgment of the district court.

______________________________
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<RESTATED>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                          31,735
<SECURITIES>                                    11,437
<RECEIVABLES>                                   15,627
<ALLOWANCES>                                     (330)
<INVENTORY>                                      7,853
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                70,677
<PP&E>                                          16,695
<DEPRECIATION>                                   4,615
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  93,364
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           10,511
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             8
<OTHER-SE>                                      79,068
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    93,364
<SALES>                                         81,710
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                81,710
<CGS>                                           36,902
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   64,445
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 (524)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               (325)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 17,936
<INCOME-TAX>                                     7,419
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             10,517
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    10,517
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.36
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.32
        

</TABLE>
Exhibit 10.1

CONSULTING AGREEMENT

This Consulting Agreement is made this twenty-fourth day of April between Provident Bank and
Enos K. Fry.



|              |  |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           
|------------- |  | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|Purpose:      |  | To benefit from the expertise and background of Mr. Fry after he retires from Provident Bank. Mr. Frys experience and significant presence in the Washington Metro business community
makes him uniquely qualified to assist Provident in continuing to grow the business in that region.
|              | 
|Services:     |  | Mr. Fry will provide consulting services for approximately 1,000 hours per year. Business development activities as well as customer interface will be Mr. Frys primary
focus.                                                                                                           
|              | 
|Compensation: |  | Mr. Fry will be paid $115,000 per year. His post retirement benefits remain the same.                                                                                                                                                                                                     
|              | 
|Term:         |  | The initial term of consulting services under this agreement will be a period commencing on the date of Mr. Frys retirement. At the end of twelve months the agreement will be evaluated.
If Provident and Mr. Fry desire, the agreement will be renewed for an additional twelve months.
|              | 
|Termination:  |  | This agreement can be terminated at any time by Provident Bank or Mr. Fry. This agreement constitutes the full and complete agreement of the parties and it may be modified or amended only by
a written instrument signed by the parties.                                                



|                     |  |                   
|-------------------- |  | ------------------
|Date: April 25, 2006 |  | /s/ Enos K. Fry   
|                     |  | Enos K. Fry       
|                     | 
|Date: April 25, 2006 |  | /s/ Gary N. Geisel
|                     |  | Gary N. Geisel
No. 11-11059.

#### Henry *v.*United States.

C. A. 1st Cir. Cer-tiorari denied.
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 46 (Monday, March 10, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 10871]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-5819]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service


Notice of Receipt of Applications for Permit

    The following applicants have applied for a permit to conduct 
certain activities with endangered species. This notice is provided 
pursuant to Section 10(c) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as 
amended (16 U.S.C. 1531, et seq.).
    Applicant: Houston Zoological Gardens, Houston, TX, PRT-825689.
    The applicant request a permit to import one male captive born Pink 
pigeon (Columba mayeri) from Jersey Wildlife Preservation Trust for the 
purpose of enhancement of the species through propagation.
    Applicant: Lance K. Parks, Billings, MT, PRT-825893.
    The applicant requests a permit to import the sport-hunted trophy 
of one male bontebok (Damaliscus pygargus dorcas) culled from a captive 
herd maintained under the management program of the Republic of South 
Africa, for the purpose of enhancement of the survival of the species.
    Applicant: Duke University Primate Center, Durham, NC, PRT-825870.
    The applicant requests a permit to export the frozen cadaver of one 
captive-born female mongoose lemur (Eulemur coronatus), which died of 
natural causes, to the Institute for Experimental Pathology, Muenster, 
Germany, for the purpose of enhancement of the species through genetic 
research.
    Written data or comments should be submitted to the Director, U.S. 
Fish and Wildlife Service, Office of Management Authority, 4401 North 
Fairfax Drive, Room 430, Arlington, Virginia 22203 and must be received 
by the Director within 30 days of the date of this publication.
    Documents and other information submitted with these applications 
are available for review, subject to the requirements of the Privacy 
Act and Freedom of Information Act, by any party who submits a written 
request for a copy of such documents to the following office within 30 
days of the date of publication of this notice: U.S. Fish and Wildlife 
Service, Office of Management Authority, 4401 North Fairfax Drive, Room 
430, Arlington, Virginia 22203. Phone: (703/358-2104); FAX: (703/358-
2281).

    Dated: March 4, 1997.
Caroline Anderson,
Acting Chief, Branch of Permits, Office of Management Authority.
[FR Doc. 97-5819 Filed 3-7-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P
Order entered February 25, 2021

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-20-00575-CV

IN THE INTEREST OF B.N.L., H.T.L. AND A.K.L., CHILDREN

On Appeal from the 429th Judicial District Court

Collin County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 429-56250-2017

ORDER

Before the Court is appellee’s February 23, 2021 third motion to extend time 

to file his brief. Appellee explains the extension is necessary as a result of the 

winter storms. 

We GRANT the motion and ORDER the brief be filed no later than March 

31, 2021. We caution appellee that further extensions will not be granted absent 

exigent circumstances. 

/s/ CRAIG SMITH

JUSTICE
IV 

116TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. RES. 1002 

Strongly condemning the recent acts of violence, riots, and looting in the 

United States. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JUNE 15, 2020 

Mr. GUEST submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the 

Committee on the Judiciary 

RESOLUTION 

Strongly condemning the recent acts of violence, riots, and 

looting in the United States. 

Whereas in the wake of the tragic death of George Floyd on 

Monday, May 25, 2020, peaceful protests began across 

the United States focused on justice for African-American victims of police misconduct; 

Whereas these peaceful protests are protected by the Constitution of the United States through an individual’s 

First Amendment rights of freedom of speech, peaceful 

assembly, and petitioning the Government concerning 

grievances; 

Whereas what began as peaceful demonstrations, have been 

exploited by violent extremists who have carried out acts 

of violence, looting, destruction of business and personal 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•HRES 1002 IH 

property, and additional loss of life, including the deliberate targeting of law enforcement officers; 

Whereas due to the actions of violent extremists, certain government functions have been temporarily closed, businesses have been forced to be shuttered, and livelihoods 

have been impacted; 

Whereas these acts of violence are considered criminal activity; and 

Whereas these actions take our focus as a country away from 

a safe and civil dialogue on issues of importance to our 

Nation: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the House of Representatives— 

2 (1) strongly condemns the violence, riots, and 

3 looting in the United States; 

4 (2) recognizes that violent opportunists use the 

5 cover of legitimate protests by their fellow citizens to 

6 sow chaos; 

7 (3) recognizes that the actions of those bent on 

8 violence does not diminish the rights of other Ameri9 cans to peacefully protest; 

10 (4) urges peace and order to be restored; and 

11 (5) expresses that those responsible for these 

12 violent acts be held criminally responsible for their 

13 actions. 

Æ 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
BPI 2013 10-K - EX-10.33






Exhibit 10.33


BRIDGEPOINT EDUCATION, INC.
STOCK OWNERSHIP GUIDELINES
(Effective January 1, 2012, Amended May 14, 2013)


	
		
	Objective
	To create a linkage between stockholders, senior executives and the Board of Directors through a required level of stock ownership.




	
		
	Covered Employees
	Chief Executive Officer, Executive Vice Presidents, Senior Vice Presidents and non-employee members of the Board of Directors.




	
		
	Stock Ownership Guidelines
	It is expected that within five years of becoming subject to these guidelines that the covered employee shall achieve the appropriate stock ownership guideline, as set forth below:




		
	•
	Chief Executive Officer - A number of shares equal to the quotient of (1) an amount equal to six times base salary, divided by (2) the stock price at the date of calculation


		
	•
	Executive Vice Presidents - A number of shares equal to the quotient of (1) an amount equal to three times base salary, divided by (2) the stock price at the date of calculation


		
	•
	Senior Vice Presidents - A number of shares equal to the quotient of (1) an amount equal to two times base salary, divided by (2) the stock price at the date of calculation


		
	•
	Non-Employee Directors - A number of shares equal to the quotient of (1) an amount equal to three times the annual retainer for service on the Board of Directors (excluding retainers for committee or chair service), divided by (2) the stock price at the date of calculation


	
		
	 
	Initially, the date of calculation for Executives was November 30, 2011 and May 14, 2013 for the Board of Directors; thereafter, the date of calculation will be the date of annual equity awards or the date of a contemplated sale by a covered employee.




	
		
	Shares and Equivalents
	Covered employees and members of the Board of Directors may satisfy their ownership guidelines with:




		
	•
	Shares owned directly or indirectly by the covered employee’s spouse or minor children, or a trust controlled by the covered employee;


		
	•
	Deferred compensation payable in shares;


		
	•
	Share equivalents (vested and unvested restricted stock units, deferred compensation payable in stock); and


		
	•
	“In the money” exercisable stock options held directly or indirectly by the covered employee’s spouse or minor children, or a trust controlled by the covered employee.











	
		
	 
	Non-employee members of the Board of Directors may also satisfy their ownership guidelines with shares or other securities beneficially owned through their affiliates.






	
		
	Compliance Assurance
	Covered employees may not sell shares unless they will satisfy the appropriate ownership guidelines after the completion of the sale.
Adams, Kevin (OST) 

From: 

Sent: 

To: 

Cc: 

Subject: 

Bill Van <billv@aaghi.com> 

Monday, May 27, 2013 3:23 PM 

Adams, Kevin (OST) 

Dennis.Adams@dot.gov 

Air travel from Kamuela to Honolulu 

-' . ' 

- , __ :. 

.-.. ·-. .- ~ ' ··, ; .: .... .,.. 

I am a residence of Kamuela and it would be a of great convenience for me to be 

able to travel on a daily bases. I have my cooperate offices in Honolulu and would 

love to spend more time in Kamuela. I also like the services that Schuman aviation 

provides I have used them in the past. They are a reliable company with great 

integrity. I used Pacific Wings in the past and there services were horrible. From 

the front desk to the pilots no customer service whatsoever. I sincerely hope we 

get this service back it would do a lot for me and my family. 

Bill van den Hurk 

Aloha Auto Group I President I billv@aaghi.com 

LOH 

I All Islands I Oahu I Maui I Big Island I Kauai I 

YAMAHA 

Office: (808) 792-8909 I Fax: (808) 833-3444 I Mobile: (808) 864-6649 

2841 N Nimitz Hwy. I Honolulu, HI 96719 I www.aaghi.com 

is oniv the intended recipient ot the transmission, and may contain 

by return email and delete messag"" and of it from your 

1 

your·
No. 11-10939.

#### Scarborough *v.*Miller et al.

C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.