alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
|                                                                                                  
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                                  
|View History:  Monthly  Annual Download Data (XLS File)                                          
|View History:  Monthly  Annual                                                                    
|View History:  Monthly  Annual                                                                    
|View History:                                                                                     
|                                                                                                  
|Price of Freeport, TX Liquefied Natural Gas Exports to Lithuania (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet)
|                                                                                                  
|                                                                                                  
|Price of Freeport, TX Liquefied Natural Gas Exports to Lithuania (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet)
|                                                                                                  

|Year                                                                                                                              | Jan | Feb | Mar  | Apr  | May   | Jun | Jul | Aug | Sep | Oct | Nov | Dec
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | --- | --- | ---- | ---- | ----- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | ---
|2020                                                                                                                              |     |     |      | W    |       |     |     |     | W   |     |     |    
|2021                                                                                                                              |     | W   |      |      |       | W   | W   |     |     |     |     |    
|2022                                                                                                                              |     |     | 9.27 | 9.56 | 12.51 |     |     |     |     |     |     |    
|2023                                                                                                                              |     |     |      |      |       |     |     |     | W   |     |     |    
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 7/31/2024                                                                                                          
|Next Release Date: 8/30/2024
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia Clerk's Office, Atlanta, November 13, 2023. I certify that the above is a true extract from the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia. Witness my signature and the seal of said court hereto affixed the day and year last above written. , Clerk. 

# Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia
ATLANTA, November 13, 2023 The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order A24D0110. LORI ELIZABETH COPELAND v. JERRY COPELAND, JR.
Upon consideration of the Application for Discretionary Appeal, it is ordered that it be hereby DENIED.
LC NUMBERS: SUCV2021000012
|                                                                         
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                         
|View History:  Monthly  Annual Download Data (XLS File)                 
|View History:  Monthly  Annual                                           
|View History:  Monthly  Annual                                           
|View History:                                                            
|                                                                         
|Cameron, LA Liquefied Natural Gas Exports to Belgium (Million Cubic Feet)
|                                                                         
|                                                                         
|Cameron, LA Liquefied Natural Gas Exports to Belgium (Million Cubic Feet)
|                                                                         

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|2010's                                                                                                                            |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |        | 0     
|2020's                                                                                                                            | 3,290  | 2,100  | 12,831 | 10,845 |        |        |        |        |        |       
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 7/31/2024                                                                                                          
|Next Release Date: 8/30/2024
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 108 (Friday, June 5, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Pages 30758-30759]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-14910]


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

FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM


Change in Bank Control Notices; Acquisitions of Shares of Banks 
or Bank Holding Companies

    The notificants listed below have applied under the Change in Bank 
Control Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)) and Sec.  225.41 of the Board's 
Regulation Y (12 CFR 225.41) to acquire a bank or bank holding company. 
The factors that are considered in acting on the notices are set forth 
in paragraph 7 of the Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)(7)).
    The notices are available for immediate inspection at the Federal 
Reserve Bank indicated. The notices also will be available for 
inspection at the offices of the Board of Governors. Interested persons 
may express their views in writing to the Reserve Bank indicated for 
that notice or to the offices

[[Page 30759]]

of the Board of Governors. Comments must be received not later than 
June 19, 1998.
    A. Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago (Philip Jackson, Applications 
Officer) 230 South LaSalle Street, Chicago, Illinois 60690-1413:
    1. PSB Corporation ESOP with 401K provisions, Wellsburg, Iowa; to 
acquire additional voting shares of PSB Corporation, Wellsburg, Iowa, 
and thereby indirectly acquire First State Bank, Sumner, Iowa, and 
Peoples Savings Bank, Wellsburg, Iowa.

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, June 1, 1998.
Robert deV. Frierson,
Associate Secretary of the Board.
[FR Doc. 98-14910 Filed 6-4-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6210-01-F
|                                                                                                
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                                
|View History:  Monthly  Annual Download Data (XLS File)                                        
|View History:  Monthly  Annual                                                                  
|View History:  Monthly  Annual                                                                  
|View History:                                                                                   
|                                                                                                
|Price of Rio Grande, TX Natural Gas Pipeline Exports to Mexico (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet)
|                                                                                                
|                                                                                                
|Price of Rio Grande, TX Natural Gas Pipeline Exports to Mexico (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet)
|                                                                                                

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|2010's                                                                                                                            |        |        |        | --     | 4.42   | 2.85   | 2.76   | 3.47   | 3.68   | 2.78  
|2020's                                                                                                                            | 2.29   | 5.88   | 6.24   | 2.67   |        |        |        |        |        |       
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 7/31/2024                                                                                                          
|Next Release Date: 8/30/2024
<PAGE>
 
 
                                                                 Exhibit 24.1(e)

                               POWER OF ATTORNEY
                               -----------------

     The undersigned certifies that he is a Director of Unisource Worldwide, 
Inc. ("Unisource").

     The undersigned hereby appoints each of Hugh G. Moulton and Thomas A. 
Decker as his attorneys-in-fact, each with the power of substitution, to 
execute, on his behalf the foregoing Report on Form 10-K, and any and all 
amendments thereto, for filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission 
("SEC"), and to do all such other acts and execute all such other documents 
which said attorney may deem necessary or desirable.

     Dated this 17th day of December, 1997

                                            /s/ James W. Stratton
                                            ---------------------------
                                                James W. Stratton

                                      57
#### Robins v. Freeman 64

07/27/2016

229 MAL (2016)

64

. Justice MUNDY did not participate in the consideration or decision of this matter.

Denied

Pa.Super., 144 A.3d 188
# Paul Riggs joins the PaCE program

/ Published Dec. 4, 2019
BATTLE CREEK, Mich., 
                Paul Riggs                            Paul Riggs is assigned to the DLA Pathways to Career Excellence (PaCE) Program as a Property Disposal Specialist with Environmental duties. Paul comes from Disposition Services Norfolk, where he was a Material Handler and Identifier.            SHARE IMAGE:Download ImageImage DetailsPhoto By: Jace ArmstrongVIRIN: 191203-D-OS362-007Paul Riggs is assigned to the DLA Pathways to Career Excellence Program as a Property Disposal Specialist with Environmental duties.

Paul comes from Disposition Services Norfolk, where he was a Material Handler and Identifier. Prior to DLA, he worked as a Warehouse Technician for Workforce Resources Inc. where he was responsible for receiving and processing Coast Guard “F” condition items for repair or disposal. He also served a distinguished 20 year career in the United States Navy retiring in 2013 as a Weapons Supply Supervisor. 

Paul is married to his wife Chrissy and they have thee children; Tora (age 14), Aiden (age 10), and Ethyn (age 7).

Paul enjoys spending time with his family by going on adventure's and exploring the outdoors along with their two Golden Retrievers, Punkin and Noel.
#### Edward Heegan, Respondent, v United International Insurance Company, Appellant, 1840 Pub, Inc., Doing Business as Last Second Saloon, et al., Respondents, et al., Defendant.

[767 NYS2d 861]—

In an action, inter alia, for a judgment declaring that the defendant United International Insurance Company is obligated to defend and indemnify the defendant 1840 Pub, Inc., doing business as Last Second Saloon, in an underlying personal injury action entitled *Heegan v 1840 Pub,*pending in the Supreme Court, Kings County, under Index No. 30940/97, the defendant United International Insurance Company appeals from an order and judgment (one paper) of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Belen, J.), dated September 10, 2002, which, in effect, denied its motion for summary judgment, and, upon searching the rec*404ord, granted summary judgment to the plaintiff and declared that it is obligated to defend and indemnify the defendant 1840 Pub, Inc., doing business as Last Second Saloon, in the underlying personal injury action, and granted the cross motion of the defendant John Paterno, Inc., for summary judgment.

Ordered that the appeal from so much of the order and judgment as granted the cross motion is dismissed, as the appellant is not aggrieved by that portion of the order *(see*CPLR 5511); and it is further,

Ordered that the order and judgment is affirmed insofar as reviewed; and it is further,

Ordered that one bill of costs is awarded to the respondents appearing separately and filing separate briefs.

The Supreme Court properly searched the record and granted summary judgment to the plaintiff *(see*CPLR 3212 [b]; *Zuckerman v City of New York,*49 NY2d 557 [1980]; *Vanegas v Nationwide Mut. Fire Ins. Co.,*282 AD2d 671 [2001]).

Insurance Law § 3420 (d) requires that an insurer “give written notice as soon as is reasonably possible” of a denial of coverage. In this case, the lateness of the notice of occurrence given by the defendant 1840 Pub, Inc., doing business as Last Second Saloon (hereinafter the insured), to the defendant United International Insurance Company (hereinafter the insurer), which was the asserted reason for the denial of coverage, was evident on the face of the complaint in the underlying action *(see Wasserheit v New York Cent. Mut. Fire Ins. Co.,*271 AD2d 439 [2000]; *Matter of Nationwide Mut. Ins. Co. v Steiner,*199 AD2d 507 [1993]). To the extent that an investigation was necessary to determine if the insured had a reasonable excuse for its tardiness, the insurer provided no explanation for its own delay in promptly commencing such an investigation *(see Hartford Ins. Co. v County of Nassau,*46 NY2d 1028, 1030 [1979]; *cf. Generali-U.S. Branch v Rothschild,*295 AD2d 236 [2002]; *Farmbrew Realty Corp. v Tower Ins. Co. of N.Y.,*289 AD2d 284 [2001]; *2540 Assoc. v Assicurazioni Generali,*271 AD2d 282 [2000]; *see also First Fin. Ins. Co. v Jetco Contr. Corp.,*1 NY3d 64 [2003]). Accordingly, the insurer must defend and indemnify the insured in the underlying personal injury action.

The insurer’s remaining contentions are without merit. Ritter, J.P., Florio, Smith and H. Miller, JJ., concur.
**EXHIBIT 10.50**
**TERMINATION AGREEMENT**
     This Termination Agreement (“Agreement”) is made and entered into as of the 3rd day of May,2005 (“Effective Date”) by and between AESP, Inc. (“AESP”), a Florida Corporation, andDaidone-Steffens, LLC, a Pennsylvania Limited Liability Company (“Daidone”).
     **WHEREAS**, AESP and Daidone are parties to that certain License Agreement dated December 31,2003 (“License Agreement”), and
     **WHEREAS,**AESP and Daidone have agreed that the License Agreement shall be terminated effectiveas of the Effective Date.
     **NOW, THEREFORE,**in consideration of the foregoing, the parties hereto agree as follows:
 1.  The License Agreement is hereby terminated, effective as of the Effective Date. As ofsuch date, the parties hereby release each other from any and all obligations under theLicense Agreement.  2.  AESP and Daidone hereby fully and forever release, acquit, discharge and hold oneanother harmless from any and all, and all manner of, actions and causes of action,claims, suits, costs, debts, sums of money, claims and demands, presently known orunknown, whatsoever in law or equity or otherwise, which AESP or Daidone ever had, now hasor may now have, or will have in the future, by reason of any matter, cause or thingwhatsoever, from the beginning of the world and all times thereafter, including withoutlimitation all matters arising out of the License Agreement.  3.  This agreement may not be modified, amended, supplemented, cancelled, or discharged,except by written agreement executed by all parties.  4.  This Agreement contains the entire understanding of the parties in respect of itssubject matter and supercedes all prior agreements and understandings (oral or written)between or among the parties with respect to such subject matter.  5.  The rights and obligations of this agreement shall bind and inure to the benefit ofthe parties and their respective successors and assigns.
**[Signatures appear on following page]**
 

 

     **IN WITNESS WHEREOF,**the parties have executed this Agreement the day and year first abovewritten.      For AESP, Inc.
#### In the Matter of New York State Division of Human Rights et al., Petitioners, v SUV Production, Inc., Respondent.

[52 NYS3d 94]

*524Application pursuant to Executive Law § 298 to enforce petitioner New York State Division of Human Rights’ (DHR) order, dated December 19, 2008, which, upon finding that the complaints of petitioners Rafael Perez and Leopoldo Rivera for employment discrimination and hostile work environment in violation of the New York State Human Rights Law had been proven, awarded Perez three months of back pay in the amount of $7,098, awarded Rivera three months of back pay in the amount of $3,816, and awarded each complainant $5,000 for mental anguish and humiliation (transferred to this Court by order of Supreme Court, New York County [Geoffrey D. Wright, J.], entered August 21, 2015), unanimously confirmed, without costs.

DHR’s findings are supported by substantial evidence (see *generally 300 Gramatan Ave. Assoc. v State Div. of Human Rights,*45 NY2d 176 [1978]). The hearing testimony amply demonstrated that respondent discriminated against Perez and Rivera on account of their national origin and subjected them to a hostile work environment.

The awards of back pay and compensatory damages for mental anguish are proper under the circumstances presented *(see*Executive Law § 297 [4] [c] [ii], [iii]; *Matter of Mize v State Div. of Human Rights,*33 NY2d 53, 56 [1973]; *Matter of New York State Div. of Human Rights v Neighborhood Youth & Family Servs.,*102 AD3d 491 [1st Dept 2013]).

Concur — Acosta, J.P., Renwick, Manzanet-Daniels, Kapnick and Webber, JJ.
No. 12-7818.

#### A. P. *v.*J. M. M.

Super. Ct. N. J., App. Div. Certiorari denied.
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATIONS OF CEO AND CFO PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

I, Tom W. Olofson, Chief Executive Officer of Epiq Systems, Inc. (the "Company"), hereby certify pursuant to
Section 1350, of chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code, and Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge, (1) the annual
report on Form 10-K of the Company to which this Exhibit is attached (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934, and (2) the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

/s/ TOM
W. OLOFSON 
Tom W. Olofson

Date:
March 1, 2010

I,
Elizabeth M. Braham, Chief Financial Officer of Epiq Systems, Inc. (the "Company"), hereby certify pursuant to Section 1350, of chapter 63 of title 18,
United States Code, and Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge, (1) the annual report on Form 10-K of the Company to which
this Exhibit is attached (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and (2) the information contained in the Report
fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

/s/ ELIZABETH
M. BRAHAM
Elizabeth M. Braham

Date:
March 1, 2010

---



QuickLinks
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

Mc KENZIE DANIELS,

Plaintiff

- Appellant,

v. PATRICK R. DONAHOE, Postmaster U.S. Postal Service,

Defendant

- Appellee. No. 14

- 56967

D.C. No. 2:14

- cv
- 06731

- JFW

- PJW

MEMORANDUM *

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California John F. Walter, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted September 13, 2016 **

Before: HAWKINS, N.R. SMITH, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges.

M cKenzie Daniels appeals pro se from the district court’s order dismissing
his employment action alleging violations of Title VII and the Age Discrimination
in Employment Act (“ADEA”) , and breach of implied contract. 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

SEP 21 2016
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLER K U.S. COURT OF APPEAL S2 14

- 56967

jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a dismissal for failure to

exhaust administrative remedies

. Vinieratos v. United States , 939 F.2d 762, 768
(9th Cir. 1991)

. We reverse and remand.
Dismissal of Daniels’ action for failure to exhaust was premature at the
pleading stage because it is not obvious from the face of the complaint and
attached exhibits when Daniels became aware of the alleged discriminatory acts

a nd, therefore, whether Daniels’ contact with an E qual E mployment O pportunity
counselor was timely. See Kraus v. Presidio Tr

. Facilities Div

. /Residential Mgmt.

Branch , 572 F.3d 1039, 1046 n.7 (9th Cir. 2009) (“Whether a plaintiff in a Title
VII action has timely exhausted her administrative remedies is an affirmative
defense, [so] the defendant bears the burden of pleading and p roving it.” (citation
and internal quotation marks omitted)); see also Rivera v. Peri & So n s Farms, Inc. ,
735 F.3d 892 , 902 (9th Cir. 2013) (“[P ]laintiffs ordinarily need not plead on the
subject of an a nticipated affirmative defense. When an affirmative defense is
obvious on the face of a complaint, however, a defendant can raise that defense in

a motion to dismiss.” (citation and internal quotation marks omitted) ).
Because we are remanding, w e do not address the merits of Daniels’ breach
of implied contr act claim , which the district court may address in the first instance

.3 14

- 56967

We treat Daniels’ October 9, 2015 filing as both a request to supplement the
opening brief and a supplement to the opening brief , and we deny the request as

unnecessary.

REVERSED and REMANDED.