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

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET, CONSOLIDATED INCOME STATEMENT, CONSOLIDATED 
STATEMENT OF CASH FLOWS AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH 
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                           5,696
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   21,207
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     24,650
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                60,629
<PP&E>                                          16,120
<DEPRECIATION>                                   1,406
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  93,071
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           23,917
<BONDS>                                              0
<COMMON>                                         5,617
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                         15
<OTHER-SE>                                      45,602
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    93,071
<SALES>                                         76,897
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                76,897
<CGS>                                           70,906
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   77,671
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   539
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,052
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  (774)
<INCOME-TAX>                                        48
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              (822)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (822)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.22)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.22)
        

</TABLE>
# United States Court of Appeals **For the Eighth Circuit**

___________________________ No. 15-3118

___________________________

Chris Erwin; T. Blake Mitchell lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiffs - Appellees
v. David Hudson, individually and in his offi cial capacity as a Police Officer in and for the City of Little Rock, Arkansas lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant Stuart Thomas, Chief of Police, individually and in his official capacity as Chief of Police for the Little Rock Police Depart ment; City of Little Rock, Arkansas; Ferneau, LLC; Donnie Ferneau; John Does, 1-10 lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant s

____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas - Little Rock

____________ Submitted: April 11, 2016 Filed: April 14, 2016 [Unpublished]

____________ Before WOLLMAN, BOWMAN, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges.

____________PER CURIAM. Little Rock Police Officer David Huds on challenges the district court’s 1 denial of summary judgment based on qualified immunity on an excessive-force claim raised by plaintiff Chris Erwin in a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. After careful review, see Shannon v. Koehler , 616 F.3d 855, 861 (8th Cir. 2010) (appellate court has jurisdiction to review denial of qualified immunity through interlocutory appeal under collateral order doctrine; appellate review in this circumstance is limited to determining whether conduct district c ourt found sufficiently supported for summary judgment purposes violated plaintiff’s clearly established rights); Krout v. Goemmer , 583 F.3d 557, 564 (8th Cir. 2009) (de novo review of legal issues is given to district court’s determination that defendant is not entitled to qualified immunity), we conclude denial was appropriate for th e reasons stated by the district court. The denial of qualified immunity is affirmed. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

______________________________

1 The Honorable James M. Moody Jr., United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas. -2-
No. 10-5365.

#### Gerard D. Grandoit, Petitioner v. Benjamin J. Gilson, et al.

562 U.S. 807, 131 S. Ct. 284,

178 L. Ed. 2d 8,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 7818.

October 4, 2010.

Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed in forma pauperis denied, and petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit dismissed. See Rule 39.8.
**AD Economic Evaluation**

Docket No . FAA - 2012 - 1128 Directorate ID : 2012 - SW - 064 - AD Helicopter Model: Eurocopter France Model EC225 Helicopters Number of Helicopters (U.S. Operators): 3 Helicopters in the US Registry . Reaso n : These actions are intended to detect a missing through - hole and prevent lift bearing failure and subsequent loss of control of the helicopter. Costs : Parts per Helicopter $554,204 Labor per Helicopter ( .5 work- hour x $ 8 5 /workhour for the inspection) ( 10 work- hours x $85/work- hour for the replacement) $ 43 $850 Other (Explain) Total Cost per Helicopter $ 43 for the inspection $555,054 for the replacement Total US Fleet Cost $129 for the inspection Executive Order 12866 : Could the AD be considered a “significant regulatory action?” Yes ( ) No (  ) DOT Regulatory

Policies and Procedures : Is the AD significant? Yes ( ) Explain Below No (  ) Regulatory

Flexibility

Act : Will the AD have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities? Yes ( ) No (  ) Project Engineer : Rao Edupuganti
164 A.3d 389

#### STATE OF NEW JERSEY, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, v. JOSE GOMEZ, DEFENDANT-PETITIONER.

March 16, 2017

ON PETITION FOR CERTIFICATION

To the Appellate Division, Superior Court:

A petition for certification of the judgment in [ A-XXXXXX-XX ] having been submitted to this Court, and the Court having considered the same;

It is ORDERED that the petition for certification is denied.
2017-1244.

#### Bank of Am., N.A. v. Brown.

Cuyahoga App. No. 105954. On motion for stay of eviction, stay of sheriff sale, and to restore all utilities back into movant’s name. Motion denied.
# Finance employee praised for ingenuity

/ Published Nov. 18, 2019
Battle Creek, Michigan, 
When he could not present an award to a DLA Disposition Services employee in person, he used video conference to reach out – sort of – to make the presentation.

Defense Logistics Agency Director Army Lt. Gen. Darrell Williams presented Bryan Mattheis, a systems accountant for business analysis and integration with DLA Finance at DLA Disposition Services, with a “Ya Done Good” awards solutions affecting financial procedures and systemic concerns. 

When DLA Disposition Services took two weeks in September for a required annual inventory of all items in the organization’s possession, getting the on-site inventory to match the numbers shown in  financial and property accounting systems was essential, according to Annual Inventory Project Manager Mike Rogers. Mattheis helped achieve that by using more than a hundred different spreadsheets to validate every transaction researched by Reconciliation Team.

“We were their failsafe,” Mattheis said.

Item information can be tracked differently in DLA’s Distribution Standard System and Enterprise Business System. Mattheis explained that one system may track an item by the box while the other counts the same thing by the dozen.

“Most transactions turned out okay, but we did catch more than 100 errors, which isn’t bad when you are talking about hundreds of thousands of items,” Mattheis said. “Having the team go back and reconcile those conflicts improved our accuracy rate.”

Mattheis was also praised for singlehandedly creating ways designed to help the Public Sales Directorate understand finance and reduce their accounts receivable.

“I found a way to show finance information to our public sales personnel more clearly since they are not trained in finance,” Mattheis said. “I built a bridge between our two languages.”

That bridge helped close out a large commercial venture contract as the outgoing vendor was paid monies still owed.

“I had to systematically apply a lot of credits that were due to the contractor when information about an item was incorrect and required a reimbursement,” Mattheis explained. “I had to create a process to apply them.”

That system cut the accounts receivable balance by 90%, from $39 million to $3.8 million.
# Daylight saving time: Fall back this Sunday

/ Published Nov. 4, 2021
FORT BELVOIR, Va., 
Daylight saving time begins the second Sunday in March and ends the first Sunday in November, when clocks are adjusted one hour back to standard time.

The United States adopted daylight saving time when the Uniform Time Act of 1966 standardized time zones and daylight saving practices across the United States. The act allowed states to pass laws exempting themselves. The only states that don’t observe daylight saving time are Hawaii and most of Arizona. It’s also not observed by these U.S. territories: American Somoa, Guam, Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands.

Defense Logistics Agency Installation Management fire officials use this time to remind employees to change batteries in smoke detectors and other home safety devices.

The National Fire Alarm and Signaling Code requires that a working smoke detector be installed in and outside every room used for sleeping, as well as on every level of the home including the basement. Homes that use wood or natural gas for fuel should also have a least one carbon monoxide detector.
**Exhibit 23.1**
**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**
We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on Form S-8 (Registration No.333-123011, 333-123009 and 333-164686) and in the Registration Statements on Form S-3 (333-144349 and 333-129879) ofour report dated October 14, 2010, with respect to the consolidated financial statements of KMG Chemicals, Inc. (the“Company”) as of July 31, 2010 and 2009, and for each of the three years in the period ended July 31, 2010 included inthe Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended July 31, 2010.
Houston, Texas
II

103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. 1953

To amend the Flood Control Act of 1968 to prohibit the imposition of

certain fees for the use of developed recreation sites and facilities, and

for other purposes.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

MARCH 21 (legislative day, FEBRUARY 22), 1993

Mr. FORD introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to

the Committee on Environment and Public Works

A BILL

To amend the Flood Control Act of 1968 to prohibit the

imposition of certain fees for the use of developed recreation sites and facilities, and for other purposes.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. RECREATIONAL USER FEES.

4 (a) FEES FOR USE OF DEVELOPED RECREATION

5 SITES AND FACILITIES.—Section 210 of the Flood Con6 trol Act of 1968 (16 U.S.C. 460d–3) is amended—

7 (1) by striking ‘‘(a) PROHIBITION ON ADMIS8 SION FEES.—’’;
2

•S 1953 IS

1 (2) by inserting after the first sentence the fol2 lowing: ‘‘User fees collected at the lakes and res3 ervoirs referred to in the preceding sentence—

4 ‘‘(1) shall be collected by officers and employees

5 of the United States only from users of highly devel6 oped facilities requiring the continuous presence of

7 personnel for the maintenance and supervision of the

8 facilities; and

9 ‘‘(2) may not be collected for access to or use

10 of water areas, undeveloped or lightly developed

11 shoreland, picnic grounds, overlook sites, scenic

12 drives, or boat launching ramps where no mechani13 cal or hydraulic equipment is provided.’’; and

14 (3) by striking subsection (b).

15 (b) CAMPSITES.—Section 4(b) of the Land and

16 Water Conservation Fund Act of 1965 (16 U.S.C. 460l–

17 6a(b)) is amended by inserting before the last sentence

18 the following: ‘‘At each lake or reservoir under the juris19 diction of the Corps of Engineers where camping is per20 mitted, the Federal agency shall provide at least 1 primi21 tive campground, containing designated campsites, sani22 tary facilities, and vehicular access, with respect to which

23 no charge is imposed.’’.

Æ
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF PHYSICIANS SPECIALTY FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31,
1998 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR  
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                       4,925,501
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                               16,246,944
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            22,951,515
<PP&E>                                       8,861,850
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              63,685,155
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        4,563,773
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         9,152
<OTHER-SE>                                  47,798,529
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                63,685,155
<SALES>                                     61,601,187
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            61,601,187
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               53,330,104
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                54,169
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              8,216,914
<INCOME-TAX>                                 3,206,794
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          5,010,120
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 5,010,120
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.62
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.60
        

</TABLE>
# DLA supports White House effort to supply COVID-19 tests nationwide

/ Published April 27, 2021
NEW CUMBERLAND, Pa., 
Defense Logistics Agency Distribution is working with the Department of Health and Human Services and Defense Department to provide over 8 million over-the-counter, at-home COVID-19 tests nationwide.

The test is the first to receive emergency-use authorization from the Food and Drug Administration and is suitable for ages 2 and up. It provides results in 15 minutes via a smartphone application.

DOD announced the effort in a Feb. 1 statement indicating it coordinated with HHS to award $231.8 million to Ellume USA LLC to increase production of the home tests in support of a White House effort.

“The tests will be distributed across the U.S. in accordance with the National Strategy for the COVID-19 Response and Pandemic Preparedness policy established Jan. 21,” the statement said.

The tests are being shipped from the manufacturer in Brisbane, Australia, to a U.S.-based freight forwarder in Texas, then on to DLA Distribution Susquehanna, Pennsylvania, where workers are receipting, storing, monitoring and distributing the tests to HHS and DOD customers. Temperature and humidity-level monitoring devices are being used to ensure test validity during shipping.

The first 100,000 tests were delivered to DDSP’s medical storage building April 12 and have been shipped to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta and Oklahoma City Area Indian Health Service in Oklahoma.
#### In the Matter of Nekia C., a Child Alleged to be Permanently Neglected. Kevin E.C., Appellant; Saint Dominic’s Home, Respondent; Laurel S.McC., Respondent.

[63 NYS3d 234]-

*432Order, Family Court, Bronx County (Joan L. Piccirillo, J.), entered on or about April 1, 2016, which to the extent appealed from, after a fact-finding hearing, found that respondent father Kevin E.C. permanently neglected the subject child, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Although this nondispositional order is not appealable as of right, since this is a case based on permanent neglect (see Family Ct Act § 1112 [a]; *Matter of Alyssa L. [Deborah K.],*93 AD3d 1083 [3d Dept 2012]; *Matter of Tasha E.,*161 AD2d 226 [1st Dept 1990]), the finding of permanent neglect constitutes a “permanent and significant stigma” that may impact respondent’s status in future proceedings *(Matter of Latisha T’Keyah J. [Monie J.],*117 AD3d 1051, 1052 [2d Dept 2014]; see *also Matter of Joseph Benjamin P. [Allen P.],*81 AD3d 415 [1st Dept 2011], *lv denied*16 NY3d 710 [2011]). Accordingly, the Court, on its own motion, deems the notice of appeal to be a request for leave to appeal, and hereby grants leave to appeal.

Clear and convincing evidence in the record supports Family Court’s finding that the agency made diligent efforts to strengthen the parental relationship by scheduling visitation and providing referrals for services, to address the reason for the child’s placement into foster care, and respondent had failed, for more than a year, to plan for the return of the child.

The fact that respondent completed services does not preclude a finding of permanent neglect, since the record shows that he was unable to demonstrate the necessary parenting skills and failed to adequately plan for the subject child because of his inability to separate from the mother, who continued to suffer from untreated alcoholism (see *Matter of Leroy Simpson M. [Joanne M.],*122 AD3d 480 [1st Dept 2014]; *Matter of Kie Asia T. [Shaneene T.],*89 AD3d 528 [1st Dept 2011]; *Matter of John G., Jr. [John G.],*70 AD3d 419, 420 [1st Dept 2010]; Social Services Law § 384-b [7] [a], [f]). Respondent refused to acknowledge his failure to protect the child from the effects of the mother’s alcoholism that started, according to him, before the child’s birth, and continued up to the date of the petitions *(see Matter of John G., Jr.).*

Concur—Manzanet-Daniels, J.R, Andrias, Gische, Kern and Singh, JJ.
No. 10-5446.

#### Kimberly Albright-Lazzari, et vir, Petitioners v. Connecticut.

562 U.S. 807, 131 S. Ct. 300,

178 L. Ed. 2d 9,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 7682.

October 4, 2010.

Motion of petitioners for leave to proceed in forma pauperis denied, and petition for writ of certiorari to the Appellate Court of Connecticut dismissed. See Rule 39.8. As petitioner has repeatedly abused this Court’s process, the Clerk is directed not to accept any further petitions in noncriminal matters from petitioner unless the docketing fee required by Rule 38(a) is paid and petition submitted in compliance with Rule 33.1. See Martin v. District of Columbia Court of Appeals, 506 U.S. 1, 113 S. Ct. 397, 121 L. Ed. 2d 305 (1992) (per curiam).
45CSR14 PERMITS FOR CONSTRUCTION AND MA JOR MODIFICATION OF MAJOR STATIONARY SOURCES FOR THE PREVENTION OF SIGNIFICANT DETERIORATION OF AIR QUALITY RESPONSE TO COMMENTS On June 6, 2014, the Division of Air Quality (DAQ) commenced a thirty day public comment period and subsequently held a public hearing on July 7, 2014 to accept oral comments on proposed revisions to legislative rules 45C SR14. Written comments were also accepted through 6:00 PM on Monday, July 7, 2014. No commenter submitted written comments regarding proposed revisions to rule 45CSR14, and no commenter provided relevant verbal comment.

1
# Protecting our workforce – think OPSEC

/ Published Sept. 15, 2021
Richmond, Va. , 
The primary goal of the Defense Logistics Agency Intelligence’s Operations Security Program is to increase mission effectiveness by identifying and protecting critical information.

“Everyone who works at DLA has access to critical information that may reveal details about Defense Logistics Agency and military operations,” said Stephen Robinson, a security manager with DLA Intelligence who works on Defense Supply Center Richmond, Virginia.  “In the wrong hands, this information can be exploited and cause casualties, mission failure, or help to advance the goals of an adversary using our research and development or process improvement.”

Robinson said that DLA faces several threats from foreign intelligence services, terrorist organizations, criminals, and hackers.

He urged employees to take a moment to think about all the information they process each day.

“You are the first line of defense. If you don’t take steps to protect that information, it will be easily exploitable,” he said.

Common vulnerabilities include recycling paper.

“It may seem like a good idea, but those documents won’t be destroyed until it is too late,” he said.

Recycling is frequently sold to the highest bidder and there is no telling what will happen to the documents once they are out of government control. As a reminder, DLA Aviation has a User-Shred policy  (*access requires a DLA Common Access Card*) which states that if you print it, it is your responsibility to shred it.

In January 2021, DLA Intelligence introduced DLA Instruction: DLAi 5200.48, Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI)*(access requires a DLA Common Access Card*.) Items that are currently on the Aviation Critical Information List should now be considered as CUI. In addition, OPSEC falls under CUI categories of Intelligence and Provisional.  Under the Organization Index Grouping Intelligence, operations security is critical information determined to give evidence of the planning and execution of sensitive (frequently classified) government activities and for the Provisional grouping, operations security is unclassified information that could constitute an indicator of U.S. government intentions, capabilities, operations, activities or otherwise threaten/compromise operations security. This information can be found at CUI Categories | National Archives.

For additional guidance, employees may contact Stephen Robinson.
#### Jennifer Sanders, Respondent, v Mitchell Sanders, Appellant.

Submitted January 9, 2017;

decided March 28, 2017

*932Motion for leave to appeal dismissed upon the ground that the order sought to be appealed from does not finally determine the action within the meaning of the Constitution.