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

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JAN-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUL-31-1997
<CASH>                                          28,732
<SECURITIES>                                         3
<RECEIVABLES>                                    1,472
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     72,670
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               114,031
<PP&E>                                          21,631
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (4,308)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 140,870
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           49,372
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           103
<OTHER-SE>                                      83,255
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   140,870
<SALES>                                         63,773
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                77,884
<CGS>                                           48,959
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   28,748
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               (238)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    415
<INCOME-TAX>                                       185
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                230
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       230
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.02
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 146 (Tuesday, August 3, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Page 41882]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-16482]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration


Availability of Record of Decision for the Environmental Impact 
Statement (EIS) for the Proposed LaGuardia Access Improvement Project 
at LaGuardia Airport (LGA), New York City, Queens County, New York; 
Correction

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of 
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Notice of Availability for Record of Decision; correction.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This notice corrects the Notice of Availability (NOA) for the 
Record of Decision for the Final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) 
for the proposed LaGuardia Airport (LGA) Access Improvement Project. 
The original NOA was published in the Federal Register on July 23, 2021 
and included an incorrect statement.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Andrew Brooks, Environmental 
Program Manager, Eastern Regional Office, AEA-610, Federal Aviation 
Administration, 1 Aviation Plaza, Jamaica, NY 11434. Telephone: 718-
553-2511.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Correction

    In the NOA FR Doc. 2021-15704, on page 39098 in the issue of July 
23, 2021, make the following correction in the Supplementary 
Information section. On page 39098, the first paragraph following the 
bulleted list describing the determination in the Record of Decision is 
updated as follows.
    The following text is removed from the NOA:

    This ROD also presents the decision of the NPS, as cooperating 
agency in the Final EIS, to approve a partial conversion of 0.5 
acres of parklands subject to the Land and Water Conservation Fund 
(LWCF) Act in Flushing Meadows-Corona Park, as well as to approve a 
Temporary Non-Conforming Use (TNCU) of 1.2 acres of parkland subject 
to the LWCF Act.

    It is replaced with the following text:

    The Port Authority will be responsible for completion of all 
necessary approvals related to the conversion of property under the 
Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) Act, including acquisition 
and development of the replacement property once the Port Authority 
identifies suitable replacement property that meets LWCF conversion 
requirements. The Port Authority will develop replacement property 
in coordination with New York City Department of Parks and 
Recreation and New York State Department of Parks, Recreation and 
Historic Preservation, subject to the approval of the National Park 
Service.

    Issued in Jamaica, New York, July 29, 2021.
Patricia Henn,
Manager, Planning and Programming Branch, Airports Division, Eastern 
Region.
[FR Doc. 2021-16482 Filed 8-2-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
### NUMBER 13 - 1 9 - 00 100 - C V COURT OF APPEALS THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

IN R E DENNIS W. BERRY, MARVIN G. BERRY, BAY INC., BERRY GP, INC. D/B/A BERRY CONTRACTING AND BERRY CONTRACTING, LP D/B/A BAY LTD

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus.

ORDER
Before Chief Justice Contreras and Justices Longoria and Perkes Per Curiam Order

Relator s Dennis W. Berry, Marvin G. Berry, Bay Inc., Berry GP, Inc. d/b/a Berry Contracting and Berry Contracting, LP d/b/a Bay Ltd, f iled a petition for writ of mandamus and motion for emergency stay in the above cause on March 8, 2019

. Through this original pro ceeding, relator s seek to compel the trial court to vacate the March 4, 2019 “Order Granting Plaintiffs’ Motion for Substituted Service of Allen L. Berry.” Through their motion for emergency stay, relators seek to stay the March 4, 2019 order pending

reso lution of this original proceeding.2

The Court, having examined and fully considered the motion for emergency stay , is of the opinion that the motion should be granted

. The motion for emergency stay is GRANTED and the trial court ’s order of March 4, 2019 is ordered STAYED pending further order of this Court, or until the case is finally decided. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P . 52.10(b) (“Unless vacated or modified, an order granting temporary relief is effective until the case is finally decided.”).
T he Court requ ests that the real part ies in interest , Kenneth L. Berry, individually and Kenneth L. Berry in a derivative capacity for Skyeagle, Inc. , or any others whose interest would be directly affected by the relief sought, file a response to the petition for
writ of mandamus on or before the expiration of ten days from the date of this order. See
id. R

. 52.2, 52.4, 52.8. IT IS SO ORDERED. PER CURIAM
D elivered and filed the 11th day of Ma rch , 201 9

.
#### Town of Oyster Bay, Appellant, v J.D. Posillico, Inc., et al., Respondents.

[942 NYS2d 806]

In an action to recover damages for continuing public nuisance, the plaintiff appeals, as limited by its brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Murphy, J), entered January 5, 2011, as (1), upon renewal, in effect, vacated so much of its prior order entered April 9, 2010, as denied that branch of the motion of the defendant J.D. Posillico, Inc., which was pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) (5) to dismiss the complaint insofar as asserted against it as time-barred, and thereupon granted that branch of the motion, and (2) granted the separate motion of the defendant Lizza Industries, Inc., for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against it as time-barred.

Ordered that the order entered January 5, 2011, is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with one bill of costs.

The plaintiff alleges that, pursuant to a contract with Nassau County, the defendants completed certain sewer construction work in 1978, and that defects in the construction work constitute and contribute to a continuing public nuisance. The action is time-barred for the reasons stated in the companion case of *Village of Lindenhurst v J.D. Posillico, Inc.*(94 AD3d 1101 [2012] [decided herewith]).

The plaintiffs contentions relating to alleged statutory violations are not properly before this Court. Rivera, J.E, Dillon, Angiolillo and Leventhal, JJ., concur.
# C_2006326EN.01000502.xml

| 30.12.2006 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 326/5 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.12.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 326/5

---

Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 9 November 2006 — Commission of the European Communities v Kingdom of Belgium

(Case C-433/04) (1)

1

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Articles 49 EC and 50 EC - Freedom to provide services - Activities in the construction sector - Prevention of tax fraud in the construction sector - National legislation requiring the withholding of 15 % on payments to contracting partners not registered in Belgium - National legislation imposing joint and several liability for the tax debts of contracting partners not registered in Belgium)

(2006/C 326/11)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: D. Triantafyllou, Agent)

Applicant:

Defendant: Kingdom of Belgium (represented by: E. Dominkovits, Agent, and by B. van de Walle de Ghelcke, avocat,)

Defendant:

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Breach of Articles 49 EC and 50 EC — National legislation requiring principals and contractors, on pain of a fine, to withhold 15 % of the amount billed by contracting partners not registered in Belgium and to pay the sum withheld to the Belgian authorities, in order to ensure that the tax debts of those contracting partners are paid — Joint and several liability of principals and contractors for the tax debts of their contracting partners who are not registered

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Declares that, by obliging principals and contractors who have recourse to foreign contracting partners not registered in Belgium to withhold 15 % of the sum payable for work carried out and by imposing on those principals and contractors joint and several liability for the tax debts of such contracting partners, the Kingdom of Belgium has failed to fulfil its obligations under Articles 49 EC and 50 EC; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Declares that, by obliging principals and contractors who have recourse to foreign contracting partners not registered in Belgium to withhold 15 % of the sum payable for work carried out and by imposing on those principals and contractors joint and several liability for the tax debts of such contracting partners, the Kingdom of Belgium has failed to fulfil its obligations under Articles 49 EC and 50 EC;

| 2. | Orders the Kingdom of Belgium to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders the Kingdom of Belgium to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 300, 04.12.2004.

1

---
#### Louis J. Vasile, Respondent, v Marianne B. Vasile, Also Known as Marianne B. Piccirillo, Appellant.

Order unanimously modified, on the law, and, as modified, affirmed, without costs, in accordance with the following memorandum: The denial of visitation to a noncustodial parent constitutes such a drastic remedy that it should be ordered only when there are compelling reasons, and there must be substantial evidence that such visitation is detrimental to the children’s welfare *(De Pinto v De Pinto,*98 AD2d 985; *Shipp v Gaglia,*97 AD2d 945; *Parker v Ford,*89 AD2d 806; *Chirumbolo v Chirumbolo,*75 AD2d 992, 993; *Farhi v Farhi,*64 AD2d 840; *Hotze v Hotze,*57 AD2d 85, *Iv denied*42 NY2d 805). On this record, we find the court abused its discretion by denying defendant visitation with her children, because no evidence was presented to support a conclusion that visitation with defendant is detrimental to the children’s welfare. The court based its conclusion that the children were in danger of being harmed when they visited their mother’s home on a report that, on one occasion, defendant’s boyfriend beat her and made verbal threats to harm the children. The children were not present when the alleged incident occurred. There was no evidence that defendant’s boyfriend ever engaged in assaultive behavior toward the children. We also note that defendant’s violation of a prior court order prohibiting her boyfriend from returning the children to their father after visitation is insufficient reason to deny her visitation. Visitation may not be denied solely for reasons unrelated to the welfare of the children *(Farhi v Farhi,*64 AD2d 840, 841).

The visitation arrangements stipulated to between the parties on August 2, 1984 and incorporated into a temporary order of the court dated September 5, 1984 should be reinstated.

We note that the order appealed from and a series of prior orders involving the dispute between the parties are all designated as temporary orders. On the record before us we are unable to determine why there has been no order finally and conclusively determining the custodial and visitation rights of *1022the parties and the children. We urge the parties and the court to proceed with dispatch to arrive at a final resolution of this matter. Further, applications and hearings in this case shall be conducted before a Justice other than the one from whose order the present appeal is taken. (Appeal from order of Supreme Court, Cayuga County, Contiguglia, J.—visitation.) Present—Callahan, J. P., Doerr, Boomer, Pine and Schnepp, JJ.
Case: 1:01-cv-05182 Document #: 15 Filed: 11/27/02 Page 1 of 6 PageID #:57

Case: 1:01-cv-05182 Document #: 15 Filed: 11/27/02 Page 2 of 6 PageID #:58

Case: 1:01-cv-05182 Document #: 15 Filed: 11/27/02 Page 3 of 6 PageID #:59

Case: 1:01-cv-05182 Document #: 15 Filed: 11/27/02 Page 4 of 6 PageID #:60

Case: 1:01-cv-05182 Document #: 15 Filed: 11/27/02 Page 5 of 6 PageID #:61

Case: 1:01-cv-05182 Document #: 15 Filed: 11/27/02 Page 6 of 6 PageID #:62
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan

October 31, 2007 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice
133697 Michael F. Cavanagh Elizabeth A. Weaver Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan WOLVERINE WORLD WIDE, INC., Plaintiff-Appellant, Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markman, Justices

v SC: 133697 COA: 260330 Kent CC: 01-011763-CK LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant,

and

ONEBEACON INSU RANCE COMPANY f/k/a CGU INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant-Appellee.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the March 8, 2007 judgment of the Court of Appeals is consid ered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.

p1024 I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

October 31, 2007

Clerk
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                                              5
<LEGEND>
                      1998 Financial Data Schedule
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                 0001000779
<NAME>                Consolidated Delivery & Logistics, Inc.
<MULTIPLIER>                                        1,000
<CURRENCY>                                          U.S. 
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                   DEC-31-1998
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                       1
<CASH>                                              295
<SECURITIES>                                          0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    26,356
<ALLOWANCES>                                      1,865
<INVENTORY>                                           0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 27,346
<PP&E>                                           16,551
<DEPRECIATION>                                    9,921
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   52,088
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            31,542
<BONDS>                                             890
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                 0
<PREFERRED>                                           0
<COMMON>                                              7
<OTHER-SE>                                       11,400
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     52,088
<SALES>                                               0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                185,739
<CGS>                                                 0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   142,062
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                      0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                  1,151
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                1,246
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   3,727
<INCOME-TAX>                                      1,416
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               2,311
<DISCONTINUED>                                        0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                       0
<CHANGES>                                             0
<NET-INCOME>                                      2,311
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                       .35
<EPS-DILUTED>                                       .34
        

</TABLE>
# Official Journal C 228/2022

| | ISSN 1977-091X |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 228 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 6513 June 2022 |

ISSN 1977-091X

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 228

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 6513 June 2022

---

| Contents | page |
| --- | --- |
| | II   Information |
| | INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES |
| | European Commission |
| 2022/C 228/01 | Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.10746 – MORGAN STANLEY / BAWAG / GYLE JV) (
  1
  ) | 1 |
| 2022/C 228/02 | Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.10700 – HY24 / ENAGAS / ENAGAS RENOVABLE) (
  1
  ) | 2 |
| 2022/C 228/03 | Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.10662 – ATLANTIA / YUNEX) (
  1
  ) | 3 |
| 2022/C 228/04 | Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.10515 – ILIAD / UPC POLSKA) (
  1
  ) | 4 |
| 2022/C 228/05 | Withdrawal of notification of a concentration (Case M.10658 – NORSK HYDRO / ALUMETAL) (
  1
  ) | 5 |

Contents

page

II   Information

INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

European Commission

2022/C 228/01

Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.10746 – MORGAN STANLEY / BAWAG / GYLE JV) (
  1
  )

1

1

2022/C 228/02

Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.10700 – HY24 / ENAGAS / ENAGAS RENOVABLE) (
  1
  )

1

2

2022/C 228/03

Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.10662 – ATLANTIA / YUNEX) (
  1
  )

1

3

2022/C 228/04

Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.10515 – ILIAD / UPC POLSKA) (
  1
  )

1

4

2022/C 228/05

Withdrawal of notification of a concentration (Case M.10658 – NORSK HYDRO / ALUMETAL) (
  1
  )

1

5

---

| | IV   Notices |
| --- | --- |
| | NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES |
| | European Commission |
| 2022/C 228/06 | Euro exchange rates — 10 June 2022 | 6 |

IV   Notices

NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

European Commission

2022/C 228/06

Euro exchange rates — 10 June 2022

6

---

| | V   Announcements |
| --- | --- |
| | PROCEDURES RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF COMPETITION POLICY |
| | European Commission |
| 2022/C 228/07 | Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.10720 – IVANHOE CAMBRIDGE / MUBADALA / DUTCH RESIDENTIAL INVESTMENTS IV) – Candidate case for simplified procedure (
  1
  ) | 7 |

V   Announcements

PROCEDURES RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF COMPETITION POLICY

European Commission

2022/C 228/07

Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.10720 – IVANHOE CAMBRIDGE / MUBADALA / DUTCH RESIDENTIAL INVESTMENTS IV) – Candidate case for simplified procedure (
  1
  )

1

7

---

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | (1)   Text with EEA relevance. |

---

(1)   Text with EEA relevance.

1

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM LUMISYS
INCORPORATED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS AT DECEMBER 31, 1998 AND CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF INCOME FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1998 AND IS QUALIFIED
IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                        10651000
<SECURITIES>                                   7007000
<RECEIVABLES>                                  4923000
<ALLOWANCES>                                    717000
<INVENTORY>                                    4046000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                              27934000
<PP&E>                                         1657000
<DEPRECIATION>                                  904000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                30606000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          5292000
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         10000
<OTHER-SE>                                    25158000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                  30606000
<SALES>                                       24546000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                              24546000
<CGS>                                         11468000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                 11468000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                              12893000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                            (933000)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                1118000
<INCOME-TAX>                                    436000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             682000
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    682000
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.07
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.07
        

</TABLE>