alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
U.S. flagAn official website of the United States government
                    Here's how you know **Official websites use .gov**
                            
                            A **.gov** website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
 **Secure .gov websites use HTTPS**
                            
                            A **lock** (                            
                              A locked padlock                                                      
                            
                            ) or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.


Menu Agricultural Research Service
						
                    U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
 Knipling-Bushland U.S. Livestock Insects Research Laboratory: Kerrville, TX
 close



    Research

                    Research Projects
                                    Publications
                                    Collaborations
                                    News
                People

                    Staff Listing
                                    Careers


        


                    Docs
                    Grand Challenge Synergies ProjectSearch small
                    Search
            
            ARS Home
                                About ARS
                                Contact Us




ARS Home Plains Area Kerrville, Texas Knipling-Bushland U.S. Livestock Insects Research Laboratory People







Matthew L Waldon

(Matt)    Biological Science Lab Technician (Insects)


Return to top


Connect with ARS Sign up


ARS Home
                            USDA.gov
                            Plain Writing
                            Policies & Links
                            Civil Rights Statements
                            FOIA
                            Accessibility Statement
                            Privacy Policy
                            Non-Discrimination Statement
                            Quality of Information
                            USA.gov
                            WhiteHouse.gov
#### In the Matter of Richard M. Pratt, Petitioner, v Edward V. Regan, as Comptroller of the State of New York, Respondent.

—Weiss, J.

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this court by order of the Supreme Court at *849Special Term, entered in Albany County) to review a determination of respondent which denied petitioner’s application for accidental disability retirement benefits.

On October 17, 1979, petitioner, employed as a fireman by the City of Rochester Fire Department, injured his left knee exiting a fire truck while responding to an emergency assistance call. He eventually required surgery and returned to light duty. On August 10, 1983, petitioner filed an application for accidental disability retirement benefits with the New York State Policemen’s and Firemen’s Retirement System. After a hearing, respondent disapproved the application, finding that the incident of October 17, 1979 did not constitute an accident within the context of Retirement and Social Security Law § 363. This CPLR article 78 proceeding was commenced to review that determination.

The case of *Matter of McCambridge v McGuire*(62 NY2d 563) instructs that our focus in resolving this dispute is not "on the petitioner’s job assignment [but rather] on the precipitating cause of injury” *(supra,*at p 567; *see, Matter of Rowe v Regan,*107 AD2d 967, 968). An injury emanating from risks inherent in an employee’s regular duties does not constitute an accident for present purposes *(see, Matter of Cummings v Regan,*107 AD2d 968, 969). The precipitating event must be "unexpected in nature” *(Matter of Rowe v Regan, supra,*p 968). At the hearing, petitioner testified that he had 27 years of experience in driving fire trucks, that he never had any previous difficulty getting into or out of a truck and that he was fully familiar with the truck he was driving on October 17, 1979. In describing the incident, petitioner noted that he was exiting the vehicle at normal speed and wearing the Fire Department’s approved safety shoes, but caught his right heel on the running board, lost his balance and came down on his left leg. His battalion chief observed that petitioner fell in a pothole 10 to 12 inches deep. Given this description, it becomes clear that petitioner’s injury did not result from any unusual or unexpected event, but rather from his own misstep in the routine process of exiting the fire truck. Unlike the factual scenario in *McCambridge*and *Rowe,*there was no intervening cause that precipitated the incident, such as wet pavement or the unexpected loss of support. Here, the day was dry and clear. Accordingly, respondent’s determination that petitioner had not sustained an accident within the meaning of Retirement and Social Security Law § 363 is supported by substantial evidence and should be confirmed.

Determination confirmed, and petition dismissed, without *850costs. Mahoney, P. J., Kane, Casey, Weiss and Levine, JJ., concur.
[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 148 (Thursday, August 5, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Page 42778]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-16710]


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

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service


Alaska Region Supplement to Forest Service Manual 2720: Special 
Uses; Outfitting and Guiding Permit for Strictly Point-To-Point 
Commercial Transportation To, From, and Within the Mendenhall Glacier 
Visitor Center Subunit of the Mendenhall Glacier Recreation Area

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Extension of comment period.

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

SUMMARY: The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Forest 
Service is seeking public comment on a proposed revision to a directive 
supplement that would require an outfitting and guiding permit for 
strictly point-to-point commercial transportation to, from, and within 
the Mendenhall Glacier Visitor Center subunit of the Mendenhall Glacier 
Recreation Area (Visitor Center subunit) in the Alaska Region of the 
Forest Service (Alaska Region). Comment is also requested on the 
revision to the Forest Service's approved information collection for 
outfitting and guiding permits.

DATES: The comment period for the proposed rule published June 24, 
2021, at 86 FR 33211, is extended. Comments should be received on or 
before August 27, 2021.

ADDRESSES: The proposed revision to the directive supplement is 
available at, and comments may be submitted electronically to, https://cara.ecosystem-management.org/Public/CommentInput?project=ORMS-2314. 
Written comments may be mailed to Jennifer Berger, Alaska Region Public 
Services Program Leader (RLM), P.O. Box 21628, Room 535b, Juneau, AK 
99802-1628. All timely comments, including names and addresses, will be 
placed in the record and will be available for public inspection and 
copying. The public may inspect comments received at https://cara.ecosystem-management.org/Public/ReadingRoom?project=ORMS-2314.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jennifer Berger, Alaska Region Public 
Services Program Leader, at 907-586-8843 or <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#3359565d5d5a5556411d51564154564173464057521d545c45"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="264c4348484f40435408444354414354665355424708414950">[email protected]</span></a>. 
Individuals using telecommunication devices for the hearing-impaired 
may call the Federal Information Relay Service at 800-877-8339 between 
8 a.m. and 8 p.m. Eastern Daylight Time, Monday through Friday.

    Dated: August 2, 2021.
Tina Johna Terrell,
Associate Deputy Chief, National Forest System.
[FR Doc. 2021-16710 Filed 8-4-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3411-15-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND**

**CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO**

**18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

Eachof the undersigned hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, inhis capacity as an officer of Force Protection, Inc. (the “Company”),that, to his knowledge, the Quarterly Report of the Company on Form 10-Q/Afor the period ended June 30, 2007, fully complies with the requirementsof Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934(15 U.S.C. § 78m or 78o(d)) and that the information contained in such reportfairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and resultsof operations of the Company. This written statement is being furnished to theSecurities and Exchange Commission as an exhibit to such Form 10-Q/A. Asigned original of this statement has been provided to the Company and will beretained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commissionor its staff upon request.

 

 
| Date:  September 30, 2008 | /s/ MICHAEL MOODY                                                       |
|--------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                           | **Michael Moody****President and  Chief Executive Officer**             |
|                           |                                                                    |
| Date:  September 30, 2008 | /s/ FRANCIS E. SCHEUERELL, JR.                                          |
|                           | **Francis E. Scheuerell, Jr.****Interim Chief  Financial Officer** |

 

Thisexhibit shall not be deemed “filed” for purposes of Section 18 of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934 or otherwise subject to the liabilities of thatSection, nor shall it be deemed incorporated by reference in any filings underthe Securities Act of 1933 or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, whether madebefore or after the date hereof and irrespective of any general incorporationlanguage in any filings.

 

----
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
     THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
HAGLER BAILLY, INC. UNAUDITED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE NINE
MONTHS ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 1997
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                         0001033693
<NAME>                        Hagler Bailly Inc
<MULTIPLIER>                  1                
<CURRENCY>                                     U.S DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                             DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                                JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                  SEP-30-1997
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                     1.000
<CASH>                                          1,996,983
<SECURITIES>                                            0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  25,487,635
<ALLOWANCES>                                    1,057,921
<INVENTORY>                                             0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               41,620,709
<PP&E>                                          4,178,655
<DEPRECIATION>                                  1,788,465
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 52,236,276
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          10,247,505
<BONDS>                                                 0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                   0
<PREFERRED>                                             0
<COMMON>                                           79,825
<OTHER-SE>                                     41,908,947
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   52,236,276
<SALES>                                        57,807,521
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               57,807,521
<CGS>                                          44,536,388
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  44,536,388
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                        0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                        0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                583,578
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 6,189,942
<INCOME-TAX>                                    2,228,608
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             3,961,334
<DISCONTINUED>                                          0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                         0
<CHANGES>                                               0
<NET-INCOME>                                    3,961,334
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0.55
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0.55
        


</TABLE>
**Exhibit31.1**

CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Tim Paterson-Brown,certify that:

1. I have reviewedthis annual report on Form 10-K of MGTCapital Investments, Inc (formerly Medicsight, Inc);

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not containany untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material factnecessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances underwhich such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements,and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in allmaterial respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flowsof the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I areresponsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures(as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrantand have:

(a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures,or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under oursupervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant,including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others withinthose entities, particularly during the period in which this report is beingprepared;

(b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’sdisclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusionsabout the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of theend of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

(c) Disclosed in this report any change in theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during theregistrant’s fourth fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter inthe case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonablylikely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting; and

5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and Ihave disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control overfinancial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee ofthe registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions):

(a) All significant deficiencies and materialweaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financialreporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’sability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

(b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involvesmanagement or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting.
|           | By:                      | /s/ TIM PATERSON  BROWN |   |
|----------------|--------------------------|-------------------------|--------|
|           | Tim  Paterson-Brown      |
|           | Chief Executive  Officer |
|           |
| March 28, 2007 |

 

E-2

----
Case: 1:01-cv-08876 Document #: 1 Filed: 11/16/01 Page 1 of 14 PageID #:1
Case: 1:01-cv-08876 Document #: 1 Filed: 11/16/01 Page 2 of 14 PageID #:2
Case: 1:01-cv-08876 Document #: 1 Filed: 11/16/01 Page 3 of 14 PageID #:3
Case: 1:01-cv-08876 Document #: 1 Filed: 11/16/01 Page 4 of 14 PageID #:4
Case: 1:01-cv-08876 Document #: 1 Filed: 11/16/01 Page 5 of 14 PageID #:5
Case: 1:01-cv-08876 Document #: 1 Filed: 11/16/01 Page 6 of 14 PageID #:6
Case: 1:01-cv-08876 Document #: 1 Filed: 11/16/01 Page 7 of 14 PageID #:7
Case: 1:01-cv-08876 Document #: 1 Filed: 11/16/01 Page 8 of 14 PageID #:8
Case: 1:01-cv-08876 Document #: 1 Filed: 11/16/01 Page 9 of 14 PageID #:9
Case: 1:01-cv-08876 Document #: 1 Filed: 11/16/01 Page 10 of 14 PageID #:10
Case: 1:01-cv-08876 Document #: 1 Filed: 11/16/01 Page 11 of 14 PageID #:11
Case: 1:01-cv-08876 Document #: 1 Filed: 11/16/01 Page 12 of 14 PageID #:12
Case: 1:01-cv-08876 Document #: 1 Filed: 11/16/01 Page 13 of 14 PageID #:13
Case: 1:01-cv-08876 Document #: 1 Filed: 11/16/01 Page 14 of 14 PageID #:14
<PAGE>   1

                                                                      EXHIBIT 21

                  SUBSIDIARIES OF QUINTEL COMMUNICATIONS, INC.

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                     STATE OF INCORPORATION
                           SUBSIDIARY                                   OR ORGANIZATION
                           ----------                                ----------------------
<C>  <S>                                                             <C>
 1.  MultiBuyer, Inc.                                                    Delaware
 2.  Quintelcomm, Inc.                                                   Delaware
 3.  Quintel Financial Information Services, Inc.                        Delaware
 4.  Calling Card Company, Inc.                                          New York
 5.  New Lauderdale L.C.                                                 Florida
 6.  N.L. Corp.                                                          Delaware
 7.  Creative Direct Marketing, Inc.                                     Delaware
 8.  Quintel Hair Products, Inc.                                         Delaware
 9.  Quintel Products, Inc.                                              Delaware
10.  Quintelco., Inc.                                                    Delaware
11.  Quintel Psychic Zone, Inc.                                          Delaware
12.  Quintel LaBuick Products, LLC                                       Delaware
</TABLE>
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT

Everett McKinley Dirksen UnitedStatesCourthouse

 Room 2722 - 219 S. Dearborn Street

 Chicago, Illinois 60604

Office of the Clerk

Phone: (312) 435-5850

www.ca7.uscourts.gov

NOTICE OF DOCKETING - Short Form

September 18, 2013

To: Thomas G. Bruton

Clerk of Court

To: Robert W. Gettleman

District Court Judge

The below captioned appeal has been docketed in the United States Court of Appeals for the

Seventh Circuit:

Appellate Case No: 13-3055

Caption:

IN RE:

 KEVIN TRUDEAU,

Petitioner

District Court No: 1:03-cv-03904

Court Reporter Jennifer Costales

District Judge Robert Gettleman

Clerk/Agency Rep Thomas Bruton

If you have any questions regarding this appeal, please call this office.

form name: c7_Docket_Notice_short_form(form ID: 188)

Case: 13-3055 Document: 1-3 Filed: 09/18/2013 Pages: 1

Case: 1:03-cv-03904 Document #: 752-1 Filed: 09/18/13 Page 1 of 1 PageID #:13343
#### Tarvin *v.*Rome Cooperage Company.

Atkinson, J.

Paul Tarvin, by next friend, instituted an action for damages against the Rome Cooperage Company, a corporation. In the 5th and 6th paragraphs of the petition it was alleged, that the plaintiff “was an employee of the Southern Co-operative Eoundry Company; that he was ordered by his boss, Charlie Moore, to go to the Rome Cooperage Company and carry a message in regard to some lumber for . the Rome Cooperage Company; that the said Paul Tarvin was rightfully in the plant of the said defendant, attending to business for his said superior in the interest of his said superior and in the interest of the defendant; that the said Paul Tarvin, on entering the plant of the defendant, found it necessary, in attending to said business, to pass through and under the shaftings, beltings, and pulleys and machinery of the said defendant,” and was injured on account of alleged acts of negligence in regard to keeping in a safe condition the pulleys and other machinery. By amendment it was alleged that the plaintiff “was invited in and upon said premises and into said plant of the defendant by the defendant, and by its agent and employee, Tim Corey, who had authority to do so, and with' the full knowledge and consent of the said defendant plaintiff did enter in and upon the said premises and go into the plant of the defendant upon the errand and business as heretofore set forth.” On the trial the plaintiff testified: “He [Mr. Moore] sent me there to tell Mr. Corey [the foreman of the defendant’s cooperage plant] to come up there first, and I went down there and told him what he said, and he came up there to the foundry where we were at work, I found Mr. Corey in the cooperage plant. I went through the plant into the cooperage where he was. I went to see him the second time, and also went the third time. The third time I went I got hurt. I wont in there and told Mr. Corey that Mr. Moore said, if he was going to come on, to do so, and if he was not coming, to send him the gun. Mr, Corey said to me, ‘Wait a minute and I will see if I can get it.’ I don’t know where Mr. Corey went. He went out of the cooperage, While I was waiting I got hurt. The machine fell on me.” *Seld:*

1, By the allegations contained in the petition, the plaintiff projected his ease, in so far as it related to a duty by the defendant to him, on the sole theory that he was on the defendant’s premises by invitation op account of a matter of business in which the defendant was interested.

*597June 25, 1915.

Action for damages. Before Judge Wright. Floyd superior court. February 3, 1914.

*Hamilton & Hamilton*and *Hutchens & Hutchens,*for plaintiff.

*Lipscomb & Willingham*and *Nathan Harris,*for defendant.

2. The evidence on this point did not support the ease alleged; but, from the plaintiff’s testimony explanatory of his presence on the defendant’s premises, it appears that plaintiff was a trespasser, or, at most, a mere licensee.

3. The plaintiff having failed to prove his case as alleged, it was not erroneous to grant a nonsuit at the conclusion of his evidence.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*All the Justices concur.*