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

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1995
<CASH>                                           3,445
<SECURITIES>                                     5,660
<RECEIVABLES>                                    2,925
<ALLOWANCES>                                       569
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                         148,607
<DEPRECIATION>                                  88,354
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  84,259
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                              0
<COMMON>                                             0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                      30,337
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    84,259
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                28,055
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   21,875
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               3,474
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  2,706
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              2,706
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     2,706
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

JOAQUIN H. CIRIA,

 Plaintiff - Appellant,

 v.

BLACKWELL,

 Defendant - Appellee.

No. 14-15858

D.C. No. 2:10-cv-01351-TLNDAD

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of California

Troy L. Nunley, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted September 21, 2015** 

Before: REINHARDT, LEAVY, and BERZON, Circuit Judges.

California state prisoner Joaquin H. Ciria appeals pro se from the district

court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging retaliation. We

have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for an abuse of discretion a

dismissal for failure to comply with a court order, Pagtalunan v. Galaza, 291 F.3d

FILED

OCT 05 2015

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

 * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

 ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
639, 640 (9th Cir. 2002), and we affirm.

The district court did not abuse its discretion by dismissing Ciria’s action

because, despite a warning that his action could be dismissed and multiple

extensions of time, Ciria failed to comply with the district court’s order instructing

him to file an opposition to defendant’s motion for summary judgment. See id. at

642-43 (discussing the five factors for determining whether to dismiss under Fed.

R. Civ. P. 41(b)); Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1260 (9th Cir. 1992)

(although dismissal is a harsh penalty, the district court’s dismissal should not be

disturbed absent “a definite and firm conviction” that it “committed a clear error of

judgment” (citation and internal quotation marks omitted)).

Ciria’s motion to file a substitute reply brief, filed on February 20, 2015, is

granted. The Clerk shall file the reply brief received on February 2, 2015.

AFFIRMED.

2 14-15858
#### Levy, Sherwood, Klein & Dudley, P.A., Appellant, v Floyd Miller et al., Respondents.

— Order unanimously affirmed, without costs, *(see, Money-Line, Inc. v Cunningham, 80*AD2d 60). (Appeal from order of Supreme Court, Chautauqua County, Rath, J. — summary judgment.) Present — Dillon, P. J., Denman, Boomer, Pine and Balio, JJ.
#### HAAS v. NEW YORK CENT. & H. R. R. CO.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department.

December 1, 1896.)

Railroad Companies—Action for Killing Stock—Evidence.

A railroad company, on whose tracks a horse strayed in consequence of the neglect of the company to maintain a sufficient fence, is liable for the killing of the horse by a locomotive, though the locomotive was owned by another railroad company.

Appeal from Rockland county court.

Action by Frank X. Haas against the New York Central & Hudson River Railroad Company for the value of a horse killed on defendant’s right of way by being struck by a locomotive and train. From a judgment in favor of plaintiff, and from an order denying a motion for a new trial, defendant appeals.

Affirmed.

Argued before BROWN, P. J., and CULLEN, BARTLETT, HATCH, and BRADLEY, JJ.

Herbert E. Kinney, for appellant.

Lexow & Wyre, for respondent.

PER CURIAM.

There was testimony in this case which permitted the jury to find that the horse which was killed escaped from the pasture lot onto the railroad tracks through an opening in the fence, which existed through the negligence of the defendant; and we must assume from the verdict that the jury did so find. In this view of the case the fact that the horse was killed by a train - of the Ontario & Western Railroad Company does not appear to be material, and it was not error by the court to so charge the jury. No other question requires consideration.

The judgment and order must be affirmed, with costs.
# C_2009132EN.01000401.xml

| 11.6.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 132/4 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

11.6.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 132/4

---

COUNCIL DECISION

COUNCIL DECISION

of 4 June 2009

appointing one UK member of the Committee of the Regions

2009/C 132/04

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Article 263 thereof,

Having regard to the proposal of the Government of the United Kingdom,

Whereas:

| (1) | On 24 January 2006, the Council adopted Decision 2006/116/EC appointing the members and alternate members of the Committee of the Regions for the period from 26 January 2006 to 25 January 2010 (1). |
| --- | --- |

(1)

On 24 January 2006, the Council adopted Decision 2006/116/EC appointing the members and alternate members of the Committee of the Regions for the period from 26 January 2006 to 25 January 2010 (1).

1

| (2) | A member's seat on the Committee of the Regions has become vacant following the end of mandate of Mr Andrew CAMPBELL as a member of the Committee of the Regions, |
| --- | --- |

(2)

A member's seat on the Committee of the Regions has become vacant following the end of mandate of Mr Andrew CAMPBELL as a member of the Committee of the Regions,

HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:

Article 1

The following is hereby appointed to the Committee of the Regions as a member for the remainder of the current term of office, which runs until 25 January 2010:

Ms Sue RAMSEY, Member of the Legislative Assembly, Northern Ireland.

Article 2

This Decision shall take effect on the day of its adoption.

Done at Luxembourg, 4 June 2009.

For the Council

The President

Martin PECINA

---

(1)  OJ L 56, 25.2.2006, p. 75.

1

---
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-2132
JERRY D. MCMILLION, Petitioner, versus SLAB FORK COAL COMPANY; DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION PROGRAMS, Respondents. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Benefits Review Board. (06-0318-BLA) Submitted: April 19, 2007 Decided: April 23, 2007 Before NIEMEYER, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Jerry D. McMillion, Petitioner Pro Se. Waseem A. Karim, JACKSON &KELLY, Lexington, Kentucky; Patricia May Nece, Emily GoldbergKraft, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, Washington, D.C., for Respondents. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.- 2 - PER CURIAM: Jerry D. McMillion seeks review of the Benefits Review Board’s decision and order affirming the administrative law judge’s denial of black lung benefits pursuant to 30 U.S.C. §§ 901-945 (2000). Our review of the record discloses that the Board’s decision is based upon substantial evidence and is without reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the Board. McMillion v. Slab Fork Coal Co. , No. 06-0318-BLA (B.R.B. Aug. 31, 2006). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
2006 Remaining Months: 8.25 Release - Modified MLFF

800 725 725 600 600 700 833 8

555

777

8 

17

15

13 13 13

15

18 

02468

101214161820

JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL A

Daily Range TCFS Release
Glen Canyon Dam Generation Comparison:

ROD Operation vs. Relaxed Operation 

Max Daily Change: 12 TCFS, Up Ramp: 4 TCFS/hr, Down Ramp 3 TCFS/

200300400500600700800900

1000

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 

MW

Customer Demand GC ROD Generation GC Relaxed DC & DRR G

10 Hours @ 17100 CFS

8 Hours @ 9100 CFS

Decem

13 Hours @ 17145 CFS

6 Hours @ 5145 CFS
Glen Canyon Dam Generation Comparison:

ROD Operation vs. Relaxed Operation 

Max Daily Change: 10 TCFS, Up Ramp: 4 TCFS/hr, Down Ramp 3 TCFS/

200300400500600700800900

1000

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 

MW

Customer Demand GC ROD Generation GC Relaxed DC & DRR G

10 Hours @ 17100 CFS

8 Hours @ 9100 CFS

Decem

13 Hours @ 17025 CFS

6 Hours @ 7025 CFS
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
 Pest Management Research: Sidney, MT
 close



    Research

                    Research Projects
                                    Publications
                                    Collaborations
                                    News
                People

                    Staff Listing
                                    Careers


        


                    NPARL
                        Northern Plains Agricultural Research Laboratory
                                    Agricultural Systems Research Unit
                                    Grasshoppers: Their Biology, Identification and ManagementSearch small
                    Search
            
            ARS Home
                                About ARS
                                Contact Us




ARS Home Plains Area Sidney, Montana Northern Plains Agricultural Research Laboratory Pest Management Research PMRU Docs Grasshoppers: Their Biology, Identification and Management: Outbreak and Survey Info





- NPARL Home
- PMRU Home
- ASRU Home
- Site Highlights
- Outbreak and Survey Info
- ID Tools | Apps
- Grasshopper Management
- IPM Handbook
- USDA Research | Contact Info

Outbreak Info: 2003 Grasshopper Adult Survey Mapheadline bar **National Cumulative Adult Grasshopper Density**(Oct 14, 2003) /ARSUserFiles/30320505/grasshopper/Extras/images/Maps/a101503.jpg Return to Outbreak Info


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
#### Mark H. Thomas et al., Appellants, v William S. Kiriluk et al., Respondents.

[944 NYS2d 262]—

*998In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for breach of contract, the plaintiffs appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Cohalan, J.), entered February 16, 2011, as, upon an order of the same court dated November 10, 2010, granting those branches of the defendants’ motion which were for summary judgment dismissing the causes of action to recover damages for breach of contract and in quantum meruit, is in favor of the defendants and against them, dismissing those causes of action.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

“As a general rule, this Court does not consider an issue on a subsequent appeal which was raised or could have been raised in an earlier appeal which was dismissed for lack of prosecution, although the Court has the inherent jurisdiction to do so” *(Kitt v Podlofsky,*72 AD3d 1030, 1031 [2010]; *see Bray v Cox,*38 NY2d 350 [1976]). Here, the plaintiffs appealed from an order dated November 10, 2010, which granted the defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, but the appeal was dismissed by decision and order on motion of this Court dated October 24, 2011, for failure to prosecute. Nevertheless, under the circumstances, we exercise our discretion to review the issues raised by the plaintiffs on their appeal from the judgment *(see Kitt v Podlofsky,*72 AD3d at 1031).

Contrary to the plaintiffs’ contention, the defendants demonstrated their prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law dismissing the first two causes of actions seeking to recover damages based on breach of contract and quantum meruit. The defendants demonstrated that they paid the plaintiffs more than the contract price claimed by the plaintiffs and more than the reasonable value of the labor and materials provided. In opposition to the defendants’ motion, the plaintiffs failed to raise a triable issue of fact *(see Zuckerman v City of New York,*49 NY2d 557 [1980]). Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly granted those branches of the defendants’ motion which were for summary judgment dismissing the causes of action to recover damages for breach of contract and in quantum meruit.

In light of our determination, we need not reach the parties’ remaining contentions. Dickerson, J.E, Chambers, Austin and Miller, JJ., concur.
AMENDED AND RESTATED
                       CERTIFICATE OF LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
                                       OF
                        PAINEWEBBER/GEODYNE ENERGY INCOME
                            LIMITED PARTNERSHIP II-A

TO THE SECRETARY OF STATE
OF THE STATE OF OKLAHOMA:

       The  undersigned,  desiring  to amend and  restate  its  certificate  of
limited   partnership   pursuant  to  the  Oklahoma   Revised  Uniform  Limited
Partnership  Act, as amended,  54 O.S. Supp.  1988,  Sec.  301-365 (the "Act"),
does hereby state:

       1.    The  name of the  limited  partnership  is  "PaineWebber/  Geodyne
Energy Income Limited Partnership II-A."

       2.    The  date  of  filing   the   original   certificate   of  limited
partnership is July 23, 1987.

       3. (a) The address of the office of the limited partnership, which is the
same address where the records of the limited partnership are kept, is 320 South
Boston, The Mezzanine, Tulsa, Oklahoma 74103-3708.

             (b)   The name and  address  of the agent for  service  of process
are  Geodyne  Properties,   Inc.,  320  South  Boston,  The  Mezzanine,  Tulsa,
Oklahoma 74103--3708.

       4.    The  name and  business  address  of the  general  partner  are as
follows:
                   Geodyne Properties, Inc.
                   320 South Boston, The Mezzanine
                   Tulsa, Oklahoma 74103--3708

       5.    The latest date upon which the limited  partnership is to dissolve
is December 31, 2001.

       6.    The limited  partnership hereby elects to become subject to all of
the provisions of the Act.

DATED March 9, 1989.
                                        Geodyne Properties, Inc.
                                        General Partner of PaineWebber/
                                        Geodyne Energy Income Limited
                                        Partnership II-A

                                        By: /s/ Michael E. Luttrell
                                            ------------------------------
                                           Michael E. Luttrell
                                           Executive Vice President
Exhibit 32.1



Certification of Principal Executive Officer

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350

(Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002)



I, Lawrence S. Barker, President and Chief Executive Officer (principal executive officer) of
Visual networks, Inc. (the Registrant), certify that to the best of my knowledge, based upon review of the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2003 of the Registrant (the Report):



| | (1) |  | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and
| | --- |  | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (2) |  | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Registrant.
| | --- |  | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                                                                                      
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                      
|/s/ LAWRENCE S. BARKER                                                                
|                                                                                      
|Name:                    Lawrence
S. Barker Date:                      August
14, 2003



49
#### TOUART v. FAITH, ET AL.

(Decided November 13, 1913.)

Appeal from Mobile Law and Equity Court.

Heard before Hon. Saffold Berney.

No counsel marked for either party.

Per curiam.

Affirmed on certificate.
II

105TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. 2181

To amend section 3702 of title 38, United States Code, to make permanent

the eligibility of former members of the Selected Reserve for veterans

housing loans.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

JUNE 17, 1998

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

to the Committee on Veterans’ Affairs

A BILL

To amend section 3702 of title 38, United States Code,

to make permanent the eligibility of former members

of the Selected Reserve for veterans housing loans.

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

3 SECTION 1. PERMANENT ELIGIBILITY OF FORMER MEM4 BERS OF SELECTED RESERVE FOR VETERANS

5 HOUSING LOANS.

6 Section 3702(a)(2)(E) of title 38, United States

7 Code, is amended by striking out ‘‘For the period begin8 ning on October 28, 1992, and ending on October 27,
2

•S 2181 IS

1 1999, each veteran’’ and inserting in lieu thereof ‘‘Each

2 veteran’’.

Æ
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
 Aerial Application Technology Research: College Station, TX
 close



    Research

                    Research Projects
                                    Publications
                                    Collaborations
                                    News
                People

                    Staff Listing
                                    CareersSearch small
                    Search
            
            ARS Home
                                About ARS
                                Contact Us




ARS Home Plains Area College Station, Texas Southern Plains Agricultural Research Center Aerial Application Technology Research Docs







Dr. Martin's Publicationsheadline bar Under Maintenance


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
---



Exhibit 32.1



CERTIFICATIONS PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

(18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350)



In connection with the Annual Report of mPhase Technologies, Inc. a New Jersey corporation (the "Company"), on Form 10K for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), I, Ronald A. Durando, Chief Executive Officer of the Company certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. Section 1350), that to his knowledge:

1.

The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) 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/ Ronald A. Durando



Ronald A. Durando

Chief Executive Officer



September 28, 2005





---
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 USC SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form
10-Q of Medallion Financial Corp. (the Company) for the quarter ending March 31, 2013 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the undersigned hereby certifies, pursuant to 18
USC Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, based on my knowledge:

(1) The Report
fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) 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 as of the dates and for the periods expressed in the Report.



|                                                  |  |                  
|------------------------------------------------- |  | -----------------
|By:                                               |  | /s/ Larry D. Hall
|Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer

Date: May 8, 2013