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


<ARTICLE>                     5

       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-mos
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              SEP-30-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                   DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                          13,537,212
<SECURITIES>                                             0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   19,143,019
<ALLOWANCES>                                       (79,646)
<INVENTORY>                                        574,782
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                38,191,642
<PP&E>                                          87,681,702
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (16,785,102)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 109,213,692
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           20,770,098
<BONDS>                                                  0 
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                    0
<PREFERRED>                                              0
<COMMON>                                            62,858
<OTHER-SE>                                      61,675,037
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   109,213,692
<SALES>                                                  0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                47,006,493
<CGS>                                                    0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   43,620,922
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                         0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                         0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 388,875
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  2,996,696
<INCOME-TAX>                                     1,132,751
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              1,863,945
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                          0
<CHANGES>                                                0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,863,945
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                         0.30
<EPS-DILUTED>                                         0.29
        


</TABLE>
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1721 Introduced in House (IH)]

114th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1721

 To reauthorize appropriations for the National Women's Rights History 
                              Project Act.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 26, 2015

 Ms. Slaughter (for herself, Mr. Hanna, Mr. Tonko, Mr. Katko, and Mr. 
    Reed) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                     Committee on Natural Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To reauthorize appropriations for the National Women's Rights History 
                              Project Act.

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

SECTION 1. REAUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

    (a) Votes for Women's Trail.--Section 1602 of Title XVI of Public 
Law 96-607 (16 U.S.C. 410ll-1) is amended in subsection (f)(2) by 
striking ``2013'' and inserting ``2019''.
    (b) National Women's Rights History Project Registry and the 
National Women's Rights History Project Partnership Network.--Section 
7111 of the Omnibus Public Land Management Act of 2009 (Public Law 111-
11) is amended--
            (1) in subsection (b)(5) by striking ``2013'' and inserting 
        ``2019''; and
            (2) in subsection (c)(4) by striking ``2013'' and inserting 
        ``2019''.
                                 <all>
```
1 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE ST ATE OF MONTANA

S UPREME C OURT C AUSE N O . 21
- 0117 Henry and Diane Belk **,**

Plaintiffs vs. Montana Department of Environmental Quality **,** an agency of the State of Montana, and Glacier Stone Supply, LLC,

Defendants, State of Montana by and through the Office of the Attorney General,

Intervenor,

---------------------------------------- Herb Engel and Art Vail,

Plaintiffs, vs. Montana Department of Environmental Quality, and agency of the State of Montana, and Glacier Stone Supply, LLC, a Montana Limited Liability Company,

Defendants. **ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR**  **EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE REPLY BRIEF** 

Appellants have moved the Court for an extension of time to and including November 17, 2021, to file their Reply Brief. The motion being unopposed, and finding good cause therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant’s Reply Brief is due on or before No ve mber 17, 2021. No further extensions will be granted. DATED AND ELECTRONICALLY SIGNED BELOW

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

October 18 2021

10/18/2021

Case Number: DA 21-0117
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

EASTERN DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

GEORGE WILLIAMS,

Petitioner :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 35 EAL 2020

Petition for Allowance of Appeal

from the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 30th day of June, 2020

, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is

DENIED

.
<PAGE>

                                                                      Exhibit 23

               CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS

We have  issued our report  dated March 21,  2002,  accompanying  the  financial
statements  included in the Annual Report of Amplidyne,  Inc. on Form 10K-SB for
the  years  ended  December  31,  2002  and  2001.  We  hereby  consent  to  the
incorporation  by reference of said reports in the  Registration  Statements  of
Amplidyne,  Inc.  on Forms S-3  (File  No.  333-92919,  as  amended  by File No.
333-11015,  effective date January 18, 2000, and File No.  333-96361,  effective
date July 3, 2000) and Form S-8 (File No. 333-92915, effective date December 16,
1999).

KAHN BOYD LEVYCHIN, LLP

New York, New York
March 26, 2003
# C_2009097EN.01000301.xml

| 28.4.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 97/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.4.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 97/3

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.5493 — RBSK/DZ BANK/RZB/RBL JV)

(Text with EEA relevance)

2009/C 97/04

On 21 April 2009, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | from the Europa competition website (http://ec.europa.eu/comm/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

from the Europa competition website (http://ec.europa.eu/comm/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website under document number 32009M5493. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law (http://eur-lex.europa.eu). |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website under document number 32009M5493. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law (http://eur-lex.europa.eu).

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


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>

          This schedule  contains summary financial  information  extracted from
          Pen  Interconnect,  Inc.  June 30, 1998  financial  statements and is
          qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial statements.

</LEGEND>

<CIK>                         0001000266
<NAME>                        Pen Interconnect, Inc.

       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS

<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              SEP-30-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                   JUN-30-1998

<CASH>                                         994,397
<SECURITIES>                                   350,750
<RECEIVABLES>                                  3,827,019
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (105,089)
<INVENTORY>                                    5,661,634
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               11,362,670
<PP&E>                                         3,873,205
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (1,523,349)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 18,620,050
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          7,515,282
<BONDS>                                        1,380,059
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       52,650
<OTHER-SE>                                     8,570,749
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   18,620,050
<SALES>                                        15,220,519
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               15,220,519
<CGS>                                          9,431,973
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  9,431,973
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               2,197,090
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             403,539
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                88,966
<INCOME-TAX>                                   35,566
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            53,400
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   53,400
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  .01
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  .01
        


</TABLE>
IN THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

Daryl Brady, :

Petitioner :

:

v. : No. 482 M.D. 2019

:

Chief Hearing Examiner Zachary J. :

Moslak, Superintendent Barry Smith, :

Deputy D.J. Close, Major J. Barrows, :

Lt. Buterbaugh, Sgt. J. Murarik, :

Hearing Examiner S. Wiggins, :

and C.J. McKeown, :

Respondents :

PER CURIA M O R D E R

NOW, August 28, 2020

, upon consideration of P etitioner’s

application for re consideration

, and R espondent s ’ answer in response thereto,

the application is denied.
Exhibit 32

SECTION 906 CERTIFICATION

The following statement is provided by the undersigned to
accompany the foregoing Report on Form 10-Q pursuant to Title 18, Chapter 63, Section 1350 of the United States Code, as amended by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, and shall not be deemed filed pursuant to any provision of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 or any other securities law.

Each of the undersigned certifies that the foregoing Report on Form 10-Q
fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in the report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
Broadway Financial Corporation at the dates and for the periods indicated.



|                   |  |                         |  |                   
|------------------ |  | ----------------------- |  | ------------------
|Date: May 16, 2011 |  | By:                     |  | /s/ Paul C. Hudson
|                   |  | Paul C. Hudson         
|                   |  | Chief Executive Officer
|                   |  |                        
|Date: May 16, 2011 |  | By:                     |  | /s/ Samuel Sarpong
|                   |  | Samuel Sarpong         
|                   |  | Chief Financial Officer
U.S. Department of the Interior

U.S. Geological Survey

Introduction to the 2022 Annual Reporting 

Meeting Tribal Resources Session

Lucas S. Bair, U.S. Geological Survey, Southwest Biological Science Center, 

Grand Canyon Monitoring and Research Center 

Glen Canyon Dam Adaptive Management Program Annual Reporting Meeting

January 11-12, 2022

U. S. Department of Interior

U.S. Geological Survey
Glen Canyon Dam Adaptive Management Program 

Annual Reporting Meeting 2021

2
Cultural Benefits Opportunities Framework 

Virtual Collaborative Refinement Workshop, October 2021

3

• Organized by Kristin Hoelting and Doreen 

Martinez with assistance from Kurt Dongoske 

and Lucas Bair

• Workshop participants totaled 22. The group 

included approximately 11 Tribal participants, 10 

academics, 6 Federal employees, 3 Tribal 

government staff, and 1 non-profit employee 

(categories overlapping). Tribal perspectives 

included Native Hawaiian, Grande Ronde, Lower 

Elwha Klallam, Tlingit, Anishinaabe Ojibway, 

Citizen Potawatomi, Mescalero Apache, Zuni, 

and Navajo.
4

https://conference.ifas.ufl.edu/aces/virtual/home.php
Incorporating Cultural Benefits Knowledge 

into Federal Decision Making

Structured decision making

• Full articulation of resource goals

• Performance metrics

• Tradeoff analysis 

Uncertainty, value of information and adaptive 

management

5

Runge, M.C., LaGory, K.E., Russell, Kendra, Balsom, J.R., Butler, R.A., Coggins, L.G., Jr., Grantz, K.A., Hayse, John, 

Hlohowskyj, Ihor, Korman, Josh, May, J.E., O’Rourke, D.J., Poch, L.A., Prairie, J.R., VanKuiken, J.C., Van Lonkhuyzen, R.A., 

Varyu, D.R., Verhaaren, B.T., Vesekla, T.D., Williams, N.T., Wuthrich, K.K., Yackulic, C.B., Billerbeck, R.P., and Knowles, 

G.W., 2015, Decision analysis to support development of the Glen Canyon Dam Long-Term Experimental and Management 

Plan: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2015–5176, 64 p., http://dx.doi.org/10.3133/sir20155176
6
#### In the Matter of the Claim of Jelena Petrov, Respondent. Bragard Inc., Appellant; Commissioner of Labor, Respondent.

[947 NYS2d 227]

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed March 17, 2011, which ruled that claimant was entitled to receive unemployment insurance benefits.

Claimant worked as an administrative assistant for a uniform company. Following an incident in which the chief operating officer of the company held a wire or strap around claimant’s neck in front of two coworkers, claimant became upset, packed her things and left her job. She subsequently applied for unemployment insurance benefits. The Department of Labor initially disqualified her from receiving benefits on the basis that she voluntarily left her employment without good cause, charged her with a recoverable overpayment of benefits as well as federal additional compensation benefits and imposed a forfeiture penalty after finding that she had made a willful misrepresentation to obtain benefits. Following a hearing, an Administrative Law Judge sustained these determinations. The Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, however, modified the Administrative Law Judge’s decision and ruled, among other things, that claimant was entitled to receive benefits. The employer now appeals.

“Whether a claimant has voluntarily left employment is a factual issue to be resolved by the Board, and its determination will not be disturbed so long as it is supported by substantial evidence, despite the existence of evidence which would have supported a contrary result” *(Matter of Grace [Astrocom Elecs., Inc.*—Commissioner *of Labor],*69 AD3d 1156, 1157 [2010] [citations omitted]). Credibility issues arising from conflicting witness testimony are for the Board to resolve *(see Matter of Messado [City of New York*—Commissioner *of Labor],*76 AD3d 740, 741 [2010]). Here, the Board credited the testimony of claimant and her coworker that the employer’s chief operating officer placed a strap or wire around claimant’s neck without her permission, which caused claimant to suffer fear and emotional distress. Under the particular circumstances presented here, we cannot say that the Board’s determination that good cause existed for claimant to leave her employment is unsupported by *1340the record (see *Matter of Grace [Astrocom Elecs., Inc*.—Commis*sioner of Labor],*69 AD3d at 1157).

Peters, P.J., Rose, Malone Jr., Stein and Garry, JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Energy

###### Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

          - [Project No. 14797-001]

On August 19, 2021, California Department of Water Resources submitted to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) a copy of their application for a Clean Water Act section 401(a)(1) water quality certification filed with the California State Water Resources Control Board (California Water Board), in conjunction with the above captioned project. Pursuant to 40 CFR 121.6, we hereby notify the California Water Board of the following:

*Date of Receipt of the Certification Request:* August 19, 2021.

*Reasonable Period of Time to Act on the Certification Request:* One year.

*Date Waiver Occurs for Failure to Act:* August 19, 2022.

If the California Water Board fails or refuses to act on the water quality certification request by the above waiver date, then the agency's certifying authority is deemed waived pursuant to section 401(a)(1) of the Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. 1341(a)(1).

Dated: August 24, 2021.

Kimberly D. Bose,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 2021-18619 Filed 8-27-21; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
Document

Exhibit 10.7

Amendment to Employment Agreement
This Amendment to Employment Agreement (this “Amendment”) is made as of March 24, 2020 by and between Scientific Games Corporation, a Nevada corporation, (the “Company”) and Patrick J. McHugh (“Executive”).
WHEREAS, the Company and Executive entered into an Amended and Restated Employment Agreement dated as of January 1, 2019, which was then amended on February 26, 2020 (the “Agreement”);
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and the mutual benefits to be derived herefrom and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows: 
1.Decrease in Base Salary.  The Agreement is hereby amended by adding the following sentence to the end of Section 3(a):
“Effective as of April 5, 2020, Executive will be paid seventy-one thousand, five hundred and six U.S. dollars ($71,506) of base salary until and through June 30, 2020, and Executive’s annual base salary of six hundred thousand U.S. dollars ($600,000) is reduced by seventy-one thousand, five hundred and six U.S. dollars ($71,506), representing the portion of his annual base salary attributable to the period from April 5, 2020 through June 30, 2020.”
2. The Company and Executive further expressly agree that the decrease in base salary set forth in Section 1 of this Amendment does not constitute “Good Reason,” as that phrase is defined in Section 4(e) of the Agreement.
3. Except as set forth in this Amendment, all terms and conditions of the Agreement shall remain unchanged and in full force and effect in accordance with their terms.  All references to the “Agreement” in the Agreement shall refer to the Agreement as amended by this Amendment. Any defined terms used in this Amendment and not defined herein shall have the meaning as set forth in the Agreement.
        4. This Amendment may be executed in counterparts, each of which shall for all purposes be deemed to be an original and all of which shall constitute the same instrument.  Delivery of an executed counterpart of a signature page of this Amendment by electronic transmission shall be effective as delivery of a manually executed counterpart of this Amendment.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, each of the parties hereto has duly executed this Amendment as of March 24, 2020.
SCIENTIFIC GAMES CORPORATION


By:     /s/ Shawn Williams 
Name: Shawn Williams 
Title: Senior Vice President, Chief Human Resources Officer
        
        /s/ Patrick J. McHugh 
1








Patrick J. McHugh
2
#### CONDON, Respondent, v. METROPOLITAN LIFE INS. CO., Appellant.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department.

April, 1896.)

Action by Ellen Condon against the Metropolitan Life Insurance Company.

No opinion. Order affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

STEPHEN JEROME WILLIAMS,

Plaintiff

- Appellant,

v.

E. HAZEL, Sgt.; et al.,

Defendants

- Appellees. No. 17

- 17466

D.C. No. 4:16

- cv

- 01136

- HSG

MEMORANDUM *

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of California

Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr., District Judge, Presiding

Submitted June 12, 2018 **

Before: RAWLINSON, CLIFTON, and NGU Y E N, Circuit Judges.

California state prisoner Stephen Jerome Williams appeals pro se from the

district court ’ s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging access

- to

courts and due process claims

. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We

review de novo a district court’ s dismissal on the basis of qualified immunity.

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

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36

- 3.

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

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). 

# FILED

JUN 20 2018

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLER K

U.S. COURT OF APPEAL S2 17

- 17466

Nelson v. Heiss , 271 F.3d 891, 893 (9th Cir. 2001). We affirm.

The district court properly dismissed Williams’s action on the basis of

qualified immunity because it would not have been clear to every reasonable

officer that he was violating Williams’s constitutional rights. See Ashcroft v. al

Kidd , 563 U.S. 731, 7 35 (2011) (explaining two

- part test for qualified immunity).

The district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Williams’s motion

for reconsideration because Williams failed to demonstrate any basis for relief

.

See Carroll v. Nakatani , 342 F.3d 934, 940, 945 (9th Cir. 2003) (setting forth

standard of review and grounds for reconsideration under Fed eral R ule of Civ il

P rocedure 59 (e) ).

AFFIRMED.