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

<ARTICLE>                                          5

<S>                                                                    <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                                          6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                                      JAN-31-2001
<PERIOD-START>                                                         MAY-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                                           JUL-31-2000
<CASH>                                                                        6,000
<SECURITIES>                                                                      0
<RECEIVABLES>                                                             7,560,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                                              1,921,000
<INVENTORY>                                                               3,996,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                                         10,026,000
<PP&E>                                                                   16,233,000
<DEPRECIATION>                                                           15,022,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                                           12,050,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                                     8,306,000
<BONDS>                                                                  26,267,000
<COMMON>                                                                      1,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                                             0
<PREFERRED>                                                                       0
<OTHER-SE>                                                               22,522,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                                             12,050,000
<SALES>                                                                   9,751,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                                          9,751,000
<CGS>                                                                     9,093,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                                             9,093,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                                          8,250,000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                                                  0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                                          225,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                                          (7,817,000)
<INCOME-TAX>                                                                      0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                                      (7,817,000)
<DISCONTINUED>                                                                    0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                                                   0
<CHANGES>                                                                         0
<NET-INCOME>                                                             (7,817,000)
<EPS-BASIC>                                                                 (1.84)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                                 (1.84)



</TABLE>
Glen Canyon Dam Technical Work Group Meeting September 29-30, 2009 

 List of Attachments 

 AIF = Agenda Information Form No. Attachment Presenter / Author 

1 E-mail message from Shane Capron, subject: pre-TWG preparation and background on agenda items 

 Shane Capron 

2 TWG Work Plan 1-Year Running Workplan 3 Action Item Tracking Report 4a Memo from Anne Castle, signed 9/15/09, Subj: Report and Recommendations 

from the Glen Canyon Dam Adaptive Management Federal Advisory Committee 

 Shane Capron 

4b All Motions from the last AMWG Meeting 5 Draft Agenda from the Govt-to-Govt Consultation with the Pueblo of Zuni 

Meeting Dennis Kubly Kurt Dongoske 

6 GCMRC Updates GCMRC staff 7 Fiscal Year 2009 Project Report for the Glen Canyon Dam Adaptive 

Management Program Template John Hamill 

8a PROSPECTUS Evaluation of a Transition in the Roles of Science and Management During the Evolution of Adaptive Management Programs 

 Dr. Dave Garrett 

8b Evaluation of Transition of Science to Management Actions in Adaptive Management Programs PPT 

 9 AIF: Treatment Plan Update and Geoarchaeology Project Update PPT Joel Pedersen 10a Nearshore ecology of Juvenile Native Fish in Grand Canyon PPT Dr. Josh Korman 10b A Review of the “Grand Canyon Non-Native Fish Control Plan I: Short Term 

Monitoring and Research Actions” Executive Summary and Recommendations  Dr. Dave Garrett 

10c Memo from Matthew Andersen dated Sept. 19, 2009, Subj: Fall Steady Flows Science Plan and Comment Table Matthew Andersen 

 11a 

Workshop Prospectus to Guide Development of a Work Plan and Request for Proposal to Address High Priority Socio-economic Information Needs of the GCDAMP Helen Fairley 

11b Upcoming Workshops: General Core Monitoring and Socioeconomic Program Workshop PPT 

12a Review of the Grand Canyon Non-native Fish Control Plan: Short Term Monitoring and Research Actions PPT Dr. Dave Garrett 

12b Memo from Matthew Andersen, Subj: Review of Nonnative Fish Control Plan and Non-native Fish Plan TWG Response Table 

 Matthew Andersen  12c Nonnative Fish Control Plan: Responses to Reviews PPT 

13 AIF: Biennial Budget Process Development with Biennial Budget Process, Draft Outline for TWG Review  Shane Capron 

14 Selective Withdrawal and Sediment Augmentation Update PPT Dennis Kubly 15 Tamarisk Leaf Beetle Invasion to the Colorado River Ecosystem in the Grand 

Canyon PPT Larry Stevens 

16 Life Cycle Impact Assessment (LCIA) of Renewable Electrical Generation Technologies Compared to the WECC Baseline Report Clayton Palmer 

 Document(s) Distributed but not Formally Presented 

 17 Memo from Clayton Palmer dated 9/25/09 submitting the final report for the “Annotated Bibliography for 

the Humpback Chub (Gila cypha) with Emphasis on the Grand Canyon Population” prepared by Argonne National Laboratory 

18 Nonnative Fish Control Plan: Summary of Primary Revisions from TWG Review PPT 

 Kara Hilwig Matthew Andersen 19 GCMRC Response to TWG Comments dated Sept. 18, 2009 

20 E-mail message from Kurt Dongoske Kurt Dongoske 21 Agenda for GCMRC FY09 Annual Project Reporting Meeting John Hamill
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM (A)
UNAUDITED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR SIX MONTHS ENDED JUNE 30, 1998 AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH (B) QUARTERLY REPORT ON FORM
10-QSB.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                           4,543
<SECURITIES>                                   104,930
<RECEIVABLES>                                    4,743
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               739,286
<PP&E>                                         997,887
<DEPRECIATION>                                 141,622
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               3,459,621
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        2,954,975
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                     42,427
<COMMON>                                       184,650
<OTHER-SE>                                     537,699
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 3,459,621
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               130,385
<CGS>                                          365,078
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  632,285
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               220,040
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             185,572
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                721,940 
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            721,940 
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   721,940 
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.04)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.04)
        

</TABLE>
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 99-6246
ROBERT KNOTTS, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus FRANK MCGUIRT, Defendant - Appellee.Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Graham C. Mullen, Chief District Judge. (CA-99-14-3-2-MU) Submitted: May 13, 1999 Decided: May 19, 1999Before WIDENER and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Robert Knotts, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Robert Knotts appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp. 1998) complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Knotts v. McGuirt , No. CA-99-14-3-2-MU (W.D.N.C. Feb. 12, 1999). We dispense with oral argument becausethe facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
# L_2009322EN.01004001.xml

| 9.12.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 322/40 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

9.12.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 322/40

---

Corrigendum to Commission Decision 2009/442/EC of 5 June 2009 implementing Directive 2007/2/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards monitoring and reporting

(
  Official Journal of the European Union L 148 of 11 June 2009
  )

On the second page of the cover, at the end of the title of Commission Decision 2009/442/EC, the footnote reference ‘(1)’ is deleted.

1

On page 18, the sub-title ‘(Text with EEA relevance)’ is deleted.

---
The Honorable Catherine D. Perry, United States District Judge for the Eastern 1 District of Missouri. 

## United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 97-3369

___________ Robin McGhee, * * Plaintiff - Appellant, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the Eastern * District of Missouri. Northwest Airlines, Inc., * * [UNPUBLISHED] Defendant - Appellee. * *

___________ Submitted: May 15, 1998 Filed: June 4, 1998

___________ Before BEAM, LOKEN, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM. Robin McGhee appeals from a judgment entered on a jury verdict denying Title VII race and sex discrimination claims against her employer, Northwest Airlines, Inc. See42 U.S.C. 2000e et seq. She argues that she is entitled to a new trial because of the denial of her motion to compel discovery of interview notes taken during Northwest’s int ernal investigation of her claims. The district court denied the motion to compe l 1 after finding that the particular documents were protected work product. See-2-

Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b)(3). The notes fall within this categ ory and Northwest never asked witnesses t o testify about the contents of the interviews, but McGhee argues she i s entitled to them b ecause they are relevant to her claim that Northwest took inadequate remed ialaction. As an additional basis for a new trial she argues the court erred i n instructing the jury. We have carefully considered the arguments and after reviewing the recor d find that there was no abuse of discretion in the district court’s discovery ru ling and that the instructions as a whole fairly submitted the case to the jury. Se e Karcher v. Emerson Elec. Co. , 94 F.3d 502, 509 (8th Cir. 1996) ; cert. denied , 117 S.Ct. 1692 (1997). For these reasons we affirm the judgment. A true copy.
Attest: CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
AO 440 (Rev. 06112) Summons in a Civil Action 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

for the 

District of Oregon 

SPEARHEAD ROOFING, LLC, an Oregon limited 

liability corporation, 

Plaintiff(s) 

v. 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

Civil Action No. 1 :15-cv-00147-CL 

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS 

AFFAIRS 

Defendant(s) 

SUMMONS IN A CIVIL ACTION 

To: (Defendant's name and address) United States Department of Veterans Affairs 

A lawsuit has been filed against you. 

Within 21 days after service of this summons on you (not counting the day you received it) - or 60 days if you 

are the United States or a United States agency, or an officer or employee of the United States described in Fed. R. Civ. 

P. 12 (a)(2) or (3) - you must serve on the plaintiff an answer to the attached complaint or a motion under Rule 12 of 

the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The answer or motion must be served on the plaintiff or plaintiff s attorney, 

whose name and address are: David W. Smiley, Esq. 

Marks, Finch, Thornton & Baird, LLP 

4747 Executive Drive, Suite 700 

San Diego, California 92121 

If you fail to respond, judgment by default will be entered against you for the relief demanded in the complaint. 

You also must file your answer or motion with the court. 

CLERK OF COURT 

Date: _________ _ 

Signature of Clerk or Deputy Clerk 

Case 1:15-cv-00147-CL Document 6 Filed 02/03/15 Page 1 of 2
AD 440 (Rev. 06112) Summons in a Civil Action (Page 2) 

Civil Action No. 1:15-cv-00147-CL 

PROOF OF SERVICE 

(This section should not be filed with the court unless required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 4 (I)) 

This summons for (name of individual and title, if any) 

was received by me on (date) 

o I personally served the summons on the individual at (place) 

on (date) ; or --------------------------------------------- -----------------

o I left the summons at the individual's residence or usual place of abode with (name) 

, a person of suitable age and discretion who resides there, ----------------------------------

on (date) , and mailed a copy to the individual's last known address; or --------------

o I served the summons on (name of individual) ,who is --------------------------------------- designated by law to accept service of process on behalf of (name of organization) 

on (date) ; or --------------------------------------------- -----------------

o I returned the summons unexecuted because ; or -----------------------------------------

o Other (specify): 

My fees are $ for travel and $ for services, for a total of $ 0.00 -------

I declare under penalty of perjury that this information is true. 

Date: 

Server's signature 

Printed name and title 

Server's address 

Additional information regarding attempted service, etc: 

Case 1:15-cv-00147-CL Document 6 Filed 02/03/15 Page 2 of 2
NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.

United States Court of Appeals 

for the Federal Circuit

__________________________ 

SHELIA WINSETT, 

Claimant-Appellant, 

v. 

ERIC K. SHINSEKI, SECRETARY OF VETERANS 

AFFAIRS, 

Respondent-Appellee. 

__________________________ 

2012-7180 

__________________________ 

Appeal from the United States Court of Appeals for 

Veterans Claims in case no. 12-784, Judge Alan G. Lance, 

Sr. 

__________________________ 

ON MOTION

__________________________ 

PER CURIAM. 

O R D E R

Shelia Winsett moves for reconsideration of the 

court’s November 21, 2012 order denying her “Motion 

Notifying Court Secretary Shinseki Has Filed Notice of 

Appearance Under Perjury Illegal.” Winsett also submits 

a motion entitled “Asking Permission to File a Reply to 

Case: 12-7180 Document: 21 Page: 1 Filed: 04/09/2013
SHELIA WINSETT V. SHINSEKI 2

Respondent’s Response to Motion Regarding Notice of 

Appearance.” 

Upon consideration thereof, 

IT IS ORDERED THAT: 

(1) The motion for leave to file a reply is granted.

(2) The motion for reconsideration is denied. 

 

FOR THE COURT

 /s/ Jan Horbaly 

 Jan Horbaly

 Clerk

s26 

Case: 12-7180 Document: 21 Page: 2 Filed: 04/09/2013
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON 

PORTLAND DIVISION 

LA WREN CE P. CIUFFITELLI, et al., 

Plaintiffs, 

V. 

DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP, et al., 

Defendants. 

MOSMAN,J., 

No. 3:16-cv-00580-AC 

OPINION AND ORDER 

On September 21, 2018, Defendant Deloitte & Touche LLP's ("Deloitte") moved to 

compel documents related to Plaintiffs' financial condition at the time of their Aequitas security 

transactions and to Plaintiffs' damages claims. 1 [364]. On December 10, 2018, Judge Acosta 

issued an Order on Defendant's Motion to Compel [421] that denied Deloitte's September 2018 

Motion as well as a second motion to compel filed in October 2018. Deloitte filed objections 

[431] to Judge Acosta's order denying the September 2018 motion to compel documents related 

to Plaintiffs' financial condition. Plaintiffs filed a response [446] opposing Deloitte's objections. 

DISCUSSION 

When a magistrate judge has ruled on a non-dispositive matter, I may reconsider his 

decision only if the objecting party has "shown that the magistrate judge's order is clearly 

1 The parties reached agreement regarding production of documents related to damages 

claims before Judge Acosta issued his Order. [ 405]. 

1 - OPINION AND ORDER 
en-oneous or contrary to law." 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l)(A); see also Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(a). I am 

not required to review the factual or legal conclusions of a magistrate judge to which a party has 

not objected. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985); United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 

1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003). While the level of scrutiny with which I am required to review the 

magistrate judge's decision depends on whether the matter is dispositive and whether objections 

have been filed, in either case, I am free to accept, reject, or modify any pati of the magistrate 

judge's recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l)(C). 

Upon careful review, I agree with Judge Acosta's analysis, and I affam his Order [421] 

denying Deloitte's Motion to Compel Production of Plaintiffs' Financial Condition and Damages 

Documents. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

DATED this ~ day of February, 2019. 

Chief United es District Judge 

2 - OPINION AND ORDER
ROARING FORK RIVER AB DIFFICULT C NR ASPEN, CO.Latitude: 39.141Longitude: -106.774Elevation: 8120

ROARING FORK RIVER AB DIFFICULT C NR ASPEN, CO.

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Chapman Tunnel Site Page...



Chapman Tunnel

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Upper Taylor Site Page...



Upper Taylor

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Brumley Site Page...



Brumley

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Independence Pass Site Page...



Independence Pass
Potential LTEMP Experiments

WY 2023

TWG

October 12, 2022

1
LTEMP Flow Experiments 

w/ WY 2023 Potential

GCD Experimental Flow Duration Implementation 

Window

Spring HFE∆ up to 96 hours March – April

Proactive Spring HFE∆◊ 24 hours** April – June

Trout Management Flows up to 3 cycles/month for 4 months May – August

Macroinvertebrate Flows target 2-3 replicates May – August

Fall HFE up to 96 hours October - November

Extended Duration Fall HFE 97- 192* or 97-250 hours*** October - November

∆ no Spring HFE in same WY as extended duration Fall HFE

◊ no proactive Spring HFE in same WY as sediment-driven Spring HFE

* First test not to exceed 192 hours

** First test 24 hours

*** After first test, up to 250 hours

2
3
USGS Preliminary Data, 2022. Do Not Cite. 

(https://www.gcmrc.gov/discharge_qw_sediment/station/GCDAMP/09382000# )

Discharge

July 1, 2022 – September 22, 2022

Cumulative Sand Load

July 1, 2022 – September 22, 2022 ~ 1,000,000 metric tons

Paria River Discharge & Sand Inputs
Sand Mass Balance Results

At 33,100 cfs, up to a 192-hour HFE would be 

triggered based on the lower bound mass balance 
Considering Alternate 

Hydrographs:

1) 24-hour

2) 48-hour

3) 96-hour

4) 144-hour

*192-hour was triggered

Also varied reallocation options:

(D) = December

(DJ) = December and January

(DJF) = December, January, and Februrary

(MAM) = March, April, and May

6

Resource Considerations

Resource Concerns:

o Hydrology and Operations

o Hydropower impacts

o Non-native Fish

o SMB at -12m slough

o Green Sunfish

8
9
10
11

Estimated Total HFE Cost
Resource 

Consideration

• Fish Monitoring Update • Entrainment • Dispersal
Fall WY 2023 HFE Timeline

13

• Next Steps

o PA notification sent out 9/27

o Virtual AMWG/TWG webinar: 9/27

o Feedback due 9/29 for PI Team, 9/30 for Leadership Team / Secretary’s Designee.

o Send directly to cfullard@usbr.gov and melissa_mata@fws.gov

o Final Technical Team call and recommendation: 9/29

o Leadership team recommendation: 10/3-5

o DOI decision: ~10/5

o Notification of decision: ~10/6-8

o Potential Implementation: 11/7
Planning and Implementation

• Planning / Implementation team coordination

• Strives for consensus recommendation to DOI

• Secretary of the Interior makes decision

14
Consultation

With Tribes, AZGFD, States, and UCRC as requested

15
Improvements to PI Team Process 

in the Future

•More notice to Parties to the PA:

• Currently required to send out notice 30 days from 

potential action, but we’ll strive for 45-60 days to allow 

for more time.

•Continue to host AMWG/TWG webinar

• Feedback is submitted to LT and Secretary’s Designee

16
Thank you

Clarence Fullard

303-253-1042 (work cell)

cfullard@usbr.gov