alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Glen Canyon Dam Technical Work Group 

FINAL Meeting Minutes 

May 3, 2004 

Conducting: Dennis Kubly, Acting Chairman 

Committee Members Present: 

Mary Barger, WAPA 

Marklyn Chee, Navajo Nation 

Wayne Cook, UCRC 

William Davis, CREDA 

Lisa Force, Grand Canyon Trust 

Lloyd Greiner, UAMPS 

Christopher Harris, CRB/CA 

Amy Heuslein, BIA 

Matt Kaplinski, GCRG 

Robert King, UDWR 

Glen Knowles, USFWS 

Phillip Lehr, Colo. River Comm./NV 

Ken McMullen, NPS/GCNP 

Bill Persons, AGFD 

John Ritenour, NPS/GLCA 

Larry Stevens, Grand Canyon Wildlands Council 

Michael Yeatts, Hopi Tribe 

Committee Members Absent: 

Illa Bullets, So. Paiute Consortium 

Kerry Christensen, Hualapai Tribe 

Jonathan Damp, Pueblo of Zuni 

Norm Henderson, NPS 

D. Randolph Seaholm, CWCB 

Mark Steffen, Federation of Fly Fishers 

John Shields, WY State Engineers Office 

John Whipple, NM Interstate Stream Comm. 

Vacant, Arizona Dept. of Water Resources

Alternates Present: For: 

Jeff English Mark Steffen, Federation of Fly Fishers 

Wayne Cook John Shields, WY State Engineers Office 

Interested Persons: 

Gary Burton, WAPA 

Lew Coggins, USGS/GCMRC 

Kurt Dongoske, CREDA 

Helen Fairley, USGS/GCMRC 

Paul Li, Bob Lynch’s Office 

Mike Liszewski, USGS/GCMRC 

Jeff Lovich, USGS/GCMRC 

Mark McKinstry, USBR 

Ted Melis, USGS/GCMRC 

Anthony Miller, Colo. River Comm./NV 

Barbara Ralston, USGS/GCMRC 

Chris Updike, USGS/GCMRC 

Mike Yard, USGS/GCMRC 

Meeting Recorder: Linda Whetton, USBR 
Glen Canyon Dam Technical Work Group 

Minutes of May 3-4, 2004, Meeting 

Page 8 

Glen Canyon Dam Technical Work Group 

FINAL Meeting Minutes

May 4, 2004 

Conducting: Dennis Kubly, Acting Chairman 

Committee Members Present: 

Mary Barger, WAPA 

Marklyn Chee, Navajo Nation 

Wayne Cook, UCRC 

William Davis, CREDA 

Lisa Force, Grand Canyon Trust 

Lloyd Greiner, UAMPS 

Christopher Harris, CRB/CA 

Amy Heuslein, BIA 

Matt Kaplinski, GCRG 

Robert King, UDWR 

Glen Knowles, USFWS 

Phillip Lehr, Colo. River Comm./NV 

Ken McMullen, NPS/GCNP 

Bill Persons, AGFD 

John Ritenour, NPS/GLCA 

Larry Stevens, Grand Canyon Wildlands Council 

Michael Yeatts, Hopi Tribe 

Committee Members Absent: 

Illa Bullets, So. Paiute Consortium 

Kerry Christensen, Hualapai Tribe 

Jonathan Damp, Pueblo of Zuni 

Norm Henderson NPS 

D. Randolph Seaholm, CWCB 

Mark Steffen, Federation of Fly Fishers 

John Shields, WY State Engineers Office 

John Whipple, NM Interstate Stream Comm. 

Vacant, Arizona Dept. of Water Resources

Alternates Present: For: 

Jeff English Mark Steffen, Federation of Fly Fishers 

Wayne Cook John Shields, WY State Engineers Office 

Interested Persons: 

Gary Burton, WAPA 

Lew Coggins, USGS/GCMRC 

Kurt Dongoske, CREDA 

Helen Fairley, USGS/GCMRC 

Mike Liszewski, USGS/GCMRC 

Jeff Lovich, USGS/GCMRC 

Ted Melis, USGS/GCMRC 

Anthony Miller, Colo. River Comm./NV 

Chris Updike, USGS/GCMRC 

Meeting Recorder: Linda Whetton, USBR
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                   SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                             683,522
<SECURITIES>                                             0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   55,615,486
<ALLOWANCES>                                     3,440,680
<INVENTORY>                                              0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                52,858,328
<PP&E>                                           4,141,099
<DEPRECIATION>                                   2,137,854
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  64,099,768
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            3,931,405
<BONDS>                                                  0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                    0
<PREFERRED>                                              0
<COMMON>                                            39,117
<OTHER-SE>                                       6,039,827
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    64,099,768
<SALES>                                                  0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                16,642,918
<CGS>                                                    0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    9,345,572
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                         0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 3,885,424
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               3,706,770
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   (294,848)
<INCOME-TAX>                                      (112,042)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               (182,806)
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                          0
<CHANGES>                                                0
<NET-INCOME>                                      (182,806)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                         (.05)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                         (.05)
                                               


</TABLE>
# C_2021020EN.01000201.xml

| 19.1.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 20/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.1.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 20/2

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.9974 — Groupe Crédit Agricole/Groupe Generali/Europ Assistance France/Viavita)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2021/C 20/02)

On 8 December 2020, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in French and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

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

—

in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/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 (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32020M9974. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32020M9974. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law.

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

---
#### LEMON v. SMITH et al.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department.

December 18, 1896.)

Action by J. Samuel Lemon, as administrator, etc., against Adon N. Smith and others, as executors, etc.

No opinion. Order affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. All concur.
Skip to main content

Privacy Policy•Site map

# Stephen S. Schwartz

Judge Schwartz was nominated to the U.S. Court of Federal Claims on June 7, 2017, confirmed on December 8, 2020, and received his commission on December 22, 2020.

Judge Schwartz graduated from Yale College in 2005. He received his J.D. from the University of Chicago Law School, where he was Online Editor of the University of Chicago Law Review and a Hinton Moot Court finalist. He clerked for Judge Jerry E. Smith on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.

Following his clerkship, Judge Schwartz was a litigation associate at D.C. law firm, focusing his practice on appellate and administrative law matters. He then joined a non-profit where he litigated cases related to federal government transparency and administrative agency discretion. In 2016 he joined a D.C. litigation boutique where he represented state and local governments in complex trial court and appellate proceedings, becoming a partner in 2017.

A native of Winona, Minnesota, he lives with his family in Arlington, Virginia.

Howard T. Markey National Courts Building • 717 Madison Place, NW, Washington, DC 20439 • 202-357-6400
#### Pauline A. McClary, as Administratrix of the Estate of Roger T. McClary, Deceased, Respondent, v Civil Service Employees Association, Inc., et al., Appellants.

Order unanimously reversed on the law without costs and motion granted. Memorandum: Defendants contend that Special Term erred in failing to grant their motion to dismiss plaintiffs complaint. We agree. Plaintiff’s complaint alleges that defendant unions were negligent and breached their duty of fair representation to decedent by failing to provide a safe workplace. It is also alleged that decedent was a third-party beneficiary of the job safety provisions of a contract between the State of New York and the Operational Services Unit of CSEA, Inc. Plaintiff has no cause of action for negligence, as the alleged failure by the unions to provide safe working conditions is not wholly outside the ambit of the collective bargaining agreement *(Condon v Local 2944,*683 F2d 590; *Herington v Civil Serv. Employees Assn.,*130 AD2d 961). The sole cause of action available to plaintiff is for breach of fair representation *(Herington v Civil Serv. Employees Assn., supra).*To sustain such a claim, a union member must allege bad faith, arbitrariness or discrimination on the part of the union *(Vaca v Sipes,*386 US 171; *Matter of Civil Serv. Bar Assn. v City of New York,*64 NY2d 188). Here, plaintiff does not allege that decedent was singled out and discriminated against, but rather that the unions breached their general duty to their members to provide a safe place to work. These allegations at best establish mere negligence, which is insufficient to sustain a cause of action for breach of a union’s duty of fair representation *(Smith v Sipe,*109 AD2d 1034, *revd for reasons stated in dissenting mem*67 NY2d 928; *Ferrara v American ACMI,*122 AD2d 930). Also, as decedent was not a State employee intended to benefit from the contract between the State and the Operational Services Unit of CSEA, Inc., plaintiff’s cause of action as a third-party beneficiary to this contract cannot stand *(Burns Jackson Miller Summit & Spitzer v Lindner,*59 NY2d 314, 336-337). (Appeal from order of Supreme Court, Steuben County, Curran, J.—summary judgment.) Present—Dillon, P. J., Doerr, Boomer, Pine and Lawton, JJ. *[See,*130 Misc 2d 883.]
# CI2021080EN.01000401.xml

| 9.3.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CI 80/4 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

9.3.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CI 80/4

---

Information communicated by Member States regarding closure of fisheries

(2021/C 80 I/04)

In accordance with Article 35(3) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009 of 20 November 2009 establishing a Union control system for ensuring compliance with the rules of the common fisheries policy (1), a decision has been taken to close the fishery as set down in the following table:

| Date and time of closure | 24.12.2020 |
| --- | --- |
| Duration | 24.12.2020 - 31.12.2020 |
| Member State | Belgium |
| Stock or Group of stocks | WHG/07A. |
| Species | Whiting (Merlangius merlangus) |
| Zone | 7a |
| Type(s) of fishing vessels | --- |
| Reference number | 38/TQ123 |

Date and time of closure

24.12.2020

Duration

24.12.2020 - 31.12.2020

Member State

Belgium

Stock or Group of stocks

WHG/07A.

Species

Whiting (Merlangius merlangus)

Zone

7a

Type(s) of fishing vessels

---

Reference number

38/TQ123

---

(1)  OJ L 343, 22.12.2009, p. 1.

---
U.S. Court of Federal Claims 

Schedule of Fees (effective 12/1/2023)

All fees are payable to the Clerk, U.S. Court of Federal Claims,

by cash, check, or money order.1 For cash payments, exact change is required.

FILING FEES

1. Complaint/Petition $405.002

2. Notice of Appeal $605.00

3. Petition to Perpetuate Testimony Under Rule 27(a) $52.00

4. Letters Rogatory/Request for Judicial Assistance $52.00

ATTORNEY ADMISSIONS FEES

5. Admission to Practice $299.003

6. Duplicate Certificate of Admission $21.00

7. Certificate of Good Standing $21.00

COPY FEES

8. Paper Documents $0.50/page

9. Certification of Document or Paper (in addition to cost of copy) $12.00

10. Exemplified Copy of Document or Paper $24.00

11. Audio Recording of Court Proceeding $34.00/disk

12. Copy of Document in Electronic Form $33.004

MISCELLANEOUS FEES

13. Payment Returned/Reversed or Denied for Insufficient Funds $53.00

14. Record Retrieval from Archives or other storage location 

 removed from the place of business of the court 

$70.00/first box; 

$43.00/each additional box

15. Electronic Record Retrieval (SmartScan) $20.90 plus $0.65/page5

16. Search of Court Records $34.00/name or item

17. Apostille $50.00

WITNESS FEES

18. Attendance $40.00/day

19. Automobile Mileage (effective 1/1/2023) $0.66 mile

For current and historic per diem rates, go to http://www.gsa.gov/perdiem. 

For historic automobile mileage rates, go to http://gsa.gov/mileage. 

1 If electronically filing a complaint, petition, or notice of appeal using the court’s case management/electronic case files (CM/ECF) 

system, the filer must pay the filing fee by credit card in CM/ECF. For refunds of duplicate or erroneously paid filing fees, please see 

the court’s Electronic Filing Fee Refund Policy on the court’s website http://www.uscfc.uscourts.gov/electronic-filing.

2 The $405.00 filing fee includes a $55.00 general administrative fee. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915, the $55.00 administrative fee is 

waived for prisoner-plaintiffs granted in forma pauperis (IFP) status and all filing fees are waived for non-prisoner plaintiffs granted 

IFP status.

3 Pursuant to RCFC 83.1(b)(4), the admission fee includes $100.00 above the amount prescribed by the Judicial Conference of the

United States for deposit in a fund to be used by the court for the benefit of members of the bench and the bar in the administration of 

justice.

4 This fee applies when the court provides a copy of a record in electronic form, that record is not stored in the court’s CM/ECF 

system, and no separate fee for a copy of a recording of a court proceeding applies. 

5 This service includes an $11.00 judiciary administrative fee and two additional Federal Records Center (FRC) fees: a $9.90 flat rate 

fee to pull and refile the record(s) and a $0.65 per page fee. The FRC fees are subject to change in accordance with the Inter-Agency 

Agreement between the Administrative Office of the United States Courts and the FRC.
##### 



Exhibit 23 CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement on Forms S-3 (No.
333-118920) and S-8 (No. 333-118785) of R-G Financial Corporation of our report dated March 15,
2005 relating to the financial statements, managements assessment of the effectiveness of internal
control over financial reporting and the effectiveness of internal control over financial
reporting, which appears in the 2004 Annual Report to Shareholders, which is incorporated in this
Annual Report on Form 10-K. /s/ PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS LLP
PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
San Juan, Puerto Rico
March 15, 2005
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.1

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Annual Report of TransAct Technologies Incorporated (the
"Company") on Form 10-K for the period ending December 31, 2005, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Bart C. Shuldman, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to
18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, that to the best of 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.

Date:  March 15, 2006


/s/ Bart C. Shuldman
-------------------------------------
Bart C. Shuldman
Chief Executive Officer


                                       63
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

EASTERN DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

ANTHONY REID,

Petitioner :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 236 EAL 2019

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from the Order of the Superior Court

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

ANTHONY REID,

Petitioner :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 237 EAL 2019

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 12th day of November, 2020

, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal

is DENIED

. The Application for Leave to File Post

- Submission Communication is

GRANTED

.

Chief Justice Saylor, Justice Baer and Justice Todd did not participate in the

consideration or decision of this matter.
Exhibit
32.1





CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO


SECTION
906 OF


THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In
connection with the Quarterly Report of Blount International, Inc. (the "Company") on Form
10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, James S.
Osterman, Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer of the Company,
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:




(i)           The
Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and





(ii)           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.





A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to
Blount International, Inc. and will be retained by Blount International, Inc.
and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.







Date: May
7, 2009








/s/ James S.
Osterman


James S.
Osterman


Chairman
and


Chief
Executive Officer
# C_2021121EN.01004501.xml

| 9.4.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 121/45 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

9.4.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 121/45

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.9970 — Cordes & Graefe/FACQ)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2021/C 121/03)

On 15 March 2021, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). 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:

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

—

in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/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 (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32021M9970. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32021M9970. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

---
* Local Rule 47.5 provides: "The publication of opinions

that have no precedential value and merely decide particular

cases on the basis of well-settled principles of law imposes

needless expense on the public and burdens on the legal

profession." Pursuant to that Rule, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published. 

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

__________________

No. 95-50083

Conference Calendar

__________________

THOMAS TINER,

 Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

TOMMY JONES, Etc., ET AL.,

 Defendants,

TOMMY JONES, Sheriff

of Crane County, Texas,

 Defendant-Appellee.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas 

USDC No. 94-CV-95

- - - - - - - - - -

June 28, 1995

Before JONES, WIENER, and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Thomas Tiner appeals the district court's denial of his

request for injunctive relief against Crane County, Texas, Jail

(Jail) officials. Tiner is no longer an inmate at the Jail by

his own admission and, therefore, his request for injunctive

relief is moot. See Hooten v. Jenne, 786 F.2d 692, 697 n.6 (5th

Cir. 1986). "Simply stated, a case is moot when the issues

presented are no longer `live' or the parties lack a legally

cognizable interest in the outcome." Powell v. McCormack, 395
No. 95-50083

-2-

U.S. 486, 496 (1969). The "mere possibility of future

consequences is too speculative to give rise to a case or

controversy." Bailey v. Southerland, 821 F.2d 277, 279 (5th Cir.

1987). 

Tiner's contention that he will be returned to the Jail at

some future date and the same allegedly unconstitutional

conditions will occur then is speculative. The case is moot. 

Thus, IT IS ORDERED that his appeal is DISMISSED.

APPEAL DISMISSED.