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

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                      24,701,098
<SECURITIES>                                 2,907,895
<RECEIVABLES>                               31,950,246
<ALLOWANCES>                                 7,523,000
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            86,689,149
<PP&E>                                      75,088,780
<DEPRECIATION>                              15,684,448
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             317,077,788
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       88,991,922
<BONDS>                                    205,952,369
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                       15,974,073
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        57,703
<OTHER-SE>                                 (22,304,220)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               317,077,788
<SALES>                                     37,933,875
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            37,933,875
<CGS>                                       34,529,630
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               34,529,630
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               613,921
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           8,921,082
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (29,670,483)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (29,670,483)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (29,670,483)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (0.52)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (0.52)
        

</TABLE>
STATE v. McLEAN.

No. COA07-1513.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed July 1, 2008.

Certification Date July 21, 2008.

Appeal from Wake (06CRS37197).

Case reported without published opinion. No error.
# Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 28/2014Show full title

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 28/2014 of 19 December 2013 entering a name in the register of protected designations            of origin and protected geographical indications [West Country Lamb (PGI)]         

        - Previous
        - Next

U.K.

# Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 28/2014                     

# of 19 December 2013

# entering a name in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications [West Country Lamb                        (PGI)]                     

THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

Having regard to Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 November 2012 on quality                           schemes for agricultural products and foodstuffs(1), and in particular Article 52(2) thereof,                        

Whereas:

(1)Pursuant to Article 50(2)(a) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012, the United Kingdom’s application to register the name ‘West                              Country Lamb’ was published in the *Official Journal of the European Union* (2).

(2)As no statement of opposition under Article 51 of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 has been received by the Commission, that name                              should therefore be entered in the register,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

# Article 1U.K.

The name contained in the Annex to this Regulation is hereby entered in the register.

# Article 2U.K.

This Regulation shall enter into force on the twentieth day following that of its publication in the *Official Journal of the European Union*.                  

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 19 December 2013.

*For the Commission, On behalf of the President*,                           

Dacian Cioloș                            

*Member of the Commission*                            

## ANNEXU.K.

Agricultural products intended for human consumption listed in Annex I to the Treaty:

### **Class 1.1.****Fresh meat (and offal)**U.K.

#### UNITED KINGDOMU.K.

West Country Lamb (PGI)

1

OJ L 343, 14.12.2012, p. 1.                           

2

OJ C 231, 9.8.2013, p. 9.
Exhibit








Exhibit 10.1 


SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE PROGRESSIVE CORPORATION EXECUTIVE SEPARATION ALLOWANCE PLAN
(2015 Amendment and Restatement)


WHEREAS, The Progressive Corporation (“Company”) currently maintains The Progressive Corporation Executive Separation Allowance Plan (“Plan”) pursuant to the 2015 Amendment and Restatement, as amended by First Amendment thereto; and


WHEREAS, the Company desires to amend the Plan further; 


NOW, THEREFORE, the Plan is hereby amended as follows, effective as of July 1, 2016:


		
	1.
	Section 1.9 of the Plan is hereby amended and restated in its entirety to provide as follows:




“1.9    “Eligible Employee” means a regular, non-temporary employee of a Participating Employer who is eligible to receive annual restricted stock or other annual stock-based awards under The Progressive Corporation 2015 Incentive Plan or any similar plan as determined by the Company, or whose annual compensation within the meaning of Section 401(a)(17) of the Code exceeds the maximum amount allowed under such Code Section.  Notwithstanding anything in the Plan to the contrary, Eligible Employees shall not include (i) any person classified by a Participating Employer or any Affiliated Company as an independent contractor or as an employee of an entity other than a Participating Employer or Affiliated Company, (ii) any person whose terms and conditions of employment are governed by a collective bargaining agreement,  (iii) any person who receives a one-time restricted stock award or other stock-based award, but who is not eligible to receive regular, annual restricted stock awards or other stock-based awards, or (iv) the Company’s Chairman of the Board at any time that he or she is an employee of the Company but is not also acting as the Company’s Chief Executive Officer.”


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, The Progressive Corporation has hereunto caused this Amendment to be executed by its duly authorized representative on the 16th day of May, 2016.


                        
THE PROGRESSIVE CORPORATION






By:  /s/Charles E. Jarrett                                                              
                        Name and Title:  Charles E. Jarrett, Vice President
    and Secretary
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0000930548
<NAME> RECKSON ASSOCIATES REALTY CORP
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1996
<CASH>                                          10,308
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   12,717
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                23,025
<PP&E>                                         385,676
<DEPRECIATION>                                  80,297
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 355,686
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           19,017
<BONDS>                                        149,033
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           104
<OTHER-SE>                                     143,640
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   355,686
<SALES>                                         40,412
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                41,759
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   17,133
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               5,785
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 11,322
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             11,322
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                  (895)
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     7,114
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .80
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .80
        

</TABLE>
<PAGE>
                                                                      EXHIBIT 12

RATIO OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES:


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                     THREE MONTHS ENDED               NINE MONTHS ENDED
                                                               ------------------------------   -------------------------------
                                                               SEPTEMBER 30,    SEPTEMBER 30,    SEPTEMBER 30,    SEPTEMBER 30,
                                                                   2000             2001             2000             2001
                                                               -------------    -------------    -------------    -------------
                                                                      (IN THOUSANDS)                    (IN THOUSANDS)
<S>                                                              <C>             <C>             <C>              <C>
Net loss ................................................        $(12,445)        $ (7,333)        $(20,057)        $(16,142)
     Add fixed charges:
     Interest expense including amortization of debt
       issuance cost ....................................           4,128            5,303           12,246           14,610
                                                                 --------         --------         --------         --------
Earnings (loss) .........................................        $  8,317         $  2,030         $  7,811         $  1,532
Fixed Charges

     Interest expense including amortization of debt
       issuance cost ....................................        $  4,128         $  5,303         $ 12,246         $ 14,610
                                                                 --------         --------         --------         --------

Total Fixed Charges .....................................        $  4,128         $  5,303         $ 12,246         $ 14,610
                                                                 ========         ========         ========         ========
Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges ......................              --               --               --               --
                                                                 ========         ========         ========         ========
Deficiency of Earnings to Cover Fixed Charges ...........        $ 12,445         $  7,333         $ 20,057         $ 16,142
                                                                 ========         ========         ========         ========
</TABLE>
STATE v. SAYAVONG.

No. COA08-64.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed July 1, 2008.

Certification Date July 21, 2008.

Appeal from Catawba (05CRS56774, 05CRS56775).

Case reported without published opinion. No error.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 02-1851

In Re: GRAND RIDGE CORPORATION, successor to Enterprize Park Corporation, Debtor.

HENRY T. OGLE, Appellant,
versus CHW, LLC, Creditor - Appellee,
CHRYSLER FINANCIAL; DAIMLERCHRYSLER SERVICES NORTH AMERICA L.L.C.; FORD MOTOR CREDIT COMPANY; AMERICAN EXPRESS CENTURION BANK; CIT GROUP/Equipment Financing, Incorporated; THE CINCINNATI INSURANCE COMPANY, Creditors, and
UNITED STATES TRUSTEE, Party in Interest.2 Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Asheville. Lacy H. Thornburg, District Judge. (CA-02-160) Submitted: December 31, 2002 Decided: January 13, 2003 Before NIEMEYER and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Henry T. Ogle, Appellant Pro Se. David G. Gray, Jr., WESTALL, GRAY, CONNOLLY & DAVIS, Asheville, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).3 PER CURIAM: Henry T. Ogle appeals from the district court’s order dismissing his appeal from the bankruptcy court’s order lifting the automatic stay in the underlying bankruptcy proceeding and allowing a foreclosure to proceed. Ogle, an attorney, is not a creditor of the bankruptcy estate as he has never filed a proof of claim and the time for doing so has expired. Moreover, the bankruptcy court denied Ogle permission to appear and represent Grand Ridge Corporation, and sanctioned him for attempting to do so. Therefore, we find that Ogle lacks standing to pursue this appeal and, accordingly, grant the Appellee’s motion to dismiss the appeal. See Nationwide Mut. Fire Ins. Co. v. Eason , 736 F.2d 130, 34 (4th Cir. 1984) (challenge to bankruptcy court's disposition must be made by those with requisite stake in the outcome). We deny the App ellee’s motion for sanctions and 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.

DISMISSED
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   Year
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          Dec-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             Dec-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               Dec-31-1997
<CASH>                                       5,662,849
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,806,054
<ALLOWANCES>                                    61,037
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             8,205,528
<PP&E>                                       1,787,882
<DEPRECIATION>                                 715,819
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              12,342,975
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        7,267,201
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                     78,057
<COMMON>                                        26,344
<OTHER-SE>                                   (380,552)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                12,342,975
<SALES>                                      (103,202)
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             3,134,769
<CGS>                                        3,237,971
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                3,237,971
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            13,491,073
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                86,880
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                           (13,594,275)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                       (13,594,275)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                              (13,594,275)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      (5)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      (5)
        

</TABLE>
Eric NEBLETT v. HANOVER INSPECTION SERVICE, INC. and John Harrington Wilson.

No. 515P07.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

March 6, 2008.

Vaiden Kendrick, Wilmington, for Eric Neblett.

*737Andrew McVey, Wilmington, for Hanover Inspection, et al,

*ORDER*

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 23rd day of October 2007 by Plaintiff in this matter for discretionary review of the decision of the North Carolina Court of Appeals pursuant to G.S. 7A-31, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

"Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 6th day of March 2008."
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>   5


<S>                                                                <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                                        YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                             DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                                                JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                                  DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                                             13,000
<SECURITIES>                                                            0
<RECEIVABLES>                                                           0
<ALLOWANCES>                                                            0
<INVENTORY>                                                             0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                                   69,000
<PP&E>                                                              2,000
<DEPRECIATION>                                                          0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                                     71,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                              56,000
<BONDS>                                                                 0
<COMMON>                                                           15,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                                   0
<PREFERRED>                                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                                     11,675,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                                       71,000
<SALES>                                                                 0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                                        0
<CGS>                                                                   0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                                           0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                                  691,000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                                        0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                                      0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                                  (691,000)
<INCOME-TAX>                                                            0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                              (691,000)
<DISCONTINUED>                                                          0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                                         0
<CHANGES>                                                               0
<NET-INCOME>                                                       (1,131)
<EPS-BASIC>                                                       (0.08)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                           0




</TABLE>
# Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 330/2014Show full title

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 330/2014 of 31 March 2014 establishing the standard import values for determining            the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables         

        - Previous
        - Next

U.K.

# Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 330/2014                     

# of 31 March 2014

# establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables

THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 of 22 October 2007 establishing a common organisation of agricultural                           markets and on specific provisions for certain agricultural products (Single CMO Regulation)(1),                        

Having regard to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 543/2011 of 7 June 2011 laying down detailed rules for the application                           of Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 in respect of the fruit and vegetables and processed fruit and vegetables sectors(2), and in particular Article 136(1) thereof,                        

Whereas:

(1)Implementing Regulation (EU) No 543/2011 lays down, pursuant to the outcome of the Uruguay Round multilateral trade negotiations,                              the criteria whereby the Commission fixes the standard values for imports from third countries, in respect of the products                              and periods stipulated in Annex XVI, Part A thereto.

(2)The standard import value is calculated each working day, in accordance with Article 136(1) of Implementing Regulation (EU)                              No 543/2011, taking into account variable daily data. Therefore this Regulation should enter into force on the day of its                              publication in the *Official Journal of the European Union*,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

# Article 1U.K.

The standard import values referred to in Article 136 of Implementing Regulation (EU) No 543/2011 are fixed in the Annex to                     this Regulation.                  

# Article 2U.K.

This Regulation shall enter into force on the day of its publication in the *Official Journal of the European Union*.                  

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 31 March 2014.

*For the Commission*,                           

*On behalf of the President*,                           

Jerzy Plewa                            

*Director-General for Agriculture and Rural Development*                            

## ANNEXU.K.Standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables

1

OJ L 299, 16.11.2007, p. 1.                           

2

OJ L 157, 15.6.2011, p. 1.
FREEMAN v. ROTHROCK, et al.

No. 163A08.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

August 8, 2008.

Joy H. Brewer, Ginny P. Lanier, Cary, for Rothrock, et al.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 7th day of August 2008 by Plaintiff for Extension of Time to File Brief:

"Motion Allowed. Plaintiff (Freeman) shall have up to and including the 21st day of "August 2008 to file and serve his/her brief with this Court. By order of the Court in conference this the 8th day of August 2008."