alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
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 Health and Human Services

Pursuant to the Federal Advisory Committee Act, the Department of Health and Human Services announces the following advisory committee meeting: 

*Name:*                     National Committee on Vital and Health Statistics (NCVHS), Subcommittee on Populations—Working Group on Quality.                 

*Time and Date:*                     8:30 a.m.-5 p.m., November 18, 2005.                 

*Place:*                     Hubert H. Humphrey Building, 200 Independence Avenue SW., Room 705A, Washington, DC 20201.                 

*Status:*                     Open.                 

*Purpose:*                     At this meeting the Working Group on Quality will study the expected impact of the electronic health record on health measurement and quality, hearing views from patients, the public health community, and other stakeholders.                 

*Contact Person for More Information:*                     Substantive program information as well as summaries of meetings and a roster of Committee members may be obtained from Anna Poker, Lead Staff Person for the NCVHS Subcommittee on Special Populations, Working Group on Quality, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Center for Quality Improvement and Patient Safety, 540 Gaither Road, Room #3331, Rockville, MD 20850, Phone: 301-427-1802; or Marjorie S. Greenberg, Executive Secretary, NCVHS, NCHS, CDC, 3311 Toledo Road, Hyattsville, Maryland 20782, telephone (301) 458-4245. Information also is available on the NCVHS home page of the HHS Web site:                     *http://aspe.os.dhhs.gov/​ncvhs,*                     where an agenda for the meeting will be posted when available.                 

Should you require reasonable accommodation, please contact the CDC Office of Equal Employment Opportunity on (301) 458-4EEO (4336) as soon as possible. 

Dated: October 20, 2005. 

James Scanlon, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Science and Data Policy, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation. 

[FR Doc. 05-21806  Filed 11-1-05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4151-05-M
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<MULTIPLIER>                  1
<CURRENCY>                    U.S. Dollars                 
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              MAR-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                                 APR-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                   SEP-30-1997
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                          1
<CASH>                                             409,504
<SECURITIES>                                             0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        2,216
<ALLOWANCES>                                             0
<INVENTORY>                                        157,622
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                   700,302
<PP&E>                                           8,369,198
<DEPRECIATION>                                   3,024,946
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   6,047,032
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            1,701,388
<BONDS>                                                  0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                    0
<PREFERRED>                                              0
<COMMON>                                             7,184
<OTHER-SE>                                       4,141,871
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     6,047,032
<SALES>                                          1,474,641
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 3,313,038
<CGS>                                              807,883
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    2,564,101
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                         0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                         0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  44,690
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    704,247
<INCOME-TAX>                                       227,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                477,247
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                          0
<CHANGES>                                                0
<NET-INCOME>                                       477,247
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                          .69
<EPS-DILUTED>                                          .69
                                                 

</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                          25,060
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   35,185
<ALLOWANCES>                                       453
<INVENTORY>                                      5,889
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                68,754
<PP&E>                                         367,898
<DEPRECIATION>                                 108,217
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 396,436
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           51,160
<BONDS>                                        182,917
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                      5,814
<COMMON>                                         4,230
<OTHER-SE>                                      83,533
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   396,436
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               169,064
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  129,928
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              11,563
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 26,038
<INCOME-TAX>                                     1,895
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              4,844
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     4,844
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.13
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.13
        

</TABLE>
#### STATE v. DAVIS

No. 87 PC.

Case below: 35 N.C. App. 277.

Petition by defendant for writ of certiorari to North Carolina Court of Appeals denied 8 May 1978.
United States Department of Labor

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

__________________________________________

In the Matter of M.S., Appellant

and

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, 

TRANSPORTATION SECURITY 

ADMINISTRATION, Los Angeles, CA, Employer

__________________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Docket No. 20-0120

Issued: October 27, 2023

Appearances: Case Submitted on the Record

Daniel M. Goodkin, Esq., for the appellant

Office of Solicitor, for the Director

ORDER GRANTING FEE PETITION

Before:

ALEC J. KOROMILAS, Chief Judge

JANICE B. ASKIN, Judge

JAMES D. McGINLEY, Alternate Judge

Counsel for appellant has filed a fee petition in the amount of $537.00.1 The Board notes 

that all petitions for approval of fees for representatives’services are considered under the Board’s 

statutory authority found at section 8127 of the Federal Employees’ Compensation Act,2(FECA) 

and under its Rules of Procedure found at 20 C.F.R. § 501.9(e).3

As required by the Board’s regulations, appellant has been afforded written notice of the 

fee requested and provided an opportunity to comment on the fee petition. 4 Attached to the fee 

petition is a signed acknowledgement by appellant consenting to the fee in the amount of $537.00.

1 FECA (5 U.S.C. § 8127(b)) and its implementing regulation (20 C.F.R. § 501.9) require the Board to review each 

fee petition on its own merits and with regard to the unique facts and issues of each appeal.

2

Id. at § 8127.

3

20 C.F.R. § 501.9(e).

4

Id.
2

The Board has reviewed the fee petition and finds it is in compliance with the Board’s 

Rules of Procedure.

5

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the fee petition is granted in the amount of $537.00.

Issued: October 27, 2023

Washington, DC

Alec J. Koromilas, Chief Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

Janice B. Askin, Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

James D. McGinley, Alternate Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

5

Id.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                         404,384
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    1,145
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                    223,700
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               680,404
<PP&E>                                       8,131,794
<DEPRECIATION>                               2,322,208
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               6,489,990
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        2,255,160
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         7,184
<OTHER-SE>                                   4,034,570
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 6,489,990
<SALES>                                        355,823
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               737,365
<CGS>                                          216,049
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  824,016
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              20,206
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (86,651)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (9,332)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (77,319)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (77,319)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.11)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.11)


</TABLE>
Mortensen v. State, 115 Nev. 273, 286, 986 P.2d 1105, 1114 (1999) 

(internal quotation marks omitted). We review the district court's decision 

to grant or deny a new trial for abuse of discretion. Servin v. State, 117 

Nev. 775, 792, 32 P.3d 1277, 1289 (2001). 

The record reveals that the district court reviewed the 

pleadings, considered the parties' arguments, and found that the 

bankruptcy documents were not newly discovered evidence because the 

victim testified about her pending bankruptcy proceedings at trial, the 

documents merely confirmed the victim's testimony that she did not 

change the registration on her car while the bankruptcy proceedings were 

pending, the documents were inadmissible extrinsic evidence under NRS 

50.085(3), and the documents were cumulative because defense counsel 

thoroughly cross-examined the victim about her ownership of the car and 

her bankruptcy proceedings.' The district court further found that Harsh 

failed to demonstrate that the documents would be offered for something 

more than contradicting, impeaching, or discrediting a former witness or 

that the trial result would have been different if the witness was 

impeached with the documents. And the district court determined that 

Harsh failed to make a factual showing that would justify an evidentiary 

hearing and did not satisfy the requirements for a new tria1. 2 

'Our review of the trial transcript reveals that testimony regarding 

the victim's bankruptcy proceedings was brought out during directexamination but was not explored on cross-examination. 

2During the hearing on the motion for a new trial, Harsh informed 

the district court that the evidentiary hearing was necessary to determine 

whether defense counsel could have discovered or produced the 

bankruptcy documents at trial with the exercise of due diligence. 

SUPREME COURT 

OF 

NEVADA 2 

(0) 1947A ceo 
Having reviewed the evidence at issue and the record before 

us, we conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion by 

denying Harsh's request for an evidentiary hearing and motion for a new 

trial. Accordingly, we 

ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED. 

Hardesty 

tee,4,t1/4-1 , J. 

J. Ch24T. 

Douglas Cherry 

cc: Hon. Douglas Smith, District Judge 

Oronoz & Ericsson 

Attorney General/Carson City 

Clark County District Attorney 

Eighth District Court Clerk 

SUPREME COURT 

OF 

NEVADA 3 

(01 1947A cafe4.9 

WI 1
Exhibit 10.3.5



AMENDMENT NO. 5

TO THE

UNIFIED WESTERN GROCERS, INC.

SHELTERED SAVINGS PLAN



Unified Western Grocers, Inc. (the Company) hereby amends the above-named plan (the Plan), effective as of March 28, 2005, as follows;



1. Article VI of the Plan is hereby amended by adding the following new Section 6.13 to read as follows:



Section 6.13: Automatic Rollover. In the
event of a mandatory distribution greater than $1,000 in accordance with the provisions of Article VI, if the Participant does not elect to have such distribution paid directly to an Eligible Retirement Plan specified by the Participant in a direct
rollover or to receive the distribution directly in accordance with Article VI, then the Committee shall pay the distribution in a direct rollover to an individual retirement plan designated by the Committee.



* * * * *



The Company has caused this Amendment No. 5 to be signed on the date indicated below, to be effective as indicated above.



|                          |  |  |  |                               |  |                            |  |                         
|------------------------- |  |  |  | ----------------------------- |  | -------------------------- |  | ------------------------
|                          |  |  |  | Company                    
|                          |  | 
|                          |  |  |  | UNIFIED WESTERN GROCERS, INC.
|                          |  |  | 
|Dated:    August 17, 2005 |  |  |  | By:                           |  | /s/    ROBERT M. LING,
JR.
|                          |  |  |  |                               |  |                            |  | Robert M. Ling, Jr.     
|                          |  |  |  |                               |  | Its:                       |  | Executive Vice President
|                          |  |  |  |                               |  |                            |  | General Counsel
#### BOST v. BANK

No. 602

Case below: 1 N.C. App. 470.

Petition for writ of *certiorari*to North Carolina Court of Appeals denied 23 August 1968.
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 220 (Wednesday, November 16, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Page 69586]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-22737]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE


Notice of Lodging Proposed Consent Decree

    In accordance with Departmental Policy, 28 CFR 50.7, notice is 
hereby given that a proposed Consent Decree in United States of America 
v. Lone Moose Meadows, LLC, No. CV 05-76-BU-SEH, (D. Mt.) was lodged 
with the United States District Court for the District of Montana on 
November 3, 2005.
    This proposed Consent Decree concerns a complaint filed by the 
United States against Lone Moose Meadows, LLC pursuant to section 
309(b) and (d) of the Clean Water Act (``CWA''), 33 U.S.C. 1319(b) and 
(d), to obtain injunctive relief from and impose civil penalties 
against the Defendant for violating the Clean Water Act by discharging 
pollutants without a permit into waters of the United States. The 
proposed Consent Decree resolves these allegations by requiring the 
Defendants to restore impacted areas, perform mitigation and to pay a 
civil penalty.
    The Department of Justice will accept written comments relating to 
this proposed Consent Decree for thirty (30) days from the date of 
publication of this Notice. Please address comments to Leif Johnson, 
Assistant United States Attorney, PO Box 1478, Billings, Montana 59103 
and refer to United States of America v. Lone Moose Meadows, LLC, et 
al. and DJ <greek-i>90-5-1-1-17261.
    The proposed Consent Decree may be examined at the Clerk's Office, 
United States District Court for the District of Montana, Butte 
Division, 303 Federal Building, 400 North Main St., Butte, Montana 
59701. In addition, the proposed Consent Decree may be viewed at http://www.usdoj.gov/enrd/open.html.

    Dated: November 8, 2005.
Scott Schachter,
Assistant Chief, Environmental Defense Section, Environment & Natural 
Resources Division.
[FR Doc. 05-22737 Filed 11-15-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-15-M
#### SLADE v. BOARD OF EDUCATION

No. 11 PC.

Case below: 10 N.C. App. 287.

Petition for writ of *certiorari*to North Carolina Court of Appeals denied 3 March 1971.
**Exhibit32.1**

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO**

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

In connection withthe Quarterly Report of K-tel International, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Qfor the period ended December 31, 2005, as filed with the Securities andExchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Philip Kives,certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

1.               The Report fullycomplies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934; and

2.               The informationcontained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.

A signed originalof this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to theCompany and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities andExchange Commission or its staff upon request.
| By                                   |   /s/ PHILIP KIVES |   |
|--------------------------------------|------------------------------|--------|
| Philip Kives                         |
| *Chairman, Chief Executive Officer,* |
| *President and Director*             |
| November 22, 2006                    |

 

 

----
**EXHIBIT 23**
**INDEPENDENT AUDITORS’ CONSENT**
We consent to the incorporation by reference in RegistrationStatement Nos. 2-64879, 2-80037, 33-18081, 33-23793,33-41485, 33-43459, 33-45479, 33-55825, 33-58851, 33-64345 and333-08141 of Sears, Roebuck and Co.; Registration StatementNo. 33-92082 of Sears, Roebuck and Co. and Sears RoebuckAcceptance Corp.; Registration Statement Nos. 33-64775,333-18591, and 333-43309 of Sears, Roebuck and Co. and Sears,Roebuck and Co. Deferred Compensation Plan; RegistrationStatement No. 333-102114 of Sears, Roebuck and Co. and theSears 401(K) Savings Plan (formerly, The Savings and ProfitSharing Fund of Sears Employees and the Sears 401(K) ProfitSharing Plan) and Lands’ End, Inc. Retirement Plan;Registration Statement No. 33-44671 of Sears, Roebuck andCo. and Sears DC Corp.; Registration StatementNo. 333-38131 of Sears, Roebuck and Co. and the SearsAssociate Stock Ownership Plan; Registration StatementNo. 333-52056 of Sears, Roebuck and Co. and the 2000Employee Stock Plan; Registration Statement No. 333-72514of Sears, Roebuck and Co. and the 2001 Broad-Based Stock OptionPlan; and Registration Statement No. 333-87942 of Sears,Roebuck and Co. and the 2002 Non-Employee Director Stock Plan,of our report dated February 28, 2003 (which reportexpresses an unqualified opinion and includes an explanatoryparagraph relating to changes in accounting principles to adoptnew accounting standards) appearing in the Annual Report onForm 10-K of Sears, Roebuck and Co. for the year endedDecember 28, 2002.
/s/ Deloitte & Touche LLPChicago, IllinoisMarch 12, 2003
#### MARKHAM v. SWAILS

No. 161 PC.

Case below: 29 N.C. App. 205.

Petition by plaintiff for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 denied 17 June 1976. Motion of defendants to dismiss appeal for failure to comply with Rule 36 allowed 17 June 1976.
#### HALL v. PUBLISHING CO.

No. 279 PC

Case below: 46 NC App 760

Petition by plaintiff for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 denied 15 August 1980. Motion of defendants to dismiss appeal for lack of substantial constitutional question allowed 15 August 1980.
#### STATE v. POWELL

No. 168 PC.

Case below: 18 N.C. App. 732.

Petition for writ of certiorari to North Carolina Court of Appeals denied 31 August 1973.