alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
WARNING: THE EDGAR SYSTEM ENCOUNTERED ERROR(S) WHILE PROCESSING THIS SCHEDULE.

<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000


                              EXHIBIT 27
                        Financial Data Schedule

<S>                                                <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                    9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                          22,218
<SECURITIES>                                     6,651
<RECEIVABLES>                                   93,682
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (5,178)
<INVENTORY>                                     10,020
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               143,333
<PP&E>                                         127,447
<DEPRECIATION>                                (63,256)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 306,352
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           80,310
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           661
<OTHER-SE>                                     133,631
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   306,352
<SALES>                                        385,666
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               385,666
<CGS>                                          261,134
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  261,134
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                95,168
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 1,119
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               5,005
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 24,940
<INCOME-TAX>                                    10,330
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             14,610
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    14,610
<EPS-BASIC>                                       1.26
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.15


</TABLE>
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

GAINESVILLE DIVISION

REHABCARE GROUP EAST INC.,

Plaintiff,

v. CASE NO.: 1:11cv66-SPM/GRJ

HEALTH FACILITIES INC.,

Defendant.

______________________________/

ORDER ON NOTICE OF CONFLICT WITH TRIAL PERIOD

THIS CAUSE comes before the Court for consideration of Plaintiff’s

Notice of Unavailability (doc. 26). Counsel for Plaintiff shall advise this Court in

writing on December 16, 2011, if the conflict noted still exists.

DONE ORDERED this twenty-ninth day of July, 2011.

s/ Stephan P. Mickle 

Stephan P. Mickle

Senior United States District Judge

Case 1:11-cv-00066-SPM-GRJ Document 27 Filed 07/29/11 Page 1 of 1
Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PANAMA CITY DIVISION

CHERYL MOORE.,

Plaintiff,

v. CASE NO. 5:11-cv-111-RS -GRJ

GULF COAST PODIATRY, P.A., 

Defendant.

_____________________________/

O R D E R

 Pending before the Court is Defendant’s Motion To Compel Discovery

Responses. (Doc. 29.) Pursuant to prior notice the Court held a telephonic hearing on

November 28, 2011 to address the motion. 

Defendant requests the Court to enter an order compelling Plaintiff to produce

additional records responsive to request to produce number six and to provide a more

complete response to interrogatory number 11. At the beginning of the hearing, counsel

for Defendant advised the Court that she and opposing counsel had resolved the two

issues relating to the incomplete discovery requests. Plaintiff has agreed to provide

additional documents responsive to request to produce number six and to certify that

Plaintiff does not have any other documents in her possession, custody or control

responsive to request to produce number six. 

With regard to interrogatory number eleven, Plaintiff has provided a

supplemental response to this interrogatory which cures the deficiency. The

supplemental response was not sworn by Plaintiff and therefore Defendant requested

and Plaintiff has agreed to provide the supplemental response executed by Plaintiff

Case 5:11-cv-00111-RS-GRJ Document 33 Filed 11/21/11 Page 1 of 2
Page 2 of 2

under penalty of perjury or sworn to before a notary public. 

Plaintiff is directed to provide to counsel for Defendant no later than November

28, 2011: (1) additional documents responsive to request to produce number six, (2) a

certification that Plaintiff does not have in her possession, custody or control any further

documents responsive to request to produce number six, and (3) the sworn

supplemental response to interrogatory number eleven.

Because the parties have resolved the issues in Defendant’s Motion to Compel

Discovery Responses, Defendant’s request for attorney’s fees pursuant to Rule

37(a)(5)(A) is due to be denied.

Accordingly, upon due consideration, it is ORDERED:

Defendant’s Motion To Compel Discovery Responses (Doc. 29) is due to be 

GRANTED to the limited extent that Plaintiff shall provide the additional

discovery responses agreed to by Plaintiff, and detailed in this order, on or

before November 28, 2011. Defendant’s request for attorney’s fees is denied.

DONE AND ORDERED this 21 day of November, 2011. 

st

s/ Gary R. Jones 

GARY R. JONES

United States Magistrate Judge

Case No: 5:11-cv-111-RS -GRJ

Case 5:11-cv-00111-RS-GRJ Document 33 Filed 11/21/11 Page 2 of 2
I 

115TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5720 

To deauthorize a portion of a project in California, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 9, 2018 

Mr. CALVERT (for himself, Mrs. TORRES, and Mr. AGUILAR) introduced the 

following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Transportation 

and Infrastructure 

A BILL 

To deauthorize a portion of a project in California, and 

for other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. LYTLE AND CAJON CREEKS, CALIFORNIA. 

4 That portion of the channel improvement project, 

5 Lytle and Cajon Creeks, California, authorized to be car6 ried out as a part of the Santa Ana River, California 

7 Project, that consists of five earth-filled groins commonly 

8 referred to as ‘‘the Riverside Avenue groins’’ shall no 


lotter on DSK3G9T082PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 5720 IH

1 longer be authorized as a Federal project as of the date 

2 of enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


lotter on DSK3G9T082PROD with BILLS
Page 1 of 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

GAINESVILLE DIVISION

ANDY VERTOONT,

Petitioner,

v. CASE NO. 1:11-cv-00128-MP-GRJ

DHS/ICE, JOHN GIBSON,

Respondents.

_____________________________/

O R D E R

This matter is before the Court on Mr. Vertoont’s petition to be released from ICE

custody, Doc. 1. The Magistrate Judge issued an Report and Recommendation, recommending

dismissal because Mr. Vertoont, at that time, was confined in the Southern District of Florida.

The time for filing objections has passed, and none have been filed. Indeed, the Report and

Recommendation was returned as undeliverable. Moreover, the ICE Online Detainee Locator

System indicates that Mr. Vertoont has been released from ICE custody within the last 60 days. 

Accordingly, it is hereby

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED:

1. The Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge is accepted and

incorporated herein. 

2. This case is dismissed, and the Clerk is directed to close the file.

DONE AND ORDERED this 15th day of August, 2011

 s/Maurice M. Paul 

 Maurice M. Paul, Senior District Judge

Case 1:11-cv-00128-MP-GRJ Document 7 Filed 08/15/11 Page 1 of 1
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 1**  **3 -**  **7285**

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee ,
v. TERRELL MACK EDWARDS , Defendant

- Appellant
.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina , at Raleigh
. James C. Dever, III , Chief District Judge. ( 5:0 5

- cr - 00 129

- D

- 1; 5:1 1

- cv - 00 774

- D )

Submitted : January 22, 2015 Decided: January 26, 2015

Before SHEDD, KEENAN, and DIAZ , Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by un published per curiam opinion
.
Terrell Mack Edwards , Appellant Pro Se. Jennifer P. May

- Parker, Assistant United States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM:
Terr ell Mack Edwards seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing as untimely his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C.
§ 2253(c)(1)(B) (2012). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2012). When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S . 473, 484 (2000); see Miller

- El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336

- 38 (2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable, and that the motion states a de batable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Slack , 529 U.S. at 484

- 85. We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Edwards has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss th e appeal. We deny Edwards’ motions to appoint counsel and to remand the case and the Government’s motion to place the case in abeyance
. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal3 contentions are adequately presented in the materials befor e th is court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
# Fourth Court of Appeals **San Antonio, Texas** MEMORANDUM OPINION
N o. 04

- 15

- 00384

- CR Raymond ZAPATA , Appellant

v. The State of TexasAppellee The STATE of Texas, Appellee From the 187th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas Trial Court No. 2014CR 6345 Honorable Steve Hilbig, Judge Presiding
PER CURIAM Sitting: Sandee Bryan Marion, Chief Justice Karen Angelini, Justice Marialyn Barnard, Justice Delivered and Filed: July 29, 2015
APPEAL DISMISSED Pursuant to a plea bargain agreement, defendant pled guilty to aggravated robbery and was sentenced within the terms of the plea bargain

. The trial court signed a certification of defendant’s right to appeal stating that this “is a plea

- bargain case, and the defendant has NO right of appeal

. ”
See T EX
. R. A PP
. P . 25.2(a)(2). Rule 25.2(d) provides, “The appeal must be dismissed if a certification that shows the defendant has the right of appeal has not been made part of the record under these rul es.” T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 25.2(d). Accordingly, on July 16, 2015 , this court issued an order stating this appeal would be dismissed pursuant to Rule 25.2(d) unless an amended trial court04

- 15

- 00384

- CR

- 2

- certification that shows defendant has the right of appeal was made part of the appellate record. See Daniels v. State , 110 S.W.3d 174 (Tex. App.

— San Antonio 2003, order); T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 25.2(d); 37.1.
On July 20 , 20 15 , defenda nt’s appellate counsel filed a response to our order stating he was

“ compelled to concede that [d efendant] has no right of appeal from the underlying criminal case” and that this court “may dismiss th is appeal for that reason .” In light of the record presented, we agree with defendant’s counsel that Rule 25.2(d) requires this court to dismiss this ap peal. Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed.

PER CURIAM Do not publish
<PAGE>  



PRICING SUPPLEMENT NO. 204 DATED                       Filed Pursuant to
February 29, 1996 TO PROSPECTUS DATED                  Rule 424(b)(5)
March 29, 1994 AS AMENDED BY PROSPECTUS                File No. 33-51877
DATED October 14, 1995


                           CMS ENERGY CORPORATION

     General Term Notes (servicemark of J.W. Korth & Company), Series A
                 Due 9 Months to 25 Years from date of issue

       Except as set forth herein, the General Term Notes (servicemark of
J.W. Korth & Company) offered hereby (the "Notes") have such terms as are
described in the accompanying Prospectus dated October 14, 1995.

Aggregate Principal Amount:               $492,000.00       
Original Issue Date (Settlement Date)      March 5, 1996    
Stated Maturity Date:                      December 15, 1998
Issue Price to Public:                    100.00% of Principal Amount
Interest Rate:                            6.000% Per Annum
Interest Payment Dates:                   June 15 and December 15 and
                                          semi-annually thereafter
                                          Commencing June 15, 1996
Survivor's Option:                        [ X ] Yes    [   ] No
Optional Redemption:                      [   ] Yes    [ X ] No

       Agent                              Principal Amount of Notes
                                           Solicited by Each Agent
Prudential Securities Incorporated        $370,000.00       
EVEREN Securities, Inc.                   $      0.00       
First of Michigan Corporation             $ 17,000.00       
Roney & Co.                               $ 70,000.00       
J.W. Korth & Company                      $ 35,000.00       
       Total                              $492,000.00       

                                            Per Note
                                          Sold by Agents
                                           To Public           Total

Issue Price:                              $1,000.00          $492,000.00  
Agent's Discount or Commission:           $    5.00          $  2,460.00  
Maximum Dealer's Discount or
  Selling Concession:                     $   10.50          $  5,166.00  
Proceeds to the Company:                  $  984.50          $484,374.00  

CUSIP Number:   12589QJS6   
<PAGE>
Exhibit 31.1



CERTIFICATION OF THE PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE
OFFICER

PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY
ACT OF 2002



I, Paul M. Galvin, certify that:



|1. | I have reviewed this Amendment No. 1 to the Annual Report on Form 10-K/A of SG Blocks, Inc. for the year ended December 31, 2014; and
|-- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|2. | Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report.
|-- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------





|March 31, 2015 | /s/ Paul M. Galvin             
|-------------- | -------------------------------
|               | Name: Paul M. Galvin           
|               | Title:  Chief Executive Officer
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 10 (Tuesday, January 15, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Page 2545]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 08-116]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NATIONAL FOUNDATION ON THE ARTS AND THE HUMANITIES


Institute of Museum and Library Services; Sunshine Act Meeting of 
the National Museum and Library Services Board

AGENCY: Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS), NFAH.

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

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

SUMMARY: This notice sets forth the agenda of the forthcoming meeting 
of the National Museum and Library Services Board. This notice also 
describes the function of the Board. Notice of the meeting is required 
under the Sunshine in Government Act.

TIME AND DATE: Wednesday, January 30, 2008 from 1:30 p.m. to 4:30 p.m.

AGENDA: Thirteenth National Museum and Library Services Board Meeting:

I. Welcome.
II. Approval of Minutes.
III. Financial Update.
IV. Legislative Update.
V. Board Program: An Overview of State Library Programs.
VI. Board Updates.
VII. Adjournment.
(Open to the Public).

PLACE: The meeting will be held in the Perdue Board Room at the High 
Museum of Arts, 1280 Peachtree Street, NE., Atlanta, Georgia. 
Telephone: (404) 733-4400.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Elizabeth Lyons, Special Events and 
Board Liaison, Institute of Museum and Library Services, 1800 M Street, 
NW., 9th Floor, Washington, DC 20036. Telephone: (202) 653-4676.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The National Museum and Library Services 
Board is established under the Museum and Library Services Act, 20 
U.S.C. section 9101 et seq. The Board advises the Director of the 
Institute on general policies with respect to the duties, powers, and 
authorities related to Museum and Library Services. If you need special 
accommodations due to a disability, please contact: Institute of Museum 
and Library Services, 1800 M Street, NW., 9th FL., Washington DC 20036. 
Telephone: (202) 653-4676; TDD (202) 653-4699 at least seven (7) days 
prior to the meeting date.

    Dated: January 10, 2008.
Kate Fernstrom,
Chief of Staff.
[FR Doc. 08-116 Filed 1-11-08; 11:12 am]
BILLING CODE 7036-01-M
# C_2011203EN.01000101.xml

| 9.7.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 203/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

9.7.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 203/1

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.6236 — Dana/Bosch Rexroth/Dana Rexroth Transmission Services JV)

(Text with EEA relevance)

2011/C 203/01

On 27 June 2011, 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:

| — | 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/en/index.htm) under document number 32011M6236. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to the European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/en/index.htm) under document number 32011M6236. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to the European law.

---
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

RODNEY DEAN JACKSON, 

Plaintiff-Appellant, 

 v. 

ANDREW M. SAUL, Commissioner of 

Social Security, 

Defendant-Appellee.

No. 18-17442 

D.C. No. 1:17-cv-00165-GSA 

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of California

Gary S. Austin, Magistrate Judge, Presiding

Submitted April 6, 2021**

Before: SILVERMAN, GRABER, and CLIFTON, Circuit Judges.

Rodney Jackson appeals the district court’s judgment affirming the 

Commissioner of Social Security’s denial of his application for disability insurance 

benefits and supplemental security income under Titles II and XVI of the Social 

Security Act. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and 42 U.S.C. 

* 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

APR 8 2021

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 

§ 405(g). We review the district court’s affirmance of the administrative law 

judge’s (“ALJ”) decision de novo and will reverse only if the ALJ’s decision is not 

supported by substantial evidence or if the ALJ applied the wrong legal standard. 

Molina v. Astrue, 674 F.3d 1104, 1110 (9th Cir. 2012), superseded by regulation 

on other grounds. We affirm the district court’s judgment.

Substantial evidence supports the ALJ’s finding that Jackson’s testimony 

regarding his physical symptoms and limitations was “not entirely credible.” The 

ALJ performed the required two-step analysis and provided “specific, clear and 

convincing reasons” for her finding. Tommasetti v. Astrue, 533 F.3d 1035, 1039 

(9th Cir. 2008) (quoting Smolen v. Chater, 80 F.3d 1273, 1281 (9th Cir. 1996)). 

The ALJ properly relied on contradictions between the medical record, including 

an examining doctor’s opinion, and Jackson’s testimony about his back pain and 

limitations. See Rollins v. Massanari, 261 F.3d 853, 857 (9th Cir. 2001). The ALJ 

also properly considered Jackson’s course of treatment and failure to follow up 

with prescribed treatment. See Molina, 674 F.3d at 1113–14 (ALJ may consider 

claimant’s failure to seek treatment or to follow a prescribed course of treatment); 

Meanel v. Apfel, 172 F.3d 1111, 1114 (9th Cir. 1999) (subjective pain complaints 

properly discredited where claimant received “minimal” and “conservative” 

treatment).

AFFIRMED.
# U nit edSta tes C ou rt o f A pp eal s For t h e Firs t C ircu it

No. 10-1484 DOWNING/SALT POND PARTNERS, L.P., Plaintiff, Appellant,

v . STATE OF RHODE ISLAND AND PROVIDENCE PLANTATIONS, ET AL., Defendants, Appellees.

ERRATA SHEET The opinion of this Court issued on May 23, 2011, is amended as follows. On page 3, line 3, "well-plead" is deleted and replaced with "well-pled". On page 5, line 23, "cease and desist" is deleted and replaced with "cease-and-desist". On page 6, line 4, "cease and desist" is deleted and replaced with "cease-and-desist". On page 8, line 15, "Downing/Salt Pond Partners, 698 F. Supp. 2d 278" is deleted and replaced with "Downing/Salt Pond Partners, L.P. v. Rhode Island, 698 F. Supp. 2d 278 (D.R.I. 2010)". On page 8, line 20, "F.Supp.2d" is deleted and replaced with "F. Supp. 2d". On page 28, line 11, "plaintiffs" is deleted and replaced with "a plaintiff".
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

WESTERN DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

MICHAEL BRYANT HENRY,

Petitioner :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 59 WAL 2018

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from

the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 10th day of July, 2018

, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is

DENIED

.