alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
H. Res. 853 

In the House of Representatives, U. S., 

December 11, 2007. 

Whereas the oil spill that occurred on November 7, 2007, in 

the San Francisco Bay resulted in the discharge of between 53,570 and 58,000 gallons of toxic bunker fuel, 

causing one of the Bay Area’s worse environmental disasters; 

Whereas 28 beaches were closed and over 1,300 birds so far 

have been severely impacted by the spill; 

Whereas thousands of individuals throughout the San Francisco Bay Area immediately volunteered to assist with the 

cleanup; 

Whereas Bay Area community non-profit organizations, such 

as San Francisco Connect, have also rallied to support 

the response and recovery work by supporting these volunteer efforts; 

Whereas Bay Area environmental organizations, such as 

Baykeeper, Save the Bay, and the Bay Institute, have 

provided invaluable leadership in reporting, assessing, 

and helping to remediate the damage to the Bay’s ecosystem; 

Whereas the Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen’s Associations, members of the San Francisco Crab Boat Own-
2 

•HRES 853 EH 

ers Association, commercial crabbers, and other Bay Area 

fishermen have all joined the cleanup efforts as well; and 

Whereas the city of San Francisco, particularly through its 

Department of Emergency Management, has significantly 

contributed to the overall response, bringing considerable 

resources to bear: Now, therefore, be it 

Resolved, That the House of Representatives honors 

those individuals and organizations who have volunteered to 

assist in the cleanup of the November 7, 2007, oil spill in one 

of our Nation’s most beloved national treasures, the San 

Francisco Bay. 

Attest: 

Clerk.
#### Mackay *v.*Maxwell, Sheriff, et al.

(No. 24931

— Decided October 31, 1934.)

*Mr. Henry G. Binns*and *Mr. 8. U. Robinson,*for plaintiff in error.

*Mr. John R. Twmer,*for defendants in error.

It is ordered and adjudged that said petition in error be, and the same hereby is, dismissed for the reason no debatable constitutional question is involved in said cause.

*Petition in error dismissed.*

Weygandt, C. J., Stephenson, Jones, Matthias, Bevis, Zimmerman and Wilkin, JJ., concur..
<PAGE>

                                                                   Exhibit 10.51

                                 AMENDMENT NO. 1
                                       TO
                              EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT

         This Amendment No. 1 to Employment Agreement ("Agreement") is entered
into between LOWRANCE ELECTRONICS, INC., a Delaware corporation having offices
at 12000 East Skelly Drive, Tulsa, Oklahoma 74128 ("Employer" or "Company"), and
Bobby G. Callaway, an individual currently residing at 23405 S. 289th W. Ave.,
Bristow, Oklahoma 74010-3270 ("Employee"), to be effective as of March 27, 2004.

         In consideration of the mutual promises, covenants, and obligations
contained herein, the parties agree as follows:

         1. RECITALS.

                  (a) Employer and Employee entered into a certain Employment
Agreement (the "Employment Agreement") dated as of March 27, 2000 (the
"Effective Date"). Capitalized terms used but not defined herein shall have the
meanings ascribed to them in the Employment Agreement.

                  (b) The Initial Term of the Employment Agreement ended on
March 27, 2002, without either party having provided the other party with
written notice of termination.

                  (c) The Renewal Term of the Employment Agreement automatically
began on March 27, 2002, and will expire on March 27, 2004.

                  (d) Employer and Employee desire to enter into this Agreement
to extend the Renewal Term of the Employment Agreement for one (1) additional
year.

         2. AMENDMENT. The definition of "Renewal Term", as such term is used in
Exhibit A to the Employment Agreement, is hereby amended to mean the period
commencing on the expiration of the Initial Term and terminating on March 27,
2005. For purposes of the Employment Agreement, "Term" shall mean the period
commencing on the Effective Date and terminating upon the expiration of the
Renewal Term, as amended herein.

         IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Employer and Employee have duly executed this
Agreement in multiple originals to be effective on the date first written above.

LOWRANCE ELECTRONICS, INC.                    EMPLOYEE

By: ________________________________          ______________________________
    Darrell J. Lowrance, President            Bobby G. Callaway

This ____ day of ___________, 2004.           This ____ day of __________, 2004.
Exhibit 23.1

 

CONSENTOF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

 

 

Rave Restaurant Group, Inc.

The Colony, Texas

 

 

Wehereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on Forms S-8 (Nos. 033-71700, 333-77617, 333-76296,333-177436 and 333-207428) and Forms S-3 (Nos. 333-197507 and 333-219483) of Rave Restaurant Group, Inc. of our report dated September20, 2017, relating to the consolidated financial statements, which appears in this Form 10-K. 

 

 

 

MontgomeryCoscia Greilich LLP

Plano,Texas

 

September20, 2017
|What's New · 
   What's Next · 
   Site Map · 
   A-Z Index ·
   Careers ·
   RSS ·
   All Videos ·
   Current FAQs ·
   Contact Us |  | Search  Advanced Search | 
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |  | ----------------------- | 

Aboutthe Fed
    News& Events
    MonetaryPolicy
    BankingInformation& Regulation
    PaymentSystems
    EconomicResearch& Data
    Consumer Information
    CommunityDevelopment
    ReportingForms
    Publications


skip to content 
 Home Economic Research & Data Statistical Releases and Historical Data
 DDP Print
   Industrial Production and Capacity Utilization - G.17 Current Release
  Release Dates
  Monthly Supplement
  Annual Revision
  Data Download
  About
  Announcements
  Technical Q&As
 Current Release  (272 KB PDF)
(ASCII)  Table 3 Motor Vehicle Assemblies  Item
2014Average
2014
2015
2015Q3
Q4
Q1
Q2
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.Total
11.66
12.00
11.76
11.56
12.16
11.81
12.11
12.57
11.81
13.38
11.78Autos
4.25
4.39
4.28
4.09
4.34
4.26
4.37
4.59
4.05
4.64
3.54Trucks
7.41
7.61
7.48
7.47
7.83
7.54
7.75
7.98
7.76
8.74
8.23Light
7.12
7.31
7.18
7.15
7.50
7.21
7.42
7.65
7.44
8.43
7.92Medium and heavy
.29
.30
.30
.32
.32
.33
.32
.33
.31
.32
.31Memo:Autos and light trucks
11.37
11.70
11.47
11.24
11.84
11.47
11.79
12.24
11.49
13.06
11.47      Return to top
   Home Economic research and data
 Accessibility Contact Us Disclaimer  Linking Policy FOIA
 PDF Reader
B.7. Selected Measures of Financial Performance of Agricultural and Other Small Banks

Percent

Distribution of net income as a Average rate Rate N

share of average equity at of return of return 

agricultural banks on equity to assets 

25 percent Agri- Other Agri- Other A

Negative 0-4 5-9 10-14 15-19 20-24 and cultural Small cultural small cu

Period All banks income percent percent percent percent percent over banks Banks banks banks ba1997...... 100.0 1.6 5.9 34.5 39.7 14.2 3.1 1.1 11.4 12.3 1.2 1.2 1998...... 100.0 2.0 8.7 35.6 35.5 13.4 3.5 1.3 11.3 11.7 1.2 1.2 1999...... 100.0 2.9 7.9 34.8 33.3 14.2 4.9 1.9 11.8 11.9 1.2 1.1 2000...... 100.0 2.4 8.9 35.3 33.5 13.8 4.2 1.8 11.7 11.4 1.2 1.1 2001...... 100.0 3.1 12.6 37.6 28.6 13.1 3.7 1.3 10.8 10.4 1.1 1.0 2002...... 100.0 3.0 10.7 35.1 31.4 13.5 4.6 1.7 11.5 10.6 1.2 1.1 2003...... 100.0 2.7 12.2 36.6 29.3 12.9 4.4 1.8 11.2 10.7 1.2 1.1 2004...... 100.0 2.1 10.0 34.9 31.4 13.8 5.8 2.0 11.5 10.5 1.2 1.1 2005...... 100.0 1.7 10.1 34.5 29.9 14.6 6.4 2.8 11.8 10.7 1.2 1.1 2006...... 100.0 2.7 10.9 35.7 30.1 13.1 4.6 2.8 11.4 10.1 1.2 1.1 2007...... 100.0 3.2 12.3 36.6 29.4 11.8 4.5 2.2 10.6 7.7 1.1 .9 2003: Q2... n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 6.0 5.6 .6 .6  Q3... n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 8.9 8.5 .9 .8  Q4... n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 11.2 10.7 1.2 1.1 2004: Q1... n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 2.9 2.7 .3 .3  Q2... n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 6.1 5.5 .6 .5  Q3... n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 8.9 8.0 .9 .8  Q4... n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 11.5 10.5 1.2 1.1 2005: Q1... n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 3.0 2.9 .3 .3  Q2... n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 5.9 5.6 .6 .6  Q3... n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 9.0 8.3 .9 .8  Q4... n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 11.8 10.7 1.2 1.1 2006: Q1... n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 3.0 2.7 .3 .3  Q2... n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 6.1 5.7 .6 .6  Q3... n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 9.0 8.0 .9 .9  Q4... n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 11.4 10.1 1.2 1.1 2007: Q1... n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 2.8 2.3 .3 .3  Q2... n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 5.7 4.6 .6 .5  Q3... n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 8.4 6.6 .9 .7  Q4... n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 10.6 7.7 1.1 .9 2008: Q1... n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 3.0 1.5 .3 .2  Note. Agricultural and other banks are defined in the introduction to section B; small banks have less than $500 million in assets. Total primary anavailable at the end of the period specified) are measured as a percentage of total assets. Quarterly data are cumulative through the end of the quarte n.a. Not available.27
#### Nerissa Johnson, Respondent, v Lord & Taylor, a Division of The May Department Stores Company, Appellant. (And a Third-Party Action.)

[807 NYS2d 367]

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Walter B. Tolub, J.), entered July 27, 2004, which, to the extent appealed, denied defendant-appellant Lord *&*Taylor’s motion for summary judgment, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, and the motion granted. The Clerk is directed to enter judgment in favor of defendant-appellant dismissing the complaint.

The complaint alleged discriminatory denial of use of a public accommodation based upon Executive Law § 296 (2) (a). Allegedly, as plaintiff, an African-American woman, exited Lord & Taylor’s Fifth Avenue store, a security sensor sounded, and when the security guard responded, he requested that plaintiff pass through the sensor a second time and made no similar request of a Caucasian woman who exited immediately before plaintiff and continued on her way. The sensor did not sound when plaintiff was scanned the second time and the security guard advised her that she was free to leave without searching her shopping bag or person.

The motion court erred in denying Lord & Taylor summary judgment. In response to Lord *&*Taylor’s prima facie case that the momentary detention of plaintiff, by asking her to pass through the sensor a second time, had a legitimate, nondiscriminatory basis, i.e., the sensor’s sounding *(see*General Business Law § 218), plaintiff offered only speculative, conclusory statements insufficient to raise a triable issue of material fact *(see Scott v Citicorp Servs.,*91 NY2d 823, 825 [1997]; *Zuckerman v City of New York,*49 NY2d 557, 562 [1980]). No competent record evidence indicated that Lord & Taylor’s nondiscriminatory explanation of the incident was a pretext for racially disparate treatment, that plaintiff otherwise suffered racial discrimination or that the security guard even saw the Caucasian woman plaintiff described. If anything, the evidence suggests that Lord & Taylor’s conduct towards plaintiff during the incident was *436responsive and respectful. Hence, the issue of Lord & Taylor’s liability for the actions of the employee of its independent contractor/security firm is academic *(see Matter of Totem Taxi v New York State Human Rights Appeal Bd.,*65 NY2d 300, 304 [1985]). Concur—Friedman, J.P., Sullivan, Nardelli, Williams and Sweeny, JJ.
DEFENDANT: John Phillip Gallegos

YEAR OF BIRTH: 1971

ADDRESS: Seattle, Washington

COMPLAINT FILED? YES X NO 

IF YES, PROVIDE MAGISTRATE CASE NUMBER: 

HAS DEFENDANT BEEN ARRESTED ON COMPLAINT? YES X NO

IF NO, A NEW WARRANT IS REQUIRED

OFFENSE: Counts 1, 2, 5, 6, 12: Wire Fraud, 18 U.S.C. § 1343

Counts 13, 15: Engaging in Monetary Transactions in Property Derived from

Specified Unlawful Activity, 18 U.S.C. § 1957

LOCATION OF OFFENSE: Denver, Boulder, and Douglas Counties, Colorado

PENALTY: Counts 1, 2, 5, 6, 12 (Each Count): NMT 20 years’ imprisonment and/or NMT

$250,000 fine; $100.00 Special Assessment Fee.

Counts 13, 15 (Each Count): NMT 10 years’ imprisonment and/or NMT 

$250,000 fine; $100.00 Special Assessment Fee

AGENT: Special Agent Scott Doner, F.B.I.

AUTHORIZED BY: Linda Kaufman

Assistant U.S. Attorney

ESTIMATED TIME OF TRIAL:

 five days or less X over five days other

THE GOVERNMENT

 X will seek detention in this case will not seek detention in this case

The statutory presumption of detention is not applicable to this defendant.

OCDETF CASE: Yes X No

Case No. 1:11-cr-00355-MSK Document 1-2 filed 08/31/11 USDC Colorado pg 1 of 1
### UNPUBLISHED



# UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT



#  U NITED S TATES OF A MERICA ,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v. No. 01-4025



# 
D EREK O. P ENDELTON , Defendant-Appellant. 

# 
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Alexander Williams, Jr., District Judge.

(CR-00-248) Submitted: January 30, 2002 Decided: February 25, 2002 Before WIDENER, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

COUNSEL James E. Joyner, Forest Heights, Maryland, for Appellant. Thomas M. DiBiagio, United States Attorney, Steven M. Dettelbach, Assistant United States Attorney, James M. Trusty, Assistant United States Attorney, Greenbelt, Maryland, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).OPINION
PER CURIAM: Derek Owen Pendelton was convicted by a jury of possession with intent to distribute cocaine base, 21 U.S.C.A. § 841 (West 1999 & Supp. 2001), felon in possession of a firearm, 18 U.S.C.A. § 922(g)(1) (West 2001), and possession of a firearm in furtherance of a drug trafficking crime, 18 U.S.C.A. § 924(c) (1994). Pendelton appeals his conviction. We affirm.
Pendelton asserts error in the district court’s denial of his motion to suppress the fruits of an search pursuant to a search warrant thathe claims was not supported by probable cause. The affidavit presented in support of the warrant application was supported by probable cause. The reliance of the requesting agent on information provided by a confidential informant was not misplaced, and theconfidential informant’s testimony at Pendelton’s trial further supported the district court’s finding that the magistrate judge had probable cause to issue the warrant. Illinois v. Gates , 462 U.S. 213, 236 (1983); United States v. Han , 74 F.3d 537, 539 (4th Cir. 1996). Pendelton also contends on appeal that the district court erred in denying his motion for mistrial when evidence was admitted that he possessed a gun prior to the date of the charged criminal activity."[E]vidence of uncharged conduct is not considered other crimes evidence if it arose out of the same . . . series of transactions as the charged offense, . . . or if it is necessary to complete the story of the crime (on) trial." United States v. Kennedy , 32 F.3d 876, 885 (4th Cir. 1994) (internal quotation marks omitted). Further, "the mere fact that the evidence involved activities occurring before the charged timeframe of the conspiracy does not automatically transform that evidence into ‘other crimes’ evidence." Id. Here, the testimony and statements at issue helped to explain the crime and rebutted the testimonyof one of Pendelton’s witnesses. The district court’s denial of Pendelton’s motion for a mistrial was not error. Accordingly, we affirm Pendelton’s convictions and sentence. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions 2 U NITED S TATES v. P ENDELTONare adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument will not aid in the decisional process.
AFFIRMED 3 U NITED S TATES v. P ENDELTON
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS

<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                          85,000
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                3,202,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                  (134,000)
<INVENTORY>                                  2,901,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               215,000
<PP&E>                                       3,430,000
<DEPRECIATION>                              (2,058,000)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               7,940,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        7,149,000
<BONDS>                                              0
<COMMON>                                       133,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                   (665,000)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 7,940,000
<SALES>                                     16,761,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            16,761,000
<CGS>                                       12,430,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               12,430,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             4,158,000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             749,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (576,000)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (576,000)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (576,000)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                 (   0.22)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 845 Engrossed in House (EH)]

                In the House of Representatives, U. S.,

                                                         March 4, 2008.
Whereas Everglades National Park celebrated its 60th anniversary on December 6, 
        2007;
Whereas when President Harry S. Truman dedicated Everglades National Park on 
        December 6, 1947, he stated: ``Here is land, tranquil in its quiet 
        beauty, serving not as the source of water, but as the last receiver of 
        it. To its natural abundance we owe the spectacular plant and animal 
        life that distinguishes this place from all others in our country'';
Whereas Marjory Stoneman Douglas gave the Everglades the name ``River of Grass'' 
        stating, ``There are no other Everglades in the world'';
Whereas Everglades National Park has been designated an International Biosphere 
        Reserve, a World Heritage Site, and a Wetland of International 
        Importance, in recognition of its significance to all the people of the 
        world;
Whereas the Everglades ecosystem encompasses 3,000,000 acres of wetlands and is 
        the largest subtropical wilderness in the United States featuring slow-
        moving freshwater that flows south from Lake Okeechobee through sawgrass 
        and tree islands to the mangroves and seagrasses of Florida Bay;
Whereas Everglades National Park is home to rare and endangered species, such as 
        the American crocodile, the Florida panther, and the West Indian 
        manatee, and more than 350 species of birds, including the Great Egret, 
        Wood Stork, Swallow-tailed Kite, and Roseate Spoonbill;
Whereas the Central and South Florida region is an international center for 
        business, agriculture, and tourism, with a rapidly growing population of 
        varied ethnic, economic, and social values, all of which are dependent 
        on a sustainable framework for the water resources of the region to 
        restore the Everglades ecosystem, provide adequate freshwater supplies, 
        and promote a healthy and sustainable economy and overall quality of 
        life;
Whereas Everglades National Park is an essential component of a larger ecosystem 
        restoration effort, the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan, which 
        has been described as the world's largest ecosystem restoration project; 
        and
Whereas this restoration effort must succeed in order to restore the natural 
        Everglades ecosystem and ensure that the treasures of Everglades 
        National Park can be passed on to our children and grandchildren: Now, 
        therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the House of Representatives--
            (1) recognizes the 60th anniversary of Everglades National Park; and
            (2) dedicates itself to the success of the Comprehensive Everglades 
        Restoration Plan.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```