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

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                          16,053
<SECURITIES>                                   109,010
<RECEIVABLES>                                    6,475
<ALLOWANCES>                                       219
<INVENTORY>                                      4,244
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                43,376
<PP&E>                                         185,922
<DEPRECIATION>                                  47,323
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 332,278
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           23,199
<BONDS>                                        233,740
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                           55,000
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           600
<OTHER-SE>                                      15,396
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   332,278
<SALES>                                         21,155
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                22,291
<CGS>                                           13,513
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   36,520
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             (7,844)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (15,065)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (14,203)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                  (238)
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (14,441)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.32)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.32)


</TABLE>
#### In the Matter of Diana Aitola, Appellant, v New York City Employees’ Retirement System et al., Respondents.

[808 NYS2d 727]

*605In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the New York City Employees’ Retirement System dated September 19, 2003, which denied the petitioner’s application for performance-of-duty disability retirement pursuant to Retirement and Social Security Law § 607-b, and instead, approved her application for ordinary disability retirement pursuant to Retirement and Social Security Law § 605, the petitioner appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Schmidt, J.), dated September 7, 2004, which denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

The New York City Employees’ Retirement System (hereinafter NYCERS) denied the petitioner’s application for performance-of-duty disability retirement pursuant to Retirement and Social Security Law § 607-b, which governs emergency medical technicians’ retirement under a disability received in the line of duty. Instead, NYCERS awarded her benefits under Retirement and Social Security Law § 605, which governs emergency medical technicians’ retirement for ordinary disabilities.

Credible evidence established that the petitioner’s psychiatric injuries were not job related, let alone caused by a discrete on-the-job incident. Thus, NYCERS’s determination, made in reliance upon the recommendation of the NYCERS Medical Board, was not arbitrary or capricious *(see Matter of Borenstein v New York City Employees' Retirement Sys.,*88 NY2d 756 [1996]). Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding *(see Matter of Nicolosi v Board of Trustees of N.Y. City Fire Dept., Art. 1-B Pension Fund,*198 AD2d 282, 283 [1993]; *Matter of Impellizeri v Teachers' Retirement Sys. of City of N.Y.,*173 AD2d 389 [1991]; *Matter of Hipple v Ward,*146 AD2d 201 [1989]). Florio, J.P., Krausman, Lifson and Lunn, JJ., concur.
IV 

110TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. RES. 980 

Authorizing the Committee on the Judiciary to initiate or intervene in judicial 

proceedings to enforce certain subpoenas. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 13, 2008 

Mr. CONYERS submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the 

Committee on Rules 

RESOLUTION 

Authorizing the Committee on the Judiciary to initiate or 

intervene in judicial proceedings to enforce certain subpoenas. 

1 Resolved, That the Chairman of the Committee on the 

2 Judiciary is authorized to initiate or intervene in judicial 

3 proceedings in any Federal court of competent jurisdic4 tion, on behalf of the Committee on the Judiciary, to seek 

5 declaratory judgments affirming the duty of any individual 

6 to comply with any subpoena that is a subject of House 

7 Resolution 979 issued to such individual by the Committee 

8 as part of its investigation into the firing of certain United 

9 States Attorneys and related matters, and to seek appro10 priate ancillary relief, including injunctive relief. 


smartinez on PRODPC61 with BILLS
2 

•HRES 980 IH 

1 SEC. 2. The Committee on the Judiciary shall report 

2 as soon as practicable to the House with respect to any 

3 judicial proceedings which it initiates or in which it inter4 venes pursuant to this resolution. 

5 SEC. 3. The Office of General Counsel of the House 

6 of Representatives shall, at the authorization of the 

7 Speaker, represent the Committee on the Judiciary in any 

8 litigation pursuant to this resolution. In giving that au9 thorization, the Speaker shall consult with the Bipartisan 

10 Legal Advisory Group established pursuant to clause 8 of 

11 Rule II. 

Æ 


smartinez on PRODPC61 with BILLS
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Civil Action No. 11-cv-02244-RM-MJW

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff(s),

v.

RICHARD WILMER, and

ROCK WEISS,

Defendant(s).

MINUTE ORDER 

Entered by Magistrate Judge Michael J. Watanabe

It is hereby ORDERED that Defendant Weiss’ Motion to Amend Final Pretrial

Order (docket no. 102) is GRANTED for the following reasons. The Final Pretrial Order

(docket no. 62) is amended STRIKING paragraph 4. STIPULATIONS in its entirety. 

The Complaint (docket no. 1) was filed with this court on August 26, 2011. 

Defendant Weiss has been representing himself pro se from the beginning of this case

until counsel Glenn H. Lenzen, David S. Steefel, and Sudee Mirsafian Wright entered

their appearances on April 1, 2013. See docket nos. 97, 98, and 99. Counsel for

Defendant Weiss did not draft or prepare the Final Pretrial Order (docket no. 62) that

was entered by this court on November 27, 2012. Instead, Plaintiff drafted and

prepared the Final Pretrial Order, noting that Defendant Weiss was representing himself

pro se at the time. It is clear that Defendant Weiss is an unsophisticated litigant who is

not trained in the law, and I find that he did not realize the legal consequences of

actions when he was confronted by Plaintiff with those STIPULATIONS numbered 1

through 27, inclusive, outlined in paragraph 4. captioned STIPULATIONS in the Final

Pretrial Order (docket no. 62). Furthermore, I find that these STIPULATIONS

[numbered 1 through 27, inclusive] relate to issues that are clearly disputed in this case

by Defendant Weiss. Lastly, I find that the Plaintiff [Government], which has the burden

of proof, should be required to prove that the materials on Co-Defendant Wilmer’s

property in 2009 were those sold by Defendant Weiss in 2006, that the materials had no

value or use when Defendant Weiss sold them to Co-Defendant Wilmer in 2006, and

that Defendant Weiss intended to dispose of them in violation of CERCLA when he sold

them to Co-Defendant Wilmer in 2006. Accordingly, based upon these findings and the

cases of Meno v., FedEx Corporate Servs., Inc., No. 11-cv-00874-CMA-MJW, 2012 WL

3038724, *1 (D. Colo. July 25, 2012), and Lozaya v. Garrou Const., Inc., No. 04-cvCase 1:11-cv-02244-RM-MJW Document 115 Filed 06/14/13 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 2
2

02569-WDM-MEH, 2006 WL 2331081, *2 (D. Colo. Aug. 10, 2006), the subject motion

(docket no. 102) should be granted in order to prevent manifest injustice consistent with

Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(e). 

Date: June 14, 2013

Case 1:11-cv-02244-RM-MJW Document 115 Filed 06/14/13 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 2
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                          14,413
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   96,615
<ALLOWANCES>                                     2,968
<INVENTORY>                                     83,196
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               235,960
<PP&E>                                         184,402
<DEPRECIATION>                                 118,518
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 320,701
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          125,645
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       102,756
<OTHER-SE>                                      92,300
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   320,701
<SALES>                                        260,975
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               346,155
<CGS>                                          138,800
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   41,510
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               186,993
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              (3,127)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (18,021)
<INCOME-TAX>                                    (7,408)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (10,613)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (10,613)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (0.39)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (0.39)
        

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

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1997             SEP-30-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             OCT-01-1996             OCT-01-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996             DEC-31-1995
<CASH>                                      16,728,974               1,661,724
<SECURITIES>                                         0                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                                4,427,158               3,720,478
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0                       0
<INVENTORY>                                  5,961,953               4,741,658
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            27,970,499              10,749,762
<PP&E>                                       2,166,301               2,082,870
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,206,930               1,097,717
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              29,032,447              11,962,992
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        6,470,929              11,786,411
<BONDS>                                              0                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0               5,780,650
<PREFERRED>                                          0                   5,046
<COMMON>                                        88,809                  17,405
<OTHER-SE>                                  22,108,658                 594,299
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                22,561,518                 176,581
<SALES>                                      5,865,536               3,017,347
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             5,865,536               3,017,347
<CGS>                                        2,527,529               1,259,149
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                4,713,005               2,735,179
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0                       0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0                       0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              1,220,002                 300,364
<INCOME-TAX>                                   415,802                       0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            804,200                 300,364
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0                       0
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                   804,200                 300,364
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .10                     .04
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .10                     .04
        

</TABLE>
IN THE FIRST COURT OF APPEALS OF TEXAS

RODNEY CARNELL MAYS § § VS. § CASE NO. 01-13- 00 805- CR § THE STATE OF TEXAS §

MOTION TO EXTEND TIME WITHIN WHICH TO FILE APPELLATE BRIEF

TO THE HONORABLE JUSTICES OF SAID COURT:

NOW COMES, RODNEY CARNELL MAYS, appellant in the above-styled

and numbered cause, by and through h is attorney of record, Daucie Schindler, and

respectfully moves the Court for an extension of time within which to file the

appellate brief, and for cause would show the Court as follows:

I.

Mr. Mays was charged with the misdemeanor offense of assault on a family

member

. On September 3, 2013, Mr. Mays entered a plea of not guilty and proceeded

to trial. The judge found Mr. Mays guilty as charged. Mr. Mays ’ punishment was

assessed by agreement at fifty-six (56) days in the Harris County jail.

II.

Mr. Mays filed timely notice of appeal. Undersigned counsel, of The Harris

County Public Defender’s Office was appointed to represent Mr. Mays on October 3, ACCEPTED 01-13-00805-CR FIRST COURT OF APPEALS HOUSTON, TEXAS 4/10/2015 9:44:47 AM CHRISTOPHER PRINE

CLERK2014.

III.

The appellate brief i s due to be filed with the Court on or before April 10

,

201 5

. One p revious extension ha s been requested

.

IV.

U ndersigned counsel has been working simultaneously on a ppe al in State v.

Briones, State v. Sn av ely , State v. Tavarez

, State v. Fletcher , State v. Marks , State v.

Uma nzor , and State v. Phillips

. Counsel is diligently working on the brief in this case,

but requests additional time having only just reco gnized a meritorious issue and

needing to confer with the client.

V.

This request is made not to delay the proceedings, but to ensure that M r

. Mays

is adequately represented.WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, M r

. Mays respectfully prays that this

motion be granted and that the Court permits an extension of time until May 11

,

201 5 , to file the appellate brief.

Respectfully submitted,

ALEXANDER BUNIN Chief Public Defender Harris County Texas

/s/ Daucie Schindler DAUCIE SCHINDLER Assistant Public Defender Harris County Texas 1201 Franklin, 13 th Floor Houston Texas 77002 (713) 368

- 0016 (713) 368

- 9278 (Fax) Daucie.Schindler@pdo.hctx.ne t

Attorney for Appellant, RODNEY CARNELL MAYS

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing Appellant’s

Motion to Extend Time within Which to File Appellate Brief was e

- mailed to the

Appellate Division of the Harris County District Attorney’s Office on this 10 th day of

A pril

, 201 5

.
/s/ Daucie Schindler
DAUCIE SCHINDLER
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Criminal Case No. 11-cr-355-MSK

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

v.

1. WAUNITA WEINGART

2. JOHN PHILLIP GALLEGOS

3. ALOIS CRAIG WEINGART

Defendants.

 

ORDER

 

THIS MATTER, having come before the Court on the Government’s Unopposed

Motion for Variance in the Numbering of the Government’s Trial Exhibits, and the Court,

having considered the motion and being fully advised, finds good cause for granting the

government’s request.

It is therefore ORDERED that:

1. The government may label its trial exhibits consistent with the system

described in its Unopposed Motion for Variance in the Numbering of the Government’s

Trial Exhibits.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

BY THE COURT:

______________________________

Honorable Marcia S. Krieger

United States District Judge

Case No. 1:11-cr-00355-MSK Document 78-1 filed 04/03/12 USDC Colorado pg 1 of 1
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 Energy

###### Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 

          - [Docket No. EC08-119-000] 

Take notice that on September 17, 2008, Rumford Power Inc. and Tiverton Power Inc. filed a revised Exhibit M to the August 20, 2008 filed section 203 application. 

Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices, motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date. On or before the comment date, it is not necessary to serve motions to intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant. 

                    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the “eFiling” link at                     *http://www.ferc.gov.*                     Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426.                 

                    This filing is accessible on-line at                     *http://www.ferc.gov,*                     using the “eLibrary” link and is available for review in the Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an “eSubscription” link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail                     *FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov,*                     or call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.                 

*Comment Date:*                     5 p.m. Eastern Time on October 2, 2008.                 

Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., 

Deputy Secretary.

[FR Doc. E8-22855 Filed 9-29-08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
**Exhibit
      24.1**





**POWER
      OF ATTORNEY**





KNOW
      ALL
      MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, that each person whose signature appears below
      constitutes and appoints Mark Nesci and Paul Tang and each of them, his true
      and
      lawful attorneys-in-fact and agents, with full power of substitution and
      resubstitution, for him and in his name, place and stead, in any and all
      capacities, to sign the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Burlington Coat Factory
      Investments Holdings, Inc. for the fiscal year ended June 2, 2007, and any
      amendments thereto, and to file the same, with all exhibits thereto, and other
      documents in connection therewith, with the Securities and Exchange Commission,
      granting unto said attorneys-in-fact and agents, and each of them, full power
      and authority to do and perform such and every act and thing requisite and
      necessary to be done, as fully to all intents and purposes as he or she might
      or
      could do in person, hereby ratifying and confirming all that said
      attorneys-in-fact and agents, or any of them, or his or her substitute or
      substitutes, may lawfully do or cause to be done by virtue hereof.





This
      Power of Attorney may be executed in separate counterparts, each of which shall
      be deemed an original, but all such counterparts shall together constitute
      one
      and the same instrument.





IN
      WITNESS WHEREOF, each of the undersigned has executed this Power of Attorney
      as
      of the 27th  day of August, 2007.








**Name**
            **Title**
            **Signature**Joshua
                Bekenstein
            Director
            /s/: 
                Joshua BekensteinJordan
                Hitch
            Director
            /s/:
                Jordan HitchJohn
                Tudor
            Director
            /s/:  John
                TudorNicholas
                Nomicos
            Director
            /s/:
                Nicholas Nomicos
EXHIBIT A 

(to Defendant’s SENTENCING STATEMENT 

AND MOTION FOR NON-GUIDELINE 

STATUTORY SENTENCE) 

Case No. 1:11-cr-00355-MSK Document 267 filed 04/22/13 USDC Colorado pg 1 of 7
Case No. 1:11-cr-00355-MSK Document 267 filed 04/22/13 USDC Colorado pg 2 of 7
Case No. 1:11-cr-00355-MSK Document 267 filed 04/22/13 USDC Colorado pg 3 of 7
Case No. 1:11-cr-00355-MSK Document 267 filed 04/22/13 USDC Colorado pg 4 of 7
Case No. 1:11-cr-00355-MSK Document 267 filed 04/22/13 USDC Colorado pg 5 of 7
Case No. 1:11-cr-00355-MSK Document 267 filed 04/22/13 USDC Colorado pg 6 of 7
3 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

 I hereby certify that on this 22nd day of April, 2013, I served a true and correct copy of 

the foregoing EXHIBIT A to Defendant’s SENTENCING STATEMENT AND MOTION FOR NONGUIDELINE STATUTORY SENTENCE via CM/ECF to all parties listed therein including: 

Linda Kaufman 

Assistant United States Attorney 

United States Attorney’s Office 

1225 Seventeenth Street, Suite 700 

Denver, Colorado 80202 

Telephone: (303) 454-0100 

FAX: (303) 454-0401 

E-mail: Linda.Kaufman@usdoj.gov

Attorney for Government 

Martha Paluch 

Assistant United States Attorney 

United States Attorney’s Office 

1225 Seventeenth Street, Suite 700 

Denver, Colorado 80202 

Telephone: (303) 454-0100 

FAX: (303) 454-0401 

E-mail: martha.paluch@usdoj.gov

Paula M. Ray 

Paula M. Ray, P.C. 

P.O. Box 12554 

Denver, CO 80212-0554 

Telephone: 303-874-5170 

E-mail: paulamray@earthlink.net 

Attorney for Craig Weingart 

Martin Stuart 

PortmanStuart, LLC 

955 Bannock Street, suite 200 

Denver, CO 80204 

Phone: 303-355-6789 

Fax: 303-623-0714 

E-mail: mstuart@portmanstuart.com

Attorney for Waunita Weingart

Attorney for Government 

 U.S. Probation Officer Nicole Peterson 

 (via U.S. Mail) 

 

 /s/ Holli M. Baker 

 Holli M. Baker 

 

Case No. 1:11-cr-00355-MSK Document 267 filed 04/22/13 USDC Colorado pg 7 of 7