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

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                               0
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   13,663
<ALLOWANCES>                                     1,078
<INVENTORY>                                     20,958
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                36,473
<PP&E>                                          17,765
<DEPRECIATION>                                   8,865
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  46,617
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            9,996
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            15
<OTHER-SE>                                       8,681
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    46,617
<SALES>                                         71,809
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                71,809
<CGS>                                           52,573
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   69,282
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   341
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               2,657
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    211
<INCOME-TAX>                                       354
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              (143)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (143)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.09)<F1>
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.09)<F1>
<FN>
<F1>FEBRUARY 26, 1999, THE SHAREHOLDERS OF THE COMPANY APPROVED CERTAIN AMENDMENTS
TO THE COMPANY'S AMENDED AND RESTATED ARTICLES OF INCORPORATION THAT EFFECTED A
FOUR-TO-ONE REVERSE STOCK SPLIT OF THE COMPANY'S COMMON STOCK. THE EFFECTIVE
TIME OF THE REVERSE STOCK SPLIT WAS THE END OF BUSINESS ON FEBRUARY 26, 1999.
PRIOR FINANCIAL DATA SCHEDULES HAVE NOT BEEN RESTATED TO REFLECT THE REVERSE
STOCK SPLIT.
</FN>


</TABLE>
**usbank****Annual Statement of Compliance****Morgan Stanley Bank of America Merrill Lynch Trust 2014-C18***VIA: EMAIL*Morgan Stanley Capital I Inc. 1585 Broadway New York, New York 10036 Attention: Stephen Holmes stephen.holmes@morganstanley.com Re: Pooling  and  Servicing  Agreement  dated  as  of  September  1,  2014  (the  "Agreement")  between Morgan  Stanley  Capital  I  Inc.,  as  Depositor,  Wells  Fargo  Bank,  National  Association,  as  the Master  Servicer,  Rialto  Capital  Advisors,  LLC,  as  the  Special  Servicer,  Park  Bridge  Lender Services LLC, as the Trust Advisor, U.S. Bank National Association, as the Trustee, Certificate Administrator, Certificate Registrar, Authenticating Agent and Custodian. I, Michael Farrell, a Senior Vice President of U.S. Bank National Association, as Custodian, as a certifying servicer hereby certify that:           (1) A review of the activities of the Custodian during the preceding calendar year (the "Reporting Period")  and  of  the  performance  of  the  Custodian  under  the  Agreement  has  been  made  under  my supervision; and           (2)  To  the  best  of  my  knowledge,  based  on  such  review,  the  Custodian  has  fulfilled  all  its obligations under the Agreement in all material respects throughout such Reporting Period.  Capitalized terms used but not defined herein have the meanings set forth in the Agreement. Date: March 10, 2016 U.S. Bank National Association, as Custodian By:  /s/ Michael Farrell Michael Farrell Senior Vice President
#### JEAN CONKLIN v. SHOP RITE OF MANAHAWKIN, INC.

December 16, 1986.

Petition for certification denied.
1 min read

# NASA Interns at Johnson’s Rock Yard

### Monika Luabeya

Jan 22, 2024

Image Article

            -   
            -   
            -   
            -   

In this image from May 22, 2023, a NASA intern uses an augmented reality headset to test out heads-up display technology being developed for future Artemis missions. This technology was created as part of the NASA Spacesuit User Interface Technologies for Students, or SUITS, design challenge in which college students from across the country help design user interface solutions for future spaceflight needs.

Today marks the beginning of NASA’s Spring 2024 internship season; across the country, hundreds of interns are joining the Artemis Generation and contributing to the agency’s mission of exploring the universe for the benefit of all.

The deadline for Summer 2024 internship applications is Feb. 2. Learn more and apply at intern.nasa.gov.

*Image Credit: NASA/James Blair*
<PAGE>

                        CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED
                             PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM


We have issued our reports dated March 9, 2005, accompanying the consolidated
financial statements and management's assessment of the effectiveness of
internal control over financial reporting included in the Annual Report of Atlas
Pipeline Partners, L.P. on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004. We
hereby consent to the incorporation by reference of said reports in the
Registration Statements of Atlas Pipeline Partners, L.P. on Forms S-3, Amendment
1 (File No. 333-113523, effective April 2, 2004.


/s/ GRANT THORNTON LLP


Cleveland, Ohio
March 9, 2005
#### Woods and Others *v.*Pratt.

A majority of the freeholders of a town,"presented to the board of county commissioners a remonstrance against the granting of a license to any person to retail ardent spirits within the town for three years; and on the day the remonstrance was presented, a license was applied for and granted. *Held,*that the license should have been refused.

Tuesday, November 24.

ERROR to the *Franklin*Circuit Court.

Sullivan, J.

This was a proceeding under the 5th sec. of the act entitled “ An act to license and regulate taverns and groceries.” R.'S. 1838, p. 581.

At the *January*term, 1840, of the board of commissioners of *Franklin*county, the plaintiffs, being a majority of the freeholders of the town of Brookville, presented to the board of commissioners a remonstrance against granting to any person, for the term of three years, a license .to retail ardent spirits within said town. On the same day the defendant, Pratt, being a resident of *Brookville,*-applied to the board for a license to retail spirituous liquors in that”, place. The remonstrants appeared before the board and opposed the application, but the Court granted the license. The remonstrants appealed. The Circuit Court, on the hearing, dismissed the cause, and this writ of error is prosecuted to reverse that judgment.

The reason assigned for the dismissal of the cause by the Circuit Court wak, that the remonstrance filed by the appellants was too general in its terms in not opposing the,particular application before the board of commissioners.

The law is “ that no license [to retail spirituous or strong liquors] shall be granted to any person residing within any town or township, where- a majority of the freeholders in such town or township shall remonstrate against the granting of the same.” The object of the law is to protect the public morals and preserve the peace and quiet of society.Being designed for the public good, it should be so construed as to promote it.

If the construction contended for by the defendant should prevail, it would,impose upon the majority the necessity of watching, and opposing by a separate remonstrance, each *378individual application. That would be burdensome. The statute does not require such a construction to effect the design of the legislature. The evil which the statute puts it power of a majority of the freeholders to remove, can be as well' suppressed by a general remonstrance against all applications, as by a remonstrance in each particular case. The term of years named in the remonstrance was no objection to it. It clearly expressed to thé board of commissioners, the wish of a majority of the freeholders of Brooleuille, that shops for the retail of spirituous liquors should not be licensed among them.

*G.*Holland, for the plaintiffs.

*J.*Byman, for the defendant.

We think the remonstrance was within the spirit of the statute, and that the Circuit Court erred in dismissing the cause.

*Per Curiam.*

The judgment is reversed with costs. Cause remanded, &c.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                         729,328
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  445,531
<ALLOWANCES>                                  (10,276)
<INVENTORY>                                     13,060
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,207,101
<PP&E>                                       1,623,331
<DEPRECIATION>                               (487,073)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               2,365,399
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          716,262
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        71,406
<OTHER-SE>                                   1,577,731
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 2,365,399
<SALES>                                      1,387,964
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,387,964
<CGS>                                          757,467
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  757,467
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             1,417,660
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                (21)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (756,598)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (756,598)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (756,598)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.12)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.12)


</TABLE>
No. 87-6380.

#### Matias *v.*United States.

Ct. Mil. App. Certiorari denied.
Exhibit
10.2


 


TRXADE
GROUP, INC.


FIRST
AMENDMENT TO


EXECUTIVE
EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT


 


THIS
FIRST AMENDMENT TO EXECUTIVE EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT (this “Amendment”) is entered into this 5th day
of May 2020, to be effective as of the 14th day of April 2020 (the “Effective Date”), by and between
Trxade Group, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the “Company”), and Suren Ajjarapu, an individual (the “Executive”)
(each of the Company and Executive are referred to herein as a “Party”, and collectively referred to
herein as the “Parties”).


 


WHEREAS,
effective on the Effective Date, the Parties entered into an Executive Employment Agreement (the “Agreement”)1;
and


 


WHEREAS,
the Parties desire to amend the Agreement on the terms set forth below.


 


NOW,
THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and the mutual covenants, agreements, and considerations herein contained, and
other good and valuable consideration, which consideration the parties hereby acknowledge and confirm the receipt and sufficiency
thereof, the parties hereto agree as follows:


 


1.
Amendments to Agreement.


 


(a)
Effective as of the Effective Date, Exhibit B of the Agreement is amended and restated to provide as set forth on the attached
Exhibit B.


 


(b)
Effective as of the Effective Date, Section 2.3 of the Agreement is amended to include the following sentence which shall
begin immediately following the last sentence of the current Section 2.3:


 


“Notwithstanding
the limitation on the total value of the Executive’s Performance Bonuses as set forth in the first sentence of this Section
2.3, the Executive’s Performance Bonus for the twelve months ended December 31, 2020 may have a value greater than 100%
of the Executive’s Base Salary for fiscal 2020, in the event that the value of the 2020 Restricted Stock, when granted,
or deemed granted or valued (including, in connection with any amendment or modification to the 2020 Performance Metrics), has
a value exceeding such general limitation.”


 


IN
WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties hereto have executed this Agreement as of the day and year first above written.


 


	“COMPANY”	TRXADE
        GROUP, INC.

        a
        Delaware corporation

	 	
	 	By:	/s/
    Donald G. Fell
	 	Name:	Donald
    G. Fell
	 	Title:	Chairman
    of the Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors


 


	“EXECUTIVE”	/s/
    Suren Ajjarapu
	 	Suren
        Ajjarapu

        



 


 






1
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1382574/000149315220006512/ex10-4.htm


 




    	 	 	 



     


    

 


EXHIBIT
B


 


2020
Bonus Metrics


 





	1. 	Revenue Goal: Hit $ 12.5 Million 	(34,314 Shares vest)
	 	 	 
	2. 	Trxade Group Net Operating Income: 10% of total sales 	(9,804 Shares vest)
	 	 	 
	3.	Bonum Health: Achieve 7,500 app downloads	(4,902 Shares vest)
FILED U.S. COURT OF AP P EALS E LEV EN T HC IRC U IT JUL 13 , 2006 THOMAS K. KAH

N CLERK [ DO NO T P UB L I S H] I N THE UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS F O R T H E E L E V E N T H C IR C U IT

________________________ N o. 05- 15629 N on -A rgum entC al endar

________________________ D . C . D o c k e tN o . 0 5 - 0 0 0 2 2 - C R - WS U N I T E D S T A T E S O F A M E R I C A , P la in tif f - A p p e lle e , v ersu s G A R Y W A Y N E A L L M A N , D e f e n d a n t- A p p e lla n t.

________________________ A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f o rth e So u th e rn D i s tr i c to f A l ab a ma

_________________________ ( Ju l y 13, 2006) B efo re M A R C U S , W IL S O N an d C O X , C i rcu i tJu d g es. P E R C U R I A M: P et erJ. M ad d en , app oi nt ed coun se l for G ary W ay ne A l l m an i n thi s di re ct2

c r i mi n a l ap p e a l , h a s mo v e d t o w i th d r a w f r o m f u r th e r r e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f t he ap p e lla n t a n d f

ile d a b r ie f

p u r s u a n t to A n d e r s v . C a lif o rn ia , 3 8 6 U . S . 7 3 8 , 8 7 S .C t. 1 3 9 6 , 1 8 L .E d .2 d 4 9 3 ( 1 9 6 7 ) . O u rin d e p e n d e n t r e v ie w o f th e e n ti r e r e c o r d r e v e a ls th atco u n sel ’ s assessm en to f th e rel at i v e m eri to f th e ap p eal i s c o rrect . B ecau se in d e p e n d e n t e x a m in a tio n o f th e e n t i r e r e c o r d r e v e a ls n o a r g u ab le is s u e s o f m e r it, c o u n sel ’ s m o t i o n t o w i th d raw i s G R A N TED , a n d A l l ma n ’ s c o n v i c t i o n a nd se nt ence ar e A FFI R M ED .
**EXHIBIT      32.2**

**CERTIFICATION      OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER**

**PURSUANT      TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**

**AS      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

|                                                  |                                                                                     |                  |
|-------------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------|
|                                                  |                                                                                     |
|                                                  |                                                                                     |                  |
| Date:                December                21, 2006 | By:                                                                            | /s/ Thomas S. Gifford |
|                                                  | Thomas                S. Gifford                                                         |
|                                                  | Executive Vice President, Chief                Financial Officer and Secretary |

----
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

MERIT SYSTEMS PROTECTION BOARD

LENWOOD L. BUGGIE

v.

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND

HUMAN SERVICES

DOCKET NUMBER

NY04328210249

MONTINE B. CALLAWAY

v.

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY

THOMAS J. GRIFFIN

v.

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY

DOCKET NUMBER

PH04328310029

DOCKET NUMBER

CH07528210163

JANET HILL

v.

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND

HUMAN SERVICES

DZE K. KAO

DOCKET NUMBER

DC04328310305

v.

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY

DOCKET NUMBER

SE04328310109
JACK L. LARRIMORE

v.

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

DOCKET NUMBER

AT04328310090

MOSES B. SANCHEZ

v.

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE

DOCKET NUMBER

DE04328310102

LEROY SANDLAND

v.

GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION )

ORDER

DOCKET NUMBER

PH04328310205

The Board has published the attached Federal Register

notice providing interested parties with an opportunity to

file amicus briefs related to one or more issues raised

in the above captioned appeals. The Board will provide the

parties in the above appeals with copies of the amicus

briefs submitted in response to the notice. The parties are

hereby advised, however, that the Board's regulations make

no provision for a party to respond to an amicus brief or

for the Board to consider such responses.
The parties are hereby provided with thirty (30) calendar

days from '•.he <^ate of this order to file additional submissions w;

 v Board in response to the attached Federal

Register noti.«. a considering any additional submissions

by the parties, the Board may limit its review to issues

previously raised in the parties' petitions for review of

the initial decisions in these appeals. 5 C.F.R. § 1201.114;

Jackson v. Department of Transportation, 5 MSPB 95 (1981).

Parties in the above captioned appeals who decide to

respond to this order must file their submissions, in

duplicate, within the 30-day time limit, with the Secretary,

Merit Systems Protection Board, 1120 Vermont Avenue, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20419, and the submissions must include

proof of service on the opposing party.

Attachment

FOR THE BOARD:

JUN 2 b 1984

(Date>

Washington, D.C.
# Sitemap

## March 23, 2018

- Home
- Sitemap
- 2018
- 03
- March 23, 2018

            - NASA Invites Media to View Launch of InSight Mars Lander from West Coast
            - We Asked NASA’s Chief Technologist...Why NASA?
            - NASA Awards Contract for Aerospace Systems Modeling, Simulation
            - Ghost in Motion
            - Jessie Dotson and Geert Barentsen, Kepler’s Contributions to Astronomy
            - Southeastern U.S. Sees Wildfire Activity
            - RMC Icy-Regolith Simulant
            - In Case You Missed It: A Weekly Summary of Top Content from NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center
            - NASA Rocket Experiments to Examine Lifecycle of Stars
            - Look Inside NASA’s Artemis I Rocket
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 205 (Monday, October 25, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Page 65528]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-26761]


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

NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION


Membership of the National Science Board's Senior Executive 
Service Performance Review Board

AGENCY: National Science Foundation.

ACTION: Announcement of Membership of the National Science Foundation's 
Performance Review Board for the Office of Inspector General and the 
National Science Board Office Senior Executive Service positions.

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

SUMMARY: This announcement of the membership of the National Science 
Foundation's Office of Inspector General and National Science Board 
Office Senior Executive Service Performance Review Board is made in 
compliance with 5 U.S.C. 4314(c)(4).

ADDRESSES: Comments should be addressed to Interim Director, Division 
of Human Resource Management and Chief Human Capital Officer, National 
Science Foundation, Room 315, 4201 Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, VA 
22230.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Judith S. Sunley at the above 
address or (703) 292-8180.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The membership of the National Science 
Board's Senior Executive Service Performance Review Board is as 
follows:

Arthur K. Reilly, Chairman, Audit and Oversight Committee, National 
Science Board.
Judith S. Sunley, Interim Director, Division of Human Resource 
Management and Chief Human Capital Officer.

    Plus two members to be selected from the IG community.

    Dated: October 18, 2010.
Judith S. Sunley,
Interim Director, Division of Human Resource Management and Chief Human 
Capital Officer.
[FR Doc. 2010-26761 Filed 10-22-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7555-01-M
# Sitemap

## October 29, 2000

- Home
- Sitemap
- 2000
- 10
- October 29, 2000

            - STS-92
            - STS-92 Discovery in the Mate-Demate Device
            - STS-92 Discovery in the Mate-Demate Device
            - STS-92 Discovery at the Mate-Demate Device
CERTIFICATION OF ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT

I, Richard M. Cohen, Chief Financial Officer of Dune Energy, Inc. hereby
certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

(1) the Annual Report on Form 10-KSB for the period ended December 31, 2004 (the
"Annual Report") which this statement accompanies fully complies with the
requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)) and

(2) information contained in the Annual Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Dune Energy, Inc.

Dated: March 29, 2005

                                                     /s/ Richard Cohen
                                                     ---------------------------
                                                     Richard M. Cohen

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-6878

BERNARD S. LEVI, Petitioner - Appellant, versus M. E. RAY, Warden, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Charleston. Margaret B. Seymour, District Judge. (CA-00-2318-2-24) Submitted: June 26, 2002 Decided: July 12, 2002 Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Bernard S. Levi, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Bernard S. Levi appeals the district court’s orders denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (1994) petition and denying reconsideration of that order. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s order accepting with modification the recommendation of the magistrate judge and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Levi v. Ray , No. CA-00-2318-2-24 (D.S.C. filed Apr. 25, 2001; entered Apr. 27, 2002 & filed Jan. 22, 2002; entered Jan. 24, 2002). We deny Levi’s motion for a temporary restraining order and a preliminary injunction, and his motion for correction of the district court’s docket entry. We 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.

AFFIRMED
Table   of Contents

Foreword

Sputnik   Night

Korolev   and Freedom of Space

One   Small Ball in the Air

The   Birth of NASA

Denouement

Notes

Key   Events

Documents

Credits