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

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM
BOOKS-A-MILLION, INC. CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS, CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF
OPERATIONS AND CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FORM 10-Q FOR THE TWENTY-SIX WEEKS ENDED JULY 29,
2000.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          FEB-03-2001
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-30-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUL-29-2000
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                           5,101
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   11,082
<ALLOWANCES>                                     1,350
<INVENTORY>                                    209,860
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               234,046<F1>
<PP&E>                                         128,682
<DEPRECIATION>                                  67,818
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 296,519<F2>
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          136,649
<BONDS>                                              0<F3>
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0<F4>
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           181
<OTHER-SE>                                     121,197
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   296,519
<SALES>                                         93,629
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                93,629
<CGS>                                           69,285
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   89,635
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 3,652
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,258
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   (916)
<INCOME-TAX>                                      (348)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               (568)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                      (568)
<EPS-BASIC>                                       (.03)<F5>
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     (.03)<F5>
<FN>
<F1>9,353  OTHER CURRENT ASSETS
<F2>1,609  OTHER ASSETS
<F3>35,972 LONG TERM DEBT
<F4>2,520  DEFERRED INCOME TAXES
<F5>THE EARNINGS PER SHARE CALCULATIONS HAVE BEEN PREPARED IN ACCORDANCE WITH
SFAS NO. 128 AND BASIC AND DILUTED EARNINGS PER SHARE HAVE BEEN ENTERED IN
PLACE OF PRIMARY AND FULLY DILUTED, RESPECTIVELY.
</FN>


</TABLE>
## I N T H E C O U R T O F C R I M I N A L A P P E A L S O F T E X A S NO. WR-63,583-28

EX P ARTE RONNIE TURNER, Appli cant

ON AP P LICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORP US CAUSE NO. C-3-W011403- 0941085-O IN CRIMIN AL DISTRICT COURT NUMBER THREE

F ROM TARRANT COUNTY

Per curiam . O R D E R P u rs u ant to the provisions of Article 11.07 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure, th e cler k of the trial court transmitted to this Court this application for a writ of habea s corpus. Ex parte Y oung , 418 S.W .2d 824, 826 (Tex. Crim. App. 1967). Appl i ca n t was convicted of ag gravated robber y and sentenc ed to forty-five year s’ imprisonment. The Second Court of Appea ls aff irmed his conviction. Turner v. State , No. 02-05-00427- CR (Tex. App.—For t Worth Oct. 5, 2006) (not designated f

or publication). Applicant contends, among other things, that he is actua ll y innocent. This application, howeve r, presents a more serious question. Acc ording to this Court’s rec ords, Appli cant has filed2

at least five previous applications that have been dismiss ed under Article 11.07, § 4 of the Code of Criminal Procedur e. It is obvious from the rec ord that Applicant continues to raise issues that have been prese nted and reje cted in previous applications or that should have been prese nted in previous applications. The writ of habea s corpus is not to be lightly or easily abused. Sanders v. U.S. , 373 U.S. 1 (1963); Ex parte Carr , 511 S.W .2d 523 (Tex. Crim. App. 1974). Be cause of his repe titive claims,

we hold that Applicant’s claims are barr ed from revie w under Article 11.07, § 4, and are waived and abandone d by

his abuse of the writ. This application is dismiss ed. There fore , we instruct the Clerk of the C ourt of C riminal Appea ls not to accept any future application perta ining to this conviction unless Applicant is able to show in such an application that any claims prese nted have not been r aised previously and that they could not have been presented in a previous application for a writ of habea s corpus. Ex parte Bilton , 602 S.W .2d 534 (Tex. Crim. App. 1980). Copies of this order shall be sent to the Texas Depa rtment of Criminal J ustice–Corre ctional Institut ions Division and Pardons and Paroles Division.

Filed: September

11, 2019 Do not publish
#### George HAMILTON, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. Richard J. EHLE, Jr.; et al., Defendants—Appellees.

No. 02-16972.

D.C. No. CV-02-00635-WBS.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Sept. 8, 2003.*

Decided Sept. 15, 2003.

George Hamilton, pro se, Corcoran, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellant.

Before PREGERSON, THOMAS and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.

*

 This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

*815MEMORANDUM **

California state prisoner George Hamilton appeals pro se the district court’s dismissal for failure to state a claim in his petition seeking a writ of mandamus. Hamilton requested that the district court order state prison officials to stop interfering with his legal mail and provide him proper access to the prison library. We conclude that the district court did not err in finding it lacked jurisdiction to issue a writ of mandamus to state officers. *Demos v. United States Dist. Court for E. Dist. of Wash., 925*F.2d 1160, 1161 (9th Cir.1991).*** The district court’s dismissal is therefore

AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

***

 Appellant’s motion to correct the minor deficiency in the filing of his opening briefs is granted, and the additional copies of the opening brief are ordered filed.
# USACE Vicksburg District begins drawdown of Thatcher Lock and Dam

VICKSBURG, Miss. – The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Vicksburg District will begin pool draw down at Thatcher Lock and Dam on Nov. 19, 2021, to make repairs to the seal of the hinge crest gate.The pool at Thatcher Lock and Dam is expected to fall as much as six inches per day, from 77 to 72 feet. The USACE Vicksburg District is working with City of Camden personnel to create a slower draw down from 73 to 72 feet to closely monitor the city’s water supply intake pipes. It is possible that the draw down might have to continue to 71 feet if the inspection cannot be completed at 72 feet.

The inspection of the structure and installation of the poiree needle system will begin by Dec. 3 with completion estimated on Dec. 10. A repair plan will be developed once inspections are complete, and those repairs will begin immediately. The pool will be raised behind the poiree needle system to 74 feet until all repairs are complete.

The USACE Vicksburg District remains vigilant in communicating with partners and stakeholders regarding updates to the progress of Thatcher Lock and Dam repairs.  We’ve been in communication with the Ouachita River Valley Association (ORVA), City of Camden, Arkansas, and Union County Water Conservation Board as well as the Arkansas Game and Fish and Arkansas Natural Resource Commission.  

The public is encouraged to contact local authorities and management officials for updates about conditions in their area and should be cautious while boating upstream of the structure as underwater debris (i.e. trees, pipes, stumps) could become exposed as the pool level falls and become a boating hazard. In addition, you can find pool levels for Thatcher Lock and Dam at https://go.usa.gov/xMJhU.

Completed and put in operation in 1984, Thatcher Lock and Dam creates a navigable pool all the way to Camden Arkansas, a distance of 52 river miles. Thatcher is the northern most lock and dam on the Ouachita River.  

The USACE Vicksburg District is engineering solutions to the nation’s toughest challenges. The Vicksburg District encompasses a 68,000-square-mile area across portions of Mississippi, Arkansas and Louisiana, that holds nine major river basins and incorporates approximately 460 miles of mainline Mississippi River levees. The Vicksburg District is engaged in hundreds of projects and employs approximately 1,100 personnel.

**Contact**

Release no. 21-083

lock and dam

Thatcher

Maintenance Activities

Ouachita River

Camden

AR
Exhibit








EXHIBIT 10.1


WERNER ENTERPRISES, INC.
NON-EMPLOYEE DIRECTOR COMPENSATION




Independent members of the Board of Directors (the “Board”) of Werner Enterprises, Inc. (the “Company”) receive annual cash retainers and restricted stock awards summarized in the table below. Such fees were approved in January, 2020 by the Compensation Committee (the “Committee”) of the Board and became effective April 1, 2020.
	
			
	 
Fee or Retainer
	 
	

Amount

	 
	 
	 

	Annual Cash Retainer for Board Membership
	 
	$50,000



	 
	 
	 

	Annual Cash Retainer for the Audit Committee Chair
	 
	$15,000



	 
	 
	 

	Annual Cash Retainer for the Compensation Committee Chair
	 
	$10,000



	 
	 
	 

	Annual Cash Retainer for the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee Chair
	 
	$10,000



	 
	 
	 

	Annual Restricted Stock Award for Board Membership
	 
	$80,000








Cash compensation is paid in equal quarterly installments. Annual restricted stock awards vest over a three-year period from the date of grant. Restricted stock awards are granted pursuant to the terms of the Werner Enterprises, Inc. Amended and Restated Equity Plan and the Form of Restricted Stock Award Agreement, both of which are filed as exhibits to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2019. To the extent required by SEC regulations, equity awards granted to the Company’s independent directors are reported on Form 4 filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission.


We also reimburse each independent director at cost for all of their reasonable out-of-pocket travel expenses incurred in connection with their attendance at Board and Board committee meetings and for other reasonable out-of-pocket expenses directly related to their Board and Board committee service.
# Space Shuttle Projects

STS-49, the first flight of the Space Shuttle Orbiter Endeavour, lifted off from launch pad 39B on May 7, 1992 at 6:40 pm CDT. The STS-49 mission was the first U.S. orbital flight to feature 4 extravehicular activities (EVAs), and the first flight to involve 3 crew members working simultaneously outside of the spacecraft. The primary objective was the capture and redeployment of the INTELSAT VI (F-3) which was stranded in an unusable orbit since its launch aboard the Titan rocket in March 1990. In this STS-49 onboard photo, Astronaut Kathryn Thornton joins three struts together during her Extra Vehicular Activity (EVA).

                    -  Facebook PinterestX
-  LinkedIn Emailhttps://www.nasa.gov/image-detail/amf-9257751/Copy URL to clipboard>DownloadShareTakenMay 14, 1992ProducerMSFCSize1907x1920pxPIA Number9257751The National Aeronautics and Space Administration
NASA explores the unknown in air and space, innovates for the benefit of humanity, and inspires the world through discovery.
- About NASA's Mission
Join Us- Home
- News & Events
- Multimedia
- NASA+
- Missions
- Humans in Space
- Earth & Climate
- The Solar System
- The Universe
- Science
- Aeronautics
- Technology
- Learning Resources
- About NASA
- NASA en Español
Follow NASA-   
-   
-   
-   
- 
- More NASA Social Accounts
- NASA Newsletters
- Sitemap
- For Media
- Privacy Policy
- FOIA
- No FEAR Act
- Office of the IGBudget & Annual Reports
Agency Financial Reports
Contact NASA
Accessibility
-  									Page Last Updated:								  								Apr 13, 2023								 
-  									Page Editor:								   
-  								Responsible NASA Official:							  								Abigail Bowman
THORNBURG MORTGAGE ASSET CORPORATION
                          DBA THORNBURG MORTGAGE, INC.

                               AMENDMENT TO BYLAWS

                            (effective July 15, 1999)

Article  IV,  Section  13

The  penultimate  sentence  in  the  third paragraph of Article IV Section 13 is
restated  as  follows:

Each  contract  for  the  services  of  a  Manager  entered into by the Board of
Directors  shall  have  a  term  of no more than ten (10) years, renewable at or
prior  to  expiration  of  the  contract.


                                       38
<PAGE>
FILED

United States Court of Appeals

Tenth Circuit

January 5, 2010

Elisabeth A. Shumaker

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS Clerk of Court

FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT

MICHAEL D. LOWERY; JAMES

ERNEST LANE,

 Plaintiffs - Appellants,

v.

DREW EDMONDSON, Attorney General

of Oklahoma; JUSTIN JONES, Director,

Oklahoma Department of Corrections;

DEBBIE L. MORTON; LEO BROWN,

Religious Coordinator; BOBBY JOE

BOYD, Asst. Warden/Religious Director;

CORRECTIONS CORPORATION OF

AMERICA; DAVIS CORRECTIONAL

FACILITY, 

 Defendants - Appellees.

No. 09-7081 

(D.C. No. 6:09-CV-00286-RAW-SPS)

(E.D. Okla.)

ORDER

Before KELLY, BRISCOE, and GORSUCH, Circuit Judges.

Plaintiffs, state prisoners proceeding pro se, seek to appeal the district court’s July

23, 2009 Order denying their motion to appoint counsel and request for class action

certification. 

Appellate Case: 09-7081 Document: 01018342569 Date Filed: 01/05/2010 Page: 1
-2-

Plaintiffs’ civil rights action is proceeding before the district court. We dismiss for lack

of jurisdiction. The order appealed is interlocutory.

A final decision under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 is one that disposes of all the issues on

the merits and leaves nothing for the court to do but execute the judgment. See

Cunningham v. Hamilton County, 527 U.S. 198, 204 (1999) (citing Van Cauwenberghe

v. Biard, 486 U.S. 517, 521-22 (1988)). Furthermore, the Supreme Court has stressed

that very few types of interlocutory orders qualify as immediately appealable collateral

orders because the requirements are strict and “unless they are kept so, the underlying

doctrine will overpower the substantial finality interests § 1291 is meant to further.” Will

v. Hallock, 546 U.S. 345, 349-50 (2006).

Upon review, the court concludes that the order appealed by Plaintiffs does not

constitute a final or immediately appealable decision under § 1291 or under any

recognized exception to the final judgment rule. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(f); see also

Coopers & Lyrand v. Livesay, 437 U.S. 463, 477 (1978) (collateral order exception does

not apply to prejudgment orders denying class certification); Cotner v. Mason, 657 F.2d

1390, 1391-92 (10th Cir. 1981) (per curiam) (denial of motion to appoint counsel in civil

case is interlocutory and not appealable until entry of final judgment). The district

court’s July 23, 2009 Order can be effectively reviewed on appeal following entry of

final judgment by the district court in Plaintiffs’ civil rights action.

Appellate Case: 09-7081 Document: 01018342569 Date Filed: 01/05/2010 Page: 2
-3-

The appeal is DISMISSED for lack of appellate jurisdiction. All pending motions

are DENIED.

Entered for the Court,

Elisabeth A. Shumaker, Clerk

Kathleen T. Clifford

Attorney - Deputy Clerk

Appellate Case: 09-7081 Document: 01018342569 Date Filed: 01/05/2010 Page: 3
**Exhibit 31.3****CERTIFICATIONS**I, Jay T. Caldwell, certify that:1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Redhook Ale Brewery, Incorporated;2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report;3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisreport;4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and we have: (a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controlsand procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material informationrelating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us byothers within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is beingprepared;  (b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controlsand procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and  (c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (theregistrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal controlover financial reporting; and5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and theaudit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions); (a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affectthe registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information;and  (b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees whohave a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.Date: August 10, 2007         BY: /s/ Jay T. Caldwell           Jay T. Caldwell                *Chief Financial Officer*                *and Treasurer*  
38
EXHIBIT 23

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

We
consent to the incorporation by reference of our report dated February 7, 2005, except for Notes 11(a) and 21, as to which the date is February 18, 2005, with
respect to the consolidated financial statements and schedule of Magna Entertainment Corp. included in the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31,
2004, in each of (a) the Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-32414) pertaining to the Long-Term Incentive Plan of Magna
Entertainment Corp.; (b) the Registration Statement (Form S-3 No. 333-102889) and related prospectus of Magna Entertainment Corp. for the
registration of 71/4% Convertible Subordinated Notes due December 15, 2009 and Shares of Class A Subordinate Voting Stock issuable upon the Conversion of such Notes;
(c) the Registration Statement (Form S-3 No. 333-107368) and related prospectus of Magna Entertainment Corp. for the registration of 8.55%
Convertible Subordinated Notes due June 15, 2010 and Shares of Class A Subordinate Voting Stock issuable upon the Conversion of such Notes and (d) the Registration Statement
(Form S-3 No. 333-109922) and related prospectus of Magna Entertainment Corp. for the sale of up to $300,000,000 of Magna Entertainment Corp.'s
Warrants to Purchase Debt Securities, Warrants to Purchase Class A Subordinate Voting Stock, Debt Securities, including the Debt Securities issuable upon exchange of other Debt Securities or
the exercise of such Warrants, and Class A Subordinate Voting Stock, including the Shares of Class A Subordinate Voting Stock issuable upon the exercise of such Warrants or the
conversion or exchange of such Debt Securities,

| |  | /s/ Ernst & Young LLPChartered Accountants
| |  | ------------------------------------------

March 14,
2005
Toronto, Canada

---



QuickLinks
NASA Advisory Council Recommendation 

Recovering the Planetary Exploration Program 

2012-01-05 (SC-01) 

Recommendation: 

The Council recommends that NASA seek restoration offunds in its FYI4 budget proposal to 

repair the damage done to the Nation's robotic planetary exploration program within the context, 

but not at the expense of a balanced science program that has already absorbed numerous 

funding reductions in recent years. The Council concurs with the Science Mission Directorate's 

(SMD's) initiative to reformulate the Mars Exploration Program for missions in 2018-2020 in 

partnership with human space flight, technology development, and potential international 

partners, pending any Congressional direction and under the condition that the plan must be 

consistent with Decadal Survey recommendations. 

Major Reasons for the Recommendation: 

The FYI3 budget proposal contains a precipitous drop in funding for the Planetary Science 

Division and sets the program on a decline in the out years reducing the flight rate for Discovery 

and New Frontiers missions, terminating operating missions before their prime, and removing 

funding for the 2016 and 2018 Mars missions planned in collaboration with the European Space 

Agency (ESA). The funds remaining do not allow for a Mars mission in 2016 but may be 

sufficient for a medium-class mission in 2018 or 2020. 

Consequences of No Action on the Recommendation: 

The current funding profile for the Nation's robotic planetary exploration program will 

sacrifice critical capabilities and our leadership to other space-faring nations as they pursue 

capabilities and goals abandoned by the United States. 

NASA Response: 

The FY2013 budget request reflects difficult budget decisions in this difficult budget 

environment. Given these constraints, SMD and the Planetary Science program have studies 

currently underway on how best to move forward. Since the NAC made this recommendation, 

both the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations have crafted FY 2013 appropriations 

bills that make program and funding recommendations for Planetary Science. NASA will use 

the outcome of the aforementioned studies and the outcome of the FY2013 appropriations 

process to inform its future planning, including formulation of the FY2014 budget request. 

Enclosure
### THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

13

- 16

- 00358

- CV

Ericelda Chavez, Individually and as Representative of the Estate of Rafael Chavez, Sr., Deceased, et al.

v. William R. Edwards, The Edwards Law Firm and Jo Emma Arechiga

On a ppeal from the 28th Distric t Court of Nueces County , Texas Trial Cause No. 2013

- DCV

- 2831

- A

JUDGMENT THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, having considered this cause on appeal, concludes the appeal should be dismissed . The Court orders the appeal
DISMISSED FOR WANT OF JURISDICTION in accordance with its opin ion . Costs of the appeal are adjudged against appellant.
We further order this decision certified below for observance. September 29, 2016.
FILED

United States Court of Appeals

Tenth Circuit

January 4, 2010

Elisabeth A. Shumaker

Clerk of Court

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

 Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

STANLEY DESHAWN VANN, 

 Defendant - Appellant. 

No. 09-6227

 (D.C. No. 5:07-CR-00288-M-1) 

ORDER

Appellant’s motion to dismiss this matter is granted. 10th Cir. R. 27.3(A)(9).

A copy of this order shall stand as and for the mandate of the court.

Entered for the Court,

ELISABETH A. SHUMAKER, Clerk

Appellate Case: 09-6227 Document: 01018341520 Date Filed: 01/04/2010 Page: 1