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






     <ARTICLE>                                                                5
     <MULTIPLIER>                                                         1,000

     <S>                                                            <C>
     <PERIOD-TYPE>                                                        6-MOS
     <FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                              JAN-01-2000
     <PERIOD-START>                                                 JAN-03-1999
     <PERIOD-END>                                                   JUL-03-1999
     <CASH>                                                               4,749
     <SECURITIES>                                                             0
     <RECEIVABLES>                                                       25,232
     <ALLOWANCES>                                                          (401)
     <INVENTORY>                                                         64,544
     <CURRENT-ASSETS>                                                    99,184
     <PP&E>                                                              42,636
     <DEPRECIATION>                                                      (9,830)
     <TOTAL-ASSETS>                                                     467,948
     <CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                               36,187
     <BONDS>                                                            340,364
     <PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                                    0
     <PREFERRED>                                                              0
     <COMMON>                                                                 0
     <OTHER-SE>                                                          57,375
     <TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                                     467,948
     <SALES>                                                            154,100
     <TOTAL-REVENUES>                                                   154,100
     <CGS>                                                               83,676
     <TOTAL-COSTS>                                                       54,295
     <OTHER-EXPENSES>                                                         0
     <LOSS-PROVISION>                                                         0
     <INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                                  13,080
     <INCOME-PRETAX>                                                      3,049
     <INCOME-TAX>                                                         1,494
     <INCOME-CONTINUING>                                                  1,555
     <DISCONTINUED>                                                           0
     <EXTRAORDINARY>                                                          0
     <CHANGES>                                                                0
     <NET-INCOME>                                                         1,555
     <EPS-BASIC>                                                            0
     <EPS-DILUTED>                                                            0



</TABLE>
```

[Congressional Bills 105th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 310 Introduced in House (IH)]

105th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. RES. 310

Calling on the Emir of Kuwait to provide funds for research, diagnosis, 
treatment, and compensation relating to injuries and illnesses suffered 
     by United States veterans who served in the Persian Gulf War.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            November 6, 1997

 Mr. Duncan introduced the following resolution; which was referred to 
                the Committee on International Relations

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
Calling on the Emir of Kuwait to provide funds for research, diagnosis, 
treatment, and compensation relating to injuries and illnesses suffered 
     by United States veterans who served in the Persian Gulf War.

Whereas during the Persian Gulf War, 679,000 United States forces fought to 
        liberate Kuwait;
Whereas during the Persian Gulf War, United States forces were exposed to low-
        level chemical warfare agents, pollution from blazing oil wells, and 
        radioactive depleted uranium toxic wastes;
Whereas 155,000 United States veterans of the Persian Gulf War have sought 
        medical care from the Department of Veterans Affairs for conditions that 
        may be attributable to their Gulf War service;
Whereas the Veterans of the Persian Gulf War Association estimates that 
        research, diagnosis, treatment, and compensation for United States 
        veterans of the Persian Gulf War will exceed $1,000,000,000 per year 
        during their lifetimes;
Whereas due to the courage and sacrifice of United States forces, Kuwait has 
        been restored as a world leader in oil production and per capita income; 
        and
Whereas Mohammed Al-Sabah, Ambassador of Kuwait, has failed to respond to 
        congressional or public inquiries regarding compensation for United 
        States veterans: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the House of Representatives calls on Jabir Al-
Sabah, Emir of Kuwait, to provide funds for research, diagnosis, 
treatment, and compensation relating to the injuries and illnesses 
suffered by United States veterans who served in the Persian Gulf War, 
until funds for such purposes can be obtained from Iraq.
                                 <all>
```
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

EASTERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

COMMONWEALTH OF 

MASSACHUSETTS,

and

STATE OF WISCONSIN,

 Plaintiffs,

v.

DAIRY FARMERS OF AMERICA, INC.,

and

DEAN FOODS COMPANY,

 Defendants.

Case No. 1:20-cv-02658

Judge Gary S. Feinerman

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO RETAIN

THE FRANKLIN PLANT

THIS CAUSE came before the Court on Defendant Dairy Farmers of America, Inc.’s

(“DFA’s”) Motion to Retain the Franklin Plant Pursuant to the Terms of the Final Judgment (the 

“Motion”). For good cause shown, this Motion is granted.

NOW THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the 

requirements that DFA divest the Franklin Divestiture Assets pursuant to the Final Judgment [Dkt. 

No. 53] and to hold separate the Franklin Plant pursuant to the Asset Preservation and Hold 

Separate Stipulation and Order (“Stipulation and Order”) [Dkt. No. 13] are terminated. All other 

obligations as they relate solely to the Franklin Divestiture Assets of the Final Judgment and the 

Case: 1:20-cv-02658 Document #: 58 Filed: 12/17/20 Page 1 of 2 PageID #:729
Stipulation and Order are also terminated. The Final Judgment and Stipulation and Order

otherwise remain in full force and effect.

SO ORDERED,

This 17th day of December 2020.

________________________

U.S. District Judge

 

Case: 1:20-cv-02658 Document #: 58 Filed: 12/17/20 Page 2 of 2 PageID #:730
I

105TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 877

To amend the Higher Education Act of 1965 to prevent students called

to active duty from entering repayment on student loans.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

FEBRUARY 27, 1997

Mr. KLUG (for himself, Mr. MCCOLLUM, Mr. SAXTON, Mr. MCINTOSH, Mr.

KLECZKA, Mr. SANDERS, Mr. UNDERWOOD, Mr. KIND, Mr. ANDREWS,

Mr. CANADY of Florida, Mr. WATTS of Oklahoma, Mr. ENGLISH of Pennsylvania, Mr. FOGLIETTA, Mr. WHITFIELD, Mr. TIAHRT, Mr. NEY, Ms.

SLAUGHTER, Ms. DELAURO, and Mr. HINOJOSA) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Education and the

Workforce

A BILL

To amend the Higher Education Act of 1965 to prevent

students called to active duty from entering repayment

on student loans.

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

3 SECTION 1. DELAY IN COMMENCEMENT OF REPAYMENT

4 PERIOD.

5 Section 428(b)(7) of the Higher Education Act of

6 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1078(b)(7)) is amended by inserting

7 after subparagraph (C) the following new subparagraph:
2

•HR 877 IH

1 ‘‘(D) There shall be excluded from the 6

2 months determined under subparagraph (A)(i) any

3 period during which the student was called or or4 dered to active duty in a reserve component of the

5 Armed Forces of the United States.’’.

Æ
#### Isaac Rosenfield and Others, Appellants, *v.*Al Heller, Otherwise Known as “Albert,” “Alfred ” and “Alexander ” Heller, Respondent.

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department,

January 7, 1926.

Depositions — motion to vacate notice for examination of plaintiffs for purpose of supporting defense — insufficiency of defense warrants vacation of notice.

A notice for the examination of the plaintiffs for the purpose of supporting a possible defense to the action herein should be vacated since said defense is so obviously insufficient on its face that it is evident that no evidence in support thereof can be produced on the trial.

Appeal by plaintiffs from an order of the City Court of the City of New York entered in favor of the defendant.

*Hollander & Bernheimer [Harry T. Zucker*of counsel], for the appellants.

*Ruttenberg & Ruttenberg [Norbert Ruttenberg*of counsel], for the respondent.

Per Curiam.

While ordinarily it is not the office of the court to inquire into the sufficiency of a defense where the motion is to vacate the examination of a party for the purpose of supporting it when, as here, the attempted defense is so palpably insufficient on its face that no evidence in support thereof could be adduced upon the trial, we feel warranted in ordering a vacation of the notice. Nowhere does the defense allege a single act done by plaintiffs to the actual injury of the defendant. The order appealed from is reversed and the notice for examination is vacated.

Order reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and motion granted, with ten dollars costs.

All concur; present, Guy, Wagner and Lydon, JJ.
N OTE : This disposition is nonprecedential.


# United States Court of Appeals **for the Federal Circuit**

______________________

MSHIFT, INC., Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.

DIGITAL INSIGHT CORPORATION (doing business as Intuit Financial Services), Defendant-Appellee.

and

COMMUNITY TRUST BANK, MOBILE MONEY VENTURES, LLC, MERITRUST CREDIT UNION, PROFESSIONAL FEDERAL CREDIT UNION, SANFORD INSTITUTION FOR SAVINGS, FORT

WORTH COMMUNITY CREDIT UNION, USE CREDIT UNION, GATE CITY BANK, BUSEY BANK, DENSION STATE BANK, FIDELITY BANK, FIRST INTERNET BANK OF INDIANA, and VISION BANK, Defendants-Appellees.

and

SK C&C CO., LTD., Defendant-Appellee.

____________________

2011-1057

______________________

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California in No. 10-CV-0710, Judge William H. Alsup.______________________

JUDGMENT

______________________

J AMES C. O TTESON , Agility IP Law, of East Palo Alto, California, argued for plaintiff-appellant. With him on

the brief was X IANG L ONG . Of counsel on the brief was

M ELINDA M. M ORTON , Bergeson, LLP, of San Jose,

California. Of counsel was M ONICA M UCCHETTI E NO

, Agility IP Law, of East Palo Alto, California.

H EATHER N. M EWES , Fenwick & West LLP, of San Francisco, California, argued for all defendants-appellees.

With her on the brief was H ECTOR J. R IBERA for Digital Insight Corporation. On the brief were A NDREW P.

V

ALENTINE and B RENT K. Y AMASHITA , of DLA Piper LLP, of East Palo Alto, California, for defendants-appellees Community Trust Bank, et al.; and H AE -C HAN P ARK and

W AYNE M. H ELGE , of H.C. Park & Associates, PLC, of Vienna, Virginia, for defendants-appellees SK C&C Co. Ltd, and Mobile Money Ventures, LLC; and B RAIN S.

S EAL , of Highbury Chapman, LLC , of Washington, DC, for defendant-appellee SK C&C Co. Ltd. Of counsel was E RIK R. F UEHRER , of DLA Piper LLP, of East Palo Alto,

California.

______________________

T HIS C AUSE having been heard and considered, it is

O RDERED and A DJUDGED :

P ER C URIAM (P ROST

, M AYER , and O’M ALLEY

, Circuit Judges ).

AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.

E NTERED BY O RDER OF THE C OURT

July 8, 2011 /s/ Jan Horbaly Date Jan Horbaly
Clerk
#### Mosier *v.*Smith.

•To sustain an action of disseisin the plaintiff must, as in ejectment, show a legal title; and such a title is not conveyed by a land office certificate.

ERROR to the *Morgan*Circuit Court.

Blackford, *J.*

Smith brought an action of disseisin against *Mosier.*The declaration avers that the plaintiff below, on the 13th of *October,*1830, purchased at the land office in *Cravsfordsville,*a certain quarter section of land, and received a certificate for the same, signed by the receiver of the land office. It also avers that the defendant, previously tó the plaintiff’s purchase, had entered into possession of a part of the premises, without any right, and still continued in possession. There is a plea of not guilty, and judgment for the plaintiff

This judgment must be reversed. The declaration contains no caúse of action. To sustain an action of disseisin, the plaintiff is bound, as in ejectment, to show a legal title. A land office certificate conveys no legal title (1). It requires a patent, executed by the president of the *United States,*to convey the legal title for public land.

*133*P. Sweetser,*for the plaintiff.

C. *Fletcher*and *H. Gregg,*for the defendant.

*Per Curiam.*

The judgment is reversed with costs. To be certified, &c.

(1)

 Sed vide Stat, 1833, p. 113, contra.
[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 215 (Thursday, November 6, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Page 66030]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-26370]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Transit Administration


Notice To Rescind the Record of Decision (ROD) for the North 
Metro Corridor Project in the City of Denver, Commerce City, Thornton, 
Northglenn, and Adams County, Colorado

AGENCY: Federal Transit Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Rescind the Record of Decision.

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

SUMMARY: The Federal Transit Administration (FTA), in cooperation with 
the Regional Transportation District (RTD), is issuing this notice to 
advise the public that the Record of Decision (ROD) for the proposed 
North Metro Corridor project in Denver, Colorado is being rescinded.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. David L. Beckhouse, Team Leader 
for Planning and Project Development, Federal Transit Administration 
Region VIII, 12300 West Dakota Avenue, Suite 310, Lakewood, CO 80228, 
phone 720-963-3306, email <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#367257405f52187453555d5e594345537652594218515940"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="692d081f000d472b0c0a0201061c1a0c290d061d470e061f">[email protected]</span></a>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FTA, as the lead federal agency, in 
cooperation with the Regional Transportation District published a ROD 
on April 22, 2011 for the North Metro Corridor project, an 18-mile 
commuter rail and track system to connect Denver Union Station and the 
State Highway 7/162nd Avenue area in the Denver, Colorado area.
    Since that time, RTD notified FTA that federal funds will not be 
utilized during the final design and construction of the project. 
Therefore, the FTA has determined that the ROD for the Final 
Environmental Impact Statement dated January 3, 2011 will be rescinded 
since there will be no federal action, and the requirements of the 
National Environmental Policy Act pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 4321, et se. 
and 23 Code of Federal Regulations 771 no longer apply.
    Comments and questions concerning the proposed action should be 
directed to FTA at the address provided above.

    Dated: October 31, 2014.
Linda M. Gehrke,
Regional Administrator, Federal Transit Administration, Region VIII.
[FR Doc. 2014-26370 Filed 11-5-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
United States Court of Appeals

For the Seventh Circuit

Chicago, Illinois 60604

July 27, 2020

Before

FRANK H. EASTERBROOK, Circuit Judge

MICHAEL S. KANNE, Circuit Judge

DAVID F. HAMILTON, Circuit Judge

No. 20-1811

ELIM ROMANIAN PENTECOSTAL CHURCH and

LOGOS BAPTIST MINISTRIES,

Plaintiffs-Appellants,

v.

JAY ROBERT PRITZKER, Governor of Illinois,

Defendant-Appellee.

Appeal from the United States 

District Court for the Northern

District of Illinois, Eastern

Division.

No. 20 C 2782

Robert W. Gettleman, Judge.

Order

Plaintiffs-Appellants filed a petition for rehearing and rehearing en banc on July 10, 

2020. No judge in regular active service has requested a vote on the petition for 

rehearing en banc, and all of the judges on the panel have voted to deny rehearing. The 

petition for rehearing is therefore DENIED.

Case: 20-1811 Document: 00713657318 Filed: 08/04/2020 Pages: 1

Case: 1:20-cv-02782 Document #: 52 Filed: 08/04/20 Page 1 of 1 PageID #:631
Exhibit 31.2

Certification of Chief Financial Officer  of Periodic Report Pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a) and Rule 15d-14(a)

I,
Penni F. Roll, certify that:

1.     I
have reviewed this Annual Report on Form 10-K of Ares Capital Corporation;

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

3.     Based
on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition,
results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4.     The
registrant's other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act
Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the registrant and have:



5.     The
registrant's other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant's
auditors and the audit committee of the registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):



Date:
February 26, 2014

/s/ PENNI F. ROLL Penni F. Roll Chief Financial Officer(Principal Financial Officer)


---



QuickLinks
9596.

#### Jones *et al. v.*Funston.

Wade, C. J.

1. Where personal property is recovered in a bail-trover action, and no alternative judgment is rendered, and thereafter the defendant sues out a writ of certiorari, giving the usual condemnation bond, and at the hearing the certiorari is dismissed for want of legal notice, and judgment is rendered against the plaintiff and his surety on the certiorari bond, for the cost of the proceeding only, suit on that bond may thereafter be instituted against the principal and the surety for- the value of the property recovered in the original trover action, *411to be ascertained by proof, where the property itself can not be found to answer the judgment therefor, oy has been destroyed or has ceased to exist. See, in this connection, Civil Code (1910), § 5205.

Decided May 17, 1918.

Action upon bond; from city court of Hinesville—Judge W. C. Hodges. January 23, 1918.

*N. J. Norman,*for plaintiffs in error.

*Ben A. Way,*contra.

*(a)*The case of Franklin *v. Kriegshaber,*114 *Ga.*947 (41 S. E. 47), relative to the liability of a surety on a supersedeas bond executed where a bill of exceptions was sued out to the Supreme Court, and the case of *Bryan*v. *Simpson,*92 *Ga.*307 (18 S. E. 547), and similar cases relative to the proper judgment to be returned on an appeal bond in a claim ease, have no relevancy to the question raised in this case. 2. The trial court did not err in overruling the general demurrer.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*Jenkins and Luke, JJ., conewr.*
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"Garrett Shea","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/garrett-shea-1nasa-gov\/","title":"SEH 2.0 Fundamentals of Systems Engineering","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"RQhrjEKMV2\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/reference\/2-0-fundamentals-of-systems-engineering\/\">SEH 2.0 Fundamentals of Systems Engineering<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/reference\/2-0-fundamentals-of-systems-engineering\/embed\/#?secret=RQhrjEKMV2\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“SEH 2.0 Fundamentals of Systems Engineering” — NASA\" data-secret=\"RQhrjEKMV2\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n<\/script>\n","thumbnail_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/02\/seh_diagram_20-1.jpg?w=600","thumbnail_width":600,"thumbnail_height":456}
V

105TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 808

For the relief of John M. Ragsdale.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

FEBRUARY 13, 1997

Mr. CALVERT introduced the following bill; which was referred to the

Committee on the Judiciary

A BILL

For the relief of John M. Ragsdale.

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

3 SECTION 1. COMPENSATION FOR WORK-RELATED INJURY.

4 (a) AUTHORIZATION OF PAYMENT.—The Secretary

5 of the Treasury shall pay, out of money in the Treasury

6 not otherwise appropriated, the sum of $49,331.29 to

7 John M. Ragsdale as compensation for injuries sustained

8 by John M. Ragsdale in June and July of 1952 while John

9 M. Ragsdale was employed by the National Bureau of

10 Standards.

11 (b) SETTLEMENT OF CLAIMS.—The payment made

12 under subsection (a) shall be a full settlement of all claims
2

•HR 808 IH

1 by John M. Ragsdale against the United States for the

2 injuries referred to in subsection (a).

3 SEC. 2. LIMITATION ON AGENTS AND ATTORNEYS’ FEES.

4 It shall be unlawful for an amount that exceeds 10

5 percent of the amount authorized by section 1 to be paid

6 to or received by any agent or attorney in consideration

7 of services rendered in connection with this Act. Any per8 son who violates this section shall be guilty of an infrac9 tion and shall be subject to a fine in the amount provided

10 in title 18, United States Code.

Æ