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


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
The schedule contains summary financial information extracted from Form 10-K for
the period ended January 3, 1999 and is qualified in its entirety by reference
to such financial statements.      
</LEGEND>
                    
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              Jan-3-1999
<PERIOD-START>                                 Dec-28-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                   Jan-3-1999
<CASH>                                           107,000
<SECURITIES>                                           0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    327,100
<ALLOWANCES>                                      (8,100)
<INVENTORY>                                      151,300
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 681,000
<PP&E>                                         1,289,800
<DEPRECIATION>                                   704,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 1,646,500
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            516,900
<BONDS>                                          307,700
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                  0
<PREFERRED>                                            0
<COMMON>                                          68,800
<OTHER-SE>                                       494,900
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   1,646,500
<SALES>                                        2,498,700
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               2,498,700
<CGS>                                          2,128,500
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  2,320,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   5,900
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                35,800
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  112,700
<INCOME-TAX>                                      38,300
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               78,400
<DISCONTINUED>                                         0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                        0
<CHANGES>                                              0
<NET-INCOME>                                      78,400
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                       3.29
<EPS-DILUTED>                                       3.23
        

 

</TABLE>
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 109 (Tuesday, June 9, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 27336]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-13518]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention


Disease, Disability, and Injury Prevention and Control Special 
Emphasis Panel (SEP): Addressing Emerging Infectious Diseases and 
Related Public Health Threats in the People's Republic of China, 
Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA), GH09-002, Initial Review

    In accordance with Section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory 
Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463), the Centers for Disease Control and 
Prevention (CDC) announces the aforementioned meeting:

    Time and Date: 1 p.m.-4 p.m., June 25, 2009 (Closed).
    Place: Teleconference.
    Status: The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance 
with provisions set forth in Section 552b(c)(4) and (6), Title 5 
U.S.C., and the Determination of the Director, Management Analysis 
and Services Office, CDC, pursuant to Public Law 92-463.
    Matters to be Discussed: The meeting will include the initial 
review, discussion, and evaluation of ``Addressing Emerging 
Infectious Diseases and Related Public Health Threats in the 
People's Republic of China, FOA GH09-002.''
    Contact Person for More Information: Shoukat Qari, PhD, 
Scientific Review Administrator, CDC, 1600 Clifton Road, NE., 
Mailstop D72, Atlanta, GA 30333, Telephone (404) 639-4663.
    The Director, Management Analysis and Services Office, has been 
delegated the authority to sign Federal Register notices pertaining 
to announcements of meetings and other committee management 
activities, for both CDC and the Agency for Toxic Substances and 
Disease Registry.

    Dated: June 2, 2009.
Lorenzo Falgiano,
Acting Director, Management Analysis and Services Office, Centers for 
Disease Control and Prevention.
[FR Doc. E9-13518 Filed 6-8-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4163-18-P
#### Sunrise Check Cashing and Payroll Services, Inc., et al., Respondents, v Town of Hempstead, Appellant.

Submitted March 25, 2013;

decided June 25, 2013

Motion for reargument denied *[see*20 NY3d 481 (2013)].

Judges Rivera and Abdus-Salaam taking no part.
<PAGE>   1

                                                                      EXHIBIT 23

                       Consent of Independent Accountants


We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statement of
Rent-Way, Inc. on Form S-8 (File Numbers, 0-22026 and 333-13355) of our report
dated October 31, 1997, on our audits of the financial statements of Rent-Way,
Inc. as of September 30, 1887 and 1996, and for the years ended September 30,
1997,1996 and 1995, which report is included in this Annual Report on Form
10-K.


                                                        Coopers & Lybrand L.L.P.


Cleveland, Ohio
#### In the Matter of Danny Montes, Appellant, v Norman Bezio, as Director of Special Housing and Inmate Disciplinary Programs, Respondent.

Submitted January 31, 2011;

decided April 5, 2011

Motion for leave to appeal granted. Motion for poor person relief granted.
#### Ogdensburgh & Lake Champlain R. Co. *v.*The Northern R. Co. of New Hampshire and Others.

*(Circuit Court, D. New Hampshire.*

February 24, 1881.)

1. Bill for Account—Several and Distinct Accounts—Parties.

In Equity. Demurrer to Amended Bill. .

*Sidney Bartlett*and *Wallace Uachedt,*for complainant.

*Mr. Wilson*and *J. H. Benton, Jr.,*for defendants.

Lowell, C. J.

This bill is brought upon the same contract which was under consideration by this court in the district of Massachusetts in a cáse heard by' Mr. Justice Clifford and *myself,—Ogdensburgh & Lake Champlain R. Co.*v. *Boston &**881*Lowell R. Corp.*4 Fed. Rep. 64. We then gave a construction to this very singular and difficult contract, and held that the four railroad companies, who are its parties of the third part, had agreed severally with the plaintiff corporation to repay to it the large sum which it had advanced, to the extent of the gross proceeds of the business in said contract mentioned and provided for, and only to this extent. The demurrer to the bill in that case was sustained because there was no allegation as to the amount of gross earnings, and because it did not appear that Smith & Stark, the trustees of the sinking fund, had no fund in their possession applicable to the payment of the debt. In the present case the bill has been amended to meet the objections which were sustained in the other case. The principal point made in support of the demurrer is that the Nashua & Lowell Railroad Company, against whom a separate suit is pending, being within the state of New Hampshire, ought to have been made a party defendant.

It was intimated in the former decision that if all four of the borrowing corporations had been found in one district, a single suit might properly have been sustained against them; but we held that they' were not necessary parties. The amended bill demands only one-fourth of the debt from this defendant, and, if its gross earnings are equal to that sum, I do not see that the other corporations are even proper parties to that inquiry. At all events, there is no advantage in joining two out of four of the accounting parties, each account being several and distinct.

Demurrer overruled.
#### Calvin Dudley, Jr., Respondent, v Yajaira Reyes et al., Appellants.

[976 NYS2d 403]

In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendants appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Jacobson, J.), dated March 19, 2013, which denied their motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint on the ground that the plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d) as a result of the subject accident.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The defendants failed to meet their prima facie burden of showing that the plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d) as a result of the subject accident *(see Toure v Avis Rent A Car Sys.,*98 NY2d 345 [2002]; *Gaddy v Eyler,*79 NY2d 955, 956-957 [1992]). The papers submitted by the defendants did not adequately address the plaintiff’s claim, set forth in the bill of particulars, that he sustained a serious injury under the 90/180-day category of Insurance Law § 5102 (d) *(see DeVille v Barry,*41 AD3d 763, 763-764 [2007]).

Since the defendants did not sustain their prima facie burden, it is unnecessary to determine whether the papers submitted by the plaintiff in opposition were sufficient to raise a triable issue of fact *(see id.*at 764). Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly denied the defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. Rivera, J.E, Hall, Roman and Cohen, JJ., concur.
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 112 (Friday, June 12, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 28035-28036]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-13837]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY


Notice of Extension of Public Comment Period for the Revised 
Draft Environmental Impact Statement for Decommissioning and/or Long-
Term Stewardship at the West Valley Demonstration Project and Western 
New York Nuclear Service Center, DOE/EIS-0226D (Revised)

AGENCY: Department of Energy.

ACTION: Notice of extension of public comment period.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces an extension of the public comment 
period initially published in the December 5, 2008 Notice of 
Availability (73 FR 74160) for the Revised Draft Environmental Impact 
Statement for Decommissioning and/or Long-Term Stewardship at the West 
Valley Demonstration Project and Western New York Nuclear Service 
Center [DOE/EIS-0226-D (Revised)] (referred to as the ``Draft 
Decommissioning and/or Long-Term Stewardship EIS'' or ``Draft EIS.''). 
The comment period will now close on September 8, 2009.

DATES: The comment period will be extended from June 8, 2009 to 
September 8, 2009.

ADDRESSES: Copies of this Draft EIS are available for review at the 
Concord Public Library, 18 Chapel Street, Springville, New York 14141, 
(716) 592-7742, the Ashford Office Complex Reading Room, 9030 Route 
219, West Valley, New York 14171, (716) 942-4555 and the U.S. 
Department of Energy, FOIA Reading Room, 1E-190, Forrestal Bldg., 1000 
Independence Ave., SW., Washington, DC 20585, 202-586-3142.
    This Draft EIS is also available at http://www.westvalleyeis.com.
    Written comments may be mailed to Catherine Bohan, EIS Document 
Manager, West Valley Demonstration Project, U.S. Department of Energy, 
P.O. Box 2368, Germantown, MD 20874. Comments or requests for 
information may also be submitted via e-mail at http://www.westvalleyeis.com or by faxing toll-free to 866-306-9094. Please 
mark all envelopes, faxes and e-mail: ``Draft Decommissioning and/or 
Long-Term Stewardship EIS Comments.'' All comments received during the 
comment

[[Page 28036]]

period, as extended, will be considered during preparation of the Final 
EIS.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For information regarding the WVDP or 
this Draft EIS, contact Catherine Bohan at the above address. The 
following Web sites may also be accessed for additional information on 
the Draft EIS or the West Valley Site: http://www.westvalleyeis.com or 
http://www.wv.doe.gov.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on June 5, 2009.
Michael C. Moore,
Director, Office of Small Sites.
[FR Doc. E9-13837 Filed 6-11-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
<PAGE>

          BOSTON FINANCIAL TAX CREDIT FUND VII, A LIMITED PARTNERSHIP

                                  EXHIBIT 32.1

                CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                    AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE
                           SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


In connection with the Annual Report of Boston Financial Tax Credits Fund VII
(the "Fund") on Form 10-KSB for the year ended March 31, 2006 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the
undersigned, the Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer,
hereby certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

1.   the Report fully complies with the  requirements  of Section 13(a) or
     15(d) of the Securities  Exchange Act of 1934; and

2.   the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
     respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
     Partnership.



                                       /s/Jenny Netzer
                                       ------------------------------------
                                       Jenny Netzer
                                       Principal Executive Officer and
                                       Principal Financial Officer
                                       Arch Street VIII, Inc. as
                                       Managing General Partner of
                                       Boston Financial Tax Credits Fund VII


                                       Date:  June 28, 2006


A signed original of this written statement required by section 906 has been
provided to the Fund and will be retained by the Fund and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 3282 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

111th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 3282

     To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to extend the work 
       opportunity tax credit for employers of certain veterans.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             April 29, 2010

  Mr. Specter introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
                  referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
     To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to extend the work 
       opportunity tax credit for employers of certain veterans.

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

SECTION 1. EXTENSION OF WORK OPPORTUNITY CREDIT FOR UNEMPLOYED 
              VETERANS.

    (a) In General.--Paragraph (14) of section 51(d) of the Internal 
Revenue Code of 1986 is amended--
            (1) by striking ``hired in 2009 or 2010'' in the heading,
            (2) by striking ``who begins work for the employer during 
        2009 or 2010'' in subparagraph (A),
            (3) by inserting ``who begins work for the employer during 
        2009, 2010, 2011, or 2012, and'' after ``without regard to 
        clause (ii) thereof)'' in subparagraph (B)(i), and
            (4) by inserting ``who begins work for the employer during 
        2009 or 2010 and'' after ``any individual'' in subparagraph 
        (B)(ii).
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section shall 
apply to individuals whose hiring date (as defined in section 51(d)(11) 
of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986) is after December 31, 2010.
                                 <all>
```
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet at June 30, 1999 (Unaudited) and the
Condensed Consolidated Statement of Operations for the Six Months Ended June 30,
1999 (Unaudited) and is qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial
statements.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                           1,418
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      588
<ALLOWANCES>                                        61
<INVENTORY>                                         67
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 2,089
<PP&E>                                           6,886
<DEPRECIATION>                                   1,556
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  12,930
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            1,448
<BONDS>                                          8,334
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                            1,672
<PREFERRED>                                        291
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                       (201)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    12,930
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 1,457
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                      329
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   471
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 407
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  (724)
<INCOME-TAX>                                      (17)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              (707)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (707)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (2.69)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (2.69)


</TABLE>
#### Michael R. ATRAQCHI and Irene S. Atraqchi, Appellants v. UNKNOWN NAMED AGENTS OF the FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, et al., Appellees.

No. 06-5021.

United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit.

June 27, 2006.

Michael R. Atraqchi, Washington, DC, pro se.

Irene S. Atraqchi, Washington, DC, pro se.

Before: GINSBURG, Chief Judge, and ROGERS and BROWN, Circuit Judges.

*JUDGMENT*

PER CURIAM.

This appeal was considered on the record from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia and on the brief filed by appellants. The court has determined that the issues presented occasion no need for an opinion. *See*D.C.Cir. Rule 36(b). It is

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the district court’s order filed January 13, 2006, be affirmed. The complaint contains factual allegations that are so implausible as to be “fantastic or delusional.” *Neitzke v. Williams,*490 U.S. 319, 327-28, 109 S.Ct. 1827, 104 L.Ed.2d 338 (1989). Accordingly, the district court properly dis*6missed the ease as frivolous under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2).

Pursuant to D.C. Circuit Rule 36, this disposition will not be published. The Clerk is directed to withhold issuance of the mandate herein until seven days after resolution of any timely petition for rehearing or petition for rehearing en banc. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 41(b); D.C.Cir. Rule 41.
#### Arthur YATES-BEY, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Gene M. JOHNSON, Respondent-Appellee.

No. 06-7353.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: Oct. 6, 2006.

Decided: Oct. 26, 2006.

Arthur Yates-Bey, Appellant Pro Se. Susan Lee Parrish, Office of the Attorney General of Virginia, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.

Before WILKINSON and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

*258PER CURIAM:

Arthur Yates-Bey seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000) petition. The district court referred this case to a magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) (2000). The magistrate judge recommended that relief be denied and advised Yates-Bey that failure to file timely objections to this recommendation could waive appellate review of a district court order based upon the recommendation. Despite this warning, Yates-Bey failed to object to the magistrate judge’s recommendation.

The timely filing of specific objections to a magistrate judge’s recommendation is necessary to preserve appellate review of the substance of that recommendation when the parties have been warned of the consequences of noncompliance. *Wright v. Collins,*766 F.2d 841, 845-46 (4th Cir. 1985); *see also Thomas v. Arn,*474 U.S. 140, 106 S.Ct. 466, 88 L.Ed.2d 435 (1985). Yates-Bey has waived appellate review by failing to timely file specific objections after receiving proper notice. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability, deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis, and dismiss the appeal.

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.

*DISMISSED.*
97-685.

#### Thomas v. Conrad.

Montgomery App. Nos. 15873 and 15898. On review of order certifying a conflict. The court determines that a conflict exists; the parties are to brief the question certified by the court of appeals at page 2 of its Decision and Entry filed March 13,1997:

> “ * * * [0]ur decision in this appeal conflicts with the Tenth District Court of Appeals’ decision in *Moore v. Trimble*(Dec. 21, 1993), Franklin App. No. 93APE08-1084, unreported [1993 WL 531289], and the Fifth District Court of Appeals’ decision in *Jones v. Massillon Bd. of Edn.*(June 13, 1994), Stark App. No. 94 CA0018, unreported [1994 WL 313721],

> “The issue presented is whether an employer may appeal in the common pleas court from an administrative denial of its request to terminate an employee’s continued participation in the workers’ compensation system. In *Moore*and *Jones,*the appellate courts held that an employer may appeal in the common pleas court from any Industrial Commission ruling ‘involving’ a claimant’s right to continue participating in the workers’ compensation system. Consequently, both courts found an appeal to the common pleas court proper when the Industrial Commission refused to terminate an employee’s continued participation.

> “Conversely, this court and the Eleventh District Court of Appeals in *Bishop v. Thomas Steel Strip Corp.*(1995), 101 Ohio App.3d 522 [655 N.E.2d 1370], have held that the Industrial Commission’s refusal to terminate an employee’s continued participation in the workers’ compensation system must be appealed through mandamus rather than through an appeal to the common pleas court. We determined that once a claimant is granted the right to participate in the workers’ compensation system, no subsequent Industrial Commission ruling, except a ruling terminating that right, may be appealed to the common pleas court.

> “Having found that a conflict exists, we certify the following question to the Ohio Supreme Court for review and final determination:

> *1494“May an employer appeal in common pleas court from an Industrial Commission order refusing to terminate an employee’s continued participation in the workers’ compensation system?”