alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# Consumer Price Index Latest Numbers

Latest Numbers for Consumer Price Index, U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics

- Consumer Price Index Latest Numbers CPI-U, US City Average, All Items:															           NSA					+0.4%  in Apr 2024					Historical Data								           SA					+0.3%  in Apr 2024					Historical Data								           NSA					+3.4%  since Apr 2023					Historical Data																		CPI-U, US City Average, All Items Less Food and Energy:															           NSA					+0.3%  in Apr 2024					Historical Data								           SA					+0.3%  in Apr 2024					Historical Data								           NSA					+3.6%  since Apr 2023					Historical Data																		CPI-U, US City Average, Medical Care:															           NSA					+0.3%  in Apr 2024					Historical Data								           SA					+0.4%  in Apr 2024					Historical Data								           NSA					+2.6%  since Apr 2023					Historical Data																		CPI-W, US City Average, All Items:															           NSA					+0.4%  in Apr 2024					Historical Data								           SA					+0.3%  in Apr 2024					Historical Data								           NSA					+3.4%  since Apr 2023					Historical Data																				SA- Seasonally Adjusted				NSA- Not Seasonally Adjusted
EX-10.10.3




 EXHIBIT 10.10.3 
 COMPENSATION AGREEMENT 
 It is hereby agreed and understood between Brian J. Sisko
(“Executive”) and Safeguard Scientifics, Inc. (the “Company”) as of this 28th day of December, 2012 as follows: 

Notwithstanding anything to the contrary that may be contained in any other written agreement pertaining to the employment of Executive by the Company,
in an effort to comply with Section 409A of the Internal Revenue Code and other applicable rules and regulations, effective December 31, 2012, upon any termination of Executive’s employment in circumstances which result in the Company
being obligated regarding the payment of amounts relating to COBRA coverage, in order to comply with its obligations the Company shall no longer waive the applicable premium otherwise payable for COBRA continuation coverage or directly subsidize
payment of the applicable premium for continued coverage under Safeguard’s medical insurance plan for Executive (and, to the extent covered immediately prior to the date of Executive’s termination of employment, his spouse and dependents).

 In lieu of such waiver or direct subsidy, Executive will be entitled to reimbursement by the Company of the cost of such COBRA continuation
coverage with respect to medical insurance, less such co-payment amount payable by Executive under the terms of the Company’s medical insurance program, as may be amended from time to time. Such reimbursement shall only be made to the extent
Executive continues to pay the monthly premiums for such medical insurance. 
 Other than as specifically set forth herein, it is not intended
that this Agreement shall in any way affect any of the other prevailing terms of employment between Executive and the Company 
 In witness
whereof, the undersigned have caused this Agreement to be duly executed as of the date first above written. 
  

			
	
	EXECUTIVE
		
		 	/s/ Brian J. Sisko
	Name:	 	Brian J. Sisko
	
	SAFEGUARD SCIENTIFICS, INC.
		
	By:	 	/s/ Stephen T. Zarrilli
	Name:	 	Stephen T. Zarrilli
	Title:	 	President and Chief Executive Officer
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 672 Referred in Senate (RFS)]

  1st Session
                                H. R. 672

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           February 27, 2003

  Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Armed Services

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
To rename the Guam South Elementary/Middle School of the Department of 
Defense Domestic Dependents Elementary and Secondary Schools System in 
honor of Navy Commander William ``Willie'' McCool, who was the pilot of 
 the Space Shuttle Columbia when it was tragically lost on February 1, 
                                 2003.

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

SECTION 1. FINDINGS.

    Congress finds the following:
            (1) Commander William C. McCool of the United States Navy, 
        pilot of the Space Shuttle Columbia when it was tragically lost 
        on February 1, 2003, attended Dededo Middle School and John F. 
        Kennedy High School on Guam.
            (2) Commander McCool carried a flag commemorating the 
        liberation of Guam on NASA mission STS-107 of the Space Shuttle 
        Columbia.
            (3) Commander McCool pursued his dream of space flight with 
        vigor and passion and, by his life and accomplishments, is an 
        inspiration for school children everywhere to dare to dream big 
        things, to believe in themselves, and to reach for the stars.

SEC. 2. DESIGNATION.

    The Guam South Elementary/Middle School of the Department of 
Defense Domestic Dependents Elementary and Secondary Schools System in 
Apra Heights, Guam, shall be known and designated as the ``Commander 
William C. McCool Elementary/Middle School'', in honor of William C. 
McCool, who was a commander in the United States Navy and pilot of the 
Space Shuttle Columbia when it was tragically lost on February 1, 2003.

SEC. 3. REFERENCES.

    Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper, or other 
record of the United States to the Guam South Elementary/Middle School 
shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Commander William C. McCool 
Elementary/Middle School''.

            Passed the House of Representatives February 26, 2003.

            Attest:

                                                 JEFF TRANDAHL,

                                                                 Clerk.
```
#### BEE MACH. CO., Inc., v. FREEMAN.

Civ. Mo. 1224.

District Court, D. Massachusetts.

Nov. 5, 1943.

See also 41 F.Supp. 461.

Cedric W. Porter (of Dike, Calver *&*Porter), of Boston, Mass., for plaintiff.

Nathan Heard, of Boston, Mass., and Marston Allen, of Cincinnati, Ohio, for defendant.

FORD, District Judge.

The plaintiff has renewed its motion, originally filed July 9, 1941, to amend its-complaint by adding a claim for treble damages under the anti-trust laws of the United States. The motion was originally denied by this court for lack of jurisdiction, D.C., 42 F.Supp. 938. Cf. 15 U.S. C.A. § 15. On November 6,1942, the United! States Circuit Court of Appeals, 131 F.2d 190, for this circuit vacated the judgment of the district court (affirmed United States. Supreme Court June 1, 1943, 319 U.S. 448, 63 S.Ct. 1146, 87 L.Ed. 1509) and remanded the case for further proceedings not inconsistent with its opinion.

This court, under Rules 15, Amended and Supplemental Pleadings, and 18, Joinder of Claims and Remedies, Rules of Civil Procedure 28 U.S.C.A. following section 723c, may, in the exercise of its discretion, allow the amendment proposed.

Rule 18(a) authorizes the joinder of claims and counterclaims with a view of disposing of all claims existing between the parties in a single action, consistent with the requirements of jurisdiction and venue-

Leave to allow amendments under Rule 15 (a) is “freely given when justice so requires”. The defendant contends the litigation in the Massachusetts, courts involves injustice and that all the-matters in controversy between the parties, “are properly located in Ohio” where litigation is pending between the parties involving certain counterclaims of the defendant in an action originally brought *311there by the plaintiff against the defendant. This court cannot agree with this contention. There is no injustice involved. The present suit in the Massachusetts courts is properly here. This court has jurisdiction of the parties and the subject matter. The venue provision of Section 4 of the Clayton Act, for the purpose of this amendment, is satisfied. (Supreme Court opinion of June 1, 1943). The plaintiff is a Massachusetts corporation and it assures the court that all its witnesses with respect to the anti-trust issue reside here. There is no adequate reason why the anti-trust suit should not be tried in Massachusetts.

The motion to amend is allowed.
7 8

Table 36. Unincorporated self-employed persons in nonagricultural industries by sex, 1976-2004 annual averages 

(Numbers in thousands)

Total 

employed

Selfemployed

Selfemployed as 

a percent of 

total

Total 

employed

Selfemployed

Selfemployed as 

a percent of 

total

Total 

employed

Selfemployed

Selfemployed as 

a percent of 

total

1976...... 85,421 5,782 6.8 35,027 1,549 4.4 50,394 4,233 8.4 26.8

1977..... 88,734 6,115 6.9 36,677 1,692 4.6 52,057 4,423 8.5 27.7

1978..... 92,661 6,428 6.9 38,900 1,814 4.7 53,761 4,614 8.6 28.2

1979..... 95,477 6,792 7.1 40,556 1,982 4.9 54,921 4,810 8.8 29.2

1980..... 95,938 7,001 7.3 41,461 2,097 5.1 54,477 4,904 9.0 30.0

1981..... 97,030 7,097 7.3 42,333 2,192 5.2 54,697 4,905 9.0 30.9

1982..... 96,125 7,263 7.6 42,591 2,309 5.4 53,534 4,954 9.3 31.8

1983..... 97,450 7,575 7.8 43,367 2,439 5.6 54,083 5,136 9.5 32.2

1984...... 101,685 7,785 7.7 45,262 2,566 5.7 56,423 5,219 9.2 33.0

1985..... 103,971 7,810 7.5 46,615 2,603 5.6 57,356 5,207 9.1 33.3

1986..... 106,435 7,881 7.4 48,054 2,610 5.4 58,381 5,271 9.0 33.1

1987..... 109,232 8,201 7.5 49,668 2,778 5.6 59,564 5,423 9.1 33.9

1988...... 111,800 8,519 7.6 51,020 2,955 5.8 60,780 5,564 9.2 34.7

1989..... 114,143 8,605 7.5 52,341 3,043 5.8 61,802 5,562 9.0 35.4

1990...... 115,570 8,719 7.5 53,011 3,122 5.9 62,559 5,597 8.9 35.8

1991..... 114,449 8,850 7.7 52,815 3,150 6.0 61,634 5,700 9.2 35.6

1992..... 115,246 8,576 7.4 53,380 2,963 5.6 61,866 5,613 9.1 34.5

1993..... 117,144 8,959 7.6 54,273 3,065 5.6 62,871 5,894 9.4 34.2

1994..... 119,651 9,003 7.5 55,755 3,443 6.2 63,896 5,560 8.7 38.2

1995..... 121,460 8,901 7.3 56,642 3,440 6.1 64,818 5,461 8.4 38.6

1996..... 123,264 8,971 7.3 57,630 3,506 6.1 65,634 5,465 8.3 39.1

1997..... 126,159 9,056 7.2 59,026 3,550 6.0 67,133 5,506 8.2 39.2

1998..... 128,085 8,962 7.0 59,945 3,482 5.8 68,140 5,480 8.0 38.9

1999..... 130,207 8,790 6.8 61,193 3,424 5.6 69,014 5,366 7.8 39.0

2000..... 134,427 9,205 6.8 62,983 3,631 5.8 71,444 5,573 7.8 39.4

2001..... 134,635 9,121 6.8 63,147 3,594 5.7 71,488 5,527 7.7 39.4

2002...... 134,174 8,923 6.7 62,995 3,499 5.6 71,179 5,425 7.6 39.2

2003..... 135,461 9,344 6.9 63,824 3,609 5.7 71,636 5,736 8.0 38.6

2004...... 137,020 9,467 6.9 64,182 3,607 5.6 72,838 5,860 8.0 38.1

Selfemployed 

women as 

percent of 

total selfemployed

Men

Year

Total Women

NOTE: Beginning in 2000, data reflect the introduction of the

2002 Census industry classification system derived from the 2002

North American Industry Classification System into the Current Population Survey (CPS).
Exhibit
32.1
  CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO
 SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
 
 In
connection with the annual report on Form 10-KSB of Sinoenergy Corporation (the
“Company”) for the year ended September 30, 2009, as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Bo Huang, the
Chief Executive Officer, and I, Shiao Ming Sheng, the Chief Financial Officer,
of the Company, do hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted
pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my knowledge
and belief that:
 
 (1) the
Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and
 
 (2) the
information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
 
 December
      29, 2009/s/
      Bo
      HuangBo
      HuangChief
      Executive Officer/s/
      Shiao Ming
      ShengShiao
      Ming ShengChief
      Financial Officer
  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.
 
 The
foregoing certification is being furnished solely to accompany the Report
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350 and is not being filed for purposes of
Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and is not to be
incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company, whether made before or
after the date hereof, regardless of any general incorporation language in such
filing.
November 30, 2001


To the Board of Directors of
Capital Income Builder, Inc.

In planning and performing our audit of the financial statements
of Capital Income Builder, Inc. (the "Fund") for the year ended
October 31, 2001, we considered its internal control, including
control activities for safeguarding securities, in order to
determine our auditing procedures for the purpose of expressing
our opinion on the financial statements and to comply with the
requirements of Form N-SAR, not to provide assurance on internal
control.

The management of the Fund is responsible for establishing and
maintaining internal control.  In fulfilling this
responsibility, estimates and judgments by management are
required to assess the expected benefits and related costs of
controls.  Generally, controls that are relevant to an audit
pertain to the entity's objective of preparing financial
statements for external purposes that are fairly presented in
conformity with generally accepted accounting principles.  Those
controls include the safeguarding of assets against unauthorized
acquisition, use or disposition.

Because of inherent limitations in internal control, errors or
fraud may occur and not be detected.  Also, projection of any
evaluation of internal control to future periods is subject to
the risk that it may become inadequate because of changes in
conditions or that the effectiveness of the design and operation
may deteriorate.

Our consideration of internal control would not necessarily
disclose all matters in internal control that might be material
weaknesses under standards established by the American Institute
of Certified Public Accountants.  A material weakness is a
condition in which the design or operation of one or more of the
internal control components does not reduce to a relatively low
level the risk that misstatements caused by errors or fraud in
amounts that would be material in relation to the financial
statements being audited may occur and not be detected within a
timely period by employees in the normal course of performing
their assigned functions.  However, we noted no matters
involving internal control and its operation, including controls
for safeguarding securities, that we consider to be material
weaknesses as defined above as of October 31, 2001.

This report is intended solely for the information and use of
the Board of Directors of the Fund, management and the
Securities and Exchange Commission and is not intended to be and
should not be used by anyone other than these specified parties.



PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS
Los Angeles, California
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 784 Introduced in House (IH)]

108th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 784

     To amend the Federal Water Pollution Control Act to authorize 
           appropriations for sewer overflow control grants.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           February 13, 2003

 Mr. Camp (for himself, Mr. Pascrell, Ms. Kilpatrick, Mr. Kildee, Mr. 
Quinn, Mr. Ehlers, Mrs. Miller of Michigan, Ms. Bordallo, Mr. English, 
  Mr. Rogers of Michigan, Mr. Shimkus, Mr. Levin, Mr. McDermott, Mrs. 
 Davis of California, Mr. Stupak, Mr. Grijalva, Mr. Goodlatte, and Mr. 
   McHugh) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
             Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
     To amend the Federal Water Pollution Control Act to authorize 
           appropriations for sewer overflow control grants.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Water Quality Investment Act of 
2003''.

SEC. 2. SEWER OVERFLOW CONTROL GRANTS.

    Section 221 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 
1301) is amended--
            (1) in subsection (f) by striking ``2002 and 2003'' and 
        inserting ``2004 and 2005'';
            (2) in subsection (g)(1)--
                    (A) in the heading by striking ``2002'' and 
                inserting ``2004''; and
                    (B) by striking ``2002'' and inserting ``2004'';
            (3) in subsection (g)(2)--
                    (A) in the heading by striking ``2003'' and 
                inserting ``2005''; and
                    (B) by striking ``2003'' and inserting ``2005''; 
                and
            (4) in subsection (i) by striking ``2003'' and inserting 
        ``2005''.
                                 <all>
```
EXHIBIT 21.1



Subsidiaries of the Registrant



|                                                 |  |                             
|------------------------------------------------ |  | ----------------------------
|Name                                             |  | Jurisdiction ofIncorporation
|HTM Holdings, Inc.                               |  | Delaware                    
|                                                 | 
|Qualtron, Inc.                                   |  | Massachusetts               
|                                                 | 
|SMTC de Chihuahua S.A. de C.V.                   |  | Mexico                      
|                                                 | 
|SMTC Ireland Company                             |  | Ireland                     
|                                                 | 
|SMTC Manufacturing Corporation of California     |  | California                  
|                                                 | 
|SMTC Manufacturing Corporation of Canada         |  | Ontario, Canada             
|                                                 | 
|SMTC Manufacturing Corporation of Colorado       |  | Delaware                    
|                                                 | 
|SMTC Manufacturing Corporation of Massachusetts  |  | Massachusetts               
|                                                 | 
|SMTC Manufacturing Corporation of North Carolina |  | North Carolina              
|                                                 | 
|SMTC Manufacturing Corporation of Texas          |  | Texas                       
|                                                 | 
|SMTC Manufacturing Corporation of Wisconsin      |  | Wisconsin                   
|                                                 | 
|SMTC Mex Holdings, Inc.                          |  | Delaware                    
|                                                 | 
|SMTC Nova Scotia Company                         |  | Nova Scotia, Canada         
|                                                 | 
|SMTC R&D Teoranta                                |  | Ireland                     
|                                                 | 
|SMTC Teoranta                                    |  | Ireland
Exhibit 32.3

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 Quarterly Report of PRIMEDIA Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2003 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Robert J. Sforzo, Senior Vice President, Chief Accounting Officer and Controller of the Company, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



/s/
Robert J. Sforzo

Robert
J. Sforzo
Senior Vice President, Chief Accounting Officer and Controller
August 14, 2003

This
certification accompanies each Report pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of §18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.

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.

---

QuickLinks
Exhibit 10.10


 


Amendment
to Executive Severance Agreements


 


The
following amendment was made to executive severance agreements between MBT Financial Corp. and Donald M. Lieto, Executive Vice
President – Senior Administration Manager, Scott E. McKelvey, Executive Vice President – Senior Wealth Management Officer;
Thomas G. Myers, Executive Vice President – Chief Lending Manager; and John L. Skibski, Executive Vice President & Chief
Financial Officer:


 


The
paragraph entitled “SEPARATION PAYMENT” is amended and replaced in its entirety to read as follows:


 


SEPARATION
PAYMENT: A separation payment, before applicable deductions, equal to one (1) times the sum of your base salary as in effect as
of your termination of employment, plus in the event of a Qualifying Termination under subparagraphs (3) or (4) as set forth in
the definition below of Qualifying Termination, an amount equal to the average annual cash bonuses received by you during the three
year period ending prior to the year in which the Change in Control occurs (the "Separation Payment").


 


If
you have executed and returned the Release described below within thirty days after the date of your Qualifying Termination, the
Separation Payment shall be paid as follows: 50% of the Separation Payment shall be paid to you within ten business days of your
execution of the Release, with the remaining 50% to be paid in equal installments, without interest, commencing on the Company's
second regularly scheduled payroll following your execution of the Release and ending with the Company's regularly scheduled payroll
one year later (the "Separation Pay Period"), provided that if the ten business day period would end in a later calendar
year than the date of the Qualifying Termination, no part of the Separation Payment shall be paid until the first business day
of the subsequent calendar year. In the event of a change in payroll practice during the Separation Pay Period, the Company may
adjust the amounts of such installments as necessary to ensure that the total amount paid is equal to the Separation Payment, as
defined above. Notwithstanding the foregoing, in the event of a Qualifying Termination within one year following a Change in Control,
the Separation Payment shall be paid in a single lump sum within 10 days following the effective date of the Qualifying Termination,
again provided that if the ten business day period would end in a later calendar year than the date of the Qualifying Termination,
no part of the Separation Payment shall be paid during the earlier calendar year.


 


Sincerely,


 


H. Douglas Chaffin


President & Chief Executive Officer


MBT Financial Corp.


 


I have read, understand, and agree to the
foregoing terms and conditions.


 


	 	 	December 5, 2012
	(Executive’s Name)	 	Date
	(Title)