alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 155 (Monday, August 14, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Page 37857]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-17237]


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

FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION


Sunshine Act Meetings

AGENCY: Federal Election Commission

DATE AND TIME:  Thursday, August 17, 2017 at 10:00 a.m.

PLACE:  999 E Street NW., Washington, DC. (Ninth floor).

STATUS:  This meeting will be open to the public.

ITEMS TO BE DISCUSSED: 
Audit Division Recommendation Memorandum on the Illinois Republican 
Party (IRP) (A13-09)
Draft Advisory Opinion 2017-06: Stein and Gottlieb
Management and Administrative Matters

    Individuals who plan to attend and require special assistance, such 
as sign language interpretation or other reasonable accommodations, 
should contact Dayna C. Brown, Secretary and Clerk, at (202) 694-1040, 
at least 72 hours prior to the meeting date.

PERSON TO CONTACT FOR INFORMATION:  Judith Ingram, Press Officer, 
Telephone: (202) 694-1220.

Laura E. Sinram,
Acting Deputy Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2017-17237 Filed 8-10-17; 4:15 pm]
 BILLING CODE 6715-01-P
Exhibit 31.2
 CERTIFICATION
      (a)
    
    designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such
disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to
ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its
consolidated subsidiary, is made known to us by others within those entities,
particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;(b)
    
    designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such
internal control over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision,
to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting
and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance
with generally accepted accounting principles;(c)
    
    evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and
procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness
of the disclosure controls and procedures as of the end of the period covered by
this report based on such evaluation; and(d)
    
    disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control
over financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal
quarter (the registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report)
that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the
registrants internal control over financial reporting; and
  (a)
    
    all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or
operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably
likely to adversely affect the 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 who have a significant role in the registrants internal control over
financial reporting.
 Date: May 20, 2008/s/ Michael C. KeefeMichael C. KeefeExecutive Vice President and Acting Chief Financial Officer(Principal Financial Officer)
Second Amendment to Amended and Restated Performance Compensation Plan



 Exhibit 10.12.2 
 SECOND AMENDMENT TO AMENDED AND RESTATED MANAGEMENT 
 PERFORMANCE COMPENSATION PLAN 
 The following section of the AnnTaylor Stores Corporation Management Performance Compensation Plan (“ATIP”) is hereby amended and restated,
effective as of March 5, 2009, to read as follows: 
 “2(i) “Performance Compensation” means the cash
amount payable to a Participant pursuant to this Plan; provided that the Committee may determine from time to time that all or a portion of amounts payable to a Participant or Participants pursuant to the Plan shall be made in the form of shares of
the Company’s common stock reserved for issuance under the Company’s 2003 Equity Incentive Plan, as amended, or any successor plan that has been approved by the Company’s shareholders.” 
 Except as set forth above, ATIP is hereby ratified and affirmed in all respects.
<PAGE>


                                EXHIBIT 12

     COMPUTATION IN SUPPORT OF RATIO OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES

                   For Year Ended December 31, 1999

                    (Dollar Amounts in Thousands)



                                        West Penn Power Company

Earnings:
     Net Income                                   $137,600*
     Fixed charges (see below)                      73,303
     Income taxes                                   71,945*

     Total earnings                               $282,848*


Fixed Charges:
     Interest on long-term debt                   $ 61,729
     Other interest                                  6,995
     Estimated interest
       component of rentals                          4,579

     Total fixed charges                          $ 73,303


Ratio of Earnings to
  Fixed Charges                                       3.86


__________

*Excludes the effect of the extraordinary charge.
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
            THE SHERWOOD GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES         EXHIBIT 11
            COMPUTATION OF NET INCOME PER COMMON SHARE


                                         Three Months Ended August 31,
                                              1996               1995
<S>                                        <C>               <C>

Common stock and common stock equivalents:
  Average common stock outstanding         13,017,406        12,404,820
  Average common stock equivalents
    issuable under stock options               32,776           949,548

Total average common stock and common 
  stock equivalents used for earnings per 
  share computation                        13,050,182        13,354,368

Income:
    Net income                           $  3,003,041      $  4,467,864

Income per common and common
   equivalent share (a)<F1>:
    Net income                              $    0.23           $  0.33


<FN>
<F1>(a) For presentation purposes, primary and fully diluted are identical.
</FN>



</TABLE>
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent *

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision **

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

DONNA KRIEG,

 Plaintiff-Appellant,

 v.

U.S. FOODSERVICE, INC.,

 Defendant-Appellee.

No. 11-17423

D.C. No. 3:10-cv-02491-WHA

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of California

William Alsup, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted March 12, 2013** 

San Francisco, California

Before: WALLACE, MCKEOWN, and IKUTA, Circuit Judges.

FILED

MAR 14 2013

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2

Donna Krieg appeals the district court’s summary judgment in favor of U.S.

Foodservice, Inc. on multiple claims relating to her termination as a clerical

assistant after she suffered a back injury. We affirm.

Because Krieg’s deposition testimony flatly contradicted the statements in

her declaration that her supervisors informed her she was terminated due to failure

to perform and that her supervisor complained about her work restrictions, the

district court did not err in striking those statements as shams. See Van Asdale v.

Int'l Game Tech., 577 F.3d 989, 998 (9th Cir. 2009). Because Krieg failed to list

Fran LaGrange in her Rule 26 disclosure, the district court did not abuse its

discretion in deeming LaGrange’s declaration inadmissible. Goodman v. Staples

The Office Superstore, LLC, 644 F.3d 817, 827 (9th Cir. 2011). 

Although U.S. Foodservice informed Krieg of its decision to terminate her

after her injury, the unrebutted testimony of U.S. Foodservice decisionmakers

established that the decision to terminate Krieg preceded her injury; therefore, the

sequence of events does not raise the inference of a discriminatory motive. 

Accordingly, the district court did not err in entering summary judgment in favor

of U.S. Foodservice on Krieg’s claim of disability discrimination under Cal. Gov’t

Code § 12940(a). Avila v. Continental Airlines, Inc., 165 Cal. App. 4th 1237,

1246–52 (Cal. Ct. App. 2008). To the extent U.S. Foodservice had an obligation to
3

accommodate Krieg’s injury before her termination date, Krieg’s own testimony

establishes that she was fully accommodated. Therefore, the district court also did

not err in entering summary judgment on her claims of failure to accommodate and

failure to engage in the interactive process under Cal. Gov’t Code §§ 12940(m) and

(n). Avila, 165 Cal. App. 4th at 1252–53. 

U.S. Foodservice was not under a contractual obligation to offer Krieg a

position in its temporary return to work program, since its employee handbook,

which Krieg signed, expressly disclaimed any such obligation and made clear that

Krieg’s employment status was at will. Tomlinson v. Qualcomm, Inc., 97 Cal.

App. 4th 934, 944 (Cal. Ct. App. 2002). 

Krieg’s intentional infliction of emotional distress claim is entirely without

merit, Hughes v. Pair, 46 Cal. 4th 1035, 1051 (Cal. 2009), and her punitive

damages claim is moot.

AFFIRMED.
EXHIBIT 32


                                CERTIFICATION OF
                             CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
                           OF VALENCE TECHNOLOGY, INC.


     This certification is provided pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and accompanies the quarterly report on Form 10-Q
(the "Form 10-Q") for the quarter ended June 30, 2003 of Valence Technology,
Inc. (the "Issuer").

     I, Stephan B. Godevais, the Chief Executive Officer of the Issuer, certify
that to the best of my knowledge:

     (i)  the Form 10-Q fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
          Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m(a)
          or 78o(d)); and

     (ii) the information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all
          material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
          of the Issuer.

Dated:  August 14, 2003.



                                            /s/ Stephan B. Godevais
                                            -------------------------------
                                            Name:  Stephan B. Godevais



                                       34
<PAGE>


                                CERTIFICATION OF
                           PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER
                           OF VALENCE TECHNOLOGY, INC.


     This certification is provided pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and accompanies the quarterly report on Form 10-Q
(the "Form 10-Q") for the quarter ended June 30, 2003 of Valence Technology,
Inc. (the "Issuer").

     I, Kevin W. Mischnick, the Vice President of Finance (the Principal
Financial Officer) of the Issuer, certify that to the best of my knowledge:

     (i)  the Form 10-Q fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
          Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m(a)
          or 78o(d)); and

     (ii) the information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all
          material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
          of the Issuer.


Dated:  August 14, 2003.

                                             /s/ Kevin W. Mischnick
                                             -------------------------------
                                             Name:  Kevin W. Mischnick
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Dayson Mack, Appellant.

[853 NYS2d 764]

Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him upon his plea of guilty of criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree (Penal Law § 265.02 [former (4)]). Contrary *1292to defendant’s contention, Supreme Court properly refused to suppress the handgun seized by the police from defendant’s person as well as defendant’s subsequent statements to the police. The record establishes that the officers had an articulable reason for approaching defendant and his two companions to conduct a common-law inquiry, i.e., they had “a founded suspicion that criminal activity [was] afoot” *(People v De Bour,*40 NY2d 210, 223 [1976]). Specifically, the officers observed the three men standing on the sidewalk near two boarded up drug houses, and at least one of the three men was drinking from a large bottle wrapped in a brown paper bag, which was a possible violation of the open container ordinance of the City of Syracuse *(see generally People v Hollman,*79 NY2d 181, 189-190 [1992]; *People v Hewitt,*247 AD2d 552 [1998], *lv denied*92 NY2d 880, 926 [1998]; *People v Muhammad,*120 AD2d 937, 938 [1986]). The disproportionately frightened reaction of defendant upon seeing the uniformed officers approach, his refusal to remove his hand from his pocket despite the repeated demands of one of the officers that he do so, his conduct in walking toward that officer with his hand in his pocket, and the fact that the area in which the incident occurred was one in which violent crimes and shootings were common provided the officers with reasonable suspicion to believe that defendant posed a threat to their safety *(see People v Hensen,*21 AD3d 172, 176 [2005], *lv denied*5 NY3d 828 [2005]; *People v Robinson,*278 AD2d 808, 809 [2000], *lv denied*96 NY2d 787 [2001]; *People v Pettis,*195 AD2d 421 [1993]). The officer toward whom defendant was walking thus was justified in grabbing defendant’s elbow and in placing his hand over defendant’s hand and pocket. In doing so, the officer felt the butt of a handgun, which led to the seizure of the loaded firearm from defendant’s pocket. We conclude that the frisk was a “constitutionally justified intrusion designed to protect the safety of the officers” *(Robinson,*278 AD2d at 809), and that the court properly refused to suppress the evidence seized as a result thereof, as well as defendant’s ensuing statements. Present—Scudder, P.J., Centra, Lunn, Fahey and Green, JJ.
EXHIBIT 31.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Barry S.
Logan, certify that:



|1. | I have reviewed this Amendment No. 1 to Annual Report on Form 10-K of Watsco, Inc.;
|-- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|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; and
|-- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|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.
|-- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date:
August 9, 2013



|                                    
|------------------------------------
|                                    
|                                    
|/s/ Barry S. Logan                  
|Barry S. Logan Senior Vice
President
II 

114TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 3405 

To transfer certain items from the United States Munitions List to the 

Commerce Control List. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

SEPTEMBER 27, 2016 

Mr. DAINES (for himself and Mrs. CAPITO) introduced the following bill; 

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs 

A BILL 

To transfer certain items from the United States Munitions 

List to the Commerce Control List. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Export Control Reform 

5 Act of 2016’’. 

6 SEC. 2. EXPORT CONTROLS ON CERTAIN ITEMS. 

7 (a) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding section 38(f) of 

8 the Arms Export Control Act (22 U.S.C. 2778(f)) or any 

9 other provision of law, all items described in subsection 

10 (b) that are on the United States Munitions List and conVerDate Sep 11 2014 22:45 Sep 30, 2016 Jkt 069200 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\S3405.IS S3405

asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 3405 IS

1 trolled under section 38 of the Arms Export Control Act 

2 (22 U.S.C. 2778) on the date of the enactment of this 

3 Act shall be transferred to the Commerce Control List of 

4 dual-use items in the Export Administration Regulations 

5 (15 C.F.R. part 730 et seq.). 

6 (b) TRANSFERRED ITEMS.—The items referred to in 

7 subsection (a) are the following: 

8 (1) Non-automatic and semi-automatic fire9 arms, including all rifles, carbines, pistols, revolvers 

10 and shotguns. 

11 (2) Non-automatic and non-semi-automatic ri12 fles, carbines, revolvers, or pistols of a caliber great13 er than .50 inches (12.7 mm) up to and including 

14 .72 inches (18.0 mm). 

15 (3) Ammunition for such firearms excluding 

16 caseless ammunition. 

17 (4) Silencers, mufflers, and sound and flash 

18 suppressors. 

19 (5) Rifle scopes. 

20 (6) Barrels, cylinders, receivers (frames), or 

21 complete breech mechanisms. 

22 (7) Related components, parts, accessories, at23 tachments, tooling, and equipment for any articles 

24 listed in paragraphs (1) through (6). 


asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•S 3405 IS

1 (c) EFFECTIVE DATE.—This section shall take effect 

2 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act and 

3 shall not apply to any export license issued before such 

4 effective date or to any export license application made 

5 under the United States Munitions List before such effec6 tive date. 

Æ 


asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
Electronically Filed

Intermediate Court of Appeals

CAAP-17-0000517

24-FEB-2020

07:47 AM
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FIFTH DISTRICT

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

JOHN CALVIN MAI, JR., 

Appellant, 

v.

Case No. 5D21-2539

LT Case No. 2019-302111-CFDB

STATE OF FLORIDA, 

Appellee. 

_______________________________/ 

Decision filed September 20, 2022

Appeal from the Circuit Court

for Volusia County, 

Dennis Craig, Judge.

Oscar Hardin Eaton, Jr. and Lori D. 

Loftis, of Office of Criminal Conflict &

Civil Regional Counsel, Casselberry,

for Appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General,

Tallahassee, and Kaylee D. Tatman, 

Assistant Attorney General, Daytona

Beach, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

LAMBERT, C.J., EDWARDS and EISNAUGLE, JJ., concur.
No. 700.

#### Harris *v.*United States.

June 10, 1946.

*Herbert K. Hyde*for petitioner.

*Solicitor General McGrath*and *Robert S. Erdahl*for the United States.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Circuit Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit granted.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
The schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
consolidated interim financial statements for the second quarter ended September
30, 1999 and is qualified in its entirety by reference to such statements.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                         DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                            JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                              SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                         73,073
<SECURITIES>                                        0
<RECEIVABLES>                                 202,189
<ALLOWANCES>                                   94,718
<INVENTORY>                                    96,270
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                              279,668
<PP&E>                                        952,083
<DEPRECIATION>                                853,311
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                496,725
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       2,917,142
<BONDS>                                        18,451
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                               0
<PREFERRED>                                 1,555,000
<COMMON>                                       67,490
<OTHER-SE>                                 (4,042,907)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                  496,725
<SALES>                                       747,966
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                              747,966
<CGS>                                         673,447
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                 673,447
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            1,583,640
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              6,265
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (1,514,748)
<INCOME-TAX>                                        0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                 0
<DISCONTINUED>                                      0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                     0
<CHANGES>                                           0
<NET-INCOME>                               (1,514,748)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (.39)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.39)



</TABLE>
exhibit_h.htm


    EXHIBIT
H

     

    


     

    FORM
OF OPINION OF COUNSEL FOR TMCC

     

     

    [Not included in
agreement]

     

    


     

    


    
 

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

    
      
        
        

      

      
        
          H-1

          Form of Opinion of Counsel for TMCC