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>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                           2,625
<SECURITIES>                                       403
<RECEIVABLES>                                    4,609
<ALLOWANCES>                                       719
<INVENTORY>                                      7,772
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                26,939
<PP&E>                                         878,871
<DEPRECIATION>                                 299,786
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 648,006
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           84,163
<BONDS>                                        245,104
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       555,399
<OTHER-SE>                                   (350,517)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   648,006
<SALES>                                         71,550
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               277,761
<CGS>                                           13,363
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  240,145
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                32,952
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   320
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              16,570
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (11,906)
<INCOME-TAX>                                       566
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (12,472)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (12,472)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.07)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.07)
        

</TABLE>
II 

114TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 507 

To amend the National Labor Relations Act to permit employers to pay 

higher wages to their employees. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

FEBRUARY 12, 2015 

Mr. RUBIO (for himself, Mr. VITTER, Mr. INHOFE, Mr. ISAKSON, Mr. CRAPO, 

Mr. ALEXANDER, Mr. BARRASSO, Mr. LEE, Mr. ENZI, Mr. ROBERTS, Mr. 

SCOTT, Mr. MCCONNELL, Mr. HATCH, Mr. CORNYN, and Mr. RISCH) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions 

A BILL 

To amend the National Labor Relations Act to permit 

employers to pay higher wages to their employees. 

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 ‘‘Rewarding Achieve5 ment and Incentivizing Successful Employees Act’’ or the 

6 ‘‘RAISE Act’’. 

7 SEC. 2. PAYMENT OF HIGHER WAGES. 

8 Section 9(a) of the National Labor Relations Act (29 

9 U.S.C. 159(a)) is amended— 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with BILLS

2 

•S 507 IS

1 (1) by inserting ‘‘(1)’’ after ‘‘(a)’’; and 

2 (2) by adding at the end the following: 

3 ‘‘(2) Notwithstanding a labor organization’s exclusive 

4 representation of employees in a unit, or the terms and 

5 conditions of any collective bargaining contract or agree6 ment then in effect, nothing in either— 

7 ‘‘(A) paragraph (1) or (5) of section 8(a); or 

8 ‘‘(B) a collective bargaining contract or agree9 ment renewed or entered into after the date of en10 actment of the RAISE Act, 

11 shall prohibit an employer from paying an employee in the 

12 unit greater wages, pay, or other compensation for, or by 

13 reason of, his or her services as an employee of such em14 ployer, than provided for in such contract or agreement.’’. 

Æ 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Securities and Exchange Commission

Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the Government in the Sunshine Act, Public Law 94-409, that the Securities and Exchange Commission will hold a closed meeting on Thursday, August 17, 2017 at 2 p.m.

Commissioners, Counsel to the Commissioners, the Secretary to the Commission, and recording secretaries will attend the closed meeting. Certain staff members who have an interest in the matters also may be present.

The General Counsel of the Commission, or his designee, has certified that, in his opinion, one or more of the exemptions set forth in 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(3), (5), (7), 9(B) and (10) and 17 CFR 200.402(a)(3), (a)(5), (a)(7), (a)(9)(ii) and (a)(10), permit consideration of the scheduled matters at the closed meeting.

Commissioner Piwowar, as duty officer, voted to consider the items listed for the closed meeting in closed session.

The subject matters of the closed meeting will be:

Institution and settlement of injunctive actions;

Institution and settlement of administrative proceedings;

Consideration of amici participation;

Resolution of litigation claims;

Post Argument Discussion; and

Other matters relating to enforcement proceedings.

At times, changes in Commission priorities require alterations in the scheduling of meeting items.

For further information and to ascertain what, if any, matters have been added, deleted or postponed, please contact Brent J. Fields from the Office of the Secretary at (202) 551-5400.

Dated: August 10, 2017.

Robert W. Errett,

Deputy Secretary.

[FR Doc. 2017-17286 Filed 8-11-17; 11:15 am]

 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
SECOND AMENDED AND RESTATED BYLAWS
OF
ARBITRON INC.
 Effective
as of February 25, 2009
 __________________
 ARTICLE I
OFFICES
  ARTICLE II
STOCKHOLDERS
 Section 1. Annual Meeting .
 Section 2. Special Meetings .
 Section 3. Place of Meeting .
 Section 4. Notice of Meeting .




---



##### 



Section 5. Fixing Date for Determination of Stockholders of Record .
  Section 6. Voting Lists .




---



##### 



Section 7. Quorum .
 Section 8. Required Vote .
 Section 9. Proxies .
 Section 10. Voting of Shares .
 Section 11. No Cumulative Voting .
 Section 12. Business to be Conducted .




---



##### 



provided however
 provided however
   Section 13. Stockholder Nomination of Directors




---



##### 



provided, however
 ARTICLE III
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
 Section 1. General Powers .
 Section 2. Number, Tenure, Election and Qualifications .
 Section 3. Regular Meetings .
 Section 4. Special Meetings .
 Section 5. Notice .




---



##### 



Section 6. Quorum .
 Section 7. Manner of Acting .
 Section 8. Vacancies .
 Section 9 Compensation.
 Section 10 Presumption of Assent .
 Section 11. Action by Directors in Lieu of Meeting .
 Section 12. Telephonic Meetings.




---



##### 



Section 13. Chairman of the Board of Directors .
 Section 14. Director Emeritus .
 ARTICLE IV
COMMITTEES
 Section 1. Number, Tenure and Qualifications.
 Section 2. Powers.
 Section 3. Meetings.
 Section 4. Vacancies.
 ARTICLE V
OFFICERS
 Section 1. Number and Election .
 Section 2. Term of Office .




---



##### 



Section 3. Chief Executive Officer .
 Section 4. President
 Section 5. The Vice Presidents .
 Section 6. Chief Financial Officer.
 Section 7. The Secretary and Assistant Secretaries .
  Section 8. The Treasurer and Assistant Treasurers .




---



##### 



Section 9. Compensation.
 ARTICLE VI
INDEMNITY
 Section 1. Indemnification Rights .
 Section 2. Advancement of Expenses .
 Section 3. Rights Not Exclusive .
 Section 4. Definitions .




---



##### 



ARTICLE VII
INDEMNIFICATION AGREEMENTS
  ARTICLE VIII
CERTIFICATES FOR SHARES AND THEIR TRANSFER
 Section 1. Certificates for Shares .
 Section 2. Transfer of Shares .




---



##### 



ARTICLE IX
FISCAL YEAR
  ARTICLE X
DIVIDENDS
  ARTICLE XI
SEAL
  ARTICLE XII
AMENDMENT
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 9
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                          19,817
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                          39,072
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                     0
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                    495,496
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                               0
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                                 0
<LOANS>                                      1,303,437
<ALLOWANCE>                                      6,251
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,965,989
<DEPOSITS>                                   1,241,355
<SHORT-TERM>                                   146,950
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                            412,608
<LONG-TERM>                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           117
<OTHER-SE>                                     164,959
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>               1,965,989
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                 71,437
<INTEREST-INVEST>                               24,870
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                 2,619
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                98,926
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                              39,381
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              59,184
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                           39,742
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                      150
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                 436
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                 37,897
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 20,262
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                      20,262
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    13,736
<EPS-BASIC>                                     1.24
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.18
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    2.83
<LOANS-NON>                                      3,958
<LOANS-PAST>                                         0
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                 6,350
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                      279
<RECOVERIES>                                        30
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                6,251
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                             3,311
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                          2,940


</TABLE>
#### VELASQUEZ v. SOUTH ATLANTIC S. S. LINE, Inc.

United States District Court S. D. New York.

Jan. 9, 1951.

Benjamin B. Sterling, New York City, for plaintiff.

Tompkins, Boal & Tompkins, New York City, for defendant.

WEINFELD, District Judge.

Plaintiff, a seaman, has instituted an action for damages for personal injuries pursuant to the Jones Act, Title 46, U.S. C.A. § 688, and for maintenance and cure.

On December 28th, 1950, plaintiff served a notice for the taking of a deposition at San Francisco, California, on January 10th, 1951. Defendant now moves that this notice be vacated, or in the alternative, that plaintiff be directed to pay a counsel fee for the attendance of defendant’s attorney at the place where the deposition is to be taken. The defendant contends that it will be necessary to retain an attorney in San Francisco, and, therefore, requests that plaintiff be required to pay a reasonable counsel fee.

No reason has ¡been shown why the notice should be vacated and accordingly that aspect of the present motion is denied.

There remains the question of the payment of counsel fees. Although Rule 30(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C.A., does not expressly provide for the granting of counsel fees on the taking of a deposition, it is well recognized that the Court, in the exercise of its discretion, may direct that such payment be made under the authority of this rule. *197The financial circumstances of the parties may be' considered by the Court in determining this question.

The complaint alleges that plaintiff was injured as a result of defendant’s negligence on July 30th, 1950, while acting within the scope of his employment on the defendant’s vessel. Plaintiff has also asserted a claim for maintenance and cure. Defendant has denied the allegation with respect to the latter claim, but has not contended that plaintiff was guilty of willful misconduct, insubordination, or any other conduct which would defeat a cause of action for maintenance and cure.

According to the affidavit submitted in opposition on the present motion, plaintiff remained in a marine hospital for a period of three weeks, and after, his discharge received out-patient treatment until the second or third week of November 1950. During this time, plaintiff’s attorney made several requests for the payment of maintenance and cure, but despite the fact that defendant has raised no contention that plaintiff is not entitled to such relief, it has refused to make any payments.

In view of the financial circumstances of the plaintiff and the failure of the defendant to make any payments for maintenance and cure, the application for the payment of a counsel fee is denied.

The motion is, therefore, denied in all respects.
<PAGE>   1

                                                                      EXHIBIT 23


                         CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS


         We consent to the incorporation by reference in this Annual Report
(Form 10-K) of Wynn's International, Inc. of our report dated January 27, 2000,
included in the 1999 Annual Report to Stockholders of Wynn's International, Inc.

         Our audits also included the financial statement schedule of Wynn's
International, Inc. in Item 14(a). This schedule is the responsibility of the
Company's management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion based on our
audits. In our opinion, the financial statement schedule referred to above, when
considered in relation to the basic consolidated financial statements taken as a
whole, presents fairly in all material respects the information set forth
therein.

         We also consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration
Statement (Form S-8 No. 2-68157) pertaining to the Amended and Restated 1980
Stock Option and Appreciation Rights Plan and the 1982 Incentive Stock Option
Plan of Wynn's International, Inc., the Registration Statements (Form S-8 Nos.
33-30296, 33-64090, 333-39045 and 333-93699) pertaining to the Wynn's
International, Inc. Stock-Based Incentive Award Plan and the Wynn's
International, Inc. 1999 Stock Awards Plan, the Registration Statement (Form S-8
No. 33-53917) pertaining to the Wynn's International, Inc. Non-Employee
Directors' Stock Option Plan, the Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 33-53921)
pertaining to the Wynn's International, Inc. Employee Stock Purchase Plan, and
in the related Prospectuses of our report dated January 27, 2000, with respect
to the consolidated financial statements incorporated herein by reference, and
our report included in the preceding paragraph with respect to the financial
statement schedule included in the Annual Report (Form 10-K) of Wynn's
International, Inc. for the year ended December 31, 1999.




                                          /s/ ERNST & YOUNG LLP



Los Angeles, California
March 24, 2000
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff - Appellee,

 v.

NABOR CAMPILLO-VEGA, a.k.a.

Eduardo Campillo-Vega, a.k.a. Juan

Manuel Vega-Zuniga,

 Defendant - Appellant.

No. 13-10641

D.C. No. 2:07-cr-00478-JGZ

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Arizona

Jennifer G. Zipps, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted February 17, 2015** 

Before: O’SCANNLAIN, LEAVY, and FERNANDEZ, Circuit Judges.

Nabor Campillo-Vega appeals from the revocation of supervised release and

24-month consecutive sentence imposed upon revocation. Pursuant to Anders v.

California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), Campillo-Vega’s counsel has filed a brief stating

FILED

FEB 24 2015

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

 * 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).
that there are no grounds for relief, along with a motion to withdraw as counsel of

record. We have provided Campillo-Vega the opportunity to file a pro se

supplemental brief. No pro se supplemental brief or answering brief has been

filed.

Our independent review of the record pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S.

75, 80 (1988), discloses no arguable grounds for relief on direct appeal.

Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED.

AFFIRMED. 

2 13-10641
#### ALEXANDER v. OBERNDORF et al.

United States District Court S. D. New York.

Aug. 18, 1952.

Richard J. Mackey, New York City, for plaintiff.

Satterlee, Warfield & Stephens, New York City, for defendant.

SUGARMAN, District Judge.

Plaintiff, a psychiatrist residing in California, moves for an order “forbidding” *138the taking of her deposition in New York on the ground that her testimony has already been given in answers to interrogatories propounded by defendants, or in the alternative for an order requiring that such examination be had in Los Angeles, California at the expense of the defendants.

Although plaintiff has already ,'been examined to some extent through interrogatories, the defendant is not thereby precluded from seeking her examination by deposition.1 From the nature of plaintiff’s answer's to the interrogatories, it appears that this is a proper case to permit further examination by oral deposition.2

The court recognizes that the peculiarly personal relationship between a psychiatrist and patient is such that compelling a psychiatrist to abandon her practice and travel a great distance for a number of days (twelve, according to plaintiff’s attorney in this case) might constitute the annoyance, embarrassment or oppression contemplated by F.R.Civ.P. 30(b), 28 U.S. C.A. However the necessity for an oral deposition herein was wrought by plaintiff’s insufficient answers to interrogatories.

Balancing the hardship that plaintiff might suffer, by being compelled to come to New York for the examination, with the defendant’s right to further examine plaintiff, the case of Worth v. Trans World Films, D.C., 11 F.R.D. 197, 198 seems apposite. There it was 'said :

> “It seems to the Court that the plaintiff if he decides not to come to New York City for examination should pay the expenses and counsel fee of the defendant.”

Accordingly, plaintiff’s motion is denied. Settle order on notice providing that plaintiff be examined in New York with an alternative provision that if plaintiff elects not to come to this District for the examination, it shall be conducted in Los Angeles, California, upon condition that expenses and reasonable counsel fee shall be paid by plaintiff to defendant’s attorneys in an amount to be fixed by the court.

1

. F.R.Civ.P. 33, 28 U.S.C.A.

2

. Moore’s Federal Practice, 2d Ed., par. 33.09, p. 2286.
Exhibit 31.2

                          CERTIFICATIONS

I, Dan Mumford, Acting Chief Financial Officer of Speaking Roses
International, Inc., certify that:

1. I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of Speaking Roses
International, 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;

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)) for the registrant and have:

     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 subsidiaries, is made known to us by others
     within those entities, particularly during the period in which this
     report is being prepared;

     b) 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

     c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal
     control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's
     second fiscal quarter ended June 30, 2005 that has materially affected,
     or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant's internal
     control over financial reporting; and

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 registrant's board of
directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

     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:     August 19, 2005     By   /s/ Dan Mumford
                         Dan Mumford,
                         Acting Chief Financial Officer
No. 1127.

#### Hastings Manufacturing Co. *v.*Federal Trade Commission.

May 27, 1946.

*Laurence A. Masselink*for petitioner.

*Solicitor General McGrath, Assistant Attorney General Berge, Charles H. Weston, W. T. Kelley*and *Walter B. Wooden*for respondent.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Circuit Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit denied.