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

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
UNAUDITED CONDENSED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AT 9/30/97
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0001016275
<NAME> GEO PETROLEUM, INC.
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                        $289,819
<SECURITIES>                                        $0
<RECEIVABLES>                                 $835,912
<ALLOWANCES>                                   $69,072
<INVENTORY>                                         $0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            $1,194,803
<PP&E>                                      $6,631,942
<DEPRECIATION>                            $(1,182,552)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              $6,644,192
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       $1,284,821
<BONDS>                                             $0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                               $0
<PREFERRED>                                         $0
<COMMON>                                    $6,686,185
<OTHER-SE>                                $(1,326,814)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                $6,644,192
<SALES>                                       $149,450
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                              $571,533
<CGS>                                         $106,038
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                 $227,915
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                    $0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    $0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             $18,798
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               $324,820
<INCOME-TAX>                                        $0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                 $0
<DISCONTINUED>                                      $0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                     $0
<CHANGES>                                           $0
<NET-INCOME>                                  $324,820
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    $0.04
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    $0.04
        

</TABLE>
H. R. 2675 

One Hundred Eleventh Congress 

of the 

United States of America 

AT THE FIRST SESSION 

Begun and held at the City of Washington on Tuesday, 

the sixth day of January, two thousand and nine 

An Act 

To amend title II of the Antitrust Criminal Penalty Enhancement and Reform 

Act of 2004 to extend the operation of such title for a 1-year period ending 

June 22, 2010. 

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 ‘‘Antitrust Criminal Penalty 

Enhancement and Reform Act of 2004 Extension Act’’. 

SEC. 2. DELAY OF SUNSET. 

Section 211(a) of the Antitrust Criminal Penalty Enhancement 

and Reform Act of 2004 (15 U.S.C. 1 note) is amended by striking 

‘‘5 years’’ and inserting ‘‘6 years’’. 

SEC. 3. EFFECTIVE DATE OF AMENDMENT. 

The amendment made by section 2 shall take effect immediately 

before June 22, 2009. 

Speaker of the House of Representatives. 

Vice President of the United States and

President of the Senate.
I 

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 3132 

To extend the authorization period for certain uses of funds from the San 

Gabriel Basin Restoration Fund. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

OCTOBER 6, 2011 

Ms. CHU introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee 

on Natural Resources 

A BILL 

To extend the authorization period for certain uses of funds 

from the San Gabriel Basin Restoration Fund. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SAN GABRIEL BASIN RESTORATION. 

4 (a) EXTENSION.—Section 110(a)(3)(A)(ii) of division 

5 B of the Miscellaneous Appropriations Act, 2001 (as en6 acted into law by section 1(a)(4) of Public Law 106–554) 

7 is amended by striking ‘‘10’’ and inserting ‘‘15’’. 

8 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

9 subsection (a) shall apply to any project constructed under 


emcdonald on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 3132 IH

1 Section 110 of such Act before, on, or after the date of 

2 enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


emcdonald on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
**EXHIBIT 32.1**

 

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

SECTION 1350, CHAPTER 63 OF TITLE 18, UNITED STATES CODE,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

 

 

Pursuant to Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned, as Co-Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Optimal Group Inc. (the “Company”), does hereby certify that to the best of the undersigned’s knowledge:

 

|   | 1) | the Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2007 (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 Company. |
|--------|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

| Dated | May 9, 2007 |
|-------|-------------|

 

|   | By: | (s)  Neil S. Wechsler |
|--------|-----|-----------------------|

|   | Neil S. Wechsler |
|--------|------------------|

|   | Co-Chairman and |
|--------|-----------------|

|   | Chief Executive Officer |
|--------|-------------------------|

 

 

The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350 and is not being filed as part of this report or as a separate disclosure document.
Exhibit








Exhibit10.2


Directors Equity Compensation Program 
Initial and annual grants will be made to outside directors primarily under the Power Integrations, Inc. 2016 Incentive Award Plan (the “2016 Plan”) as follows (the “Directors Equity Compensation Program”): 
1.Each current participant and each individual who would have been eligible to participate in the 1997 Outside Directors Stock Option Plan shall be a participant in the Directors Equity Compensation Program;
2.On the first trading day of July in each year (the “Regular Grant Date”):
		
	•
	Each outside director will receive a grant of a restricted stock unit award with an aggregate value of $100,000 (the “Award”).


		
	•
	The number of shares subject to such Award would be calculated as the dollar value of such Award divided by the closing trading price of the Company's common stock on such grant date


		
	•
	Each such Award would vest in full effective immediately prior to the commencement of the Company's first annual meeting of stockholders in the year following the year of the grant date, provided that the recipient is still providing services to the Company as a director as of such time, and, provided, further, that 100% of the shares subject to such Award would be deemed fully vested upon the occurrence of a Change of Control, as such term is defined in the Company's 2016 Plan.


3.A new eligible director would receive under the 2016 Plan an Award, which shall be equal to the pro rated portion of the Company's annual Awards based on the time between the date the new director is appointed to the Board and the first trading day of Nasdaq in the month of July following such director's appointment. 
4.The Directors Equity Compensation Program shall remain in effect at the discretion of the Board or the Compensation Committee.
#### In the Matter of Wayne Fedorczak et al., Respondents, v John M. Dolce, as Public Safety Commissioner of the City of White Plains, et al., Appellants.

[609 NYS2d 292]

—In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review determinations by the respondents dated April 29, 1991, and May 29, 1991, respectively, which allocated time lost as a result of the petitioners’ injuries to sick leave, thereby denying them benefits under General Municipal Law § 207-a, the appeal is from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Rosato, J.), entered May 22, 1992, which annulled the determinations and directed the appellants to provide the petitioners with such benefits as may be due under General Municipal Law § 207-a.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

The petitioners are firefighters employed by the City of White Plains who claim they were injured in the performance of their duties. The Commissioner of Public Safety of the City of White Plains determined that any time lost as a result of those injuries should be allocated to sick leave, and consequently denied the petitioners benefits pursuant to General Municipal Law § 207-a. The Supreme Court found that the issue as to whether the firefighters were injured in the course of performance of their duties was necessarily decided by the ruling of the Workers’ Compensation Board which rendered awards in favor of the firefighters. Therefore, the court an*669nulled the determinations and directed the appellants to calculate the petitioners’ benefits in accordance with General Municipal Law § 207-a.

We have previously found that law enforcement personnel are entitled to benefits pursuant to General Municipal Law § 207-c based on determinations made in Workers’ Compensation proceedings *(see, Matter of Maresco v Rozzi,*162 AD2d 534; *Matter of Crawford v Sheriff’s Dept.,*152 AD2d 382). General Municipal Law § 207-c, applicable to law enforcement personnel, is a counterpart to General Municipal Law § 207-a. Both statutes are remedial in nature and were enacted for the benefit of law enforcement personnel and firefighters injured and disabled while in the performance of their duties *(see, Matter of Curley v Dilworth,*96 AD2d 903; *Pease v Colucci,*59 AD2d 233). Therefore, our reasoning in *Maresco*and *Crawford*is equally applicable to this proceeding. Here, as in those cases, the issue as to whether the petitioners’ injuries occurred in the performance of their duties was necessarily decided in their favor by the Workers’ Compensation Board.

Furthermore, we also find the respondents’ determination to be arbitrary and capricious *(see, Matter of Pell v Board of Educ.,*34 NY2d 222). The facts established that the petitioners were injured in the performance of their duties and were therefore entitled to benefits pursuant to General Municipal Law § 207-a. Bracken, J. P., O’Brien, Pizzuto and Altman, JJ., concur.
Form of Series 10 Preferred Stock Certificate


 Exhibit 4.1 

 

					
	Number P10-        	  	CELL THERAPEUTICS, INC.	  	*                    * Shares
		  	A Washington Corporation	  	Series 10 Preferred Stock

 THIS CERTIFIES THAT
*                                        
                                         
                                       * is the
record holder of
*                                        
                                         
                   (                     
                                   )* shares of
Series 10 Preferred Stock of Cell Therapeutics, Inc. (the “Corporation”) transferable only on the share register of the Corporation by the holder, in person or by such holder’s duly authorized attorney,
upon surrender of this certificate properly endorsed or assigned. 
 This certificate and the shares represented hereby shall be
held subject to all of the provisions of the Amended and Restated Articles of Incorporation and the Second Amended and Restated Bylaws of the Corporation and any amendments thereto, a copy of each of which is on file at the office of the Corporation
and made a part hereof as fully as though the provisions of said Amended and Restated Articles of Incorporation and Second Amended and Restated Bylaws were imprinted in full on this Certificate, to all of which the holder of this Certificate, by
acceptance hereof, assents and agrees to be bound. 
 The Corporation will furnish without charge to each shareholder who so
requests, the powers, designations, preferences and relative, participating, optional or other special rights of each class of stock or series thereof and the qualifications, limitations or restrictions of such preferences or rights. 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Corporation has caused this Certificate to be signed by its duly authorized officers this
     day of             , 2011. 
  

					
	  
	 		  	  

	James A. Bianco, Chief Executive Officer	 		  	Louis A. Bianco, Executive Vice President, Finance and Administration







 FOR VALUE RECEIVED, THE UNDERSIGNED HEREBY SELLS, ASSIGNS AND TRANSFERS UNTO
                                         
                                        
                                         
     SHARES REPRESENTED BY THE WITHIN CERTIFICATE AND DOES HEREBY IRREVOCABLY CONSTITUTE AND APPOINT
                                 ATTORNEY TO TRANSFER THE SAID SHARES ON THE SHARE
REGISTER OF THE WITHIN NAMED CORPORATION WITH FULL POWER OF SUBSTITUTION IN THE PREMISES. 

DATED                     

 

	
	  

	(Signature)


 NOTICE: THE SIGNATURE ON THIS ASSIGNMENT
MUST CORRESPOND WITH THE NAME AS WRITTEN UPON THE FACE OF THIS CERTIFICATE, IN EVERY PARTICULAR, WITHOUT ALTERATION OR ENLARGEMENT, OR ANY CHANGE WHATEVER.
#### In the Matter of Jack Vigliotti, Petitioner, v James Bell, as Correction Captain, et al., Respondents.

[860 NYS2d 288]

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, entered in Albany County) to review a determination of the Superintendent of Clinton Correctional Facility which found petitioner guilty of violating certain prison disciplinary rules.

Following a tier II prison disciplinary hearing, petitioner was found guilty of creating a disturbance, refusing a direct order, making threats and engaging in harassing behavior. As a result, a penalty of 30 days in keeplock and a corresponding loss of privileges was imposed. The determination was administratively affirmed and this CPLR article 78 proceeding seeking annulment ensued.

We confirm. The misbehavior report, together with the hearing testimony of the correction officer who authored it, provide substantial evidence to support the determination of guilt *(see Matter of Rodriguez v Selsky,*48 AD3d 851, 852 [2008]). To the extent that petitioner and other inmate witnesses offered contradictory testimony, credibility issues were created for resolution by the Hearing Officer *(see Matter of Rosa v Brown,*47 AD3d 1142, 1143 [2008]). Petitioner’s assertion that the Hearing Officer was biased is not substantiated by the record, and there is no indication that the determination flowed from any purported bias *(see Matter of Kirby v Leclaire,*47 AD3d 1174, 1175 [2008]). We have reviewed petitioner’s remaining contentions, including his claims that his mental health was not properly considered and the penalty imposed was excessive, and find them to be unavailing.

Mercure, J.P, Peters, Carpinello, Kane and Stein, JJ., concur. Adjudged that the determination is confirmed, without costs, and petition dismissed.
#### Constancio LARA, Jr., Petitioner, v. OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT, Respondent.

No. 2011-3067.

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.

July 12, 2011.

Before GAJARSA, MAYER, AND PROST, Circuit Judges.

ON MOTION

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

The Office of Personnel Management (OPM) moves to dismiss Constancio Lara, Jr.’s petition for review as untimely.

On October 22, 2010, an administrative judge issued an initial decision, affirming OPM’s denial of Lara’s claims, and notifying Lara that, absent an appeal to the Board, the decision would become final on November 26, 2010. The Board further informed Lara that any petition for review must be received by this court within 60 calendar days of the date the initial decision became final. Lara did not appeal the initial decision to the Board. Lara’s petition for review was received by the court on January 27, 2011, 62 days after the Board’s decision became final on November 26.

A petition for review must be received by the court within 60 days of receipt of notice of the Board’s final order. 5 U.S.C. § 7703(b)(1). To be timely filed, the petition must be received by this court on or before the date that the petition is due. *Pinat v. Office of Personnel Management,*931 F.2d 1544, 1546 (Fed.Cir.1991) (petition is filed when received by this court; court dismissed petition received nine days late).

Because Lara’s petition was not timely received by this court, it must be dismissed based on controlling precedent of this court. *See Oja v. Dep’t of the Army,*405 F.3d 1349, 1360 (Fed.Cir.2005) (“Seeing no specific authorization for the equitable .tolling of section 7703(b)(1), we find that the congressionally approved statements of Rules 15(a)(1) and 26(b)(2) re*979quire the conclusion first reached in *Mon-zo[ v. Department of Transp., F.A.A.,*735 F.2d 1335 (Fed.Cir.1984) ] and herein followed. Compliance with the filing deadline for 5 U.S.C. § 7703(b)(1) is a prerequisite to our exercise of jurisdiction over this case.”).

Accordingly,

It Is Ordered That:

(1) OPM’s motion to dismiss is granted.

(2) Each side shall bear its own costs.
**IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVA NIA** 

IN RE: DESIGNATION OF VICE
- CHAIR OF THE JUVENILE COURT PROCEDURAL RULES COMMITTEE : : : : : No. 658 SUPREME COURT RULES DOCKET

**O R D E R PER CURIA**  **M:**

AND NOW , this 21 st day of January, 201 5 , Kerith Strano Taylor , Esquire is hereby designated as Vice
- Chair of the Juvenile Court Procedural Rules Committee commencing February 1, 201 5

.
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2720 Introduced in House (IH)]

111th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2720

   To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to make permanent the 
election to treat the cost of qualified film and television productions 
       as an expense which is not chargeable to capital account.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              June 4, 2009

Mr. Crowley (for himself and Mr. Dreier) introduced the following bill; 
         which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to make permanent the 
election to treat the cost of qualified film and television productions 
       as an expense which is not chargeable to capital account.

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

SECTION 1. EXPENSING OF QUALIFIED FILM AND TELEVISION PRODUCTION COSTS 
              MADE PERMANENT.

    Section 181 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to 
treatment of certain qualified film and television productions) is 
amended by striking subsection (f).
                                 <all>
```
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 188 (Friday, September 29, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Page 45658]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-20898]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration


RTCA Federal Advisory Committee

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of RTCA charter renewal.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is issuing this notice to advise the public of the 
renewal of the RTCA Charter (FAA Order 1110.77X) for 6 months, 
effective September 29, 2017. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) 
is authorized to establish the RTCA advisory committee in accordance 
with the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA). The 
current charter agreement requires that the RTCA manage various Federal 
subcommittees on behalf of the agency.
    The objective of the advisory committee is to seek resolution of 
issues and challenges involving air transportation concepts, 
requirements, operational capabilities, the associated use of 
technology, and related considerations to aeronautical operations that 
affect the future of the Air Traffic Management System and the 
integration of new technologies.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Andy Cebula at <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#3f5e5c5a5d4a535e7f4d4b5c5e11504d58"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="5c3d3f393e29303d1c2e283f3d72332e3b">[email protected]</span></a> or 
(202) 330-0652, or the RTCA Secretariat, 1150 18th Street NW., Suite 
910, Washington, DC 20036, or by telephone at (202) 833-9339, fax at 
(202) 833-9434, or Web site at http://www.rtca.org.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Federal Advisory Committee meetings are 
open to the public and announced in the Federal Register, except as 
authorized by Section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on September 26, 2017.
Mohannad Dawoud,
Management & Program Analyst, Partnership Contracts Branch, ANG-A17, 
NextGen, Procurement Services Division, Federal Aviation 
Administration.
[FR Doc. 2017-20898 Filed 9-28-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


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