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


<ARTICLE>                                           7
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                                   DEC-31-1996
<DEBT-HELD-FOR-SALE>                           606621
<DEBT-CARRYING-VALUE>                          36043
<DEBT-MARKET-VALUE>                            36620
<EQUITIES>                                     30896
<MORTGAGE>                                     0
<REAL-ESTATE>                                  0
<TOTAL-INVEST>                                 673560
<CASH>                                         51134
<RECOVER-REINSURE>                             29767
<DEFERRED-ACQUISITION>                         17903
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 1257864
<POLICY-LOSSES>                                747858
<UNEARNED-PREMIUMS>                            81599
<POLICY-OTHER>                                 0
<POLICY-HOLDER-FUNDS>                          0
<NOTES-PAYABLE>                                134838
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       96
<OTHER-SE>                                     225894
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   1257864
<PREMIUMS>                                     209503
<INVESTMENT-INCOME>                            44089
<INVESTMENT-GAINS>                             1158
<OTHER-INCOME>                                 9726
<BENEFITS>                                     150621
<UNDERWRITING-AMORTIZATION>                    52030
<UNDERWRITING-OTHER>                           15774
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                32520
<INCOME-TAX>                                   9657
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            22863
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                1874
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   20989
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  2.31
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  2.31
<RESERVE-OPEN>                                 561613
<PROVISION-CURRENT>                            152338
<PROVISION-PRIOR>                              (1717)
<PAYMENTS-CURRENT>                             29554
<PAYMENTS-PRIOR>                               107199
<RESERVE-CLOSE>                                575481
<CUMULATIVE-DEFICIENCY>                        1700
        


</TABLE>
#### Bryan Oscar COOPER, Plaintiff-Appellant v. Juan TREVINO, Correctional Officer, In His Individual and Official Capacity, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 13-51102.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

May 20, 2014.

Bryan Oscar Cooper, Rosharon, TX, pro se.

Adam Auchter Allgood, Esq., Morgan, Lewis & Bockius, L.L.P., Houston, TX, Demetri Anastasiadis, Assistant Attorney General, John-Robert Skrabanek, Esq., Office of the Attorney General, Austin, TX, for Defendant-Appellee.

*343Before JONES, CLEMENT, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Bryan Oscar Cooper, Texas prisoner # 1043427, moves this court for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP) in his appeal of the district court’s denial of his motion to compel payment of the jury award. In Cooper’s 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action, the jury found Juan Trevino liable in his individual capacity and awarded Cooper $30 in compensatory damages and $3,500 in punitive damages. The district court denied Cooper’s motion to compel payment of the jury award because Trevino had not been served with Cooper’s motion and the Attorney General’s Office had not determined whether to indemnify Trevino for the amount of the jury’s award and, as a result, did not have the authority to represent Trevino in a collection proceeding. Pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 24(a)(3)(A), the court denied Cooper leave to proceed IFP on appeal, certifying that his appeal was not taken in good faith because he had failed to explain why its reasons for denying the motion were erroneous.

By moving for IFP status in this court, Cooper is challenging the district court’s certification that his appeal is not taken in good faith. *See Baugh v. Taylor,*117. F.3d 197, 202 (5th Cir.1997); Fed. R. App. P. 24(a). Cooper does not address the district court’s reasons for its certification decision. *See Baugh,*117 F.3d at 202. Accordingly, Cooper’s challenge to the district court’s certification decision is deemed abandoned. *See Brinkmann v. Dallas Cnty. Deputy Sheriff Abner,*813 F.2d 744, 748 (5th Cir.1987). Cooper has not shown that his appeal involves “legal points arguable on their merits (and therefore not frivolous).” *Howard v. King,*707 F.2d 215, 220 (5th Cir.1983) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). Therefore, Cooper’s motion for leave to proceed IFP on appeal is DENIED, and his appeal is DISMISSED as frivolous. *See Baugh,*117 F.3d at 202 & n. 24; 5th Cir. R. 42.2.

Our dismissal as frivolous of Cooper’s appeal counts as a strike pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). *See Adepegba v. Ham-mons,*103 F.3d 383, 385-87 (5th Cir.1996). Cooper is CAUTIONED that if he accumulates three § 1915(g) strikes, he will not be able to proceed IFP in any civil action or appeal filed while he is incarcerated or detained in any facility unless he is under imminent danger of serious physical injury. *See*§ 1915(g).

*

 Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
#### Dan C. BOECHLER, Petitioner, v. DEPARTMENT OF the INTERIOR, Respondent.

No. 05-3252.

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.

March 19, 2007.

*970David C. Thompson, David C. Thompson, P.C., of Grand Forks, North Dakota, argued for petitioner.

Brian T. Edmunds, Attorney, Commercial Litigation Branch, Civil Division, United States Department of Justice, of Washington, DC, argued for respondent. On the brief were Peter D. Keisler, Assistant Attorney General; David M. Cohen, Director; Donald E. Kinner, Assistant Director; and Claudia Burke, Attorney.

Before NEWMAN, MAYER, and BRYSON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

The court has reviewed the issues and arguments, and concludes that the Board’s decision must be *affirmed,.*
      *1*
      **Although the repeated critical statements to members of Congress and other high officials may on their face meet the criteria of the Whistleblower Protection Act, 5 U.S.C. § 2302(b)(8)(A) (2000), as Mr. Boechler argues, there was evidence adequate to support the Board’s factual finding that the proposed and rescinded 20-day suspension, the late seasonal start, and the selection of another candidate for the position for which Mr. Boechler applied, were not in retaliation for his protected disclosures.

Further, we discern no denial of due process in the erratic performance of the Board’s audiovisual teleconferencing system, for it was not shown that evidence or argument on Mr. Boechler’s behalf was thereby excluded.

With respect to the evidence elicited from Thomas Lonnie, Mr. Boechler has pointed to nothing in the record to convince us that Mr. Lonnie’s testimony was “inherently improbable or discredited by undisputed evidence.” *Gibson v. Dep’t of Veterans Affairs,*160 F.3d 722, 726 (Fed.Cir.1998). The existence of some inconsistencies in the evidence is not enough to overturn the administrative judge’s credibility determination. Finally, contrary to Mr. Boechler’s contention, we find no statutory or constitutional infirmity in the Board’s system for reviewing the decisions of its administrative judges.

No costs.

. *Boechler v. Dep’t of the Interior,*No. DE1221020389-W-3 (M.S.P.B. May 2, 2005).
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 9
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                           3,592
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                               0
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                22,048
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                    321,261
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                               0
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                                 0
<LOANS>                                        288,486
<ALLOWANCE>                                      5,024
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 645,304
<DEPOSITS>                                     482,839
<SHORT-TERM>                                    30,779
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                              4,846
<LONG-TERM>                                     96,700
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        30,140
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 645,304
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                 25,653
<INTEREST-INVEST>                               19,366
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                   221
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                45,240
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                              21,416
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              28,538
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                           16,702
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                      910
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                 252
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                 10,279
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  7,991
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                       4,847
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     4,847
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.72
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.64
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    3.15
<LOANS-NON>                                          0
<LOANS-PAST>                                         0
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                  2,700
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                 4,100
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                       20
<RECOVERIES>                                        34
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                5,024
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                             5,024
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0
        

</TABLE>
UN PUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 18
- 2391

FAYE BEATRICE HAYES , Plaintiff

- Appellant ,

v. TERRI GORMAN, Official Capacity Individual Capacity; SEAN ADGERSON, Individual Capacity Official Capacity; JAMES C. NEWTON, SR., Individual Capacity Official Capacity; BART P. PLANO, Individual Capacity Official Capacity; WILLIAM ROMMEL, Individual Capacity Official Capacity; MASS TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION, Official Capacity Individual Capacity; STATE OF MARYLAND , Defendants

- Appellees

.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland , at Baltimore

. Richard D. Bennett , District Judge. ( 1:18

- cv
- 00691

- RDB )

Submitted : January 17, 2019 Decided: January 22, 2019

Before WILKINSON and DUNCAN , Circuit Judges , and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge

.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

.
Faye Beatrice Hayes, Appellant Pro Se. Eric Scott Hartwig, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Faye Beatrice Hayes appeals the district court’s order entering judgment in favor
of Defendants on Hayes’ several civil claims against them, including d iscrimination and
retaliation claims brought pursuant to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42
U.S.C.A. §§ 2000e to 2000e

- 17 (West 2012 & Supp. 2018)

. C onfin ing our review to the
issues raised in Hayes’ informal brief , s ee 4th Cir. R. 34(b) , we ha ve reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the district court ’s order

. See Hayes

v. Gorman , No. 1:18

- cv
- 00691

- RDB (D. Md

. Nov. 6 , 2018 ). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
### T E X A S C O U R T O F A P P E A L S , T H I R D D I S T R I C T , A T A U S T I N
NO. 03-14-00133- CV Leonard Robles, App ellant

v. Dianna Martinez-R obles, App ellee
F ROM TH E DISTRI CT COURT O F TRAVIS CO UNTY, 98TH JUDICI AL DISTRICT NO. D-1 -F M- 06- 0033 32, H ONO RAB LE TIM SULAK , JUDGE P RESIDING

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N Appellant L eonar d Robles has filed an unopposed motion to dismiss this appea l. We g rant Robles’s motion and dismiss the appeal. SeeTex. R. App. P . 42.1(a) (1).

__________________________________________ Bob Pembe rton, J ustice Be fore J ustices Pury ear , Pemberton, and F ield Dismissed on Appellant’s Motion Filed: Jul y

11, 2014
EX-10.21





 Exhibit 10.21 

AMENDMENT NO. 5 
 TO

 AMENDED AND RESTATED 

2013 STOCK OPTION PLAN 

WHEREAS, the Montrose Environmental Group, Inc. (the “Company”) maintains the Montrose Environmental Group, Inc.
Amended and Restated 2013 Stock Option Plan, as amended by Amendment Nos. 1-4 (as amended, the “Plan”); and 

WHEREAS, the Board of Directors of the Company have determined it in the best interests of the Company to amend the Plan pursuant to
Section 13 thereof to provide for an additional number of Shares (as defined in the Plan) currently available under the Plan. 
 NOW
THEREFORE, effective as of the date approved by the Company’s shareholders, the Plan is hereby amended as follows: 
  

	 	1.	 Defined Terms. Capitalized terms used but not defined herein shall have the meanings ascribed to such
terms in the Plan. 


  

	 	2.	 Stock Subject to the Plan. The second sentence of Section 3 of the Plan shall be amended and
restated in its entirety to reflect the increase in available options to read as follows: 


 “Subject to the
provisions of Section 12 of the Plan, the maximum aggregate number of Shares which may be issued upon exercise of such Options is Eighty Five Thousand Five Hundred Forty Seven (85,547) Shares.” 

Except as expressly set forth in this Amendment, all other terms and conditions set forth in the Plan shall remain in full force and effect. 

This Amendment has been adopted by the Board of Directors and the Majority Shareholder as of August 16, 2016.
<PAGE>

                                  EXHIBIT 32.2
                CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                    AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE
                           SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

         Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and in
connection with the Annual Report of Avondale Incorporated (the "Company") on
Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended August 29, 2003, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Jack R.
Altherr, Jr, Vice Chairman and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby
certify that:

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

    (2)  The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
         material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
         the Company.

Date: November 10, 2003                             /s/ JACK R. ALTHERR, JR.
                                                    ------------------------
                                                        Jack R. Altherr, Jr.
                                                        Vice Chairman and Chief
                                                        Financial Officer
Exhibit 23.1


               CONSENT OF ERNST & YOUNG LLP, INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement (Form
S-8 No. 333-4489)  pertaining to the Sola Optical 401(K) Savings Plan and in the
Registration   Statement  (Form  S-8  No.  33-93788)   pertaining  to  the  Sola
International  Inc. Stock Option Plan and the Sola Investors'  Stock Option Plan
of Sola  International Inc. of our report dated May 6, 1997, with respect to the
consolidated  financial  statements  and  schedule  of Sola  International  Inc.
included in this Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended March 31, 1997.




                                                            Ernst & Young LLP


Palo Alto, California
June 7, 1997
[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 35 (Wednesday, February 21, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Page 11014]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-4206]



[[Page 11014]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Docket No. EC99-101-003]


Northern States Power Company (Minnesota) on Behalf of Itself and 
Its Public Utility Subsidiaries and New Century Energies, Inc. on 
Behalf of Its Public Utility Subsidiaries; Notice of Filing

February 13, 2001.
    Take notice that on January 16, 2001, Southwestern Public Service 
Company, an Excel Energy Operating Company, tendered for filing with 
the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission), a request for 
approval to fulfill its Regional Transmission Organization (RTO) 
commitment by joining the Southwest Power Pool rather than the Midwest 
Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest such filing should 
file a motion to intervene or protest with the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20426, 
in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of 
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). All such motions 
and protests should be filed on or before March 2, 2001. Protests will 
be considered by the Commission to determine the appropriate action to 
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the 
proceedings. Any person wishing to become a party must file a motion to 
intervene. Copies of this filing are on file with the Commission and 
are available for public inspection. This filing may also be viewed on 
the Internet at http://www.ferc.fed.us/online/rims.htm (call 202-208-
2222 for assistance). Comments and protests may be filed electronically 
via the internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 CFR 384.2001(a)(1)(iii) and 
the instructions on the Commission's web site at http://www.ferc.fed.us/efi/doorbell.htm.

Linwood A. Watson, Jr.,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 01-4206 Filed 2-20-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
No. 03-15-00522-CV 

_____________________________________ 

In the Third Court of Appeals _____________________________________ 

MICHAEL W. SCHUETZ AND JAMIE K. SCHUETZ,

Appellants,

V. 

SOURCE ONE MORTGAGE SERVICES CORPORATION; MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC 

REGISTRATION SYSTEMS, INC.; CITIMORTGAGE, INC.; AND BARRETT DAFFIN 

FRAPPIER TURNER & ENGLE, ROBERT FERGUSON, AND BARBARA FERGUSON, 

Appellees.

_____________________________________ 

On Appeal from Cause No. C2013-1445C 

247th Judicial District Court, Comal County, Texas 

Hon. Dib Waldrip, Judge Presiding 

NOTICE OF APPEARANCE OF ADDITIONAL COUNSEL

TO THE HONORABLE THIRD COURT OF APPEALS: 

Pursuant to Rule 6.2, TEX. R. APP. P., Appellees Citimortgage, Inc. and 

Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. hereby file this Notice of 

Appearance of Additional Counsel as follows: 

Susan A. Kidwell 

State Bar No. 24032626 

skidwell@lockelord.com

LOCKE LORD LLP 

600 Congress Avenue, Suite 2200 

Austin, Texas 78701 

Daniel Durell 

State Bar No. 24078450 

daniel.durell@lockelord.com

LOCKE LORD LLP 

600 Congress Avenue, Suite 2200 

Austin, Texas 78701 

ACCEPTED

03-15-00522-CV

8044059

THIRD COURT OF APPEALS

AUSTIN, TEXAS

12/2/2015 8:47:22 AM

JEFFREY D. KYLE

CLERK

 FILED IN 3rd COURT OF APPEALS AUSTIN, TEXAS 12/2/2015 8:47:22 AM JEFFREY D. KYLE Clerk
2 

Telephone: (512) 305-4700 

Facsimile: (512) 305-4800 

Telephone: (512) 305-4700 

Facsimile: (512) 305-4800 

Dated: December 2, 2015 

Respectfully submitted, 

LOCKE LORD LLP 

By: 

B. David L. Foster 

 State Bar No. 24031555 

 dfoster@lockelord.com

Susan A. Kidwell 

 State Bar No. 24032626 

 skidwell@lockelord.com

Daniel Durell 

 State Bar No. 24078450 

 daniel.durell@lockelord.com 

600 Congress Avenue, Suite 2200 

Austin, Texas 78701 

512-305-4700 (Telephone) 

512-305-4800 (Facsimile) 

Robert T. Mowrey 

 State Bar No. 14607500 

 rmowrey@lockelord.com

LOCKE LORD LLP 

2200 Ross Avenue, Suite 2200 

Dallas, Texas 75201 

214-740-8000 (Telephone) 

214-740-8800 (Facsimile) 

COUNSEL FOR CITIMORTGAGE, INC. AND 

MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION 

SYSTEMS, INC. 
3 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on December 2, 2015, a true and correct copy of the 

foregoing was served via EFileTx.gov upon the following: 

Stephen Casey 

stephen@caseylawoffice.us

CASEY LAW OFFICE, P.C. 

595 Round Rock West Drive 

Suite 102 

Round Rock, Texas 78681 

Counsel for Appellants 

Mark Hopkins 

mark@hopkinslawtexas.com

HOPKINS LAW

12117 Bee Caves Road 

Suite 260 

Austin, Texas 78738 

Counsel for Appellees (BDFT&E) 

David Pfeuffer 

dpfeuffer@nblawyers.net

BRAZLE & PFEUFFER, L.L.P. 

170 E. San Antonio Street 

New Braunfels, TX 78130 

Counsel for Appellees (Fergusons) 

 

Susan A. Kidwell