alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 533.6 Approval and disapproval. ( a ) The Chairman may approve a management contract if it meets the standards of part 531 of this chapter and § 533.3 of this part. Failure to comply with the standards of part 531 of this chapter or § 533.3 may result in the Chairman's disapproval of the management contract.
( b ) The Chairman shall disapprove a management contract for class II gaming if he or she determines that— ( 1 ) Any person with a direct or indirect financial interest in, or having management responsibility for, a management contract: ( i ) Is an elected member of the governing body of the tribe that is party to the management contract;
( ii ) Has been convicted of any felony or any misdemeanor gaming offense;
( iii ) Has knowingly and willfully provided materially false statements or information to the Commission or to a tribe;
( iv ) Has refused to respond to questions asked by the Chairman in accordance with his or her responsibilities under this part; or
( v ) Is determined by the Chairman to be a person whose prior activities, criminal record, if any, or reputation, habits, and associations pose a threat to the public interest or to the effective regulation and control of gaming, or create or enhance the dangers of unsuitable, unfair, or illegal practices, methods, and activities in the conduct of gaming or the carrying on of related business and financial arrangements;
( 2 ) The management contractor or its agents have unduly interfered with or influenced for advantage, or have tried to unduly interfere with or influence for advantage, any decision or process of tribal government relating to the gaming operation;
( 3 ) The management contractor or its agents has deliberately or substantially failed to follow the terms of the management contract or the tribal gaming ordinance or resolution adopted and approved pursuant to the Act; or
( 4 ) A trustee, exercising the skill and diligence to which a trustee is commonly held, would not approve the contract.
( c ) The Chairman may disapprove a management contract for class III gaming if he or she determines that a person with a financial interest in, or management responsibility for, a management contract is a person whose prior activities, criminal record, if any, or reputation, habits, and associations pose a threat to the public interest or to the effective regulation and control of gaming, or create or enhance the dangers of unsuitable, unfair, or illegal practices, methods, and activities in the conduct of gaming or the carrying on of related business and financial arrangements.
[74 FR 36935, July 27, 2009, as amended at 80 FR 31994, June 5, 2015]
### §784. Right to be heard

The Board or a Federal reserve bank (in the case of a clearing bank that is a member of that bank) may raise and may appear and be heard on any issue in a case under this subchapter.

(Added Pub. L. 106–554, §1(a)(5) [title I, §112(c)(5)(B)], Dec. 21, 2000, 114 Stat. 2763, 2763A–395.)
Editorial Note on Part 900
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 900 appear at 67 FR 34602, May 15, 2002.

§ 900.252 In an emergency reassumption, what is the Secretary required to do? ( a ) Immediately rescind, in whole or in part, the contract;
( b ) Assume control or operation of all or part of the program; and
( c ) Give written notice to the contractor and the Indian tribes or tribal organizations served.
•^'^ARTMENTOF 

VAKiSPORTATlON 

BEFORE THE " ' i''q OPER/^FIONS 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

WASHINGTON, D.C. ^^^ ^ ^ ^^ p ,2: | 3 

) 

Essential Air Service at ) 

) 

KINGMAN, ARIZONA ) OST-1996-1899 

PAGE, ARIZONA ) OST-1997-2694 

PRESCOTT, ARIZONA ) OST-1996-1899 

SHOW LOW, ARIZONA ) OST-1998-4409 

CARLSBAD, NEW MEXICO ) OST-2002-12802 

CLOVIS, NEW MEXICO ) OST-1996-1902 

SILVER CITY, NEW MEXICO ) OST-1996-1903 

) 

Under 49 U.S.C. §41731 et seq. ) 

GULFSTREAM INTERNATIONAL AIRLINES WITHDRAWAL OF ITS 

PROPOSAL TO PROVIDE SUBSIDIZED AIR SERICE AT 

KINGMAN. ARIZONA; PAGE, ARIZONA; PRESCOTT. ARIZONA; SHOW 

LOW. ARIZONA; CARLSBAD. NEW MEXICO; CLOVIS. NEW MEXICO AND 

SILVER CITY. NEW MEXICO 

Correspondence with regard to this document should be addressed to: 

Mickey Bowman 

Vice President of Corporate Development 

Gulfstream International Airlines 

3201 Griffin Road, 4"" Floor 

Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33312 

Telephone: 270-689-2180 

Fax:270-689-2180 

E-Mail: mbowman@gulfstreamair.com 

Gulfstream International Airlines ("Gulfstream") hereby withdraws its proposals to provide subsidized air 

service to the cites of Kingman, AZ; Page, AZ; Prescott, AZ; Show Low, AZ; Carlsbad, NM; Clovis, NM 

and Silver City, NM. 

Gulfstream was informed yesterday, February 1*', that by Order 2011-1-27 we are named the new Essential 

Air Service provider for the Montana Cities of Glasgow, Glendive, Havre, Lewiston, Miles City, Sidney 

and Wolf Point. While we welcome the challenge of establishing such operations and have no doubt in our 

ability to deliver a quality product, we feel it is only prudent to limit ourselves in terms of logistical 

reach. Gulfstream feels this action will allow us to focus all of our energies on commencing service in these 

Montana cities in an expeditious manner. 

Should you have any further questions relating to these bids please don't hesitate to contact me directly.
#### Beverly Murnan et al., Respondents, v Town of Tonawanda, Defendant, and Kathleen S. Konitsch, as Administrator of the Estate of Helen L. Peters, Deceased, Appellant.

[824 NYS2d 551]

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Erie County (Frederick J. Marshall, J.), entered September 6, 2005 in a personal injury action. The order, insofar as appealed from, denied that part of the cross motion of defendant Kathleen S. Konitsch, as administrator of the estate of Helen L. Peters, deceased, for summary judgment dismissing the complaint and cross claims against her on the ground that decedent was not negligent.

It is hereby ordered that the order so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed without costs.

Memorandum: Plaintiffs commenced this action alleging that plaintiff Beverly Murnan was injured after tripping and falling on a crack in a sidewalk that was used as part of the driveway of Helen L. Peters (decedent). Supreme Court properly denied that part of the cross motion of Kathleen S. Konitsch (defendant), the administrator of decedent’s estate, for summary judgment dismissing the complaint and all cross claims against her on the ground that decedent was not negligent. In support of that part of her cross motion, defendant failed to meet her *1297burden of establishing that decedent, the abutting landowner, “did nothing to either create the [allegedly] defective condition or cause the condition through the special use of [that part of the public sidewalk] as a driveway” *(Adorno v Carty,*23 AD3d 590, 591 [2005] [internal quotation marks omitted]; *see Katz v City of New York,*18 AD3d 818, 819 [2005]; *cf. Torres v City of New York,*32 AD 3d 347). Present—Hurlbutt, A.P.J., Kehoe, Smith and Green, JJ.
#### Gary Marillo, Respondent, v Benjamin Moore & Co. et al., Appellants.

[823 NYS2d *705]*

*Motion to*vacate the order of this Court denied. Present—Hurlbutt, A.PJ., Scudder, Gorski and Green, JJ.
Exhibit
32.1





Certification
Pursuant to


18
U.S.C. Section 1350,


as
added by


Section
906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002





In
connection with the quarterly report of Pulaski Financial Corp. (the “Company”)
on Form 10-Q for the period ended December 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), I, Gary W. Douglass, President and Chief
Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as
added by § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:




1.
            The
      Report fully complies with the requirement 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
      as of and for the period covered by the
Report.




Date:
      February 12, 2010
              /s/ Gary W. DouglassName:
              Gary
      W. DouglassTitle:
              President
      and Chief Executive Officer
APRJUNJul 28200820102011 5             captures             2             May 07 - 28 Jun 10CloseHelpHome             > Publications             > Abstract    Publication Abstract             | Search             | FAQs             | Contact             UsTool Kit for                         Creating Your Own Truancy Reduction Program(NCJ 217271) February                       2007Office of Juvenile                         Justice and Delinquency PreventionProvides an overview of                         truancy issues, its causes, and solutions to the                         problem. This tool kit outlines critical components of                         truancy programs such as family involvement, use of                         incentives and sanctions, developing a support network,                         and program evaluation. The tool kit examines the legal                         and economic implications of truancy and provides                         recommendations to courts, schools, State lawmakers, and                         researchers for addressing this issue.PDF(By                               Chapter)HTML
AMBER       Alert | National       Sex Offender Public Web Site | OJP       Reentry InitiativeUSA.gov       | Privacy       | Policies       & Disclaimers | FOIA       | Site       Map | Ask OJJDPA component of       the Office       of Justice Programs, U.S.       Department of Justice
BOARD OF DIRECTORS

DIRECTOR

CHIEF INSURANCE PROGRAMS 

OFFICER

Department of Insurance Supervision & Compliance 

 Office of the Chief Counsel

 Multi-employer Program Division Standard Termination  Compliance Division

Advisory Committee

OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR 

GENERAL

Pension Benefit Guaranty Corp

CHIEF FINANCIAL OFF

 Chief Investment Officer  Corporate Investments De

 Financial Operations Depa

GENERAL COUNSEL

Contracts & Controls RevieDepartment 

CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER

DEPUTY DIRECTOR

OPERATIONS

DEPUTY DIRECTOR

POLICY CHIEF OF S

Communications & Public Affairs Department

Legislative and Regulatory Department

Policy, Research, and Analysis Department 

Business Process Management UnitBenefits Administration and Payment Department

Legal Division Disclosure DivisionAppeals Division 

Approved:______________________________________ _________________Charles E.F. Millard, Director Date
Editorial Note on Part 900
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 900 appear at 67 FR 34602, May 15, 2002.

§ 900.29 What is the Secretary required to do if the Secretary decides to decline all or a portion of a proposal? If the Secretary decides to decline all or a severable portion of a proposal, the Secretary is required: ( a ) To advise the Indian tribe or tribal organization in writing of the Secretary's objections, including a specific finding that clearly demonstrates that (or that is supported by a controlling legal authority that) one of the conditions set forth in § 900.22 exists, together with a detailed explanation of the reason for the decision to decline the proposal and, within 20 days, any documents relied on in making the decision; and
( b ) To advise the Indian tribe or tribal organization in writing of the rights described in § 900.31.
###### Editorial Note on Part 900

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 900 appear at 67 FR 34602, May 15, 2002.

#### § 900.94 Is contractor-purchased real property to which an Indian tribe or tribal organization holds title eligible for facilities operation and maintenance funding from the Secretary?

Yes.
# C_2006281EN.01001001.xml

| 18.11.2006 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 281/10 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

18.11.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 281/10

---

Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 12 September 2006 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Østre Landsret (Denmark)) — Laserdisken ApS v Kulturministeriet

(Case C-479/04) (1)

1

(Directive 2001/29/EC - Harmonisation of certain aspects of copyright and related rights in the information society - Article 4 - Distribution rights - Rule of exhaustion - Legal basis - International agreements - Competition policy - Principle of proportionality - Freedom of expression - Principle of equal treatment - Articles 151 EC and 153 EC)

(2006/C 281/15)

Language of the case: Danish

Referring court

Østre Landsret (Denmark)

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Laserdisken ApS

Applicant:

Defendant: Kulturministeriet

Defendant:

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Østre Landsret — Validity and interpretation of Article 4(2) of Directive 2001/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2001 on the harmonisation of certain aspects of copyright and related rights in the information society (OJ 2001 L 167, p. 10) — Exhaustion of the rightholder's rights only as of the first sale or first other transfer of ownership in the Community by the rightholder or with his consent — Imports from third countries of DVDs of cinematographic works.

Operative part of the judgment

| 1. | Consideration of the first question does not reveal any information such as to affect the validity of Article 4(2) of Directive 2001/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2001 on the harmonisation of certain aspects of copyright and related rights in the information society. |
| --- | --- |

1.

Consideration of the first question does not reveal any information such as to affect the validity of Article 4(2) of Directive 2001/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2001 on the harmonisation of certain aspects of copyright and related rights in the information society.

| 2. | Article 4(2) of Directive 2001/29 is to be interpreted as precluding national rules providing for exhaustion of the distribution right in respect of the original or copies of a work placed on the market outside the European Community by the rightholder or with his consent. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Article 4(2) of Directive 2001/29 is to be interpreted as precluding national rules providing for exhaustion of the distribution right in respect of the original or copies of a work placed on the market outside the European Community by the rightholder or with his consent.

---

(1)  OJ C 31, 05.02.2005.

1

---
§ 533.4 Action by the Chairman. ( a ) The Chairman shall approve or disapprove a management contract, applying the standards contained in § 533.6 of this part, within 180 days of the date on which the Chairman receives a complete submission under § 533.3 of this part, unless the Chairman notifies the tribe and management contractor in writing of the need for an extension of up to ninety (90) days.
( b ) A tribe may bring an action in a U.S. district court to compel action by the Chairman: ( 1 ) After 180 days following the date on which the Chairman receives a complete submission if the Chairman does not approve or disapprove the contract under this part; or
( 2 ) After 270 days following the Chairman's receipt of a complete submission if the Chairman has told the tribe and management contractor in writing of the need for an extension and has not approved or disapproved the contract under this part.
[74 FR 36935, July 27, 2009]
Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation 

75-34 

November 28, 1975 

REFERENCE: 

 [*1] 4022(a) Benefits Guaranteed. Type of Benefits Guaranteed 

OPINION: 

 This letter is written in response to your letters dated October 2, October 3, and October 28, 1975, and in light of

the conference held at our Offices Friday, November 21, 1975. 

You have asked us whether PBGC would view as invalid a waiver of a vested, deferred benefit pursuant to an

election available individually to each employee and negotiated at arms length for the participants in a pension plan by

their collective bargaining representative. In that context, PBGC will not consider a plan to be liable for a pension where

this Corporation is satisfied that, at a reasonable time prior to termination, a participant, pursuant to state law, has waived

his right to a deferred, vested benefit for a reasonable and adequate consideration. PBGC would consider such a waiver

valid if the Corporation is satisfied that the transaction was free from coercion of any kind and that the participant was

fully advised of the substance of the benefit and of its present value, and of the value of the consideration he was

receiving before he exercised the election. In the event a court rules the election invalid, of course, PBGC would assert

[*2] its rights under Section 4062 of the Act against the employer. 

The views expressed in this letter, relate only to Title IV of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974

and are expressed on behalf of this Corporation only. The consequences of this transaction under the Internal Revenue

Code and under Title I of the Act are, of course, matters of concern to the Internal Revenue Service and the Department

of Labor. We do not purport to speak on their behalf. 

Henry Rose 

General Counsel
Exhibit 32.1

 

**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 General Metals Corporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-QSB for the period ended July 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Stephen Parent, the President and Chief Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer) of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:

(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 result of operations of the Company.

Dated: September 20, 2007.

 

/s/ Stephen Parent                                                          

Stephen Parent

President and Chief Executive Officer

(Principal Executive Officer)
#### L. Aloysius Nelligan, as Receiver, etc., Plaintiff, v. Peter Groth, Appellant. Rudolph Liebmann, Respondent.

—Motion to dismiss appeal denied, and motion for leave to correct papers on appeal granted, without costs. Present — Jenks, Hooker, Gaynor, Rich and Miller, JJ.
#### STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. KENNETH DUANE FARRIS

No. 225PA89

(Filed 18 January 1990)

On the State of North Carolina’s petition for discretionary review of the decision of the Court of Appeals, 93 N.C. App. 757, 379 S.E.2d 283 (1989), which overruled the judgment of *Cornelius, J.,*at the 28 March 1988 session of Superior Court, Yadkin County, and granted a new trial to defendant. Heard in the Supreme Court 13 December 1989.

*Lacy H. Thornburg, Attorney General, by Norma S. Harrell, Assistant Attorney General, for the state-appellant.*

*Malcolm Ray Hunter, Appellate Defender, by Teresa A. McHugh, Assistant Appellate Defender, for the defendant-appellee.*

PER CURIAM.

Discretionary review improvidently allowed.
Episiotomy

What You Need To

Know About...

What You Need to Know

An episiotomy is a surgical cut in the

perineum. (That is the area between the vagina

and the anus.) When a woman has a baby, the

doctor, nurse-midwife, or midwife may make

this cut.

If you are pregnant, you should talk to your

doctor, nurse-midwife, or midwife about

episiotomies, just as you talk about whether

you want pain medicine during childbirth. Do

it before you get to the delivery room! 

To Have or Not to Have an

Episiotomy?

Some doctors perform episiotomies for every

birth. Researchers looked at the evidence for

this routine use of episiotomies. They did not

look at special cases, such as when a baby’s

shoulders get stuck during birth. 

The research shows that routine use of

episiotomies does not keep the mother’s skin

from tearing during birth. It does not speed up

a normal birth. It does not help avoid the

bladder control problems women sometimes

get after having a baby.
You should know that:

• Both episiotomies and tears that occur

when giving birth may be painful. They

may be slow to heal. They can become

infected.

• If you do not have an episiotomy, your skin

may tear during delivery. But the tear is

likely to be smaller than an episiotomy and

to heal with less pain.

Women who do not have episiotomies:

• Are likely to start having sex sooner after

childbirth than women who have them.

• Have less pain the first time they have

sexual intercourse after childbirth.

What Should I Do?

Be informed!

• Talk with your doctor, nurse-midwife, or

midwife. Ask the reasons they might

perform an episiotomy. Ask how often they

perform them.

• Tell your doctor, nurse-midwife, or

midwife any questions or concerns you

have about having an episiotomy.

• Tell them what you prefer. Your voice

counts!

This information came from a report from the Agency

for Healthcare Research and Quality, produced by the

RTI-International/University of North Carolina at

Chapel Hill Evidence-based Practice Center: The Use of

Episiotomy in Obstetrical Care: A Systematic Review

(http://www.ahrq.gov/clinic/tp/epistp.htm).

AHRQ Pub No. 06-0005

December 2005
EXHIBIT 32.2

                CERTIFICATE 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 Satellite Enterprises Corp. (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ended  September 30, 2004 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),  the
undersigned,  as Chief  Financial  Officer  of the  Company,  hereby  certifies,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  Section 1350,  as adopted  pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 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.

/s/ Leo Van de Voort
---------------------------------
Leo Van de Voort
Chief Financial Officer

November 22, 2004

A signed  original  of this  written  statement  required  by Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002 ("Section  906"), or other document  authenticating,
acknowledging,  or otherwise  adopting the signature  that appears in typed form
within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906,
has been  provided  to  Satellite  Enterprises  Corp.  and will be  retained  by
Satellite  Enterprises  Corp.  and  furnished  to the  Securities  and  Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.