alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 39.1202 Distribution of funds. ( a ) Each contract school shall receive in fiscal year 1980 a portion of the Contract School Operation and Maintenance Fund determined by the percentage share which that school's fiscal year 1979 operation and maintenance cost represents in the total fiscal year 1979 operation and maintenance cost for all such schools.
( b ) To be eligible for these funds, a contract school shall submit a detailed report of actual operation and maintenance costs for fiscal year 1979 to the Director by November 23, 1979. These cost figures will be subject to verification by the Director to assure their accuracy prior to the allotment of any funds under this subpart.
( c ) Any funds generated under this subpart shall be included in the computation of the phase-in amount if supplemental operation and maintenance funds were included in a school's fiscal year 1979 3100 contract funds.
[44 FR 61864, Oct. 26, 1979. Redesignated at 47 FR 13327, Mar. 30, 1982. Redesignated and amended at 70 FR 33702, June 9, 2005]
##### 



Exhibit 32.2 CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL
OFFICER REGARDING PERIODIC REPORT CONTAINING
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS I, Paul E. Martin, the Interim Co-Chief Financial Officer of Renaissance
Media Group LLC, Renaissance Media (Louisiana) LLC, Renaissance Media
(Tennessee) LLC and Renaissance Media Capital Corporation (collectively, the
Company) in compliance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, hereby certify that, the
Companys Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2004
(the Report) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission:  
    
    fully complies with the requirements of Section 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
    
    the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
of the Company. /s/ Paul E. MartinPaul E. MartinInterim Co-Chief Financial Officer(Co-Principal Financial Officer)November 12, 2004
## NUMBER 13

- 2 1

- 00 236

- C V

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI

– EDINBURG

OSVALDO BENAVIDES AND

ROSAURA DALEL SALDANA

, Appellant s

,

v.

LOS CAMPEONES, INC.

, Appellee.

On appeal from the 197th District Court

of Cameron C ounty, Texas.



## ORDER ABATING APPEAL

Before Chief Justice Contreras and Justices Hinojosa and Silva

Order Per Curiam

Appellants Osvaldo Benavides and Rosaur a Dalel Saldana seek to appeal a

summary judgment order issued on March 4, 2021, in favor of appellee Los Campeones,

Inc. Appellant s submitted a n untimely notice of appeal on August 2 , 2021, and2 subsequently filed an “Opposed First Motion to Extend Time to File Notice of Appeal.”

See T EX

. R. A PP

. P . 26.1

.

Before the Texas Supreme Court is a petition for review on a similar issue in a

case arising from this C ourt. See Rodriguez v. Marez

, No. 13

- 20

- 00323

- CV, 2021 WL

377253 (Tex. App.

— Corpus Christi

– Edinburg Feb. 4, 2021, pet. filed) (mem. op.)

. At

issue in Rodriguez

, is whether th is Court committed error in dismissing the case for want

of jurisdiction after declining to extend the deadline for petitioner’s otherwise untimely

notice of appeal

. See id.

Having reexamined and reconsidered the documents on file, this Court, on its own

motion, issues the following ruling. A ppellants’ opposed first motion to extend time to file

notice of appeal is carried with the case

, and t his appeal is ABATED until such time as

the Texas Supreme Court issues its opinion or denies or refuses petition in the direct

appeal of the aforementioned cause. After which

, we direct appellant s to promptly file a

motion to reinstate the appeal, which shall reference and include a copy of the opinion or

applicable order issued by the Texas Supreme Court

.

PER CURIAM

Delivered and filed on the

2nd day of September

, 202 1

.
§ 273.174 Are there any Indian preference requirements for contracts and subcontracts? ( a ) Any contract made with a State, public school district, or Indian corporation for the benefit of Indian students must require that the contractor, to the greatest extent feasible: ( 1 ) Give preference in and opportunities for employment and training to Indians in connection with the administration of such contract(s); and
( 2 ) Give preference in the award of subcontracts to Indian organizations and Indian-owned economic enterprises.
( b ) All subcontractors employed by the contractor must, to the extent possible, give preference to Indians for employment and training and must include in their bid submission a plan to achieve maximum use of Indian personnel.
#### Edward B Marks and Joseph W. Stern, Copartners, Doing Business under the Name of Jos. W. Stern & Co., Appellants, v. Benjamin W. Dodge, Respondent.

Order affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements. No opinion..
#### Otis Shepherd et al., Appellants, v State of New York, Respondent.

(Claim No. 108350.)

[823 NYS2d 729]

Appeal from an order of the Court of Claims (Diane L. Fitzpatrick, J.), entered December 14, 2005 in a personal injury action. The order granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment and dismissed the claim.

It is hereby ordered that the order so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed without costs for reasons stated in decision at the Court of Claims. Present— Gorski, J.P, Smith, Centra and Green, JJ.
## Breadcrumb

-  Home 
-  Workers & Retirees 
-  J.C. Penney Corporation, Inc. Pension Plan 

This page has not been translated. Please go to PBGC.gov's Spanish home page for more information available in Spanish.

Esta página no ha sido traducida. Por favor vaya a la página principal del sitio de español de PBGC para ver información disponible en español.

# J.C. Penney Corporation, Inc. Pension Plan

PBGC continues to work with the J.C. Penney Corporation, Inc. to protect the interests of the pension plan’s current and future retirees.

In November 2020, PBGC initiated steps to take responsibility for the plan. Those efforts were put on hold so the company could explore options to avoid the need for PBGC to become responsible for the plan and prevent possible cuts to benefits. Since then, the company has announced its intent to execute a standard termination of the plan in which participants will receive all benefits accrued as of December 31, 2020.

For more information on the transaction please visit J.C. Penney’s Restructuring Information.

## Contact

J.C. Penney pension plan participants with questions about their benefits should contact the J.C. Penney Benefits Center, Monday through Friday 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m., Central Time. 

Online: http://www.jcpbenefits.com

By telephone: 1-888-890-8900
### [§857a. Repealed. Pub. L. 114–328, div. E, title LVIII, §5302(b)(1), Dec. 23, 2016, 130 Stat. 2923]

Section, added Pub. L. 90–632, §2(24), Oct. 24, 1968, 82 Stat. 1341, §857(d); amended Pub. L. 102–484, div. A, title X, §1064, Oct. 23, 1992, 106 Stat. 2505; renumbered §857a and amended Pub. L. 104–106, div. A, title XI, §1123(a), Feb. 10, 1996, 110 Stat. 463, related to deferment of sentence to confinement.

#### **Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries**

#### Effective Date of Repeal

Repeal effective on Jan. 1, 2019, as designated by the President, with implementing regulations and provisions relating to applicability to various situations, see section 5542 of Pub. L. 114–328 and Ex. Ord. No. 13825, set out as notes under section 801 of this title.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Corey Alexander, Appellant.

[823 NYS2d 696]

Application by the appellant for a writ of error coram nobis to vacate, on the ground of ineffective assistance of appellate counsel, a decision and order of this Court dated March 14, 2005 *(People v Alexander,*16 AD3d 515 [2005]), affirming a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County, rendered May 22, 2003.

Ordered that the application is denied.

The appellant has failed to establish that he was denied the effective assistance of appellate counsel *(see Jones v Barnes,*463 US 745 [1983]; *People v Stultz,*2 NY3d 277 [2004]). Miller, J.P., Crane, Spolzino and Fisher, JJ., concur.
**EXHIBIT 32.2**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

In connectionwith the Quarterly Report of 24/7 Real Media, Inc. (the “**Company**”) on Form 10-Q for the periodending September 30, 2003 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commissionon the date hereof (the “**Report**”),I, Norman Blashka, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of theCompany, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss.906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

(1) The Reportfully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

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

 

 
| November 14,  2003 |                                                  |
|--------------------|-------------------------------------------------------|
|               |                                                  |
|               | /s/  Norman M. Blashka                           |
|               | Executive  Vice President and Chief Financial Officer |
|               | (Principal  Financial and Accounting Officer)         |

 

----
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

October 9, 2014

No. 04-14-00629-CV

BEXAR COUNTY,

Appellant

v.

Leticia VOTION,

Appellee

From the 407th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2013-CI-02670

Honorable David A. Canales, Judge Presiding

ORDER

The Appellant’s First Motion for Extension of Time to File Brief is GRANTED. The

appellant’s brief is due on October 29, 2014.

_________________________________

Sandee Bryan Marion, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 9th day of October, 2014.

___________________________________

Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court
**Exhibit 32**

 

**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 Atlantica, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending March 31, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), we, Duane S. Jenson and Shelley Goff, certify, 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 result of operations of the Company. 

 

| *Date:*** | *05/08/07*** | * * | *By:***  | */s/Duane S. Jenson***                      |
|-----------|--------------|----------|----------|---------------------------------------------|
| * *  | * *     | * * | * * | *Duane S. Jenson, President and Director*** |
| * *  | * *     | * * | * * | *Atlantica, Inc.***                         |
| * *  | * *     | * * | * * | * *                                    |
| *Date:*** | *05/08/07*** | * * | *By:***  | */s/Shelley Goff***                         |
| * *  | * *     | * * | * * | *Shelley Goff, Secretary and Director***    |
| * *  | * *     | * * | * * | *Atlantica, Inc.***                         |
# C_2007020EN.01004102.xml

| 27.1.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 20/41 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.1.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 20/41

---

Action brought on 22 December 2006 — Bleyaert v Council

(Case F-144/06)

(2007/C 20/64)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Eric Bleyaert (Maldegem, Belgium) (represented by: S. Orlandi, A. Coolen, J.-N. Louis and E. Marchal, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: Council of the European Union

Defendant:

Form of order sought

| — | annul the decision of the Appointing Authority not to include the applicant's name on the list of officials selected to follow the training programme in the framework of the certification procedure for 2005; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the decision of the Appointing Authority not to include the applicant's name on the list of officials selected to follow the training programme in the framework of the certification procedure for 2005;

| — | order the defendant to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the defendant to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicant, a Council official in Grade AST 8, applied for the certification procedure for 2005. His name, which appeared in the draft list of officials selected to follow the training programme in the framework of the 2005 certification exercise, was not included in the definitive list, published on 22 May 2006, which the Appointing Authority adopted taking into account the opinion of the joint committee for the certification procedure. That committee had heard the applicant on 17 May 2006.

In support of his action, the applicant relies, first, on breach of the duty to state reasons, especially as the Appointing Authority did not reply to his complaint. Moreover, the applicant asserts the infringement of Article 45a of the Staff Regulations and Article 5 of the general provisions implementing that article of those Regulations. In particular, the joint committee, which could hear only officials who challenged the draft list, was not entitled to summon the applicant. In any event, the applicant claims that the principle of equal treatment was also infringed, in that the joint committee did not hear all the officials whose names were included on the draft list.

---
Exhibit 99.8












March 11, 2015






Consent of Independent Auditor
 
 
 We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in this Annual Report on Form 40-F for the yearended December 31, 2014 of Crescent Point Energy Corp. our report dated March 10, 2015, relating tothe consolidated financial statements, which comprise the consolidated balance sheet as at December31, 2014 and December 31, 2013 and the consolidated statements of comprehensive income, changes inshareholders equity and cash flows for the years ended December 31, 2014 and December 31, 2013 andthe effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2014, which appears inthis Annual Report. We also consent to reference to us under the heading "Interests of Experts", whichappears in the Annual Information Form included in the Exhibit incorporated by reference in thisAnnual Report on Form 40-F.
 
 
 Image
 Chartered Accountants
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, Chartered Accountants
 111 5 Avenue SW, Suite 3100, Calgary, Alberta, Canada T2P 5L3
 T: +1 403 509 7500, F: +1 403 7811825, www.pwc.com/ca
 
 “PwC” refers to PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, an Ontario limited liability partnership, which is a member firm of PricewaterhouseCoopers International Limited, each member firm of which is a separate legal entity.
# C_2006310EN.01001802.xml

| 16.12.2006 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 310/18 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.12.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 310/18

---

Action brought on 4 September 2006 — Promat v OHIM — Puertas Proma (PROMAT)

(Case T-243/06)

(2006/C 310/37)

Language in which the application was lodged: German

Parties

Applicant: Promat GmbH (Ratingen, Germany) (represented by: J. Krenzel)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Puertas Proma, S.A.L.

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM:

Form of order sought

| — | amend the defendant's decision of 4 May 2006 (Ref. R 1059/2005-1) so as to allow the appeal in full; |
| --- | --- |

—

amend the defendant's decision of 4 May 2006 (Ref. R 1059/2005-1) so as to allow the appeal in full;

| — | order the defendant to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the defendant to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Applicant for a Community trade mark: the applicant.

Applicant for a Community trade mark:

Community trade mark concerned: the word mark ‘PROMAT’ for goods and services in Classes 1, 3, 6 to 12, 14, 16 to 17, 20 to 22, 25 and 37 (Application No 932 202).

Community trade mark concerned:

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: Puertas Proma, S.A.L

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings:

Mark or sign cited in opposition: in particular, the figurative mark ‘PROMA’ for goods and services in Classes 6, 20 and 39 (Community trade mark No 239 384), the opposition being directed against the application in respect of Classes 6 and 20.

Mark or sign cited in opposition:

Decision of the Opposition Division: Opposition partially upheld.

Decision of the Opposition Division:

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Appeal partially dismissed.

Decision of the Board of Appeal:

Pleas in law: breach of Article 8(1)(a) and (b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (1), on the ground that neither the opposing signs nor the opposing goods are similar. Therefore there is no likelihood of confusion between the opposing marks.

Pleas in law:

1

---

(1)  Council Regulation (EC) No 40/94 of 20 December 1993 on the Community trade mark (OJ 1994 L 11, p. 1).

1

---
### Engineering geologic, geophysical, hydrologic, and rock-mechanics investigations of the Straight Creek Tunnel site and pilot bore, Colorado

By: Charles Sherwood Robinson**F. T. LeeJ. H. ScottR. D. CarrollR. T. HurrD. B. RichardsF. A. MatteiB. E. HartmannJ. F. Abel Jr.

                            https://doi.org/10.3133/pp815

#### Links

-                                                                                                                             Document:                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  **Report**                                                                                                     (pdf)                                                                                                                                     
- Plates:                               - **Plate 1**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 2**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 3**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 4**                            (pdf) 
- NGMDB Index Page:  **National Geologic Map Database Index Page**                            (html)
- Superseded Publications:
                                        Geology of the Straight Creek tunnel site, Clear Creek and Summit Counties, Colorado, and its predicted effect on tunnel construction(1962)                                    

                                        Physical properties, dynamic and static test results, Straight Creek Tunnel pilot bore, Clear Creek and Summit Counties, Colorado(1965)                                    

                                        Preliminary Report on the Engineering Geology of the Straight Creek Tunnel Pilot Bore, Clear Creek and Summit Counties, Colorado(1965)                                    

                                        The validity of geologic projection, a successful example: the Straight Creek Tunnel pilot bore, Colorado(1965)                                    

                                        Geologic map of Straight Creek Tunnel pilot bore, Clear Creek and Summit Counties, Colorado(1967)                                    

- Download citation as:  RIS                         |                         Dublin                            Core

#### Abstract

No abstract available.

#### Study Area

Part or all of this report is presented in Portable Document Format                        (PDF). For best results viewing and printing PDF documents, it is recommended that you download                        the documents to your computer and open them with Adobe Reader. PDF documents opened from your                        browser may not display or print as intended. Download the latest version of Adobe Reader, free of charge. More information                        about viewing, downloading, and printing report files can be found at the common download problems FAQ.
[if !vml]>[endif]>
[if !vml]>[endif]>
You havereached the Federal Depository Library Program Electronic Collection (FDLP/EC)Archive. This archive assures ongoing access to publications in the FDLP/EC.Access to publications in the archive is available through GPO's suite ofcataloging and locator services, including the Catalog of U.S. GovernmentPublications.  Archived copies of publications are retrieved in the eventthat publications are no longer available from the original publishing agencysite. (Historical purposes)
**Title:****ORWH researchprogram, fiscal year...**** 
SuDocNumber:HE20.3070/2:
ItemNumber:0507-A-68(online)
CGPSystem Number:000598915
 
1998
1999
2000**
§ 115.165 Coordinated response. ( a ) The agency shall develop a written institutional plan and use a coordinated, multidisciplinary team approach to responding to sexual abuse.
( b ) If a victim of sexual abuse is transferred between facilities covered by subpart A or B of this part, the agency shall, as permitted by law, inform the receiving facility of the incident and the victim's potential need for medical or social services.
( c ) If a victim is transferred from a DHS holding facility to a facility not covered by paragraph (b) of this section, the agency shall, as permitted by law, inform the receiving facility of the incident and the victim's potential need for medical or social services, unless the victim requests otherwise.