alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 806.32 Reopening/modification. ( a ) Once a project is approved, the Commission, upon its own motion, or upon petition of the project sponsor or any interested party, may at any time reopen any project approval and make additional orders or otherwise modify or impose such additional conditions that may be necessary to mitigate or avoid adverse impacts or to otherwise protect the public health, safety, and welfare or water resources. Whenever a petition for reopening is filed by an interested party, the burden shall be upon that interested party to show, by a preponderance of the evidence, that a significant adverse impact or a threat to the public health, safety and welfare or water resources exists that warrants reopening of the docket. Notwithstanding the foregoing, any petition filed by a party who previously sought the same or functionally equivalent relief identified in the petition pursuant to the administrative appeals process under § 808.2 will not be eligible for consideration by the Commission absent new facts not known or readily discernable at the time of consideration of the petitioner's previous request for administrative appeal filed pursuant to § 808.2.
( b ) If the project sponsor fails to comply with any term or condition of a Commission approval, the Commission may issue an order suspending, modifying or revoking its approval of the project. The Commission may also, in its discretion, suspend, modify or revoke its approval if the project sponsor fails to obtain or maintain other federal, state or local approvals.
( c ) For any previously approved project where interference occurs, the Commission may require a project sponsor to provide a temporary source of potable water at the project sponsor's expense, pending a final determination of causation by the Commission.
( d ) The Commission, upon its own motion, may at any time reopen any project approval and make additional corrective modifications that may be necessary.
[71 FR 78579, Dec. 29, 2006, as amended at 74 FR 49813, Sept. 29, 2009]
Order entered April 22 , 2016

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05
- 15
- 01389
- CV
GEORGE JONES RESIDEN TIAL, LLC, Appellant
V. ANTONIO L. ADAMS, Appellee On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 4

Dallas County, Texas Tria l Court Cause No. CC
- 15
- 03973
- D



### O RDER Appellant George Jones Residential, LLC is not currently represented by counsel. Because in Texas, a corporation may appear and be represented in court only by a licensed attorney, appellant is DIRECTED to provide th e Court, within thirty (30) days of the date of this letter, the name of its counsel as well as counsel’s mailing address, telephone number, fax number, if any, and State Bar of Texas identification number. If the requested information is not received wit hin the time specified, this appeal will be dismissed without further notice.

/s/ CAROLYN WRIGHT CHIEF JUSTICE
Exhibit 23

Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

The Board of Directors

The Goldfield Corporation:

We consent to the incorporation by reference in
the registration statement (No. 333-72241) on Form S-8 of The Goldfield Corporation of our report dated March 17, 2009 with respect to the consolidated balance sheets of The Goldfield Corporation and subsidiaries as of December 31, 2008
and 2007, and the related consolidated statements of operations, stockholders equity and cash flows for the years ended December 31, 2008 and 2007, which report appears in the December 31, 2008 annual report on Form 10-K of The
Goldfield Corporation.



|                            
|----------------------------
|/s/ KPMG LLP                
|                            
|Certified Public Accountants
|                            
|Orlando, Florida            
|March 17, 2009              



52
# SBIRT Colorado

**Program Description**

Since 2006, Colorado has received funding from the Substance Abuse Mental Health Services Administration to implement screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment (SBIRT) in diverse settings statewide. SBIRT Colorado is focused on integrating SBIRT within existing state initiatives and expanding and enhancing Colorado’s capacity to address the needs of youth and adults at risk for health consequences due to substance use. SBIRT Colorado provides training, education, consultation, and quality improvement services to nurses, physicians, and other health professionals to develop the skills necessary to implement evidence based screening for substance use and to provide effective, quick brief interventions to help individuals reduce their use of alcohol, tobacco, and drugs. Specific goals and objectives of the current grant include:

1) Disseminate SBIRT as a standard of care to primary care clinics and community-based settings serving diverse populations; integrate SBIRT in HIV prevention and care service agencies, schools, and employee assistance programs; incorporate SBIRT in components of state health reform initiatives; and utilize health educators to collect SBIRT data in six sites, serving 78,000 people through the life of project and 15,600 annually.

2) Improve linkages between primary care, mental health, and substance use treatment providers to support efficient and effective referrals to clinically appropriate services; and connect the delivery systems using LinkingCare.org, an online referral database.

3) Institutionalize SBIRT as a standard of care through state-level system and policy change by developing a collaborative effort involving multiple state agencies to support the standardization of SBIRT as a healthcare practice; build recognition of the behavioral health system; and affecting the delivery of a comprehensive healthcare system.

SBIRT Colorado is administered by the Colorado Department of Human Services, Office of Behavioral Health, managed and implemented by Peer Assistance Services, Inc., and evaluated by the OMNI Institute.

**Website and Social Media Links**

www.improvinghealthcolorado.org

www.facebook.com/SBIRTColorado

www.twitter.com/SBIRTColorado

**Contact Information**

Stan Paprocki, Director, Prevention and Early Intervention

Colorado Department of Human Services, Office of Behavioral Health

303.866.7503 

stan.paprocki@state.co.us

Leigh Fischer, MPH, Director, SBIRT Colorado

Peer Assistance Services, Inc.

303.369.0039 x237

lfischer@peerassist.org
**Judgment of the General Court (Second Chamber) of 10 May 2011 – Emram v OHIM – Guccio Gucci (G)**

**(Case T-187/10)**

Community trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for the Community figurative mark G – Earlier national and Community figurative marks G – Relative ground for refusal – Likelihood of confusion – Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009

1.                     *Community trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the Community trade mark – Signs capable of constituting a mark – Signs
composed of a letter or combination of letters – Relative grounds for refusal – Opposition by the proprietor of an earlier
identical or similar mark registered for identical or similar goods or services – Likelihood of confusion with the earlier
mark – Criteria for assessment (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Arts 4, 7 and 8(1)(b)) (see para. 49)*

2.                     *Community trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the Community trade mark – Relative grounds for refusal – Opposition
by the proprietor of an earlier identical or similar mark registered for identical or similar goods or services – Likelihood
of confusion with the earlier mark (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paras 55, 74, 78)*

**Re:**

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | ACTION brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 11 February 2010 (Case R 1281/2008-1), concerning opposition proceedings between Guccio Gucci SpA and Mr Maurice Emram. |

**Information relating to the case**

| | |
| --- | --- |
| Applicant for the Community trade mark: | Maurice Emram |
| Community trade mark sought: | Figurative trade mark G for goods in Classes 9, 18 and 25 – Application No 2421402 |
| Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: | Guccio Gucci SpA |
| Mark or sign cited in opposition: | Community and national figurative trade marks G for goods in Classes 9, 18 and 25 |
| Decision of the Opposition Division: | Opposition dismissed |
| Decision of the Board of Appeal: | Decision of the Opposition Division annulled; registration refused |

**Operative part**

The Court:

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 1. | | Dismisses the action; |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 2. | | Orders Mr Maurice Emram to pay the costs. |
## Breadcrumb

-  Home 
-  SBA District Offices 
-  Seattle 
-  Washington Export Outreach Team 

# Washington Export Outreach Team

----

## Content

----

Established in 2013 following a national mandate to do more to support international trade, the Washington Export Outreach Team (WEOT) is a collaborative team of local, state, regional, and federal export assistance agencies who provide you the tools and resources you need to sell internationally.

Contact any of the WEOT members for export assistance. If that office is not the best fit for your specific export needs, you will receive a referral and a direct contact to another agency that will assist you.

## Export events

                  - SBA Exporting events
                  - Local WEOT export events  

## Contact us

 

##           Trade tools for international sales        

----

Nearly 96% of consumers live outside the United States, and two-thirds of the world’s purchasing power is in foreign countries.

Explore trade tools
HomeLatest FilingsPrevious Page

    - SEC Home  »
    - Search the Next-Generation EDGAR System  »
    - Company Search  »
    - Current Page

154 WEST 14TH STREET2ND FLOORNEW YORK NY 10011         

154 WEST 14TH STREET2ND FLOORNEW YORK NY 10011         6466615441

Roundhill ETF Trust CIK#: 0001976517 (see all company filings)
State location: NY | State of Inc.: **DE** | Fiscal Year End: 1231File Number: **812-15516**(List all Funds and Classes/Contracts for Roundhill ETF Trust)

||
||
Exhibit 32.1







STATEMENT OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER


PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350





In connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2009 (the “Form 10-K”) of Middleburg Financial Corporation (the “Company”), I, Joseph L. Boling, Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer, hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to my knowledge:





(a)          the Form 10-K fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and





(b)          the information contained in the Form 10-K fairly presents, in all material respects, the consolidated financial condition and results of operations of the Company and its subsidiaries as of, and for, the periods presented in the Form 10-K.








Date: March 16, 2010
/s/ Joseph L. BolingJoseph L. BolingChairman of the Board and

Chief Executive Officer
§ 22.20 Mistakes and Corrections [Rule 20]. ( a ) *To decisions and orders.* Clerical mistakes in decisions or orders of the Board may be corrected at any time on the Board's own initiative or upon motion of a party, except that if an appeal has been filed with another tribunal, such mistakes may be corrected only with leave of that tribunal.
( b ) *To the official transcript.* Corrections to an official transcript of a hearing will be made only when they involve errors affecting its substance. The Board may order such corrections on motion or on its own initiative and only after notice to the parties giving them an opportunity to object. Such corrections will ordinarily be made either by hand with pen and ink or by the appending of an errata sheet, or the Board may require that the reporter provide substitute or additional pages.
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.3


                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS

We consent to the incorporation by reference into the Registration Statement of
GIANT GROUP, LTD. on Form S-8 (File No. 33-16848) of our report dated March 10,
1995, on our audits of the consolidated financial statements of GIANT GROUP,
LTD. as of December 31, 1994 and for each of the two years in the period ended
December 31, 1994, which report is included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.



COOPERS & LYBRAND L.L.P.



Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
March 27, 1996
### §204. Exclusive jurisdiction ceded to United States by California

Sole and exclusive jurisdiction is assumed by the United States over the territory which is included as of April 26, 1928, or thereafter within the Lassen Volcanic National Park, saving, however, to the State of California the right to serve civil or criminal process within the limits of the aforesaid park in suits or prosecutions for or on account of rights acquired, obligations incurred, or crimes committed in said State outside of said park; and saving further to the said State the right to tax persons and corporations, their franchises and property on the lands included in said park, and the right to fix and collect license fees for fishing in said park; and saving also to the persons residing in said park now, or hereafter, the right to vote at all elections held within the county or counties in which said park is situated. All the laws applicable to places under sole and exclusive jurisdiction of the United States shall have force and effect in said park. All fugitives from justice taking refuge in said park shall be subject to the same laws as refugees from justice found in the State of California.

(Apr. 26, 1928, ch. 438, §1, 45 Stat. 463.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

A provision accepting the act of the California Legislature which ceded to the United States exclusive jurisdiction over the territory referred to in this section has been omitted as executed.
## Breadcrumb

-  Home 
-  Document Search 
-  Protecting The Integrity of The Pandemic Relief Programs 

# Protecting the Integrity of the Pandemic Relief Programs

## About this document and download

In response to the historic threat posed to small businesses by the COVID-19 pandemic, the U.S. Small Business Administration delivered an unprecedented $1.2 trillion in emergency grants and loans over two years. That funding contributed to a historic economic recovery of 21 million lost private sector jobs plus the attainment of 4 million more private sector jobs than ever existed before the pandemic.The surge of funding also invited unprecedented fraud attacks against the agency, which was left vulnerable by missteps that weakened agency defenses in the early months of the pandemic. This report:
                  - Estimates fraud levels in each of the four major SBA relief programs, 86% of which originated in the first nine months of the pandemic.
                  - Describes SBA’s actions under the Biden-Harris Administration to rebuild and strengthen anti-fraud controls within the Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) and the COVID-19 Economic Injury Disaster Loan (EIDL), both of which started in 2020 and continued into 2021. Those actions include the initiation of SBA pre-approval screening for PPP, tax transcript verification for COVID-EIDL, and Treasury Do Not Pay list validation for both.
                  - Details how SBA learned from the mistakes of the 2020 implementation of PPP and COVID-EIDL to design the two major relief programs that launched in 2021 — SVOG and RRF — which both achieved estimated fraud rates of well below 1%.
                  - Supports President Biden’s proposal for $1.6 billion in mandatory funding for law enforcement in pursuit of government-wide pandemic fraud — and provides additional policy recommendations to minimize fraud in future small business emergency relief programs.

  Download  .pdf

**Effective**

**Related Programs**    Related programs:
46°

age

40°

38°

86° 84°

82° 80°

74°

Structural front—Dashed where inferred

Structural discontinuity—Dashed where inferred

Hinge zone
Kimberlite

| | |

1
| BOWLING crew |
| FAULT ZONE AND |

GRENVILLE FRONT,

a
tL

\

\

-t------

TT

Lackawanna syncline \ .
\

Rome trough \ /

”  CLARENDON-LINDEN
Vv FAULT ZONE

, —*39 Joo
S \ \
is 2.0 92.0 7
20 Nee
i r|

L}

Bradford 1

te
/

Raa Sullivan

\

\

15 |

i N°
MIDDLETOWN °1.

- Paul

°1.5 [CAMBRIDGE
TRUCTURAL
DISCONTINUITY

N \

<> STRUCTURAL
FRONT

p ALLEGHENY —\ (2

25

50

a T f RT T T T T ~
h x . ee
| _ EXPLANATION _ aaa \,
! <L _L[— Je /
| +15 Location and value of Ordovician CAlmax sample (this Mesozoic basins fa Te >
LS report)—al, allochthonous strata; au, autochthonous strata NN 1 \ a i j i ae
. Location of Ordovician CAlmax sample—Data from Harris and Blue Ridge Drovince \ 3 \ ~ ~ a! c
others (1978) \ \ 1 yi es ~ é
1 The senior author has assigned a CAI value of 1.5 to 2.0 for the Great Valley (Pa., Md.) and Shenandoah Valley (Va., W. Va.) \ e ie als SK
Trenton Limestone in this well i f 1 \) J Le
02 The CAI value of 3.0 is from the Beekmantown Dolomite about M. burg F \ - f ) AN \
1,500 to 2,000 ft below the Trenton Limestone in this well artinsburg Foripation \ a Vey a v
(No. 8610T James) \ \ \\ o> \
03 The senior author has assigned a CAI value of 3.5 to 4.0 for the Hamburg Sequence \ \ ive f _
Trenton Limestone at this outcrop location \ a 4 7 {
Ordovician CAlmax isograd (this report)—Dashed where inferred; Valley and Ridge viovince an . ie i
hachured to indicate isograd depression \ \ T Adirondack an) cos
———— Ordovician CAlmax isograd—Data from Harris and others (1978) Eocene intrusive rocks \ oy » Mou ntain S| \ rf ~
————— 12,000-ft isopach for Middle Ordovician to Permian strata— \ aan \
Data from Harris and others (1978) Scranton gravity ah >
—~———~_ Thrust fault—Sawteeth on upper plate Henderson dome \ \
Fault—Dashed where inferred; BSF, Burning Springs fault; HF, \
Highlandtown fault yy \

75 100 MILES
J

carey

50

T
100

T
150 KILOMETERS

44°

36°

80° 78°

Figure 5.—Ordovician conodont color alteration index (CAlmax) isograds superimposed on selected structural features and provinces.

Tae
§ 302.1 Public and private sector comment procedures. ( a ) Any interested party having any comment concerning the business operations of Federal Prison Industries, Inc. (UNICOR) may write to the Chief Operating Officer of UNICOR, or to the Chairman of the Board of Directors of UNICOR, and bring such matters to the attention of either or both officials. Where appropriate, a response shall promptly be made. The Board shall be kept advised of all comments and responses.
( b ) Address correspondence as follows: ( 1 ) Chief Operating Officer, Federal Prison Industries, Inc., 320 First Street, NW., Washington, DC 20534, Attn: Comment Procedures; or
( 2 ) Board of Directors, Federal Prison Industries, Inc., 320 First Street, NW., Washington, DC 20534, Attn: Comment Procedures.
( c ) This section does not apply to inmate complaints which are properly raised through the procedures provided in the Bureau of Prisons' rule on Administrative Remedy (28 CFR part 42).
[55 FR 30668, July 26, 1990, as amended at 69 FR 1524, Jan. 9, 2004]
<PAGE>

                                                                     EXHIBIT 2.4

                       CERTIFICATE OF OWNERSHIP AND MERGER
               MERGING KCC DELAWARE COMPANY INTO GIANT GROUP, LTD.

                     (PURSUANT TO SECTION 253 OF THE GENERAL
                          CORPORATION LAW OF DELAWARE)

GIANT GROUP, LTD. a Delaware corporation (the "Corporation"), does hereby
certify:

FIRST: That the Corporation is incorporated pursuant to the General Corporation
Law of the State of Delaware.

SECOND: That the Corporation owns all of the outstanding shares of each class of
the capital stock of KCC DELAWARE COMPANY, a Delaware corporation.

THIRD: That the Corporation, by the resolutions of its Board of Directors (see
Exhibit 2.4.1), which are duly adopted by unanimous written consent pursuant to
Section 141(f) of the Delaware General Corporation Law dated December 17, 2002,
determined to merge into itself KCC DELAWARE COMPANY on the conditions set forth
in such resolutions.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Corporation has caused this certificate to be signed by
its authorized officer, this 17th day of December 2002.


GIANT GROUP, LTD.


By: /s/ Burt Sugarman
   --------------------
Name:  Burt Sugarman
Title: Chief Executive Officer


By: /s/ Pasquale A. Ambrogio
   ---------------------------
Name:  Pasquale A. Ambrogio
Title: Chief Financial Officer
May 29, 2015

Mr. Paul Hem, Jr. Block Communications, Inc 7829 Hedingham Road Sylvania, OH 43560

Dear Hem, Jr.:

This letter is to inform you that we are unable to process your request for an exemption. It explains why we can not process your request and what you should do in the next 30 days.

Why We Can Not Process Your Request

We entered your April 23, 2015, exemption request on behalf into the public docket (No. FAA-2015-1168), but we are unable to pr ocess your request any further. The information you sent does not comply with the requirements of § 11.81 (copy enclosed). For us to consider the request any further, you must send us all of the following:

 The specific section or sections of 14 CFR from which you seek relief, the extent of the relief you seek, and the reason you seek relief.

 The reasons why granting the request would be in the public interest; that is, how it would benefit the public as a whole.

 The reasons why the exemption would not adversely affect safety or how the exemption would provide a level of safety at least equal to that provided by the rule from which you seek an exemption.

 Any additional information, views, or arguments available to support your request.

What You Should Do

If you want us to process your request any further, you must send the information described earlier to reach us within 30 days. Please note that § 11.63(d) requires you to send your petition for exemption at least 120 days before the proposed effective date of the exemption.2

If We Do Not Hear From You

If we do not hear from you within 30 days, we will close the docket without notifying you further. If you have any questions or require additional time, you may call (202) 267-9677.

Sincerely,

/s/

Brenda Robeson Program Analyst, Airmen and Airspace Rules Division

Enclosure
Exhibit 32.1



Certification



Pursuant to Section 1350 of Title 18 of the United States Code, the undersigned hereby certifies that:

(1) I have reviewed the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Inland Monthly Income Fund II, L.P. (the "Report") to which this statement is an Exhibit;

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

(3) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Inland Monthly Income Fund II, L.P.



|By:    | Inland Real Estate Investment Corporation                        
|------ | -----------------------------------------------------------------
|       | General Partner                                                  
|       |                                                                  
|       |                                                                  
|       | /S/ Brenda G. Gujral                                             
|       |                                                                  
|Name:  | Brenda G. Gujral                                                 
|Title: | President of the General Partner and                             
|       | principal executive officer of Inland Monthly Income Fund II, L.P
|Date:  | March 23, 2005