alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### § 725.506 Payment on behalf of another; “legal guardian” defined.

Benefits are paid only to the beneficiary, his or her representative payee (see § 725.510) or his or her legal guardian. As used in this section, “legal guardian” means an individual who has been appointed by a court of competent jurisdiction or otherwise appointed pursuant to law to assume control of and responsibility for the care of the beneficiary, the management of his or her estate, or both.
EXHIBIT 10.20

AMENDMENT NO. 1

TO

EMPLOYMENT LETTER AGREEMENT

This Amendment No. 1 is made effective as of January 28, 2007, and modifies and amends the Employment Letter Agreement dated November 1, 2005 (Agreement) between NewPage
Corporation (Company) and Douglas K. Cooper (Executive). Terms defined in the Agreement have the same meaning when used in this Amendment unless otherwise indicated. For good and valuable
consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is acknowledged, Company and Executive agree as follows:



|1. | Section 2(c) of the Agreement is amended in its entirety to read as follows:
|-- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------

(c) Annual Bonus. For performance periods during the Term, Executive will be entitled to participate in the NewPage Corporation management incentive or bonus plan or plans approved annually by the Board
of Directors of the Company (the Annual Incentive Plan). Executives target bonus will be 45% of Base Salary for achieving targets set annually pursuant to the terms the Annual Incentive Plan. Each annual bonus (Annual
Bonus) will be paid on or before March 15th of the year following the tax year in which the relevant services required for payment have been performed. There will be no cap on the amount of any Annual Bonus.



|2. | Except as modified by this Amendment, the Agreement remains in full force and effect.
|-- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                    |  |                   |  |                      
|------------------- |  | ----------------- |  | ---------------------
|Company:            |  | Executive:       
|NewPage Corporation |  |                  
|                    |  |                  
|By:                 |  | /s/ Mark A. Suwyn |  | /s/ Douglas K. Cooper
|                    |  |                   |  | Douglas K. Cooper    
|Title:              |  | Chairman and CEO  |  |
### §§914, 915. Repealed. Pub. L. 96–465, title II, §2205(1), Oct. 17, 1980, 94 Stat. 2159

Section 914, acts Aug. 13, 1946, ch. 957, title V, §519, 60 Stat. 1008; Aug. 17, 1977, Pub. L. 95–105, title IV, §406, 91 Stat. 854, related to reassignment to Foreign Service of former ambassadors or ministers.

Section 915, acts Aug. 13, 1946, ch. 957, title V, §520, 60 Stat. 1009; Sept. 8, 1960, Pub. L. 86–723, §10, 74 Stat. 832; Sept. 6, 1966, Pub. L. 89–554, §8(a), 80 Stat. 661; July 12, 1976, Pub. L. 94–350, title V, §517, 90 Stat. 845, related to reappointment or recall of Foreign Service officers or employees.

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

#### Effective Date of Repeal

Repeal effective Feb. 15, 1981, except as otherwise provided, see section 2403 of Pub. L. 96–465, set out as an Effective Date note under section 3901 of this title.
null

450.91666
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 84 (Tuesday, May 1, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 25732-25733]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-10409]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

U.S. Customs and Border Protection

[CBP Dec. 12-09]


Tuna--Tariff-Rate Quota; the Tariff-Rate Quota for Calendar Year 
2012 Tuna Classifiable Under Subheading 1604.14.22, Harmonized Tariff 
Schedule of the United States (HTSUS); Correction

AGENCY: U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Department of Homeland 
Security.

ACTION: Announcement of the quota quantity of tuna in airtight 
containers for Calendar Year 2012; correction.

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

SUMMARY: U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) published in the 
Federal Register of April 17, 2012, a document concerning tariff rates 
for tuna in airtight containers for Calendar Year 2012. Inadvertently, 
no CBP Decision Number was listed in the heading of that document. This 
document corrects the April 17, 2012 document to reflect that the CBP 
Decision Number is 12-09 as set forth above.

DATES: Effective Dates: This correction is effective May 1, 2012. The 
2012 tariff- rate quota is applicable to tuna fish entered, or 
withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption during the period January 1, 
through December 31, 2012.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ryan Olden, Regulations and Rulings, 
Office of International Trade, (202) 325-0009.

Correction

    In notice document, FR Doc. 2012-9131, beginning on page 22796 in 
the issue of Tuesday, April 17, 2012, make the following correction in 
the third column:
    Insert ``CBP Dec. 12-09'' into the heading of the document between 
the

[[Page 25733]]

agency name, ``U.S. Customs and Border Protection,'' and the title of 
the document, ``Tuna--Tariff-Rate Quota; the Tariff-Rate Quota for 
Calendar Year 2012 Tuna Classifiable under Subheading 1604.14.22, 
Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS).''

    Dated: April 25, 2012.
Harold M. Singer,
Director, Regulations and Disclosure Law Division, U.S. Customs and 
Border Protection.
[FR Doc. 2012-10409 Filed 4-30-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-14-P
#### Mark WILSON, Plaintiff — Appellant, v. Chuck SULLIVAN, Detective Anaheim Police Department; et al., Defendants — Appellees.

No. 04-56565.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Feb. 13, 2006.*

Decided Feb. 22, 2006.

Mark Wilson, pro se.

Moses W. Johnson, IV, Esq., Anaheim City Attorney’s Office, Anaheim, CA, Patrick J. Hehir, Esq., California Attorney General’s Office, Los Angeles, CA, for Defendants-Appellees.

Before: FERNANDEZ, RYMER, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Mark Wilson appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. We review de novo a dismissal for failure to state a claim. *Knievel v. ESPN,*393 F.3d 1068, 1072 (9th Cir.2005). We review for abuse of discretion a dismissal for failure to timely serve summons and complaint. *Walker v. Sumner,*14 F.3d 1415, 1422 (9th Cir.1994). We affirm.

Wilson alleged, among other things, that an unidentified woman accused him of bothering her on different occasions and defendants Sullivan and Valente were involved in the investigation of the woman’s complaint; although no criminal charges were brought against Wilson, the woman’s complaint resulted in the revocation of Wilson’s parole.

The district court properly dismissed for failure to state a claim Wilson’s section 1983 claims based on alleged malicious prosecution because Wilson could not allege “favorable termination”; he conceded that his parole was revoked based on the unidentified woman’s complaints. *See Awabdy v. City of Adelanto,*368 F.3d *2481062, 1068 (9th Cir.2004) (“An individual seeking to bring a malicious prosecution claim must generally establish that the prior proceedings terminated in such a manner as to indicate his innocence.”).

We are not persuaded by Wilson’s contention that the district court abused its discretion by considering the police reports submitted by defendant Sullivan. *See Knievel,*393 F.3d at 1076.

The district court also properly concluded that Wilson failed to state constitutional claims against defendants Sullivan and Valente related to the parole revocation hearing process or against Valente for alleged mail tampering.

The district court also did not abuse its discretion by dismissing without prejudice the claims against Doe defendants because Wilson did not effect service within 120 days. *See*Fed.R.Civ.P. 4(m).

Wilson’s remaining contentions are not persuasive.

We grant defendant Valente’s motion to strike documents that were not part of the district court record. *See Kirshner v. Uniden Corp. of America,*842 F.2d 1074, 1077 (9th Cir.1988).

AFFIRMED

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
§ 702.407 Supervision of medical care. The Director, OWCP, through the district directors and their designees, shall actively supervise the medical care of an injured employee covered by the Act. Such supervision shall include: ( a ) The requirement that periodic reports on the medical care being rendered be filed in the office of the district director, the frequency thereof being determined by order of the district director or sound judgment of the attending physician as the nature of the injury may dictate;
( b ) The determination of the necessity, character and sufficiency of any medical care furnished or to be furnished the employee, including whether the charges made by any medical care provider exceed those permitted under the Act;
( c ) The determination of whether a change of physicians, hospitals or other persons or locales providing treatment should be made or is necessary;
( d ) The further evaluation of medical questions arising in any case under the Act, with respect to the nature and extent of the covered injury, and the medical care required therefor.
[38 FR 26861, Sept. 26, 1973, as amended at 50 FR 402, Jan. 3, 1985]
§ 422.106 Filing applications with other government agencies. ( a ) *Agreements.* In carrying out its responsibilities to assign social security numbers, SSA enters into agreements with the United States Attorney General, other Federal officials, and State and local welfare agencies. An example of these agreements is discussed in paragraph (b) of this section.
( b ) *States.* SSA and a State may enter into an agreement that authorizes employees of a State or one of its subdivisions to accept social security number card applications from some individuals who apply for or are receiving welfare benefits under a State-administered Federal program. Under such an agreement, a State employee is also authorized to certify the application to show that he or she has reviewed the required evidence of the applicant's age, identity, and U.S. citizenship. The employee is also authorized to obtain evidence to assist SSA in determining whether the applicant has previously been assigned a number. The employee will then send the application to SSA which will issue a social security number card.
[55 FR 46665, Nov. 6, 1990, as amended at 63 FR 56555, Oct. 22, 1998]
(No. 74-CC-807

#### Mobil Oil Corporation, Claimant, *vs.*State of Illinois, Attorney General’s Office, Respondent.

*Opinion filed June 27, 1974.*

Giffin, Winning, Linder, Newkirk, Cohen, Bodewes & Narmoct, Attorney for Claimant.

William J. Scott, Attorney General; Howard W. Feldman, Assistant Attorney General, for Respondent.

*511Per Curiam.
§ 661.210 Under what circumstances may the Governor select an alternative entity in place of the State Workforce Investment Board? ( a ) The State may use any State entity that meets the requirements of WIA section 111(e) to perform the functions of the State Board.
( b ) If the State uses an alternative entity, the State workforce investment plan must demonstrate that the alternative entity meets all three of the requirements of WIA section 111(e). Section 111(e) requires that such entity: ( 1 ) Was in existence on December 31, 1997;
( 2 ) ( i ) Was established under section 122 (relating to State Job Training Coordinating Councils) or title VII (relating to State Human Resource Investment Councils) of the Job Training Partnership Act (29 U.S.C.1501 *et seq.*), as in effect on December 31, 1997, or
( ii ) Is substantially similar to the State Board described in WIA section 111(a), (b), and (c) and § 661.200; and
( 3 ) Includes, at a minimum, two or more representatives of business in the State and two or more representatives of labor organizations in the State.
( c ) If the alternative entity does not provide for representative membership of each of the categories of required State Board membership under WIA section 111(b), the State Plan must explain the manner in which the State will ensure an ongoing role for any unrepresented membership group in the workforce investment system. The State Board may maintain an ongoing role for an unrepresented membership group, including entities carrying out One-stop partner programs, by means such as regularly scheduled consultations with entities within the unrepresented membership groups, by providing an opportunity for input into the State Plan or other policy development by unrepresented membership groups, or by establishing an advisory committee of unrepresented membership groups.
( d ) If the membership structure of the alternative entity is significantly changed after December 31, 1997, the entity will no longer be eligible to perform the functions of the State Board. In such case, the Governor must establish a new State Board which meets all of the criteria of WIA section 111(b).
( e ) A significant change in the membership structure includes any significant change in the organization of the alternative entity or in the categories of entities represented on the alternative entity which requires a change to the alternative entity's charter or a similar document that defines the formal organization of the alternative entity, regardless of whether the required change to the document has or has not been made. A significant change in the membership structure is considered to have occurred when members are added to represent groups not previously represented on the entity. A significant change in the membership structure is not considered to have occurred when additional members are added to an existing membership category, when non-voting members are added, or when a member is added to fill a vacancy created in an existing membership category.
( f ) In 20 CFR parts 660 through 671, all references to the State Board also apply to an alternative entity used by a State.
#### Louisiana Construction Corp., Respondent, v. Cortland Bay Shore Corporation, Appellant. (Action No. 1.) Ralph M. Lauer, Appellant, v. Benjamin L. Marvin et al., Respondents. (Action No. 2.)

— Motion for reargument denied, with $10 costs. Motion for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals denied. Present — Lewis, P. J., Carswell, Adel and Sneed, JJ.; Wenzel, J., not voting. [See *ante,*p. 871.]
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

Solely for the purpose of Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, and
solely to the extent this certification is applicable to Amendment No. 1 to the
Quarterly Report of Warrantech Corporation (the "Company") on Form 10-Q (the
"Report"), the undersigned hereby certify that this Report fully complies with
the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 and that the information contained in this Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.


     Date: November 16, 2004           /s/ Joel San Antonio
                                       --------------------
                                       Joel San Antonio
                                       Chairman, Chief Executive Officer
                                       and Director

     Date: November 16, 2004           /s/ Richard Gavino
                                       ------------------
                                       Richard Gavino
                                       Executive Vice President, Chief
                                       Financial Officer, Chief Accounting
                                       Officer, and Treasurer
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

DAY ELEV

 831.09

 831.16

 831.22

 831.30

 831.38

 831.45

 831.52

 831.66

 832.01

 832.98

 833.98

 834.00

 834.43

 834.40

 834.04

 834.09

 834.02

 834.50

 834.92

 835.28

 835.61

 835.97

 835.95

 835.82

 835.78

 836.30

 836.58

 836.77

 38.41

 38.49

 38.56

 38.65

 38.74

 38.82

 38.90

 39.05

 39.45

 40.56

 41.72

 41.74

 42.25

 42.21

 41.79

 41.85

 41.77

 42.33

 42.83

 43.26

 43.65

 44.08

 44.06

 43.90

 43.86

 44.49

 44.83

 45.06

STORAGE

+0.07

+0.08

+0.07

+0.09

+0.09

+0.08

+0.08

+0.16

+0.39

+1.11

+1.16

+0.02

+0.51

-0.04

-0.43

+0.06

-0.08

+0.57

+0.50

+0.43

+0.40

+0.43

-0.02

-0.16

-0.05

+0.63

+0.34

+0.23

CHANGE

67

73

67

78

79

72

74

112

228

1,055

2,803

1,691

961

644

447

377

308

323

275

241

220

541

319

262

317

660

514

457

INFLOW

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 1,589

 1,047

 76

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

SPILL

 12

 12

 12

 12

 12

 12

 12

 9

 9

 475

 628

 628

 628

 640

 640

 326

 326

 15

 0

 0

 0

 300

 306

 319

 320

 320

 320

 320

OUTLET

 1

 1

 1

 1

 2

 1

 2

 3

 1

 0

 0

 4

 1

 2

 1

 1

 3

 3

 5

 4

 1

 3

 5

 2

 1

 3

 3

 1

C.F.S.

 .04

 .02

 .03

 .03

 .05

 .02

 .06

 .08

 .04

 .00

 .00

 .11

 .02

 .05

 .04

 .04

 .07

 .08

 .12

 .11

 .02

 .08

 .12

 .06

 .03

 .08

 .08

 .03

INCHES

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .63

 1.10

 1.03

 .54

 .00

 .18

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .13

 .00

 .00

 .33

 .02

 .02

 .00

PRECIP

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

FEBRUARY 2007 RUN DATE: 03/09/2007

IN LAKE

EVAPORATION

INCHES

C.F.S.

COMPUTED*

1000 ACRE-FEET

RELEASE - C.F.S.

TOTALS +6.72 13,265 6,613 3,212 56 1.51 3.98

ACRE-FEET +6,720 26,311 13,117 6,371 111

COMMENTS:

* COMPUTED INFLOW IS THE SUM OF CHANGE IN STORAGE, RELEASES AND EVAPORATION.

SUMMARY

RELEASE (ACRE-FEET)

SPILL 6,371

OUTLET

TOTAL

 13,117

 19,488

PRECIPITATION

THIS MONTH =

TO DATE =

 3.98

JULY 1, 2006 9.18

 38.35

STONY GORGE RESERVOIR DAILY OPERATIONS
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

DAY

 2,634

 2,163

 1,925

 2,529

 2,660

 2,722

 2,171

 2,454

 2,299

 2,377

 1,502

 2,231

 2,304

 2,055

 2,724

 3,530

 1,995

 2,767

 2,011

 3,578

 3,750

 6,161

 4,840

 13,564

 10,789

 6,330

 5,600

 5,170

 5,481

 4,206

 2,869

 95,000

 92,752

 90,170

 87,490

 85,518

 83,769

 82,166

 80,121

 78,446

 76,708

 75,130

 72,801

 71,280

 69,905

 68,362

 67,532

 67,509

 66,028

 65,356

 63,998

 64,197

 64,550

 67,176

 68,415

 77,880

 84,235

 86,037

 87,055

 87,614

 88,440

 88,014

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

U.S. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION-CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT-CALIFORNIA

OCTOBER 2021 SHASTA LAKE FLOOD CONTROL REQUIREMENTS RUN DATE: November 18, 2021

 97,634

 94,915

 92,095

 90,019

 88,178

 86,491

 84,337

 82,575

 80,745

 79,085

 76,632

 75,032

 73,584

 71,960

 71,086

 71,062

 69,504

 68,795

 67,367

 67,576

 67,947

 70,711

 72,016

 81,979

 88,669

 90,565

 91,637

 92,225

 93,095

 92,646

 90,883

 4,531,000

 4,509,000

 4,488,000

 4,467,000

 4,445,000

 4,424,000

 4,403,000

 4,382,000

 4,360,000

 4,339,000

 4,318,000

 4,296,000

 4,275,000

 4,254,000

 4,232,000

 4,211,000

 4,190,000

 4,168,000

 4,147,000

 4,126,000

 4,104,000

 4,083,000

 4,062,000

 4,041,000

 4,019,000

 3,998,000

 3,977,000

 3,955,000

 3,934,000

 3,913,000

 3,891,000

 SHASTA

 INFLOW 

C. F. S. 

 PREV DAY

 F. C. PAR 

 (COL 3) 

 X .95 

 F. C. 

 PARAM 

 (COLS. 

 1 + 2 ) 

 .0356* 

 X DAYS 

 12/23 THRU

3/20 

 530,000

 MINUS 

 F. C. 

 PARAM

 (COL 3)

 COLS 

 4 X 5 

 F. C. 

 RESERV 

 (1,300,000 

 - COL 6 ) 

 MINUS 

 14,943 

 PER DAY 

 AFTER 

 3/20 

 ADJUSTED 

 F. C. 

 RESERV 

 (7-8) 

 PERM 

 STORAGE 

 COMMENTS:

 * LEAP YEAR CONSTANT = .0352 

 CONSTANT .0356 = 1,300,000 / (TOTAL DAYS X (530,000 - 110,000 ) )

 IF COL 3 IS GREATER THAN 530,000 OR LESS THAN 110,000 USE THOSE VALUES FOR COL 3 INSTEAD OF THE COMPUTED VALUE. 

 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 

 100,000
### §§281 to 282. Repealed. Pub. L. 93–43, §7(a)(6), (8), (10)–(12), (60), June 18, 1973, 87 Stat. 82, 88

Section 281, acts May 14, 1948, ch. 289, §1, 62 Stat. 234; Sept. 14, 1959, Pub. L. 86–260, 73 Stat. 547, enumerated classes of persons eligible for burial in national cemeteries and provided for removal of remains. See section 2402 of Title 38, Veterans' Benefits.

Section 281a, act Aug. 4, 1947, ch. 467, §1, 61 Stat. 742, provided for utilization of surplus military real property for cemeteries.

Section 281b, act Aug. 4, 1947, ch. 467, §2, 61 Stat. 742, related to utilization of surplus military real property for expansion of existing cemeteries and limited the expanded national cemetery area to six hundred and forty acres.

Section 281c, act Aug. 4, 1947, ch. 467, §3, 61 Stat. 742, authorized regulations respecting utilization of surplus military real property for cemeteries.

Section 281d, act Mar. 10, 1950, ch. 52, §1, 64 Stat. 12, related to utilization of surplus military real property for cemeteries at Fort Logan, Colo.

Section 281e, act Mar. 10, 1950, ch. 52, §2, 64 Stat. 12, provided for selection of lands, care and maintenance, and limitation of area of national cemetery at Fort Logan, Colo.

Section 281f, act Mar. 10, 1950, ch. 52, §3, 64 Stat. 12, authorized Secretary of the Army to prescribe rules and regulations for administration of national cemetery at Fort Logan, Colo.

Section 281g, act Aug. 10, 1950, ch. 672, §§1, 2, 64 Stat. 434, provided for expansion of existing cemeteries at Rock Island National Cemetery, Rock Island, Illinois, Fort Leavenworth, National Cemetery, Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, and Barrancas National Cemetery, near Pensacola, Florida.

Section 282, act Aug. 24, 1912, ch. 355, §1, 37 Stat. 440, provided for burial of Confederate veterans.

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

#### Effective Date of Repeal

Repeal effective Sept. 1, 1973, or such earlier date as the President may prescribe and publish in the Federal Register, see section 10(c) of Pub. L. 93–43, set out as a note under section 2306 of Title 38, Veterans' Benefits.

#### Matured Rights and Duties, Incurred Penalties, Liabilities, and Forfeitures, and Commenced Proceedings Excepted in Repeal of National Cemeteries Provisions

Provisions repealed except with respect to rights and duties matured, penalties, liabilities, and forfeitures that were incurred, and proceedings that were begun before effective date of section 7 of Pub. L. 93–43, see section 7(a) of Pub. L. 93–43, set out as a note under sections 271 to 276 of this title.