alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 3809.596 How does BLM initiate forfeiture of my financial guarantee? When BLM decides to require the forfeiture of all or part of your financial guarantee, BLM will notify you (the operator or mining claimant) by certified mail, return receipt requested; the surety on the financial guarantee, if any; and the State agency holding the financial guarantee, if any, informing you and them of the following: ( a ) BLM's decision to require the forfeiture of all or part of the financial guarantee;
( b ) The reasons for the forfeiture;
( c ) The amount that you will forfeit based on the estimated total cost of achieving the reclamation plan requirements for the project area or portion of the project area affected, including BLM's administrative costs; and
( d ) How you may avoid forfeiture, including— ( 1 ) Providing a written agreement under which you or another person will perform reclamation operations in accordance with a compliance schedule which meets the conditions of your notice or your approved plan of operations and the reclamation plan, and a demonstration that such other person has the ability to satisfy the conditions; and
( 2 ) Obtaining written permission from BLM for a surety to complete the reclamation, or the portion of the reclamation applicable to the bonded phase or increment, if the surety can demonstrate an ability to complete the reclamation in accordance with the reclamation measures incorporated in your notice or approved plan of operations.
Exhibit 4.2



AMENDMENT NO. 1

TO THE AMENDED AND RESTATED
INVESTMENT AGREEMENT



THIS AMENDMENT NO. 1 to the Amended and
Restated Investment Agreement, dated as of September 4, 2001, is made as of October 31, 2002 between Kookmin Bank (the Bank) and Goldman Sachs Capital Koryo, L.P. (Koryo).



WHEREAS, the parties entered into an Amended and Restated Investment
Agreement, dated as of September 4, 2001 (the Agreement); and



WHEREAS, the Bank and Koryo desire to enter into this Amendment No. 1 to the Agreement (Amendment No. 1), pursuant to Section 7.06 of the Agreement in order to eliminate certain provisions therein;



NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and
agreements contained herein, the parties agree as follows:



1.    From and after the date hereof, Sections 2.01, 2.02, 3.01, 3.02, 4.01, 4.02, 4.03, 4.04, 4.05, 6.01, 6.04, 6.05, 7.02 and Exhibit A of the Agreement shall be deleted in their entirety and shall cease to apply.



2.    This Amendment No. 1 shall be
governed by the laws of the State of New York and Article VII of the Agreement is incorporated herein mutatis mutandis. Except as expressly set forth in this Amendment No. 1, the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect and no rights
or remedies shall be deemed waived.



3.    This Amendment No. 1 may be executed in one or more counterparts, each such counterpart being deemed an original by the parties executing such counterpart, and all of which shall be considered one and the same
instrument.



IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Amendment No. 1 has been
signed on behalf of each of the parties hereto as of the date first written above.



GOLDMAN SACHS CAPITAL KORYO, L.P.By:

Goldman Sachs Capital Koryo Gen Par,L.L.C., its General Partner






By:Name:

Ji Hong MinTitle:

Attorney-in-Fact






KOOKMIN BANKBy:Name:

Jong-Kyoo YoonTitle:

Executive Vice President
J. 

J. 

MIMMIRM :WitZMICIENASS 

is reasonably susceptible to more than one interpretation" (internal 

quotations omitted)). Further, to the extent that the transcript attached 

to the divorce decree was inconsistent with the unambiguous terms of the 

decree, the district court properly declined to consider the transcript to 

interpret the provision. 1 See Kishner v. Kishner, 93 Nev. 220, 225, 562 

P.2d 493, 496 (1977) (noting that the district court may not construe a 

decree that is not ambiguous). Accordingly, we 

ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED. 

ett.AA. 

Parraguirre 

C641. 

Cherry 

cc: Hon. Charles J. Hoskin, District Judge, Family Court Division 

Lansford W. Levitt, Settlement Judge 

Mills & Mills 

Renee Schmidt 

Eighth District Court Clerk 

'We decline to consider appellant's argument that the transcript was 

incorporated into the divorce decree pursuant to NRS 123.080, as 

appellant failed to raise that argument before the district court. See State 

Bd. of Equalization v. Barta, 124 Nev. 612, 621, 188 P.3d 1092, 1098 

(2008) (providing that "this court generally will not consider arguments 

that a party raises for the first time on appeal"). 

SUPREME COURT 

OF 

NEVADA 

(0) 1947A 

2
### §5722. Reports

Every manufacturer or importer of tobacco products, processed tobacco, or cigarette papers and tubes, and every export warehouse proprietor, shall make reports containing such information, in such form, at such times, and for such periods as the Secretary shall by regulation prescribe.

(Aug. 16, 1954, ch. 736, 68A Stat. 713; Pub. L. 85–859, title II, §202, Sept. 2, 1958, 72 Stat. 1422; Pub. L. 94–455, title XIX, §1906(b)(13)(A), Oct. 4, 1976, 90 Stat. 1834; Pub. L. 105–33, title IX, §9302(h)(2)(A), Aug. 5, 1997, 111 Stat. 674; Pub. L. 111–3, title VII, §702(a)(2)(B), Feb. 4, 2009, 123 Stat. 108.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

2009—Pub. L. 111–3 inserted ", processed tobacco," after "tobacco products".

1997—Pub. L. 105–33 inserted "or importer" after "manufacturer".

1976—Pub. L. 94–455 struck out "or his delegate" after "Secretary".

1958—Pub. L. 85–859 substituted "manufacturer of tobacco products or cigarette papers and tubes, and every export warehouse proprietor" for "manufacturer of articles".

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

#### Effective Date of 2009 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 111–3 effective Apr. 1, 2009, see section 702(a)(6) of Pub. L. 111–3, set out as a note under section 5702 of this title.

#### Effective Date of 1997 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 105–33 applicable to articles removed, as defined in section 5702(j) of this title, after Dec. 31, 1999, with transition rule, see section 9302(i) of Pub. L. 105–33, set out as a note under section 5701 of this title.

#### Effective Date of 1958 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 85–859 effective Sept. 3, 1958, see section 210(a)(1) of Pub. L. 85–859, set out as an Effective Date note under section 5001 of this title.
Exhibit 10.4


 


Newbury Street Acquisition Corporation





8 Newbury Street





Boston, MA 02116


 


March 22, 2021


 


Newbury Street Acquisition Sponsor LLC





8 Newbury Street





Boston, MA 02116


 


Ladies and Gentlemen:


 


This letter will confirm our
agreement that, commencing on the effective date (the “Effective Date”) of the registration statement (the “Registration
Statement”) for the initial public offering of the securities (the “IPO”) of Newbury Street Acquisition
Corporation (the “Company”) and continuing until the earlier of (i) the consummation by the Company of
an initial business combination or (ii) the Company’s liquidation (in each case as described in the Registration Statement)
(such earlier date hereinafter referred to as the “Termination Date”), Newbury Street Acquisition Sponsor LLC
(the “Sponsor”) shall make available to the Company certain office space, utilities and secretarial support
as may be required by the Company from time to time, situated at 8 Newbury Street, Boston, MA 02116 (or any successor location). In exchange
therefore, the Company shall pay the Sponsor the sum of $10,000 per month on the Effective Date and continuing monthly thereafter until
the Termination Date. The Sponsor hereby agrees that it does not have any right, title, interest or claim of any kind in or to any monies
that may be set aside in a trust account (the “Trust Account”) to be established upon the consummation of the
IPO (the “Claim”) and hereby waives any Claim it may have in the future as a result of, or arising out of, any
negotiations, contracts or agreements with the Company and will not seek recourse against the Trust Account for any reason whatsoever.


 


[Signature Page Follows]


 









     


     


    

 


 


	 	
    Very truly yours,

     

    Newbury Street Acquisition Corporation

	 	 
	 	 
	 	By:	/s/ Thomas Bushey
	 	 	Name:	Thomas Bushey
	 	 	Title:	Chief Executive Officer 


 


	AGREED TO AND ACCEPTED BY:
	 
	Newbury Street Acquisition Sponsor LLC
	 	 	 
	By:	/s/ Kenneth King	 
	 	Name: Kenneth King	 
	 	Title: Authorized Person	 


 


[Signature Page to Administrative Services
Agreement]
#### § 3809.421 Enforcement of performance standards.

Failure of the operator to prevent unnecessary or undue degradation or to complete reclamation to the standards described in this subpart may cause the operator to be subject to enforcement as described in §§ 3809.600 through 3809. 605 of this subpart.

[66 FR 54862, Oct. 30, 2001]
Exhibit 4.364

 

/Emblem of the Russian Federation/

 

FEDERAL SERVICE FOR SUPERVISION IN THE SPHERE OF COMMUNICATIONS, INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY AND MASS MEDIA

 

LICENSE

 

No. 158710 dated July 28, 2016

 

For Rendering

 

Telecommunication services for Cable Broadcasting

 

This License is granted to

 

Limited Liability Company

 

Pervoe Cifrovoe Televidenie (Zelenaya Tochka Group)

 

Primary State Registration Number of a Legal Entity 
 (Individual Entrepreneur) (OGRN, OGRNIP)

 

1062635112858

 

Tax Identification Number (TIN)

 

2634070361

 











 

Location address (place of residence):

 

56 r., 280, Lenina str., Stavropol, Stavropol region, 355035

 

The territory covered by telecommunications services is specified in the Appendix.

 

This License is granted for a term:

 

until July 28, 2021.

 

This License is granted by decision of the licensing body - Order dated September 27, 2017 No. 589-рчс

 

Appendix being an integral part of this license is executed on 2 sheets.

 

	
Deputy Head
    	
/signature/ O.A.   Ivanov
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
Stamp here
    	
 
    
	
Official   seal:
    	
 
    
	
MINISTRY OF TELECOM AND   MASS
   COMMUNICATIONS
    	
 
    
	
OF THE RUSSIAN   FEDERATION
    	
 
    
	
FEDERAL SERVICE FOR   SUPERVISION
   IN THE SPHERE
    	
 
    
	
OF   COMMUNICATIONS, INFORMATION
   TECHNOLOGY
    	
 
    
	
AND MASS MEDIA
    	
 
    
	
PSRN 1087746736296
    	
 
    


 

CN 095850
§ 423.39 Standards for vessels. ( a ) All vessels on Reclamation waters must: ( 1 ) Be constructed and maintained in compliance with the standards and requirements established by, or promulgated under, Title 46 United States Code, and any applicable State and local laws and regulations;
( 2 ) Have safety equipment, including personal flotation devices, on board in compliance with U.S. Coast Guard boating safety requirements and in compliance with applicable State and local boating safety laws and regulations; and
( 3 ) If motorized, have and utilize a proper and effective exhaust muffler as defined by applicable State and local laws. Actions or devices which render exhaust mufflers ineffective are prohibited.
( b ) Owners or operators of vessels not in compliance with this § 423.39 may be required to remove the vessel immediately from Reclamation waterbodies until items of non-compliance are corrected.
1

Jeng, Terry

From: Law, Preston

Sent: Friday, November 13, 2015 1:24 PM

To: ATroutwine@Polsinelli.com

Subject: NPL Listing Inquiry for Iowa-Nebraska Light and Power Co

Attachments: Fw: Centel/Norfolk FMGP Site

Mr. Troutwine,

My name is Preston Law and I serve as the National Priorities List (NPL) Coordinator in Region 7. Since we are in the 60‐

day comment period for the proposed NPL listing, I will respond to your e‐mail sent to Barbara Peterson on 11/10/2015

(see attached).

The Voluntary Cleanup Program (VCP) is a state led program. Processes involving the VCP should be discussed with the

state. Once the state notifies Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) of a successful enrollment into the VCP,  EPA will

take it under consideration. Until that time,  EPA will proceed with the NPL listing process.

Thanks,  

Preston Law

Remedial Project Manager  

USEPA‐R7 SUPR/SPEB

11201 Renner Blvd

Lenexa, KS 66219

(913) 551‐7097
#### F. Leon Percippe, Respondent, v. Elias Stewart Manee and Another, Appellants.

Judgment and order reversed and new trial ordered, with costs to appellants to abide event, unless plaintiff stipulates to reduce verdict.to $500, in which event, judgment as so modified and order affirmed, without costs. Ho opinion. Order to be settled on notice. Present — Ingraham, P. J., McLaughlin, Laughlin, Dowling and Hotchkiss, JJ.
BEFORE THE

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

WASHINGTON, D.C.

APPLICATION OF: )

)

SOUTHER AIR CHARTER CO., LTD ) Docket – OST – 2010 – 0027

)

FOR EXEMPTION PURSUANT TO )

49 U.S.C. §40109(c) )

____________________________________)

CER TIFICATE OF SERVICE

Pursuant to the request of the U.S. Department of Transportation, Office of the

Secretary of Transportation a copy of the Application of Southern Air Charter Co., Ltd

for Exemption Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. §40109 is being served on Thomas A. Gillies at

Southern Air, Inc. this _8 th _ day of March, 2010.

Respectfully submitted,

McDONALD, TINKER, SKAER,

QUINN & HERRINGTON, P.A.

300 W. Douglas, Suite 500

Wichita, Kansas 67202

(316) 263

- 5851

(316) 263

- 4677 fax

By :

___ s/ Kevin M. McMaster

__ ________

Counsel for Southern Air Charter Co., LTD2 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on this _ 8 th _ day of March , 2010 a true and accurate copy of

the above and forgoing was served , by electronic transmission, addressed to :

Mr. Thomas A. G illies

Southern Air, Inc.

tgilllies@southernair.com

___ s/ Kevin M. McMaster

__________
**Exhibit31.1**

**CERTIFICATIONOF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICERPURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

I, Michael N. Chang,certify that:

1. I have reviewed this annualreport on Form 10-K of Optimer Pharmaceuticals, Inc.;

2. Based on my knowledge,this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit tostate a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading withrespect to the period covered by this report;

3. Based on my knowledge,the financial statements, and other financial information included in thisreport, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition,results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, theperiods presented in this report;

4. The registrant’s othercertifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintainingdisclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange ActRules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

a)     designed such disclosure controls andprocedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designedunder our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to theregistrant, including any consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us byothers within those entities, particularly during the period in which thisreport is being prepared;

b)    evaluated the effectiveness of theregistrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this reportour conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and

c)    disclosed in this report any change in theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during theregistrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarterin the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonablylikely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting; and

5. The registrant’s othercertifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation ofinternal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and theaudit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performingthe equivalent functions):

a)    allsignificant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely toadversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize andreport financial information; and

b)    any fraud,whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have asignificant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.

Date: March 29, 2007 
| /s/ Michael N. Chang                  |   |
|---------------------------------------|--------|
| Michael N. Chang                      |
| President and Chief Executive Officer |

 

 

----
§ 4.356 Appeals. ( a ) A party aggrieved by a final order of an administrative judge under § 4.352, or by a final order upon reconsideration of an administrative judge under § 4.354, may appeal to the Board. A copy of the notice of appeal must also be sent to the Project Director and to the administrative judge whose decision is being appealed.
( b ) The notice of appeal must be filed with the Board no later than thirty (30) days from the date on which the final order of the administrative judge was mailed, or, if there has been a petition for reconsideration or rehearing filed, no later than thirty (30) days from the date on which the final order upon reconsideration of the administrative judge was mailed. A notice of appeal that is not timely filed will be dismissed.
( c ) The Project Director shall ensure that the record is expeditiously forwarded to the Board.
( d ) Within thirty (30) days after the notice of appeal is filed, the appellant shall file a statement of the reasons why the final order or final order upon reconsideration is in error. If the Board finds that the appellant has set forth sufficient reasons for questioning the final order or final order upon reconsideration, the Board will issue an order giving all parties in interest an opportunity to respond, following which a decision shall be issued. If the Board finds that the appellant has not set forth sufficient reasons for questioning the final order, the Board may issue a decision on the appeal without further briefing.
( e ) The Board may issue a decision affirming, modifying, or vacating the final order or final order upon reconsideration. A decision on appeal by the Board either affirming or modifying the final order or final order upon reconsideration shall be final for the Department of the Interior. In the event the final order or final order upon reconsideration is vacated, the proceeding shall be remanded to the appropriate administrative judge for reconsideration and/or rehearing.
[56 FR 61383, Dec. 3, 1991, as amended at 67 FR 4368, Jan. 30, 2002; 88 FR 5793, Jan. 30, 2023]
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 95-7220
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus DENNIS LEE ROSE, Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. James C. Turk, District Judge. (CR-89-70-B, CA-94-648-R) Submitted: December 14, 1995 Decided: January 17, 1996 Before ERVIN, Chief Judge, and WIDENER and WILKINS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Dennis Lee Rose, Appellant Pro Se. Julie Marie Campbell, Assistant United States Attorney, Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).* In denying relief on Appellant's motion, the district court granted Appellee's motion to dismiss filed pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6). Where, as in this case, the district court considered matters outside the pleadings, it should have treated the Rule 12(b)(6) motion as a motion for summary judgment. See Gay v. Wall , 761 F.2d 175, 177 (4th Cir. 1985). Any error was harmless because Appellant received the necessary notice pursuant to Roseboro v. Garrison, 528 F.2d 309, 310 (4th Cir. 1975). 2 PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (1988) motion. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. * United States v. Rose , Nos. CR-89-70-B; CA-94-648-R (W.D. Va. May 5, 1995). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
### Subpart C—Nonrecognition of Gain on Rollover of Empowerment Zone Investments

Sec.
1397B.
Nonrecognition of gain on rollover of empowerment zone investments.

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

**2000**—Pub. L. 106–554, §1(a)(7) [title I, §116(a)(3)], Dec. 21, 2000, 114 Stat. 2763, 2763A–602, added subpart C heading and item 1397B. Former subpart C, consisting of sections 1397B and 1397C, redesignated D.
# U.S. DOT’s Small Business Innovation Research Program

 

  										View the list of FY24.2 Award Recommendations  									

#             Learn More About SBIR          

#                   View Our Latest SBIR Funding Opportunities                

#                   Browse Past Solicitations and Awardees                

#                   Search SBIR Frequently Asked Questions                

# Stay Connected

Stay up to date on SBIR news and events and get notified when U.S. DOT’s next SBIR solicitation opens. 

                  Subscribe for Updates                

#                 SBIR Funding              

U.S. DOT’s FY24.2 Phase I Solicitation closed on May 10, 2024.
                                -                        Sign up to be notified when the next U.S. DOT SBIR solicitation opens                     
                                -                        Learn more about U.S. DOT's SBIR program                     
                                -                        Browse past SBIR solicitations and awardees                     
                                -                        Suggest a topic for consideration                     
Learn About SBIR Funding Opportunities

#             Additional Resources          

#                   Research Funding Outside of SBIR                

#                   Search the U.S. DOT Research Hub for Recently Completed Projects                

#                   View Available Resources for Small and Disadvantaged Businesses from OSDBU                

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

**John A. Volpe National Transportation Systems Center**

220 Binney Street, Kendall Square

Cambridge, MA 02142-1093

617-494-2000

Subscribe to email updates
                              - **
                              - **
                              - **
                              - **
                              - **

## About Us

-  About U.S. DOT Volpe Center 
-  Our Team 
-  Careers 
-  Contact Us 

## News & Events

-  News 
-  Events 
-  New Facility 
-  50th Anniversary 

## Technical Areas

-  Our Work 
-  Sponsors 
-  Our Priorities 
-  Thought Leadership 
-  Infographics 

## SBIR

-  Work With Us 
-  Procurement Opportunities 
-  About the SBIR Program 
-  Volpe Project Cost 
-  Technology Transfer 

## Resources

-  Publications 
-  Special Collections 
-  Corporate Publications 

## Policies, Rights, and Legal

-  About DOT 
-  Budget and Performance 
-  Civil Rights 
-  Ethics 
-  FOIA 
-  Information Quality 
-  No FEAR Act Data 
-  Office of Inspector General 
-  Office of Special Counsel 
-  Privacy Policy 
-  USA.gov 
-  Vulnerability Disclosure Policy 
-  Web Policies & Notices 
-  Web Standards
#### § 3832.32 How much land may I include in my mill site?

The maximum size of an individual mill site is 5 acres. You may locate more than one mill site per mining claim if you use each site for at least one of the purposes described in § 3832.34 of this part. You may locate only that amount of mill site acreage that is reasonably necessary to be used or occupied for efficient and reasonably compact mining or milling operations.