alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
HPV2 PMDA CASRN 89-32-7 Time Extension Request fro ACC Consortium

Paul Campanella to: Gulledge, Bill 09/27/2012 02:32 PM

Cc: John Schaeffer

Dear Mr. Gulledge, Based on our extensive discussion with you regarding the testing of 

this compound that include, inter alia , problems encountered in bid acquisition and 

evaluation time for a large amount of data, laboratory availability and scheduling and 

report preparation and review time, the EPA is willing to extend the due date for 

submittal of the final reports to the requested time of December 28, 2013. Please notify 

us of any changes to the schedule that would enable you to submit the data at an earlier 

time for our review.

.

HPV 2 CASRN 89-32-7 89-32-7 EPA Agreement Agreement to ACC Extenson Extenson request request for data submittal.pd submittal.pdf

Paul J. Campanella, Ph.D.

Chemical Information and Testing Branch

Chemical Control Division

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Washington, D.C. 

202-564-8091
**Exhibit 4.6**
**Summary of Employment Arrangements**
**between Bayer Aktiengesellschaft**
**and Klaus Kühn**

Term: K. Kühn was appointed member of the Board of Management of the Company by theSupervisory Board effective May 1, 2002. The term will expire on April 30, 2007.
Compensation: The aggregate remuneration of K. Kühn for 2004 is comprised of the followingelements:
Base salary: EUR 408,417. K. Kühn also received remuneration in kind totaling EUR 25,348and consisting mainly of amounts such as the value assigned to the use of a company car fortaxation purposes.
Fixed supplement: EUR 170,647
Variable bonus: EUR 771,120 (determined by attainment of the group cash flow target)
Stock option rights: K. Kühn received a total of 6,735 option rights on the basis of hisown investments. The options from this tranche had a market value of EUR 212,355 at the closingdate.
Retirement: K. Kühn is entitled to receive pension up from the age of 60. The yearlypension entitlement is based on at least 30% of the sum of the last yearly base salary and fixedsupplement. This percentage increases over time depending on years of service as a Board member anddetermines the final target pension level which is capped at 80%. These amounts are in addition toany amounts received as a result of his participation in Bayer’s Employee Pension Plan (See Item6).
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 96-2826

CLAUDE HOSCH,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

BANDAG, INCORPORATED,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. W. Earl Britt, District

Judge. (CA-96-894-5-BR-2)

Submitted: March 13, 1997 Decided: March 18, 1997

Before HALL, ERVIN, and WILKINS, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Claude Hosch, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals the district court's order denying relief on

his civil complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e) (1994), amended by

Prison Litigation Reform Act, Pub. L. No. 104-134, 110 Stat. 1321

(1996). We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find that this appeal is frivolous. Accordingly, we dismiss

the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. Hosch v. Bandag,

No. CA-96-894-5-BR-2 (E.D.N.C. Dec. 6, 1996). 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.

DISMISSED
No. 13,114.

#### Fort *v.*Demmer.

(14 P. [2d] 489)

Decided September 12, 1932.

*286Mr. Hugo Selig, for plaintiff in error.

Messrs. Moynihah, Hughes & Khous, for defendant in error.

*In Department.*

Mr. Justice Alter

delivered the opinion of the court.

George E. Demmer, defendant in error, will hereinafter be referred to as plaintiff, and Mabel Fort, plaintiff in error, as defendant. Plaintiff began an unlawful detainer action in the justice of the peace court against defendant. Judgment was rendered for plaintiff, from which judgment defendant attempted an appeal to the county court. In the county court both plaintiff and defendant filed written motions for dismissal, and the county court granted plaintiff’s motion, and rendered judgment accordingly. Defendant prosecutes this writ seeking a reversal for reasons which will hereinafter appear.

The summons issued herein was returnable in four days rather than within the time fixed by section 6376, C. L. 1921,- however, defendant appeared at the trial and attempted her appeal without objecting either to the summons or the service thereof. She thereby *287waived all irregularities in the summons and service. *Deitz v. City of*Central, 1 Colo. 323, 330.

Plaintiff filed his written verified complaint, as provided by section 6375, C. L. 1921, for commencing proceedings under the unlawful detainer act in the justice of the peace court, but defendant failed to file her written verified answer setting forth all the substantial facts upon which she relied entitling her to possession of the property involved in the action. *Joss v. Hallett,*39 Colo. 392, 395, 89 Pac. 809; *Babnik v. Culig,*89 Colo. 449, 450, 3 P. (2d) 801. There was, therefore, no issue to be tried by either the justice of the peace court or the county court, and defendant was wholly in default in both these tribunals.

 The record discloses that the judgment was rendered in the justice of the peace court on April 18, 1932, and the appeal bond approved by the justice of the peace on April 29, 1932. In the absence of a filing mark upon the bond, we must assume that it was tendered and filed on the day of the approval. Section 6173, C. L. 1921, provides that one desiring to appeal may file his bond in the office of the justice of the peace who shall have rendered the judgment, and that the bond shall be approved by him. So far as we are advised by the record herein, the appeal bond was filed and approved too late, and the county court was right in dismissing the action. Defendant’s motion to dismiss was upon the ground that the county court had no jurisdiction; but, if the county court make a correct decision, assigning a wrong reason therefor, it is wholly immaterial. *Noble v. Canon City,*73 Colo. 374, 377, 215 Pac. 867.

It is fair to counsel for defendant to say that he had nothing whatever to do with the trial in the justice of the peace court, and should not be held responsible for the basic errors committed there.

Judgment affirmed.

Mr. Chief Justice Adams and Mr. Justice Butler concur.
No. 13,144.

#### State of Colorado ex rel. Palace Amusement Company *v.*City and County of Denver et al.

(14 P. [2d] 1119)

Decided October 3, 1932.

Mr. Thomas H. Gibson, Mr. Carl Cline, for plaintiff in error.

Mr. James D. Parriott, Mr. Robert J. Kirschwing, for defendants in error.

Judgment affirmed en banc -without written opinion.
July 7, 2008
Exhibit 31.2
 CONTROL CERTIFICATION
 
 I, Richard K Brock, certify that:
 
 1.  I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of PLM Equipment Growth & Income Fund VII.
 
 2.  Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this quarterly report.
 
 3.  Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this quarterly report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this quarterly report.
 
 4.  The registrants other certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:
 
 a)  designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared; and
 
 b)  evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation.
 
 5.  The registrants other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal controls over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the audit committee of registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):
 
 a)  all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal controls over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and
 
 b)  any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrants internal controls over financial reporting.
 
 6.  The registrants other certifying officers and I have indicated in this quarterly report whether there were significant changes in internal controls or in other factors that could significantly affect internal controls subsequent to the date of our most recent evaluation, including any corrective actions with regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.
 
 
 
 
 Date: August 13, 2004  By:  /s/ Richard K Brock
 Richard K Brock
 Chief Financial Officer
 (Principal Financial Officer)
EXHIBIT
23CONSENT OF AUDITORS TO INCORPORATE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS INTO FORM
S-8







Exhibit
23




CONSENT
OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
 
 
 
 
 
 We
consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement No.
333-105598 on Form S-8 pertaining to the AJS Bancorp, Inc. 2003 Stock Option
Plan and the 2003 Recognition and Retention Plan of our report dated March 16,
2009 incorporated by reference in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of AJS
Bancorp, Inc. for the year ended December 31, 2008.
 
 
 
 
 signature
 
 Oak
Brook, Illinois
 March 23,
2009
HomeAbout NRCRadiation ProtectionHow the NRC Protects YouHealth Physics Positions Based on 10 CFR Part 20

# Health Physics Questions and Answers - Question 98

**Question 98:** The following questions concern the requirements of 10 CFR 20.1502 as applied to nuclear power plants.
> 
(a) Since the nuclear power industry has had few intakes approaching the 10% criteria for adding internal and external doses, is the historical record of intakes plus the establishment of a corporate (licensee) policy to limit intakes to less than 10% of an ALI sufficient to exclude a nuclear power licensee from the requirements for "monitoring" intakes (10 CFR 20.1502) and adding internal and external (except for specific intake instances)?

(b) Will the apparent new practice of minimizing TEDE and allowing some intakes invalidate this historical basis and essentially require nuclear power licensees to "monitor" intakes?

(c) In determining whether a worker is likely to exceed the 10% criteria, on what basis are projections to be made of the future intake of contract workers (for the remainder of the year after they leave our site)?

**Answer:**
> 
(a) Yes, assuming that the conditions of exposure are not expected to change to the extent that they are outside the bounds of that historical record and that procedures will be put into effect to implement the policy. However, "surveys", in accordance with 10 CFR 20.1501 (a), would still be needed.)

(b) Not likely. However, the resulting potential increase in intakes will need to be considered in determining whether or not workers are likely to receive intakes in excess of 10% of an ALI. The historical record should be useful in evaluating this potential increase.

(c) Such projections are not required. As indicated in draft Regulatory Guide DG-8010 ("Criteria for Monitoring and Methods for Summation of Internal and External Occupational Doses"), each licensee makes the determination independently; doses that may have been received, or that may be received in the future, at another licensee's facility are not included in the determination of the monitoring requirement.

(Reference: 10 CFR 20.1502).

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Friday, December 15, 2017
Composite Exhibit 4

Case 0:20-cv-61404-DPG Document 1-5 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/13/2020 Page 1 of 5
Case 0:20-cv-61404-DPG Document 1-5 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/13/2020 Page 2 of 5
USPTO Assignments on the Web

http://assignments.uspto.gov/...reel=&frame=&sno=&rno=1222529&asnr=&asnri=&asne=&asnei=&asns=&apct=&apcti=&rgst=&rgsti=[11/15/2018 11:42:50 AM]

United States Patent and Trademark Office

Home|Site Index|Search|Guides|Contacts|eBusiness|eBiz alerts|News|Help

Assignments on the Web > Trademark Query

Trademark Assignment Abstract of Title

Total Assignments: 2

Serial #: 73330071 Filing Dt: 09/28/1981 Reg #: 1222529 Reg. Dt: 01/04/1983

Registrant: Nemi S.A.

Mark: HUBLOT

Assignment: 1

Reel/Frame: 0593/0925 Recorded: 02/26/1988 Pages: 1

Conveyance: ASSIGNS THE ENTIRE INTEREST AND THE GOODWILL

Assignor: NEMI S.A. Exec Dt: 09/18/1987

Entity Type: JOINT STOCK COMPANY

Citizenship: SWITZERLAND

Assignee: MDM SA, GENEVE

PLACE CORNAVIN 12

GENEVE, SWITZERLAND

Entity Type: CORPORATION

Citizenship: SWITZERLAND

Correspondent: MCGLEW AND TUTTLE, P.C.

28 W. 44TH STREET

NEW YORK, NY 10036

Assignment: 2

Reel/Frame: 3766/0505 Recorded: 04/24/2008 Pages: 3

Conveyance: CHANGE OF NAME

Assignor: MDM SA, GENEVE Exec Dt: 10/29/2004

Entity Type: CORPORATION

Citizenship: SWITZERLAND

Assignee: HUBLOT SA, GENEVE

RUE DE LA FONTAINE 7

GENEVE, SWITZERLAND

Entity Type: CORPORATION

Citizenship: SWITZERLAND

Correspondent: GARY D. KRUGMAN

2100 PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE, N.W.

WASHINGTON, DC 20037-3213

Search Results as of: 11/15/2018 11:42 AM

If you have any comments or questions concerning the data displayed, contact PRD / Assignments at 571-272-3350. v.2.6

Web interface last modified: August 25, 2017 v.2.6

| .HOME | INDEX| SEARCH | eBUSINESS | CONTACT US | PRIVACY STATEMENT

Case 0:20-cv-61404-DPG Document 1-5 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/13/2020 Page 3 of 5
Case 0:20-cv-61404-DPG Document 1-5 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/13/2020 Page 4 of 5
Case 0:20-cv-61404-DPG Document 1-5 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/13/2020 Page 5 of 5
No: 23-018 March 3, 2023 

CONTACT: Scott Burnell, 301-415-8200 

NRC Accepts Application for Monticello Subsequent License Renewal; 

Announces Opportunity to Request a Hearing

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has accepted for review an application from 

Northern States Power Company-Minnesota, requesting an additional 20 years for the renewed 

operating license of the Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant. The company submitted the 

subsequent license renewal application Jan. 9. 

The application, with proprietary details removed, is available on the NRC website. The 

company is seeking a subsequent renewal for Monticello, a boiling-water reactor in Monticello, 

Minnesota, located approximately 35 miles northwest of Minneapolis. The NRC approved the 

initial license renewal in November 2006, with the reactor currently licensed to operate through 

Sept. 8, 2030. Subsequent license renewal would extend the license to Sept. 8, 2050. 

Accepting the application for review, or “docketing” the application, does not indicate 

whether the Commission will approve or reject the request. More information about subsequent 

license renewal is available on the NRC website.

The NRC has published in the Federal Register a notice of opportunity to request a 

hearing or petition to intervene in an adjudicatory hearing. Requests for hearing and petitions to 

intervene in a hearing must be filed no later than May 2, by anyone whose interest may be 

affected by the proposed license renewal and who wishes to participate as a party in the 

proceeding. More information on the hearing process is available on the NRC website.
#### In the Matter of Bond and Mortgage Guarantee Company (Boardwalk, between West 11th St. and West 12th St., Coney Island, New York — Guarantee No. 171,050). John G. Ward et al., as Executors and Trustees of William J. Ward, Deceased, Appellants; Lafayette National Bank of Brooklyn in New York, as Trustee for Certificate Holders, et al., Respondents.

*980Carswell, Johnston, Adel, Taylor and Lewis, JJ., concur.
§ 207.10 Review of management cost rates. ( a ) FEMA will review management cost rates not later than 3 years after this rule is in effect and periodically thereafter.
( b ) In order for FEMA to review the management cost rates established, and in accordance with 2 CFR parts 200 and 3002, the grantee and subgrantee must document all costs expended for management costs (including cost overruns). After review of this documentation, FEMA will determine whether the established management cost rates are adequate for the administration and closeout of the PA and HMGP programs.
[72 FR 57875, Oct. 11, 2007, as amended at 79 FR 76087, Dec. 19, 2014]
PUBLIC LAW 108–459—DEC. 21, 2004 118 STAT. 3873

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY—H.R. 480:

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 150 (2004):

Sept. 22, considered and passed House.

Dec. 7, considered and passed Senate.

Æ

Public Law 108–459

108th Congress

An Act

To redesignate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 747

Broadway in Albany, New York, as the ‘‘United States Postal Service Henry

Johnson Annex’’.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of

the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. REDESIGNATION.

The facility of the United States Postal Service located at

747 Broadway in Albany, New York, and known as the United

States Postal Service Carrier Annex, shall be known and designated

as the ‘‘United States Postal Service Henry Johnson Annex’’.

SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper,

or other record of the United States to the facility referred to

in section 1 shall be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘United

States Postal Service Henry Johnson Annex’’.

Approved December 21, 2004.

Dec. 21, 2004

[H.R. 480]
### Part C—Job Corps

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

#### Definition of "Secretary"

In this part, "Secretary" means the Secretary of Labor, see section 3151(b)(1)(C)(ii)(II) of this title.
#### § 305.1 Purpose and scope.

Public Works and Economic Development Investments (“*Public Works Investments”*) intend to help the nation's most distressed communities revitalize, expand, and upgrade their physical infrastructure (as defined in § 301.11 of this chapter) to attract new industry, encourage business expansion, diversify local economies, and generate or retain long-term private sector jobs and investments. The primary goal of these Investments is to create new or retain existing, long-term private sector job opportunities in communities experiencing significant economic distress as evidenced by chronic high unemployment, underemployment, low per capita income, outmigration, or a Special Need. These Investments also intend to assist communities in attracting private capital investment and new and better job opportunities and to promote the successful long-term economic recovery of a Region.

[79 FR 76131, Dec. 19, 2014]
#### Continental Casualty Company, Respondent, v. Rolou Land Company, Appellant.

Ho opinion. The cause is restored to the day calendar of Trial Term, Part I, of the Supreme Court, Kings County, for the 11th day of October, 1943. Close, P. J., Hagarty, Carswell, Johnston and Taylor, JJ., concur.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Agriculture

###### Forest Service

# AGENCY:

Forest Service, USDA.

# ACTION:

Notice of Resource Advisory Committee Meeting. 

# SUMMARY:

                        Pursuant to the authorities in the Federal Advisory Committee Act of 1972 (Pub. L. 92-463) and under the secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act of 2000 (Pub. L. 106-393) the Sierra National Forest's                               ( print page 61468)                            Resource Advisory Committee for Madera County will meet on Monday, October 18, 2004. The Madera Resource Advisory Committee will meet at the Forest Service Office, North Fork, CA 93643. The purpose of the meeting is: new member orientation and review FY 2004 RAC proposals.                    

# DATES:

The Madera Resource Advisory Committee meeting will be held Monday, October 18, 2004. The meeting will be held from 7 p.m. to 9 p.m.

# ADDRESSES:

The Madera County RAC meeting will be held at the Forest Service Office, 57003 Road 225, North Fork, CA 93644.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        Dave Martin, U.S.D.A., Sierra National Forest, Bass Lake Ranger District, 57003 Road 225, North Fork, CA 93643 (559) 877-2218 ext. 3100; e-mail:                         *dmartin05fs.fed.us.*

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Agenda items to be covered include: (1) New member orientation and (2) review of FY 2004 RAC proposals.

Dated: October 11, 2004.

David W. Martin,

District Ranger, Bass Lake Ranger District.

[FR Doc. 04-23363  Filed 10-18-04; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410-11-M
#### STATE ex rel SYLVIA D. KANE, Relator, Respondent, v. HACKETT, Appellant.

(197 N. W. 787.)

(File No. 5187.

Opinion filed March 18, 1924.)

Appeal and Error — Briefs—Court Rules — Judgment Affirmed Where Appeal Abandoned, by Default in Filing Briefs

Where no briefs were filed by appellant within the time for filing appellant’s brief, and no other action of any kind was taken in prosecuting appeal or complying with the Supreme *272Court rules, the appeal will be deemed abandoned, and the . judgment appealed from will be affirmed.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Hand County; Hon. John F. Hughes, Judge.

*Frank Rr Fisher,*of Miller, for Appellant.

*John Pusey,*of Miller, for Respondent.

PE'R CURIAM.

A certified copy of the notice of appeal from a judgment of the circuit court of Hand county was filed in this court on July 6, 1922. The appeal is from a judgment entered June 28, 1921, and from an order denying a new trial entered June 27, 1922. No other papers of any kind have been filed in this court. For all the reasons set forth in the case of Wederath v. Gigg, County Superintendent, 197 N. W. 786, decided at this term of court, this appeal is deemed abandoned, and the judgment and order of the lower court are affirmed.

Note. — Reported in 197 N. W. 787. See, Headnote, Appeal and Error, 3 C. J. Sec. 1607, 4 C. J. Sec. 2437, 3 C. J. Sec. 1603.