alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
NOTE: Pursuant to Fed. Cir. R. 47.6, this disposition is not citable as precedent. It is a public record. 

## United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

04-3215

WILLIE J. HAMILTON, Petitioner,

v. DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS, Respondent.

__________ ________________ DECI DED: March 10, 2005

__________________________ Before MAYER, LOURIE, and BRYSON, Circuit Judges

. PER CURIAM.
Willie J. Hamilton appeals the final deci sion of the Merit Systems Protection Board upholding a settlement agreement bet ween him and the Department of Veterans Affairs (“agency”). Hamilton v. Dep’t of Veterans Affairs , DE-1221-99-0359-B-1 (MSPB Mar. 12, 2004). We affirm

. We must affirm the board’s decision unless we determine that it is arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discreti on, or otherwise not in accor dance with law, or if not supported by substantial evidence. See 5 U.S.C. § 7703(c) (2000); Cheeseman v. Office of Pers. Mgmt. , 791 F.2d 138, 140 (Fed. Cir. 1986) . The settlement agreementmay be s e t aside if Hamilton proves the agreement invalid on the b a sis of fraud, coercion or mutual mistake. Asberry v. United States Postal Ser v

. , 692 F.2d 1378 (Fed. Cir. 1982). To establish a mutual mistak e of fact, Hamilton must show that: (1) the parties to the contract were mistaken in th eir belief regarding a fact; (2) that mistaken belief cons tituted a basic assumption under lying the contract; (3) the mistake had a material effect on the bargain; and (4) the cont ract did not put the ri sk of the mistake on the party seeking reformation. See Atlas Corp. v. U n ited States , 895 F.2d 745, 750 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (citations omitted). The board examined w hether Hamilton was fraudulently led to believ e , or shared a mutually mistaken belief, that he could not receive a Federal Employees Retirement System (“FERS”) disability retirement after he had withdr aw n his retirement contributions, thus making the settlement agr eement invalid. Substant ial ev idenc e supports the administrative ju dge’s find ing that because Office of Personnel Management policy at the time of the settl ement agreement allow ed a former employee to receive a FERS disability retirement even though he had withdrawn his retirement contributions, Hamilton was nev er prohibited from applying for and possibly receiving a FERS dis ability retirement. Therefore, Hamilton’s withdrawal of his retirement contributions could not ground a finding of mutual mistake. Bec ause Hamilton failed to
prove mutual mistak e or fraud, the board did not abus e its discretion dismissing t h e appeal as settled.

04-3215 2
EXHIBIT 32

 

CERTIFICATION PURSUANTTO

18 U.S.C. SECTION1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THESARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

 

In connection withthe Annual Report of Fun For You, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-KSB for theperiod ended December 31, 2004, as filed with the Securities and ExchangeCommission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Anthony N. DeMint, Presidentand Chief Accounting Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of2002, that:

-  The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a)				or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
-  The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all				material respects, the financial condition and results of				operations of the Company.

/s/ Anthony N. DeMint                           

Anthony N. DeMint

President and Chief AccountingOfficer

February 2, 2005
### §704. Modification of project

The project for the control of floods in the Sacramento River, California, adopted by section 703 of this title, is modified in accordance with the report of the California Débris Commission submitted in Senate Document Numbered 23, Sixty-ninth Congress, first session: Provided, That the total amounts contributed by the Federal Government, including the amounts heretofore contributed by it, shall in no event exceed in the aggregate $17,600,000.

(May 15, 1928, ch. 569, §13, 45 Stat. 539.)
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 95-7909
DARRIN DEWAYNE BRUMMETT, Plaintiff - Appellant, and SCOTT WILKINSON; MICHAEL A. COSENTINO; RONNIE B. SHARPE; DON R. SMITH; DARRLY A. DIXON; LAMAR DESHAWN MULLINS; DANIEL ID-DEEN; LONNIE THOMPSON; MICHAEL PETERSON, a/k/a Larry G. Arrington, Plaintiffs, versus JAMES MCCAULEY, Defendant - Appellee.

No. 95-8586
LAMAR DESHAWN MULLINS, Plaintiff - Appellant, and DARRIN DEWAYNE BRUMMETT; SCOTT WILKINSON; MICHAEL A. COSENTINO; RONNIE B. SHARPE; DON R. SMITH; DARRLY A. DIXON; DANIEL ID-DEEN; LONNIE THOMPSON; MICHAEL PETERSON, a/k/a Larry G. Arrington,2 Plaintiffs,3 versus JAMES MCCAULEY, Defendant - Appellee.
Appeals from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. Henry M. Herlong, Jr., District Judge. (CA-95-3262-3-20BC) Submitted: July 23, 1996 Decided: July 30, 1996 Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Darrin DeWayne Brummett, Lamar Deshawn Mullins, Appellants Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).4 PER CURIAM: Appellants appeal from the district court's order denying relief on their 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1988) complaint. 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. Brummett v. McCauley, No. CA-95-3262-3-20BC (D.S.C. Nov. 8, 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
Home > NRC Library > ADAMS Public Documents

# SECY-04-0123 - Litigation Report - 2004 - 03

Accession Number: ML041980467

Date Released: Friday, July 30, 2004

Package Contents

The following links on this page are to Adobe Portable Document Format (PDF) files. To obtain a free viewer for displaying this format, see our Plugins, Viewers, and Other Tools.
    - ML041980418 - SECY-04-0123Atch - No. 01-1258, Nuclear Energe Institute v. EPA (100 page(s), 7/16/2004)
    - ML041980459 - SECY-04-0123 - Litigation Report - 2004 -03, dated 7/16/2004 (4 page(s), 7/16/2004)

Privacy PolicySite Disclaimer
99.1 Certifying  Statement of the Chief Executive  Officer pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
     Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley Act
     of 2002

      CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT
                TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


In connection with the Annual Report of New Millennium Media International, Inc.
(the  "Company") on Form 10-KSB for the period ended  December 31, 2002 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),
I, John "JT" Thatch CEO/President of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted  pursuant to Section 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of
2002, that:

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

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

New Millennium Media International, Inc.


By: /s/__________________________________      Dated this 14th day of April 2003
    John "JT" Thatch CEO/President/Director
**Exhibit 32.3**

 

# CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

**18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**

**AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

** **

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Alamo Group Inc.(the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2009 as filed withthe Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I,Richard J. Wehrle, Vice President & Corporate Controller and PrincipalAccounting Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, asadopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

-  The Form 10-Q fully complies withthe requirements of section 13 (a) or 15 (d) of the Securities Exchange Act of1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and
-  The information contained in the Form10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition andresults of operations of the Company.

 

| May 8, 2009 | /s/  Richard J. Wehrle                     |
|-------------|--------------------------------------------|
|        | Richard  J. Wehrle                         |
|        | Vice President  & Corporate Controller |
|        | (Principal  Accounting Officer)            |
HomeNRC LibraryDocument CollectionsNUREG-Series PublicationsPublications Prepared by NRC Contractors

# Fort Saint Vrain Gas Cooled Reactor Operational Experience (NUREG/CR-6839, ORNL/TM-2003/223)

On this page:
        - Publication Information
        - Abstract

Download complete document
        - NUREG/CR-6839 (PDF - 704 KB)

## Publication Information

**Manuscript Completed:**September 2003**Date Published:**January 2004

**Prepared by:** D.A. Copinger, D.L. Moses Oak Ridge National Laboratory Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37831-6487 Managed by UT-Battelle, LLC

L.R. Cupidon, NRC Program Manager

**Prepared for:** Division of Systems Analysis and Regulatory Effectiveness Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission****Washington, DC 20555-0001

NRC Job Code Y6695 

Availability Notice

## Abstract

Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) performed an operational events assessment of Fort St. Vrain (FSV) nuclear power plant during 1981–1989. As part of that assessment, the ORNL principal investigator filed 96 monthly reports detailing the results of each month's analysis. This project reviewed those 96 monthly reports and identified pertinent operating experiences that occurred at FSV which may be applicable to current or future gas cooled reactor (GCR) designs.

Two hundred seventy-nine events were catalogued into seven general categories: (1) water incursion events or failures of moisture detection systems; (2) air or other unwanted gas incursion events and failures of gas detection systems; (3) fuel failures or anomalies; (4) failures or cracks in graphite, pipes, and other reactor structural components; (5) failures of nuclear instrumentation systems; (6) human factors and operator performance issues; and (7) other events or conditions that may be relevant to current GCR designs. Several events were reviewed over a period of years and appeared in more than one monthly report.

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Wednesday, March 24, 2021
### §878. Appropriations; purchases from

The Secretary of Commerce is authorized to purchase, from the appropriation for the National Ocean Survey, provisions, clothing, and small stores for the enlisted men, and food supplies for field parties working in remote localities, such provisions, clothing, small stores, and food supplies to be sold to the employees of said survey and the appropriation reimbursed.

(Mar. 3, 1901, ch. 853, §1, 31 Stat. 1144; Feb. 14, 1903, ch. 552, §4, 32 Stat. 826.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section was a provision of the Sundry Civil Appropriation Act of Mar. 3, 1901.

Upon incorporation into the Code, the words "Secretary of Commerce" were substituted for "Secretary of the Treasury" to conform to act Feb. 14, 1903.

Section was formerly classified to section 661 of Title 31 prior to the general revision and enactment of Title 31, Money and Finance, by Pub. L. 97–258, Sept. 13, 1982, 96 Stat. 877.

#### **Executive Documents**

#### Transfer of Functions

Coast and Geodetic Survey consolidated with National Weather Bureau to form Environmental Science Services Administration by Reorg. Plan No. 2 of 1965, eff. July 13, 1965, 30 F.R. 8819, 79 Stat. 1318. Environmental Science Services Administration abolished and its personnel, property, records, etc., transferred to National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration by Reorg. Plan No. 4 of 1970, eff. Oct. 3, 1970, 35 F.R. 15627, 84 Stat. 2090. By order of Acting Associate Administrator of National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 35 F.R. 19249, Dec. 19, 1970, Coast and Geodetic Survey redesignated National Ocean Survey. For further details, see note set out under section 851 of this title.
### §472. Transferred

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section, act Sept. 15, 1922, ch. 313, 42 Stat. 844, which related to marking of anchorage grounds by the Commissioner of Lighthouses, was transferred to the end of subchapter III of chapter 5 of Title 14, Coast Guard, and redesignated as section 548 of that title by Pub. L. 117–263, div. K, title CXVIII, §11808(c), Dec. 23, 2022, 136 Stat. 4166.
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-03-00597-CR

Paul J. Stautzenberger, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

FROM THE COUNTY COURT AT LAW OF COMAL COUNTY

NO. 2003CR0881A, HONORABLE BRENDA CHAPMAN, JUDGE PRESIDING

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

Paul J. Stautzenberger was convicted in justice of the peace court for driving without

being secured by a safety belt. See Tex. Transp. Code Ann. § 545.413(a) (West Supp. 2004-05).

He was again convicted on appeal by trial de novo in the county court at law. The latter court

assessed a $100 fine.

Stautzenberger represents himself on appeal, as he did at trial. No brief was tendered

for filing. See Tex. R. App. P. 38.8(b)(4) (consideration of appeal without briefs). Because the fine

does not exceed $100 and no issue of the constitutionality of section 545.413(a) has been raised, this

Court is without jurisdiction. Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 4.03 (West 2005).
2

The appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction.

___________________________________________

Bea Ann Smith, Justice

Before Chief Justice Law, Justices B. A. Smith and Pemberton

Dismissed for Want of Jurisdiction

Filed: May 26, 2005

Do Not Publish
### §26. Calumet River, Cook County, Illinois, old channel

The portion of the old channel of the Calumet River in the northwest quarter of section thirty, township thirty-seven north, range fifteen east, of the third principal meridian, in Cook County, Illinois, which lies outside of the new channel lines as established by the United States and shown on "Map of the Calumet River, Illinois, from Lake Michigan to Calumet Lake, to accompany report of W. G. Ewing, United States attorney to the Attorney-General, respecting cession of right of way for improvement of said river under Act of Congress approved July fifth, eighteen hundred and eighty-four," is hereby abandoned as navigable water from and after the time that a navigable channel shall be cut through said quarter section within the new channel lines of the river as shown on the said map.

The portion of the old channel of the Calumet River in the north quarter of fractional section seven, township thirty-seven north, range fifteen, east of the third principal meridian, south of the Indian boundary line, in Cook County, Illinois, which lies outside of the new channel lines as established by the United States and shown on "map of the Calumet River, Illinois, from Lake Michigan to Calumet Lake, to accompany report of W. G. Ewing, United States attorney, to the Attorney General, respecting cession of right of way for improvement of said river, under Act of Congress approved July fifth, eighteen hundred and eighty-four," is abandoned as navigable water.

(Apr. 21, 1904, ch. 1409, 33 Stat. 239, 240; Feb. 27, 1915, ch. 68, 38 Stat. 817.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

Act of Congress approved July 5, 1884, referred to in text, is act July 5, 1884, ch. 229, 23 Stat. 143, which provided in part for the appropriation of $50,000 for the continuing improvement of the Calumet River, provided that no part of such appropriation be expended until the right of way should have been conveyed to the United States, free from expense, and the United States released from liability to adjacent property owners, to the satisfaction of the Secretary of War.
NRC NEWS U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

 Office of Public Affairs Region IV 

 611 Ryan Plaza Drive - Suite 400

 Arlington, TX 76011-4005

No. IV-06-021 September 25, 2006

Contact: Victor Dricks E-Mail: opa4@nrc.gov

Phone: 817-860-8128

NRC ISSUES ORDER BARRING INDIVIDUAL FROM INVOLVEMENT

IN NRC-LICENSED ACTIVITIES

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has barred a former senior manager at a commercial

irradiation facility in Tustin, Calif., from any involvement in NRC-licensed activities for one

year. The individual mishandled security-sensitive information and did not provide complete and

accurate information to NRC investigators when questioned about the incident.

The Confirmatory Order issued to Gary Abel is part of a settlement agreement he and the

NRC reached following Alternate Dispute Resolution. The order is effective immediately.

An NRC inspection and investigation determined that Mr. Abel violated NRC

requirements while employed as the general manager of a Sterigenics International, Inc.,

irradiation facility in Tustin. Calif. Abel faxed a document containing security-sensitive

information to Sterigenics’ security contractor over an unprotected phone line and submitted

information to an NRC investigator he knew was incomplete or inaccurate when questioned

about the incident. 

“The NRC relies on the accuracy of information provided by its licensees and their

employees,” said Bruce S. Mallett, Administrator of the NRC’s Region IV office in Arlington,

Texas. “The action we have taken underscores the seriousness with which we view Mr. Abel’s

behavior.” 

Mr. Abel has acknowledged that he sent the fax, but denies deliberately misleading NRC

investigators when questioned about the incident. In a separate action, the NRC has proposed a

$9,600 civil penalty against Sterigenics for violating NRC requirements.

The order to Mr. Abel will be made available to interested members of the public through

the agency’s electronic reading room at: http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html . Help in
accessing these documents is available from the NRC Public Document Room at: 1-800-397-

4209.

###
[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 210 (Monday, November 1, 2004)]
[Notices]
[Page 63417]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-24411]


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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[File No. 500-1]


U.S. Canadian Minerals, Inc.; Order of Suspension of Trading

October 28, 2004.
    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is 
a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of 
U.S. Canadian Minerals, Inc. (OTC Bulletin Board symbol ``USCA''), a 
Nevada corporation. Questions have been raised about the accuracy of 
publicly disseminated information concerning, among other things, U.S. 
Canadian Minerals' financing and mining activities and the value of 
U.S. Canadian Minerals' purported assets.
    The Commission is of the opinion that the public interest and the 
protection of investors require a suspension of trading in the 
securities of the above-listed company.
    Therefore, it is ordered, pursuant to Section 12(k) of the 
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, that trading in the above listed 
company is suspended for the period from 9:30 a.m. EDT, October 28, 
2004, through 11:59 p.m. EST, on November 10, 2004.

    By the Commission.
Jill M. Peterson,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 04-24411 Filed 10-28-04; 12:00 pm]
BILLING CODE 8010-01-P
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Queensboro Farm Products, Inc., Appellant.

Present — Martin, P. J., Townley, Glennon, Untermyer and Dore, JJ.; Dore, J., dissents and votes to affirm; Martin, P. J., taking no part.
# L_2015311EN.01002801.xml

| 26.11.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 311/28 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.11.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 311/28

---

DECISION OF THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE

No 275/2014

of 12 December 2014

amending Annex II (Technical regulations, standards, testing and certification) to the EEA Agreement [2015/2142]

THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE,

Having regard to the Agreement on the European Economic Area (‘the EEA Agreement’), and in particular Article 98 thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | Commission Implementing Decision 2014/61/EU of 5 February 2014 extending the validity of Decision 2006/502/EC requiring Member States to take measures to ensure that only lighters which are child-resistant are placed on the market and to prohibit the placing on the market of novelty lighters (1) is to be incorporated into the EEA Agreement. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Commission Implementing Decision 2014/61/EU of 5 February 2014 extending the validity of Decision 2006/502/EC requiring Member States to take measures to ensure that only lighters which are child-resistant are placed on the market and to prohibit the placing on the market of novelty lighters (1) is to be incorporated into the EEA Agreement.

| (2) | Annex II to the EEA Agreement should therefore be amended accordingly, |
| --- | --- |

(2)

Annex II to the EEA Agreement should therefore be amended accordingly,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

The following indent is added in point 3k (Commission Decision 2006/502/EC) of Chapter XIX of Annex II to the EEA Agreement:

| ‘— | 32014 D 0061: Commission Implementing Decision 2014/61/EU of 5 February 2014 (OJ L 38, 7.2.2014, p. 43).’ |
| --- | --- |

‘—

32014 D 0061: Commission Implementing Decision 2014/61/EU of 5 February 2014 (OJ L 38, 7.2.2014, p. 43).’

Article 2

The texts of Implementing Decision 2014/61/EU in the Icelandic and Norwegian languages, to be published in the EEA Supplement to the Official Journal of the European Union, shall be authentic.

Article 3

This Decision shall enter into force on 13 December 2014, provided that all the notifications under Article 103(1) of the EEA Agreement have been made (*1).

Article 4

This Decision shall be published in the EEA Section of, and in the EEA Supplement to, the Official Journal of the European Union.

Done at Brussels, 12 December 2014.

For the EEA Joint Committee

The President

Kurt JÄGER

---

(1)  
  OJ L 38, 7.2.2014, p. 43.

1

(*1)  No constitutional requirements indicated.

*1

---
§ 2423.40 Exceptions; oppositions and cross-exceptions; oppositions to cross-exceptions; waiver. ( a ) *Exceptions.* Any exceptions to the Administrative Law Judge's decision must be filed with the Authority within 25 days after the date of service of the Judge's decision. Exceptions shall satisfy the filing and service requirements of part 2429 of this subchapter. Exceptions shall consist of the following: ( 1 ) The specific findings, conclusions, determinations, rulings, or recommendations being challenged; the grounds relied upon; and the relief sought.
( 2 ) Supporting arguments, which shall set forth, in order: all relevant facts with specific citations to the record; the issues to be addressed; and a separate argument for each issue, which shall include a discussion of applicable law. Attachments to briefs shall be separately paginated and indexed as necessary.
( 3 ) Exceptions containing 25 or more pages shall include a table of legal authorities cited.
( b ) *Oppositions and cross-exceptions.* Unless otherwise directed or approved by the Authority, oppositions to exceptions, cross-exceptions, and oppositions to cross-exceptions may be filed with the Authority within 20 days after the date of service of the exceptions or cross-exceptions, respectively. Oppositions shall state the specific exceptions being opposed. Oppositions and cross-exceptions shall be subject to the same requirements as exceptions set out in paragraph (a) of this section.
( c ) *Reply briefs.* Reply briefs shall not be filed absent prior permission of the Authority.
( d ) *Waiver.* Any exception not specifically argued shall be deemed to have been waived.
[62 FR 40916, July 31, 1997, as amended at 77 FR 26433, May 4, 2012]