alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### §2105. Definitions

For purposes of this chapter—

(1) The term "artificial reef" means a structure which is constructed or placed in waters covered under this chapter for the purpose of enhancing fishery resources and commercial and recreational fishing opportunities.

(2) The term "State" means a State of the United States, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, the United States Virgin Islands, American Samoa, Guam, Johnston Island, Midway Island, and Wake Island.

(3) The term "waters covered under this chapter" means the navigable waters of the United States and the waters superjacent to the Outer Continental Shelf as defined in section 1331 of title 43, to the extent such waters exist in or are adjacent to any State.

(Pub. L. 98–623, title II, §206, Nov. 8, 1984, 98 Stat. 3397.)
SUITE 1850

1066 WEST HASTINGS STREET

VANCOUVER, BC V6E 3X2

T:******604.683.3850**

**ACAL G****ROUP**

F:******604.688.8479**

**C****HARTERED A****CCOUNTANTS**
**PCAOB & CPAB Registrant**

**INDEPENDENT AUDITORS’ CONSENT**

We  consent  to  the  use  of  our  report  dated  September  26,  2010  on  the  consolidated  financial

statements of  Teryl Resources Corp. as at  May 31,  2010,  and for the year  ended May 31,  2010

that are included in the Company's Annual Report Form 20-F filing.

Vancouver, Canada

*”ACAL Group”*

November 30, 2010

Chartered Accountants
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Stephen J. Markman

, Chief Justice

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano

Richard H. Bernstein

Joan L. Larsen

Kurtis T. Wilder,

Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

July 7, 2017

s0705 

# Order

Clerk July 7, 2017

154871 & (84)(86)

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff

- Appellee,

v SC: 154871

COA: 326542

Wayne CC: 14

- 005613

- FC

MICHAEL DEMOND LAWSON,

Defendant

- Appellant.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the motion for miscellaneous relief and the motion to

amend the record are GRANTED, in part, to the extent that the de fendant asks this Court

to consider the issues in his application that were not raised in the Court of Appeals. The

application for leave to appeal the October 11, 2016 judgment of the Court of Appeals is

considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not p ersuaded that the questions presented

should be reviewed by this Court.
### §763c. Repealed. Pub. L. 93–222, §7(b), Dec. 29, 1973, 87 Stat. 936

Section, act July 1, 1944, ch. 373, title XIII, §1310(b), formerly title VI, §610(b), 58 Stat. 714; renumbered title VII, §710(b), by act Aug. 13, 1946, ch. 958, §5, 60 Stat. 1049; renumbered title VIII, §810(b), by act July 30, 1956, ch. 779, §3(b), 70 Stat. 721; renumbered title IX, §910(b), by Pub. L. 88–581, §4(b), Sept. 4, 1964, 78 Stat. 919; renumbered title X, §1010(b), by Pub. L. 89–239, §3(b), Oct. 6, 1965, 79 Stat. 931; renumbered title XI, §1110(b) by Pub. L. 91–572, §6(b), Dec. 24, 1970, 84 Stat. 1506; renumbered title XII, §1210(b) by Pub. L. 92–294, §3(b), May 16, 1972, 86 Stat. 137; renumbered title XIII, §1310(b), by Pub. L. 93–154, §2(b)(2), Nov. 16, 1973, 87 Stat. 604, made provision for hospital facilities for officers and employees.
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION

Pursuant to the requirement set forth in Rule 13a-14(b) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, (the Exchange Act) and Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code (18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted), Paul B. Bowman, Chief Financial Officer of Cymer, Inc., a
Nevada corporation (the Registrant), hereby certifies that, to the best of his knowledge:



|   |  |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          
|-- |  | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|1. |  | The Registrants quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2009, to which this certification is attached as Exhibit 32.2 (the Report), fully
complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act; and
|   | 
|2. |  | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Registrant.                                                                                  

In Witness Whereof, the undersigned has set his hand hereto as of the 5th day of
August, 2009.



|                       
|-----------------------
|/s/ PAUL B. BOWMAN     
|Paul B. Bowman,        
|Chief Financial Officer

This certification accompanies the quarterly report on Form 10-Q to which it relates, is not
deemed filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of Cymer, Inc. under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (whether made
before or after the date of the quarterly report on Form 10-Q to which it relates), irrespective of any general incorporation language contained in such filing.
### SUBCHAPTER XXXIV—CONFRONTING USE OF METHAMPHETAMINE
### §3010. Awards and decorations

The Under Secretary may provide ribbons, medals, badges, trophies, and similar devices to members of the commissioned officer corps of the Administration and to members of other uniformed services for service and achievement in support of the missions of the Administration.

(Pub. L. 107–372, title II, §220, as added Pub. L. 117–263, div. K, title CXVII, §11704(a), Dec. 23, 2022, 136 Stat. 4156.)
# L_2015311EN.01001301.xml

| 26.11.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 311/13 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.11.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 311/13

---

DECISION OF THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE

No 263/2014

of 12 December 2014

amending Annex II (Technical regulations, standards, testing and certification) to the EEA Agreement [2015/2130]

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 Delegated Regulation (EU) No 357/2014 of 3 February 2014 supplementing Directive 2001/83/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards situations in which post-authorisation efficacy studies may be required (1) is to be incorporated into the EEA Agreement. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No 357/2014 of 3 February 2014 supplementing Directive 2001/83/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards situations in which post-authorisation efficacy studies may be required (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 point is inserted after point 15qb (Commission Implementing Decision 2012/715/EU) of Chapter XIII of Annex II to the EEA Agreement:

| ‘15qc. | 32014 R 0357: Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No 357/2014 of 3 February 2014 supplementing Directive 2001/83/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards situations in which post-authorisation efficacy studies may be required (OJ L 107, 10.4.2014, p. 1).’ |
| --- | --- |

‘15qc.

32014 R 0357: Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No 357/2014 of 3 February 2014 supplementing Directive 2001/83/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards situations in which post-authorisation efficacy studies may be required (OJ L 107, 10.4.2014, p. 1).’

Article 2

The text of Delegated Regulation (EU) No 357/2014 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 107, 10.4.2014, p. 1.

1

(*1)  No constitutional requirements indicated.

*1

---
Home > NRC Library > ADAMS Public Documents

# SECY-06-0042 - ANNUAL REPORT ON COMMISSION ADJUDICATION

Accession Number: ML060590160

Date Released: Tuesday, March 14, 2006

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.
    - ML060590181 - SECY-06-0042 - ANNUAL REPORT ON COMMISSION ADJUDICATION (5 page(s), 2/28/2006)
    - ML060590199 - SECY-06-0042 - ATTACHMENT - ANNUAL REPORT ON COMMISSION ADJUDICATION CHART (6 page(s), 2/28/2006)

Privacy PolicySite Disclaimer
#### § 531.505 Restrictions on granting quality step increases.

As provided by 5 U.S.C. 5336, a quality step increase may not be granted to an employee who has received a quality step increase within the preceding 52 consecutive calendar weeks.

[51 FR 8421, Mar. 11, 1986]
```

[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 245 (Friday, December 21, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Page 65675]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-27722]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

Notice of Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended, notice is hereby given of the following meeting.
    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the 
provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 
U.S.C., as amended, and the Determination of the Director, Management 
Analysis and Services Office, CDC, pursuant to Public Law 92-463. The 
grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential 
trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and 
personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant 
applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly 
unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: Disease, Disability, and Injury Prevention 
and Control Special Emphasis Panel (SEP)--PAR 13-129; NIOSH Member 
Conflict Special Emphasis Panel.
    Date: February 26, 2019.
    Time: 12:00 p.m.-4:00 p.m. EST.
    Place: Teleconference.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    For Further Information Contact: Nina Turner, Ph.D., Scientific 
Review Officer, Office of Extramural Programs, 1095 Willowdale Road, 
Morgantown, West Virginia 26506, Telephone: (304) 285-5976; Email: 
[email protected].

    The Chief Operating Officer, Centers for Disease Control and 
Prevention, has been delegated the authority to sign Federal 
Register notices pertaining to announcements of meetings and other 
committee management activities, for both the Centers for Disease 
Control and Prevention and the Agency for Toxic Substances and 
Disease Registry.

Sherri Berger,
Chief Operating Officer, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
[FR Doc. 2018-27722 Filed 12-20-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4163-18-P
```
§ 1650.11 Post-employment distribution elections. ( a ) Subject to the restrictions in this subpart, participants may elect a distribution of all or a portion of their TSP accounts in a single payment, a series of installment payments, a life annuity, or any combination of these options.
( b ) If a participant's account balance is less than $5.00 when he or she separates from Government service, the balance will automatically be forfeited to the TSP. The participant can reclaim the money by contacting the TSP record keeper and requesting the amount that was forfeited; however, TSP investment earnings will not be credited to the account after the date of the forfeiture.
( c ) Provided that the participant has not submitted a post-employment distribution election prior to the date the automatic payment is processed, if a participant's vested account balance is less than $200 when he or she separates from Government service, the TSP record keeper will automatically pay the balance in a single payment to the participant at his or her TSP address of record. The participant will not be eligible for any other payment option or be allowed to remain in the TSP.
[87 FR 31682, May 24, 2022, as amended at 89 FR 18534, Mar. 14, 2024]
^i::f^RIMEWTOF 

^'HANSPOfiTATION 

U.S . DEPARTMEN T O F TRANSPORTS^TiI^i y 

office of Hearings 

Washington, D.dOi] APR 13 R^rft^i 

Montgomery A\iation, Inc. 

FAA DOCKET NO. CP (not yet assigiicti) 

EIR 2010-GL-11-0096 

C\y\\ Peniilty Action 

APR - 6 2012 

HEARING DOCKET 

Administrative Law Judcc .I.E. Sullivan rsAXL^ 

^ |hP^_^^'^_ l 

WlTHDRAWiVL OF i\PPEAL 

Respondent Montgomery Aviation, Inc. withdraws its appeal of the Final Notice of 

Proposed Civil Penalt>' (and subsequent Complaint). 

The parlies reached an agreement and settlement oi the case, reflected in the agency's 

Order .Assessing Civil Pena!t>' dated March 26. 2012. 

J.C. Bueliier,(#;nf3-49) 

HUEHLER ASSOCIATES. ATFORNI-^S 

777 East 86"' Street 

Ho.v 40924 

Indianapolis, IN 46240-^)924 

(M17) 253-H686 ^ 

••(3i7)'253=937i"I^a.\ ' ' 

CERTIUCATE OF SI.RVICE 

I certify lli;it a cop>iit thi.s documont »\js scned lo Chris Zuralc;. Senior AIIcirnc.\', GrL-at Lukes Ri„'nion, 2300 East Devon 

Avenue. Dcs Pljne.s, Illinuis, 60018-4696 on March 30, 2012. 

W-/J^
Laplant v. Pallito, No. 240-4-14 Wncv (Teachout, J., February 4, 2015)

[The text of this Vermont trial court opinion is unofficial. It has been reformatted from the original. The accuracy of the text and the 

accompanying data included in the Vermont trial court opinion database is not guaranteed.]

STATE OF VERMONT

SUPERIOR COURT CIVIL DIVISION

Washington Unit Docket No. 240-4-14 Wncv

TRAVIS LAPLANT

Petitioner

v.

ANDREW PALLITO, COMMISSIONER,

Vermont Department of Corrections

Defendant

DECISION

The DOC’s Motion to Dismiss

Petitioner Travis LaPlant, an inmate in the custody of the Vermont Department of 

Corrections (DOC), seeks Rule 75 review of the DOC’s decision to not give him a work camp 

placement, which would enable him to earn work camp good time. He characterizes the DOC’s 

refusal as a violation of his due process rights, his rights under Vermont’s Common Benefits 

Clause, and as an abuse of discretion. He seeks placement in work camp and an award of good 

time dating back to when he believes his eligibility began. The DOC has filed a motion to 

dismiss.

Mr. LaPlant alleges that he was “case staffed” to participate in work camp but then that 

decision was reversed internally. E-mails produced by the DOC at his request, and appended to 

his original complaint, brought to his attention that the decision against work camp was 

motivated by the existence of a prior DR and perceptions about his propensity toward violence 

and escape.

All of Mr. LaPlant’s claims are predicated on his belief that he has some entitlement to 

participate in work camp. The statutes that address work camp, principally 28 V.S.A. §§ 811

and 817, do not entitle any inmate to a work camp placement and no statute, rule, policy, or 

directive limits the DOC’s discretion to determine whether or not to place a particular inmate in 

work camp. There is no right to work camp or to review of a decision against work camp.

Mr. LaPlant thus has not identified any ministerial duty that might entitle him to relief in 

the nature of mandamus, or any quasi-judicial decision that might entitle him to relief in the 

nature of certiorari, as contemplated by Rule 75. See Inman v. Pallito, 2013 VT 94, ¶¶ 10–18, 

195 Vt. 218 (explaining that the DOC’s broad discretion over an inmate’s programming 

requirements is not reviewable). He similarly has not identified any liberty interest that might 

give rise to due process rights, and has not meaningfully described any Common Benefits 

violation.
2

ORDER

For the foregoing reasons, the DOC’s motion to dismiss is granted.

Dated at Montpelier, Vermont this ____ day of February, 2015.

_____________________________

Mary Miles Teachout

Superior Judge
Exhibit 32.1

Certification of Chief Executive Officer

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as created by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned officer of
Conceptus, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the  Company) hereby certifies, to such officers knowledge, that:



| | (i) | the accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the three and six months ended June 30, 2010 (the  Report) fully complies
with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and
| | --- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (ii) | the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| | ---- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: August 6, 2010



|                         
|-------------------------
|                         
|/S/    MARK M.
SIECZKAREK
|Mark M. Sieczkarek       
|Chief Executive Officer
BARRY L. FRIEDMAN, P.C.
                        Certified Public Accountant


1582 TULITA DRIVE                           OFFICE (702) 361-8414
LAS VEGAS, NEVADA 89123                    FAX NO. (702) 896-0278


                      CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS


To Whom It May Concern:
                                                          January 2, 2001

     The  firm  of  Barry  L. Friedman, P.C., Certified  Public  Accountant
consents  to  the inclusion of their report of  January 2,  2001,  on  the
Financial Statements of Saveyoutime.com, Inc., as of December 31, 2000,
In any filings  that are  necessary  now  or  in the near future with the
U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.



Very truly yours,

/s/ Barry L. Friedman

Barry L. Friedman
Certified Public Accountant
#### § 335.106 Special selection procedures for certain veterans under merit promotion.

Preference eligibles or veterans who have been separated under honorable conditions from the armed forces after completing (as determined by the agency) 3 or more years of continuous active military service may compete for vacancies under merit promotion when an agency accepts applications from individuals outside its own workforce. Those veterans selected will be given career or career conditional appointments under § 315.611 of this chapter.

[65 FR 14432, Mar. 17, 2000]
§ 551.212 Foreign exemption criteria. *Foreign exemption* means a provision of the Act under which the minimum wage, overtime, and child labor provisions of the Act do not apply to any employee who spends all hours of work in a given workweek in an exempt area. ( a ) *Application.* When the foreign exemption applies, the minimum wage, overtime, and child labor provisions of the Act do not apply to any employee who spends all hours of work in a given workweek in an exempt area. When an employee meets one of the two criteria in paragraph (b) of this section, the foreign exemption applies until the employee spends any hours of work in any nonexempt area as defined in § 551.104.
( b ) *Foreign exemption applies.* If an employee meets one of the two following criteria, the employee is subject to the foreign exemption of the Act and the minimum wage, overtime, and child labor provisions of the Act do not apply: ( 1 ) The employee is permanently stationed in an exempt area and spends all hours of work in a given workweek in one or more exempt areas; or
( 2 ) The employee is not permanently stationed in an exempt area, but spends all hours of work in a given workweek in one or more exempt areas.
( c ) *Foreign exemption does not apply.* For any given workweek, the minimum wage, overtime, and child labor provisions of the Act apply to an employee permanently stationed in an exempt area who spends any hours of work in any nonexempt area. For that workweek, the employee is not subject to the foreign exemption, and the agency must determine the exemption status of such an employee as described in paragraphs (c)(1) and (c)(2) of this section. The foreign exemption does not resume until the employee again meets one of the criteria in paragraph (b) of this section. ( 1 ) *Same duties.* If the duties performed during that workweek are consistent with the primary duties of the employee's official position, the agency must designate the employee the same FLSA exemption status as if the employee were permanently stationed in any nonexempt area.
( 2 ) *Different duties.* If the duties performed during that workweek are not consistent with the primary duties of the employee's official position: ( i ) The agency must first designate the employee the same FLSA exemption status as the employee would have been designated based on the duties included in the employee's official position if the employee was permanently stationed in any nonexempt area; and
( ii ) The agency must determine the employee's exemption status for that workweek by applying § 551.211.
( d ) *Resumption of foreign exemption.* When an employee returns to any exempt area from performing any hours of work in any nonexempt area, the employee is not subject to the foreign exemption until the employee meets one of the criteria in paragraph (b) of this section.
### §884. Power to use books, maps, etc., and to employ persons

The President is authorized, in executing the provisions of title 56 of the Revised Statutes relating to the coast survey, to use all maps, charts, books, instruments, and apparatus belonging to the United States, and to direct where the same shall be deposited, and to employ all persons in the land or naval service of the United States, and such astronomers and other persons as he shall deem proper.

(R.S. §4685.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

Title 56 of the Revised Statutes, referred to in text, was in the original "this Title", meaning title 56 of the Revised Statutes, consisting of R.S. §§4681 to 4691 of the Revised Statutes, which are classified to sections 881 to 883 and 884 to 888 of this title. For complete classification of R.S. §§4681 to 4691 to the Code, see Tables.

#### Codification

Section was not enacted as part of act Aug. 6, 1947, ch. 504, 61 Stat. 787, which comprises this subchapter.

R.S. §4685 derived from act July 10, 1832, ch. 191, §2, 4 Stat. 571.