alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 2424.26 Agency's reply; purpose; time limits; content; service. ( a ) *Purpose.* The purpose of the agency's reply is to inform the Authority and the exclusive representative whether and why it disagrees with any facts or arguments made for the first time in the exclusive representative's response.
( b ) *Time limit for filing.* Unless the time limit for filing has been extended pursuant to § 2424.23 or part 2429 of this subchapter, within fifteen (15) days after the date the agency receives a copy of the exclusive representative's response to the agency's statement of position, the agency may file a reply.
( c ) *Content.* You must file your reply on a form that the Authority has provided for that purpose, or in a substantially similar format. You meet this requirement if you file your reply electronically through use of the eFiling system on the FLRA's website at *www.flra.gov .* That website also provides copies of reply forms. You must limit your reply to matters that the exclusive representative raised for the first time in its response. You must date your reply, unless you file it electronically through use of the FLRA's eFiling system. And, regardless of how you file your reply, you must ensure that it identifies any disagreement with the exclusive representative's assertions in its response, including your disagreements with assertions about the bargaining obligation and negotiability matters identified in § 2424.2(a) and (c), respectively. You must: State the arguments and authorities supporting your position; include specific citation to, and explanation of the relevance of, any law, rule, regulation, section of a collective bargaining agreement, or other authority on which you rely; and provide a copy of any such material that the Authority may not easily access (which you may upload as attachments if you file your reply electronically through use of the FLRA's eFiling system). You are not required to repeat arguments that you made in your statement of position.
( d ) *Service.* A copy of the agency's reply, including all attachments, must be served in accord with § 2424.2(g).
[88 FR 62458, Sept. 12, 2023]
### TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED MAY 31, 2023

NO. 03

- 22

- 00471

- CR

Bryan Jarett Riepl , Appellant

v.

The State of Texas , Appellee

APPEAL FROM THE 207TH DISTRICT COURT OF COMAL COUNTY
BEFORE CHIEF JUSTICE BYRNE, J USTICES TRIANA AND TH EOFANIS

AFFIRMED

-- OPINION BY JUSTICE TRIANA

This is an appeal from the judgment of conviction entered by the trial court. Having reviewed

the re cord and the parties ’ arguments, the Court holds that there was no reversible error in the

trial court’s judgment of conviction

. Therefore, the Court affirms the trial court’s judgment of

conviction

. Because appellan t is indigent and u nable to pay costs, no adjudica t i on of costs

is made.
Exhibit32



CERTIFICATION
 OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER 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 report on Form 10-Q/A
 of Allied Resources, Inc. for the quarterly
 period ended June 30, 2008 as filed with the Securities and
 Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Ruairidh
 Campbell, do hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §906
 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge and belief:

| | (1) | This 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 this report fairly represents, in all material respects, the financial condition of the small business issuer at the end of the period covered by this report and results of operations of the small business issuer
 for the period covered by this report.
| | --- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Date:
 August19, 2008



/s/
 Ruairidh Campbell

Ruairidh
 Campbell

Chief
 Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer



Thiscertification
 accompanies this report pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not,
 except to the extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the small
 business issuer for the purposes of §18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as
 amended. This certification shall not be incorporated by reference into any filing 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 this report),
 irrespective of any general incorporation language contained in such filing. A signed original of this written statement
 required by §906 has been provided to the small business issuer
 and will be retained by the small business issuer
 and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.



11
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 Too Late Financial Corporation (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 7, 2005
### §515. Contracts for project; guaranty of cost

After approval of such general plans and specifications by the Secretary, and after notification of such approval, the bridge owner shall, in such manner and within such times as the Secretary may prescribe, take bids for the alteration of such bridge in accordance with such general plans and specifications. All bids, including any bid for all or part of the project submitted by the bridge owner, shall be submitted to the Secretary, together with a recommendation by the bridge owner as to the most competent bid or bids, and at the same time the bridge owner shall submit to the Secretary a written guaranty that the total cost of the project, including the cost of such work as is to be performed by the bridge owner and not included in the work to be performed by contract, shall not exceed the sum stated in said guaranty. The Secretary may direct the bridge owner to reject all bids and to take new bids, or may authorize the bridge owner to proceed with the project, by contract, or partly by contract and partly by the bridge owner, or wholly by the bridge owner. Upon such authorization and fixing of the proportionate shares of the cost as provided in section 516 of this title, the bridge owner shall, within a reasonable time to be prescribed by the Secretary, proceed with the work of alteration; and the cost thereof shall be borne by the United States and by the bridge owner, as provided in sections 516 and 517 of this title: Provided, That where funds have been appropriated for part only of a project, the bridge owner may take bids for part only of the work. In the event the bridge owner proceeds with the alteration through the taking of successive partial bids, the bridge owner shall, if required by the Secretary, submit a revised guaranty of cost after bids are accepted for successive parts of the work.

(June 21, 1940, ch. 409, §5, 54 Stat. 498; Pub. L. 85–640, §1(a), (b), Aug. 14, 1958, 72 Stat. 595.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

1958—Pub. L. 85–640 struck out provisions which required bridge owner to take bids within 90 days after notification of approval of general plans and specifications, and inserted provisions permitting the taking of partial bids where funds have been appropriated for part of a project, and requiring the bridge owner, if requested, to submit a revised guaranty of cost.
### §420. Piers and cribs on Mississippi and St. Croix Rivers

The owners of sawmills on the Mississippi River and the Saint Croix River in the States of Wisconsin and Minnesota are authorized and empowered under the direction of the Secretary of the Army, to construct piers or cribs in front of their mill property on the banks of the river, for the protection of their mills and rafts against damage by floods and ice: Provided, however, That the piers or cribs so constructed shall not interfere with or obstruct the navigation of the river. And in case any pier or crib constructed under authority of this section shall at any time, and for any cause, be found to obstruct the navigation of the river, the Government expressly reserves the right to remove or direct the removal of it, at the cost and expense of the owners thereof.

(R.S. §5254; May 1, 1882, ch. 112, 22 Stat. 52; July 26, 1947, ch. 343, title II, §205(a), 61 Stat. 501.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

R.S. §5254 derived from act Mar. 3, 1873, ch. 278, 17 Stat. 606.

#### Amendments

1882—Act May 1, 1882, inserted reference to Saint Croix River in the States of Wisconsin and Minnesota.

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

#### Change of Name

Department of War designated Department of the Army and title of Secretary of War changed to Secretary of the Army by section 205(a) of act July 26, 1947, ch. 343, title II, 61 Stat. 501. Section 205(a) of act July 26, 1947, was repealed by section 53 of act Aug. 10, 1956, ch. 1041, 70A Stat. 641. Section 1 of act Aug. 10, 1956, enacted "Title 10, Armed Forces" which in sections 3010 to 3013 continued Department of the Army under administrative supervision of Secretary of the Army.

#### Transfer of Functions

Functions, powers, and duties of Secretary of the Army and other offices and officers of Department of the Army under section 401 of this title to extent that they relate generally to location and clearances of bridges and causeways in navigable waters of United States transferred to and vested in Secretary of Transportation by Pub. L. 89–670, §6(g)(6)(A), Oct. 15, 1966, 80 Stat. 941, which created Department of Transportation. Pub. L. 97–449 amended section 401 of this title to reflect transfer made by section 6(g)(6)(A) of Pub. L. 89–670, and repealed section 6(g)(6)(A).
Great Northern Iron Ore Properties EXHIBIT 10a to Form 10-K Dated: December 31, 2003




Exhibit 10(a) – Court Order on President of the Trustees’ Compensation

and Annual Hearing of Accounts dated May 14, 2003 




	STATE OF MINNESOTA	DISTRICT COURT
	
COUNTY OF RAMSEY	
SECOND JUDICIAL DISTRICT
		
Court File No. C5-72-386008
	 
	

	In the Matter of the Trust known as 
Great Northern Iron Ore Properties 
	

		
ORDER 







        This
matter came on for hearing before the undersigned on May 14, 2003, upon the
Petition for Allowance of Accounts and for Instructions filed by Joseph S.
Micallef, Roger W. Staehle, Robert A. Stein and John H.
Roe III, the Trustees of the Trust known as Great Northern Iron Ore
Properties (“Trust”). 



        Sue
Ann Nelson of Oppenheimer Wolff & Donnelly LLP appeared on behalf of the
Trustees of the Trust (“Trustees”). 



        The
Court, having heard the arguments of counsel, and based upon the Petition, the
affidavits filed in support of the Petition and the entire file and record
herein, 



        IT IS HEREBY ORDERED:  



	  	 1. 	  	 Due,
published and mailed notice of this hearing was given pursuant to the Court’s
Order dated April 9, 2003, as more fully appears from the proof of publication
and affidavits of mailing contained in the file. 






	  	 2. 	  	The accounts of
the Trustees for the calendar year 2002 are approved, settled and allowed in all
respects. 

























Exhibit 10(a) – Court Order (continued) 




	  	 3. 	  	The requested
increase in the compensation of the President of the Trust from $100,000 per
annum to $150,000 per annum plus an increase in the maximum additional sum from
$35,000 to $50,000 (computed as 1% of the excess of the gross income of the
Trust over $5 million per annum up to a maximum additional sum of $50,000) is
granted. 





		BY THE COURT
	
Date: May 14, 2003 	
By:  /s/   Margaret Marinan                   
		Judge of District Court
#### § 6801.101 Purpose.

In accordance with 5 CFR 2635.105, the regulations in this part supplement the Standards of Ethical Conduct for Employees of the Executive Branch found at 5 CFR part 2635. They apply to members and other employees of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (“Board”).
1

In The

Court of Appeals

Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

____________________

NO. 09-13-00460-CR

____________________

CODY DEMAL ANDREWS, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

_______________________________________________________ ______________

On Appeal from the Criminal District Court 

Jefferson County, Texas

Trial Cause No. 11-12881 

________________________________________________________ _____________

MEMORANDUM OPINION 

Cody Demal Andrews pleaded guilty under a plea agreement to the offense 

of robbery. See Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 29.02 (West 2011). The trial court 

deferred adjudication of guilt, assessed a fine of $500, and placed Andrews on 

unadjudicated community supervision for ten years. The State filed a motion to 

revoke community supervision. Andrews pleaded “true” to violations of his 

supervision. Finding Andrews violated the terms of his community supervision, the 
2

trial court revoked Andrews’s supervision, adjudicated his guilt, and sentenced him 

to twenty years in prison.

Andrews’s appellate counsel filed a brief that presents counsel’s professional 

evaluation of the record and concludes there are no arguable points of error. See 

Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967); High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. 

Crim. App. 1978). We granted an extension of time for Andrews to file a pro se

response. We received no response from Andrews. 

We have independently reviewed the clerk’s record and reporter’s record to 

determine whether there are arguable grounds which might support an appeal. See 

Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826-28 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005); Stafford v. 

State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 509-11 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). We have found none. 

Therefore, it is unnecessary to order appointment of new counsel to rebrief 

Andrews’s appeal. See Bledsoe, 178 S.W.3d at 826-28; compare Stafford, 813 

S.W.2d at 511.

We affirm the trial court’s judgment.

AFFIRMED. 

_________________________

 LEANNE JOHNSON

 Justice

Submitted on April 1, 2014

Opinion Delivered May 7, 2014

Do Not Publish

Before McKeithen, C.J., Kreger and Johnson, JJ.
# L_2017270EN.01002201.xml

| 19.10.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 270/22 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.10.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 270/22

---

DECISION OF THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE

No 53/2016

of 18 March 2016

amending Annex XI (Electronic communication, audiovisual services and information society) to the EEA Agreement [2017/1883]

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 2014/702/EU of 7 October 2014 amending Decision 2007/131/EC on allowing the use of the radio spectrum for equipment using ultra-wideband technology in a harmonised manner in the Community (1) is to be incorporated into the EEA Agreement. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Commission Implementing Decision 2014/702/EU of 7 October 2014 amending Decision 2007/131/EC on allowing the use of the radio spectrum for equipment using ultra-wideband technology in a harmonised manner in the Community (1) is to be incorporated into the EEA Agreement.

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

(2)

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

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

Point 5cw (Commission Decision 2007/131/EC) of Annex XI to the EEA Agreement shall be amended as follows:

| (1) | the following text is added:

  ‘The provisions of the Decision shall, for the purposes of this Agreement, be read with the following adaptation:
  Iceland and Norway shall be exempted from allowing the use of the 6,0 to 8,5 GHz band by equipment using ultra-wideband technology onboard aircraft.’; |
| --- | --- |

(1)

the following text is added:

‘The provisions of the Decision shall, for the purposes of this Agreement, be read with the following adaptation:

Iceland and Norway shall be exempted from allowing the use of the 6,0 to 8,5 GHz band by equipment using ultra-wideband technology onboard aircraft.’;

| (2) | the following indent is added:






  ‘— | 32014 D 0702: Commission Implementing Decision 2014/702/EU of 7 October 2014 (OJ L 293, 9.10.2014, p. 48).’. |
| --- | --- | --- |

(2)

the following indent is added:

‘—

32014 D 0702: Commission Implementing Decision 2014/702/EU of 7 October 2014 (OJ L 293, 9.10.2014, p. 48).’.

Article 2

The text of Implementing Decision 2014/702/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 19 March 2016, 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, 18 March 2016.

For the EEA Joint Committee

The President

Claude MAERTEN

---

(1)  
  OJ L 293, 9.10.2014, p. 48.

1

(*1)  No constitutional requirements indicated.

*1

---
#### Effie S. Smith, Appellant, v. John L. Young et al., as Trustees under the Will of Winfred L. Smith, Deceased, Respondents.

Order denying plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment and granting defendants’ motion for leave to serve an amended answer, affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. The *816decision at Special Term upon the second motion for - an examination before trial established the right of plaintiff’s counsel to continue the action. *(Bloch*V. *Bloch,*131 App. Div. 859, 861.) However, the affidavits present triable issues of fact as to the amount due plaintiff at the commencement of suit, the amount due from plaintiff for rent, and as to possibility of endangering the 'entire trust estate involved in making the payments due to the plaintiff under the terms of the trust. Lewis, P. J., Carswell, Johnston, Sneed and Wenzel, JJ., concur. [See *post,*p. 868.]
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

WILLIAM HERRON, 

Plaintiff-Appellant,

 v.

PERI & SONS FARMS, INC., 

Defendant-Appellee.

No. 14-16134

D.C. No. 

3:13-cv-00075-HDM-VPC

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Nevada

Howard D. McKibben, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted February 9, 2017** 

San Francisco, California

Before: GOODWIN, LEAVY, and SILVERMAN, Circuit Judges.

William Herron appeals the district court’s summary judgment in his action

alleging that Peri & Sons Farms, Inc., discriminated against him by terminating his

employment as a maintenance mechanic and failing to accommodate his bad back

FILED

FEB 13 2017

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
in violation of Americans with Disabilities Act. We have jurisdiction under 28

U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo. Samper v. Providence St. Vincent Med. Ctr.,

675 F.3d 1233, 1235 n.1 (9th Cir. 2012). We affirm.

The district court properly granted summary judgment because Herron failed

to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether he was “‘a qualified

individual able to perform the essential functions of the job with reasonable

accommodation.’” Id. at 1237 (citation omitted) (setting out requirements for a

prima facie case of failure to accommodate); see also id. (to determine whether an

individual is qualified, “‘[t]he court first examines whether the individual satisfies

the requisite skill, experience, education, and other job-related requirements of the

position’” (citation omitted)); Snead v. Metro. Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co., 237 F.3d

1080, 1087 (9th Cir. 2001) (same requirements for a prima facie case of disability

discrimination). The record shows that the maintenance mechanic position for

which Herron was hired required a certificate of completion or equivalent from a

certified trade school. It is undisputed that Herron lacked a certificate of

completion from a certified trade school, and Herron provided no evidence that his

various other expired certificates demonstrated equivalent training.

AFFIRMED.

2
Home > NRC Library > ADAMS Public Documents

# SECY-07-0157- Periodic Assessment of the Activities of the Committee to review Generic Requirements from June 1, 2006, through May 31, 2007

Accession Number: ML072330341

Date Released: Tuesday, September 25, 2007

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.
    - ML071760341 - SECY-07-0157 - Periodic Assessment of the Activities of the Committee To review Generic Requirements from June 1, 2006, Through May 31, 2007 (8 page(s), 9/10/2007)
    - ML072330348 - SECY-07-0157 - Enclosure 1 - Topics Addressed By the Committee to Review Generic Requirements Between June 1, 2006, and May 31, 2007 (3 page(s), 9/10/2007)
    - ML072330349 - SECY-07-0157 - Enclosure 2 - Topics Reviewed by the Chairman of the Committee to Review Generic Requirements Between June 1, 2006, and May 31, 2007 (3 page(s), 9/10/2007)

Privacy PolicySite Disclaimer
**Exhibit 32.2**

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO**

**18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

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

The undersigned, Norman S. Johnson, the Chief Financial Officer of California Oil & Gas Corporation, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

(1)           the quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of California Oil & Gas Corporation for the period ended May 31, 2007 (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 results of operations of California Oil & Gas Corporation.

Dated July 13, 2007.

/s/ Norman S. Johnson 

Norman S. Johnson

Chief Financial Officer

(Principal Financial Officer

and Principal Accounting Officer)

 

 

CW1323229.1