alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 248 (Friday, December 28, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Page 67374]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-28158]


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

POSTAL SERVICE


Product Change--Parcel Return Service Negotiated Service 
Agreement

AGENCY: Postal Service\TM\.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the 
Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services 
contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail 
Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.

DATES: Date of required notice: December 28, 2018.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Elizabeth Reed, 202-268-3179.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The United States Postal Service[supreg] 
hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on 
December 20, 2018, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a 
USPS Request to Add Parcel Return Service Contract 11 to Competitive 
Product List. Documents are available at www.prc.gov, Docket Nos. 
MC2019-62, CP2019-67.

Elizabeth Reed,
Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.
[FR Doc. 2018-28158 Filed 12-27-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
**Exhibit23.1**

CONSENT OFINDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

We hereby consentto the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on Forms S-3and S-8 (Nos. 333-127401, 333-114413, 333-99711, 333-137168 and 333-137169) ofAvocent Corporation of our report dated March 1, 2007 relating to theconsolidated financial statements, financial statement schedule, management’sassessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reportingand the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, whichappears in this Form 10-K.
| /s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP |   |
|--------------------------------|--------|
| PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP     |
| Birmingham, Alabama            |
| March 1, 2007             |

 

----
# L_2017306EN.01000101.xml

| 22.11.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 306/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.11.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 306/1

---

Notice concerning the entry into force of the Protocol to the Framework Agreement on Comprehensive Partnership and Cooperation between the European Union and its Member States, of the one part, and the Socialist Republic of Viet Nam, of the other part, to take account of the accession of the Republic of Croatia to the European Union

The Protocol to the Framework Agreement on Comprehensive Partnership and Cooperation between the European Union and its Member States, of the one part, and the Socialist Republic of Viet Nam, of the other part, to take account of the accession of the Republic of Croatia to the European Union (1) will enter into force on 1 December 2017, the procedure provided for in Article 4.2 of the Protocol to the Framework Agreement having been completed on 6 November 2017.

1

---

(1)  
  OJ L 348, 21.12.2016, p. 3.

1

---
# L_2020207EN.01000301.xml

| 30.6.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 207/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.6.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 207/3

---

Notice concerning the date of entry into force of the Free Trade Agreement between the European Union and the Socialist Republic of Viet Nam

The Free Trade Agreement between the European Union and the Socialist Republic of Viet Nam (1), signed in Hanoi on 30 June 2019, will enter into force on 1 August 2020.

1

---

(1)  
  OJ L 186, 12.6.2020, p. 3

1

---
### IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA DA 22

- 0185

_________________ STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee,

v. DEVIN DERUSKY LANDUCCI,

Defendant and Appellant. O R D E R

_________________ This Court reviews briefs to ensure compliance with Rules 11 and 12 of the Montana Rules of Appellate Procedure. After reviewing the Appellant ’ s reply brief filed electronically on November 8, 2023 , this Court has determined that the brief does not comply with the Rule s and must be resubmitted as it appears the Appellant has inadvertently resubmitted his opening brief , rather than a reply brief

. Therefore, IT IS ORDERED that the referenced brief is rejected. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that within ten (10) days of the date of this Order the Appellant shall electronically file with the Clerk of this Court a revised brief containing the revisions necessary to comply with the specified R ule s and that the Appellant shall serve copies of the revised brief on all parties of record ; and IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the times for any subsequent briefing contained in M. R. App. P. 13 shall run from the date of filing of the revised brief. The Clerk is directed to provide a true copy of this Order to the Appellant and to all parties of record.

Electronically signed by: Ingrid Gustafson Justice, Montana Supreme Court November 8 2023

11/08/2023

Case Number: DA 22-0185
## THE STATE OF TEXAS

MANDATE

TO THE COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 1 OF HUNT COUNTY, GREETINGS:

Before the Court of Appeals for the Sixth Court of Appeals District of Texas, on the 14th

day of January, A.D. 2015, the cause upon appeal to revise or reverse your Judgment was

determined; and therein our said Court made its order in these words:

Arvel William Stewart, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee No. 06

- 14

- 00087

- CR

Trial Court No. CR1301157

As stated in the Court’s opinion of this date, we find no error in the judgment of the court

below. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

We note that the appellant, Arvel William Stewart, has adequately indicated his inability

to pay costs of appeal. Therefore, we waive payment of costs.

WHEREFORE, WE COMMAND YOU to observe the order of our said Court in this

behalf, and in all things to have it duly recognized, obeyed, and executed.

WITNESS, the Hon. Josh R. Morriss, III, Chief Justice of our said Cou rt of Appeals, with

the seal thereof annexed, at the City of Texarkana, this the 17th day of March , A.D. 2015

.

DEBRA K. AUTREY , Clerk
### §230310. Service of process

The corporation shall have a designated agent in the District of Columbia to receive service of process for the corporation. Notice to or service on the agent, or mailed to the business address of the agent, is notice to or service on the corporation.

(Pub. L. 105–225, Aug. 12, 1998, 112 Stat. 1485.)

| Revised Section | Source (U.S. Code) | Source (Statutes at Large) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 230310 | 36:769(b). | July 18, 1958, Pub. L. 85–530, §9(b), 72 Stat. 373. |

Section

The words "at all times" are omitted as unnecessary. The words "to receive" are substituted for "authorized to accept", and the word "is" is substituted for "will be deemed", for consistency in the revised title.
§ 838.1009 Decisions. ( a ) ( 1 ) When the individual does not respond within the 30-day notice period provided for by § 838.1008, the court order will be honored in accordance with the notification.
( 2 ) When a timely response to the notification is received, the Associate Director will consider the response. The former spouse's claim will be denied and the former spouse will be notified of the right to request reconsideration under § 831.109 of this chapter whenever is is shown that— ( i ) The court order is not a qualifying court order; or
( ii ) The court order is inconsistent with a contemporaneous or subsequent court order.
( b ) If any person who may lose benefits if OPM honors the court order objects to payment based on the validity of the court order and the record contains reasonable support for the objection, he or she will be granted 30 days to initiate legal action to determine the validity of the objection. If funds are available under § 838.1006 and evidence is submitted that legal action had been started before the 30 days have expired, money will continue to be withheld, but no payment will be made to the former spouse pending judicial determination of the validity of the court order.
[50 FR 20077, May 13, 1985. Redesignated and amended at 57 FR 33596, July 29, 1992]
### **CHAPTER 303—BLINDED VETERANS ASSOCIATION**

Sec.
30301.
Organization.
30302.
Purposes.
30303.
Membership.
30304.
Governing body.
30305.
Powers.
30306.
Exclusive right to name, seals, emblems, and badges.
30307.
Restrictions.
30308.
Principal office.
30309.
Records and inspection.
30310.
Service of process.
30311.
Liability for acts of officers and agents.
30312.
Distribution of assets on dissolution or final liquidation.
### §170107. Headquarters and principal place of business

The headquarters and principal place of business of the corporation shall be in the District of Columbia. However, the activities of the corporation are not confined to the District of Columbia but may be conducted throughout the States, territories, and possessions of the United States.

(Pub. L. 105–225, Aug. 12, 1998, 112 Stat. 1441.)

| Revised Section | Source (U.S. Code) | Source (Statutes at Large) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 170107 | 36:1158. | Aug. 11, 1971, Pub. L. 92–93, §8, 85 Stat. 318. |

Section

The words "activities of the corporation are not confined to the District of Columbia but may be" are substituted for "activities of said organization, as set out herein, shall not be confined to said city, but shall be" for consistency in the revised title.
**Exhibit
      32.1**





**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 I-trax, Inc. (the **“Company”** )
      on Form
      10-K for the period ending December 31, 2006 as filed with the Securities and
      Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the **“Report”** ),
      I, R.
      Dixon Thayer, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to
      18
      U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §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.








/s/
      R.
      Dixon Thayer


R.
      Dixon
      Thayer


Chief
      Executive Officer





March
      16,
      2007
### §40722. Functions

The functions of the Civilian Marksmanship Program are—

(1) to instruct citizens of the United States in marksmanship;

(2) to promote practice and safety in the use of firearms;

(3) to conduct competitions in the use of firearms and to award trophies, prizes, badges, and other insignia to competitors;

(4) to secure and account for firearms, ammunition, and other equipment for which the corporation is responsible;

(5) to issue, loan, or sell firearms, ammunition, repair parts, and other supplies under sections 40731 and 40732 of this title; and

(6) to procure necessary supplies and services to carry out the Program.

(Pub. L. 105–225, Aug. 12, 1998, 112 Stat. 1337.)

| Revised Section | Source (U.S. Code) | Source (Statutes at Large) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 40722 | 36:5502(a) (less words before cl. (1)). | Feb. 10, 1996, Pub. L. 104–106, title XVI, §1612(a) (less words before cl. (1)), 110 Stat. 516. |

Section

Before clause (1), the words "The functions of the Civilian Marksmanship Program are" are added because of the reorganization of the revised chapter.

In clause (3), the word "matches" is omitted as included in "competitions".

In clause (4), the words "to secure and account for" are substituted for "The provision of security and accountability for" for clarity and to eliminate unnecessary words. The words "for which the corporation is responsible" are substituted for "under the custody and control of the Corporation" for clarity and for consistency with section 40731(b) of this title related to firearms that are not under the direct custody and control of the corporation because they have been issued or loaned.

In clause (5), the words "ammunition, repair parts, and other supplies" are substituted for "ammunition, supplies, and appliances" for consistency in the revised title.

In clause (6), the words "supplies and services" are substituted for "supplies, appliances, clerical services, other related services, and labor" to eliminate unnecessary words.
Reconsideration Determination

Northwestern Pacific Railway Company, L.L.C.

AUG 2 7 2001

This is the determination ofthe Railroad Retirement Board concerning the request

for reconsideration submitted by the Northwestern Pacific Railway Company,

L.L.C. (NWPY).

The Board held NWPY to be an employer effective February 13, 2001 (Board

Coverage Decision 01-37 dated April 27, 2001). The date of February 13, 2001,

was based on a report of a telephone call advising ofthe beginning date ofrailroad

operations. However, in its request for reconsideration the company states that it

began operations July 25, 2000, which is the date employees began work and as of

which they were first compensated for the start ofrailroad construction and

maintenance to comply with standards set forth by the Federal Railroad

Administration emergency order intended to permit commercial operations to 

begin. NWPY requests an appropriate modification ofthe effective date. See 

Revenue Ruling 82-100 wherein it was held that coverage begins on the date a

company first hires employees to perform functions directly related to its earner

operations.

The Board finds that the start ofrailroad construction and maintenance, as

described above, to enable commercial operations to begin are functions

directly related to carrier operations. Accordingly, it is the decision ofthe

Board that NWPY became an employer covered under the Railroad

Retirement Act and the Railroad Unemployment Insurance Act on July 25,

2000.

Cherryl T. Thomas

V. M. Speakman, Jr.

BA# 2793
1

EMPLOYER STATUS DETERMINATION

The Colorado & Southern RailwayEmployees' Hospital Association

This is the determination of the Railroad Retirement Board 

concerning the status of the Colorado & Southern Railway Employees'

Hospital Association (CSREH) (BA No. 9716) as an employer under the

Railroad Retirement Act (45 U.S.C. §231 et sea. ) (RRA) and the

Railroad Unemployment Insurance Act (45 U.S.C. §351 et seq.)

(RUIA).

According to information provided in letters dated January 2, 1996,

and February 14, 1996, from Ms. Elaine M. Heberlein, Manager of

CSREH, CSREH closed effective September 30, 1995. It did not merge

with another railroad or company. The two employees last performed

compensated service on December 31, 1995. Assets of CSREH were

first used to pay outstanding bills, and then disbursed to the

members in good standing on the date of closing. As CSREH is not

a corporation, it did not have Articles of Dissolution.

Based upon the information summarized above, it is determined that

the Colorado & Southern Railway Employees' Hospital Association

ceased to be a covered employer under the RRA and RUIA effective

erome F. Kever

t

BCD 1996-46 BA # 9716
§ 575.308 Approval criteria and written determination. ( a ) An agency in its sole and exclusive discretion, subject only to OPM review and oversight, may approve a retention incentive for an individual employee or group or category of employees using the approval criteria in § 575.306.
( b ) For each determination to pay a retention incentive under this subpart, an agency must document in writing— ( 1 ) The basis for determining that the unusually high or unique qualifications of the employee (or group of employees) or a special need of the agency for the employee's (or group of employees') services makes it essential to retain the employee(s);
( 2 ) The basis for determining that the employee (or a significant number of employees in a group) would be likely to leave the Federal service in the absence of a retention incentive; and
( 3 ) The basis for establishing the amount and timing of the approved retention incentive payment and the length of the required service period.
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATIONS OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

UNDER

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT

PACIFIC
MERCANTILE BANCORP

Annual Report on Form 10-K

for the Year
ended December 31, 2005

In connection with the accompanying Annual Report on Form 10-K of Pacific Mercantile Bancorp (the
Company) for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2005 (the Annual Report), , and pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, I, Raymond E. Dellerba, President and
Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify that:

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

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

Dated: March 15, 2006



/s/    RAYMOND E.
DELLERBARaymond E. Dellerba President and Chief Executive Officer
CERTIFICATION
                                                                    Exhibit 31.2



      I, Randall J. Opliger, certify that:

      1. I have reviewed this quarterly report for the fiscal quarter ended June
30, 2004 on Form 10-Q of Pioneer Financial Services, Inc.;

      2. Based on my knowledge, this 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 report;

      3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this 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 report;

      4. The registrant's other certifying officer 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 our 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;

           (b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure
      controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about
      the effectiveness of the controls and procedures, as of the end of the
      period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

           (c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal
      control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's
      most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably
      likely to materially affect, the registrant's internal control over
      financial reporting; and

      5. The registrant's other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based
on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to
the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of the 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 control 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
      control over financial reporting.

Date: August 13, 2004



                               ---------------------------------------
                               Randall J. Opliger
                               Chief Financial Officer
Carroll,

Dec., 1897.

#### Pitman *v.*Mauran.

Whether a verdict should be set aside as against the evidence, is a question-of fact determinable at the trial term.

Exceptions to instructions are waived, unless taken before the jury retire.

Assumpsit. Trial by jury and verdict for the defendant. The day after the verdict was rendered the plaintiff moved to set it aside as against the law and evidence; and two or three days afterward filed a written motion to set it aside on the same ground and also in arrest of judgment and for a new trial,, specifying certain particulars wherein he claimed it was against the law and the evidence. The errors of law claimed were in-the instructions which the court gave or failed to give the jury. There were no exceptions to the charge, and no requests for instructions which were not granted. The motions were denied,, and the plaintiff excepted.

*George W. M. Pitman*and *Josiah H. Hobbs,*for the plaintiff*.'

*Fred B. Osgood,*for the defendant.

Wallace, J.

Whether the verdict is against the evidence, is a question of fact to be decided at the trial term. *Fuller*v. *Bailey,*58 N. H. 71; *Lefavor*v. *Smith,*58 N. H. 125; *Kelley*v. *Woodward,*58 N. H. 153; *Daniels*v. *Lebanon,*58 N. H. 284; *Hovey*v. *Brown,*59 N. H. 114; *Little*v. *Upham,*64 N. H. 279; *Lucier*v. *Larose,*66 N. H. 141.

If the plaintiff desired different or additional instructions, he. should have asked for them at the trial. If an exception was-desired to the charge, it should have been taken before the jury retired. If there was any error, it could have been, and doubtless would have been, corrected. Such exceptions not taken at *231that time are waived, and cannot be taken afterward. Rules of Court, No. 54,—56 N. H. 590; *Moore*v. *Ross,*11 N. H. 547, 557; *State*v. *Rye,*35 N. H. 368, 381; *Boyce*v. *Railroad,*43 N. H. 627; *State*v. *Gorham,*55 N. H. 152; *Bank*v. *Ferguson,*58 N. H. 403; *Dow*v. *Merrill,*65 N. H. 107.

*Exceptions overruled.*

Clark, J., did not sit: the others concurred.