alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Gertrude Estin, Respondent, v. Joseph Estin, Appellant.

In a separation action, order awarding to plaintiff counsel fees and expenses in connection with argument on the return of a writ of certiorari in the United States Supreme Court modified by striking out the figure “ $1,150 ”, and substituting in place thereof the .figure *“*$650 ”. As thus modified the order is affirmed, without costs. In view of all the facts and circumstances, and particularly the amounts of the prior allowances, the allowance herein was excessive. Lewis, P. J., Cars-well, Johnston, Adel and Wenzel, JJ., concur.
§ 630.501 Annual leave recredit. ( a ) When an employee transfers between positions under subchapter I of chapter 63 of title 5, United States Code, the agency from which he transfers shall certify his annual leave account to the employing agency for credit or charge.
( b ) When annual leave is transferred between different leave systems under section 6308 of title 5, United States Code, or is recredited under a different leave system as the result of a refund under section 6306 of that title, 7 calendar days of annual leave are deemed equal to 5 workdays of annual leave.
[35 FR 18581, Dec. 8, 1970]
### §186. Penalty

Whoever, during the period or periods of time an invention has been ordered to be kept secret and the grant of a patent thereon withheld pursuant to section 181, shall, with knowledge of such order and without due authorization, willfully publish or disclose or authorize or cause to be published or disclosed the invention, or material information with respect thereto, or whoever willfully, in violation of the provisions of section 184, shall file or cause or authorize to be filed in any foreign country an application for patent or for the registration of a utility model, industrial design, or model in respect of any invention made in the United States, shall, upon conviction, be fined not more than $10,000 or imprisoned for not more than two years, or both.

(July 19, 1952, ch. 950, 66 Stat. 807; Pub. L. 100–418, title IX, §9101(b)(3), Aug. 23, 1988, 102 Stat. 1568; Pub. L. 112–29, §20(j), Sept. 16, 2011, 125 Stat. 335.)

#### Historical and Revision Notes

Based on Title 35, U.S.C., 1946 ed., §156 (Feb. 1, 1952, ch. 4, §6, 66 Stat. 5, 6).

Language is changed.

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

2011—Pub. L. 112–29 struck out "of this title" after "181" and after "184".

1988—Pub. L. 100–418, which directed the insertion of "willfully" after second reference to "whoever", was executed by making the insertion after "or whoever", as the probable intent of Congress.

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

#### Effective Date of 2011 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 112–29 effective upon the expiration of the 1-year period beginning on Sept. 16, 2011, and applicable to proceedings commenced on or after that effective date, see section 20(l) of Pub. L. 112–29, set out as a note under section 2 of this title.

#### Effective Date of 1988 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 100–418 applicable, subject to certain qualifications and exceptions, to all United States patents, and to all licenses under section 184 of this title, regardless of the date such patents or licenses are granted, and to all applications for such patents pending on or filed after Aug. 23, 1988, see section 9101(d) of Pub. L. 100–418, set out as a note under section 184 of this title.
Home > NRC Library > ADAMS Public Documents

# SECY-06-0196 - Issuance of Generic Letter 2006-XX, "Post-Fire Safe-Shutdown Circuits Analysis Spurious Actuations"

Accession Number: ML062200089

Date Released: Friday, September 22, 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.
    - ML061840009 - SECY-06-0196 - Issuance of Generic Letter 2006-XX, "Post-Fire Safe-Shutdown Circuits Analysis Spurious Actuations" (4 page(s), 9/11/2006)
    - ML061860439 - SECY-06-0196Encl1 - NRC GENERIC LETTER 2006-XX:POST-FIRE SAFE-SHUTDOWN CIRCUIT ANALYSIS SPURIOUS ACTUATIONS (12 page(s), 9/11/2006)
    - ML062190464 - SECY-06-0196Encl2 - Circuits Generic Letter Public Comment Resolution (15 page(s), 9/11/2006)

Privacy PolicySite Disclaimer
# L_2021337EN.01003801.xml

| 23.9.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 337/38 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.9.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 337/38

---

DECISION OF THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE No 244/2018

of 5 December 2018

amending Annex II (Technical regulations, standards, testing and certification) to the EEA Agreement [2021/1511]

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 Regulation (EU) 2018/608 of 19 April 2018 laying down technical criteria for electronic tags for marine equipment (1) is to be incorporated into the EEA Agreement. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/608 of 19 April 2018 laying down technical criteria for electronic tags for marine equipment (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 4 (Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2018/414) of Chapter XXXII of Annex II to the EEA Agreement:

| ‘5. | 32018 R 0608: Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/608 of 19 April 2018 laying down technical criteria for electronic tags for marine equipment (OJ L 101, 20.4.2018, p. 64).’ |
| --- | --- |

‘5.

32018 R 0608: Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/608 of 19 April 2018 laying down technical criteria for electronic tags for marine equipment (OJ L 101, 20.4.2018, p. 64).’

Article 2

The text of Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/608 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 6 December 2018, provided that all the notifications under Article 103(1) of the EEA Agreement have been made (*).

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, 5 December 2018.

For the EEA Joint Committee

The President

Oda Helen SLETNES

The Secretaries

To the EEA Joint Committee

Hege M. HOFF

Mikołaj KARŁOWSKI

---

(1)  
  OJ L 101, 20.4.2018, p. 64.

1

(*)  No constitutional requirements indicated.

*

---
#### Unity Sheet Metal Works, Inc., Respondent, *v.*Theodore T. Knappen et al., Copartners Doing Business under the Name of Knappen Tippetts Abbett Engineering Co., Appellants, et al., Defendants.

First Department,

December 18, 1951.

*246*Sidney G. Kingsley*of counsel *(Sylvester <& Harris,*attorneys), for appellants.

*Nelson Rosenbaum*for respondent.

*Per Curiam.*

A report to a principal by agents such as defendants-appellants, engineers employed by the lessee of a pier to act as the lessee’s representatives and overseers during the performance of construction work, is privileged as against a claim by a third person such as this plaintiff, a subcontractor, having no contractual relationship with either the lessee, or the engineers *(Greyhound Corp.*v. *Commercial Cas. Ins. Co.,*259 App. Div. 317).

The complaint does not allege that plaintiff complied with the terms of its own subcontract or duly performed all the terms and conditions on its part to be performed.

The complaint also fails to allege disclosed material facts as distinguished from general and conclusory allegations of wrongdoing on defendants’ part. There is no allegation that appellants acted contrary to the interests of their principal. Nor is there sufficient allegation of misrepresentations of material facts to state a cause of action for fraud. *(Gerdes*v. *Reynolds,*281 N. Y. 180.)

The second cause of action asserting a conspiracy is equally defective as it asserts no additional factual basis of liability.

The complaint seems to be based on undisclosed facts which must be disclosed before plaintiff may state any cause of action-

*247The order appealed from should be reversed, with $20 costs and disbursements to defendants-appellants and the complaint dismissed, with leave to plaintiff if so advised to replead.

6

Glennon, J. P., Does, Cohn and Callahan, JJ., concur; Shientag, J., dissents and votes to affirm on authority of *Advance Music Corp.*v. *American Tobacco Co.*(296 N. Y. 79).

Order reversed, with $20 costs and disbursements to appellants and the complaint dismissed, with leave to the plaintiff, if so advised, to replead. Settle order on notice.
§ 831.1904 State responsibilities. The State will, in performance of this agreement: ( a ) Accept requests and revocations from annuitants who have designated that State income tax deductions will go to the State.
( b ) Convert these requests on a monthly basis to a machine-readable magnetic tape using specifications received from OPM, and forward that tape to OPM for processing.
( c ) Inform annuitants whose tax requests are rejected by OPM that the request was so rejected and of the reason why it was so rejected.
( d ) Recognize that, to the extent not prohibited by State laws, records maintained by the State relating to this program are considered jointly maintained by OPM and are subject to the Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a). Accordingly, the States will maintain such records in accordance with that statute and OPM's implementing regulations at 5 CFR part 297.
( e ) Respond to requests of annuitants for information and advice in regard to State income tax withholding.
( f ) Credit the amounts withheld from civil service annuities to the State tax liability of the respective annuitants, and, subject to applicable provisions of State law to the contrary, refund any balance over and above that liability to the annuitant, unless he or she should request otherwise.
( g ) Surrender all tax withholding requests to OPM when this agreement is terminated or when the documents are not otherwise needed for this State tax withholding program.
( h ) Allow OPM, the Comptroller General or any of their duly authorized representatives access to, and the right to examine, all records, books, papers or documents related to the processing of requests for State income tax withholding from civil service annuities.
NO. 07-07-0379-CR

	IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

	FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

	AT AMARILLO

	PANEL B

	OCTOBER 1, 2007

	______________________________

	MARCUS MOONEY DUNN,

				Appellant

	v.

	THE STATE OF TEXAS, 

				Appellee

	_________________________________

	FROM THE 242nd DISTRICT COURT OF HALE COUNTY;

	NO. B16635-0602; HON. ED SELF, PRESIDING

	_______________________________

	ON MOTION TO DISMISS

	__________________________________

Before QUINN, C.J., and CAMPBELL and HANCOCK, JJ.

	Appellant Marcus Mooney Dunn, by and through his attorney, has filed a motion to dismiss his appeal because he no longer desires to prosecute it.  Without passing on the merits of the case, we grant the motion to dismiss pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 42.2(a) and dismiss the appeal.  Having dismissed the appeal at appellant’s request, no motion for rehearing will be entertained, and our mandate will issue forthwith.

							Brian Quinn

						          Chief Justice

Do not publish.
#### BEECHER v. LEAVENWORTH STATE BANK et al.

No. 14167.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

June 16, 1954.

Rehearing Denied July 15, 1954.

*114S. P. Beecher, in pro. per.

C. D. Randall, Randall & Danskin & Lundin, Henry R. Newton, John J. Ripple, Spokane, Wash., Fred M. Crollard, Sr., Wenatchee, Wash., for appellees.

Before DENMAN, Chief Judge, and ORR and POPE, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Appellees move to dismiss this appeal on the ground that Beecher has failed to take the proper steps necessary to perfect it. The motion is well made. The attorney for the Bank states he never received a copy of Beecher’s statement of points on appeal and there is no affidavit sworn before a notary or otherwise in the record of a service by mail upon the Bank.

The statement of points reveals that Beecher is relying upon the contention that there are moneys in the registry of the court which are available for the purposes of redeeming the property. This contention has been rejected by this court. Beecher v. Leavenworth State Bank, 9 Cir., 211 F.2d 158, certio-rari denied, 347 U.S. 949, 74 S.Ct. 649, see also Beecher v. Leavenworth State Bank, 9 Cir., 209 F.2d 20, 22, certiorari denied, 347 U.S. 949, 74 S.Ct. 649.

The motion to dismiss is ordered granted.
### §60907. Procedures to promote compliance

#### (a) Regulations

Not later than one year after August 3, 2022, the head of each agency shall promulgate regulations to enforce the right of a designated person to request a review under this chapter and to ensure compliance by the agency with the obligations described in this chapter.

#### (b) Procedures

The regulations promulgated under subsection (a) shall—

(1) designate an administrative authority within the agency to receive and investigate complaints relating to a review initiated under section 60901 of this title or a reinvestigation initiated under section 60903 of this title;

(2) require a course of training for appropriate employees and officers within the agency regarding the procedures, responsibilities, and obligations required under this chapter;

(3) contain disciplinary sanctions, which may include suspension or termination from employment, for employees of the agency who are shown to have willfully or wantonly failed to comply with this chapter;

(4) provide a procedure for the resolution of complaints filed by the designated person concerning the agency's handling of a cold case murder investigation or the case file evaluation; and

(5) provide that the head of the agency, or the designee thereof, shall be the final arbiter of the complaint, and that there shall be no judicial review of the final decision of the head of the agency by a complainant.

(Pub. L. 117–164, §8, Aug. 3, 2022, 136 Stat. 1360.)
B.C.D. 02-33

EMPLOYER STATUS DETERMINATION APR 2 6 2002

Southwestern Railroad Company, Inc.

This is the decision of the Railroad Retirement Board concerning the status of

Southwestern Railroad Company, Inc. (SWR) as an employer under the Railroad

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

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

In March 1990, in Finance Docket No. 31613, SWR filed with the former Interstate

Commerce Commission1 a notice of exemption under 49 CFR 1150.31 to acquire and

operate the Whitewater and Shattuck branches of the Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe 

Railway Company (SF), which consist of 129 miles of track in New Mexico, Oklahoma, and

Texas. The exemption became effective March 26, 1990. SWR has been pre-assigned a

BA number (BA number 2775), and has reported service and compensation from January

1, 1990 through December 2001, the most recent year for which reports of service and

compensation were due. See 20 CFR 209.8.

Section 1(a)(1) of the RRA defines the term "employer” to include:

Section 1 of the RUIA contains essentially the same definition, as does section 3231 of the

Railroad Retirement Tax Act (26 U.S.C. §3231).

The Board finds that SWR became a rail carrier employer under the RRA and the RUIA

effective January 1, 1990, the date for which it first reported that it had compensated

employees.

(i) any carrier by railroad subject to the jurisdiction of the Surface

Transportation Board under part A of subtitle IV of title 49, United

States Code. [45 U.S.C. §231 (a)(1 )(i)].

V. M. Speakman, Jr.

1 The Surface Transportation Board now has jurisdiction over interstate rail transportation

formerly held by the Interstate Commerce Commission.

BA# 2775
[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 217 (Wednesday, November 10, 2004)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 65069]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-24975]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2004-18820; Airspace Docket No. 04-ACE-46]


Modification of Class E Airspace; Kennett, MO

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Direct final rule; confirmation of effective date.

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

SUMMARY: This document confirms the effective date of the direct final 
rule which revises Class E airspace at Kennett, MO.

EFFECTIVE DATE: 0901 UTC, January 20, 2005.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Brenda Mumper, Air Traffic Division, 
Airspace Branch, ACE-520A, DOT Regional Headquarters Building, Federal 
Aviation Administration, 901 Locust, Kansas City, MO 64106; telephone: 
(816) 329-2524.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FAA published this direct final rule 
with a request for comments in the Federal Register on September 28, 
2004 (69 FR 57839). The FAA uses the direct final rulemaking procedure 
for a non-controversial rule where the FAA believes that there will be 
no adverse public comment. This direct final rule advised the public 
that no adverse comments were anticipated, and that unless a written 
adverse comment, or a written notice of intent to submit such an 
adverse comment, were received within the comment period, the 
regulation would become effective on January 20, 2005. No adverse 
comments were received, and thus this notice confirms that this direct 
final rule will become effective on that date.

    Issued in Kansas City, MO on October 28, 2004.
Anthony D. Roetzel,
Acting Area Director, Western Flight Services Operations.
[FR Doc. 04-24975 Filed 11-9-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-M
#### § 875.213 May I apply as a qualified relative if I am the domestic partner of an employee or annuitant?

You may apply for coverage as a qualified relative if you are a domestic partner, as described in § 875.101. As prescribed by OPM, you will be required to provide documentation to demonstrate that you meet these requirements, and you must submit to full underwriting requirements. However, as explained in § 875.210, if you lose your status as a domestic partner, and therefore status as a qualified relative, before your coverage goes into effect, you are no longer eligible for FLTCIP coverage.

[87 FR 68598, Nov. 16, 2022]
§ 880.304 FEGLI coverage. ( a ) FEGLI premiums will not be collected during periods when an annuitant is a missing annuitant.
( b ) ( 1 ) If the annuity of a missing annuitant is restored under § 880.204(a), OPM will deduct the amount of FEGLI premiums attributable to the period when the annuitant was a missing annuitant from any adjustment payment due the annuitant under § 880.204(a).
( 2 ) If a missing annuitant is determined to be dead under § 880.205, FEGLI premiums and benefits will be computed using the date of death established under § 880.206(a).
### §22904. Membership

Eligibility for membership in the corporation and the rights and privileges of members are as provided in the bylaws.

(Pub. L. 105–225, Aug. 12, 1998, 112 Stat. 1310.)

| Revised Section | Source (U.S. Code) | Source (Statutes at Large) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 22904 | 36:3905. | Nov. 6, 1986, Pub. L. 99–604, §5, 100 Stat. 3447. |

Section
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

Written Statement of Chief Executive Officer Pursuant to Section 906of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

 

The undersigned, the Chief Executive Officer of American Bank Holdings, Inc.(The “Company”), Hereby certifies that to his knowledge on the date hereof:

 

(a)          The Quarterly Report of Form 10-QSB ofthe Company for the Quarter Ended June 30, 2005 filed on the date hereofwith the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “report”) fully complies withthe requirements of Section 13(a) or 15 (d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934; and

 

(b)         Information contained in the Report fairlypresents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results ofoperations of the Company.

 

 

Date: August 12, 2005

 
| /s/James E. Plack                     |   |
|---------------------------------------|--------|
| James E. Plack                        |
| President and Chief Executive Officer |

 

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906has been provided to American Bank Holdings, Inc. and will be retained byAmerican Bank Holdings, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and ExchangeCommission or its staff upon request.

 

----
Editorial Note on Subpart B of Part 591
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to subpart B of part 591 appear at 70 FR 31313, May 31, 2005.

§ 591.235 When do COLA and post differential payments begin? ( a ) Agencies begin paying an employee a COLA or post differential on the effective date of the change in the employee's official worksite to an official worksite within the COLA or post differential area or, in the case of local recruitment, on the effective date of the appointment.
( b ) For an employee detailed to temporary duty in a post differential area and who is otherwise eligible for a post differential, agencies must begin paying a post differential after 42 consecutive calendar days of temporary duty in the post differential area.
Greetings, 

This e-mail is a confirmation that your extension request for the steam electric effluent 

guidelines questionnaire was received. Extension requests will be evaluated on a case-by-case 

basis. Please be aware that submittal of an extension request to EPA does not alter the due date

of your questionnaire unless and until EPA agrees to the extension and establishes a new date.

Sincerely, 

Page 1 of 1

file://C:\Documents and Settings\TMedley\Local Settings\Temp\XPgrpwise\4C3C02CED... 8/29/2011