alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### §1594. Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Advisory Council

(a) There is created the Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Advisory Council composed of no more than three members from each State appointed by the Governor of each of the Colorado River Basin States.

(b) The Council shall be advisory only and shall—

(1) act as liaison between both the Secretaries of Interior and Agriculture and the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency and the States in accomplishing the purposes of this subchapter;

(2) receive reports from the Secretary on the progress of the salinity control program and review and comment on said reports; and

(3) recommend to both the Secretary and the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency appropriate studies of further projects, techniques, or methods for accomplishing the purposes of this subchapter.

(Pub. L. 93–320, title II, §204, June 24, 1974, 88 Stat. 272.)

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

#### Termination of Advisory Councils

Advisory councils established after Jan. 5, 1973, to terminate not later than the expiration of the 2-year period beginning on the date of their establishment, unless, in the case of a council established by the President or an officer of the Federal Government, such council is renewed by appropriate action prior to the expiration of such 2-year period, or in the case of a council established by the Congress, its duration is otherwise provided for by law. See sections 1001(2) and 1013 of Title 5, Government Organization and Employees.
```

[House Report 110-488]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

110th Congress                                                   Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 1st Session                                                    110-488

======================================================================

 
 PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF THE CONFERENCE REPORT TO ACCOMPANY THE 
 BILL (H.R. 1585) TO AUTHORIZE APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2008 FOR 
    MILITARY ACTIVITIES OF THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE, FOR MILITARY 
 CONSTRUCTION, AND FOR DEFENSE ACTIVITIES OF THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY, 
TO PRESCRIBE MILITARY PERSONNEL STRENGTHS FOR SUCH FISCAL YEAR, AND FOR 
                             OTHER PURPOSES

                                _______
                                

 December 11, 2007.--Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be 
                                printed

                                _______
                                

    Ms. Castor, from the Committee on Rules, submitted the following

                              R E P O R T

                       [To accompany H. Res. 860]

    The Committee on Rules, having had under consideration 
House Resolution 860, by a nonrecord vote, report the same to 
the House with the recommendation that the resolution be 
adopted.

                SUMMARY OF PROVISIONS OF THE RESOLUTION

    The resolution provides for consideration of the conference 
report to accompany H.R. 1585, the ``National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008.'' The rule waives all 
points of order against the conference report and its 
consideration. The rule provides that the conferees on H.R. 
3093 are hereby discharged and that the conference and its 
accompanying papers are hereby tabled.

                         EXPLANATION OF WAIVERS

    The waiver of all points of order against the conference 
report and against its consideration includes a waiver of 
clause 9 of rule XXII (precluding conferees from including 
matter outside the scope of conference). Although the rule 
waives all points of order against the conference report and 
against its consideration, the conference report does not 
violate either clause 9 or 10 of rule XXI (requiring earmarks 
to be disclosed and requiring conference reports to be in 
compliance with the paygo rule).

                                  

```
I 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 3015 

To suspend temporarily the duty on 2 benzylthio-3-ethyl sulfonyl pyridine. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JUNE 21, 2005 

Mr. LAHOOD introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To suspend temporarily the duty on 2 benzylthio-3-ethyl 

sulfonyl pyridine. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. 2 BENZYLTHIO-3-ETHYL SULFONYL PYRIDINE. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter II of chapter 99 of 

5 the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is 

6 amended by inserting in numerical sequence the following 

7 new heading: 

‘‘ 9902.05.70 2 benzylthio-3-ethyl sulfonyl 

pyridine (CAS No. 175729– 

82–5) provided for in subheading 2933.39.6190) ........ Free No change No change On or before 

12/31/2009 ’’. 
2 

•HR 3015 IH 

1 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

2 subsection (a) applies to goods entered, or withdrawn from 

3 warehouse for consumption, on or after the 15th day after 

4 the date of enactment of this Act. 

Æ
Materials Not Included in

Airworthiness Directive (AD) Docket

Docket Number: FAA- 2011-1062

Directorate Identifier: 2011NM038AD

340-32-139 --- 1/12/10

340-32-127, R01 --- 1/23/03

340-32-128, R02 --- 1/12/10

Name/Description of Item(s) Not Included in FDMS Docket and Maintained in the 

Supplemental AD Docket

MAY BE VIEWED AT: Federal Aviation Administration

Transport Airplane Directorate

Rules Docket

1601 Lind Ave. SW.,

Renton, WA 98057

425.227.1221

DURING THE HOURS OF: 9 a.m. and 3 p.m., Monday through Friday,

except Federal holidays.

Form Date: 03/05/2008
#### In the Matter of the Claim of Hannah Beer, Appellant. Martin P. Catherwood, as Industrial Commissioner, Respondent.

This is an appeal by the claimant from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board which held that the claimant was ineligible to receive benefits because she refused, without good cause, an offer of employment. It appears that the claimant was a bookkeeper with about three years experience when she became unemployed. At the time her employment was terminated (October 23, 1960) she was earning $75 per six-day week plus the season’s use of a cabana (value at about $650 per season) and three meals per day. The same position would have been available in January, 1961 upon the completion of alterations to the property of the employer. During the interim she moved to California. On October 26, I960 claimant was offered a job at the rate of $60 per five-day week, but refused this job on the ground that the salary was inadequate and the further ground that the travel time would be too long. The Unemployment Insurance Interviewer testified that the travel time was about one-half hour from the area where claimant resided. Such a travel timo is not unusual nor unreasonable. The record further *1007shows that the median wage for bookkeepers in claimant’s classification was $65 per week and accordingly the rate of $60 was not substantially lower than the prevailing wage for similar work in the locality. The determination here was a question of fact based upon substantial evidence to support the finding. *(Matter of Lipschitz [Lubin],*7 A D 2d 777, 778.) Decision unanimously affirmed, without costs. Present — Bergan, P. J., Gibson, Herlihy, Reynolds and Taylor, JJ.
§ 203.340 Special forbearance. ( a ) If the conditions of § 203.614 are met and special forbearance relief is granted pursuant to that section, the contract of insurance shall continue in force except as otherwise provided in this subpart.
( b ) The contract of insurance shall continue in force, except as otherwise provided in this subpart, when the conditions of this section which were effective prior to January 1, 1977, have been met and special forbearance relief is granted pursuant thereto prior to January 1, 1977.
[41 FR 49735, Nov. 10, 1976]
ex10_4.htm








 


Exhibit 10.4


 


October 27, 2010







Playboy Enterprises, Inc.


2706 Media Center Drive


Los Angeles, CA  90065


Attn:  Gary Rosenson







Dear Gary:







Reference is made to that certain Amended And Restated Affiliation And License Agreement For DTH Satellite Exhibition Of Programming between DIRECTV, Inc. ("Affiliate") and Playboy Entertainment Group and Spice Hot Entertainment, Inc. ("Programmer") made as of August 1, 2007 as extended by the Letter Agreements dated October 12, 2009, November 13, 2009, December 14, 2009, January 14, 2010, February 12, 2010, March 11, 2010, April 8, 2010, June 25, 2010 and September 1, 2010 (the "Agreement").







Except as modified expressly below, all terms of the Agreement are hereby ratified and remain in full force and effect.  All capitalized terms used herein shall have the meanings ascribed to them as set forth in the Agreement.







Affiliate and Programmer hereby agree to extend the Term of the Agreement as set forth in Paragraph 6.(a) through the earlier of the parties entering into a replacement agreement or November 16, 2010.







Very truly yours,







DIRECTV, Inc.







/s/ Toby Berlin







Toby Berlin


Vice President, Programming Acquisition












ACCEPTED AND AGREED:








	
PLAYBOY ENTERTAINMENT GROUP, INC.

	  	
SPICE HOT ENTERTAINMENT, INC.


	  	  	  	  	  
	  	  	  	  	  
	
By:

	
/s/ Gary Rosenson

	  	
By:

	
/s/ Gary Rosenson


	
Title:  

	
SVP & GM

	  	
Title:  

	
SVP & GM
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 

REGION IX 

75 Hawthorne Street 

San Francisco, CA 94105 

November 1, 2011 

Ms. Karen Magliano, Manager 

Air Quality Data Branch 

Planning and Technical Support Division 

Air Resources Board 

California Environmental Protection Agency 

P.O. Box 2815 

Sacramento, CA 95812 

Dear Ms. Magliano: 

Thank you for your timely submission of the 2011 Annual Monitoring Network Report for Small 

Districts in California. We have reviewed the submitted document and have found that it meets all of 

the requirements for annual network plans as required by our regulations set forth under 40 CFR Part 

58.10. While this letter serves as official approval of the annual network plan, it does not constitute 

approval of the system modifications that are proposed in the plan for the future. We will continue to 

work with your agency to review system changes as they proceed. Lastly, please review comments to 

network plans submitted by other agencies that are within the CARB PQAO. 

If you have any questions regarding this letter, please feel free to contact me at (415) 972-3851 or 

Meredith Kurpius at (415) 947-4534. 

 Sincerely, 

 

/s/ 

 

 Matthew Lakin, Manager 

 Air Quality Analysis Office 

 Air Division 

cc: Ken Stroud, ARB 

Mike Miguel, ARB
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ADAM BERGMAN, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

 v.

THELEN LLP,

Defendant. /

No. C-08-5322 MMC

ORDER DIRECTING PLAINTIFFS

DARYL YEAKLE AND RAYMOND R.

PLANTE TO INFORM COURT RE:

CONSENT TO MAGISTRATE JUDGE

On February 29, 2016, the above-titled action was reassigned to the undersigned.

In cases assigned to a district judge, the parties may consent at any time to

reassignment of the case to a magistrate judge for all purposes, including entry of final

judgment. See Civil L.R. 73-1(b).

Defendant has consented to have a magistrate judge conduct all proceedings in the

instant action (see Doc. No. 23), as have plaintiffs Adam Bergman, Kendrick Patterson,

Michael Attianese and Andrea Levy (see Doc. No. 13). The remaining two plaintiffs,

specifically, Daryl Yeakle and Raymond D. Plante, have not advised the Court as to

whether they so consent.

Accordingly, plaintiffs Daryl Yeakle and Raymond D. Plante are hereby DIRECTED

to advise the Court, no later than March 18, 2016, as to whether they consent to have a

magistrate judge conduct all further proceedings in the instant action. For plaintiffs’

Case 3:08-cv-05322-LB Document 80 Filed 03/09/16 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2

convenience, a consent form is attached hereto; forms are also available at

http://www.cand.uscourts.gov, in the “Forms” section.

The parties are further advised that they may jointly request assignment to a specific

magistrate judge. As defendant and four of the six plaintiffs have previously filed a general

consent, any such joint request must be made in a separate document filed concurrently

with any consent forms signed by plaintiffs Daryl Yeakle and Raymond D. Plante.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 9, 2016 

MAXINE M. CHESNEY

United States District Judge

Case 3:08-cv-05322-LB Document 80 Filed 03/09/16 Page 2 of 2
#### In the Matter of Barbara S. Miller, Respondent, v Jonathan S. Miller, Appellant

Supreme Court, New York County, entered September 29, 1977, which granted plaintiff temporary child support of $100 per week commencing June 30, 1977, plus expenses for the infant child’s education, medical bills and telephone, unanimously reversed, on the law, and on the facts, without costs and without disbursements, to the extent appealed from, by vacating the second decretal paragraph which directs defendant to pay $100 per week for temporary child support. Under sections 413 and 414 of the Family Court Act "both the father and the mother are equally responsible for the support of their children and * * * it is within the power of the * * * Court, and it is its duty, to apportion the costs of such support between them in accordance with their respective means and responsibilities, without regard to the sex of the parent” *(Matter of Carter v Carter,*58 AD2d 438, 447; *Tessler v Siegel,*59 AD2d 846). Since plaintiff’s income for the past several years exceeded that of defendant and her assets are much greater, it is clear that the award of child support on this record was based on the erroneous assumption that the father is primarily obligated to support the children. The older of the parties’ two children resides with defendant and he is paying all of her expenses. The younger resides with plaintiff and defendant is voluntarily paying her telephone, educational and medical bills. Under these circumstances, the mandate of a fair apportionment of child support requires vacatur of the decretal paragraph of the order which directs defendant to pay $100 per week for temporary child support. Concur—Lupiano, J. P., Birns, Lane, Sandler and Sullivan, JJ.
#### In re MALCOM BREWING CO.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department.

February 11, 1903.)

In the matter of the voluntary dissolution of the Malcom Brewing Company.

No opinion. Motion denied.
109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2967

AN ACT

To designate the Federal building located at 333 Mt. Elliott 

Street in Detroit, Michigan, as the ‘‘Rosa Parks Federal 

Building’’.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
2

•HR 2967 EH 

1 SECTION 1. DESIGNATION. 

2 The Federal building located at 333 Mt. Elliott 

3 Street in Detroit, Michigan, shall be known and des4 ignated as the ‘‘Rosa Parks Federal Building’’. 

5 SEC. 2. REFERENCES. 

6 Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 

7 paper, or other record of the United States to the Federal 

8 building referred to in section 1 shall be deemed to be 

9 a reference to the ‘‘Rosa Parks Federal Building’’.

Passed the House of Representatives October 26, 

2005. 

Attest:

Clerk. 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2967

AN ACT

To designate the Federal building located at 333 

‘‘Rosa Parks Federal Building’’.Mt. Elliott Street in Detroit, Michigan, as the
#### § 291.505 Definitions.

For purposes of this subpart:

*Locality* means the community, neighborhood, or jurisdiction of the unit of general local government, or Indian tribal government;

*Unit of general local government* means a county or parish, city, town, township, or other political subdivision of a State.

[81 FR 53003, Aug. 11, 2016]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-11409

Summary Calendar

JONATHAN MARSHALL, SR.,

Petitioner-Appellant

v.

MYRON L. BATTS, Warden; KEN PAXTON, Attorney General, State of Texas,

Respondents-Appellees

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 1:16-CV-107

Before REAVLEY, PRADO, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Jonathan Marshall, Sr., federal prisoner # 17040-077, appeals the 

district court’s dismissal without prejudice of his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition for 

failing to comply with the court’s order to file an amended petition using the 

form provided by the court.

We review a district court’s dismissal of an action for failure to prosecute 

or for failure to comply with any court order for abuse of discretion. 

 

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not 

be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH 

CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

December 21, 2017

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 16-11409 Document: 00514282973 Page: 1 Date Filed: 12/21/2017
No. 16-11409

2

McCullough v. Lynaugh, 835 F.2d 1126, 1127 (5th Cir. 1988). Marshall does 

not challenge the district court’s conclusion that he failed to comply with the 

court’s order to file an amended petition. By failing to brief any argument 

challenging the district court’s reason for dismissal, Marshall has abandoned 

the issue. See Yohey v. Collins, 985 F.2d 222, 224-25 (5th Cir. 1993); 

Brinkmann v. Dallas Cty. Deputy Sheriff Abner, 813 F.2d 744, 748 (5th Cir. 

1987). Thus, he has not shown that the district court abused its discretion in 

dismissing his petition without prejudice. See McCullough, 835 F.2d at 1127.

The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

 Case: 16-11409 Document: 00514282973 Page: 2 Date Filed: 12/21/2017
#### Mildred Fleer v. Martin Fleer.

Motion for a stay granted and the plaintiff and her attorney are stayed from taking any proceedings to collect the counsel fee awarded under the order appealed from, pending the hearing and determination of the appeal, on condition that the appellant serves one copy of the typewritten appellant’s points upon the attorney for respondent and files six typewritten copies thereof with this court on or before September 22, 1960, with notice of argument for October 4, 1960, said appeal to be argued or submitted when reached. Respondent’s points are to be served and filed on or before September 28, 1960. Concur — Botein, P. J., Breitel, Rabin, Valente and McNally, JJ.
#### In the Matter of InJah E. Tafari, Appellant, v Donald Selsky, as Director of Special Housing/Inmate Disciplinary Programs, New York State Department of Correctional Services, Respondent.

[833 NYS2d 421]

Appeal from a judgment (denominated decision) of the Supreme Court, Erie County (Penny M. Wolfgang, J.), dated December 10, 2004 in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78. The judgment dismissed the petition.

It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed without costs. Present—Hurlbutt, J.P, Martoche, Smith, Centra and Peradotto, JJ.
Exhibit 99.3


                        Independent Accountant's Report


Synthetic Fixed-Income Securities, Inc. (as Depositor)
One Wachovia Center
301 South College Street, DC-7
Charlotte, NC 28288

 U.S. Bank Trust National Association (as Trustee)
 Corporate Trust Department
 100 Wall Street
 New York, NY 10005


Re:  STRATS Trust For IBM Corporation Securities Series 2004-7 (the "Trust")
     -----------------------------------------------------------------------

Ladies and Gentlemen:

We have examined assertions of Synthetic Fixed-Income Securities, Inc. (the
"Depositor") and U.S. Bank National Association, (the "Trustee" and Together
with the Depositor, the "Management") that the Depositor and the Trustee have
complied, in all material respects, with the provisions of the Base Trust
Agreement dated as of September 26, 2003, as supplemented by a series
supplement dated as of June 15, 2004 (together, the "Trust Agreement"), in
respect of the STRATS Trust For IBM Corporation Securities Series 2004-7 (the
"Trust"), during the period covered by the annual report on Form 10-K filed by
the Depositor on behalf of the Trust for the year ended December 31, 2004 (the
"Annual Report"). Management is responsible for compliance with the Trust
Agreement. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on Management's
assertions based on our examination.

Our examination was made in accordance with attestation standards established
by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants and, accordingly,
included examining, on a test basis, evidence about the Depositor's and the
Trustee's compliance with the Trust Agreement and performing such other
procedures as considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our
examination provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.

In our opinion, the Depositor and the Trustee have complied, in all material
respects, with the Trust Agreement during the period covered by the Annual
Report and Management's assertions with respect to such compliance are fairly
stated, in all material respects, for the year ended December 31, 2004.


/s/ Aston Bell, CPA
New York, New York
March 22, 2005
exv10w2










Exhibit 10.2




SUMMARY OF FISCAL YEAR 2011 EXECUTIVE OFFICER

ANNUAL CASH INCENTIVE COMPENSATION PLAN




     For the twelve month period ending June 30, 2011, each executive officer of Cardiovascular
Systems, Inc. is eligible to receive cash incentive compensation as follows:



     Revenue and Adjusted EBITDA Financial Goals



     Receipt of cash incentive compensation for fiscal 2011 is based on the Company’s achievement
of revenue and adjusted EBITDA financial goals. Target bonus amounts are split evenly between
these two goals. None of the executive officers is subject to individual goals under the plan.
Target bonus levels as a percentage of base salary are 75% for the President and Chief Executive
Officer and 50% for the other executive officers. Depending upon the Company’s performance against
the goals, participants are eligible to earn 50% to 150% of their target bonus amount for adjusted
EBITDA and 50% to 150% of their target bonus amount for revenue; however, in the event of
extraordinary revenue performance above the goals set by the Board, the participants could receive
incentive payments greater than 150% of their targets for the revenue goal based upon a formula
established by the Board, with no maximum payout set under the plan. The plan criteria are the same
for all of the executive officers.



     Management by Objective Targets



     The plan also provides “management by objective” (MBO) targets related to certain
predetermined FDA and product achievement milestones for the first six months and full year periods
of fiscal 2011. Achievement of the MBO targets could result in additional cash bonuses to executive
officers of 3.75% of their annual base salaries for each of the target periods.



     Other Incentives



     In addition to incentives under the plan, the Company’s Vice President of Sales and Vice
President of Business Development are eligible to receive monthly sales commissions. The Board also
has authority to grant additional discretionary cash bonuses of up to 10% of annual base salary for
any executive officer.