alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Bessie L. McGregor, defendant in error, v. John Siegel, plaintiff in error.

Gen. No. 28,300.

Action for deceit on contract for purchase of rooming house. Judgment for plaintiff. Error to the Circuit Court of Cook county; the Hon. David M. Brothers, Judge, presiding. Heard in the second division of this court for the first district at the March term, 1923.

Reversed and remanded.

Opinion filed October 2, 1923.

Frank T. McDermott, for plaintiff in error; Frank A. Ramsey, of counsel. Dwight D. Root, for defendant in error.

Mr. Justice Barnes

delivered the opinion of the court.
§ 270.5 Complaint. ( a ) Whenever any person believes that he or she has been denied a contract or subcontract to which this part applies on the grounds of race, creed, color, national origin, or sex, such person may complain of such denial or withholding to the Regional Director of the OCS Region in which such action is alleged to have occurred. Any complaint filed under this part must be submitted in writing to the appropriate Regional Director not later than 180 days after the date of the alleged unlawful denial of a contract or subcontract which is the basis of the complaint.
( b ) The complaint referred to in paragraph (a) of this section shall be accompanied by such evidence as may be available to a person and which is relevant to the complaint including affidavits and other documents.
( c ) Whenever any person files a complaint under this part, the Regional Director with whom such complaint is filed shall give written notice of such filing to all persons cited in the complaint no later than 10 days after receipt of such complaint. Such notice shall include a statement describing the alleged incident of discrimination, including the date and the names of persons involved in it.
#### GORHAM, Respondent, v. ROGERS et al., Appellants.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

March 10, 1905.)

Action by Walter A. Gorham against William A. Rogers and others. M. Conboy, for appellants. H. Taylor, for respondent. No opinion. Judgment and order affirmed, with costs.
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 352 Introduced in House (IH)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 352

  To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to increase the standard 
   mileage rate for charitable purposes to the standard mileage rate 
  established by the Secretary of the Treasury for business purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 25, 2005

  Mr. Platts introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to increase the standard 
   mileage rate for charitable purposes to the standard mileage rate 
  established by the Secretary of the Treasury for business purposes.

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

SECTION 1. STANDARD MILEAGE RATE FOR CHARITABLE PURPOSES SAME AS FOR 
              BUSINESS PURPOSES.

    (a) In General.--Subsection (i) of section 170 of the Internal 
Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to standard mileage rate for use of 
passenger automobile) is amended by striking ``14 cents per mile'' and 
inserting ``the standard mileage rate for business purposes prescribed 
by the Secretary for purposes of this chapter which is in effect on the 
date of the contribution''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) shall 
apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, 2004.
                                 <all>
```
#### John Giglio, Appellant, v. Abe Haber et al., Respondents.

In an action to recover damages for personal injury, the plaintiff appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County, entered February 18, 1963 after a jury trial, in favor of the defendants, dismissing the complaint at the close of plaintiff’s evidence for failure of proof. Judgment modified on the law and in the exercise of discretion by adding a provision to the effect that the dismissal of the complaint against all the defendants is without prejudice. As so modified, the judgment is affirmed, without costs. The findings of fact below are affirmed. The record discloses that, at the end of plaintiff’s case, the Trial Justice, on the ground that a prima facie case had not been proved, dismissed the complaint *xoith*prejudice. While the judgment does not state that the dismissal is with prejudice, it must be so construed here (Civ. Prac. Act, § 482; CPLR, rule 5013). In our opinion it was error to make the dismissal with prejudice, thus precluding the prosecution of a new action. Under all the circumstances disclosed in the record, it appears that proof is available to plaintiff which will readily enable him to establish a prima facie case. The complaint therefore should have been dismissed, without prejudice. Ughetta, Acting P. J., Kleinfeld, Hill, Rabin and Hopkins, JJ., concur.
#### § 56.12053 Circuits powered from trolley wires.

Ground wires for lighting circuits powered from trolley wires shall be connected securely to the ground-return circuit.
§ 49.19 Mine emergency notification plan. ( a ) Each underground mine shall have a mine rescue notification plan outlining the procedures to follow in notifying the mine rescue teams when there is an emergency that requires their services.
( b ) A copy of the mine rescue notification plan shall be posted at the mine for the miners' information. Where a miners' representative has been designated, the operator shall also provide the representative with a copy of the plan.
###### Editorial Note on Part 250

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 250 appear at 77 FR 50891, Aug. 22, 2012.

#### § 250.831 Alteration or disconnection of subsea pipeline or umbilical.

If a necessary alteration or disconnection of the pipeline or umbilical of any subsea well would affect your ability to monitor casing pressure or to test any subsea valves or equipment, you must contact the appropriate District Office at least 48 hours in advance and submit a repair or replacement plan to conduct the required monitoring and testing. You must not alter or disconnect until the repair or replacement plan is approved.
###### Editorial Note on Part 250

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 250 appear at 77 FR 50891, Aug. 22, 2012.

#### § 250.701 May I use alternate procedures or equipment during operations?

You may use alternate procedures or equipment during operations after receiving approval as described in § 250.141. You must identify and discuss your proposed alternate procedures or equipment in your Application for Permit to Drill (APD) (Form BSEE-0123) (see § 250.414(h)) or your Application for Permit to Modify (APM) (Form BSEE-0124). Procedures for obtaining approval of alternate procedures or equipment are described in § 250.141.
#### § 1243.12 May I substitute a demonstration of financial solvency for a bond posted before the effective date of this rule?

If you appealed an order before June 14, 1999 and you submitted an ONRR-specified surety instrument to suspend compliance with that order, you may replace the surety with a demonstration of financial solvency under this part at an administratively convenient time, such as when the surety instrument is due for renewal.
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsDAC-3 Pointing Stability Analysis Results for SAGE 3 and Other Users of the International Space Station (ISS) Payload Attachment Sites (PAS)The purpose of this paper is to provide final results of a pointing stability analysis for external payload attachment sites (PAS) on the International Space Station (ISS). As a specific example, the pointing stability requirement of the SAGE III atmospheric science instrument was examined in this paper. The instrument requires 10 arcsec stability over 2 second periods. SAGE 3 will be mounted on the ISS starboard side at the lower, outboard FIAS. In this engineering analysis, an open-loop DAC-3 finite element model of ISS was used by the Microgravity Group at Johnson Space Flight Center to generate transient responses at PAS to a limited number of disturbances. The model included dynamics up to 50 Hz. Disturbance models considered included operation of the solar array rotary joints, thermal radiator rotary joints, and control moment gyros. Responses were filtered to model the anticipated vibration attenuation effects of active control systems on the solar and thermal radiator rotary joints. A pointing stability analysis was conducted by double integrating acceleration transient over a 2 second period. Results of the analysis are tabulated for ISS X, Y, and Z Axis rotations. These results indicate that the largest excursions in rotation during pointing occurred due to rapid slewing of the thermal radiator. Even without attenuation at the rotary joints, the resulting pointing error was limited to less than 1.6 arcsec. With vibration control at the joints, to a maximum 0.5 arcsec over a 2 second period. Based on this current level of model definition, it was concluded that between 0 - 50 Hz, the pointing stability requirement for SAGE 3 will not be exceeded by the disturbances evaluated in this study.Document ID19970012916Acquisition SourceLangley Research CenterDocument TypeTechnical Memorandum (TM)AuthorsWoods-Vedeler, Jessica A.*(NASA Langley Research Center Hampton, VA United States)*Rombado, Gabriel*(Grumman Technical Services, Inc. Houston, TX United States)*Date AcquiredSeptember 6, 2013Publication DateJanuary 1, 1997Subject CategoryStructural MechanicsReport/Patent NumberNASA-TM-110318NAS 1.15:110318Accession Number97N17040Funding Number(s)PROJECT: RTOP 632-20-21-11Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType19970012916.pdfSTIcloud_downloadcontent_copyvisibilityRelated RecordsThere are no records associated with this record.visibility_offNo Preview Available
 No Fear Act | Freedom of Information Act | Office of the Inspector General | Agency Financial ReportsNASA Web Privacy Policy and Important Notices | NASA Guidelines for Quality of InformationDisclaimers, Copyright, Terms of Use | Accessibility | NASA OCIO | USA.gov | NASA.govContact Us | Site MapSTI LogoNASA Official: JoAnne R. Calhoun Site Curator: STI Compliance and Distribution Services Last Modified: September 12, 2024
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





In
connection with the Annual Report of PetroHunter Energy Corporation (the
“Company”) on Form 10-K for the period ending September 30, 2008, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I,
Charles A. Josenhans, Interim Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 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 results of operations of the
      Company.










/s/ Charles A.
Josenhans


Charles
A. Josenhans


Interim
Chief Financial Officer











Date:January 13,
2009
EXHIBIT
      32: Rule 13a-14(b) Certifications








The
      undersigned officer certifies that this report fully complies with the
      requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and that
      the information contained in the report fairly presents, in all material
      respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Centale,
      Inc.





A
      signed
      original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided
      to
      Centale, Inc. and will be retained by Centale, Inc. and furnished to the
      Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.





June
                28, 2007
            /s/
                Thaddeus A. Wier, Jr.Thaddeus
                A. Wier, Jr.
              (Chief
                Executive Officer and Chief Financial
                Officer)






































*       *       *       *       *
<PAGE>



                                                                    Exhibit 10.1

          Confidential Materials omitted and filed separately with the
         Securities and Exchange Commission. Asterisks denote omissions.


                                 AMENDMENT #5 OF
                         EXCLUSIVE DISTRIBUTOR AGREEMENT
                                 OF MAY 30, 1996

Dated: June 28, 2002

1)   Term: The term is hereby extended through May 31, 2003

2)   CH 2000:

     a)   Minimums: There shall be [**] minimum purchases required of CH 2000
          Systems.

3)   Heartwave:

     a)   Exclusivity: FD will purchase [**] units of HeartWave for a period of
          trial marketing. Based upon this purchase FD will have exclusive
          rights to market HeartWave in Japan for the period ending May 31,
          2003.

     b)   MHLW Approvals: By signature of this Amendment #5, FD acknowledges
          that they have made appropriate filing with the MHLW in Japan.
          Anticipated MHLW approval is estimated by October 2002.

     c)   Minimum purchases: Within 30 days of import approval by MHLW, FD
          agrees to issue CHI a purchase order for [**] HeartWave systems as per
          3a. In any eventuality FD agrees to purchase the [**] Heartwave
          systems no later than December 16, 2002.

     d)   Pricing: Pricing of the [**] units of the Heartwave as mentioned above
          in 3c will be $[**] per unit.

     e)   Termination: In the event that FD and CHI are not able to agree on
          terms for continuation of FD's exclusive rights to market HeartWave
          for the period beyond May 31, 2003 then, if CHI requests, FD will
          transfer the MHLW import approval to a distributor of CHI's choosing.
          In such case CHI will pay FD's direct expenses for obtaining MHLW
          approval.

     f)   If MHLW approval takes greater than 4 months from submission, and FD
          has submitted in accordance with 3b, both sides agree to discuss
          possibilities of extending the term for exclusivity.


                                     Page 1                             11/13/02


<PAGE>


4)   Sensor Pricing:

     a)   The price of sensor sets will remain at $[**] through May 31, 2003.







CAMBRIDGE HEART                             FUKUDA DENSHI



Signed:  /s/ David A. Chazanovitz               Signed:  [ILLEGIBLE]
        -------------------------                        -----------------------



By:  David A. Chazanovitz                       By:
     ----------------------------                    ---------------------------



Date: June 28, 2002                             Date:
      ---------------------------                    ---------------------------










                                     Page 2                             11/13/02
### §415. Limitations of actions

#### (a) Recovery of charges by carrier

All actions at law by carriers for recovery of their lawful charges, or any part thereof, shall be begun within two years from the time the cause of action accrues, and not after.

#### (b) Recovery of damages

All complaints against carriers for the recovery of damages not based on overcharges shall be filed with the Commission within two years from the time the cause of action accrues, and not after, subject to subsection (d) of this section.

#### (c) Recovery of overcharges

For recovery of overcharges action at law shall be begun or complaint filed with the Commission against carriers within two years from the time the cause of action accrues, and not after, subject to subsection (d) of this section, except that if claim for the overcharge has been presented in writing to the carrier within the two-year period of limitation said period shall be extended to include two years from the time notice in writing is given by the carrier to the claimant of disallowance of the claim, or any part or parts thereof, specified in the notice.

#### (d) Extension

If on or before expiration of the period of limitation in subsection (b) or (c) a carrier begins action under subsection (a) for recovery of lawful charges in respect of the same service, or, without beginning action, collects charges in respect of that service, said period of limitation shall be extended to include ninety days from the time such action is begun or such charges are collected by the carrier.

#### (e) Accrual of cause of action for transmission of message

The cause of action in respect of the transmission of a message shall, for the purposes of this section, be deemed to accrue upon delivery or tender of delivery thereof by the carrier, and not after.

#### (f) Enforcement petition

A petition for the enforcement of an order of the Commission for the payment of money shall be filed in the district court or the State court within one year from the date of the order, and not after.

#### (g) "Overcharges" defined

The term "overcharges" as used in this section shall be deemed to mean charges for services in excess of those applicable thereto under the schedules of charges lawfully on file with the Commission.

(June 19, 1934, ch. 652, title IV, §415, 48 Stat. 1099; Pub. L. 93–507, Nov. 30, 1974, 88 Stat. 1577.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

1974—Subsecs. (a) to (c). Pub. L. 93–507 amended subsecs. (a) to (c) generally, substituting reference to two years for reference to one year wherever appearing.
RB

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 24-0256

STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee,

v.

CHARLES DAVID AMENT,

Defendant and Appellant.

GRANT OF EXTENSION

Upon consideration of Appellee’s motion for a 30-day extension of time, 

and good cause appearing therefor, Appellee is granted an extension of time to 

and including August 20, 2024, within which to prepare, serve, and file its 

response brief. 

Electronically signed by:

Bowen Greenwood

Clerk of the Supreme Court

July 12 2024

07/12/2024

Case Number: DA 24-0256
#### § 27.41 Test to determine resistance to moisture.

Components, subassemblies, or assemblies, the normal functioning of which might be affected by moisture, shall be tested in atmospheres of high relative humidity (80 percent or more at 65°-75 °F.) for continuous operating and idle periods of 4 hours each. The component or subassembly or assembly shall function normally after being subjected to those tests.
# United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit Chicago, Illinois 60604 May 15, 2003 Before Hon. Joel M. Flaum, Chief Judge Hon. Harlington Wood, Jr., Circuit Judge Hon. Daniel A. Manion, Circuit Judge

No. 01-3648 John Doe and Jane Doe, et al.,

Plaintiffs-Appellants ,
v. Carla Heck, et al, Defendants-Appellees

. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin No. 99 C 907 J. P. Stadtmueller, Judge

.

O R D E R The opinion of this court issued on April 16, 2003 is amended as follows: Replace the text of fn. 13 with the following: To the extent the plaintiffs’ suit against the defendants in their official capacities with the Bureau seeks retrospective monetary damages, this action constitutes a suit against the state that is prohibited by the Eleventh Amendment. Wynn v. Southward , 251 F.3d 588, 592 (7th Cir. 2001). This aspect of the plaintiffs’ suit is, therefore, dismissed. See Higgins v. Mississippi , 217 F.3d 951, 954 (7th Cir. 2000) (though this court need not raise Eleventh Amendment immunity sua sponte, since it does not implicate subject matter jurisdiction, it may do so). On April 30, 2003 the appellees filed a petition for rehearing. All of the judges on the original panel voted to deny the petition. The petition is therefore DENIED.
**Exhibit 10.28**

**SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE**

**NALCO COMPANY**

**SUPPLEMENTAL RETIREMENT INCOME PLAN**

(As Amended and Restated Effective as of January 1, 2004) 

**WHEREAS**,Nalco Company (the “Company”) maintains the Nalco Company Supplemental Retirement Income Plan, as amended and restated effective January 1, 2004 (the “Plan”); and 

**WHEREAS**, pursuant to Section 7.2 thereof, the Plan may be amended by action of the Nalco Company Employee Benefit PlanAdministration Committee (“EBPAC”); and 

**WHEREAS**, EBPAC desires to amend the Plan provide certain benefits todomestic partners and make certain other changes; 

**NOW**, **THEREFORE**, **BE IT RESOLVED**, that EBPAC herebyamends the Plan, effective as of January 1, 2010, as follows: 

1. Section 2.1(g) of the Plan is hereby amended byreplacing the phrase, “surviving spouse” with the following phrase, “surviving spouse, or Domestic Partner (as such term is defined under the Retirement Income Plan).” 

2. Article IX of the Plan is hereby amended by inserting the following new Section 9.9 at the end thereof: 

“9.9. **Restriction on Venue and Limitations on Actions**

Any Participant or Beneficiary can bring an action in connection with the Plan only after exhausting the claims procedures contained in theRetirement Income Plan and only in Federal District Court in Chicago, Illinois. The Participant or Beneficiary must bring the cause of action within two years from the date of EBPAC’s final determination which is being challenged.”

**IN WITNESS WHEREOF**, EBPAC has caused this Second Amendment to be executed by its dulyauthorized members this 30th day of November, 2009. 

 
**NALCO COMPANY**
**EMPLOYEE BENEFIT PLAN**

**ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE**

 
Erik Fyrwald
 
Brad Bell
 
Steve Landsman
 
Laurie Marsh
 
Bob Dompke
### **CHAPTER 139—REGISTRATION**

Sec.
13901.
Requirement for registration. 1

13902.
Registration of motor carriers.
13903.
Registration of freight forwarders.
13904.
Registration of brokers.
13905.
Effective periods of registration.
13906.
Security of motor carriers, motor private carriers, brokers, and freight forwarders.
13907.
Household goods agents.
13908.
Registration and other reforms.
13909.
Availability of information.

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

**2012**—Pub. L. 112–141, div. C, title II, §32914(b)(2), July 6, 2012, 126 Stat. 820, added item 13909.

**2005**—Pub. L. 109–59, title IV, §4303(d)(2), Aug. 10, 2005, 119 Stat. 1763, inserted "motor private carriers," after "motor carriers," in item 13906.

1  So in original. Section catchline amended by Pub. L. 112–141 without corresponding amendment of chapter analysis.