alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### §306109. Costs of preservation as eligible project costs

A Federal agency may include the costs of preservation activities of the agency under this division as eligible project costs in all undertakings of the agency or assisted by the agency. The eligible project costs may include amounts paid by a Federal agency to a State to be used in carrying out the preservation responsibilities of the Federal agency under this division, and reasonable costs may be charged to Federal licensees and permittees as a condition to the issuance of the license or permit.

(Pub. L. 113–287, §3, Dec. 19, 2014, 128 Stat. 3227.)

| Revised Section | Source (U.S. Code) | Source (Statutes at Large) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 306109 | 16 U.S.C. 470h–2(g). | Pub. L. 89–665, title I, §110(g), as added Pub. L. 96–515, title II, §206, Dec. 12, 1980, 94 Stat. 2996. |

Section
§ 212.2 Applicability. ( a ) This part applies to: ( 1 ) The Office of the Secretary of Defense, the Military Departments, the Office of the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the Joint Staff, the Combatant Commands, the Office of Inspector General of the Department of Defense, the Defense Agencies, the DoD Field Activities, and all other organizational entities within the Department of Defense (hereafter referred to collectively as the “DoD Components”).
( 2 ) Non-Federal entities authorized to operate on DoD installations.
( b ) This part shall not apply to: ( 1 ) Military relief societies.
( 2 ) Banks or credit unions according to 32 CFR part 230.
( 3 ) Support provided under Innovative Readiness Training according to DoD Directive 1100.20.[1]
Footnotes -
212.2
[1] Copies of unclassified DoD Directives, Instructions, Publications, and Administrative Instructions may be obtained at *http://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/ .*
**Exhibit32.1**

**CERTIFICATION OFPRESIDENT AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER**

**18 U.S.C.1350 Certification of Bruce C. DalePresident and Chief Executive OfficerofDuckwall-ALCO Stores, Inc.**

I, Bruce C. Dale,President and Chief Executive Officer of Duckwall-ALCO Stores, Inc., herebycertify, in accordance with 18 U.S.C. ss 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

(a)          The Quarterly Report onForm 10-Q for the quarter ended October 29, 2006, which accompanies thiscertification, fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d)of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

(b)         The information containedthe Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended October 30, 2005, whichaccompanies this certification, fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operation of Duckwall-ALCO Stores, Inc.

A signed originalof this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided toDuckwall-ALCO Stores, Inc. and will be retained by Duckwall-ALCO Stores, Inc.and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff uponrequest.

Dated:  December 8, 2006
|        | *By*   | * /s/ Bruce  C. Dale*            |
|--------|--------|---------------------------------------|
|   |   | Bruce C. Dale                         |
|   |   | President and Chief Executive Officer |

** **

28

----
#### § 1602.15 Local board of jurisdiction.

The local board of jurisdiction is the local board to which a registrant is assigned and which has authority, in accord with the provisions of this chapter, to determine his claim or to issue to him an order. *His local board* and *registrant's local board* refer to the local board of jurisdiction.

[52 FR 24454, July 1, 1987]
**Order of the Court of First Instance (Third Chamber) of 8 January 2008 – Commission v Lior and Others**

**(Case T-245/04)**

Arbitration clause – Jurisdiction of the Court of First Instance – Action against a European Economic Interest Grouping and its members and former members – Partial jurisdiction

Procedure – Referral to the Court of First Instance under an arbitration clause (Arts 238 EC and 240 EC) (see paras 111-113, 138-140)

**Re:**

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | ACTION pursuant to Article 238 EC seeking an order against all the defendants jointly to repay the amounts paid by the Community in accordance with six contracts concluded in the framework of the Thermie programme and one contract concluded in the framework of the Altener II programme. |

**Operative part**

The Court:

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 1. | | Dismisses the action as inadmissible in so far as it relates to Deira SA, Eutec Srl, Mindshare BVBA, Società politecnica italiana recherche e progetti Srl, RPA Spa, Carmen eV, University College Dublin – Energy Research Group, Beneport SA, Europe Information Service SA, Managium SPRL and Aris Hellas EPE; |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 2. | | Orders the Commission to bear its own costs with regard to the action brought against Deira, Eutec, Mindshare, Società politecnica italiana recerche e progetti, RPA, Carmen, University College Dublin – Energy Research Group, Beneport, Europe Information Service, Managium and Aris Hellas, and pay the costs of Deira, Eutec, Mindshare, Società politecnica italiana recerche e progetti, RPA, Carmen, University College Dublin – Energy Research Group, Beneport, Europe Information Service and Managium; |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 3. | | Orders Aris Hellas to bear its own costs. |
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 1067 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. RES. 1067

   Recognizing the 175th anniversary of the organization of Laclede 
          County, Missouri, and the city of Lebanon, Missouri.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 8, 2024

 Mr. Alford submitted the following resolution; which was referred to 
             the Committee on Oversight and Accountability

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
   Recognizing the 175th anniversary of the organization of Laclede 
          County, Missouri, and the city of Lebanon, Missouri.

Whereas, on February 24, 1849, Laclede County, Missouri, and Lebanon, Missouri, 
        were organized;
Whereas Laclede County is made up of more than 36,000 proud Missourians, and 
        Lebanon of more than 14,000 Missourians;
Whereas Laclede County was named after Pierre Laclede, the founder of St. Louis, 
        Missouri; and
Whereas the city of Lebanon, Missouri, is the largest municipality of Laclede 
        County, Missouri: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the House of Representatives--
            (1) recognizes the 175th anniversary of the organization of 
        Laclede County, Missouri, and the city of Lebanon, Missouri; 
        and
            (2) acknowledges the importance of Laclede County, 
        Missouri, and the city of Lebanon, Missouri, to the State of 
        Missouri.
                                 <all>
```
### Part F—Federal Emergency Procurement Flexibility
### §5525. Allotment and assignment of pay

The head of each agency may establish procedures under which each employee of the agency is permitted to make allotments and assignments of amounts out of his pay for such purpose as the head of the agency considers appropriate. For purposes of this section, the term "agency" includes the Office of the Architect of the Capitol.

(Pub. L. 89–554, Sept. 6, 1966, 80 Stat. 481; Pub. L. 107–68, title I, §133(b)(1), Nov. 12, 2001, 115 Stat. 582.)

| Derivation | U.S. Code | Revised Statutes and Statutes at Large |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | 5 U.S.C. 3075. | Sept. 26, 1961, Pub. L. 87–304, §5, 75 Stat. 663. |

Statutes at Large

Standard changes are made to conform with the definitions applicable and the style of this title as outlined in the preface to the report.

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

2001—Pub. L. 107–68 inserted at end "For purposes of this section, the term 'agency' includes the Office of the Architect of the Capitol."

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

#### Effective Date of 2001 Amendment

Pub. L. 107–68, title I, §133(b)(2), Nov. 12, 2001, 115 Stat. 582, provided that: "The amendment made by paragraph (1) [amending this section] shall apply with respect to pay periods beginning on or after the date of the enactment of this Act [Nov. 12, 2001]."
Hon. R. L. Crazier

countyAttorney Johnson County cleburne, Texas De*r Sir: Opinion No. O-2148 Rer The qualificationof a trustee of a common schooldistrict as a sproperty taxpayer." We are in receipt of your letter of recent date inwhich you request the opinion of this departmenttouohing the question stated‘-by you 88 follows, "Is a personnho~owns personal propertywithin

the o-on schooldistriot, which personalproperty hasbeen assessed for taxes, but upon v&i&the said taxes are delinquem'c, a property taxpaying and quali-, fied to hold the office of trustee in the common school district?" Artiole 2745, Revised Statutes of Texas, follows* (I

. . . providing no person shall be trustee unless he is a property taxpayer towhich he is eleoted . , .s provides, in part, as qualified as in the district

This departmenlheld:in an opinion by Assistant Attorney General Joe J.Alsup, under date of April 14, 1936, that a personwho hss been assessed taxes on personalproperty is s. property taxpayer and a qualified trustee of a ccsmnon school district in Texas, in such particular, althoughhe has never paid the taxes on such personal property.

It will bs noted that this statute does not require that the trustee shall be a taxpayer as to real property in the absence of which this requirmnent is satisfiedupon the basis of personal property taxes. RUSEN VS. CWJTFAU COUNTY, 265 Pac. 676; 82 MONT. 115.

The general rule also appears to be, absent any contrary indication in the particular statute,that theterm "taxpayer"means a person chargeablewith a tax; one who owns propertywithin the county subject to taxation. HILLSMARVS. FAISON, 57 S.W. 920 (Tex. Civ.App.); RADGH VS. LITILS, 282 Pac. 459, 140 Okla. 206; CASTILLOvs. STATE HIGHWAY KMMISSION of MO. 279 S. W. 6733 312No. 244. We do not beliewHon. R. L. Crocier, Page 2 (O-2148)

it is a necessary qualification,under Article 2745,~supm, that the trustee.shallhave mtually paid the taxes assessed against him.

You are, therefore, respectfullyadvised that it is our opinion, as heretofore held by this department,that a person is a "propertytaxpayer"within the purview of Article 2745, supra, if he owns personal propertywithin the districtwhioh has been assessed fortaxes, notwithstandingthat suoh person is delinquent in the paymentthereof. Yours very truly ATTORNEY GEEEBAL OFTEXAS 

### By /s/ Eollie C. Steakley Zollie C. Steakley

Assistmt

Opinion Committee By BWB Ch*irman
### §578. Definition

In this subchapter, the term "interoperable" has the meaning given the term "interoperable communications" under section 194(g)(1) of this title.

(Pub. L. 107–296, title XVIII, §1808, as added Pub. L. 109–295, title VI, §671(b), Oct. 4, 2006, 120 Stat. 1441.)
#### Charles A. Strand, appellee, v. Eric J. Strand, appellant.

Gen. No. 29,618.

Action for an accounting. Decree for complainant. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook county; the Hon. Hugo M. Friend, Judge, presiding. Heard in the first division of this court for the first district at the October term, 1924. Certiorari denied by Supreme Court (making opinion final).

Affirmed.

Opinion filed May 11, 1925.

Rehearing denied May 25, 1925.

Samuel M. Booth and Charles Turner Brown, for appeEant.

Harry A. Biossot, for appeEee.

Mr. Justice Matehett

deEvered the opinion of the court.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
     (Replace this text with the legend)
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                           768408
<NAME>                          Cyanotech Corporation

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>               Mar-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                  Apr-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                    Mar-31-2000
<CASH>                                          405
<SECURITIES>                                      0
<RECEIVABLES>                                 1,623
<ALLOWANCES>                                     10
<INVENTORY>                                   1,609
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                              3,831
<PP&E>                                       23,129
<DEPRECIATION>                                7,383
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               19,689
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                         1,737
<BONDS>                                           0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                             0
<PREFERRED>                                       1
<COMMON>                                         73
<OTHER-SE>                                   16,571
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 19,689
<SALES>                                       7,398
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                              7,398
<CGS>                                         5,895
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                 5,895
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                              5,815
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                  0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              282
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (4,505)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     20
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               0
<DISCONTINUED>                                    0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                   0
<CHANGES>                                         0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (4,485)
<EPS-BASIC>                                   (0.34)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                 (0.34)


</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 23





	CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
	-----------------------------------------



As independent public accountants, we hereby consent to the 
incorporation of our reports included in and incorporated by 
reference in this Form 10-K, into the Company's previously filed 
Registration Statements on Form S-8 (Nos. 2-93964, 2-93963, 2-
87076, 2-72454, 33-16489, 33-36457, 33-43645, 33-67132, 33-
67134, 33-55755, 333-13029 and 333-43257) and Form S-3 (Nos. 33-
50682 and 333-27415).










Milwaukee, Wisconsin,                      ARTHUR ANDERSEN LLP
March 16, 1998.
### §1154. Public awareness

Not later than 180 days after August 3, 2007, the Secretary shall develop a national plan for railroad and over-the-road bus security public outreach and awareness. Such a plan shall be designed to increase awareness of measures that the general public, passengers, and employees of railroad carriers and over-the-road bus operators can take to increase the security of the national railroad and over-the-road bus transportation systems. Such a plan shall also provide outreach to railroad carriers and over-the-road bus operators and their employees to improve their awareness of available technologies, ongoing research and development efforts, and available Federal funding sources to improve security. Not later than 9 months after August 3, 2007, the Secretary shall implement the plan developed under this section.

(Pub. L. 110–53, title XV, §1504, Aug. 3, 2007, 121 Stat. 425.)
1997 D e c i sion s O p inion s of the U nit e d

S t a t e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit

2-6-1997


# H e r t z C or p . v

. NL RB

P r e c e de n t i al or N on-P r e c e de n t i al :

D ock e t 95-3621

F o l lo w thi s a nd a dd it ion al w ork s a t : h tt p://d i g it alc ommon s .l a w

. v i l l a no v a

. e du/thir dc ir c uit_1997

Thi s de c i sion i s br ou gh t t o y ou for f r e e a nd ope n a c c e s s b y the O p inion s of the U nit e d S t a t e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit a t V i l l a no v a

U niv e r sit y S choo l of L a

w Di g it al R e posit or y

. I t h as be e n a c c e pt e d for inclusion in 1997 D e c i sion s b y a n a uthor i z e d a dmini s tr a t or of V i l l a no v a

U niv e r sit y S choo l of L a

w Di g it al R e posit or y

. F or mor e infor m a t ion, p le as e c on t a ct Be n j a min

. C a rl s on@l a

w

. v i l l a no v a

. e du

. R e c omme nde d C it a t ion

" H e r tz C or p . v

. NLR B " (1997). 1997 D e cisio n s

. P a pe r 30.

h tt p://d i g it alc ommon s .l a

w

. v i l l a no v a

. e du/thir dc ir c uit_1997/30UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT

Nos. 95-3621 & 96-3000

HERTZ CORPORATION,

Petitioner

v.

NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD,

Respondent.

On Petition for Review of an Order of the National Labor Relations Board , United States Department of Labor (NLRB No. 5-CA-23956)

Argued June 11, 1996

Before: SCIRICA and ROTH, Circuit Judges

and RESTANI 1 , Judge, U.S. Court of International Trade

(Opinion Filed January 28, 1997)

ORDER AMENDING SLIP OPINION

1 Honorable Jane A. Restani, United States Judge for the United States Court of Interna tional Trade, sitting by designation.It is hereby ordered that the slip opinion in the above-entitled matter on January

28, 1997 is hereby amended in accordance with the following:

The caption is amended to include appeal No. 96-3000 and the first complete paragraph on page 13 of the slip opinion shall read:

Information pertaining to individuals who are not members of a

union bargaining unit is not available to a union on demand. A union must communicate facts that reasonably support its suspicion of discrimination in hiring. Because Local 922 failed to do so in this case, we will grant Hertz’s petition for review, reverse the NLRB panel decision, and remand the case to the NLRB to dismiss the Union's complaint. We will also deny the Board's cross-application for enforcement.

BY THE COURT:

/s/ Jane R. Roth

Circuit Judge

DATED: February 6, 1997
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

HONGXIN LIU; SHENGYANG LI, 

Petitioners,

 v.

WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General, 

Respondent.

No. 18-71424

Agency Nos. A206-659-444

A206-659-445

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted July 6, 2020** 

Before: SCHROEDER, HAWKINS, and GRABER, Circuit Judges.

Petitioners Hongxin Liu and Shenyang Li petition for review of the Board of

Immigration Appeal’s (BIA) order dismissing the immigration judge’s (IJ’s) denial

of their applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the

FILED

JUL 8 2020

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).
Convention Against Torture (CAT). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252,

and we deny the petition.

The IJ and BIA did not err in concluding that Petitioners failed to establish

eligibility for asylum or withholding, because substantial evidence supports the IJ’s

adverse credibility determination. Petitioners often contradicted each other on

events that were central to their applications for asylum and withholding. For

example, Liu and Li testified inconsistently about whether Li was at their home

when Liu was removed by state officials, and about whether they visited their

young son after they went into hiding. The record therefore does not compel a

finding that Petitioners are credible.

The IJ also concluded that Petitioners were not eligible for relief under CAT,

and Petitioners have not challenged that determination. Petitioners have therefore

waived their CAT claim. See Cruz v. Int’l Collection Corp., 673 F.3d 991, 998

(9th Cir. 2012) (“We review only issues which are argued specifically and

distinctly in a party's opening brief.” (internal quotation marks omitted)). 

PETITION DENIED.

2
# C_2008301EN.01006703.xml

| 22.11.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 301/67 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.11.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 301/67

---

Order of the Civil Service Tribunal of 23 September 2008 — Tolios and Others v Court of Auditors

(Case F-8/06) (1)

1

(2008/C 301/132)

Language of the case: French

Language of the case: French

The President of the First Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

---

(1)  OJ C 74, 25.3.2006, p. 35.

1

---
First Amendment to Building Lease Agreement for Warehouses, dated December 2005



 Exhibit 10.9(a) 
 FIRST AMENDMENT TO BUILDING LEASE AGREEMENT 
 This First Amendment to Building Lease Agreement (this
“Amendment”) is entered into as of December 30, 2005 by and between Hynix Semiconductor, Inc. (“Lessor”) and MagnaChip Semiconductor Ltd. (“Lessee”) (each a “Party”, and collectively the
“Parties”). 
 WHEREAS, the Parties are parties to that certain Building Lease Agreement with respect to certain Buildings and Warehouses located
in Cheong-Ju, dated as of October 6, 2004 (the “Agreement”), and wish to amend the Agreement as set forth below. 
 NOW, THEREFORE, the
Parties agree as follows: 
  

	 	1.	Section 6.1 is hereby amended and restated in its entirety as follows: 

 “Lessor shall provide an invoice (the “Invoice”) to Lessee by the last day of each calendar month which shall include the amounts of Rent (including Taxes), Lessor Maintenance Fee, Other Costs (as
defined in Section 6.3) and the corresponding VAT amount payable by Lessee for such month. Lessee shall pay in aggregate the Rent, Lessor Maintenance Fee, Other Costs and the corresponding VAT amount stated on each Invoice to the Lessor’s
designated account, or as otherwise designated by Lessor, by means of a wire transfer in immediately available funds by the 25th day of the next calendar month following the date of the Invoice (the “Due Date”). Lessee shall review each Invoice for Taxes by the 20th day of the next calendar month following the date of the Invoice, and, notwithstanding anything herein to the contrary, if not in agreement with the amount, then Lessee may require the Lessor to
contest such Taxes as provided in Section 4.3 of this Agreement.” 
  

	 	2.	Capitalized terms not otherwise defined herein shall have the meanings ascribed to them in the Agreement. 

  

	 	3.	Wherever necessary, all terms of the Agreement are hereby amended to be consistent with the terms of this Amendment. Except as set forth herein, the Agreement remains in full force
and effect according to its terms. 

  

 1 









	 	4.	This Amendment shall become effective from the 6th of October, 2004. 

  

	 	5.	This Amendment shall be governed by, and shall be construed in accordance with, the laws of Korea. 

 [Signature Page Follows] 
  

 2 








 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have caused their duly authorized representatives to execute this Amendment as of the
date first set forth above. 
  

			
	MagnaChip Semiconductor, Ltd.
		
	 By:
	 	  
	 Name:
	 	 Youm Huh

	 Title:
	 	 President & Chief Executive Officer

	
	 Hynix Semiconductor, Inc.

		
	 By:
	 	  
	 Name:
	 	
	 Title:
	 	

  

 3