alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 34.14 Program income. ( a ) DoD Components shall apply the standards in this section to the disposition of program income from projects financed in whole or in part with Federal funds.
( b ) Recipients shall have no obligation to the Government, unless the terms and conditions of the award provide otherwise, for program income earned: ( 1 ) From license fees and royalties for copyrighted material, patents, patent applications, trademarks, and inventions produced under an award. Note, however, that the Patent and Trademark Amendments (35 U.S.C. Chapter 18), as implemented in § 34.25, apply to inventions made under a research award.
( 2 ) After the end of the project period. If a grants officer anticipates that an award is likely to generate program income after the end of the project period, the grants officer should indicate in the award document whether the recipient will have any obligation to the Federal Government with respect to such income.
( c ) If authorized by the terms and conditions of the award, costs incident to the generation of program income may be deducted from gross income to determine program income, provided these costs have not been charged to the award.
( d ) Other than any program income excluded pursuant to paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section, program income earned during the project period shall be retained by the recipient and used in one or more of the following ways, as specified in program regulations or the terms and conditions of the award: ( 1 ) Added to funds committed to the project by the DoD Component and recipient and used to further eligible project or program objectives.
( 2 ) Used to finance the non-Federal share of the project or program.
( 3 ) Deducted from the total project or program allowable cost in determining the net allowable costs on which the Federal share of costs is based.
( e ) If the terms and conditions of an award authorize the disposition of program income as described in paragraph (d)(1) or (d)(2) of this section, and stipulate a limit on the amounts that may be used in those ways, program income in excess of the stipulated limits shall be used in accordance with paragraph (d)(3) of this section.
( f ) In the event that the terms and conditions of the award do not specify how program income is to be used, paragraph (d)(3) of this section shall apply automatically to all projects or programs except research. For awards that support research, paragraph (d)(1) of this section shall apply automatically unless the terms and conditions specify another alternative or the recipient is subject to special award conditions, as indicated in § 34.4.
( g ) Proceeds from the sale of property that is acquired, rather than fabricated, under an award are not program income and shall be handled in accordance with the requirements of the Property Standards (see §§ 34.20 through 34.25).
#### Lucretia L. Peterson, appellee, v. J. F. Long, appellant.

Gen. No. 29,815.

Action for personal injury sustained in an automobile collision. Judgment for plaintiff. Appeal from the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Daniel P. Trude, Judge, presiding. Heard in the first division of this court for the first district at the October term, 1924.

Affirmed.

Opinion filed May 11, 1925.

Thomas J. Hickey, for appellant.

Elmer J. Sehnackenberg, for appellee.

Mr. Justice Matchett

delivered the opinion of the court.
Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,
Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanag h
Elizabeth A. Weave r

Maura D. Corriga n Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markma n Diane M. Hathaway,
J ustices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

_______________________________________ __ Clerk February 4, 2009

p0128 

# Order

February 4, 2009

137344 & (19)

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 137344 COA: 286260 Kent CC: 06-003858-FC TERRY JAMES CASHA, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the motion to file a reply to the prosecutor’s answer is GRANTED. The application for leave to appeal the August 7, 2008 order of the Court of Appeals is considered and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the questions presented should be revi ewed by this Court.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                          19,308
<SECURITIES>                                   151,645
<RECEIVABLES>                                8,484,012
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               581,939
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               9,236,904
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          515,940
<BONDS>                                      8,484,012
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       184,960
<OTHER-SE>                                      51,992
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 9,236,904
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,107,885
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,109,757
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (1,872)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     (370)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (1,502)
<EPS-BASIC>                                    (.63)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
DISMISS and Opinion Filed May 15, 2024 

# S

In The 

### Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05-24-00295-CV CHARLOTTE CARROLL, Appellant V. SERPE ANDREWS, Appellee
On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 5 Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. CC-23-06476-E

MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Smith, Miskel, and Breedlove Opinion by Justice Breedlove Before the Court is appellant’s May 3, 2024 motion to dismiss the appeal
without prejudice. We grant the motion to the extent we dismiss the appeal. See

T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 42.1(a).

240295f.p05 / Maricela Breedlove / MARICELA BREEDLOVE JUSTICE–2– 

# S

Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
JUDGMENT

CHARLOTTE CARROLL, Appellant

No. 05-24-00295-CV V.

SERPE ANDREWS, Appellee On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 5, Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. CC-23-06476- E. Opinion delivered by Justice Breedlove, Justices Smith and Miskel participating.

In accordance with this Court’ s opinion of this date, we DISMISS the appeal.

Judgment entered May 15, 2024.
#### In the matter of the estate of John Paul, deceased.

Gen. No. 7,794.

Petition for probate of will. Petition granted. Appeal from the Circuit Court of McLean county; the Hon. Edward Barry, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1924.

Affirmed.

Opinion filed April 11, 1925.

*Certiorari*denied by Supreme Court (making opinion final).

A. E. and R. C. De Mange, for appellant.

Costigan & Wollrab, for appellee.

Mr. Justice Niehaus

delivered the opinion of the court.
### §677f. Authorization of appropriations

There are authorized to be appropriated to the Fund $20,000,000 for fiscal year 2022 and each fiscal year thereafter until September 30, 2028, which shall remain available until September 30, 2028.

(Pub. L. 107–296, title XXII, §2237, as added Pub. L. 117–58, div. G, title VI, §70602(a), Nov. 15, 2021, 135 Stat. 1272.)
**Order of the Court (Second Chamber) of 13 July 2006 – Front national and Others v Parliament and Council**

**(Case C-338/05 P)**

Appeal – Regulation (EC) No 2004/2003 – Regulation and funding of political parties at European level – Action for annulment – Objection of inadmissibility – Act open to challenge – Standing to bring proceedings – Inadmissibility – Appeal manifestly inadmissible

Appeal – Grounds – Mere repetition of the pleas and arguments put forward before the Court of First Instance – Failure to specify the error of law relied on – Inadmissible (Art. 225 EC; Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 58, first para.; Rules of Procedure of the Court, Art. 112(1)(c),
first subpara.) (see paras 23-25)

**Re:**

| | | | | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| APPEAL brought against the judgment of the Court of First Instance (Second Chamber) of 11 July 2005 in Case T-17/04 | Front national and Others | v | Parliament and Council | , by which it dismissed as inadmissible an action for the annulment of Regulation (EC) No 2004/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 November 2003 on the regulations governing political parties at European level and the rules regarding their funding (OJ 2003 L 297, p. 1). |

**Operative part:**

The Court:

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | | Dismisses the appeal; |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | | Orders the appellants to pay the costs. |
#### § 243.10 Disputes.

Carriers should first address concerns to the ratemaking team for resolution. Ratemaking issues that are not resolved to the carrier's satisfaction through discussions with the ratemaking team may be directed to the USTRANSCOM contracting officer.
#### § 241.13 Implementation.

The DoD CIO is responsible for administering, coordinating and implementing the Pilot Program for the Temporary Exchange of Information Personnel, referred to as the Information Technology Exchange Program (ITEP) pilot. The DoD CIO will coordinate with DoD Components.
### **CHAPTER 76—DAIRY RESEARCH AND PROMOTION**

#### SUBCHAPTER I—DAIRY PROMOTION PROGRAM

Sec.
4501.
Congressional findings and declaration of policy.
4502.
Definitions.
4503.
Issuance of orders.
4504.
Required terms in orders.
4505.
Certification of organizations.
4506.
Requirement of referendum.
4507.
Suspension and termination of orders.
4508.
Cooperative association representation.
4509.
Petition and review.
4510.
Enforcement.
4511.
Investigations; power to subpena and take oaths and affirmations; aid of courts.
4512.
Administrative provisions.
4513.
Authorization of appropriations.
4514.
Dairy reports.

#### SUBCHAPTER II—DAIRY RESEARCH PROGRAM

4531.
Definitions.
4532.
Establishment of National Dairy Research Endowment Institute.
4533.
Issuance of order.
4534.
Required terms of order; agreements under order; records.
4535.
Petition and review; enforcement; investigations.
4536.
Dairy Research Trust Fund.
4537.
Termination of order, Institute, and Fund.
4538.
Additional authority.

#### SUBCHAPTER III—INDEMNITY PAYMENTS TO DAIRY FARMERS

4551.
Indemnity payments to dairy farmers and manufacturers of dairy products; milk removed for its residue of chemical or toxic substances; nuclear radiation or fallout contaminants; other legal recourse.
4552.
Authorization of appropriations for dairy farmer indemnities.
4553.
Expiration of dairy farmer indemnity program.
##### 



Exhibit 32.2 The following certification is furnished in connection with Dynamics
Research Corporations Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter
ended June 30, 2004 and is not filed as provided in Item 601(b)(32)(ii)
of Regulation S-K of the Securities and Exchange Commission. 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 Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Dynamics Research
Corporation, a Massachusetts corporation (the Company), for the period
ended June 30, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
on the date hereof (the Report), the undersigned, the Chief Financial
Officer of the Company, hereby certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350 as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 that,
to his knowledge: (1) the Report of the Company filed today pursuant to Section 13(a) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the Exchange Act),
fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Exchange
Act; 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/ David KeleherDavid KeleherAugust 9, 2004
    Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer 54
**Exhibit 32(b)**

 

CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THESARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

 

In connection with theAnnual Report of Hickory Tech Corporation (HickoryTech) on Form 10-K for theyear ended December 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities and ExchangeCommission on the date hereof (the Report), I, David A. Christensen, ChiefFinancial Officer of HickoryTech, 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 HickoryTech. |

 
| /s/ David A.  Christensen                          |   |
|----------------------------------------------------|--------|
| David A. Christensen                               |
| Senior Vice President  and Chief Financial Officer |
| March 7, 2006                                      |

 

1

----
IN THE

TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

No. 10-19-00055-CV

IN RE LOWELL QUINCY GREEN

Original Proceeding

D E N I A L O F M O T I O N F O R R E H E A R I N G

It is difficult to determine the nature of Green’s pleading filed on March 7, 2019, 

and the proper classification of the relief, including whether this filing is civil or criminal 

and whether it is a suit, appeal, original proceeding, or a motion for rehearing. We have 

carefully reviewed the document and, based on its content and the timing of its receipt, 

have classified it as best as we can, recognizing that others may characterize it differently. 

And after review, we deny Green’s pro se motion for rehearing filed on March 7, 2019.1

 

1 On March 14, 2019, Green filed a document that appears to have been filed originally in the United 

States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. Because Green included the appellate cause number in this 

matter—10-19-00055-CV, we filed this document in this matter. However, because this document does not 

appear to be a motion for rehearing, and because we cannot readily ascertain the purpose of the filing, we 

will take no action on Green’s March 14, 2019 filing.
In re Green Page 2

PER CURIAM

Before Chief Justice Gray,

Justice Davis, and

Justice Neill

Order issued and filed April 3, 2019

Do not publish

[CV06]
- All
            - Title
            - Author
            - Subject
            - Date
            - Full-Text

            -                              Explore                            ******                - Educational Resources
              - Archival Collections
              -                                      Themes                                    ******                  - Economic Data
                - Federal Reserve
                - View all 
              - Timelines 
            -                              Browse                            ******                - Titles
              - Authors
              - Subjects
              - Dates 
            -                              About                            ******                - About FRASER
              - FAQ
              - Contact Us
              -                                      FRASER API                                    ******                  - REST API
                - OAI-PMH 
            - Inside FRASER Blog

            - **

Home                 > Browse by Title > Improvement of Labor-Utilization Procedures

              																	Evans, W. Duane, 1909-1974. 						*Improvement of Labor-Utilization Procedures : Bulletin of the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics, No. 807*,												Washington, D.C: 								G.P.O., 										1945,									https://fraser.stlouisfed.org/title/4277,			accessed on September 10, 2024.						    

        - **FRASER**
        - About
        - FAQ
        - Legal and Privacy
        - FRASER API

          -                              @FedFRASER 
          - ** Contact Us
          -  **  What's New  
          -  **  Inside FRASER
Exhibit 99


                                   Certificate

            Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

                            (18 U.S.C. Section 1350)






         I, Dawn E. Neuman, duly authorized member of the SENA 401(k) Board,
certify that, to the best of my knowledge, the Annual Report on Form 11-K of
Stora Enso Oyj (Stora Enso Corporation) relating to the SENA 401(k) Plan for the
year ended December 31, 2000, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
on the date hereof (i) fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and (ii) the
information contained therein fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of the SENA 401(k) Plan.





Dated: September 29, 2003                    By /s/ Dawn E. Neuman
                                                -----------------------------
                                                Dawn E. Neuman
                                                Member, SENA 401(k) Board
                                                On behalf of the SENA 401(k)
                                                Board as Plan Administrator
# C_2008107EN.01002301.xml

| 26.4.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 107/23 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.4.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 107/23

---

Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 12 March 2008 — Evropaïki Dynamiki v Commission

(Case T-345/03) (1)

1

(Public service contracts - Community tendering procedure - Provision of services for the development and provision of services in support of the Community Research and Development Service (CORDIS) - Rejection of a tender - Principles of equal treatment as between tenderers and transparency)

(2008/C 107/36)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Evropaïki Dynamiki — Proigmena Systimata Tilepikoinonion Pliroforikis kai Tilematikis AE (Athens, Greece) (represented: initially by S. Pappas and subsequently by N. Korogiannakis, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: C. O'Reilly and L. Parpala, agents)

Defendant:

Re:

Application for the annulment of the decision to award the contract which is the subject of the Commission's call for tenders ENTR/02/055 — CORDIS Lot 2 for the development and provision of services for in support of the Community Research and Development Service (CORDIS)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Annuls the decision of the Commission of 16 July 2003 to award the contract which is the subject of the call for tenders ENTR/02/55 — CORDIS Lot 2. |
| --- | --- |

1.

Annuls the decision of the Commission of 16 July 2003 to award the contract which is the subject of the call for tenders ENTR/02/55 — CORDIS Lot 2.

| 2. | Orders the Commission to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders the Commission to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 289, 29.11.2003.

1

---
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
REGISTRANT'S FORM 10-K FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1998 AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
INCLUDED IN SUCH REPORT.
</LEGEND>

       
<S>                   <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>         12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>     DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>          DEC-31-1998

<CASH>                       76,721,487 
<SECURITIES>                       0    
<RECEIVABLES>                      0    
<ALLOWANCES>                       0    
<INVENTORY>                        0    
<CURRENT-ASSETS>             76,721,487 
<PP&E>                             0    
<DEPRECIATION>                     0    
<TOTAL-ASSETS>               76,721,487 
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>              0    
<BONDS>                            0    
<COMMON>                           0    
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>              0    
<PREFERRED>                        0    
<OTHER-SE>                   76,721,487 
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY> 76,721,487 
<SALES>                      16,528,284 
<TOTAL-REVENUES>             55,200,104 
<CGS>                              0    
<TOTAL-COSTS>                 5,419,310 
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                872,844 
<LOSS-PROVISION>                   0    
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>            5,096,161 
<INCOME-PRETAX>              43,811,789 
<INCOME-TAX>                       0    
<INCOME-CONTINUING>          41,751,961 
<DISCONTINUED>               21,005,670 
<EXTRAORDINARY>              (1,259,118)
<CHANGES>                          0    
<NET-INCOME>                 61,498,513 
<EPS-PRIMARY>                    331.44 
<EPS-DILUTED>                    331.44 

        


</TABLE>
### **CHAPTER 21A—TOBACCO INSPECTION**

Sec.
511.
Definitions.
511a.
Declaration of purpose.
511b.
Official standards for classification; tentative standards; modification.
511c.
Demonstration of official standards; samples; cost.
511d.
Designation of markets; manner; inspection and related services; fees and charges.
511e.
Sampling and weighing; cost; disposition of moneys received; expenses; purpose.
511f.
Reinspection and appeal inspection; certificate as evidence.
511g.
Placing of grade on warehouse tickets, etc.; form.
511h.
Publication of information relating to tobacco.
511i.
Offenses.
511j.
Publication of violations.
511k.
Penalty for violations.
511 l.
Act of agent as that of principal.
511m.
Regulation; hearings; employees; expenditures; authorization of appropriations.
511n.
Hearings; examination of witnesses; refusal to testify or produce evidence.
511 o.
Separability.
511p.
Delegation of duties by Secretary of Agriculture.
511q.
Short title.
511r.
Repealed.
511s.
Grading of tobacco.