alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### §21006. Requirement for public notice and comment

For purposes of section 21001(a)(1)(C) 1 of this title, a State plan meets the public notice and comment requirements of this section if—

(1) not later than 30 days prior to the submission of the plan, the State made a preliminary version of the plan available for public inspection and comment;

(2) the State publishes notice that the preliminary version of the plan is so available; and

(3) the State took the public comments made regarding the preliminary version of the plan into account in preparing the plan which was filed with the Commission.

(Pub. L. 107–252, title II, §256, Oct. 29, 2002, 116 Stat. 1697.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

Section 21001(a)(1)(C) of this title, referred to in text, probably should be a reference to section 21003(b)(1)(C) of this title because there is no subsec. (a)(1)(C) in section 21001 and subsec. (b)(1)(C) of section 21003 relates to public notice and comment requirements of section 21006 of this title.

#### Codification

Section was formerly classified to section 15406 of Title 42, The Public Health and Welfare, prior to editorial reclassification and renumbering as this section.

1 See References in Text note below.
Exhibit 15.3

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

The Board of Directors

Given Imaging Ltd:

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statement (File No. 333-111310) on Form S-8 of Elron Electronic Industries Ltd. of our report dated March 31, 2008, with respect to the consolidated balance sheets of Given Imaging Ltd. (the ‘‘Company’’) and its subsidiaries as of December 31, 2007 and 2006, and the related consolidated statements of operations, changes in shareholders’ equity and cash flows for each of the years in the three year period ended December 31, 2007, which report appears in the December 31, 2007 annual report on Form 20-F of Elron Electronic Industries Ltd.

Our report on the consolidated financial statements refers to the adoption by the Company of Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 123R, ‘‘Share-Based Payment’’, effective January 1, 2006 and to the adoption of FASB Interpretation No. 48, ‘‘Accounting for Uncertainty in Income Taxes, effective January 1, 2007.

Somekh Chaikin
Certified Public Accountants (Israel)
Member firm of KPMG International

Tel-Aviv, Israel
June 25, 2008

---
# C_2008301EN.01003403.xml

| 22.11.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 301/34 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.11.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 301/34

---

Order of the Court of First Instance of 12 September 2008 — Goris v Commission

(Case T-126/04) (1)

1

(Staff case - Officials - Interlocutory judgment - No need to adjudicate)

(2008/C 301/57)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Willem Goris (Strassen, Luxembourg) (represented by: N. Lhoëst, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: J. Currall and H. Krämer, Agents, assisted by B. Wägenbaur, lawyer)

Defendant:

Re:

First, application for annulment of the Commission's decision of 5 May 2003 altering the applicant's classification in grade, in so far as it fixes his classification in step on recruitment in step 2 of Grade B4, fixes 5 October 1995 as the date on which the decision was to have pecuniary effect and did not re-establish the applicant's career grade, and an application for annulment of the decision rejecting the applicant's complaint and, second, an application for compensation for the damage allegedly caused by that decision.

Operative part of the order

| 1. | There is no longer any need to adjudicate on this action. |
| --- | --- |

1.

There is no longer any need to adjudicate on this action.

| 2. | The Commission shall pay all the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

The Commission shall pay all the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 118, 30.4.2004.

1

---
Exhibit 10.10


Description of Deferred
Compensation Arrangement

between Edward J. Faneuil and

Global GP LLC on behalf of Global Partners LP


·       Deferred
compensation arrangement to be memorialized by a written agreement between
Global GP LLC on behalf of Global Partners LP and Edward J. Faneuil, Executive
Vice President, General Counsel and Secretary of Global Partners LP.


·       Fully
vested, nonforfeitable benefit in the amount of $70,000 per annum, payable in equal
monthly installments over a period of 15 years to Mr. Faneuil or, in the
event of his death, to his designated beneficiary.


·       Benefits
commence and are paid on the first business day of each calendar month
following the later of (1) termination of employment (for any reason) or (2) July 31,
2014.


·       Agreement
is unfunded and payable from the general assets of Global Partners LP (or any
successor).


·       Agreement
can only be amended with the mutual agreement of Mr. Faneuil and Global
Partners LP.
### [§5114. Repealed. Pub. L. 99–386, title I, §110(a), Aug. 22, 1986, 100 Stat. 822]

Section, Pub. L. 89–554, Sept. 6, 1966, 80 Stat. 456; Pub. L. 95–454, title IX, §906(a)(2), (3), Oct. 13, 1978, 92 Stat. 1224, related to reports to Congress on positions in GS–16, 17, and 18.
M. P. No. 77-115.

#### Lester Fayerweather *v.*State Board of Elections *et al.*

*Keven A. McKenna,*for petitioner.

*Julius C. Michaelson,*Attorney General, *Stephen F. Achille, William Y. Chaika,*for Lloyd Griffin, for respondents.

The order of April 11, 1977 in this case is vacated.

The petitioner is ordered to file an amended petition setting forth the names of all proper parties forthwith.

Bevilacqua, C. J., not participating.
Unassociated Document


    EXHIBIT
      10 (k)

    


    REVOLVING
      LOAN AND SECURITY AGREEMENT

    CONVERTIBLE
      REVOLVING CREDIT PROMISSORY NOTE

    DATED
      OCTOBER 26, 1987

    ADDENDUM
      NO. 17

     

    For
      consideration given and received, Robert Howard and iCAD, Inc. hereby agree
      to
      extend the repayment date in Paragraph D of the above referenced Convertible
      Revolving Credit Promissory Note, as amended, (the “Note”) from January 4, 2006
      to March 31, 2007. Also the Note hereafter will be a maximum principal sum
      of
      Five Million Dollars ($5,000,000). 

    


    Effective
      the 31st.
      day of
      December 2005.

    


    Please
      note that I, Mr. Robert Howard, do not intend to call in the principal balance
      of the note within 366 days from the date of this amendment. 

    

      In
        addition, I agree that I will not, while the revolving line of credit exists,
        convert any outstanding advances under the agreement into shares of iCAD’ common
        stock that would exceed the available shares for issuance defined as the
        authorized shares of the iCAD common stock less issued and outstanding common
        shares less any reserved shares for outstanding convertible preferred stock,
        non-employee warrants and non-employee stock options.

       

    

    ICAD,
      INC.

    


    

      
        	
                By:
                  /s/
                  Annette
                  Heroux                         
                   

              	
                /s/
                  Robert
                  Howard                                
                  

              
	
                Title:Chief
                  Financial Officer 

              	
                Robert
                  Howard

              
	 	March
                30, 2006
§ 176.40 Adverse determinations. ( a ) *Review and consultation.* If the resubmission fails to meet the requirements of § 176.35(b) or if no resubmission is received, HUD will review the original application, including the notices of interest submitted by representatives of the homeless. In addition, in such instances or when no original application has been submitted, HUD: ( 1 ) Shall consult with the representatives of the homeless, if any, for purposes of evaluation the continuing interest of such representatives in the use of buildings or property at the installation to assist the homeless;
( 2 ) May consult with the applicable Military Department regarding the suitability of the buildings and property at the installation for use to assist the homeless; and,
( 3 ) May consult with representatives of the homeless and other parties as necessary.
( b ) *Notice of decision.* ( 1 ) Within 90 days of receipt of an LRA's revised application which HUD determines does not meet the requirements of § 176.35(b), HUD shall, based upon its reviews and consultations under § 176.40(a): ( i ) Notify DoD and the LRA of the buildings and property at the installation that HUD determines are suitable for use to assist the homeless, and;
( ii ) Notify DoD and the LRA of the extent to which the revised redevelopment plan meets the criteria set forth in § 176.35(b).
( 2 ) In the event that an LRA does not submit a revised redevelopment plan under § 176.35(d), HUD shall, based upon its reviews and consultations under § 176.40(a), notify DoD and the LRA of the buildings and property at the installation that HUD determines are suitable for use to assist the homeless, either ( i ) Within 190 days after HUD sends its notice of preliminary adverse determination under § 176.35(c)(1), if an LRA has not submitted a revised redevelopment plan; or
( ii ) Within 390 days after the Military Department's Federal Register publication of available property under § 176.20(b), if no redevelopment plan has been received and no extension has been approved.
Exhibit 99.1

                                  Certification
            Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
(Subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States
                                      Code)

     Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a)
and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code), each of
the undersigned officers of Gristede's Foods, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the
"Company"), does hereby certify, to such officer's knowledge, that:

     The Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 2, 2003 (the
"Form 10-Q") of the Company fully complies with the requirements of Section
13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and information contained
in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
condition and results of operations of the Company.

Dated:         July 16, 2003
/s/  John A. Catsimatidis

                              Name:  John A. Catsimatidis
                                     Chief Executive Officer


Dated:         July 16, 2003
/s/  Gary Pokrassa

                              Name:  Gary Pokrassa
                                     Chief Financial Officer

     The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to section
906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350,
Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code) and is not being filed as part of
Form 10-Q or as a separate disclosure document.

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


                                       24
<PAGE>
Exhibit 32.1









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 of Educational Development Corporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ending May 31, 2011, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), the undersigned 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.








Date:  July 14, 2011                                                      By      /s/ Randall W. White


Randall W. White


Chairman of the Board, President and Chief Executive Officer











Date:  July 14, 2011                                                      By     /s/ Marilyn R. Pinney


Controller and Corporate Secretary


(Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)
§ 45.15 Other claims procedures and administrative matters. ( a ) *Payment of damages.* In the event damages are awarded, the claimant or the claimant's estate is entitled to payment of those damages.
( b ) *Communication through counsel.* If the claimant is represented by counsel, all communications will be through the claimant's counsel.
( c ) *Remedies for filing false claims or making false statements.* Remedies available to the United States for filing false claims with Federal agencies or making false statements to Federal agencies and officials are applicable to claims and statements made in connection with claims under this part. Applicable authorities include 31 U.S.C. 3729 and 18 U.S.C. 1001. False claims and claims supported by false statements will be denied.
( d ) *Reports to the Defense Health Agency.* As provided in section 2733a(e), not later than 30 calendar days after a Final Determination of medical malpractice or the payment of all or a portion of a claim under this part, a report documenting that determination is sent to the Director, Defense Health Agency to be used for all necessary and appropriate purposes, including those actions undertaken as part of DoD's Clinical Quality Management Program.
( e ) *Monitoring claims adjudications under this part.* The General Counsel of the Defense Health Agency will monitor the performance of the claims adjudications structures and procedures under this part, including accounting for the number of claims processed under this part and the resolution of each claim and identifying means to enhance the effectiveness of the claims adjudication process.
( f ) *Authority for actions under this part.* To ensure consistency and compliance with statutory requirements, supplementation of the procedures in this part is not permitted without approval in writing by the General Counsel of the Department of Defense. The General Counsel of the Department of Defense, under DoD Directive 5145.01, “General Counsel of the Department of Defense,” may delegate in writing authority for making Initial and Final Determinations, and other actions by DoD officials under this part. As used in this part, and at DoD's discretion, “DoD” or “DoD Components” may include, but is not limited to, Military Departments.
[86 FR 32208, June 17, 2021, as amended at 87 FR 52463, Aug. 26, 2022]
§ 34.41 Monitoring and reporting program and financial performance. Grants officers may use the provisions of subparts A and B of 2 CFR part 1134 for awards to for-profit organizations, or may include equivalent technical and financial reporting requirements that ensure reasonable oversight of the expenditure of appropriated funds. As a minimum, equivalent requirements must include: ( a ) Periodic reports (at least annually, and no more frequently than quarterly) addressing both program status and business status, as follows: ( 1 ) The program portions of the reports must address progress toward achieving program performance goals, including current issues, problems, or developments.
( 2 ) The business portions of the reports shall provide summarized details on the status of resources (federal funds and non-federal cost sharing or matching), including an accounting of expenditures for the period covered by the report. The report should compare the resource status with any payment and expenditure schedules or plans provided in the original award; explain any major deviations from those schedules; and discuss actions that will be taken to address the deviations.
( 3 ) When grants officers previously authorized advance payments, pursuant to § 34.12(a)(2), they should consult with the program official and consider whether program progress reported in the periodic report, in relation to reported expenditures, is sufficient to justify continued authorization of advance payments.
( b ) Unless inappropriate, a final performance report that addresses all major accomplishments under the award.
[63 FR 12204, Mar. 12, 1998, as amended at 85 FR 51244, Aug. 19, 2020]
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 06-4400

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus DONALD EMANUEL RYAN, Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. William D. Quarles, Jr., District Judge. (1:04-cr-00114-WDQ) Submitted: November 20, 2006 Decided: December 11, 2006 Before WILLIAMS, TRAXLER, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. David R. Solomon, GLASER & SOLOMON, LLC, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellant. Rod J. Rosenstein, United States Attorney, John F. Purcell, Jr., Assistant United States Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.- 2 - PER CURIAM: Donald Emanuel Ryan pled guilty, pursuant to a plea agreement, to one count of conspiracy to import cocaine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 963 (2000). The district court sentenced Ryan to 188 months’ imprisonment. On appeal, Ryan argues that the district court erred in denying his requests for downward departure based upon the hardship to his family, and upon the disparity of sentencing compared to his co-defendant. The Government asserts that Ryan validly waived the right to appeal his sentence in the plea agreement. A defendant may waive the right to appeal if that waiver is knowing and intelligent. United States v. Blick , 408 F.3d 162, 169 (4th Cir. 2005). To determine whether a waiver is knowing and intelligent, this court examines the background, experience, and conduct of the defendant. United States v. Broughton-Jones , 71 F.3d 1143, 1146 (4th Cir. 1995). Generally, if the district court fully questions a defendant regarding the waiver of her right to appeal during the Fed. R. Crim. P. 11 colloquy, the waiver is both valid and enforceable. United States v. Johnson , 410 F.3d 137, 151 (4th Cir.), cert. denied , 126 S. Ct. 461 (2005); United States v. Wessells , 936 F.2d 165, 167-68 (4th Cir. 1991). However, an appeal waiver does not preclude challenges to a sentence on the ground that it exceeds the statutory maximum or is based on a constitutionally impermissible factor such as race, appeals from- 3 - the denial of a motion to withdraw a guilty plea based on ineffective assistance of counsel, or claims concerning a violation of the Sixth Amendment right to counsel in proceedings following the guilty plea. Johnson , 410 F.3d at 151 (citations omitted). The question of whether a defendant validly waived her right to appeal is a question of law that this court reviews de novo. Blick , 408 F.3d at 168. Our review of the record leads us to conclude that Ryan knowingly and voluntarily waived the right to appeal his sentence. SeeBlick , 408 F.3d at 169. Moreover, the challenges Ryan raises on appeal fall within the scope of the waiver. Accordingly, we dismiss Ryan’s appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED
E xhibit 32.1
 
 **CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO**
 **SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**
 
 
 In connection with the Annual Report of Hurco Companies, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-K for the period ending October 31, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned hereby certifies, pursuant to § 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/ Michael Doar
 Michael Doar
 Chairman of the Board & Chief Executive Officer
 January 19, 2005
Exhibit
21.1 Lancer Corporation List of Significant Subsidiaries     United
States of America: Lancer Capital Corporation Lancer International Sales, Inc. Lancer Investment Corporation Lancer Partnership, Ltd. Lancer Frank Corporation Lancer FBD Partnership, Ltd. Lancer Ice Link, LLC Advanced Beverage Solutions, LLC Moo Technologies, LLC  Mexico: Industrias Lancermex, S.A. de C.V. Lancer de Mexico, S.A. de C.V. Servicios Lancermex, S.A. de C.V.  Brazil: Lancer do Brasil,Industria e Comercio Ltda.  Ecuador Ecualancer S.A.  Europe: Lancer Europe, S.A. OOO Lancer Sales Company Lancer GB, LLP  Australia: Lancer Pacific, Pty. Ltd. Lancer Pacific Industies, Pty. Ltd.  New
Zealand: Lancer Pacific, Ltd.