alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>   1



                                                                   Exhibit 10.46

                FIRST AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT DATED APRIL 6, 1998
                ------------------------------------------------

         THIS AGREEMENT MADE AND ENTERED INTO at Cleveland, Ohio this 28th day
of February, 2000, by and between FOREST CITY ENTERPRISES, INC., an Ohio
corporation, of Terminal Tower, 50 Public Square, Suite 1100, Cleveland, Ohio,
44113-2267, hereinafter referred to as "Company", and RONALD A. RATNER, of 17300
Parkland Drive Shaker Heights, Ohio 44120, hereinafter referred to as
"Employee".

         WHEREAS, the Company desires to grant to the Employee a benefit to his
Estate upon his death, and

         WHEREAS, the Compensation Committee of this Company has recommended
such benefit to be paid to his Estate, and

         NOW THEREFORE, it is agreed that in consideration of the Employee
working for the Company, it is agreed that:

         In consideration of his employment, if the Employee dies while in the
employ of the Company, the Company agrees to pay to the beneficiaries of the
Employee as stipulated in his Will, or designated by written notice to the
Company from the Employee during his lifetime, or designated by operation of law
if the Employee dies intestate, an amount equal to one hundred percent (100%) of
the salary paid to the Employee for the last calendar year prior to the death,
for a period of five (5) years following the decease of said Employee; said sum
to be payable in quarterly installments to said beneficiaries of said deceased
Employee.

         The parties hereto have set their hands the day and year first above
written.

                                                FOREST CITY ENTERPRISES, INC.

                                                By: Charles A. Ratner, President
                                                --------------------------------


                                                And: Thomas G. Smith, Secretary
                                                --------------------------------


                                                 RONALD A. RATNER, Employee
                                                --------------------------------
II 

115TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 703 

To extend the authority of the Secretary of the Interior to carry out the 

Equus Beds Division of the Wichita Project. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MARCH 22, 2017 

Mr. MORAN (for himself and Mr. ROBERTS) introduced the following bill; 

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

A BILL 

To extend the authority of the Secretary of the Interior 

to carry out the Equus Beds Division of the Wichita Project. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Wichita Project Equus 

5 Beds Division Authorization Extension Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. EQUUS BEDS DIVISION. 

7 Section 10(h) of Public Law 86–787 (74 Stat. 1026; 

8 120 Stat. 1474) is amended by striking ‘‘10 years’’ and 

9 inserting ‘‘20 years’’. 

Æ 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
(Republished)

#### Benson & Partners, Ltd., et al., Appellants, v Alexander’s Department Store, Inc., et al., Respondents.

— Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County, entered on September 16, 1977, unanimously affirmed. Respondents shall recover of appellants $75 costs and disbursements of this appeal. Appeal from the order of said court entered on September 14, 1977, dismissed as subsumed in and reviewed on the appeal from said judgment, without costs and without disbursements. The order of this court entered on February 15, 1979 [67 AD2d 870], is vacated. No opinion. Concur — Kupferman, J. P., Fein, Markewich, Silverman and Yesawich, JJ.
#### In the Matter of the Claim of Caroline Smith, Respondent, v. Henry James et al., Appellants. Workmen’s Compensation Board, Respondent.

*834The employer and carrier appeal from an award of disability benefits. Appellants’ only contention is that the board erroneously established claimant’s average weekly wage at $50. For one year before the accident claimant worked one day a week as a maid for the employer appellant and received therefor $10 per week. During the same period she worked five days a week as a maid for a beauty shop and received for her services $40 per week. Claimant was injured while working for the employer appellant. The Referee and the board have found that the employments were similar and, under section 14 of the Workmen’s Compensation Law, have utilized earnings in both employments to determine the average weekly wage. Where an employee is injured in one of two or more employments in which he is concurrently employed, the board may include his joint earnings in fixing the average weekly wage if the employments are similar in nature. *(Matter of Walla*v. *Streigel,*2 A D 2d 914; *Matter of McDowell*v. *Flatbush Congregational Church,*277 N. Y. 536.) Here claimant testified that she was employed as a maid at both places. Her principal work was cleaning. She was not employed by the beauty parlor as a beautician. She described her duties at the beauty parlor as *“*Cleaning. I waited on the customers. Put them under the dryers. Clean the mirrors and keep the bathrooms and served lunches, and things like that. That was all.” It was within the province of the Referee and the board to determine factually that the two employments were similar. Award unanimously affirmed, with costs to the Workmen’s Compensation Board. Present — Bergan, P. J., Coon, Gibson, Herlihy and Reynolds, JJ.
Suggested edits for accreditation.

Rationale: The public sector of higher education often has oversite from the state legislature (as is 

the case in Pennsylvania). This oversight and other formal authorizations may create preemption 

issues should a teach-out plan be required at accreditation recertification. Consideration would 

need to be given to the fact that these public institutions cannot simply close, and in some cases 

even change programs, without state legislative actions. Further, teach-out plans may initiate the 

necessity to violate collective bargaining agreements if enacted, creating further legal issues and 

potentially challenges. It would be best to have a public institution exemption out with regard to 

requiring teach-out plans at accreditation recertification.

(c) Teach-out plans and agreements.

(1) The agency must require an institution it accredits to submit a teach-out plan, as defined 

in 34 CFR 600.2, to the agency for approval upon submitting an application for initial or renewal of 

accreditation. Public institutions with prior authorization for the use of Title IV/HEA aid are 

exempted from the requirement to provide a teach-out plan at renewal of accreditation.

(2) The agency must require an institution it accredits to update its teach-out plan and 

submit it to the agency for approval upon the occurrence of any of the following events and 

annually until the issue has been resolved:
Order Form (01/2005)

United States District Court, Northern District of Illinois

Name of Assigned Judge

or Magistrate Judge Samuel Der-Yeghiayan Sitting Judge if Otherthan Assigned Judge

CASE NUMBER 12 C 2669 DATE 5/23/2012

CASE

TITLE

Bennie K. Ellison vs. Illinois Dept Of Corrections

DOCKET ENTRY TEXT

Motions by petitioner Bennie K. Ellison for leave to file application of extraordinary peculiar emergency [6]

and [7] are denied.

O[ For further details see text below.] Docketing to mail notices.

STATEMENT

 This matter is before the court on Petitioner Bennie K. Ellison’s (Ellison) pro se motions. 

Since Ellison is proceeding pro se, the court has liberally construed his motions. On April 11,

2012, Ellison filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus (Petition) brought pursuant to 28 U.S.C.

§ 2254. Ellison had previously filed a habeas petition in case number 11 C 6262, and on

September 27, 2011, this court dismissed the petition in that case since Ellison had failed to

exhaust his state court remedies. On April 23, 2012, the court dismissed without prejudice the

Petition since Ellison had still failed to exhaust his state court remedies. 

In the instant pro se motions, Ellison indicates that the court should allow him to proceed

with the Petition, contending that there is an “extraordinary peculiar emergency/urgency,” due

to reasons such as his contention that the state courts are “aiding and abetting [Ellison’s]

unconstitutional and unlawful abduction and kidnaping.” (5/14/12 Mot. 1). Ellison has not

shown that his Petition should be reinstated or that the court erred in dismissing the Petition. 

12C2669 Bennie K. Ellison vs. Illinois Dept Of Corrections Page 1 of 2
STATEMENT

Ellison’s motions and the attached documents merely reaffirm that he is currently seeking relief

from the state courts and has not exhausted his state court remedies. Ellison also requests a

“stay of execution,” apparently of certain state court orders, and the “immed[iate] release” of

information possessed by the public defender. (5/3/12 1). Ellison has not presented any valid

basis for relief before this court in the instant motions, and the instant motions are therefore

denied.

12C2669 Bennie K. Ellison vs. Illinois Dept Of Corrections Page 2 of 2
212.602 Streamlined evaluation of offers. ( b ) ( i ) For the acquisition of transportation and transportation-related services, also consider evaluating offers in accordance with the criteria at 247.206(1).
( ii ) For the acquisition of transportation in supply contracts that will include a significant requirement for transportation of items outside the contiguous United States, also evaluate offers in accordance with the criterion at 247.301-71.
( iii ) For the direct purchase of ocean transportation services, also evaluate offers in accordance with the criteria at 247.573-2(c).
[65 FR 50143, Aug. 17, 2000, as amended at 70 FR 35544, June 21, 2005; 72 FR 49205, Aug. 28, 2007]
1825.1101 Acquisition of supplies. ( c ) ( 1 ) NASA has determined that the restrictions of the Buy American Act are not applicable to U.S.-made end products.
( e ) The contracting officer must add paragraph (k) as set forth in 1852.225-8, Duty-Free Entry of Space Articles, in solicitations and contracts when the supplies that will be accorded duty-free entry are identifiable before award. Insert the supplies determined in accordance with FAR subpart 25.9 and 1825.903.
[65 FR 10031, Feb. 25, 2000, as amended at 68 FR 11748, Mar. 12, 2003]
U.S. DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

ATTORNEY APPEARANCE FORM

NOTE: In order to appear before this Court an attorney must either be a member in good

standing of this Court’s general bar or be granted leave to appear pro hac vice as provided for

by Local Rules 83.12 through 83.14.

In the Matter of Case Number:

AN APPEARANCE IS HEREBY FILED BY THE UNDERSIGNED AS ATTORNEY FOR:

NAME (Type or print)

SIGNATURE (Use electronic signature if the appearance form is filed electronically)

 s/

FIRM

STREET ADDRESS

CITY/STATE/ZIP

ID NUMBER (SEE ITEM 3 IN INSTRUCTIONS) TELEPHONE NUMBER

ARE YOU ACTING AS LEAD COUNSEL IN THIS CASE? YES NO 

ARE YOU ACTING AS LOCAL COUNSEL IN THIS CASE? YES NO 

ARE YOU A MEMBER OF THIS COURT’S TRIAL BAR? YES NO 

IF THIS CASE REACHES TRIAL, WILL YOU ACT AS THE TRIAL ATTORNEY? YES NO 

IF THIS IS A CRIMINAL CASE, CHECK THE BOX BELOW THAT DESCRIBES YOUR STATUS.

RETAINED COUNSEL APPOINTED COUNSEL 

Case: 1:12-cv-03516 Document #: 3 Filed: 05/08/12 Page 1 of 1 PageID #:10
#### 215.270 Peer Reviews.

Agency officials shall conduct Peer Reviews in accordance with 201.170.

[74 FR 37626, July 29, 2009]
# Diario Oficial C 345/2015

| | ISSN 1977-0928 |
| --- | --- |
| Diario Oficial
  de la Unión Europea | C 345 |
| | |
| Edición en lengua española | Comunicaciones e informaciones | 58° año18 de octubre de 2015 |

ISSN 1977-0928

Diario Oficial

de la Unión Europea

C 345

Edición en lengua española

Comunicaciones e informaciones

58° año18 de octubre de 2015

---

| Número de información | Sumario | Página |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | IV   Información |
| | INFORMACIÓN PROCEDENTE DE LAS INSTITUCIONES, ÓRGANOS Y ORGANISMOS DE LA UNIÓN EUROPEA |
| | Consejo |
| 2015/C 345/01 | Declaración del Consejo | 1 |

Número de información

Sumario

Página

IV   Información

INFORMACIÓN PROCEDENTE DE LAS INSTITUCIONES, ÓRGANOS Y ORGANISMOS DE LA UNIÓN EUROPEA

Consejo

2015/C 345/01

Declaración del Consejo

1

---

| ES | |
| --- | --- |

ES

---

IV Información

INFORMACIÓN PROCEDENTE DE LAS INSTITUCIONES, ÓRGANOS Y ORGANISMOS DE LA UNIÓN EUROPEA

Consejo

| 18.10.2015 | ES | Diario Oficial de la Unión Europea | C 345/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

18.10.2015

ES

Diario Oficial de la Unión Europea

C 345/1

---

DECLARACIÓN DEL CONSEJO

(2015/C 345/01)

El Consejo señala que el compromiso de que la UE retire todas las sanciones relacionadas con actividades nucleares de conformidad con el Plan de Acción Integral Conjunto (PAIC) se entenderá sin perjuicio del mecanismo de resolución de conflictos especificado en el PAIC y de la reintroducción de sanciones por parte de la UE en caso de incumplimientos significativos por parte de Irán de sus compromisos en el marco del PAIC.

El Consejo se compromete a reintroducir sin demora todas las sanciones de la UE relacionadas con actividades nucleares que se hayan suspendido o que hayan finalizado, en caso de incumplimientos significativos por parte de Irán de sus compromisos en el marco del PAIC, por recomendación conjunta al Consejo de la Alta Representante de la Unión para Asuntos Exteriores y Política de Seguridad, Francia, Alemania y el Reino Unido.

---
### General Information

-  Information About the Protection of Human Subjects in Research Supported by the Department -- Overview 
-  Information About the Requirements at the Application/Proposal Stage and After Award 
-  Where to Address Questions About the Protection of Human Subjects in Research 
-  Reporting Incidents to the U.S. Department of EducationRegulations Governing the Protection of Human Subjects in Research-  34 CFR Part 97, Protection of Human Subjects
Includes Subpart A (Basic Policy) and Subpart D (Additional Protections for Children).
Research Activities Which May Be Reviewed Through Expedited Review ProceduresThe Department of Education's regulations authorize expedited review procedures for certain kinds of research appearing on the list established by the Secretary of Health and Human Services. 
Report on: Expedited Review of Social and Behavioral Research ActivitiesIssued by the  interagency  National Science and Technology Council's Social and Behavioral Research Working Group of the Human Subjects Research Subcommittee, Committee on Science.34 CFR Part 98, the Protection of Pupil Rights Amendment (PPRA)
  PPRA is designed to protect the rights of parents and students in programs that receive funding from the Department.
- 34 CFR Part 99, the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA)    FERPA is designed to protect the privacy of a student's education records at all public elementary and secondary schools and virtually all public and private postsecondary institutions.
Guidance and Educational Materials- Covid-19 and Educational Research: FAQs  [ PDF,  270KB]
- **Training:** Dept. of Education: Implementing the Common Rulefor the Protection of Human Subjects in Research (34 CFR 97)
-  The Belmont ReportBasic reference document. The Department of Education's Regulations for the Protection of Human Subjects embody the principles of the "Ethical Principles and Guidelines for the Protection of Human Subjects of Research," known as the Belmont Report, which was issued in 1979 by the National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research.  
Assurance Information and Other-  Human Subjects Research Narrative instructions. - also in MS Word format (26K) 
-  ED Guidance on "Engagement" of Institutions in Research - also in MS Word format (26K) 
-  HHS Office for Human Research Protections Procedures for Registering Instutional Review Boards  
-  HHS Office for Human Research Protections Procedures for Filing Federal-Wide Assurances 
-  List of Approved Assurances on file with Office for Human Research Protections and Registered Institutional Review Boards  
-  Assurance Identification/Certification/Declaration of Exemption (Formerly Form 310) (RTF format)  
-  ED Form 424 Application for Federal Education Assistance (link to the Grant Application Forms page)    Includes grant application instructions regarding human subjects research. 

Top
  Last Modified: 08/04/2020
Disclaimer

### State Department of Education

Nevada Department of Education700 East Fifth StreetCarson City, NV 89701Phone: (775) 687-9115Website: http://www.doe.nv.gov/

### State Higher Education Agency

Nevada System of Higher Education4300 S. Maryland Pkwy.Las Vegas, NV 89119Phone: (702) 889-8426Fax: (702) 889-8495Website: http://system.nevada.edu/Nshe/

### Special Education Agency

Office of Special EducationNevada State Department of Education700 East Fifth StreetCarson City, NV 89701Phone: (702) 668-4338Fax: (775) 687-9101Website: http://www.doe.nv.gov/Inclusive_Education/Early_Childhood/

### State Adult Education Agency

Nevada Department of EducationOffice of Adult Education755 North Roop StreetSuite 201Carson City, NV 89701 Phone: (775) 687-7287Website: https://nevadaadulteducation.org/Contact-Us

Back to state map
#### § 1802.12 Requirements as to form.

The challenge shall include identification of the challenger by full name and title of position, verification of security clearance or other basis of authority, and an identification of the documents or portions of documents or information at issue. The challenge shall also, in detailed and factual terms, identify and describe the reasons why it is believed that the information is not protected by one or more of the § 1.5 provisions, that the release of the information would not cause damage to the national security, or that the information should be declassified due to the passage of time. The challenge must be properly classified; in this regard, until the challenge is decided, the authorized holder must treat the challenge, the information being challenged, and any related or explanatory information as classified at the same level as the current classification of the information in dispute.
Publications

Appendix D Status of Wild Salmonid Populations by Region, Timing of the Outmigration of Smolts in the Estuaries, and Species and Numbers of Pinnipeds Present During Adult Salmonid Return Migration

- Status classifications differ by state. See definitions listed in  Appendix   B . HRE = High Risk of Extinction; MRE = Moderate Risk of Extinction.   
- Months in all capitals have the highest number of smolts in the estuaries.   
- HS = Pacific harbor seal; CSL = California sea lion; SSL = Stellar sea   lion.   
- MS = Main Stem; NF = North Fork; SF = South Fork; MF = Middle Fork. 

Table of Contents
Exhibit
      32(f)




CERTIFICATION
      FURNISHED 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 Florida Power
      Corporation (the “Company”) for the period ending March 31, 2006 as filed with
      the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I,
      Peter M. Scott III, Executive Vice President and 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), as applicable, of
      the
      Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and


(2)           the information
      contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
      condition and result of operations of the Company.








/s/ Peter M. Scott
      III


Peter
      M.
      Scott III


Executive
      Vice President and


Chief
      Financial OfficerMay 9, 2006






This
      certification is being furnished and shall not be deemed filed by the Company
      for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended,
      or incorporated by reference in any filing under the Securities Exchange Act
      of
      1934, as amended, or the Securities Act of 1933, as amended.
#### 22.808 Complaints.

Complaints received by the contracting officer alleging violation of the requirements of E.O. 11246 shall be referred immediately to the OFCCP regional office. The complainant shall be advised in writing of the referral. The contractor that is the subject of a complaint shall not be advised in any manner or for any reason of the complainant's name, the nature of the complaint, or the fact that the complaint was received.

[48 FR 42258, Sept. 19, 1983, as amended at 63 FR 70285, Dec. 18, 1998]
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0000016343
<NAME> CALIFORNIA JOCKEY CLUB
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                           3,323
<SECURITIES>                                     5,609
<RECEIVABLES>                                        8
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                10,398
<PP&E>                                          30,524
<DEPRECIATION>                                (16,168)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  24,754
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            3,845
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            58
<OTHER-SE>                                      20,851
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    24,754
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 1,774
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                      755
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  1,019
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              1,019
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,019
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .18
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .18
        

</TABLE>