alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Featured Grant OpportunitySchool Emergency Response to Violence (Project SERV) (Funding Opportunity) 

Featured Grant OpportunityShare with Youth: NOAA Student Opportunities Database

Featured Grant OpportunityShort Courses in Social Determinants of Health for Research Education in Nursing Research (Funding...

Featured Grant OpportunityComprehensive Partnerships to Advance Cancer Health Equity (CPACHE) Program (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityRisk and Protective Factors of Family Health and Family Level Interventions (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityPersonnel Development to Improve Services and Results for Children with Disabilities--Doctoral...

Featured Grant OpportunityStanding Announcement for Tribal Title IV-E Plan Development Grants (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityProviding Research Education Experiences to Enhance Inclusivity for a Diverse Substance Use and...

Featured Grant OpportunityFY 2024 Research on School-Based Hate Crimes (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityChallenge America (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityResearch and Evaluation on Firearm Violence and Mass Shootings (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityNational Juvenile Court Data Archive (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityGraduate Research Fellowship (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityCommunity Programs for Outreach and Intervention with Youth and Young Adults at Clinical High Risk...

Featured Grant OpportunityPrint and Disseminate Child Victims and Witnesses Support Materials (Funding Opportunity)

## Breadcrumb

            -  Announcements 
            -           Resource: Prevent Unsafe Drinking on Campus      

# Resource: Prevent Unsafe Drinking on Campus

This data visualization flyer (PDF, 1 page) illustrates heavy alcohol use and binge drinking statistics amongst college age youth to inform colleges and communities. **Learn more.**
**Exhibit 15**

 

February 4, 2009

 

MWIVeterinary Supply, Inc.Meridian, ID

 

Wehave reviewed, in accordance with the standards of the Public CompanyAccounting Oversight Board (United States), the unaudited interim financialinformation of MWI Veterinary Supply, Inc. and subsidiaries for the threemonth periods ended December 31, 2008, and 2007, as indicated in ourreport dated February 4, 2009; because we did not perform an audit, weexpressed no opinion on that information.

 

We areaware that our report referred to above, which is included in your QuarterlyReport on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended December 31, 2008, isincorporated by reference in Registration Statement No. 333-127879,333-127880, and 333-149275 on Form S-8 and Registration Statement No. 333-141078on Form S-3.

 

Wealso are aware that the aforementioned report, pursuant to Rule 436(c) underthe Securities Act of 1933, is not considered a part of the RegistrationStatement prepared or certified by an accountant or a report prepared orcertified by an accountant within the meaning of Sections 7 and 11 of that Act.

 
| /s/ DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP |   |
|------------------------------------|--------|
| Boise, Idaho                       |   |

 

----
#### Jose Rodriguez, Respondent, v Angela Rodriguez, Appellant.

— In a matrimonial action, defendant appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated December 4, 1978, which, after a nonjury trial, *inter alia,*(1) granted plaintiff a divorce based on cruel and inhuman treatment, (2) dismissed her counterclaim for a separation, and (3) awarded her $75 per week for the support of each of the three children of the marriage. Judgment modified, on the law, by deleting therefrom the first, third, fourth, fifth, sixth, seventh, eighth, tenth and eleventh decretal paragraphs thereof, and substituting therefor a provision providing that plaintiff’s complaint is dismissed. As so modified, judgment affirmed, with costs to the defendant. In light of the length of this marriage of 21 years, the husband’s provocations and his ability to make alternative arrange-*642merits, defendant’s unwillingness to assist him in administering his needed dialysis treatments did not constitute cruel and inhuman treatment such as to endanger his physical or mental well-being *(Hessen v Hessen,*33 NY2d 406; *Rios v Rios,*34 AD2d 325, affd 29 NY2d 840; *Knox v Knox,*70 AD2d 652). Damiani, J. P., O’Connor, Lazer and Rabin, JJ., concur.
#### § 1709.16 Performance reviews.

Each grant agreement shall include performance criteria and RUS will regularly evaluate the progress and performance of grantee according to such criteria. If the grantee does not comply with or does not meet the performance criteria set out in the grant agreement, the Administrator may require amendment of the grant agreement, or may suspend or terminate the grant pursuant to 7 CFR 2015, subpart N. If the grantee does not comply with or does not meet the performance criteria set out in the grant agreement, the Administrator may require amendment of the grant agreement, or may suspend or terminate the grant pursuant to 2 CFR part 200, as adopted by USDA through 2 CFR part 400.

[70 FR 5351, Feb. 2, 2005, as amended at 79 FR 76002, Dec. 19, 2014]
### THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

13

- 17

- 00239

- CR

Domingo Perez III v. The State of Texas

On Appeal from the 36th District Court of San Patricio County , Texas Trial Cause No. S

- 11

- 3164CR

JUDGMENT THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, having considered thi s cause on appeal, concludes that the judgment of the trial court should be AFFIRMED . The Court orders the judgment of the trial court AFFIRMED

. We further order this decision certified below for observance. July 5, 2018
Work Assignment 1-07, Amendment 2

Contract EP-C-07-028

TITLE: Ethanol Evaluation on Nonroad Engines

Period of Performance: Effective Date through June 30, 2009

Work Assignment Manager (WAM): Cheryl Caffrey (734) 214-4849 Fax (734) 214-4050 caffrey.cheryl@epa.gov

Alternate W AM: Phil Carlson (734) 214-4270 Fax (734) 214-4050 carlson.philip@epa.gov

Level of Effort: No additional LOE is added

Purpose of the Amendment:

Through discussion between EPA and ARB, engines cur rently being tested under the ARB program are going to be used for EPA purposes.

Task 9 shall be changed as follows: The contractor shall add the sampling of ammonia, s peciation of HC, and PM/ECOC/sulfate on one emission test per small SI engine, per ARB E0 a nd ARB E10 fuels, to the ARB engine exhaust emission testing currently underway. The s pecific PM measurement system shall be the 47mm system.

The first two engines under ARB’s test program shal l be completed without this additional
sampling. This additional work shall begin with th e third engine. A total of 10 engines will
be tested with the additional sampling

If not included in the ARB work, the contractor sha ll analyze the FID’s response to ethanol and aldehydes and present the information in the report . This information will be used along with the ethanol and aldehyde measurements to assure we are not double counting hydrocarbons.

One nonhandheld and one handheld engine shall be em ission tested once each using fuels Indolene and EPAct #18 (which will be provided by E PA). This shall be done upon completion of emission testing with ARB test fuels. The nonha ndheld engine shall be the Honda 4.3hp engine, if available, and the handheld engine shall be an Echo engine, if available, on ARB’s list of engines. All emission results (including inform ation from ARB) from these engines shall be reported to EPA.Task 5:

Remove this task from the work plan. Based on init ial investigation from SwRI, it is determined
that the vast majority of new nonroad motorcycles a re now certified with 4 stroke engines.
Exceptions to this are 2 stroke competition nonroad motorcycles and these engines do not have
to meet emission requirements and the vehicles are small in number. Emission standards began
in 2006 and hence in-use two stroke nonroad motorcy cles will be of greater interest based on

contribution to inventories.

EPA anticipates that Task 9 can be completed within the current period of performance and that the hours removed and the hours added are equal. A work plan is not required; however, a revised cost estimate is required.
Youngstown-Warren Regional Airport Proposal Under the Small Community Air Service Development Program - Docket DOT-OST-2012-0069 Page 2 

# Appendix AYoungstown-Warren Regional Airport Proposal Under the Small Community Air Service Development Program - Docket DOT-OST-2012-0069 Page 3 

# Appendix A
Exhibit 10.42




FIRST
AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT




This is
the first amendment (the “First Amended Agreement”) to that certain Employment
Agreement dated as of the 18th day of
June, 2003 (the “Agreement”), between Mpower Communications Corp., a Nevada
corporation (the “Company”) and Jim Ferguson (“Executive”).




The
Company and Executive, for and in consideration of the promises, terms and
conditions contained herein, do hereby agree to make the following amendments to
the Agreement.




1.
Section 4.02 of the Agreement is deleted in its entirety, and replaced by the
following:

 

“4.02
TERMINATION WITHOUT CAUSE; RESIGNATION FOR GOOD REASON. In the event of (A) the
Company’s termination of Executive’s employment hereunder without Cause, (B)
Executive’s resignation for Good Reason, (C) Executive’s death, or (D)
Executive’s Disability, he shall be entitled to the following: (i) the payments
and benefits described immediately above in sub-section (a) of Section 4.01 and
(ii) a severance benefit (the “Severance
Benefit”) equal
to two times (a) the higher of the Fixed Salary paid immediately preceding the
Termination Date or the Fixed Salary on June 18, 2003 and (b) the highest bonus
paid by the Company to Executive during the period from the Effective Date
through the Termination Date. Payment of the Severance Benefit shall be
contingent upon Executive’s execution of a waiver and release of claims (a
“Release”) in
favor of the Company and its affiliates and their respective employees and
agents, substantially in the form set forth in Appendix A. The Severance Benefit
shall be paid by the Company in a lump sum, no later than two (2) business days
after the expiration of the Revocation Period, as defined in the
Release.”







IN
WITNESS WHEREOF, the
parties have duly executed this Second Amended Agreement as of this
28th day of
July, 2004.







MPOWER
COMMUNICATIONS CORP.






	 	 	 	 
	/s/ Russell I.
      Zuckerman	 	 	/s/ Jim
      Ferguson
	
      

    	 	 	
      

    
	
       

      Russell I.
      Zuckerman

      Senior
      Vice President, General Counsel and Corporate Secretary

      
	 	 	
       

      Jim
      Ferguson
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsRadioactive 7Be materials flown on LDEFFollowing the discovery of the atmospheric cosmogenic radionuclide Be-7 on the Long Duration Exposure Facility (LDEF), we began a search for other known nuclides produced by similar mechanisms. None of the others have the narrow gamma-ray line emission of Be-7 decay which enable its rapid detection and quantification. A search for Be-10 atoms on LDEF clamp plates using accelerator mass spectrometry is described. An unexpected result was obtained.Document ID19920024780Acquisition SourceLegacy CDMSDocument TypeContractor Report (CR)AuthorsGregory, John C.*(Alabama Univ. Huntsville, AL, United States)*Date AcquiredSeptember 6, 2013Publication DateJuly 12, 1992Subject CategorySpacecraft Design, Testing And PerformanceReport/Patent NumberNAS 1.26:184385NASA-CR-184385Accession Number92N34024Funding Number(s)CONTRACT_GRANT: NAS8-38609Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType19920024780.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 31.1****Certification**I, G. Gary Yetman, certify that:1. I have reviewed this report on Form 10-Q of Coleman Cable, Inc.;2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact oromit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstancesunder which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by thisreport;3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operationsand cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintainingdisclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) forthe registrant and have: a. designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused suchdisclosure controls and procedures to be designed under oursupervision, to ensure that material information relating to theregistrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known tous by others within those entities, particularly during the period inwhich this report is being prepared;  b. designed such internal control over financial reporting, or causedsuch internal control over financial reporting to be designed underour supervision, to provide reasonable assurance regarding thereliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financialstatements for external purposes in accordance with generally acceptedaccounting principles;  c. evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controlsand procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about theeffectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the endof the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and  d. disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’smost recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or isreasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting; and5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the auditcommittee of registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions): a. all significant deficiencies and material weaknessesin the design or operation of internal control overfinancial reporting, which are reasonably likely toadversely affect the registrant’s ability to record,process, summarize and report financial information;and  b. any fraud, whether or not material, that involvesmanagement or other employees who have a significantrole in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting.     Date: May 9, 2008 **/s/ G. Gary Yetman**              **Chief Executive Officer and President**
###### Editorial Note on Part 1940

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 1940 appear at 80 FR 9876, Feb. 24, 2015.

#### § 1940.970 [Reserved]
###### Editorial Note on Part 1940

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 1940 appear at 80 FR 9876, Feb. 24, 2015.

#### §§ 1940.580-1940.584 [Reserved]
#### PEOPLE, Appellant, v. MERCANTILE COOPERATIVE BANK, Respondent.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department.

June 8, 1906.)

Proceedings by the people of the state of New York against the Mercantile Cooperative Bank.

No opinion. Final order settling accounts and order appointing referee affirmed, without costs.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

IN RE: 3M COMBAT ARMS 

EARPLUG PRODUCTS

LIABILITY LITIGATION

This Document Relates to All Cases

Case No. 3:19md2885

Judge M. Casey Rodgers

Magistrate Judge Hope T. Cannon

ORDER

Pending before the Court are the Motions for Admission Pro Hac Vice seeking 

leave to appear as counsel for parties in matters pending before this Court associated 

with the above-referenced litigation, filed by the attorneys listed on Exhibit A. The

motions demonstrate that these attorneys are members of good standing of the bar

associations of their respective states, as stated on the certificates of good standing 

dated within 30 days of filing the motions; they have successfully completed the 

computer-based tutorials for the local rules of this Court and CM/ECF; and they 

have also paid the required admission fee. Having fully reviewed the matters, the 

Court finds the requirements of the Court’s local rules satisfied. See N.D. Fla. Loc. 

R. 11.1. Therefore, the motions identified on Exhibit A are GRANTED.

DONE AND ORDERED on this 22nd day of February 2023.

M. Casey Rodgers 

M. CASEY RODGERS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:19-md-02885-MCR-HTC Document 3678 Filed 02/22/23 Page 1 of 2
Exhibit A

ECF No. Counsel Firm

3666 Michael J. Mestitz Williams & Connolly LLP

3677 Patrick R. Dowd Holland Law Firm

Case 3:19-md-02885-MCR-HTC Document 3678 Filed 02/22/23 Page 2 of 2
§ 1778.21 Application processing. ( a ) The material submitted with the application should include the Preliminary Engineering Report, population and median household income of the area to be served, description of project, and nature of emergency that caused the problem(s) being addressed by the project. The documentation must clearly show that the applicant has had a significant decline in the quantity or quality of potable water or an acute shortage of potable water, or that such a decline or shortage is imminent, and that the proposed project will eliminate or alleviate the problem. For projects to be funded in accordance with § 1778.11 (a), evidence must be furnished that a significant decline in quantity or quality occurred within two years before filing the application with the Agency, or is expected to occur within one year after filing the application.
( b ) When favorable action will not be taken on an application, the applicant will be notified in writing by the State Program Official of the reasons why the request was not favorably considered. Notification to the applicant will state that a review of this decision by the Agency may be requested by the applicant in accordance with 7 CFR part 11.
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsIndependent Orbiter Assessment (IOA): Analysis of the electrical power generation/power reactant storage and distribution subsystemThe results of the Independent Orbiter Assessment (IOA) of the Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEA) and Critical Items List (CIL) are presented. The IOA approach features a top-down analysis of the hardware to determine failure modes, criticality, and potential critical items. To preserve independence, this analysis was accomplished without reliance upon the results contained within the NAA FMEA/CIL documentation. The independent analysis results corresponding to the Orbiter Electrical Power Generation (EPG)/Power Reactants Storage and Distribution (PRSD) System Hardware is documented. The EPG/PRSD hardware is required for performing critical functions of cryogenic hydrogen and oxygen storage and distribution to the Fuel Cell Powerplants (FCP) and Atmospheric Revitalization Pressure Control Subsystem (ARPCS). Specifically, the EPG/PRSD hardware consists of the following: Hydryogen (H2) tanks; Oxygen (O2) tanks; H2 Relief Valve/Filter Packages (HRVFP); O2 Relief Valve/Filter Packages (ORVFP); H2 Valve Modules (HVM); O2 Valve Modules (OVM); and O2 and H2 lines, components, and fittings.Document ID19900001602Acquisition SourceLegacy CDMSDocument TypeContractor Report (CR)AuthorsGotch, S. M.*(McDonnell-Douglas Astronautics Co. Houston, TX, United States)*Date AcquiredSeptember 6, 2013Publication DateDecember 5, 1986Subject CategorySpace TransportationReport/Patent NumberNAS 1.26:185556NASA-CR-185556REPT-1.0-WP-VA86001-11Accession Number90N10918Funding Number(s)CONTRACT_GRANT: NAS9-17650Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType19900001602.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
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Terrence Bryant, Appellant.

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County, rendered on March 18, 1977, unanimously affirmed. Application by appellant’s counsel to withdraw as counsel is granted. (See *Anders v California,*386 US 738; *People v Saunders,*52 AD2d 833.) We have reviewed this record and agree with appellant’s assigned counsel that there are no meritorious points which could be raised on this appeal. Concur—Kupferman, J. P., Sandler, Sullivan, Bloom and Markewich, JJ.
NUMBER 13-10-00382-CR

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

BRODERICK SMITH, Appellant,

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee.

On Appeal from the 94th District Court 

of Nueces County, Texas.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Chief Justice Valdez and Justices Rodriguez and Vela

Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam

Appellant, Broderick Smith, attempts to appeal a conviction for graffiti. The trial 

court has certified that Athe defendant has waived the right of appeal.@ See TEX. R. APP.

P. 25.2(a)(2).
2

On July 26, 2010, this Court notified appellant=s counsel of the trial court=s 

certification and ordered counsel to: (1) review the record; (2) determine whether 

appellant has a right to appeal; and (3) forward to this Court, by letter, counsel=s findings 

as to whether appellant has a right to appeal, or, alternatively, advise this Court as to the 

existence of any amended certification.

On September 7, 2010, counsel filed a letter brief with this Court. Counsel=s 

response does not establish: (1) that the certification currently on file with this Court is 

incorrect, or (2) that appellant otherwise has a right to appeal. 

The Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure provide that an appeal must be 

dismissed if the trial court=s certification does not show that the defendant has the right of 

appeal. TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(d); see TEX. R. APP. P. 37.1, 44.3, 44.4. Accordingly, this 

appeal is DISMISSED. 

PER CURIAM

Do not publish.

See TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).

Delivered and filed the 

16th day of September, 2010.