alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
217.7004 Solicitation and award.       (a)  Solicitations shall include a request for offerors to state prices—          (1)  For the new items being acquired without any exchange; and          (2)  For the new items with the exchange (trade-in allowance) for the exchange property listed.          (b)  The contracting officer is not obligated to award on an exchange basis.  If the lowest evaluated offer is an offer for the new items without any exchange, the contracting officer may award on that basis and forgo the exchange.          (c)  Exchanges may be made only with the successful offeror.  When the successful offer includes an exchange, award one contract for both the acquisition of the new property and the trade-in of the exchange property.  The only exception is when the items must be acquired against a mandatory Federal supply schedule contract, in which case, award a separate contract for the exchange.    **Parent topic:** Subpart 217.70 - EXCHANGE OF PERSONAL PROPERTY
#### Francis J. Foley, Jr., et al., as Executors of Francis J. Foley, Deceased, Respondents, v. State of New York, Appellant.

(Claim No. 45312.)

*Per Curiam.*

Appeal by the State from a judgment of the Court of Claims which awarded damages for the appropriation of lands for highway purposes. The State does not contest the award of $4,550 for direct damages. It does assert with respect to the award of $2,925 for consequential damages, first, that the amount includes a duplication of damage items attributable to the loss of a water supply and, second, that the construction of the improvement enhanced the value of the property by an amount in excess of the consequential damages, by creating a market for deposits of gravel on the property, which the highway construction contractor did, in fact, purchase, and that the rule as to offsetting *707special benefits should be applied. The water supply in question derived from, an old gravel pit and served to irrigate some 39.74 acres. It was eliminated by the appropriation. Claimants’ appraiser attributed damage of $1,000 to the loss of the water supply; but he also depreciated the value of the 39.74 acres by $25 per acre or $990 on account of the loss of irrigation. On cross-examination, he admitted that the $1,000 item represented the estimated cost of a new water supply and with respect to the $990 item conceded that the “ loss of irrigation was the only factor I put in the appraisal ”. Thus, the eost-to-eure estimate was duplicative of the depreciation item and must be deducted from the award. As respects the gravel deposits, we need not pass on the legal issue involved, as, on turning to the facts, we find that there was uncontradietéd evidence of a market long prior to the appropriation, sales having been made to the contractor for another highway and to others, and the recognized intrinsic worth of the deposits thus constituted a factor in the evaluations upon which the undisputed award of direct damages was predicated. We find no merit in the State’s final contention, which concerns the computation of interest upon the award. (See *Leeds*v. *State of New York,*20 N Y 2d 701; *Corl*v. *State of New York,*31 A D 2d 692.) Judgment modified, on the law and the facts, so as to reduce the award to $6,475 and appropriate interest and, as so modified, affirmed, without costs. Gibson, P. J., Herlihy, Reynolds, Staley, Jr., and Greenblott, JJ., concur in memorandum Per *Curiam.*
§ 760.1705 Normal marketings of milk. ( a ) The FSA county committee will determine the affected farmer's normal marketings of milk which, for the purposes of this subpart, will be the sum of the quantities of milk for which the farmer would have sold in the commercial market in each of the pay periods in the application period be it not for the removal of the affected farmer's milk from the commercial market as a result of a qualifying disaster event.
( b ) Normal marketings for each pay period are based on the average daily production during the base period.
( c ) Normal marketings determined in paragraph (b) of this section are adjusted for any change in the daily average number of cows milked during each pay period the milk is off the market compared with the average number of cows milked daily during the base period.
( d ) If only a portion of a pay period falls within the application period, normal marketings for such pay period will be reduced so that they represent only that part of such pay period which is within the application period.
( e ) The days eligible for indemnification begin on the date milk was removed or dumped and continue for the concurrent days milk was removed or dumped. Once the dairy operation returns to the normal marketing of milk, the dairy operation is no longer eligible for assistance for milk removed or dumped due to that qualifying disaster event unless after restarting commercial marketing of milk, additional milk is removed or dumped due to the same qualifying disaster event.
[84 FR 48534, Sept. 13, 2019. Redesignated and amended at 88 FR 62290, Sept. 11, 2023]
Exhibit 23.1

CONSENT OF REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

In connection with the foregoing Annual Report on Form 10-KSB to be filed
with the Washington, D.C. Office of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, we hereby consent to the inclusion of our report dated June 13, 2008 related to the audit of the financial statements of IPtimize, Inc. as of and for the years ended
December 31, 2007 and 2006.



|                 |  |  |  |                                      
|---------------- |  |  |  | -------------------------------------
|Denver, Colorado |  |  |  | /s/ Stark Winter Schenkein & CO., LLP
|June 27, 2008    |  |  |  |
52.222-16 Approval of Wage Rates.       As prescribed in 22.407(b), insert the following clause:          Approval of Wage Rates (May 2014)          All straight time wage rates, and overtime rates based thereon, for laborers and mechanics engaged in work under this contract must be submitted for approval in writing by the head of the contracting activity or a representative expressly designated for this purpose, if the straight time wages exceed the rates for corresponding classifications contained in the applicable Construction Wage Rate Requirements minimum wage determination included in the contract. Any amount paid by the Contractor to any laborer or mechanic in excess of the agency approved wage rate shall be at the expense of the Contractor and shall not be reimbursed by the Government. If the Government refuses to authorize the use of the overtime, the Contractor is not released from the obligation to pay employees at the required overtime rates for any overtime actually worked.          (End of clause)    **Parent topic:** 52.222 [Reserved]
Exhibit 32.2

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 Annual Report of IPtimize, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-K for the year ended
December 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Donald W. Prosser, Chief Financial and Accounting 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) 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.
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dated: May 29, 2009



/s/ Donald W. ProsserDonald W. ProsserChief Financial Officer


A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to and will be
retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
# C_2014295EN.01000101.xml

| 3.9.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 295/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

3.9.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 295/1

---

COUNCIL DECISION

of 2 September 2014

adopting the Council's position on the draft general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2015

(2014/C 295/01)

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 314(3) thereof, in conjunction with the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community and in particular Article 106a thereof,

Whereas:

| 1. | on 25 June 2014, the Commission submitted a proposal containing the draft general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2015 (1), |
| --- | --- |

1.

on 25 June 2014, the Commission submitted a proposal containing the draft general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2015 (1),

1

| 2. | the Council examined the Commission proposal with a view to defining a position consistent, on the revenue side, with Council Decision 2007/436/EC, Euratom of 7 June 2007 on the system of the European Communities' own resources (2), and, on the expenditure side, with Council Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 1311/2013 of 2 December 2013 laying down the multiannual financial framework for the years 2014‐2020 (3), |
| --- | --- |

2.

the Council examined the Commission proposal with a view to defining a position consistent, on the revenue side, with Council Decision 2007/436/EC, Euratom of 7 June 2007 on the system of the European Communities' own resources (2), and, on the expenditure side, with Council Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 1311/2013 of 2 December 2013 laying down the multiannual financial framework for the years 2014‐2020 (3),

2

3

HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:

Sole Article

The Council's position on the draft general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2015 was adopted by the Council on 2 September 2014.

The full text can be accessed for consultation or downloading on the Council's website: http://www.consilium.europa.eu/

Done at Brussels, on 2 September 2014.

For the Council

The President

S. GOZI

---

(1)  COM(2014) 300 final.

1

(2)  OJ L 163, 23.6.2007, p. 17.

2

(3)  OJ L 347, 20.12.2013, p. 884.

3

---
# L_2014346EN.01003101.xml

| 2.12.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 346/31 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

2.12.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 346/31

---

COUNCIL DECISION

of 25 November 2014

appointing a United Kingdom member of the Committee of the Regions

(2014/859/EU)

(2014/859/EU)

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 305 thereof,

Having regard to the proposal of the United Kingdom Government,

Whereas:

| (1) | On 22 December 2009 and on 18 January 2010, the Council adopted Decisions 2009/1014/EU (1) and 2010/29/EU (2) appointing the members and alternate members of the Committee of the Regions for the period from 26 January 2010 to 25 January 2015. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

On 22 December 2009 and on 18 January 2010, the Council adopted Decisions 2009/1014/EU (1) and 2010/29/EU (2) appointing the members and alternate members of the Committee of the Regions for the period from 26 January 2010 to 25 January 2015.

1

2

| (2) | A member's seat has become vacant following the end of the term of office of Lord Graham TOPE CBE, |
| --- | --- |

(2)

A member's seat has become vacant following the end of the term of office of Lord Graham TOPE CBE,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

The following is hereby appointed as member to the Committee of the Regions for the remainder of the current term of office, which runs until 25 January 2015:

| — | Ms Ruth DOMBEY, Councillor. |
| --- | --- |

—

Ms Ruth DOMBEY, Councillor.

Councillor

Article 2

This Decision shall enter into force on the day of its adoption.

Done at Brussels, 25 November 2014.

For the Council

The President

D. FRANCESCHINI

---

(1)  OJ L 348, 29.12.2009, p. 22.

1

(2)  OJ L 12, 19.1.2010, p. 11.

2

---
#### Knight *v.*The State.

*Indictment for Murder.*

1. *Special term of court; when legally*called; *publication of notice*; *validity of indictment.*— Where an order is made for a special term of the circuit or city court to indict and try persons charged with the killing of certain named people, and notice of such order is given for thirty days prior to the holding of the special term, by publication in a newspaper published in the county, such special term of such court is regularly and legally called; and an indictment preferred against a defendant, charging him with the killing of one of the designated persons, is valid, and can not be quashed upon the ground that the special term was not properly called.

Appeal from'the City Court of Mobile.-

Tried before the Hon. 0. J. Semmes .

The appellant was indicted and tried for the- murder of one Frank Dantzler, was convicted of murder in the first degree, and sentenced to be hanged. The indictment was preferred by the grand jury organized at a special term of the city court of Mobile, and the defendant was tried and convicted at such special term. This term was called by the judge-of the city court, and the order was published in a paper published in the city and county of Mobile for thirty days prior to the meeting of the court. The order as made and published was as follows : ‘ ‘For good and sufficient cause appearing to me, O. J. Semmes, judge of the city court of Mobile, it is ordered -that a special term of the city court of Mobile be held, to commence on the first day of September, 1897, especially for the indictment and trial of the persons charged with the killing of Thomas Jones, Frank Dantzler and George Gastin, and any other persons charged with aggravated offenses.”

Upon the trial of the cause, the defendant moved to quash the” indictment upon the ground that the special' term was not properly called. This motion was overruled, and the defendant duly excepted.

Under the opinion on the present appeal it is not necessary to set out in detail the facts relating to the other rulings of the trial court.

*487No counsel marked as appearing for appellant.

William 0. Fitts, Attorney-General, for the State.

HEAD, J.

The special term of the city court was legally and regularly called. — Acts, 1857-58, p. 56; *Nugent v.*State, 19 Ala. 544; *Harrington v. State,*36 Ala. 236; Code of 1886, §§ 752, 753; *Grant v. State,*62 Ala. 233; *Martin v. State,*77 Ala. 1.

We have carefully examined all the other exceptions raised by the record, and find them so plainly without merit that comment is unnecessary. The indictment and trial were, in all respects, legal and regular, and the prisoner lawfully condemned. Let the law be enforced.

The judgment of the city court must be affirmed; and the time fixed therein for the execution of the sentence of death having passed, Friday, January 21; 1898, is hereby fixed for the execution of said sentence.

Affirmed.
52.222-30 Construction Wage Rate

Requirements-Price Adjustment (None or

Separately Specified Method).

As prescribed in 22.407(e), insert the following clause:

Construction Wage Rate Requirements-Price Adjustment (None or Separately Specified Method)

(Aug 2018)

(a) The wage determination issued under the Construction Wage Rate Requirements statute by the

Administrator, Wage and Hour Division, U.S. Department of Labor, that is effective for an option to

extend the term of the contract, will apply to that option period.

(b) The Contracting Officer will make no adjustment in contract price, other than provided for

elsewhere in this contract, to cover any increases or decreases in wages and benefits as a result of-

(1) Incorporation of the Department of Labor’s wage determination applicable at the exercise of the

option to extend the term of the contract;

(2) Incorporation of a wage determination otherwise applied to the contract by operation of law; or

(3) An increase in wages and benefits resulting from any other requirement applicable to workers

subject to the Construction Wage Rate Requirements statute.

(End of clause)

Parent topic: 52.222 [Reserved]
xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?


L\_2016189DE.01005901.xml


| | | | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 14.7.2016 | DE | Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union | L 189/59 |

---

Berichtigung der Verordnung (EU) Nr. 69/2014 der Kommission vom 27. Januar 2014 zur Änderung der Verordnung (EU) Nr. 748/2012 zur Festlegung der Durchführungsbestimmungen für die Erteilung von Lufttüchtigkeits- und Umweltzeugnissen für Luftfahrzeuge und zugehörige Erzeugnisse, Teile und Ausrüstungen sowie für die Zulassung von Entwicklungs- und Herstellungsbetrieben

(
[Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union L 23 vom 28. Januar 2014](http://publications.europa.eu/resource/oj/JOL_2014_023_R_TOC)
)

Seite 22, Anhang, Nummer 28 zur Änderung von Anhang I (Teil-21) der Verordnung (EU) Nr. 748/2012, Punkt 21.A.109:

Anstatt:

| | |
| --- | --- |
| „b) | die Kennzeichen, einschließlich der Buchstaben EPA (Europäische Einzelteilzulassung (European Part Removal)), gemäß 21.A.804 Buchstabe a zu spezifizieren.‘“ |

muss es heißen:

| | |
| --- | --- |
| „b) | die Kennzeichen, einschließlich der Buchstaben EPA (Europäische Einzelteilzulassung (European Part Approval)), gemäß 21.A.804 Buchstabe a zu spezifizieren.‘“ |

---
**Exhibit 31.2**

 

**CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 302OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

I, Gregory A. Kittle, certify that:

 

1.     Ihave reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Video DisplayCorporation;

 

2.     Basedon my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue statement ofa material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make thestatements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements weremade, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

 

3.     Basedon my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial informationincluded in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financialcondition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, andfor, the periods presented in this annual report;

 

4.     Theregistrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishingand maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

 

a)              designedsuch disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries,is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during theperiod in which this report is being prepared;

 

b)             evaluatedthe effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by thisreport based on such evaluation; and

 

c)              disclosedin this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (theregistrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that hasmaterially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and

 

5.     Theregistrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on ourmost recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to theregistrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board ofdirectors (or persons performing the equivalent function):

 

a)              allsignificant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely toadversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize andreport financial information; and

 

b)             any fraud, whether or not material, that involves managementor other employees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internalcontrols over financial reporting.

 

 
| Date: July 15, 2005 | /s/ Gregory A. Kittle   |   |
|--------------------------|-------------------------|--------|
|                     | Gregory A. Kittle       |
|                     | Chief Financial Officer |

 

1

----
EXHIBIT 35.2

                    SERVICER COMPLIANCE STATEMENT (ITEM 1123)

                               GMAC MORTGAGE, LLC

                RASC SERIES 2006-KS8 TRUST (THE "ISSUING ENTITY")

The undersigned,  a duly authorized  officer of GMAC Mortgage,  LLC, as servicer
(the "Servicer")  pursuant to the applicable  servicing  agreement,  does hereby
certify that:

1. A review of the  Servicer's  activities  during  the  period  covered  by the
Issuing Entity's report on Form 10-K and of the Servicer's performance under the
applicable servicing agreement has been made under my supervision.

2. To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Servicer has fulfilled
all of its obligations under the applicable  servicing agreement in all material
respects throughout such period.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has duly executed this Certificate this 26th
day of March 2007.

By:    /s/ Anthony N. Renzi
       Name:  Anthony N. Renzi
       Title: Executive Vice President
#### § 58.213 Repackaging room.

A separate room shall be provided for the filling of small packages and shall meet the same requirements for construction and facilities as the bulk packaging operation.
Exhibit 32.2

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 SkyTerra Communications, Inc. (the
Company) for the period ended September 30, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Scott Macleod, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the
Company, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge:

(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/ Scott Macleod                                   
|Scott Macleod                                       
|Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer

November 9, 2007