alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2986 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

109th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 2986

 To extend the temporary suspension of duty on railway car body shells 
of stainless steel designed for use in gallery type cab control railway 
                                 cars.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              May 23, 2006

   Mr. Allen introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
                  referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To extend the temporary suspension of duty on railway car body shells 
of stainless steel designed for use in gallery type cab control railway 
                                 cars.

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

SECTION 1. RAILWAY CAR BODY SHELLS OF STAINLESS STEEL DESIGNED FOR USE 
              IN GALLERY TYPE CAB CONTROL RAILWAY CARS.

    (a) In General.--Heading 9902.86.08 of the Harmonized Tariff 
Schedule of the United States (relating to railway car body shells of 
stainless steel designed for use in gallery type cab control railway 
cars) is amended by striking ``12/31/2006'' and inserting ``12/31/
2009''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or 
after the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO**

**18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**

**AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906 OF THESARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

          Inconnection with the Quarterly Report of Outdoor Channel Holdings, Inc. (the “Company”)on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2005 as filed with the Securitiesand Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Perry T. Massie,Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, to the best of my knowledge,pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-OxleyAct of 2002, that:

 

                (1)The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

                (2)The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all materialrespects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 
| /s/ Perry T. Massie     |   |
|-------------------------|--------|
| **Perry T. Massie**     |
| Chief Executive Officer |
| August 12, 2005         |

 

A signed original of this written statement required by Section906 has been provided to Outdoor Channel Holdings, Inc. and will be retained byOutdoor Channel Holdings, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and ExchangeCommission or its staff upon request.

 

 

----
Approximate Assembly Time: 

Motor to Motor Distance: 

Rotor Type: 

Prop Diameter: 

Approximate Flight Time: 

Battery: 

Height: 

Weight: 

Motor Type: 

Control Link: 

Video Link: 

Video Link Range: 

Satellite Navigation System: 

Completion Level: 

Length: 

Width: 

No assembly requ ired 

15.7 in (400mm) 

Quadcopter 

10.0 in (253mm) 

30 minutes 

11.1V 3S 6300mA h Li-Po 

9.50 in (242mm) 

45.9 oz (1.3 kg) 

4 x 780Kv Brushle ss Outrunner 

2.4GHz, 2.4GHz 

5.8GHz 

1 ,970 ft (600m) 

GPS, GLONASS 

Ready-to-Fly 

12.8 in (325mm) 

[ 12.8 in (325mm)
§ 786.110 Misrepresentation, scheme, or device. ( a ) In addition to other penalties, sanctions, or remedies that may apply, a dairy producer is ineligible to receive assistance under this program if the producer is determined by FSA to have: ( 1 ) Adopted any scheme or device that tends to defeat the purpose of this program,
( 2 ) Made any fraudulent representation,
( 3 ) Misrepresented any fact affecting a program determination, or
( 4 ) Violated 7 CFR 795.17 and thus be ineligible for the year(s) of violation and the subsequent year.
( b ) Any funds disbursed pursuant to this part to any person or dairy operation engaged in a misrepresentation, scheme, or device, must be refunded with interest together with such other sums as may become due. Interest will run from the date of the disbursement to the producer or other recipient of the payment from FSA. Any person or dairy operation engaged in acts prohibited by this section and any person or dairy operation receiving payment under this part is jointly and severally liable with other persons or dairy operations involved in such claim for benefits for any refund due under this section and for related charges. The remedies provided in this part are in addition to other civil, criminal, or administrative remedies that may apply.
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION WASHINGTON, DC In the Matter of: SKYWESTAIRLINES, INC. FDMS No. FAA-2013-0292 Served: June 24, 2015
EXTENSION OF TIME ComplainantFederal Aviation Administration (Complainant) filed a notice of appeal in this matter from the written initial decision issued on May 29, 2015. Complainant is required to perfect its appeal by filing an appeal briefwithin 55 days from the date ofissuance ofthe initial decision under 14 C.F.R. §§ 13.233(c) and 13.2ll(e). Accordingly, Complainant's appeal briefis due onJuly 23,2015. Byrequest dated June 19,2015, Complainant's counsel has requested a 30-day extensionoftime in which to file the appeal brief. Complainant's counsel represents that opposing counsel has agreed to this request. Complainant's request for an extension oftime in which to file its appeal briefis granted under 14 C.F.R. § 13.233(c)(l). Complainant's appeal briefis now due to be filed on orbefore August 24, 2015. 1 MICHAEL P. HUERTA ADMINISTRATOR Federal Aviation Administration

**t~'i**VICKI S. LEEMON2



## ~ Manager, Adjudication Branch

1 The "mailingrule" (14 C.F.R. § 13.2ll(e)), which provides for 5 additional days after service by mail, does not apply to this extension.
2 Issued under authority delegated to the ChiefCounsel and the Assistant ChiefCounsel for Litigation by Memorandum dated October27, 1992, under49 U.S.C. § 322(b) and 14 C.P.R. § 13.202 (see 57 Fed. Reg. 58,280 (1992)) and redelegated by the Assistant ChiefCounsel for Litigation tothe Manager, Adjudication Branch, by Memorandum dated August 6, 1993.
§ 81.7 Eligibility for payment. ( a ) If total applications for payment do not exceed $17,000,000, less administration costs, payments will be made under this program to any eligible producer of prune/plums who complies with the requirements in § 81.8 and all other terms and conditions in this part.
( b ) If applications for participation in the program authorized by this part exceed $17,000,000, less administration costs, the Committee will approve the applications (subject to the requirements in § 81.8) in the order in which the completed applications are received in the Committee office up to the funding limit of $17,000,000, less administration costs, for the program. Any additional applications will be denied.
( c ) The Administrator or his delegatee may set other conditions for payment, in addition to those provided for in this part, to the extent necessary to accomplish the goals of the program.
§ 900.27 Deadline for filing post-hearing briefs and corrections to transcript. ( a ) Under § 900.10 of this part, the period of time for interested persons to file corrections to the transcript of testimony at a Federal milk marketing agreement or order amendatory proceeding shall be no more than 30 days after the hearing record is available.
( b ) Under § 900.9(b) of this part, the period of time after the completion of a Federal milk marketing agreement or order amendatory hearing for interested persons to file proposed findings and conclusions, and written arguments or briefs, shall be no more than 60 days after completion of the amendatory hearing.
N OTE : This disposition is nonprecedential.



# United States **Court of Appeals** 

**for the Federal Circuit**

______________________

BLACKBERRY LTD.,

Appellant

v.

GOOGLE LLC,

Appellee

______________________

2019

- 1145

______________________

Appeal from the United States Patent and Trademark

Office, Patent Trial and Appeal Board in No. IPR2017

-

00913.

______________________

JUDGMENT

______________________

C HING

- L EE F UKUDA , Sidley Austin LLP, New York,

NY, argued for appellant. Also represented by S HARON

L EE ; S AMUEL D ILLON , Washington, DC.

N AVEEN M ODI , Paul Hastings LLP, Washington, DC,

argued for appellee. Also represented by P HILLIP W.

C ITROEN

, S TEPHEN B LAKE K INNAIRD

, S EONGHEE E MILY L EE

, J OSEPH P ALY S

.

______________________T HIS C AUSE ha ving been heard and considered, it is

O RDERED and A DJUDGED :

P ER C URIAM (P ROST

, Chief Judge, M OORE and

H UGHES

, Circuit Judges ).

AFFIRMED. See Fed . Cir. R. 36.

E NTERED BY O RDER OF THE C OURT

January 13, 2020 /s/ Peter R. Marksteiner

Date Peter R. Marksteiner

Clerk of Court
§ 81.14 Offset, assignment, and prompt payment. ( a ) Any payment or portion thereof due any person under this part shall be allowed without regard to questions of title under State law, and without regard to any claim or lien against the crop proceeds thereof in favor of the producer or any other creditors except agencies of the U.S. Government.
( b ) Payments which are earned by a producer under this program may be assigned in the same manner as allowed under the provisions of 7 CFR part 1404.
( c ) Prompt payment interest from AMS will not be applicable.
September 25, 2014 

Dan Cohen 

Deputy Assistant General Counsel for Legislation, Regulation, and Energy Efficiency 

U.S. Department of Energy 

1000 Independence Ave., SW 

Washington, DC 20585

Dear Mr. Cohen: 

Please find attached a corrected version of my earlier memorandum to you describing a September 12th 

meeting between myself and Dave McCurdy, representing the American Gas Association, and 

employees of the U.S. Department of Energy. I had submitted this memorandum, at your request, to 

assist in you in fulfilling your obligations to provide records of all ex parte communications relating to 

the ongoing consideration of natural gas furnace energy efficiency standards. 

On my memorandum to you dated September 23rd, I incorrectly listed Secretary Ernie Moniz as 

attending the meeting. In fact, Dr. Moniz did not attend the meeting. After our meeting concluded, as 

Mr. McCurdy and I were escorted out of the building, we encountered Dr. Moniz in the hallway outside 

of his office suite. Mr. Moniz greeted Mr. McCurdy and asked cordially what had brought him to the 

Department, and if the meeting had gone well. They exchanged pleasantries for a few moments and 

then Mr. McCurdy and I departed. 

While my inclusion of the Secretary’s name on the memo was a well-intended effort to be “complete,” 

on reflection I realize it was quite an overreach to characterize that brief, polite exchange between the 

Secretary and Mr. McCurdy as a meeting. 

Please accept my apologies for my error and for any inconvenience this has caused. 

Sincerely, 

/s/ Kathryn Clay 

Kathryn Clay | Vice President, Policy Strategy 

American Gas Association

400 N. Capitol St., NW | Washington, DC | 20001 

P: 202-824-7122 | F: 202-824-9125 | kclay@aga.org
1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA 

SOUTHERN DIVISION 

NICHOLAS and JENNIFER * 

STRICKLAND, * 

 * 

 Plaintiffs, * 

 * 

v. * Case No. 06-682-TFM 

 * 

CHAMPION ENTERPRISES, INC. * 

 * 

 Defendant. * 

PLAINTIFFS’ WITNESS LIST

 Plaintiffs may call any of the following witnesses to testify during the trial of this matter: 

1. Nicholas Strickland, c/o Beasley, Allen, Crow, Methvin, Portis & Miles, 272 

Commerce Street, Montgomery, AL; 

2. Jennifer Strickland, c/o Beasley, Allen, Crow, Methvin, Portis & Miles, 272 

Commerce Street, Montgomery, AL; 

3. Jerry Allen, c/o Beasley, Allen, Crow, Methvin, Portis & Miles, 272 Commerce 

Street, Montgomery, AL; 

4. Ralph Brown, c/o Beasley, Allen, Crow, Methvin, Portis & Miles, 272 Commerce 

Street, Montgomery, AL; 

5. Terry Deese, c/o Beasley, Allen, Crow, Methvin, Portis & Miles, 272 Commerce 

Street, Montgomery, AL; 

6. Robert Ford, c/o Beasley, Allen, Crow, Methvin, Portis & Miles, 272 Commerce 

Street, Montgomery, AL; 

7. Janice Ford, c/o Beasley, Allen, Crow, Methvin, Portis & Miles, 272 Commerce 

Street, Montgomery, AL; 

Case 1:06-cv-00682-TFM Document 51 Filed 08/31/2007 Page 1 of 3
2

8. Roy E. Bonney; R. T. Bonney and Associates, Inc., Post Office Box 1491, Wise, 

Virginia 24293; 

9. Bobby Parks; Healthy Homes of Louisiana, LLC, 104 Cherokee Drive, West 

Monroe, Louisiana 71291; 

10. Robert Kondner; Kondner Engineering and Technical Services, 19624 Downes 

Road, Parktown, Maryland 21120; 

11. Corporate representative of Fleetwood Enterprises, Inc.; 

12. Corporate representative of Fleetwood Homes of Georgia, Inc.; 

13. Any witnesses listed by Defendants; 

14. Any witnesses necessary for rebuttal or impeachment purposes; 

15. Any witnesses named in the un-transcribed depositions; 

16. Any witness whose name is revealed through subsequent discovery. 

 Plaintiffs reserve the right to amend this witness list. 

 /s/ C. Lance Gould _ 

 C. LANCE GOULD (ASB-0913-G66C) 

 Attorney for Plaintiffs 

OF COUNSEL: 

BEASLEY, ALLEN, CROW, 

METHVIN, PORTIS & MILES, P.C. 

Attorneys at Law 

Post Office Box 4160 

Montgomery, AL 36103-4160 

(334) 269-2343 

(334) 954-7555 (fax) 

Case 1:06-cv-00682-TFM Document 51 Filed 08/31/2007 Page 2 of 3
3

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that I have electronically filed the original of the foregoing document in 

this Court and served a copy upon all Defendants of record as listed below by placing a copy of 

same in the United States Mail, first class, postage prepaid on this the 31st day of August, 2007. 

 /s/ C. Lance Gould 

 OF COUNSEL 

Gregory S. Ritchey 

RITCHEY & SIMPSON, PLLC 

3288 Morgan Drive, Suite 100 

Birmingham, Alabama 35216 

Case 1:06-cv-00682-TFM Document 51 Filed 08/31/2007 Page 3 of 3
#### In the Matter of Katherine B. Maccaro, an Attorney, Respondent. Bar Association of Nassau County, New York, Inc., Petitioner.

Respondent was admitted to practice as an attorney and counselor at law by this court on June 28, 1950, under the name of Katherine Butzgy Maeearo. On June 22, 1966, the Grievance Committee of the Bar Association of Nassau County, New York, Inc., conducted a hearing upon a complaint by a former client of respondent. The complaint was generally to the effect that respondent had negligently omitted to take action in behalf of the client in three certain matters. Evidence was presented not only in support of those charges but also to establish that respondent had failed to answer communications to her, concerning the complaint, from the Grievance Committee and an attorney representing respondent’s former client. Respondent’s testimony at the hearing did not refute the complaint or the fact of respondent’s failure to answer the communications. At the conclusion of the hearing, the Grievance Committee voted to recommend that a" disciplinary proceeding be instituted against respondent on the basis of the complaint and respondent’s failure to answer the communications. Thereafter, on January 12, 1967, this court received an undated letter from respondent in which she tendered her resignation as a member of the Bar. The letter was accompanied by further explanatory matter, viz., a letter from an attorney acting for respondent, dated January 11, 1967, and a report by a physician dated December 16, 1966. Respondent’s resignation as a member of the Bar is accepted and directed to be filed; and it is ordered that respondent’s name be struck from the roll of attorneys and counselors at law, effective January 30, 1967. Beldock, P. J., Ughetta, Christ, Brennan and Rabin, JJ., concur.
EX-10.71



 Exhibit 10.71 

***Text Omitted and Filed Separately 

with the Securities and Exchange Commission. 

Confidential Treatment Requested 

Under 17 C.F.R. Sections 200.80(b)(4) 

and 240.24b-2. 
 SECOND
AMENDMENT TO THE SUPPLY AGREEMENT BETWEEN 
 HORIZON PHARMA IRELAND LIMITED 

AND NUVO PHARMACEUTICALS INC 
 This
AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO SUPPLY AGREEMENT (this “Amendment”) is made and entered into as of January 1, 2017 by and between Nuvo Pharmaceuticals .Inc., formerly known as Nuvo Research Inc., a company incorporated under the laws of the
province of Ontario, Canada (“NUVO”), having offices at 7560 Airport Road, Unit 10, Mississauga, Ontario, L4T 4114, and Horizon Pharma Ireland Limited, a Irish limited company (“Horizon”), and amends that certain Supply
Agreement, dated as of October 17, 2014, as amended by Amendment No. 1 to Supply Agreement, dated as of February 4, 2016 (the “Agreement”), by and between NUVO and Horizon. Capitalized terms used herein and not otherwise
defined herein shall have the meanings assigned to such terms in the Agreement. 
 AGREEMENT 

 

	1.	Exhibit A Transfer Prices (formerly Schedule 5) of the Agreement is hereby amended and replaced with Revised Exhibit A attached hereto. 


 

	2.	EFFECT OF THIS AMENDMENT. Except as expressly provided herein, this Amendment shall not constitute an amendment, modification or waiver of any provision of the Agreement or any rights or obligations of any party under
or in respect of the Agreement. Except as modified by this Amendment, the Agreement shall continue in full force and effect. Upon the execution of this Amendment by each of the parties hereto, each reference in the Agreement to “this
Agreement” or the words “hereunder,” “hereof,” “herein” or words of similar effect referring to the Agreement shall mean and be a reference to the Agreement as amended by this Amendment, and a reference to the
Agreement in any other instrument or document shall be deemed a reference to the Agreement as amended by this Amendment. This Amendment shall be subject to, shall form a part of, and shall be governed by, the terms and conditions set forth in the
Agreement, as amended by this Amendment. 

  

	3.	GENERAL. This Amendment may be executed in multiple counterparts, each of which may be delivered via facsimile or other electronic means, which taken together shall constitute the original agreement. 


[Signature Page to Follow.] 

  
 Page 1 of 3 








 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties to this Amendment indicate their agreement effective as of the date set forth at
the beginning of this Amendment by signing below. 
  

									
	 HORIZON PHARMA IRELAND LIMITED
	    		 	NUVO PHARMACEUTICALS INC.
					
	By:	 	/s/ David G. Kelly	    		 	By:	 	/s/ Katina Loucaides
		 	(Signed)	    		 		 	(Signed)
					
	Name:	 	David G Kelly	    		 	Name:	 	Katina Loucaides
		 	(Typed)	    		 		 	(Typed)
					
	Title:	 	EVP and Company Sec.	    		 	Title:	 	VP, General Counsel


  
 Page 2 of 3 








 REVISED EXHIBIT A 

Transfer Prices 
 Supplied Product: 

[...***...] 
  

 

	***	Confidential Treatment Requested 


  
 Page 3 of 3
Part 5143 - Contract Modifications

(Revised 04 March 2024)

Subpart 5143.2 - Change Orders

5143.204 Administration.

5143.204-70-5 Exceptions.

5143.204-70-6 Allowable profit.

5143.205 Contract clauses.

Subpart 5143.2 - Change Orders

5143.204 Administration.

5143.204-70-5 Exceptions.

(c) The Assistant Secretary of the Army (Acquisition, Logistics and Technology) may waive the

limitations under DFARS 243.204-70-2, 243.204-70-3, and 243.204-70-4. See Appendix GG for

further delegation.

(S-90) See Army Class Deviation 2024-PP01—Unpriced Change Orders Related to Ukraine, Taiwan,

and Israel. (26 Feb 2024).

5143.204-70-6 Allowable profit.

The head of the contracting activity shall ensure the profit allowed reflects the conventions under

DFARS 243.204-70-6. See Appendix GG for further delegation.

5143.205 Contract clauses.

(c) The contracting officer may change the period in which the contractor may assert claims under

the clause at FAR 52.243-3, Changes—Time-and-Materials or Labor-Hours, to a period less than “30

days.”
nxst-ex1076_454.htm



 

Exhibit 10.76

AMENDMENT OF OPTION AGREEMENT

This Amendment to Option Agreement (“Amendment”) is entered into as of January 15, 2017 by and between Mission Broadcasting, Inc. (“Mission”) and Nexstar Broadcasting, Inc. (“Nexstar”).  Each of Mission and Nexstar may be referred to herein as a “party” and collectively as the “parties.”

WHEREAS, Mission is the Federal Communications Commission (“FCC”) licensee of television broadcast station KTVE, El Dorado, Arkansas (the “Station”).

WHEREAS, Nexstar and Mission are parties that certain Option Agreement dated as of January 18, 2008, which outlines the terms and conditions upon which Nexstar could purchase from Mission the assets of the Station consistent with the rules and written policies of the FCC (the “Option Agreement”).  Capitalized terms not otherwise defined herein shall have the meaning assigned to such terms in the Option Agreement.

WHEREAS, the Option Agreement’s expiration date is the ninth anniversary of the Option Agreement.

WHEREAS, the parties desire to extend the Option Agreement for an additional ten (10) year term.

NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows:


	
 
	
1.
	
Option Expiration Date.  The parties hereby agree to extend the expiration date of the Option Agreement to January 16, 2027.





	
 
	
2.
	
No Other Amendment.  No terms of the Option Agreement, other than the Option Expiration Date, are amended or modified by this Amendment, and the Option Agreement, as so extended hereby, remains in full force and effect.




IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Amendment as of the day and year first written above.

 


	
MISSION BROADCASTING, INC.
	
 
	
NEXSTAR BROADCASTING, INC.

	
 
	
 
	
 

	
By:  /s/ Dennis Thatcher              
	
 
	
By:  Thomas E. Carter              

	
Dennis Thatcher
	
 
	
Thomas E. Carter

	
President
	
 
	
EVP & Chief Financial Officer
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

NORTHERN DIVISION

LEROY WILLIAMS, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. ) CIVIL ACTION NO 2:06-cv-658-TFM

)

STATE OF ALABAMA DEP’T OF )

TRANSPORTATION, et al., )

)

Defendants. )

ORDER

It is hereby ORDERED the Final Judgment (Doc. 55, filed September 27, 2007) is

VACATED.

Pursuant to the request of the parties set forth in the stipulation of dismissal (Doc. 54,

filed September 26, 2007), the terms and conditions of the settlement agreement attached

thereto are APPROVED and the parties are ORDERED to comply with said terms and

conditions. 

The Court hereby DISMISSES this case without prejudice but retains jurisdiction

over this matter for the sole purpose of enforcing the settlement reached by the parties. The

parties are DIRECTED to submit another joint stipulation of dismissal once the terms of the

settlement agreement have been effectuated but not later than sixty (60) days from the entry

date of this Order, at which time the court will dismiss this matter with prejudice.

Case 2:06-cv-00658-TFM Document 56 Filed 09/28/2007 Page 1 of 2
DONE this 28th day of September, 2007.

 /s/Terry F. Moorer

 TERRY F. MOORER

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 

Case 2:06-cv-00658-TFM Document 56 Filed 09/28/2007 Page 2 of 2