alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 996.71 Reports and recordkeeping. ( a ) Each handler and importer shall maintain a satisfactory records system for traceability purposes as defined in § 996.73.
( b ) USDA shall maintain copies of grade and aflatoxin certificates on all peanut lots inspected and chemically tested. USDA and USDA-approved laboratories shall file copies of all aflatoxin certificates completed by such laboratories with the Southeast Region Branch, Market Development Division, Specialty Crops Program, AMS, USDA, 1124 1st Street South, Winter Haven, Florida 33880; Telephone (863) 324-3375, Fax: (863) 291-8614, or other address as determined by USDA.
[67 FR 57140, Sept. 9, 2002, as amended at 81 FR 50289, Aug. 1, 2016; 88 FR 82236, Nov. 24, 2023]
Subpart 424.1 - Protection of Individual

Privacy

Parent topic: PART 424 - PROTECTION OF PRIVACY AND FREEDOM OF INFORMATION

424.103 Procedures.

USDA regulations implementing the Privacy Act are found in 7 CFR, subtitle A, part 1, subpart G.

Contracting officers shall follow these regulations when responding to requests for information or

awarding contracts that will involve the design, development, or operation of a system of records on

individuals to accomplish agency functions.

424.104 Contract clauses.

When applicable, the contracting officer shall insert the clause at 452.224-70, Confidentiality of

Information, in contracts involving confidential information.
#### § 1042.130 Effect of employment opportunities.

The obligation to comply with these Title IX regulations is not obviated or alleviated because employment opportunities in any occupation or profession are or may be more limited for members of one sex than for members of the other sex.
Exhibit 10.4
*Salary Increases for ExecutiveOfficers.*
     The Compensation Committee in connection with its annual review ofexecutive compensation and performance increased the salaries of allexecutive officers, other than the President and Chief ExecutiveOfficer, by an amount ranging from 4% to 5% of their previous basesalaries. The base salary for Robert E. Ritchey was increased uponhis promotion from President to President and Chief ExecutiveOfficer during December 2004. The Compensation Committee alsodetermined that three of the Company’s executive officers, whodid not receive a raise at the time they were promoted into moresenior positions during fiscal year 2005, had salaries that weresubstantially below the median salaries for executives holding similarpositions at other companies in the software and telecommunicationsindustries. For these three executive officers the CompensationCommittee approved salary increases ranging from 14% to 15% of basesalary, that were in addition to the 4% to 5% increase approved forall executive officers, to better align their salaries withcomparable salaries offered by other employers. The three executiveofficers who were promoted into more senior positions during fiscal2005 are Ronald W. Nieman, Senior Vice President and General Manager,Network Strategic Market Unit; George T. Platt, Senior Vice Presidentand General Manager, Enterprise Strategic Market Unit; and Mike J.Polcyn, Senior Vice President, Engineering and Chief TechnologyOfficer.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE 

MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA 

NORTHERN DIVISION 

OWEN J. ROGAL, D.D.S., P.C., 

 Plaintiff, 

v. 

SKILSTAF, INC., 

 Defendant. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

CIVIL ACTION NO. 

3:06-cv-00728-MHT 

UNOPPOSED

DEFENDANT’S UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR LEAVE TO REPLY 

TO PLAINTIFF’S REPLY IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT 

SKILSTAF, INC.’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

In order to fully address the matters now before the Court, Defendant 

Skilstaf, Inc. (“Skilstaf”) respectfully moves the Court to permit Skilstaf to file a 

reply on or before June 11, 2007, to Plaintiff’s Reply in Opposition to Defendant 

Skilstaf, Inc.’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. No. 45). As grounds for this 

motion, Skilstaf states as follows: 

1. On May 18, 2007, the Court entered an order, indicating that 

Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment had been set for submission without 

oral argument on June 4, 2007, and that any opposing brief and evidentiary 

materials were due by that date. 

Case 3:06-cv-00728-MHT-WC Document 58 Filed 06/05/2007 Page 1 of 3
2

2. Plaintiff filed its Opposition on June 4, 2007. 

3. Skilstaf is gathering information and would like to reply to the 

some of the legal and factual arguments asserted in Plaintiff’s Opposition. 

Skilstaf’s counsel believes that it can gather the necessary information and draft its 

reply by Monday, June 11, 2007. 

4. Pursuant to the Uniform Initial Order, Skilstaf’s counsel 

contacted Plaintiff’s counsel on June 5, 2007, and Plaintiff’s counsel indicated that 

he has no objection to the requested extension. 

WHEREFORE, Skilstaf respectfully moves the Court to enter an 

order permitting Skilstaf to file a reply on or before June 11, 2007, to Plaintiff’s 

Reply in Opposition to Defendant Skilstaf, Inc.’s Motion for Summary Judgment 

(Doc. No. 45). 

Respectfully Submitted, 

 s/Charles A. Stewart III 

Charles A. Stewart III (STE067) 

Bradley Arant Rose & White LLP

The Alabama Center for Commerce 

401 Adams Avenue, Suite 780 

Montgomery, AL 36104 

Telephone: (334) 956-7700 

Facsimile: (334) 956-7701 

cstewart@bradleyarant.com

Case 3:06-cv-00728-MHT-WC Document 58 Filed 06/05/2007 Page 2 of 3
3

s/Amelia T. Driscoll 

Amelia T. Driscoll (DRI016) 

Bradley Arant Rose & White LLP

1819 Fifth Avenue North 

Birmingham, AL 35203-2104 

Telephone: (205) 521-8000 

Facsimile: (205) 521-8800 

adriscoll@bradleyarant.com

Attorneys for Defendant 

Skilstaf, Inc. 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on June 5, 2007, I electronically filed the foregoing with 

the Clerk of the Court using the CM/ECF system, which will send notification of 

such filing to the following: 

Robert E. Cole 

437 Chestnut Street, Suite 218 

Philadelphia, PA 19109 

Beth A. Friel 

Jeanne L. Bakker 

Mongtomery, McCracken, Walker & Rhoads 

123 South Broad Street 

Philadelphia, PA 19109 

and I hereby certify that I have mailed by U. S. Postal Service the document to the 

following non-CM/ECF participants: None. 

/s/ Amelia T. Driscoll 

Case 3:06-cv-00728-MHT-WC Document 58 Filed 06/05/2007 Page 3 of 3
#### § 1010.101 General.

This subpart applies to employees of the Department of Energy (DOE), excluding employees of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.

[61 FR 35088, July 5, 1996, as amended at 75 FR 75376, Dec. 3, 2010]
Exhibit 32

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 for the year ended December 31, 2007 on Form 10-K (the
Annual Report), of Hughes Network Systems, LLC (the Company) as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, we, Pradman P. Kaul and Grant A. Barber, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial
Officer, respectively, of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of our knowledge:



| | (i) | the Annual Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
| | --- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



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



|                     |  |  |  |  |  |                                           |  |                                                                                   
|-------------------- |  |  |  |  |  | ----------------------------------------- |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                     |  |  |  |  |  | HUGHES NETWORK SYSTEMS, LLC  (Registrant)
|                     |  |  | 
|Date: March 10, 2008 |  |  |  |  |  | /s/ PRADMAN P. KAUL                      
|                     |  |  |  |  |  | Name:                                     |  | Pradman P. Kaul                                                                   
|                     |  |  |  |  |  | Title:                                    |  | Chief Executive Officer and President (Principal Executive Officer)               
|                     |  |  | 
|                     |  |  |  |  |  | /s/ GRANT A. BARBER                      
|                     |  |  |  |  |  | Name:                                     |  | Grant A. Barber                                                                   
|                     |  |  |  |  |  | Title:                                    |  | Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial Officer)

A SIGNED ORIGINAL OF THIS WRITTEN STATEMENT REQUIRED BY SECTION 906 HAS BEEN PROVIDED TO THE
COMPANY AND WILL BE RETAINED BY THE COMPANY AND FURNISHED TO THE SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION OR ITS STAFF UPON REQUEST.
1317.502-70 Policy.

All Interagency Acquisitions shall adhere to the policy set forth in CAM 1317.570.

Parent topic: Subpart 1317.5 - Interagency Acquisitions Under the Economy Act
Case 2:06-cv-00736-WKW-SRW Document 4 Filed 09/11/2006 Page 1 of 1
#### Rita P. Saper, Respondent, v. Harold E. Saper, Appellant.

In an action in which a judgment of separation in favor of the plaintiff wife was granted on June 22, 1961, the husband appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated October 9, 1968, which granted plaintiff’s motion (1) to amend the judgment by increasing the alimony and (2) for a counsel fee, to the extent of awarding plaintiff (a) an additional $60 a week alimony for the period of time she remains disabled from injuries sustained in a certain accident and (b) a counsel fee of $500. Order reversed, on the law and the facts and in the exercise of discretion, without costs, and motion remitted to the Special Term for a hearing and a determination *de novo.*In our opinion, the record lacks much of the relevant information that is required for a proper determination of the motion; and it was improper to grant the motion without holding a hearing at which the facts could be fully developed. Christ, Acting P. J., Brennan, Rabin, Hopkins and Benjamin, JJ., concur.
#### § 1015.105 Form of payment.

Claims may be paid in the form of money or, when a contractual basis exists, the Government may demand the return of specific property or the performance of specific services.
```

[House Report 106-989]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

106th Congress                                                   Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 2d Session                                                     106-989

======================================================================

 
   PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF HOUSE JOINT RESOLUTION 114, MAKING 
         FURTHER CONTINUING APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2001

                                _______
                                

  October 18, 2000.--Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be 
                                printed

                                _______
                                

    Mr. Linder, from the Committee on Rules, submitted the following

                              R E P O R T

                       [To accompany H. Res. 637]

    The Committee on Rules, having had under consideration 
House Resolution 637, by a nonrecord vote, report the same to 
the House with the recommendation that the resolution be 
adopted.

                  SUMMARY OF PROVISIONS OF RESOLUTION

    The resolution provides for consideration in the House of 
House Joint Resolution 114, making further continuing 
appropriations for fiscal year 2001, under a closed rule. The 
rule waives all points of order against consideration of the 
joint resolution. The rule also provides one hour of debate 
equally divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking 
minority member of the Committee on Appropriations. Finally, 
the rule provides one motion to recommit.

                                  

```
#### § 993.57 Holding requirement and delivery.

Each handler shall at all times, hold, in his possession or under his control, in proper storage for the account of the committee, free and clear of all liens, the quantity of prunes necessary to meet his reserve obligation, less any quantity: (a) For which he has a temporary deferment pursuant to § 993.58(a); (b) of prune plums (dried weight natural condition basis) diverted pursuant to § 993.62 as shown on diversion certificates held by him, or credited by the committee against his reserve obligation; (c) disposed of by him under a sales contract of the committee; (d) delivered by him to the committee, or to a person designated by it, pursuant to its instructions; and (e) for which he is otherwise relieved by the committee of such responsibility to so hold prunes. No handler may transfer a reserve obligation but any handler may, upon notification to the committee arrange to hold reserve prunes on the premises of another handler or in approved commercial storage, under conditions of proper storage. The committee may, after giving reasonable notice, require a handler to deliver to it, or to a person designated by it, f.o.b. handler's warehouse or point of storage, reserve prunes held by him. The committee may require that such delivery consist of natural condition prunes or it may arrange for such delivery to consist of processed prunes.
II 

109TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 3458 

To require the Consumer Product Safety Commission to issue regulations 

mandating child-resistant closures on all portable gasoline containers. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JUNE 7, 2006 

Mr. BAYH (for himself and Mrs. BOXER) introduced the following bill; which 

was read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and 

Transportation 

A BILL 

To require the Consumer Product Safety Commission to 

issue regulations mandating child-resistant closures on 

all portable gasoline containers. 

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 ‘‘Children’s Gasoline 

5 Burn Prevention Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. CHILD-RESISTANT PORTABLE GASOLINE CON7 TAINERS. 

8 (a) CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY STANDARD.— 

9 Within 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act, 


ycherry on PROD1PC64 with BILLS
2 

•S 3458 IS

1 the Consumer Product Safety Commission shall promul2 gate, as final consumer product safety standards under 

3 section 9 of the Consumer Product Safety Act (15 U.S.C. 

4 2058), child-resistance standards for closures on all port5 able gasoline containers. Such standards shall be substan6 tially the same as the standard ASTM F2517–05, issued 

7 by ASTM International, or any successor standard issued 

8 by ASTM International. 

9 (b) APPLICATION OF CERTAIN PROMULGATION RE10 QUIREMENTS.—The requirements of subsections (a) 

11 through (f) of section 9 of the Consumer Product Safety 

12 Act (15 U.S.C. 2058(a) through (f)) shall not apply to 

13 the consumer product safety standards required by sub14 section (a) of this section. 

15 (c) DEFINITION.—As used in this Act, the term 

16 ‘‘portable gasoline container’’ means a portable gasoline 

17 container intended for use by consumers. 

18 (d) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The consumer product safe19 ty standard required by subsection (a) shall take effect 

20 on the date that is 6 months after the date on which such 

21 standard shall be promulgated. 

22 (e) REPORT.—Not later than 2 years after the date 

23 of enactment of this Act, the Consumer Product Safety 

24 Commission shall transmit to the Committee on Energy 

25 and Commerce of the House of Representatives and the 


ycherry on PROD1PC64 with BILLS
3 

•S 3458 IS

1 Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of 

2 the Senate a report on— 

3 (1) the degree of industry compliance with the 

4 standard promulgated under subsection (a); 

5 (2) any enforcement actions brought by the 

6 Commission to enforce such standard; and 

7 (3) incidents involving children interacting with 

8 portable gasoline containers (including both those 

9 that are and are not in compliance with the stand10 ard promulgated under subsection (a)). 

Æ 


ycherry on PROD1PC64 with BILLS
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

NORTHERN DIVISION

QUENTIN WAGNER, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. ) CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:06cv730-MHT

) (WO)

D. T. MARSHALL, et al., )

)

Defendants. )

ORDER

There being no objections filed to the Recommendations of the Magistrate Judge filed

herein on August 23, 2006 (Doc. Nos. 4 & 5), said Recommendations are hereby adopted,

and it is the

ORDER, JUDGMENT and DECREE of the court that the motion for class

certification is DENIED and this case is DISMISSED without prejudice pursuant to the

provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii). 

DONE, this the 25th day of September, 2006.

 /s/ Myron H. Thompson 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 2:06-cv-00730-MHT-SRW Document 6 Filed 09/25/2006 Page 1 of 1
EXHIBIT 32

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                              18 USC, SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

     In  connection  with the  quarterly  report of Alpha  Spacecom,  Inc.  (the
"Company")  on Form 10-QSB for the three month period  ended March 31, 2005,  as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on date hereof (the "Report"),
I, the undersigned,  in the capacity and on the date indicated  below,  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 Rule 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: November 29, 2005                 s/Xuedong Hu
                                         ---------------------------------------
                                         Xuedong Hu, Chief Executive Officer/CFO
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 11**  **- 6426** 
LARRY LORENZEN, a/k/a Larry Lee Lorenzen , Petitioner

– Appellant ,
v. WARDEN PADULAH , Respondent

– Appellee
.

Appeal from the United States District Court fo r the District of South Carolina , at Rock Hill
. Terry L. Wooten , District Judge. ( 0:08

- cv - 00905

- TLW )

Submitted : May 19, 2011 Decided: May 24, 2011

Before TRAXLER, Chief Judge, and AGEE and KEENAN , Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by un published per cu riam opinion
.
Larry Lorenzen, Appellant Pro Se. Donald John Zelenka, Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Larry Lorenzen seeks to app eal the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2006) petition. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2006)
. A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2006)
. When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this sta ndard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); see Miller

- El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336

- 38 (2003). When t he district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable, and that the petition states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Slack , 529 U.S. at 484

- 8 5. We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Lorenzen has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability, deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis, and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argum ent because the facts and legal3 contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,
Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanag h
Elizabeth A. Weave r

Maura D. Corriga n Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markma n Diane M. Hathaway,
J ustices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

_______________________________________ __ Clerk September 28, 2009

d0921 

# Order

September 28, 2009

136595

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 136595 COA: 274235 Shiawassee CC: 06-003593-FC JEREMY DAVID STUCKEY, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

By order of April 1, 2009 , the application for leave to appeal the April 10, 2008 judgment of the Court of Appeals was he ld in abeyance pending the decision in People v
Idziak (Docket No. 137301). On order of the Court, the case having been decided on July 31, 2009, 484 Mich 549 (2009 ), the application is again c onsidered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the questi ons presented should be reviewed by this

Court.

K ELLY , C.J., would grant leave to appeal for the reasons set forth in her opinion in People v Idziak , 484 Mich 549 (2009).

C AVANAGH , J., would grant leave to appeal to reconsider People v Idziak , 484 Mich 549 (2009).
-       - Superintendent of Documents
      - 2022-04-13T07:47:03-0400
      - Government Publishing Office, Washington, DC 20401
      - Government Publishing Office
      - Government Publishing Office attests that this document has not been altered since it was disseminated by Government Publishing Office