alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit
99.3




CONSENT
OF AUTHOR
  TO:
              Ur-Energy
    Inc.British Columbia
      Securities CommissionAlberta Securities
      CommissionSaskatchewan
      Securities CommissionManitoba Securities
      CommissionOntario Securities
      CommissionUnited States
      Securities and Exchange CommissionAND TO:
              Toronto Stock
      ExchangeNYSE
  AmexRE:
              Ur-Energy Inc.
      (“Ur-Energy”) - Consent under National Instrument
  43-101
 Reference
is made to the technical report (the “Technical Report”) entitled “NI 43-101 Preliminary Assessment for
the Lost Creek Project, Sweetwater County, Wyoming,”(April 2008) which
the undersigned has prepared for Ur-Energy.
 
 I have
reviewed and approved the summary of and extract from the Technical Report
prepared to be filed with the Annual Report on Form 20-F (Annual Information
Form) of Ur-Energy (fiscal year ended December 31, 2008) and confirm that the
summary and extract fairly and accurately represents the information in the
Technical Report.  I hereby consent to the written disclosure of my
name, and reference to and incorporation by reference of, the Technical Report
in the public filing of the Annual Report on Form 20-F (Annual Information Form)
of Ur-Energy with the regulatory authorities referred to above.  I
further consent to the incorporation by reference into Registration Statement
No. 333-153098 on Form S-8 of the Technical Report.
 
 I certify
that I have reviewed the Annual Report on Form 20-F (Annual Information Form)
being filed and I do not have any reason to believe that there are any
misrepresentations in the information contained therein that are derived from
the Technical Report or that are within my knowledge as a result of the services
performed by me in connection with the Technical Report.
  
 Dated:  March
24, 2009
 
 
 
 /s/ Douglas K.
Maxwell
 Douglas
K. Maxwell, P.E.
 Lyntek
Incorporated
#### DERMOTT, Respondent, v. STATE, Appellant.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department.

July 1, 1914.)

Action by Henry S. Dermott, as sole executor, etc., against the State of New York.

No opinion. Order affirmed, without costs.
# SUBCHAPTER G - CONTRACT MANAGEMENT

- PART 1942 - CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION 
- PART 1946 - QUALITY ASSURANCE 

- PART 1942 - CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION    - Subpart 1942.2 - Assignment of Contract Administration     - 1942.202-70   Authorized Representative of the Contracting Officer (AR/CO).
- PART 1946 - QUALITY ASSURANCE    - Subpart 1946.7 - Warranties     - 1946.704   Authority for use of warranties.
Case 1:06-cv-00708-CSC Document 2 Filed 08/10/2006 Page 1 of 2
Case 1:06-cv-00708-CSC Document 2 Filed 08/10/2006 Page 2 of 2
639.107-70 DOSAR solicitation provision and

contract clause.

(a) The contracting officer shall insert the provision at 652.239–70, Information Technology Security

Plan and Accreditation, in solicitations that include information technology resources or services in

which the contractor will have physical or electronic access to Department information that directly

supports the mission of the Department.

(b) The contracting officer shall insert the clause at 652.239–71, Security Requirements for

Unclassified Information Technology Resources, in solicitations and contracts containing the

provision at 652.239–70. The provision and clause shall not be inserted in solicitations and contracts

for personal services with individuals.

Parent topic: Subpart 639.1—General
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 117 Introduced in House (IH)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. RES. 117

 Providing amounts for the expenses of the Committee on the Budget in 
                    the One Hundred Ninth Congress.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           February 16, 2005

 Mr. Nussle submitted the following resolution; which was referred to 
                 the Committee on House Administration

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
 Providing amounts for the expenses of the Committee on the Budget in 
                    the One Hundred Ninth Congress.

    Resolved, 

SECTION 1. AMOUNTS FOR COMMITTEE EXPENSES.

    For the expenses of the Committee on the Budget (hereafter in this 
resolution referred to as the ``Committee''), including the expenses of 
all staff salaries, there shall be paid, out of the applicable accounts 
of the House of Representatives for committee salaries and expenses, 
not more than $12,026,478 for the One Hundred Ninth Congress.

SEC. 2. SESSION LIMITATIONS.

    Of the amount specified in section 1--
            (1) not more than $6,013,239 shall be available for 
        expenses incurred during the period beginning at noon on 
        January 3, 2005, and ending immediately before noon on January 
        3, 2006; and
            (2) not more than $6,013,239 shall be available for 
        expenses incurred during the period beginning at noon on 
        January 3, 2006, and ending immediately before noon on January 
        3, 2007.

SEC. 3. VOUCHERS.

    Payments under this resolution shall be made on vouchers authorized 
by the Committee, signed by the Chairman of the Committee, and approved 
in the manner directed by the Committee on House Administration.

SEC. 4. REGULATIONS.

    Amounts made available under this resolution shall be expended in 
accordance with regulations prescribed by the Committee on House 
Administration.
                                 <all>
```
Subpart 352.1 - Instructions for Using Provisions and Clauses    **Parent topic:** PART 352 - SOLICITATION PROVISIONS AND CONTRACT CLAUSES352.100 Scope of subpart.       This subpart provides guidance for applying the Department of Health and Human Services provisions and clauses in solicitations, contracts, and orders.352.101-70 Application of provisions and clauses.       (a) If a clause is included in the master instrument (e.g., in an indefinite delivery/indefinite quantity contract or a blanket purchase agreement), it is not necessary to also include the clause in a task order or delivery order thereunder.          (b) When a dollar amount or dollar threshold is specified (e.g., $25 million or simplified acquisition threshold), the dollar amount of the award (contract or order) includes any options thereunder.
Case 2:06-cv-00689-MEF-DRB Document 1 Filed 08/04/2006 Page 1 of 8
Case 2:06-cv-00689-MEF-DRB Document 1 Filed 08/04/2006 Page 2 of 8
Case 2:06-cv-00689-MEF-DRB Document 1 Filed 08/04/2006 Page 3 of 8
Case 2:06-cv-00689-MEF-DRB Document 1 Filed 08/04/2006 Page 4 of 8
Case 2:06-cv-00689-MEF-DRB Document 1 Filed 08/04/2006 Page 5 of 8
Case 2:06-cv-00689-MEF-DRB Document 1 Filed 08/04/2006 Page 6 of 8
Case 2:06-cv-00689-MEF-DRB Document 1 Filed 08/04/2006 Page 7 of 8
Case 2:06-cv-00689-MEF-DRB Document 1 Filed 08/04/2006 Page 8 of 8
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-6356

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus MICHAEL ANTONIO LUCAS, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District ofMaryland, at Baltimore. Frederic N. Smalkin, District Judge. (CR91-308, CA-01-278-S) Submitted: May 17, 2001 Decided: May 29, 2001 Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Michael Antonio Lucas, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Michael Antonio Lucas seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp.2000). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. See United States v. Lucas , Nos. CR-91-308; CA-01-278-S (D. Md. filed Feb. 1, 2001; entered Feb. 2, 2001). Lucas’ motion to proceed in forma pauperis is denied. We dispensewith oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
###### Editorial Note on Part 2

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 2 appear at 79 FR 75739, Dec. 19, 2014.

#### § 2.1209 Findings of fact and conclusions of law.

Each party shall file written post-hearing proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law on the contentions addressed in an oral hearing under § 2.1207 or a written hearing under § 2.1208 within 30 days of the close of the hearing or at such other time as the presiding officer directs. Proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law must conform to the format requirements in § 2.712(c).

[77 FR 46598, Aug. 3, 2012]
#### § 955.4 Production area.

*Production area* means that part of the State of Georgia enclosed by the following boundaries:

Beginning at a point in Laurens County where U.S. Highway 441 intersects Highway 16; thence continue southerly along U.S. Highway 441 to a point where it intersects the southern boundary of Laurens County; thence southwesterly along the border of Laurens County to a point where it intersects the county road known as Jay Bird Springs Road; thence southeasterly along Jay Bird Springs Road to a point where it intersects U.S. Highway 23; thence easterly to a point where U.S. Highway 23 intersects the western border of Telfair County; thence southwesterly following the western and southern border of Telfair County to a point where it intersects with Jeff Davis County; thence following the southern border of Jeff Davis County to a point where it intersects with the western border of Bacon County; thence southerly and easterly along the border of Bacon County to a point where it intersects Georgia State Road 32; thence easterly along Georgia State Road 32 to Seaboard Coastline Railroad; thence northeasterly along the tracks of Seaboard Coastline Railroad to a point where they intersect Long County and Liberty County; thence northwesterly and northerly along the southwestern border of Liberty County to a point where the border of Liberty County intersects the southern border of Evans County; thence northeasterly along the eastern border of Evans County to the intersection of the Bulloch County border; thence northeasterly along the Bulloch County border to a point where it intersects with the Ogeechee River; thence northerly along the main channel of the Ogeechee River to a point where it intersects with the southeastern border of Screven County; thence northeasterly along the southeasterly border of Screven County to the main channel of the Savannah River; thence northerly along the main channel of the Savannah River to a point where the northwestern boundary of Hampton County, South Carolina intersects the Savannah River; thence due west to a point where State Road 24 intersects Brannen Bridge Road; thence westerly along Brannen Bridge Road to a point where it intersects with State Road 21; thence westerly along State Road 21 to the intersection of State Road 17; thence westerly along State Road 17 to the intersection of State Road 56 and southerly to the northern border of Emanuel County; thence westerly and southerly along the border of Emanuel County to a point where it intersects the Treutlen County border; thence southerly to a point where the Treutlen County border intersects Interstate Highway 16; thence westerly to the point of beginning in Laurens County.

[55 FR 717, Jan. 9, 1990, as amended at 88 FR 82234, Nov. 24, 2023]
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

NORTHERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA )

)

v. ) 2:06mj82-SRW

)

KIMBERLY JOYCE SELLERS )

ORDER OF TEMPORARY DETENTION

PENDING HEARING PURSUANT TO BAIL

REFORM ACT

Upon the motion of the government, it is ORDERED that a detention hearing

is set for August 22, 2006 at 10:00 a.m. in Courtroom 5-B, Frank M. Johnson, Jr.

Federal Building and United States Courthouse Complex, One Church Street,

Montgomery, Alabama before the undersigned Magistrate Judge. Pending this

hearing, the defendant shall be held in custody of the U. S. Marshal and produced for

the hearing.

Done, this 18th day of August, 2006.

/s/ Susan Russ Walker 

SUSAN RUSS WALKER

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 2:06-mj-00082-SRW Document 5 Filed 08/18/2006 Page 1 of 1
Subpart 2146.2 - Contract Quality

Requirements

Parent topic: PART 2146 - QUALITY ASSURANCE

2146.201 General.

(a) This part prescribes policies and procedures to ensure that services acquired under the FEGLI

Program contract conform to the contract's quality requirements.

(b) OPM will make an initial evaluation of the Contractor's system of internal controls under the

quality assurance program required by 2146.270 of this chapter and will acknowledge in writing

whether or not the system is consistent with the requirements set forth in this subpart. After the

initial review, subsequent periodic reviews may be limited to changes in the Contractor's internal

control guidelines. However, a limited review does not diminish the Contractor's obligation to apply

the full internal control system.

2146.270 FEGLI Program quality assurance requirements.

(a) The contractor shall develop and apply a quality assurance program specifying procedures for

assuring contract quality, as directed by the contracting officer. At a minimum, the program should

include procedures to address:

(1) Accuracy of payments and recovery of overpayments;

(2) Timeliness of payments to beneficiaries;

(3) Quality of services and responsiveness to beneficiaries;

(4) Quality of service and responsiveness to OPM; and

(5) Detection and recovery of fraudulent claims.

(b) The Contractor must prepare overpayment recovery guidelines to include a system of internal

controls.

(c) The contracting officer may order the correction of a deficiency or a modification in the

contractor's services and/or quality assurance program. The contractor shall take the necessary

action promptly to implement the contracting officer's order. If the contracting officer orders the

correction of a deficiency or a modification of the contractor's services and/or quality assurance

program pursuant to this paragraph after the contract year has begun, the costs incurred in

correcting the deficiency or making the modification will not be considered to the contractor's

detriment in the cost control factor of the service charge [if applicable] for the following contract

year. However, if there is a deficiency, the deficiency itself may be taken into consideration.
2146.270-1 Contract clause.

The clause at 2152.246-70 shall be inserted in all FEGLI Program contracts.
§ 1042.220 Admissions. ( a ) Admissions to educational institutions prior to June 24, 1973, are not covered by these Title IX regulations.
( b ) *Administratively separate units.* For the purposes only of this section, §§ 1042.225 and 1042.230, and §§ 1042.300 through 1042.310, each administratively separate unit shall be deemed to be an educational institution.
( c ) *Application of §§ 1042.300 through 1042.310 .* Except as provided in paragraphs (d) and (e) of this section, §§ 1042.300 through 1042.310 apply to each recipient. A recipient to which §§ 1042.300 through 1042.310 apply shall not discriminate on the basis of sex in admission or recruitment in violation of §§ 1042.300 through 1042.310.
( d ) *Educational institutions.* Except as provided in paragraph (e) of this section as to recipients that are educational institutions, §§ 1042.300 through 1042.310 apply only to institutions of vocational education, professional education, graduate higher education, and public institutions of undergraduate higher education.
( e ) *Public institutions of undergraduate higher education.* §§ 1042.300 through 1042.310 do not apply to any public institution of undergraduate higher education that traditionally and continually from its establishment has had a policy of admitting students of only one sex.
1645.303-70 Contract clause.       The clause set forth in section 1652.245–70 shall be inserted in all FEHB Program contracts.    **Parent topic:** Subpart 1645.3—Providing Equipment
Exhibit A to Employment Agreement between West and Thomas Baker



 Exhibit 10.51 
 

 
 To: Thomas B. Barker 
 From: West Corporation Compensation Committee 
 Date: February 11, 2010

 Re: Exhibit A 
  

This Exhibit A for 2010 is entered into pursuant to your Employment Agreement. 
  

	1.	Your base salary will be $900,000. 

  

	2.	Effective January 1, 2010, you will be eligible to receive a performance bonus based upon West Corporation’s EBITDA (“Compensation EBITDA”) growth
in 2010. Compensation EBITDA for each quarter will be compared to the same quarter in the previous year to advance a pro-rata portion of the bonus. Each $1M increase in Compensation EBITDA for the year over 2009 Compensation EBITDA will result in a
$21,060 bonus. If any portion of the bonus is advanced, 75% of the pro-rata bonus will be paid within thirty (30) days from the end of the quarter. 100% of the total bonus earned will be paid within thirty (30) days of the final
determination of 2010 Compensation EBITDA. 

 Should Compensation EBITDA exceed $690M for the year, you will be
eligible to receive $26,325 for every $1M of Compensation EBITDA above that threshold. 
 In the event there is a negative
year-to-date profit calculation at the end of any quarter and a pro-rata portion of the bonus has been advanced in a previous quarter, “loss carry forward” will result and be applied to the next quarterly or year-to-date calculation. In
the event that at the end of the year, or upon your termination if earlier, the aggregate amount of the bonus which has been advanced exceeds the amount of bonus that otherwise would have been payable for 2010 (in the absence of advances) based on
the performance during 2010 (or, in the case of your termination, based on the performance during 2010 and the projection for performance for the balance of 2010 as of your termination date), then the amount of such excess may, in the discretion of
the Compensation Committee, either (i) result in a “loss carry forward” which shall be applied to the quarterly or year-to-date calculation of bonus payable in subsequent periods, or (ii) be required to be paid back to the
company upon such request. 
  

	3.	All objectives are based upon West Corporation operations and will not include results derived from mergers, acquisitions, joint ventures or stock buy backs except to
the extent approved by West Corporation’s Compensation Committee. 

  

	4.	At the discretion of the Compensation Committee, you may receive an additional bonus based on the Company’s and your individual performance.


  

	
	 /s/ Thomas B. Barker

	Employee – Thomas B. Barker
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA Supreme Court No. DA 21-0582

KIM NORQUAY, JR., Petitioner and Appellant,

v. STATE OF MONTANA, Respondent and Appellee.

GRANT OF EXTENSION

Counsel for Appellant Kim Norquay, Jr., has filed an unopposed motion seeking a 30-day extension of the briefing deadlines in this matter. Counsel asserts the continuance is necessary because, upon review of the record, he has determined he has a conflict of interest and is no longer able to represent the Appellant in this matter. Consequently, the Appellate will require new counsel. Once located, that counsel will require additional time to review the record and prepare the Appellant’s Opening Brief. The State does not object to the Motion. 03/30/2022

Case Number: DA 21-0582THEREFORE, the Motion is Granted. The Opening Brief in this Matter, currently due on April 4, 2022, is now due on May 4, 2022. The Office of the Appellate Defender is directed to locate new counsel for this Appellant.

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

March 30 2022
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

M IDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABA M A

OFFICE OF THE CLERK

POST OFFICE BOX 711

MONTGOMERY, ALABAMA 36101-0711

DEBRA P. HACKETT, CLERK

TELEPHONE (334) 954-3600

September 7, 2007

NOTICE OF NON-COMPLIANCE

To: ALL COUNSEL OF RECORD

Case Style: Progressive American Insurance Company v. Thorn et al

Case Number : 2:06-cv-00717-ID

Referenced Pleading: NOTICE of fing of discovery 

Docket Entry Number: 80

The referenced pleading was electronically filed on ***9/6/07   in this case and is not in

compliance with the local rules and/or administrative procedures of this court. 

** ****This pleading is discovery and is not allowed pursuant to Local Rule 5.1 NON-FILING

OF CIVIL DISCOVERY.

The pleading is hereby STRICKEN from the record and the parties are instructed to disregard

the entry of this pleading on the court’s docket. Parties should be aware that the striking of

this entry does not affect their responsibilities as to the discovery process.

Case 2:06-cv-00717-ID-SRW Document 81 Filed 09/07/2007 Page 1 of 1
§ 62.213 Official identification. Some programs offered under this subpart allow for the use of official identification or marks of conformance. A program's specific documented procedure will indicate whether official marks of conformance apply. ( a ) Products or services produced under a program authorized under this part may use an official identification mark of approval for that program, such as the “USDA Process Verified” statement and the “USDA Process Verified” shield. Use of program official identification must be in accordance with program requirements.
( b ) Use of a program's official identification mark must be approved in writing by USDA prior to use by an applicant.
( c ) *USDA Process Verified Program shield.* Products or services produced under an approved USDA PVP may use the “USDA Process Verified” statement and the “USDA Process Verified Program” shield (Figure 1 to paragraph (c)), so long as each is used in direct association with a clear description of the process verified points approved by USDA. ( 1 ) The USDA Process Verified shield must replicate the form and design of the example in Figure 1 and must be printed legibly and conspicuously: ( i ) On a white background with a gold trimmed shield, with the term “USDA” in white overlaying a blue upper third of the shield, the term “PROCESS” in black overlaying a white middle third of the shield, and term “VERIFIED” in white overlaying a red lower third of the shield; or
( ii ) On a white or transparent background with a black trimmed shield, with the term “USDA” in white overlaying a black upper third of the shield, the term “PROCESS” in black overlaying a white middle third of the shield, and the term “VERIFIED” in white overlaying a black lower third of the shield.