alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit32.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THESARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the QuarterlyReport of Hutton Investors Futures Fund L.P. II (the"Partnership") on Form 10-Q for the periodending September 30, 2005 as filed with the Securities and ExchangeCommission on the date hereof (the "Report"),I, Daniel R. McAuliffe, Jr., Chief Financial Officer and Director ofCitigroup Managed Futures LLC, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of2002, that:

(1) The Report fully complies with therequirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Actof 1934; and

(2) The information contained in the Reportfairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition andresults of operations of the Partnership.

/s/Daniel R. McAuliffe,Jr.

|  |
|--|
|  |  |
|  |

Daniel R. McAuliffe,Jr.Citigroup Managed Futures LLC Chief Financial Officer andDirector

Date: November 14,2005

----
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-6734

NATHANIEL EPPS, Petitioner - Appellant, versus RONALD J. ANGELONE, Director of the Virginia Department of Corrections, Respondent - Appellee.Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Robert E. Payne, District Judge. (CA-00-716) Submitted: September 18, 2001 Decided: October 9, 2001 Before MICHAEL and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.Nathaniel Epps, Appellant Pro Se. Thomas Drummond Bagwell, Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Nathaniel Epps appeals the district court’s order denying his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994 & Supp. 2001) petition as untimely filed. We have reviewed the record, the district court’s opinion,and Epps’ informal appellate brief. Because Epps failed to challenge on appeal the basis for the district court’s ruling, he has not preserved any issue for our review. 4th Cir. R. 34(b). In addition, it is clear that the district court’s conclusion that Epps’ petition was untimely is correct. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with 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
§ 524.1465 Mupirocin. ( a ) *Specifications.* Each gram of ointment contains 20 milligrams mupirocin.
( b ) *Sponsors.* See Nos. 025463, 051672, and 054771 in § 510.600(c) of this chapter.
( c ) *Conditions of use in dogs* — ( 1 ) *Amount.* Apply twice daily. Treatment should not exceed 30 days.
( 2 ) *Indications for use.* For the topical treatment of bacterial infections of the skin, including superficial pyoderma, caused by susceptible strains of *Staphylococcus aureus* and *S. intermedius.*
( 3 ) *Limitations.* Federal law restricts this drug to use by or on the order of a licensed veterinarian.
[72 FR 18119, Apr. 11, 2007, as amended at 75 FR 79296, Dec. 20, 2010; 78 FR 52854, Aug. 27, 2013; 79 FR 10970, Feb. 27, 2014; 82 FR 11508, Feb. 24, 2017]
Exhibit






Amendment No. 1 
to Employment Agreement  

This Amendment No. 1 (“Amendment”) to the EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT (“Agreement”) is made as of May 4, 2017 (“Amendment Effective Date”) by and between GTT Communications, Inc (“Company”) and Michael Sicoli (“Executive”).
		
	A.
	Company and Executive have entered into the Agreement on April 13, 2015.


		
	B.
	Company and Executive desire to amend the Agreement in accordance with the terms of this Amendment.


Accordingly, the parties, intending to be legally bound, hereby agree as follows:
		
	1.
	Definitions.  Unless otherwise defined in this Amendment, all capitalized terms shall have the meanings ascribed to such terms in the Agreement.




		
	2.
	Termination – By Company without Cause; By Executive for Good Reason.  Section 7.4 of the Agreement is amended by replacing the current language with the following:




7.4 Termination – By Company without Cause; By Executive for Good Reason.  The Company may terminate the Executive’s employment hereunder at any time, without any Cause, and Executive may resign for Good Reason (as hereinafter defined), without any liability other than to pay to the Executive:  (i) his base salary through the effective date of termination; (ii) the continuation of base salary and health benefits for a period of twelve (12) months after the termination of his employment; (iii) his annual bonus on a pro-rated basis through the effective date of termination as measured for that calendar year; plus (iv) 100% of the target annual bonus the Executive would have been eligible to receive for the twelve (12) month period after the date of termination.   
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Amendment No. 1 to be effective as of the Amendment Effective Date stated above.
GTT Communications, Inc.
By: ______________________________________        By: ___________________________
Print Name:_______________________________            Name: Michael Sicoli
Print Title:________________________________
§ 510.112 Antibiotics used in veterinary medicine and for nonmedical purposes; required data. ( a ) An ad hoc committee, Committee on the Veterinary Medical and Nonmedical Uses of Antibiotics, was formed by the Food and Drug Administration to study, and advise the Commissioner on, the use of antibiotics in veterinary medicine and for various nonmedical purposes as such uses may affect the enforcement of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act with respect to the safety and effectiveness of such substances. A copy of the report may be obtained from the Food and Drug Administration, Office of Public Affairs, Room 15-05, Parklawn Building, 5600 Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 20857.
( b ) On the basis of the report of the Committee and other information, sponsors of drugs containing any antibiotic intended for use in food-producing animals shall submit data for determining whether or not such antibiotics and their metabolites are present as residues in edible tissues, milk, and eggs from treated animals; however, in the case of a drug for which such data have already been submitted and for which a regulation has been promulgated under section 409 of the act, only such data as has been accumulated since the issuance of the regulation need be submitted.
( c ) The required data shall be submitted within 180 days of the date of publication of this section in the Federal Register; except that in the case of data on intramammary infusion preparations the data shall be submitted within 60 days of such publication. Data demonstrating the absence in milk of residues of intramammary infusion preparations when used as directed in their labeling are needed within the 60-day period because of the importance of milk in the human diet.
( d ) Regulatory proceedings including revocation of prior sanctions, or actions to suspend or amend new drug or antibiotic approvals granted prior to passage of the Food Additives Amendment of 1958 (72 Stat. 1784), may be initiated with regard to the continued marketing of any antibiotic preparation on which the required information is not submitted within the period of time prescribed by paragraph (c) of this section.
( e ) Questions relating to the acceptability of proposed research protocols and assay methods for determining the amount of antibiotic residues in food should be directed to the Director, Center for Veterinary Medicine, Food and Drug Administration, 7500 Standish Pl., Rockville, MD 20855.
[40 FR 13807, Mar. 27, 1975, as amended at 46 FR 8460, Jan. 27, 1981; 54 FR 18280, Apr. 28, 1989; 57 FR 6475, Feb. 25, 1992]
NO. 12-10-00334-CR

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT

TYLER, TEXAS

MICHAEL KENNEDY, § APPEAL FROM THE THIRD

APPELLANT

V. § JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

APPELLEE § ANDERSON COUNTY, TEXAS

MEMORANDUM OPINION

PER CURIAM

Appellant Michael Kennedy was convicted of burglary of a building for which sentence 

was imposed on September 16, 1986. This court affirmed the conviction, see Kennedy v. State, 

No. 12-86-00248-CR (Tex. App.–Tyler Feb. 25, 1988, no pet.) (not designated for publication), 

and issued its mandate on April 13, 1988. On October 4, 2010, Appellant filed a notice of appeal 

seeking relief from the final judgment. 

On October 8, 2010, this court notified Appellant, pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate 

Procedure 37.2, that the information received in this appeal does not contain a final judgment or 

other appealable order. Appellant was further informed that the appeal would be dismissed if the 

information received in the appeal was not amended on or before November 8, 2010, to show the 

jurisdiction of this court. In response to this court’s notice, Appellant filed a motion requesting 

an additional forty-five days to provide a final judgment or other appealable order. 

After considering Appellant’s motion and the procedural history of the underlying case, 

Appellant’s motion for extension of time is overruled, and the appeal is dismissed for want of 

jurisdiction. See TEX. R. APP. P. 37.1, 42.3. All pending motions are overruled as moot.

Opinion delivered November 10, 2010.

Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Griffith, J., and Hoyle, J.

(DO NOT PUBLISH)
§ 520.602 Dichlorvos gel. ( a ) *Specifications.* Each milligram (mg) of gel contains 2.27 milligrams (mg) dichlorvos.
( b ) *Sponsor.* See No. 069043 in § 510.600(c) of this chapter.
( c ) *Conditions of use in horses* — ( 1 ) *Amount.* Administer 20 mg per kilogram of body weight for the removal of bots and ascarids. Repeat administration every 21 to 28 days for the control of bots and ascarids. For the control of bots only, the repeat dosage is 10 milligrams per kilogram of body weight every 21 to 28 days during bot fly season.
( 2 ) *Indications for use.* For the removal and control of first, second, and third instar bots (*Gastrophilus intestinalis* and *G. nasalis*), sexually mature and sexually immature (4th stage) ascarids (*Parascaris equorum*) in horses and foals.
( 3 ) *Limitations.* Do not use in horses intended for human consumption. Federal law restricts this drug to use by or on the order of a licensed veterinarian.
[83 FR 48945, Sept. 28, 2018]
# C_2014439EN.01002101.xml

| 8.12.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 439/21 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.12.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 439/21

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Szekszárdi Közigazgatási és Munkaügyi Bíróság (Hungary) lodged on 15 September 2014 — Jácint Gábor Balogh v Nemzeti Adó- és Vámhivatal Dél-dunántúli Regionális Adó Főigazgatósága

(Case C-424/14)

(2014/C 439/27)

Language of the case: Hungarian

Referring court

Referring court

Szekszárdi Közigazgatási és Munkaügyi Bíróság

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Jácint Gábor Balogh

Applicant:

Defendant: Nemzeti Adó- és Vámhivatal Dél-dunántúli Regionális Adó Főigazgatósága

Defendant:

Questions referred

Questions referred

| 1. | Does the obligation to register laid down in Articles 213(1) and 214(1) of the VAT Directive (1) preclude the national practice in Hungary of mandatorily requiring the registration of individuals — under the threshold for the personal exemption from VAT — who do not wish to pursue an activity subject to VAT? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Does the obligation to register laid down in Articles 213(1) and 214(1) of the VAT Directive (1) preclude the national practice in Hungary of mandatorily requiring the registration of individuals — under the threshold for the personal exemption from VAT — who do not wish to pursue an activity subject to VAT?

1

| 2. | When carrying out an ex post inspection, is the tax authority permitted to penalise the failure to register where the threshold for the personal exemption has not been exceeded? |
| --- | --- |

2.

When carrying out an ex post inspection, is the tax authority permitted to penalise the failure to register where the threshold for the personal exemption has not been exceeded?

ex post

| 3. | When carrying out an ex post inspection, is the tax authority permitted to be subrogated in the individual’s right of option, and is it permitted to exclude the possibility of the individual opting for the personal exemption in breach of the principle of procedural fairness? |
| --- | --- |

3.

When carrying out an ex post inspection, is the tax authority permitted to be subrogated in the individual’s right of option, and is it permitted to exclude the possibility of the individual opting for the personal exemption in breach of the principle of procedural fairness?

ex post

---

(1)  Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax (OJ 2006 L 347, p. 1).

1

---
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Securities and Exchange Commission

Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the Government in the Sunshine Act, Public Law 94-409, that the Securities and Exchange Commission will hold a Closed Meeting on Thursday, March 4, 2010 at 2 p.m.

Commissioners, Counsel to the Commissioners, the Secretary to the Commission, and recording secretaries will attend the Closed Meeting. Certain staff members who have an interest in the matters also may be present.

The General Counsel of the Commission, or his designee, has certified that, in his opinion, one or more of the exemptions set forth in 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(3), (5), (7), 9(B) and (10) and 17 CFR 200.402(a)(3), (5), (7), 9(ii) and (10), permit consideration of the scheduled matters at the Closed Meeting.

Commissioner Aguilar, as duty officer, voted to consider the items listed for the Closed Meeting in a closed session.

The subject matter of the Closed Meeting scheduled for Thursday, March 4, 2010 will be:

Institution and settlement of injunctive actions; institution and settlement of administrative proceedings; and other matters relating to enforcement proceedings.

At times, changes in Commission priorities require alterations in the scheduling of meeting items.

                    For further information and to ascertain what, if any, matters have been                           ( print page 9455)                        added, deleted or postponed, please contact:                

The Office of the Secretary at (202) 551-5400.

Dated: February 25, 2010.

Elizabeth M. Murphy,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 2010-4333 Filed 2-26-10; 11:15 am]

BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
#### Seifer Furniture Company *v.*Taff

[No. 17,297.

Filed December 8, 1944.]

*William J. McAleer, Frwicis J. Dorsey*and *William L.*Travis. all of Hammond, for annellant.

*188
      *Thorpe, Bamber & Harrison,*all of Hammond, for appellee.

Royse, J.

— This is an appeal from an award of the Industrial Board. The sole question presented is the sufficiency of the evidence to sustain the award.

In determining the sufficiency of the evidence to sustain such an award, it is only necessary that sufficient facts and circumstances be proven from which the essential ultimate facts may be reasonably inferred, and this court on appeal will not disturb, the award though other inferences or findings might be preferred. *Bimel Spoke and Wheel Company*v. *Loper*(1917), 65 Ind. App. 479, 117 N. E. 527; *Star Publishing Company*v. *Johnson*(1925), 83 Ind. App. 309, 146 N. E. 765; *Deardorff*v. *City of East Chicago*(1943), 114 Ind. App. 102, 50 N. E. (2d) 926.

With this rule in mind we hold there was sufficient evidence to sustain the finding and award of the Industrial Board that the plaintiff was in the employ of defendant on August 7, 1943, at an average weekly wage in excess of $34.00 per week, and that on said date he received an accidental injury arising out of and in the course of his employment wherein he struck the upper right and back part of his head on an object; that as a result of said injury he became temporarily totally disabled on October 21, 1943, and such disability continued until February 23, 1944. Therefore, the award of the Industrial Board is affirmed with the usual penalty.

Note. — Reported in 57 N. E. (2d) 943.
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 7436 

To direct the Comptroller General of the United States to prepare a report 

on Federal efforts to address antimicrobial resistance. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 23, 2024 

Mr. GRIFFITH introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Energy and Commerce 

A BILL 

To direct the Comptroller General of the United States to 

prepare a report on Federal efforts to address antimicrobial resistance. 

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 ‘‘Antimicrobial Resist5 ance Research Assessment Act of 2024’’. 

6 SEC. 2. REPORT ON FEDERAL EFFORTS TO ADDRESS ANTI7 MICROBIAL RESISTANCE. 

8 (a) IN GENERAL.—The Comptroller General of the 

9 United States shall— 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 7436 IH

1 (1) prepare a report on efforts of the Federal 

2 Government to address antimicrobial resistance; and 

3 (2) not later than 1 year after the date of en4 actment of this Act— 

5 (A) finalize such report; and 

6 (B) submit such report to the Congress. 

7 (b) CONTENTS.—The report required by subsection 

8 (a) shall— 

9 (1) address all efforts of the Federal Govern10 ment regarding antimicrobial resistance, including 

11 any such efforts involving— 

12 (A) establishing, maintaining, or operating 

13 a task force, committee, or interagency pro14 gram; or 

15 (B) developing a plan or report; 

16 (2) specify the role of each Federal program 

17 and resource in such efforts; 

18 (3) identify any such efforts that are duplica19 tive; 

20 (4) recommend ways to improve the coordina21 tion of such efforts across the Federal Government; 

22 (5) identify the results achieved thus far 

23 through such efforts; 

24 (6) describe any such efforts related to phage 

25 therapy; and 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 7436 IH

1 (7) with respect to research being federally con2 ducted or supported with respect to antimicrobial re3 sistance— 

4 (A) quantify of the costs of such research; 

5 (B) if any such research is identified as 

6 duplicative pursuant to paragraph (3), rec7 ommend approaches for coordinating or consoli8 dating such research to avoid duplication; and 

9 (C) recommend whether there should be a 

10 central Federal agency to oversee such re11 search. 

Æ 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
IIB 

118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 7593 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

SEPTEMBER 10, 2024 

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Rules and 

Administration 

AN ACT 

To enhance the authority of the Director of the Congressional Research Service to obtain information directly 

from agencies of the Federal government. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
2 

HR 7593 RFS

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

2 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Modernizing the Con3 gressional Research Service’s Access to Data Act’’. 

4 SEC. 2. ACCESS OF CONGRESSIONAL RESEARCH SERVICE 

5 TO GOVERNMENT INFORMATION. 

6 (a) DIRECT ACCESS TO INFORMATION.—Section 203 

7 of the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946 (2 U.S.C. 

8 166) is amended— 

9 (1) by redesignating subsection (j) as sub10 section (k); and 

11 (2) by inserting after subsection (i) the fol12 lowing new subsection: 

13 ‘‘(j)(1) In carrying out the duties and functions of 

14 the Congressional Research Service under subsection (d), 

15 the Director is authorized to secure books, records, cor16 respondence, memoranda, papers, documents, secure in17 formation, and other data in all forms directly from the 

18 various departments, agencies, and establishments of the 

19 executive branch of the Government and the regulatory 

20 agencies and commissions of the Government as the Direc21 tor determines to be necessary to carry out the request, 

22 and all such departments, agencies, establishments, and 

23 regulatory agencies and commissions shall furnish the Di24 rector with all such available material in a timely manner. 

25 ‘‘(2) With respect to books, records, correspondence, 

26 memoranda, papers, documents, secure information, and 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
3 

HR 7593 RFS

1 other data in all forms obtained under paragraph (1), the 

2 Director shall maintain the same level of confidentiality 

3 as is required by law of the department, agency, establish4 ment, or regulatory agency or commission from which it 

5 is obtained. Officers and employees of the Congressional 

6 Research Service shall be subject to the same statutory 

7 penalties for unauthorized disclosure or use as officers or 

8 employees of the department, agency, establishment, or 

9 regulatory agency or commission from which it is ob10 tained.’’. 

11 (b) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—Section 203(d)(1) 

12 of such Act (2 U.S.C. 166(d)(1)) is amended in the matter 

13 following subparagraph (C) by striking ‘‘and in the per14 formance of this duty’’ and all that follows through ‘‘com15 ply with such request;’’. 

Passed the House of Representatives September 9, 

2024. 

Attest: KEVIN F. MCCUMBER, 

Clerk. 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
ingn-ex101_614.htm



Exhibit 10.1

CONFIDENTIAL TREATMENT REQUESTED

CONFIDENTIAL PORTIONS OF THIS DOCUMENT HAVE BEEN REDACTED AND HAVE BEEN SEPARATELY FILED WITH THE SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION. INFORMATION THAT WAS OMITTED IN THE EDGAR VERSION HAS BEEN NOTED IN THIS DOCUMENT WITH A PLACEHOLDER IDENTIFIED BY THE MARK “[***]”.

 

Addendum to Private Label Distribution Agreement Between Applied Home Health Equipment and Inogen

This addendum to the private label agreement, entered into on November 12, 2014, documents changes in the warranty coverage for the OxyGo devices.

Inogen extends the warranty on the OxyGo devices to [***] on the concentrator only for the following customers, effective on the following dates:

 


	
Customer
	
 
	
Effective Date
	
 
	
Products Covered

	
[***]
	
 
	
[***]
	
 
	
[***]

	
[***]
	
 
	
[***]
	
 
	
[***]

	
[***]
	
 
	
[***]
	
 
	
[***]




 

The [***] warranty covers the concentrator only.   All accessories, including sieve beds, batteries, power supplies and carry bags remain at [***]. 

 

Agreed and acknowledged:

 


	
For Applied Home Healthcare:
	
 
	
For Inogen:

	
 
	
 
	
 

	
/s/ David Marquard
	
 
	
/s/ Bob Fary

	
David Marquard, CEO
	
 
	
Bob Fary, VP of Strategic Alliances




 

 

[***] Certain information in this document has been omitted and filed separately with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Confidential treatment has been requested with respect to the omitted portions.