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

###### Department of the Interior

###### Bureau of Land Management

          - [F-19155-10; AK-964-1410-KC-P]

# AGENCY:

Bureau of Land Management, Interior.

# ACTION:

Notice of decision approving lands for conveyance.

# SUMMARY:

As required by 43 CFR 2650.7(d), notice is hereby given that an appealable decision approving the surface and subsurface estates in certain lands for conveyance pursuant to the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act will be issued to Doyon, Limited. The lands are in the vicinity of Ruby, Alaska, and are located in:

## Kateel River Meridian, Alaska

T. 7 S., R. 17 E.,

Sec. 31.
      ( print page 38042)    
Containing 626.65 acres.

T. 11 S., R. 17 E.,

Secs. 2, 10, 15 and 16;

Secs. 21, 22, 27 and 28;

Secs. 33 and 34.

Containing 7,176.04.

Aggregating 7,802.69 acres.

Notice of the decision will also be published four times in the Fairbanks Daily News-Miner.

# DATES:

The time limits for filing an appeal are:

1. Any party claiming a property interest which is adversely affected by the decision shall have until August 31, 2009 to file an appeal.

2. Parties receiving service of the decision by certified mail shall have 30 days from the date of receipt to file an appeal.

Parties who do not file an appeal in accordance with the requirements of 43 CFR part 4, subpart E, shall be deemed to have waived their rights.

# ADDRESSES:

A copy of the decision may be obtained from:  Bureau of Land Management, Alaska State Office, 222 West Seventh Avenue, #13, Anchorage, Alaska 99513-7504.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        The Bureau of Land Management by phone at 907-271-5960, or by e-mail at                         *ak.blm.conveyance@ak.blm.gov.*                         Persons who use a telecommunication device (TTD) may call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1-800-877-8330, 24 hours a day, seven days a week, to contact the Bureau of Land Management.                    

Barbara J. Walker,

Land Law Examiner,  Land Transfer Adjudication I Branch.

[FR Doc. E9-18217 Filed 7-29-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310-JA-P
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.                  

###### Department of Defense

###### Office of the Secretary

          - [Transmittal Nos. 09-14]

# AGENCY:

Department of Defense, Defense Security Cooperation Agency.

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

The Department of Defense is publishing the unclassified text of a section 36(b)(1) arms sales notification. This is published to fulfill the requirements of section 155 of Public Law 104-164 dated 21 July 1996.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Ms. B. English, DSCA/DBO/CFM, (703) 601-3740.

The following is a copy of a letter to the Speaker of the House of Representatives, Transmittals 09-14 with attached transmittal, and policy justification.

Dated: July 30, 2009.

Patricia L. Toppings,

OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.

      ( print page 39944)          ( print page 39945)          ( print page 39946)    

BILLING CODE 5001-06-M

[FR Doc. E9-18966 Filed 8-7-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 5001-06-C
39498.

#### A. H. MASSEY, INC. v. DIAMOND ELECTRIC & SUPPLY CORPORATION.

Hall, Judge.

The plaintiff (plaintiff in error) on May 22, 1961, filed suit against the defendant (defendant in error) for $1,452.58 on an account, including numerous items listed on a statement and invoices dated on various datesi from July 25, 1955, through January 21, 1960. The defendant filed a plea and answer denying that he was indebted on the account and alleging that any right of action the plaintiff ever had on the account was barred by the statute of limitation. At the trial, after plaintiff introduced its evidence, the court sustained the “motion of the defendant for nonsuit and upon its plea of the statute of limitations1.” On this judgment the defendant assigns error. *Held:*

1. The defendant filed a motion to dismiss the writ of error on the ground that it was not given written notice of the time and place at which the brief of evidence was presented' to the trial judge for his approval as required by *Code Ann.*§§ 6-802, 24-3364 and Rule 8 of the Civil Court of Fulton County, nor did the defendant waive such notice in writing. No harm is alleged to have resulted to the defendant because of any lack of notice. See *Carpenter v. Forshee,*103 Ga. App. 758, 770 (120 SE2d 786).

One way in which evidence may be brought to the appellate courts is to actually set it out in the bill of exceptions. *Barringer v. Porter,*211 Ga. 20 (1) (83 SE2d 603). If this method is used, the action or non-action of the trial judge as to requiring notice on the question of correctness is not reviewable. *Venable v. Gresham,*105 Ga. App. 720 (125 SE2d 507); *Code Ann.*§§ 6-908.1 and 6-909.

In this case the brief of evidence immediately precedes the certificate of the trial judge which states that “the foregoing *122bill of exceptions is true. . .” “Whatever precedes the judge’s certificate is a part of the bill of exceptions, and maybe verified by the certificate alone.” *Fellows v. Guthrie,*214 Ga. 195, 198 (104 SE2d 205). The motion to dismiss is denied.

Decided June 7, 1962.

*Edwin J. Hunt, Gerstein & Carter,*for plaintiff in error.

*Tindall & Tindall, Joseph D. Tindall,*contra.

2. Assuming (but not deciding) that charges on the account falling due before May 22, 1957, would be barred by the statute of limitation, several items on the account were charged since that date; and the total charges for these items exceed the total credits since that date. Since the evidence would authorize a recovery in some amount, the judgment sustaining the plea and nonsuit was error. *Philpot v. Chattanooga &c. R. Co.,*114 Ga. 295 (40 SE 266); *Pendleton Bros. v. Atlantic Lmbr. Co.,*3 Ga. App. 714 (60 SE 377); *Harris v. Evans,*6 Ga. App. 747 (65 SE 802); *Duke v. Cason,*25 Ga. App. 344 (103 SE 176); *Collier v. Pritchett,*30 Ga. App. 451, 452 (118 SE 444); *Smith v. Faulk,*171 Ga. 616 (156 SE 185).

*Judgment reversed.*

*Felton, C. J., and Bell, J., concur.*
EXHIBIT
10.7(b)


SCHEDULE OF EXECUTIVE
OFFICERS PARTY TO THE


CHANGE IN CONTROL
AGREEMENT FILED AS EXHIBIT 10.7(a)


Each of the parties
identified below is party to a change in control agreement (“CIC Agreement”)
with Advanced Medical Optics, Inc. substantially in the form of Exhibit 10.7 to
the Current Report on Form 8-K of Advanced Medical Optics, Inc. filed on
May 18, 2005.


	
  Name of
  Executive

  	
   

  	
  Benefit Level Under

  Section 6(a) of

  of CIC Agreement

  	
   

  	
  Benefit Level Under

  Section 8(a) of

  of CIC Agreement

  
	
  Sheree L. Aronson

  	
   

  	
  One Time

  	
   

  	
  One Year

  
	
  Leonard R. Borrmann

  	
   

  	
  Two Times

  	
   

  	
  Two Years

  
	
  Robert F. Gallagher

  	
   

  	
  One Time

  	
   

  	
  One Year

  
	
  Francine D. Meza

  	
   

  	
  Two Times

  	
   

  	
  Two Years
104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. J. RES. 110

JOINT RESOLUTION

Providing for the appointment of Howard H. Baker, Jr.

as a citizen regent of the Board of Regents of the Smithsonian Institution.

1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives

2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 That, in accordance with section 5581 of the Revised Stat4 utes of the United States (20 U.S.C. 43), the vacancy on

5 the Board of Regents of the Smithsonian Institution, in
2

•HJ 110 EH

1 the class other than Members of Congress, occurring by

2 reason of the expiration of the term of Jeannine Smith

3 Clark of the District of Columbia on August 25, 1995,

4 is filled by the appointment of Howard H. Baker, Jr. of

5 the District of Columbia. The appointment is for a term

6 of six years and shall take effect on the date on which

7 this joint resolution becomes law.

Passed the House of Representatives November 7,

1995.

Attest:

Clerk.
104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. J. RES. 110

JOINT RESOLUTION

Providing for the appointment of Howard H.

Regents of the Smithsonian Institution.Baker, Jr. as a citizen regent of the Board of
----

Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 9 November 2006 — Commission of the European Communities v Joël De Bry

(Case C-344/05 P) (1)

(Appeal - Official - Reporting procedure - Career development report - 2001/2002 reporting period - Rights of the defence - Article 26, second paragraph, of the Staff Regulations)

(2006/C 326/34)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Appellant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: L. Lozano Palacios and M.H. Kraemer, Agents)

Other party to the proceedings: Joël De Bry (represented by: S. Orlandi, avocat)

Re:

Appeal brought against the judgment of the Court of First Instance (single judge) in Case T-157/04 De Bry v Commission, setting aside the decision of 26 May 2003 drawing up the appellant's career development report for the period from 1 July 2001 to 31 December 2002.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

----

(1)OJ C 281, 12.11.2005.

----
Exhibit 99.1


                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of American Tax Credit Properties III
L.P. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 29, 2002 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), I, David Salzman, Chief Executive Officer of Richman Housing Credits
Inc., general partner of Richman Tax Credit Properties III L.P., general partner
of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. (S) 1350, as adopted pursuant to
(S) 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

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

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



/s/ David Salzman
------------------------------
David Salzman
Chief Executive Officer of Richman
Housing Credits Inc., general partner of
Richman Tax Credit Properties III L.P.,
general partner of the Company
November 13, 2002
§ 25.6060-1 Reporting requirements for tax return preparers. ( a ) *In general.* A person that employs one or more tax return preparers to prepare a return or claim for refund of gift tax under chapter 12 of subtitle B of the Internal Revenue Code, other than for the person, at any time during a return period, shall satisfy the record keeping and inspection requirements in the manner stated in § 1.6060-1 of this chapter.
( b ) *Effective/applicability date.* This section is applicable to returns and claims for refund filed after December 31, 2008.
[T.D. 9436, 73 FR 78451, Dec. 22, 2008]
AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO THE GEHL COMPANY/_______________
                    CHANGE IN CONTROL AND SEVERANCE AGREEMENT
                         DATED AS OF __________________

          THIS AMENDMENT to the Change in Control and Severance Agreement (the
"Agreement"), made and entered into as of the _____ day of _____________ by and
between Gehl Company ("GEHL"), a Wisconsin corporation, and
______________________ (the "Executive"), is made as of June 13, 2001.

                                    RECITALS

          WHEREAS, GEHL and the Executive have previously made and entered into
the Agreement and wish to enter into this Amendment amending the Agreement as
provided herein.

          NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises and agreements
set forth herein, the parties agree as follows:

          Section 1(c) of the Agreement shall be revised by deleting the word
"and" from the end of such section.

          Section 1(d) of the Agreement shall be deleted in its entirety and
replaced with the following:

          Two (2) times the sum of (i) the Current Base Salary and
          (ii) the highest bonus amount earned by the Executive in any
          of the five fiscal years which precede the year in which the
          Termination Date occurs, including any amounts deferred; and

          Section 1 of the Agreement shall be revised by adding the following
new paragraph after subsection (e) and before the paragraph beginning "In
addition":

          The Executive shall also receive, at the expense of GEHL,
          outplacement services, on an individualized basis at a level
          of service commensurate with the Executive's most senior
          status with GEHL during the 180-day period prior to the date
          of the Change in Control, provided by a nationally
          recognized senior executive placement firm selected by GEHL
          with the consent of the Executive, provided that the cost to
          GEHL of such services shall not exceed 20% of the
          Executive's Current Base Salary. In the alternative, the
          Executive, at his election, may choose to receive that net
          amount, up to a maximum of $15,000, to be paid as a lump sum
          within 30 days of the Termination Date as outlined above.

          IN WITNESS WHEREOF, GEHL has caused this Amendment to be executed by
its duly authorized officer, and Executive has hereunto set his hand, all as of
the date set forth above.

GEHL COMPANY                             EXECUTIVE

By:
   --------------------------------      ------------------------------------
Name:     William D. Gehl                ______________________
     ------------------------------
Title:    President
Petition for Exemption

Shawn W. Skenandore

Image Keepers

- Photography

454 Cottage Grove Ave Green Bay Wis,54304

I, Shawn W. Skenandore , hereby submit this petition for exemption under Section 333; FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012, Public Law 112

- 95 FEB. 14, 2012, Section 333.

I request this exemption in order to o perate my UAV/UAS, DJI Phantom 3 Professional Quad cop ter Aircraft, in order to provide services for profit to include aerial photography, aerial cinematography, aerial filming and photography for real estate, construction firms, aerial mapping, special events to include but not limited to weddings, private o r public parties/events, business advertising, promotional events, geological surveying, and environmental studies.

The ability to provide these services to other local businesses and individuals in my community will benefit them by opening up opportuniti es they otherwise did not have before. Traditional methods of aerial photography/videography are simply not viable options for the average consumer as they are costly and involve greater risks to everyone involved; i.e. the use of larger aircraft carrying humans and flammable fuel. By utilizing the UAV/UAS the same results can be achieved with much safer conditions.

Prior to each flight/operation of the UAV/UAS, I will conduct a Pre

- Flight Safety Inspection.

Only the manufacturers authorized repair facilities/ providers will perform any and all repairs. Flights will not take place over densely populated areas or private property without the owners permission. The UAV/UAS will only be operated within visual lin e of sight and will not be flown near airports or above 400 feet. The FAA can be confident that operations of this UAV/UAS will achieve at least the equivalent or greater level of safety.

The requests of this petition are similar to those of Mr. Todd Thom as Drone Pics, and Mr. Mike Lloyd & Associates, all of who have received Section 333 exemptions for comparable aircraft for similar operations.

The specific sections of 14 C.F.R from which I am seeking exemption are as follows:14 C.F.R. Part 21;

14 C.F.R . 45.23(b);

14 C.F.R. 61.101(e)(4), & (5);

14 C.F.R. 61.113(a) & (b);

14 C.F.R. 61.133 (a);

14 C.F.R. 61.23(a) & (c);

14 C.F.R 91.7(a)

14 C.F.R. 91.9(b)(2);

14C.F.R. 91.109(a);

14 C.F.R. 91.119;

14 C.F.R. 91.121;

14 C.F.R. 91.151(a);

14 C.F.R. 91.203(a) & (b);

14 C.F.R. 91.405(a);

14 C.F.R. 91.407(a)(1);

14 C.F.R. 91.409(a)(2};

14 C.F.R. 91.417(a) & (b).

Please find the included User Manual, Quick Start Guide and Smart Flight Battery Safety Guidelines

I truly thank you for your consideration.

Sincerely,

Shawn Skenandore

Imagekeepers

- Photography

http://download.dji

inn ovations.com/downloads/phantom_3/en/PHANTOM3 _User_Manual_v1.4_en.pdfhttp://download.dji

innovations.com/downloads/phantom_2/en/PHANTOM2_Quick_Start_Guide_en.pdf

http://download.dji

innovations.co m/downloads/phantom_2_vision_plus/Smart_Flight_Battery_Safety_Guidelines.pdf
# C_2014261EN.01005201.xml

| 11.8.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 261/52 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

11.8.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 261/52

---

Action brought on 26 June 2014 — Banco de Albacete v Commission

(Case T-483/14)

2014/C 261/81

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Banco de Albacete, SA (Madrid, Spain) (represented by: J.L. Buendía Sierra, E. Abad Valdenebro, R. Calvo Salinero, A. Lamadrid de Pablo and A. Biondi, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Commission

Defendant:

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The applicants claim that the General Court should:

| — | annul the contested decision in so far as it categorises the measures which, according to that decision, together constitute the ‘Spanish Tax Lease System’ as new State aid that is incompatible with the internal market; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the contested decision in so far as it categorises the measures which, according to that decision, together constitute the ‘Spanish Tax Lease System’ as new State aid that is incompatible with the internal market;

| — | in the alternative, annul Articles 1 and 4 of the contested decision, which identify the investors in the Economic Interest Groupings (EIGs) as the beneficiaries of the alleged aid and as the sole addressees of the order for recovery; |
| --- | --- |

—

in the alternative, annul Articles 1 and 4 of the contested decision, which identify the investors in the Economic Interest Groupings (EIGs) as the beneficiaries of the alleged aid and as the sole addressees of the order for recovery;

| — | in the alternative, annul Article 4 of the contested decision, in so far as it orders recovery of the alleged aid; |
| --- | --- |

—

in the alternative, annul Article 4 of the contested decision, in so far as it orders recovery of the alleged aid;

| — | annul Article 4 of the contested decision, in so far as it makes a determination as to the lawfulness of private contracts between the investors and other entities; and |
| --- | --- |

—

annul Article 4 of the contested decision, in so far as it makes a determination as to the lawfulness of private contracts between the investors and other entities; and

| — | order the Commission to pay the costs of these proceedings. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the Commission to pay the costs of these proceedings.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

The pleas in law and main arguments are those raised in Case T-700/13 Bankia v Commission.

Bankia

Commission

---
Exhibit 10.32





ADDENDUM NO 1


to the


CASUALTY EXCESS OF LOSS

REINSURANCE AGREEMENT

NO. POR327454

(hereinafter referred to as the “Agreement”)


between


SAFETY INSURANCE COMPANY

SAFETY INDEMNITY INSURANCE COMPANY

Boston, Massachusetts

(hereinafter referred to as the “Company”)


and


SWISS REINSURANCE AMERICA
CORPORATION

Armonk, New York

(hereinafter referred to as the “Reinsurer”)


It is understood and agreed that effective as of inception, January 1,
2006, Article XII - Contingent Commission is hereby deleted from this
Agreement.


ALL OTHER TERMS AND CONDITIONS REMAIN UNCHANGED



 1
 








IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Addendum to be
executed in duplicate, by their duly authorized representatives as of the
following dates:


In Boston this 2nd day of December 2006.


	
  ATTEST:

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
  SAFETY INSURANCE COMPANY

  SAFETY INDEMNITY INSURANCE COMPANY

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
  /s/ Janet Kelleher

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
  /s/ Edward N.
  Patrick Jr.

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
  Janet Kelleher

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
  Edward N.
  Patrick Jr.

  
	
  Name

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
  Name

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
  Controller

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
  VP Underwriting

  
	
  Title

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
  Title

  



 


And in Armonk, New York,
this 19th day of December, 2006.


	
  ATTEST:

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
  SWISS REINSURANCE AMERICA CORPORATION

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
  /s/ Robert Weireter

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
  /s/ Jeffrey W.
  Isaacson

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
  Robert Weireter

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
  Jeffrey W.
  Isaacson

  
	
  Name

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
  Name

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
  Vice President 

  Member of Management

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
  Vice President 

  Member of Senior Management

  
	
  Title

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
  Title

  



 



 2
----

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.4271 — Daikin/OYL)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2006/C 297/15)

On 2 October 2006, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

----