alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
HomeFact Sheets: Bureau of International Security and Nonproliferation...Project Phoenix

# 									Project Phoenix							

Fact Sheet

Bureau of International Security and Nonproliferation

September 7, 2023

A

Tags

Arms Control and NonproliferationBureau of International Security and NonproliferationInternational Security

Back to Top
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 Commerce

###### Foreign-Trade Zones Board 

          - [Order No. 1633] 

Pursuant to its authority under the Foreign-Trade Zones Act of June 18, 1934, as amended (19 U.S.C. 81a-81u), the Foreign-Trade Zones Board (the Board) adopts the following Order: 

Whereas, the Foreign-Trade Zones (FTZ) Act provides for “* * *  the establishment  * * *  of foreign-trade zones in ports of entry of the United States, to expedite and encourage foreign commerce, and for other purposes,” and authorizes the Foreign-Trade Zones Board to grant to qualified corporations the privilege of establishing foreign-trade zones in or adjacent to U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) ports of entry; 

Whereas, the Capital Region Airport Authority (the Grantee) has made application to the Board (FTZ Docket 52-2008, filed 10/1/08), requesting the establishment of a foreign-trade zone in Lansing, Michigan, at the Capital Region International Airport, which was designated as a CBP user fee port facility on January 22, 2008; 

                    Whereas, notice inviting public comment has been given in the                     **Federal Register**                     (73 FR 58930, 10/8/08), and the application has been processed pursuant to the FTZ Act and the Board's regulations; and,                 

Whereas, the Board adopts the findings and recommendations of the examiner's report, and finds that the requirements of the FTZ Act and Board's regulations are satisfied, and that approval of the application is in the public interest; 

Now, therefore, the Board hereby grants to the Grantee the privilege of establishing a foreign-trade zone, designated on the records of the Board as Foreign-Trade Zone No. 275, at the site described in the application, and subject to the FTZ Act and the Board's regulations, including section 400.28. 

Signed at Washington, DC, this 12th day of August 2009. 

Foreign-Trade Zones Board. 

Gary Locke, 

Secretary of Commerce, Chairman and Executive Officer. 

[FR Doc. E9-20990 Filed 8-28-09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE P
# C_2005330EN.01002002.xml

| 24.12.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 330/20 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.12.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 330/20

---

Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 25 October 2005 — Fardoom and Reinard v Commission

(Case T-43/04) (1)

1

(Officials - Career development report - Evaluation exercise 2001-2002)

(2005/C 330/50)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant(s): Mohammad Reza Fardoom (Roodt-sur-Syre, Luxembourg) and Marie-José Reinard (Bertrange, Luxembourg) (represented by: G. Bouneou and F. Frabetti, lawyers)

Applicant(s):

Defendant(s): Commission of the European Communities (represented by: J. Currall and H. Krämer, Agents)

Defendant(s):

Application for

annulment, principally, of the evaluation exercise 2001-2002 in so far as it concerns the applicants and, in the alternative, of the applicants' career development reports in respect of that period

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1) | Annuls the decision adopting the career development report of Ms Marie-José Reinard in respect of the period from 1 July 2001 to 31 December 2002; |
| --- | --- |

1)

Annuls the decision adopting the career development report of Ms Marie-José Reinard in respect of the period from 1 July 2001 to 31 December 2002;

| 2) | Dismisses the remainder of the action; |
| --- | --- |

2)

Dismisses the remainder of the action;

| 3) | Orders the Commission to pay, in addition to its own costs, those incurred by Ms Reinard; |
| --- | --- |

3)

Orders the Commission to pay, in addition to its own costs, those incurred by Ms Reinard;

| 4) | Orders Mr Mohammad Reza Fardoom to bear his own costs. |
| --- | --- |

4)

Orders Mr Mohammad Reza Fardoom to bear his own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 94, 17.4.2004.

1

---
Exhibit 10.6.1


 


FIRST AMENDMENT


TO THE


WALTER INDUSTRIES, INC.


EXECUTIVE INCENTIVE PLAN


 


This First Amendment to the Walter Industries, Inc. Executive
Incentive Plan is made and entered into by Walter Industries, Inc. (the “Company”)
this 17th day of December, 2008, but is effective as of January 1, 2009.


 


WITNESSETH:


 


WHEREAS, the Company
has previously adopted the Walter Industries, Inc. Executive Incentive
Plan (the “Plan”); and


 


WHEREAS, the Company
is authorized and empowered to amend the Plan; and


 


WHEREAS, the Company
has determined that it is appropriate to amend the Plan in the manner indicated
hereinbelow.


 


NOW, THEREFORE, Section 7 of Article VIII of
the Plan is hereby amended as follows:


 


7.             Incentive awards
may not be paid until the completion of the Company’s audited financial
statements corresponding to the Plan Year and the approval of the Company’s
Audit Committee has been received.  The
Company intends to pay any such incentive award in the year following the year
in which the incentive award is earned, but no later than December 31 of
such year.


 


IN WITNESS WHEREOF,
this First Amendment has been executed and is effective as of the dates set
forth hereinabove.


 


	
   

  	
   

  	
  WALTER INDUSTRIES, INC.

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
  By:

  	
  /s/ Larry E. Williams

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
  Title:  Senior Vice President
#### § 137.79 What funds must the Secretary include in a funding agreement?

The Secretary must include funds in a funding agreement in an amount equal to the amount that the Self-Governance Tribe would have been entitled to receive in a contract under Title I, including amounts for direct program costs specified under section 106(a)(1) of the Act and amounts for contract support costs specified under section 106(a) (2), (3), (5), and (6) of the Act [25 U.S.C. 450j-1(a)(2), (3), (5) and (6)]. In addition, the Secretary shall include any funds that are specifically or functionally related to the provision by the Secretary of services and benefits to the Self-Governance Tribe or its members, all without regard to the organizational level within the Department where such functions are carried out.
### NO NPRE CE DE NT IAL D ISP OSIT ION Tobec ite d only

in ac c orda

nc ewith Fe d. R. App. P. 32.1 

# U n ited S tates C o u rt o f A p p ea ls Fo r th e Se ve n th C irc u it Ch i cago, I l l i noi s 6 0604 Subm i tte d Septem ber24, 20 09 Deci ded N ove m ber12 , 20 09 A m ended N ove m ber13 , 20 09

B efo re W IL L IA M J. B A U E R, Cir cu i tJudg e JO E L M . FL A U M , Cir cu i tJudg e D IA N E P . W O O D , Cir cu i tJudg e



### UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ] Appeal from the United Plaintiff-Appellee, ] States District Court for ] the Northern District of No. 09-1349 v. ] Indiana, Hammond Division. ] STEPHEN GOLDEN, ] No. 2:94-cr-00086-RL Defendant-Appellant. ] ] Rudy Lozano, Judge .

AM END ED O RD ER A § 35 82 (c )(2) req u es t fo r se n te n c e m od ifica tio nis d isc re tio n ar y, U ni t e d S t at e s v. Cunni ngh am , 55 4 F

. 3d 703, 70 7 ( 7th Ci r. 20 09) , ev en fordefendant St ephen Gol den w hose Gu i del i ne r ange w as l owered to 36 0 m onths to l i fe fro m a ra nge o fl i fe. And despi te Gol den’s ar gum ent t o the c ontr ar y, a dist ri ct j ud ge i s per m i tte d to l eave a sente nce a l one, id ., w h ich is w h atth e jud ge d id in G old en ’s c as e. T h e d ist ric t jud ge d id n otab u se h is d iscretion in han d ling Go lden ’s § 3582(c)(2) m otion, esp ecially i n li gh t of G olden ’s adm i tte d i nci dents o fpri son m i sco nd uct. And , l i ke hi s deci si on wh etherto gr ant a sente nce r educti on, the dist ri ct j ud ge’ s deci si on notto co nd uct a hear i ng i s co m m i tte d to h is d isc re tio n . U ni t e d S t at e s v. Young, 555 F.3d 611 , 615 (7th C ir. 2009). AF F I RMED 

### .
June 1, 2015 

Mr. Jeremy Ryan 

High Flying Images 

63 Coniston Road 

Short Hills, NJ 07078 

Dear Mr. Ryan: 

This letter is to inform you that we are unable to process your request for an exemption. It 

explains why we can not process your request and what you should do in the next 30 days. 

Why We Can Not Process Your Request 

We entered your April 30, 2015, exemption request on behalf into the public docket 

(No. FAA-2015-1366), but we are unable to process your request any further. The 

information you sent does not comply with the requirements of § 11.81 (copy enclosed). For 

us to consider the request any further, you must send us all of the following: 

 The specific section or sections of 14 CFR from which you seek relief, the extent of the 

relief you seek, and the reason you seek relief. 

 The reasons why granting the request would be in the public interest; that is, how it would 

benefit the public as a whole. 

 The reasons why the exemption would not adversely affect safety or how the exemption 

would provide a level of safety at least equal to that provided by the rule from which you 

seek an exemption. 

 Any additional information, views, or arguments available to support your request. 

What You Should Do 

If you want us to process your request any further, you must send the information described 

earlier to reach us within 30 days. Please note that § 11.63(d) requires you to send your 

petition for exemption at least 120 days before the proposed effective date of the exemption. 
2 

If We Do Not Hear From You 

If we do not hear from you within 30 days, we will close the docket without notifying you 

further. If you have any questions or require additional time, you may call (202) 267-9677. 

Sincerely, 

/s/ 

Brenda Robeson 

Program Analyst, Airmen and 

 Airspace Rules Division 

Enclosure
# C_2006010EN.01001902.xml

| 14.1.2006 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 10/19 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.1.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 10/19

---

Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 17 November 2005 — Biofarma v OHIM

(Case T-154/03) (1)

1

(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Earlier national word marks ARTEX - Application for Community word mark ALREX - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94)

(2006/C 10/37)

Language of the case: Dutch

Parties

Applicant(s): Biofarma SA (Neuilly-sur-Seine, France) (represented by V. Gil Vega, A. Ruiz López and D. Gonzalez Maroto, lawyers)

Applicant(s):

Defendant(s): Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by W. Verburg and A. Folliard-Monguiral, Agents)

Defendant(s):

Other party or parties to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM intervening before the Court of First Instance: Bausch & Lomb Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (Tampa, Florida, United States) (represented by S. Klos, lawyer)

Other party or parties to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM intervening before the Court of First Instance:

Action

brought against the decision of the Third Board of Appeal of OHIM of 5 February 2003 (Case R 370/2002 3), concerning opposition proceedings between Biofarma SA and Bausch & Lomb Pharmaceuticals, Inc.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Annuls the decision of the Third Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) of 5 February 2003 (Case R 370/2002-3); |
| --- | --- |

1.

Annuls the decision of the Third Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) of 5 February 2003 (Case R 370/2002-3);

| 2. | Orders OHIM to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the applicant; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders OHIM to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the applicant;

| 3. | Orders the intervener to bear its own costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders the intervener to bear its own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 158, 5.7.2003.

1

---
# C_2006036EN.01003301.xml

| 11.2.2006 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 36/33 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

11.2.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 36/33

---

Action brought on 22 November 2005 — NHL Enterprises/OHIM

(Case T-414/05)

(2006/C 36/70)

Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties

Applicant: NHL Enterprises B.V. (Rijswijk, The Netherlands) [represented by: G. Llewelyn, Solicitor]

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

Defendant

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Glory & Pompea (Mataró, Spain)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal:

Form of order sought

| — | Annul the contested decision; |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the contested decision;

| — | order OHIM and the intervener to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order OHIM and the intervener to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Applicant for the Community trade mark: The applicant

Applicant for the Community trade mark:

Community trade mark concerned: The figurative mark ‘LA KINGS’ for goods in classes 16, 25 and 41 — application No 1 041 102

Community trade mark concerned:

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: Manufacturas Antonio Gassol S.A. The mark cited in the opposition was later assigned to Glory & Pompea, S.A.

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings:

Mark or sign cited: The national figurative mark ‘KING’ for goods in class 25

Mark or sign cited:

Decision of the Opposition Division: Opposition upheld for all the goods applied for in class 25

Decision of the Opposition Division:

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissal of the appeal

Decision of the Board of Appeal:

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Council Regulation No 40/94 as the degree of similarity between the marks at issue, notwithstanding the identity of the goods, is not sufficiently high.

Pleas in law:

---
Exhibit 32.1  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 on Form 10-Q of Merchants Bancshares, Inc. (the "Company") for the period ending June 30, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Michael R. Tuttle, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, 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 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.  A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 or other document authenticating, acknowledging or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 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.


| |     |                                                      
| | --- | -----------------------------------------------------
| | By: | /s/ Michael R. Tuttle                                
| |     | Michael R. Tuttle
President & Chief Executive Officer
| |     |                                                      
| |     | August 9, 2010                                       
| |     | Date
HomeOffice of the SpokespersonPress Releases...Designations of Former Honduran President Porfirio “Pepe” Lobo Sosa and Former First Lady Rosa Elena Bonilla Avila for Involvement in Significant Corruption

# 									Designations of Former Honduran President Porfirio “Pepe” Lobo Sosa and Former First Lady Rosa Elena Bonilla Avila for Involvement in Significant Corruption							

Press Statement

Antony J. Blinken, Secretary of State

July 20, 2021

The United States is designating former Honduran President Porfirio “Pepe” Lobo Sosa (Lobo) and former First Lady Rosa Elena Bonilla Avila (Rosa Lobo) due to their involvement in significant corruption.  While in office, President Lobo accepted bribes from the narco-trafficking organization Los Cachiros in exchange for political favors.  As First Lady, Rosa Lobo engaged in significant corruption through fraud and misappropriation of public funds for her personal benefit.  While their corrupt acts undermined the stability of Honduras’ democratic institutions, former President Lobo has not yet been convicted and Rosa Lobo has been released from prison awaiting a retrial.  

These designations are made under Section 7031(c) of the Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs Appropriations Act, 2021.  Under this authority, designated officials of foreign governments involved in significant corruption and their immediate family members are ineligible for entry into the United States.  I am also announcing the designation of the following members of the Lobos’ immediate family:  their son, Fabio Porfirio Lobo; their daughter, Ambar Naydee Lobo Bonilla; and the Lobos’ minor child.

These designations reaffirm U.S. commitment to combating the corruption and disregard for the rule of law that hinders progress in Honduras.  The Department will continue to use all available tools to promote accountability for corrupt actors and combat impunity in the region and globally.

For more information, pleasecontact INL-PAPD@state.gov.

Tags

7031(c)Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement AffairsBureau of Western Hemisphere AffairsCorruptionHondurasOffice of the SpokespersonThe Secretary of State

Back to Top
HomeDirect Line for American Business...Emerging 5G and ICT Opportunities in Latvia

# 									Emerging 5G and ICT Opportunities in Latvia							

Direct Line Event

Bureau of Economic and Business Affairs

March 8, 2022

**Topic:** Emerging 5G and ICT Opportunities in Latvia

**Host:**Ambassador John Carwile

**Date and Time:**March 8, 10:00am Eastern Standard Time (7:00am Pacific Standard Time)

**Description of Call:**U.S. Ambassador John Carwile invites you to explore emerging opportunities in the Fifth Generation and Information Communication Technology sectors in Latvia. With plans to install hundreds of 5G base stations in 2022 and increase semiconductor manufacturing, Latvia’s demand for 5G and ICT innovators, providers, and investors, is at an all-time high. Join us on the Direct Line call with guest speakers John Tully, President of the American Chamber of Commerce in Latvia, and Kaspars Rožkalns, Director of Latvia’s Investment and Development Agency, to learn more about this growing sector.

Tags

Bureau of Economic and Business AffairsDirect LineLatvia

Back to Top
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1
<CURRENCY>                                     U.S.

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              OCT-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                                 FEB-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                   APR-30-1999
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                1
<CASH>                                         1,720,626
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  0
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    68,397
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               2,131,609
<PP&E>                                         38,961,012
<DEPRECIATION>                                 2,078,479
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 44,679,120
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          46,450,098
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       38,741
<OTHER-SE>                                     0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   44,679,120
<SALES>                                        11,883,342
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               11,883,342
<CGS>                                          687,499
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  13,745,160
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             2,884,933
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (4,746,751)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            1,861,818
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (4,746,751)
<EPS-BASIC>                                  .122
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  .122


</TABLE>
#### § 417.582 Definitions.

As used in this subpart—

*AAPCC* stands for adjusted average per capita cost.

*ACR* stands for adjusted community rate.

*Actuarial factors* means factors such as the age, sex, and disability level distribution of the population and any other relevant factors that CMS determines have a significant effect on the level of utilization and cost of health services.

*APCRP* stands for average of per capita rates of payment.

*Class of Medicare enrollees* means a group of Medicare enrollees of an HMO or CMP that CMS constructs on the basis of actuarial factors.

*Similar area* means an area similar to the HMO's or CMP's geographic area but free from special characteristics that would distort the determination of the AAPCC.

*U.S. per capita incurred cost* means the average per capita cost, including intermediary or carrier administrative costs, incurred by Medicare, as determined on an accrual basis, for covered services furnished to Medicare beneficiaries nationwide during the most recent period for which CMS has complete data.

[50 FR 1346, Jan. 10, 1985; 50 FR 20570, May 17, 1985, as amended at 58 FR 38080, July 15, 1993; 60 FR 46232, Sept. 6, 1995]