alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 1208.20 Authority and scope. ( a ) *Authority.* FHFA may collect debts owed by employees to the Federal Government by means of salary offset under the authority of 5 U.S.C. 5514; 5 CFR part 550, subpart K; and this subpart B.
( b ) *Scope.* ( 1 ) The procedures set forth in this subpart B apply to situations where FHFA is attempting to collect a debt by salary offset that is owed to it by an individual employed by FHFA or by another agency; or where FHFA employs an individual who owes a debt to another agency.
( 2 ) The procedures set forth in this subpart B do not apply to: ( i ) Any routine intra-agency adjustment of pay that is attributable to clerical or administrative error or delay in processing pay documents that have occurred within the four pay periods preceding the adjustment, or any adjustment to collect a debt amounting to $50 or less. However, at the time of any such adjustment, or as soon thereafter as possible, FHFA or its designated payroll agent shall provide the employee with a written notice of the nature and the amount of the adjustment and a point of contact for contesting such adjustment.
( ii ) Any negative adjustment to pay that arises from an employee's election of coverage or a change in coverage under a Federal benefits program that requires periodic deductions from pay, if the amount to be recovered was accumulated over four pay periods or less. However, at the time such adjustment is made, FHFA or its payroll agent shall provide in the employee's earnings statement a clear and concise statement that informs the employee of the previous overpayment.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 10-6547

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

CHARLES M. RUSSELL,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of 

Maryland, at Greenbelt. Deborah K. Chasanow, Chief District 

Judge. (8:98-cr-00483-DKC-1)

Submitted: September 16, 2010 Decided: October 6, 2010

Before NIEMEYER and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior 

Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Charles M. Russell, Appellant Pro Se. Rod J. Rosenstein, United 

States Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland; Gina Simms, Assistant 

United States Attorney, Greenbelt, Maryland, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Charles M. Russell appeals the district court’s order 

denying a sentence reduction pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) 

(2006). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible 

error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the 

district court. United States v. Russell, No. 8:98-cr-00483-

DKC-1 (D. Md. Mar. 29, 2010). 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.

AFFIRMED
110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2654 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 202 South Dumont Avenue in Woonsocket, 

South Dakota, as the ‘‘Eleanor McGovern Post Office 

Building’’. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
2 

•HR 2654 EH

1 SECTION 1. ELEANOR MCGOVERN POST OFFICE BUILDING. 

2 (a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States 

3 Postal Service located at 202 South Dumont Avenue in 

4 Woonsocket, South Dakota, shall be known and des5 ignated as the ‘‘Eleanor McGovern Post Office Building’’. 

6 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg7 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

8 States to the facility referred to in subsection (a) shall 

9 be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Eleanor McGovern 

10 Post Office Building’’. 

Passed the House of Representatives September 10, 

2007. 

Attest: 

Clerk. 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2654 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States PostMcGovern Post Office Building’’. in Woonsocket, South Dakota, as the ‘‘Eleanor al Service located at 202 South Dumont Avenue
<PAGE>

                                                                   Exhibit 10.92


      COUNTERPART SIGNATURE PAGE AND JOINDER TO THE AGREEMENT AND PLAN OF
                        REORGANIZATION AND CONTRIBUTION

          The undersigned, pursuant to Section 251 of the Delaware General
Corporate Law and Section 2.1(c) of that certain Agreement and Plan of
Reorganization and Contribution by and between TeleCorp PCS, Inc., Tritel, Inc.
and AT&T Wireless Services, Inc. dated February 28, 2000 (the "Agreement"), by
execution of this counterpart signature page hereby joins in, becomes a party
to, and agrees (i) to be bound by all the terms and provisions of that
Agreement, (ii) to be subject to all of the obligations of a party to that
Agreement as set forth therein, and (iii) that all shares of common or preferred
stock of the Company now or hereafter held by the undersigned shall be subject
to the restrictions on transfer, rights of purchase and other provisions of said
Agreement.

     EXECUTED on this 31st day of May, 2000.



                          TTHC FIRST MERGER SUB, INC.


                          By:  /s/  Thomas H. Sullivan
                               ----------------------------------------------
                               Name:  Thomas H. Sullivan
                                      ---------------------------------------
                               Title: Vice President, Treasurer and Secretary
                                      ---------------------------------------
Exhibit 99(b)

            CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
               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 IGENE Biotechnology, Inc. (the "Company")
Quarterly  Report on Form 10-QSB for the period ended  March  31,
2003, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the
date  hereof  (the  "Report"),  I, Edward  J.  Weisberger,  Chief
Financial  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, as amended; and

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


Date: May 14, 2003                 By:  /s/EDWARD J. WEISBERGER
                                            EDWARD J. WEISBERGER
                                            Chief Financial
          Officer
42259.

#### CHITWOOD et al. v. AMENT.

Jordan, Judge.

The plaintiff, J. Ament, commenced this action in the Civil Court of Fulton County for “rent, damage to stove, divan, windows and screens total $239.00 (two hundred and thirty-nine).” The defendants, Charlie T. Chitwood and his wife, demurred generally and specially, on the grounds, among others, that the complaint set forth a misjoinder of actions ex contractu and ex delicto, and that the word “rent” without other facts was insufficient. The defendants in their answer alleged, by way of cross action, a complaint for damages on account of the wrongful conversion of personal property. The trial judge, at a hearing on all issues under justice of the peace rules, overruled the general demurrer, sustained the special demurrers, and allowed the plaintiff to elect to proceed ex contractu on the issue of rent, after plaintiff’s attorney supplied additional particulars regarding the claim as one for rent due of $135 for a period of six weeks. On motion of counsel for the defendants he dismissed the action against the wife as not being liable as a matter of law for rent for the family, and ex mero motu dismissed the cross action as one sounding in tort which could not be pleaded against an action ex contractu. On the merits on the issue of rent he rendered judgment against the remaining defendant for $45 rent due. The defendants, as appellants in this court, insist through counsel that the court erred in overruling the general demurrer, in dismissing the cross action, and in proceeding to judgment on the issue of rent after having sustained the special demurrer *353directed to the word “rent” in the complaint. *Held:*

Submitted September 6, 1966

Decided September 27, 1966.

*Paul C. Myers,*for appellants.

1. The niceties of pleadings are not required in a proceeding under justice of the peace rules and the averment of the word “rent” sufficiently identified the nature of the proceedings to withstand a general demurrer. *Code*§ 24-1102; *Green v. W. A. Lathem & Sons,*86 Ga. App. 335, 337 (71 SE2d 790).

2. Where the plaintiff exercised his right to proceed ex contractu for rent due after the trial judge had sustained a special demurrer directed to the misjoinder of actions ex contractu and ex delicto, it was not error to dismiss ex mero motu an ex delicto cross action which did not allege that the plaintiff is insolvent or a nonresident. *Spence v. Rodgers,*61 Ga. App. 854 (7 SE2d 787); *McKellar v. Childs,*97 Ga. App. 199, 200 (102 SE2d 513).

3. In a trial under justice of the peace rules where counsel for the plaintiff supplied in open court additional details as to the nature and amount of the account after the trial judge had sustained a special demurrer directed to such defects, it was not error for the trial judge to hear evidence and render judgment for the plaintiff on the merits.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*Bell, P. J., and Eberhardt, J., concur.*
August 11, 2016



### JUDGMENT 

## The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

ULESSIA PROCTER , Appellant

NO. 14

- 15

- 00256

- CR V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS , Appellee

________________________________ This cause was heard on the transcript of the record of the court below. Having considered the record, this Court holds that there was no error in the judgment. The Court orders the judgment AFFIRMED

.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.
# Official Journal L 108/2020

| | ISSN 1977-0677 |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | L 108 |
| | |
| English edition | Legislation | Volume 636 April 2020 |

ISSN 1977-0677

Official Journal

of the European Union

L 108

English edition

Legislation

Volume 636 April 2020

---

| Contents | | II   Non-legislative acts | page |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | REGULATIONS |
| | * | Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2020/492 of 1 April 2020 imposing definitive anti-dumping duties on imports of certain woven and/or stitched glass fibre fabrics originating in the People’s Republic of China and Egypt | 1 |

Contents

II   Non-legislative acts

page

REGULATIONS

*

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2020/492 of 1 April 2020 imposing definitive anti-dumping duties on imports of certain woven and/or stitched glass fibre fabrics originating in the People’s Republic of China and Egypt

1

| EN | Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.
  The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk. |
| --- | --- |

EN

Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.

The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk.
ex101to8k06447003_05032015.htm


Exhibit 10.1


 



SECOND AMENDMENT TO MANAGEMENT SERVICES AGREEMENT


 


This Second Amendment to Management Services Agreement (this “Amendment”) is dated as of May 3, 2015, and is between SP Corporate Services LLC (“SP Corporate”), a Delaware limited liability company having an office at 590 Madison Avenue, 32nd Floor, New York, New York 10022, and Handy & Harman Ltd., a Delaware corporation and Handy & Harman Group Ltd., a Delaware corporation (collectively, the “Company”), having an office at 1133 Westchester Avenue, Suite N-222, White Plains, New York 10604.


 


RECITALS


 


The Company and SP Corporate are parties to a Management Services Agreement dated as of January 1, 2012, as amended by the First Amendment to Management Services Agreement dated as of March 27, 2013 (the “Management Services Agreement”), whereby SP Corporate furnishes the Company and its subsidiaries with certain Services. The parties desire to amend the Management Services Agreement to clarify the Additional Corporate Services to be provided by SP Corporate to the Company and to modify the payments to be made by the Company to SP Corporate.


 


1.           Defined Terms.  Defined terms used but not defined in this Amendment are as defined in the Management Services Agreement.


 


2.           Amendment to Section 3.01(b).  In Section 3.01(b) of the Management Services Agreement, the amount “7,145,046” shall be changed to read “8,810,934.”


 


3.           Amendment to Exhibit B.  Exhibit B to the Management Services Agreement is hereby amended by adding the following to the list of Additional Corporate Services:


 



	
  

	
·

	
Operating group management services.







 


4.           Confirmation of Agreement.  All other terms of the Management Services Agreement shall remain in full force and effect.


 


5.           Counterparts.  This Amendment may be executed in two or more counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original but all of which together shall constitute one and the same instrument.


 


[Signature Page Follows]


 




  





  











  






 


The parties have duly executed this Agreement as of the date first above written.


 



	  	
SP CORPORATE SERVICES LLC


	  	  
	  	  
	  	
By:

	

/s/ Jack L. Howard




	  	  	
Name:

	
Jack L. Howard


	  	  	
Title:

	
President













	  	
HANDY & HARMAN LTD.


	  	  
	  	  
	  	
By:

	

/s/ James F. McCabe, Jr.




	  	  	
Name:

	
James F. McCabe, Jr.


	  	  	
Title:

	
Senior Vice President and CFO













	  	
HANDY & HARMAN GROUP LTD.


	  	  
	  	  
	  	
By:

	

/s/ James F. McCabe, Jr.




	  	  	
Name:

	
James F. McCabe, Jr.


	  	  	
Title:

	
Senior Vice President









 


 


 


 



[Signature Page to Second Amendment to Management Services Agreement]
United States Court of Appeals

For the Eighth Circuit

___________________________

No. 16-2693

___________________________

Roque De La Fuente, also known as Rocky

lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellant

v.

Iowa Democratic Party; Paul Pate, agent of Secretary of State

lllllllllllllllllllll Defendants - Appellees

____________

Appeal from United States District Court 

for the Southern District of Iowa - Des Moines

____________

 Submitted: February 21, 2017

Filed: February 27, 2017

[Unpublished] 

____________

Before WOLLMAN, MURPHY, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges. 

____________

PER CURIAM.

Roque De La Fuente appeals after the district court dismissed his pro se 42 1

U.S.C. § 1983 complaint against the Iowa Democratic Party and the Iowa Secretary

The Honorable Stephanie M. Rose, United States District Judge for the

1

Southern District of Iowa. 
of State, asserting claims related to his efforts to participate in the 2016 Iowa

Democratic presidential caucuses. After carefully reviewing the record, and the

parties’ arguments on appeal, we conclude that De La Fuente’s complaint was moot

to the extent he sought injunctive relief, and that it was appropriate to dismiss the

complaint for failure to state a claim. See Levy v. Ohl, 477 F.3d 988, 991 (8th Cir.

2007) (grant of motion to dismiss for failure to state claim is reviewed de novo); Doe

v. Gooden, 214 F.3d 952, 955 (8th Cir. 2000) (§ 1983 claims cannot be predicated on

violations of state law); see also Gallagher v. Magner, 636 F.3d 380, 383 (8th Cir.

2010) (discussing standard for claims under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964). 

Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

______________________________

-2-
Hoaoroblo R. C. Xil8oa. Pa60 ? 

footlou 17, Artiolo 39120, Vernon*r Annotate4 

CllII :*tttutn providrr in put: 

a.%otlon 17 (aI Tha term *pmolnot otflaorm* 

ta wed in thir art 001fm :urtioo8 of the Posoo 

ma c0mtt bm 

*In 811 oountlmr ia thl8 P;txte euoh proolnot 

offioerr ohall ooatlnue to be oua ennted 

P 

ror 

tbrlr srrvlorr on l rtt btrlr unt 1 the co~3~1irhmon~ Court ohall haro dotemined otborwlro 

in aaoordraw with tho provis&onr of %ttloa 2 

or thi8 sot. 

* 

. . . .* 

Stotloa 2 or Article )912a, supre, provlCe.8 in mrtl 

Vho Cosaisrloatrs' Court of rroh oounty in 

the Ftnte or Pexa8, at ltr ?&rat regular rmtlng 

In Jtnuary or taoh aalsndu Jbu, ohall, br order 

rsuo and entered iA the nlnutea or atBid court, 

detarzlnt okether prtoicct otficarn cf tuck aowty 

(OXO6Pt publia uolglxrr end rogistrtrs of vital 

atttl8tlos) the11 be ocmpnratsd on a salary ksi8 

ea ~0ridd lot in tbL8 AOt, or uhttber they the11 

*o o ivo l m tholr aorgtarrtion, ruoh *es 0r ors~oo 

as mty be ttrwd by tht~ in the’ performmoo ot 

tnt dutltr or tttlr 0:ri0tt, en& it rhall bt the 

duty or the oounty alork of oaoh oounty to forward 

to the Com.ptrollor 0r 3ublllo AOoowts 0r the “tat 

or Taxar OA or krom tbo 318t Ooy 0s Janwry t 

otrtititd 0-y or mtob order. . . .* 

Subriotion (b) or neotion 17, Artlolr 3912e,ruprr, 

prcrPlCer in part-t 

-Ga o@antIrd tiwm lt shall bets btmc dttertined that pmoinot offioora shall be ooaptnaottd 
moBomb1. m. a. u1laoa, ?rm 3 
. ,
# C_2016300EN.01000101.xml

| 18.8.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 300/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

18.8.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 300/1

---

EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT

EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT

2014-2015 SESSION

Sittings of 12 to 15 January 2015

The Minutes of this session have been published in OJ C 83, 3.3.2016
  .

The Minutes of this session have been published in OJ C 83, 3.3.2016

TEXTS ADOPTED

---
§ 1203.12 Documentation for fees and expenses. ( a ) The application for award must be accompanied by full and itemized documentation of the fees and other expenses for which an award is sought. The adjudicative officer may require the applicant to provide vouchers, receipts, logs, or other documentation for any fees or expenses claimed.
( b ) A separate itemized statement must be submitted for each entity or individual whose services are covered by the application. Each itemized statement must include: ( 1 ) The hours spent by each entity or individual;
( 2 ) A description of the specific services performed and the rates at which each fee has been computed; and
( 3 ) Any expenses for which reimbursement is sought, the total amount claimed, and the total amount paid or payable by the applicant or by any other person or entity.
#### Richmond *v.*The State.

*Killing or Injuring Animal.*

(Decided May 7, 1912.

58 South. 973.)

*Indictment and Information; Malicious Injury 'to Animals; Sufficiency.*— Where an affidavit for unlawfully, wantonly, or- maliciously killing or injuring animals followed the Code form, except' that the word “Maimed” was substituted for the' word “injured,” the affidavit sufficiently charged the statutory offense, since the word “maimed” imports more than the word “injured” and includes in- its meaning, “to- injure.”

Appeal from .Macon County .Court-

Heard before Hon. M. B. Abercrombie.

Shep Richmond was convicted of wantonly or intentionally killing or maiming a cow, and he appeals.

Affirmed.

*140O. S. Lewis, for appellant.

No brief came to tbe Reporter.

R. C. Brickeel, Attorney General, and W. L. Martin, Assistant Attorney General, for the State.

The demurrers to the affidavit Avere properly overruled.— *Billingslea v.*State, 68 Ala. 486; *Bailey v. State,*99 Ala-143; *Jones v. State,*136 Ala. 118; *Guarreno v.*State, 148 Ala. 637; *Coleman v. State,*150 Ala. 64.

WALKER, P. J.

The affidavit charged that the defendant “unlaAvfully, Avantonly, or maliciously killed, disabled, disfigured, or maimed a coav, the property of Jack Spradling, against the peace,” etc. It folloAved the Code form for an indictment for Avanton and malicious injury to animals (Code, §§ 6230, 7161, form 71), except that the Avord “maimed” is substituted for the Avord “injured” Avhere the latter is used in the Code form. Where another Avord is .substituted for the one used in the statute, or in the form of indictment under it, and the substituted word is equivalent in meaning to that employed in the statute, or in the Code form of indictment, or is of more extensive signification, and includes it, the indictment or affida.Adt sufficiently charges the statutory *offense.*—Sparrenberger *v. State,*53 Ala. 81, 25 Am. Rep. 643; *Ben v. State,*22 Ala. 9, 58 Am. Dec. 234; Code, § 7136. As the Avord “maim” implies a deprivation of a necessary part, a crippling, disabling, or permanent injury, it is more than the equivalent in meaning of the word “injure.” — 5 Words and Phrases, 4275. Under the rule above stated, a charge of the statutory offense was included in that made in the affidavit. The conclusion follows that the demurrer to the affidavit was properly overruled.

Affirmed.