alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# Amtsblatt C 384A/18.

| | ISSN 1977-088X |
| --- | --- |
| Amtsblatt
  der Europäischen Union | C 384A |
| | |
| Ausgabe in deutscher Sprache | Mitteilungen und Bekanntmachungen | 59. Jahrgang18. Oktober 2016 |

ISSN 1977-088X

Amtsblatt

der Europäischen Union

C 384A

Ausgabe in deutscher Sprache

Mitteilungen und Bekanntmachungen

59. Jahrgang18. Oktober 2016

---

| Informationsnummer | Inhalt | Seite |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | V   Bekanntmachungen |
| | VERWALTUNGSVERFAHREN |
| | Europäisches Parlament |
| 2016/C 384 A/01 | Auswahlverfahren PE/190/S — Referatsleiter — Mini-Parlamentarium Berlin (m/w) (AD 9) — Eignungsliste | 1 |

Informationsnummer

Inhalt

Seite

V   Bekanntmachungen

VERWALTUNGSVERFAHREN

Europäisches Parlament

2016/C 384 A/01

Auswahlverfahren PE/190/S — Referatsleiter — Mini-Parlamentarium Berlin (m/w) (AD 9) — Eignungsliste

1

---

| DE | |
| --- | --- |

DE
# C_2021382EN.01000101.xml

| 20.9.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 382/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.9.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 382/1

---

Last publications of the Court of Justice of the European Union in the Official Journal of the European Union

(2021/C 382/01)

Last publication

OJ C 368, 13.9.2021

Past publications

OJ C 357, 6.9.2021

OJ C 349, 30.8.2021

OJ C 338, 23.8.2021

OJ C 329, 16.8.2021

OJ C 320, 9.8.2021

OJ C 310, 2.8.2021

These texts are available on:

EUR-Lex: http://eur-lex.europa.eu

---
<PAGE>

                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.20



June 25, 2000



Mr. Matt Desch
Victoria Glade
Coronation Road
South Ascot
Berkshire, SL59LQ
UK

Dear Matt,

On behalf of the Board of Directors I am pleased to offer you the position of
Chairman of the Board of Airspan Networks, Inc.  The effective start date would
be July 1, 2000.

Compensation and expense coverage for this position would be as follows:

 .  Base salary of $275,000 per year

 .  Annual bonus plan developed each year under your and Eric Stonestrom's
   recommendation and implemented by the Board; annual bonuses will be targeted
   at 60% of base salary and capped at 100% of base salary

 .  Options to purchase up to 600,000 shares of common stock on a post split
   basis, (1,800,000 pre-split) at the IPO filing price, currently estimated at
   $10.00 per share. This represents approximately 1.5% of the Company on a post
   IPO basis. Options will vest monthly over two years beginning at start date.

 .  Airspan will pay directly to vendors on your behalf the cost of normal and
   reasonable UK living expenses, in accordance with Company policy, up to
   10,000 pounds sterling per month through June 2001.

 .  The Company will cover the reasonable cost of relocation to the U.S.

 .  The Company will cover the reasonable cost of providing you an office in
   Dallas, Texas upon relocation. (Sevin Rosen and Interwest have assured me
   that you are more than welcome at their offices on the 16th floor of the
   Galleria)
<PAGE>

 .  The Company will provide an office for you at the new corporate headquarters
   in Ft. Lauderdale, Florida.

Health and medical benefits will be provided consistent with those provided by
the Company to other executives.

In the unlikely event that your employment terminates involuntarily in the first
year, you will receive six months of your base salary as severance and will
automatically vest 150,000 shares on a post split basis. Beyond the first year,
a six-month severance payment of base salary will apply, but there will be no
acceleration of vesting beyond what has been earned.

In the event that a change of control occurs prior to your complete vesting,
your vesting schedule will be accelerated by the lesser of one year (300,000
shares post split) or the amount of your remaining unvested options.

Matt, there is great confidence that your leadership capabilities will greatly
contribute to the Company's international success as a world class
telecommunications firm.  I personally look forward to working with you, as does
Eric Stonestrom and the entire Board.

Sincerely,

/s/ Tom Huseby

Tom Huseby



Accepted:

Matthew J. Desch        June 27, 2000
----------------        -------------
Matt Desch              Date
§ 1081.114 Construction of time limits. ( a ) *General rule.* In computing any time period prescribed by this part, by order of the Director or a hearing officer, or by any applicable statute, exclude the day of the event that triggers the period, count every day, including intermediate Saturdays, Sundays, and Federal holidays, and include the last day of the period unless it is a Saturday, Sunday, or Federal holiday as set forth in 5 U.S.C. 6103(a). When the last day is a Saturday, Sunday, or Federal holiday, the period runs until the end of the next day that is not a Saturday, Sunday, or Federal holiday.
( b ) *When papers are deemed to be filed or served.* Filing and service are deemed to be effective: ( 1 ) In the case of personal service or same day commercial courier delivery, upon actual receipt by person served;
( 2 ) In the case of overnight commercial delivery service, Express Mail delivery, First Class Mail, Registered Mail, or Certified Mail, upon deposit in or delivery to an appropriate point of collection; or
( 3 ) In the case of electronic transmission, upon transmission.
( c ) *Calculation of time for service and filing of responsive papers.* Whenever a time limit is measured by a prescribed period from the service of any notice or paper, the applicable time limits are calculated as follows: ( 1 ) If service is made by First Class Mail, Registered Mail, or Certified Mail, add three calendar days to the prescribed period;
( 2 ) If service is made by Express Mail or overnight delivery service, add one calendar day to the prescribed period; or
( 3 ) If service is made by electronic transmission, add one calendar day to the prescribed period.
Editorial Note on Part 1204
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 1204 appear at 77 FR 4646, Jan. 31, 2012.

§ 1204.11 May FHFA-OIG obtain Privacy Act records from other Federal agencies for law enforcement purposes? ( a ) The FHFA Inspector General is authorized under the Inspector General Act of 1978, as amended, to make written requests under 5 U.S.C. 552a(b)(7) for transfer of records maintained by other Federal agencies which are necessary to carry out an authorized law enforcement activity under the Inspector General Act of 1978, as amended.
( b ) The FHFA Inspector General delegates the authority under paragraph (a) of this section to the following FHFA-OIG officials— ( 1 ) Principal Deputy Inspector General;
( 2 ) Deputy Inspector General for Audits;
( 3 ) Deputy Inspector General for Investigations;
( 4 ) Deputy Inspector General for Evaluations; and
( 5 ) Deputy Inspector General for Administration.
( c ) The officials listed in paragraph (b) of this section may not further delegate or re-delegate the authority described in paragraph (a) of this section.
HomeReportsBureau of Economic and Business Affairs2022 Fiscal Transparency Report…Comoros

# 					2022 Fiscal Transparency Report: Comoros			

 In this section										

                -  Government-by-Government Assessments: Comoros 

## Government-by-Government Assessments: Comoros

During the review period, the government made significant progress by publishing audits that covered the entire annual executed budget and contained substantive findings, recommendations, and narratives.  The government made its enacted budget available, but it did not make its executive budget proposal available online or publish an end-of-year report.  Information on debt obligations was publicly available, including for state-owned enterprises.  Budget documents provided a substantially complete picture of the government’s planned expenditures and revenue streams.  Actual expenditures and revenues did not correspond to those in the enacted budget and the government did not produce and publicly issue revised budget estimates or pass a supplementary budget.  The supreme audit institution met international standards of independence, but it did not publish an audit report of the government’s executed budget within a reasonable period.

Comoros’s fiscal transparency would be improved by:

- Publishing the executive budget proposal online and producing an end-of-year report within a reasonable period; and
- Producing a supplemental budget when estimated revenues and expenditures differ significantly from actual figures.

## View report by:

### On This Page

                    -  Government-by-Government Assessments: Comoros 

Tags

Bureau of African AffairsBureau of Economic and Business AffairsComorosDivision for International Finance and Development

Back to Top

                - White House
                - USA.gov
                - Office of the Inspector General
                - Archives
                - Contact Us

follow us
FacebookXInstagramYouTubeFlickrGovDelivery

              - Privacy Policy
              - Accessibility Statement
              - Copyright Information
              - FOIA
              - No FEAR Act

## U.S. Department *of* State

#### The Lessons of 1989: Freedom and Our Future
Exhibit 32.1

   CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 906 OF
                             THE SARBANES- OXLEY ACT


     In conjunction with the annual report of Sharps Compliance Corp. (the
"Company") on Form 10-KSB for the years ended June 30, 2004 and 2003, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Burton J.
Kunik, Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Board 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, to the best of my knowledge that

     (1)  The Form 10-KSB report for the years ended June 30, 2004 and 2003,
          filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on September 20,
          2004, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13 (a) or 15(d)
          of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934; and

     (2)  The information contained in the Form 10-KSB report for the years
          ended June 30, 2004 and 2003 fairly presents, in all material
          respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Sharps
          Compliance Corp.



By: /s/ BURTON J. KUNIK

Burton J. Kunik
Chairman of the Board of Directors
Chief Executive Officer
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

DAVID JONES AND LINDA JONES, 

 

 Appellant,

v.

TRANSPECOS BANK,

 Appellee.

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

No. 08-14-00217-CV

Appeal from the

143rd District Court

of Reeves County, Texas 

(TC# 13-10-20505-CVR)

O R D E R

The Court has reviewed Appellee’s objections to Appellants’ docketing statement. 

Because Appellee requests that the Court act on the objections and order Appellants to amend 

the docketing statement, we have construed the objections as a motion. The purpose of the 

docketing statement is to provide the appellate court with basic information about an appeal 

before the record is filed. The statements made in Appellants’ docketing statement related to 

jurisdiction, the type of relief sought in the appeal, and the nature and finality of the trial court’s 

judgment are not determinative of these issues. Accordingly, the Court overrules Appellee’s 

objections and denies its request for the Court to order Appellants to amend the docketing 

statement.

IT IS SO ORDERED this 20th day of August, 2014.

PER CURIAM

Before McClure, C.J., Rivera and Rodriguez, JJ.
# C_2021422EN.01000101.xml

| 18.10.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 422/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

18.10.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 422/1

---

Last publications of the Court of Justice of the European Union in the Official Journal of the European Union

(2021/C 422/01)

Last publication

OJ C 412, 11.10.2021

Past publications

OJ C 401, 4.10.2021

OJ C 391, 27.9.2021

OJ C 382, 20.9.2021

OJ C 368, 13.9.2021

OJ C 357, 6.9.2021

OJ C 349, 30.8.2021

These texts are available on:

EUR-Lex: http://eur-lex.europa.eu

---
HomeReportsBureau of Economic and Business Affairs2023 Fiscal Transparency Report…Suriname

# 					2023 Fiscal Transparency Report: Suriname 			

Bureau of Economic and Business Affairs

 In this section										

                -  Government-by-Government Assessments: Suriname  

## Government-by-Government Assessments: Suriname 

During the review period, the government made its executive budget proposal and enacted budget easily accessible to the public within a reasonable period, but not its end-of-year report.Information on debt obligations was publicly available, including for the sole state-owned enterprise.The budget included major sources of revenue and expenditure.Actual revenue and expenditures corresponded to those in the enacted budget.The government generally followed internationally accepted accounting principles, but it continued to treat loans as revenue.The supreme audit institution met international standards of independence and audited the entire annual executed budget.The government specified in law or regulation the criteria and procedures for awarding natural resource extraction contracts and licenses but did not appear to follow these procedures in the mining sector specifically.Basic information on natural resource extraction awards was not publicly available for mining sector concessions.The sovereign wealth fund had a sound legal framework.There are no funds in it, however, so there were no sources of funding nor general approach to withdrawals to disclose.

Suriname’s fiscal transparency would be improved by:

-  Making its end-of-year report publicly available within a reasonable period;
-  Fully preparing budget documents according to internationally accepted principles by distinguishing between loans and actual revenues;
-  Following laws and regulations for contracting and licensing in natural resource extraction in practice; and
-  Making information on natural resource extraction awards publicly available.

## View report by:

### On This Page

                    -  Government-by-Government Assessments: Suriname  

Tags

Bureau of Economic and Business AffairsBureau of Western Hemisphere AffairsDivision for International Finance and DevelopmentNicaraguaSuriname

Back to Top

                - White House
                - USA.gov
                - Office of the Inspector General
                - Archives
                - Contact Us

follow us
FacebookTwitterInstagramYouTubeFlickrGovDelivery

              - Privacy Policy
              - Accessibility Statement
              - Copyright Information
              - FOIA
              - No FEAR Act

## U.S. Department *of* State

#### The Lessons of 1989: Freedom and Our Future
#### SOUTHERN SECURITY LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY et al *v.*Betty J. SMITH, Administratrix

76-25

537 S.W. 2d 542

Opinion delivered June 7, 1976

[Rehearing denied July 6, 1976.]

*Davidson, Plastiras & Home, Ltd.,*by: *Allan W. Home, for*appellants.

*Gill, Johnson & Bivens,*by: *Marion S. Gill,*for appellee.

George Rose Smith, Justice.

This action upon two $10,-000 credit life insurance policies is governed by our decisions in *American Pioneer Life Ins. Co.*v. *Smith,*255 Ark. 949, 504 S.W. 2d 356 (1974); *American Pioneer Life Ins. Co.*v. *Turman,*254 Ark. 456, 495 S.W. 2d 866 (1973); *Union Life Ins. Co.*v. *Davis,*247 Ark. 1054, 499 S.W. 2d 192 (1970); and *Life & Cas. Ins. Co.*v. *Smith,*245 Ark. 934, 436 S.W. 2d 97 (1969).

Here, as in the cases cited, the insured signed applications in which he falsely stated that he was in good health. In *854fact, he had suffered a heart attack in 1967, after which he was placed upon a program of medication and was told to carry nitroglycerin tablets with him continuously. In December of 1972 he suffered a second attack, an acute infarction, for which he was hospitalized for two weeks. Upon his discharge he was placed upon a program of limited activity, with nitroglycerin and other medication. The two three-month policies of credit life insurance were issued in connection with the renewal of a bank loan on January 18, 1973, only 30 days after Smith’s hospitalization. He re-entered the hospital five days later as a result of recurrent chest pains. He was discharged on February 5 but died two days later from another acute infarction. There is no doubt that Smith was aware of his affliction.

In effect the appellee argues that we should overrule our recent cases and put credit life insurance in a special category. The argument is that since credit life insurers issue policies for short terms without a physical examination, they should be required to take the borrowers “as they come” and in the aggregate, rather than upon an individual basis. That argument overlooks the fact that the system of credit life insurance presumably enables borrowers who are in fact in good health to obtain such insurance at low premium rates. The appellee’s contention, if accepted, would tend to deprive those borrowers of the economical coverage that the system is meant to provide. Moreover, our controlling decisions are based upon a section of the Insurance Code, which we are not at liberty to disregard. Ark. Stat. Ann. § 66-3208 (Repl. 1966).

Reversed and dismissed.
Docket Number FAA-2014-0490
#### § 1071.304 Settlement.

The applicant and Bureau counsel may agree on a proposed settlement of the award before final action on the application, either in connection with a settlement of the underlying proceeding or after the underlying proceeding has been concluded, in accordance with the Bureau's standard settlement procedures. If a prevailing party and Bureau counsel agree on a proposed settlement of an award before an application has been filed, the application shall be filed with the proposed settlement. If a proposed settlement of an underlying proceeding provides that each side shall bear its own expenses and the settlement is accepted, no application may be filed.
# United States Court of Appeals **For the Eighth Circuit** ___________________________ No. 16-1719 ___________________________ Kenneth L. Smith, Jr. lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellant v. Carolyn W. Colvin, Acting Commissioner of Social Security lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellee ____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri - Cape Girardeau ____________ Submitted: October 5, 2016 Filed: October 11, 2016 [Unpublished] ____________ Before SMITH, BENTON, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges. ____________ PER CURIAM. Kenneth L. Smith, Jr., appeals from th e decision of the district court 1 affirming an administrative law judge’s decision de nying him disability insurance benefits. 1 The Honorable Ronnie L. White, United St ates District Judge for the Eastern District of Missouri.Having carefully reviewed the record befo re us and the parties’ submissions on appeal, we conclude that substantial evid ence on the record as a whole supports the adverse decision. SeeJohnson v. Colvin , 788 F.3d 870, 872 (8th Cir. 2015) (substantial evidence is that which r easonable mind would accept as adequate to support Commissioner’s decision). The judgment of the district court is affirmed. ______________________________

-2-
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2546 Referred in Senate (RFS)]

  1st Session
                                H. R. 2546

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             June 26, 2007

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Veterans' Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
   To designate the Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center in 
   Asheville, North Carolina, as the ``Charles George Department of 
                   Veterans Affairs Medical Center''.

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

SECTION 1. DESIGNATION OF CHARLES GEORGE DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS 
              MEDICAL CENTER.

    (a) Designation.--The Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center 
located at 1100 Tunnel Road, Asheville, North Carolina, shall after the 
date of the enactment of this Act be known and designated as the 
``Charles George Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in any law, regulation, map, 
document, record, or other paper of the United States to the medical 
center referred to in subsection (a) shall be considered to be a 
reference to the Charles George Department of Veterans Affairs Medical 
Center.

            Passed the House of Representatives June 25, 2007.

            Attest:

                                            LORRAINE C. MILLER,

                                                                 Clerk.
```
#### § 70.50 Reduced fare requests.

###### Cross Reference

Link to an amendment published at 88 FR 10037, Feb. 16, 2023.

###### Cross Reference

This amendment was delayed until Feb. 16, 2025, at 88 FR 90120, Dec. 29, 2023.

Printed reduced-fare requests for use by eligible beneficiaries and their attendants when traveling at their own expense to or from any VA facility or VA-authorized facility for authorized VA health care are available from any VA medical facility. Beneficiaries may use these request forms to ask transportation providers, such as bus companies, for a reduced fare. Whether to grant a reduced fare is determined by the transportation provider.

(Authority: 38 U.S.C. 101, 111, 501, 1701, 1714, 1720, 1728, 1782, 1783, E.O. 11302)
<PAGE>
                                                                    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 Sentex Sensing Technology, Inc., (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending August 31, 2002 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Robert S. Kendall, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to
18 U. S. C. (S) 1350, as adopted pursuant to (S) 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
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/ Robert S. Kendall
---------------------

Robert S. Kendall
Chief Executive Officer
October 15, 2002

















                                       14