alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 1650.104 Definitions. For the purpose of this subpart, terms are defined as follows: ( a ) *Agency* means: ( 1 ) An Executive agency as defined in section 105 of title 5, United States Code, including the U.S. Postal Service and the U.S. Postal Rate Commission;
( 2 ) A military department as defined in section 102 of title 5, United States Code;
( 3 ) An agency or court in the judicial branch, including a court as defined in section 610 of title 28, United States Code, the District Court for the Northern Mariana Islands, and the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation;
( 4 ) An agency of the legislative branch, including the U.S. Senate and the U.S. House of Representatives; and
( 5 ) Other independent establishments that are entities of the Federal Government.
( b ) *Commission* means those officers, employees, and agents of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission who are responsible for debt collection activities.
( c ) *Debt* means money owed by an employee of the Federal Government to an agency of the Federal Government, including direct loans, loans insured or guaranteed by the United States and all other amounts due the Government from fees, leases, rents, royalties, services, sales of real or personal property, overpayments, penalties, damages, interest, fines and forfeitures (except those arising under the Uniform Code of Military Justice), erroneous salary payments, and all other similar amounts owing to the Federal Government.
( d ) *Disposable pay* means that part of current basic pay, special pay, incentive pay, retired pay, retainer pay, or, in the case of an employee not entitled to basic pay, other authorized pay remaining after the deduction of any amount required by law to be withheld. Deductions described in 5 CFR 581.105(b) through (f) will be used to determine disposable pay subject to salary offset.
( e ) *Employee* means a current employee of an agency, including a current member of the Armed Forces or a Reserve of the Armed Forces (Reserves).
( f ) *Salary Offset* means the collection of a debt under 5 U.S.C. 5514 by deduction(s) at one or more officially established pay intervals from the current pay account of an employee without his or her consent.
#### WOOTEN v. THE STATE.

(Decided December 19, 1916.)

Appeal from Jefferson Criminal Court.

Heard before Hon. A. H. Alston.

No counsel marked for appellant.

W. L. Martin, Attorney General, for the State.

Per curiam.

Appeal dismissed for failure to file transcript in time.
#### Cora A. Countryman, Respondent, *v.*Donald H. Breen, Appellant.

Argued March 22, 1937;

decided April 27, 1937.

*472
      *Francis E. Cullen*for appellant.

*Loren E. Harter*and *Daniel Scanlon*for respondent.

Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion.

Concur: Crane, Ch. J., Lehman, O’Brien, Hijbbs, Loughran, Finch and Rippey, JJ.
§ 29.62 Rejected takeoff: Category A. The rejected takeoff distance and procedures for each condition where takeoff is approved will be established with— ( a ) The takeoff path requirements of §§ 29.59 and 29.60 being used up to the TDP where the critical engine failure is recognized and the rotorcraft is landed and brought to a complete stop on the takeoff surface;
( b ) The remaining engines operating within approved limits;
( c ) The landing gear remaining extended throughout the entire rejected takeoff; and
( d ) The use of only the primary controls until the rotorcraft is on the ground. Secondary controls located on the primary control may not be used until the rotorcraft is on the ground. Means other than wheel brakes may be used to stop the rotorcraft if the means are safe and reliable and consistent results can be expected under normal operating conditions.
[Doc. No. 24802, 61 FR 21899, May 10, 1996, as amended by Amdt. 29-44, 64 FR 45337, Aug. 19, 1999]
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

MEMORANDUM OPINION

No. 04-19-00700-CV

IN RE IMPLICITY MANAGEMENT COMPANY

Original Mandamus Proceeding1

PER CURIAM

Sitting: Sandee Bryan Marion, Chief Justice

Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice

Irene Rios, Justice

Delivered and Filed: December 11, 2019

PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS DENIED

On October 10, 2019, relator filed a petition for writ of mandamus. Relator also filed a 

motion for stay of the underlying proceedings pending final resolution of the petition for writ of 

mandamus, which this court granted on October 23, 2019. The real party in interest responded 

and relator replied. After considering the petition, response, reply, and the record, this court 

concludes relator is not entitled to the relief sought. Accordingly, the petition for writ of 

mandamus is denied. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.8(a). The stay imposed on October 23, 2019 is lifted. 

PER CURIAM

 1 This proceeding arises out of Cause No. 2016CI11019, styled Implicity Management Company v. American Risk 

Insurance Co., Inc., pending in the 224th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas, the Honorable Cathleen M. 

Stryker presiding.
AALE6AL 8179634959 03/17 '10 08:10 NO.812 02/03 

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION 

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION, 

Complainant 

V. 

AMERICAN EAGLE AIRLINES, INC., 

Respondent 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

FAA CivU Penalty 2007SW210377 

and 2007SW210393 

FAA Docket No.CP09SW0007 

Administrative Law Judge 

Hon. Richard C. Goodwin e; 

'~d> 

CD 

March 17,2010 "^^ 

REQUEST TO WITHDRAW THE REQUEST FOR A HEARING 

AND THE ANSWER TO THE COMPLAIIVT : g 

PiiTsuant to §13.215, the Respondent, by counsel. Requests to Withdraw the Request for a 

Hearing and the Answer to the Complaint canceling any hearing set for this matter. The basis of 

this motion is that the Administrator and Respondent, through counsel, have reached a 

settlement. 

Respectfully submitted the 17th day of March 2010. 

American Eagle Airlines, Inc. 

Francis C. Heil 

Senior Attorney for 

American Eagle Airlines, Inc. 

P.O. Box 619616 

Mail Drop 5675 

DFW Airport, TX 75261-9616 

Telephone: 202-496-5642 

Facsimile: 202-496-5660 
AALEGAL 8179634959 03/17 '10 08:10 NO.812 03/03 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I hereby certify that today, March 17, 2010,1 have sent by Facsimile and U.S. Mail the 

foregoing Motion to Withdraw the Request for a Hearing and the Answer to the Complaint in the 

matter of FAA v. American Eagle Airlines, Inc., to the following: 

ONE COPY 

The Honorable Richard C. Goodwin 

Administrative Law Judge 

Department of Transportation, Rm. £12-320 

Office of Hearings, M-20 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE 

Washington, DC 20590 

Telephone: 202-366-2139 

Facsimile: 202-366-7536 

Rena Price, Attorney 

Federal Aviation Administration 

Office of the Regional Counsel (ASW-7) 

Southwest Region Headquarters 

2601 Meacham Blvd., Rm. 663 

Fort Worth, Texas 76137 

Telephone: 817-222-5068 

Facsimile: 817-222-5945 

ORIGINAL & ONE COPY 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue, SW 

Washington, DC 20591 

Attn: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Wilbur Wright Building, Suite 2W1000 

Facsimile: 202-493-5142 

Madeleine Hunter for 

American Eagle Airlines, Inc. 

Telephone: 817-967-1237 

Facsimile: 817-967-2937
# EUR-Lex - 31997F0719(02) - EN

Avis juridique important

*|*

# 31997F0719(02)

**Council Act of 19 June 1997 drawing up the Second Protocol of the Convention on the protection of the European Communities' financial interests **

*
Official Journal C 221 , 19/07/1997 P. 0011 - 0011 *

COUNCIL ACT of 19 June 1997 drawing up the Second Protocol of the Convention on the protection of the European Communities' financial interests (97/C 221/02)

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on European Union, and in particular Article K.3 (2) (c) thereof,

Whereas, for the purposes of achieving the objectives of the Union, the Member States regard the combating of crime damaging the European Communities' financial interests as a matter of common interest coming under the cooperation provided for in Title VI of the Treaty;

Whereas by its Act of 26 July 1995 (1) the Council drew up, as a first agreement, the Convention on the protection of the Communities' financial interests which is intended more specifically to combat fraud that damages those interests;

Whereas by its Act of 27 September 1996 (2) the Council drew up, as a second stage, a protocol to the Convention directed in particular at acts of corruption that involve national and Community officials and damage or are likely to damage the European Communities' financial interests;

Whereas the Convention needs to be further supplemented by a second protocol directed in particular at the liability of legal persons, confiscation, money laundering and the cooperation between the Member States and the Commission for the purpose of protecting the European Communities' financial interests and protecting personal data related thereto;

DECIDES that the Second Protocol, the text of which is set out in the Annex hereto and which is signed today by the Representatives of the Governments of the Member States of the Union, is hereby drawn up;

RECOMMENDS that it be adopted by the Member States in accordance with their respective constitutional requirements.

Done at Luxembourg, 19 June 1997.

For the Council

The President

M. DE BOER

(1) OJ No C 316, 27. 11. 1995, p. 48.

(2) OJ No C 313, 23. 10. 1996, p. 1.
August 6, 2015

Mr. Jordan Mann

1193 County Road K

Mead, NE 68046

Dear Mr. Mann:

This letter is to inform you that we are unable to process your petition for an exemption from 

§ xx.xx of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR). 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 received your May 28, filed in Docket No. FAA-2015-1808, but we are unable to process 

your request any further. Your petition 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.
2

For more detailed information relating to submitting petitions for exemption, please visit 

http://aes.faa.gov/petition/index.html. This website helps the petitioner to meet Federal 

Aviation Administration (FAA) requirements outlines in § 11.81 and helps answer any 

questions you may have.

What You Should Do

If you want us to process your request any further, you must submit the requested information 

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. 

If We Do Not Hear From You

If we do not receive the information, we will close the docket without notifying you further. If

you have any questions you may call the 333 Information Line (202) 267-2999.

Sincerely,

/s/

Brittany Newton

Program Analyst, Airmen and

 Airspace Rules Division

Enclosure
3
§ 1910.242 Hand and portable powered tools and equipment, general. ( a ) *General requirements.* Each employer shall be responsible for the safe condition of tools and equipment used by employees, including tools and equipment which may be furnished by employees.
( b ) *Compressed air used for cleaning.* Compressed air shall not be used for cleaning purposes except where reduced to less than 30 p.s.i. and then only with effective chip guarding and personal protective equipment.
§ 1911.16 Powers of presiding officer. The officer presiding at a hearing shall have all the powers necessary or appropriate to conduct a fair and full hearing, including the powers: ( a ) To regulate the course of the proceedings;
( b ) To dispose of procedural requests, objections, and comparable matters;
( c ) To confine the presentations to the issues specified in the notice of hearing, or, where no issues are specified, to matters pertinent to the proposed rule;
( d ) To regulate the conduct of those present at the hearing by appropriate means;
( e ) In his discretion, to permit cross- examination of any witness;
( f ) To take official notice of material facts not appearing in the evidence in the record, so long as parties are entitled, on timely request, to an opportunity to show the contrary; and
( g ) In his discretion, to keep the record open for a reasonable, stated time to receive written recommendations, and supporting reasons, and additional data, views, and arguments from any person who has participated in the oral proceeding.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                           7,343
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      135
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 7,654
<PP&E>                                          69,451
<DEPRECIATION>                                  18,675
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  62,512
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           10,588
<BONDS>                                         44,767
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                            2,889
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         4,052
<OTHER-SE>                                     (4,270)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    62,512
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                13,338
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    4,797
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               2,878
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  1,662
<INCOME-TAX>                                     1,704
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              (141)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (141)
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.22
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.21


</TABLE>
EXHIBIT
32.1






CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO


SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


(18
U.S.C. SECTION 1350)




Pursuant
to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of
section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code), the undersigned
officer of FTS Group, Inc., a Nevada corporation (the “Company”), does hereby
certify, to such officer's knowledge, that:




The
Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2007 (the “Form
10-K”) of the Company fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and the information contained in
the Form 10-K fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition
and results of operations of the Company.






Date:
      April 15, 2008
            
            By:
            /s/
      Scott GallagherScott
      GallagherChief
      Executive Officer, Interim Chief Financial Officer and Principal
      Accounting Officer
#### § 1471.355 What information must I provide to a higher tier participant before entering into a covered transaction with that participant?

Before you enter into a covered transaction with a person at the next higher tier, you as a lower tier participant must notify that person if you know that you or any of the principals are presently excluded or disqualified.
Dolan Chemical Laboratory

4001 Bixby Road

Groveport, OH 43125

T: 614-836-4221, Audinet 210-4221

F: 614-836-4168, Audinet 210-4168

http://aepenv/labs

Water Analysis

Form REP-702

Rev. 0, 4/2012

Location: Mountaineer Plant Report Date: 10/30/2012

Sample Number: 124621-001 Date Collected: 10/24/2012 08:00 Date Received: 10/24/2012

CPS Effluent 

Parameter Result Units RL MDL Analysis By Analysis Date/Time Method

Selenium, Se 432 ug/L 0.5 0.1 DPC 10/30/2012 10:21 EPA 200.8

Bromide, Br 23.9 mg/L 5 1 CRJ 10/26/2012 EPA 300.1

Chloride, Cl 2990 mg/L 20 5 CRJ 10/26/2012 EPA 300.1

Fluoride, F 54.4 mg/L 1 0.2 CRJ 10/26/2012 EPA 300.1

Sulfate, SO4 5530 mg/L 100 30 CRJ 10/26/2012 EPA 300.1

THIS TEST REPORT RELATES ONLY TO THE ITEMS TESTED AND SHALL NOT BE REPRODUCED EXCEPT IN FULL WITHOUT WRITTEN 

APPROVAL OF THE LABORATORY. ALL TEST RESULTS MEET ALL OF THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE ACCREDITING AUTHORITY, 

UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.

Brian Snyder, Chemist II

Email bssnyder@aep.com Tel. 614-836-4224

Fax 614-836-4168 Audinet 210-4224

Mountaineer Plant, 124621 Page 1 of 1
# EUR-Lex - 31998D0144 - EN

Avis juridique important

*|*

# 31998D0144

**98/144/EC: Commission Decision of 3 February 1998 amending Commission Decision 88/566/EEC listing the products referred to in the second subparagraph of Article 3(1) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1898/87 as a result of the accession of Austria, Finland and Sweden **

*
Official Journal L 042 , 14/02/1998 P. 0061 - 0062 *

COMMISSION DECISION of 3 February 1998 amending Commission Decision 88/566/EEC listing the products referred to in the second subparagraph of Article 3(1) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1898/87 as a result of the accession of Austria, Finland and Sweden (98/144/EC)

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 1898/87 of 2 July 1987 on the protection of designations used in marketing of milk and milk products (1) as last amended by the Act of Accession of Austria, Finland and Sweden, and in particular Article 4(2)(b) thereof,

Whereas Regulation (EEC) No 1898/87 establishes the principle that the descriptions 'milk` and 'milk products` may not be used for milk products other than those described in Article 2 thereof; whereas, as an exception, in accordance with the second subparagraph of Article 3(1) of that Regulation, this principle is not applicable to the designation of products the exact nature of which is known because of traditional use and/or when the designations are clearly used to describe a characteristic quality of the product;

Whereas Commission Decision 88/566/EEC of 28 October 1988 (2) lists the products which benefit from this exception;

Whereas, following the accession to the European Union of Austria, Finland and Sweden, the new Member States submitted lists of the products which they deem to meet, within their own territories, the criteria for the abovementioned exception; whereas the Annex to Decision 88/566/EEC should be completed by including the names of the products from the new Member States, in the relevant languages, which can benefit from the exception;

Whereas the measures provided for in this Decision are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Milk and Milk Products,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

The Annex of Decision 88/566/EEC is amended as follows:

1. the products listed in point 1 of the Annex to this Decision are added to section II;

2. the new sections X and XI set out in point 2 of the Annex to this Decision are added.

Article 2

This Decision is addressed to the Member States.

Done at Brussels, 3 February 1998.

For the Commission

Franz FISCHLER

Member of the Commission

(1) OJ L 182, 3. 7. 1987, p. 36.

(2) OJ L 310, 16. 11. 1988, p. 32.

ANEXO - BILAG - ANHANG - ÐÁÑÁÑÔÇÌÁ - ANNEX - ANNEXE - ALLEGATO - BIJLAGE - ANEXO - LIITE - BILAGA

1. 'Butterhäuptel

Butterschnitzel

Faschiertes Butterschnitzel

Milchmargarine

Magarinestreichkäse`

2. 'X

Jordnötssmör

Kakaosmör

Smörsopp

Kokosmjölk

Ostkex

Magarinost

Smördeg

XI

Kaakaovoi

Maapähkinävoi

Voileipäkeksi

Voitatti

Voileipäkakku`
#### GIBSON v. THE STATE.

(Decided January 30, 1917.)

Appeal from Coffee Circuit Court.

Heard before Hon. A. B. Foster.

No counsel marked for appellant.

W. L. Martin, Attorney General, for the State.

Bricken, J.

No bill of exceptions and no error of record. Affirmed.
##### 



Exhibit 10.14
 LANCE, INC.
2005 EMPLOYEE STOCK PURCHASE PLAN
(Amended and Restated effective January 1, 2007)
 Establishment of Plan
 Purpose
 Available Shares
 Eligibility
 Participation




---



##### 



Employee Contribution
  Employer Contribution
 The Agent.
 Initiation of Participation in the Plan
 Stock Purchases
 2




---



##### 



,
 Agents Custody of Stock
  Participants Rights in the Stock
  Expenses
  3




---



##### 



Reports to Participants
 Withdrawal From Plan
     4




---



##### 



Determination of Market Value and Withdrawal Date
  Retirement, Death or Termination of Employment
 Administration of the Plan
 Amendment and Termination of the Plan
  5




---



##### 



Risk of Stock Ownership
 Liability of Company and Agent
 Tax Consequences
 Nonassignability; Sale of Stock Other Than by Withdrawal
   6




---



##### 



Notices
 th
  
  Effective Date; Coordination With Prior Plan
 7
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

EASTERN DISTRICT

**KENNETH SAXTON, REAL PARTY IN**

**INTEREST AND IN BEHALF OF ENS LEGIS: KENNETH SAXTON,** 

**Petitioner**

**v.**

**JUDGES OF THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, PHILADELPHIA COUNTY, PA,** 

**ASSIGNED TO PETITION FOR WRIT OF**

**HABEAS CORPUS RE OCTOBER TERM 1980, NOS. 761, 764 & 765,** 

**Respondents :** 

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**: No. 132 EM 2014** 

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW **, this 21 st**  **day of October, 2014, the Application for Leave to F ile** 

**Original Process is** GRANTED **, and the Petition for Writ of Mandamus and/or**

**Extraordinary Relief is** DENIED

**.**