alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**Exhibit 10.48**

 

**CERTIFICATE OF AWARD**

** **

**E.ON Group Stock Option Program**

** **

**20XX**

**Phantom Option Award**

 

The Management Board of E.ON has awarded

X,XXX phantom options to <Officer Name>, effective

January 1, 20XX with a strike price of €XX.XX to be

converted to US dollars at an exchange rate of

XXXUS dollars per Euro ($XX.XX).

 

Subject to terms and conditions of the E.ON Group Stock Option Program,these phantom options are payable in cash. The value of the phantom options will be based upon the market price ofthe underlying E.ON shares.

 
| /s/ Victor  A. Staffieri |                  |   |
|--------------------------|-----------------------|--------|
| Victor  A. Staffieri     |                  |   |
| Chief  Executive Officer | <Officer  Name> |

 
|   | Original – Employee             |
|--------|--------------------------------------|
|   |                                 |
|   | Signed Copy – Compensation File |

 

----
# EUR-Lex - 32000D0790 - EN

Avis juridique important

*|*

# 32000D0790

**2000/790/EC: Commission Decision of 30 November 2000 amending for the second time Decision 2000/284/EC establishing the list of approved semen collection centres for imports of equine semen from third countries (notified under document number C(2000) 3605) **

*
Official Journal L 314 , 14/12/2000 P. 0032 - 0040 *

Commission Decision

of 30 November 2000

amending for the second time Decision 2000/284/EC establishing the list of approved semen collection centres for imports of equine semen from third countries

(notified under document number C(2000) 3605)

(2000/790/EC)

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Directive 92/65/EEC of 13 July 1992, laying down animal health requirements governing trade in and imports into the Community of animals, semen, ova and embryos not subjected to animal health requirements laid down in specific Community rules referred to in Annex A(I) to Directive 90/425/EEC(1), as last amended by Commission Decision 95/176/EC(2), and in particular Article 17(3)(b) thereof,

Whereas:

(1) Commission Decision 2000/284/EC of 31 March 2000 established the list of approved semen collection centres for imports of equine semen from third countries(3), as last amended by Decision 2000/444/EC(4).

(2) The competent authorities of the United States of America officially informed the Commission of the approval in accordance with the provisions of Directive 92/65/EEC of respectively 13 additional equine semen collection centres. In addition the authorities of the United States of America corrected certain details of the one collection centre included in the Annex to Decision 2000/284/EC.

(3) It is appropriate to amend the list in the light of new information received from the third country concerned, and to highlight the amendments in the Annex for clarity.

(4) The measures provided for in this Decision are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Veterinary Committee,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

The Annex to Decision 2000/284/EC is replaced by the Annex to this Decision.

Article 2

This Decision is addressed to the Member States.

Done at Brussels, 30 November 2000.

For the Commission

David Byrne

Member of the Commission

(1) OJ L 268, 14.9.1992, p. 54.

(2) OJ L 117, 24.5.1995, p. 23.

(3) OJ L 94, 14.4.2000, p. 35.

(4) OJ L 179, 18.7.2000, p. 15.

ANEXO/BILAG/ANHANG/ΠΑΡΑΡΤΗΜΑ/ANNEX/ANNEXE/ALLEGATO/BIJLAGE/ANEXO/LIITE/BILAGA

>TABLE>
The State of TexasAppellee

Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

May 21, 2014

No. 04-14-00307-CR

Thomas Edward KUNKEL,

Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 187th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2014CR1566

Honorable Raymond Angelini, Judge Presiding

ORDER

Defendant pled guilty to stalking and was sentenced within the terms of a plea bargain. 

Defendant timely filed a general notice of appeal. The trial court’s Certification of Defendant’s 

Right of Appeal states this “is a plea-bargain case, and the defendant has NO right of appeal.” 

See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(a)(2). The clerk’s record contains a written plea bargain, and the 

punishment assessed did not exceed the punishment recommended by the prosecutor and agreed 

to by defendant; therefore, the trial court’s certification accurately reflects that defendant’s case 

is a plea bargain case. See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(a)(2).

“In a plea bargain case . . . a defendant may appeal only: (A) those matters that were 

raised by written motion filed and ruled on before trial, or (B) after getting the trial court's 

permission to appeal.” TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(a)(2). The clerk’s record does not contain a written 

motion ruled on before trial nor does it indicate the trial court granted defendant permission to 

appeal. This court must dismiss an appeal “if a certification that shows the defendant has the 

right of appeal has not been made a part of the record.” TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(d).

It is therefore ORDERED this appeal will be dismissed pursuant to Texas Rule of 

Appellate Procedure 25.2(d), unless an amended trial court certification that shows defendant has 

the right of appeal has been made part of the appellate record by June 20, 2014. See Daniels v. 

State, 110 S.W.3d 174 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2003, order); TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(d); 37.1. 
All other appellate deadlines are SUSPENDED pending our resolution of the certification 

issue.

_________________________________

Sandee Bryan Marion, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 21st day of May, 2014.

___________________________________

Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court
#### DOWNEY v ZIER & HACKER

Case No. 89-9805 (CZ)

Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County

August 29, 1989

APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL

Robert and Marguerita Downey, pro se.

Brenda Hacker, for appellees.

OPINION OF THE COURT

DALE ROSS, Circuit Judge.

This Cause comes before this Court on Appellee’s Motion to Dismiss for Failure to File Timely Brief and being fully advised in the premises, this Court herein denies Appellant’s Motion for Extension of Time to File Brief and grants Appellee’s Motion to Dismiss.

The Appellant in this case filed a Notice of Appeal of a County Court decision on April 5, 1989. The Appellant’s initial brief was due on June 15, 1989. However, the Appellant failed to file the brief at said time and neglected to file a Motion for an Extension of Time within the prescribed period. The Appellant filed a belated Motion for Extension of Time on June 26, 1989. On June 29, 1989, Appellant filed its *75brief. Subsequently, on July 10, 1989 Appellee filed a Motion to Dismiss Appeal or to Strike Appellant’s Brief for failure to file the brief before the deadline. Later, Appellant filed a legally insufficient Motion to Supplement Record on Appeal. After a hearing to consider said motion, this Court denied Appellant’s request.

This Court now dismissed this appeal pursuant to Rule 9.410, Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure. Rule 9.410 allows dismissal of proceedings for violations of the procedure rules governing appeals. Appellant’s failure to file an initial brief within 70 days of filing the notice, its failure to file a motion for extension of time within that period, and its failure to provide adequate reasons for the granting of said extension in its belated request, constitutes a violation of Rule 9.110(f). A Court may dismiss an appeal for failure to file a brief. *Seicegood v Florida Department of Transportation,*394 So.2d 1111 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981); *Kerr McGee Chemical Corp. v Lipford,*395 SO.2d 249 (Fla. 1st DCA).

Accordingly, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that this appeal be dismissed.

DONE AND ORDERED at Fort Lauderdale, Broward County, Florida, on this 29th day of August, 1989.
###### Editorial Note on [Part 1926](/current/title-29/part-1926?toc=1)

#### Editorial Notes:

1. At [44 FR 8577](https://www.federalregister.gov/citation/44-FR-8577), Feb. 9, 1979, and corrected at [44 FR 20940](https://www.federalregister.gov/citation/44-FR-20940), Apr. 6, 1979, OSHA reprinted without change the entire text of [29 CFR part 1926](/on/2024-09-19/title-29/part-1926) together with certain General Industry Occupational Safety and Health Standards contained in [29 CFR part 1910](/on/2024-09-19/title-29/part-1910), which have been identified as also applicable to construction work. This republication developed a single set of OSHA regulations for both labor and management forces within the construction industry.

2. Nomenclature changes to part 1926 appear at [84 FR 21597](https://www.federalregister.gov/citation/84-FR-21597), May 14, 2019.

#### § 1926.1082 Procedures during dive.

Note:

The requirements applicable to construction work under this section are identical to those set forth at [§ 1910.422 of this chapter](/on/2024-09-19/title-29/section-1910.422).

[[61 FR 31432](https://www.federalregister.gov/citation/61-FR-31432), June 20, 1996]
###### Editorial Note on [Part 1926](/current/title-29/part-1926?toc=1)

#### Editorial Notes:

1. At [44 FR 8577](https://www.federalregister.gov/citation/44-FR-8577), Feb. 9, 1979, and corrected at [44 FR 20940](https://www.federalregister.gov/citation/44-FR-20940), Apr. 6, 1979, OSHA reprinted without change the entire text of [29 CFR part 1926](/on/2024-09-19/title-29/part-1926) together with certain General Industry Occupational Safety and Health Standards contained in [29 CFR part 1910](/on/2024-09-19/title-29/part-1910), which have been identified as also applicable to construction work. This republication developed a single set of OSHA regulations for both labor and management forces within the construction industry.

2. Nomenclature changes to part 1926 appear at [84 FR 21597](https://www.federalregister.gov/citation/84-FR-21597), May 14, 2019.

#### § 1926.1144 1,2-dibromo-3-chloropropane.

Note:

The requirements applicable to construction work under this section are identical to those set forth at [§ 1910.1044 of this chapter](/on/2024-09-19/title-29/section-1910.1044).

[[61 FR 31434](https://www.federalregister.gov/citation/61-FR-31434), June 20, 1996]
Exhibit 13.2



CERTIFICATION



Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, the undersigned officer of Kyocera
Corporation (the Company) hereby certifies, to such officers knowledge, that the Companys annual report on Form 20-F for the year ended March 31, 2006 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



Dated: June 29, 2006

/s/ Masahiro Umemura


Name:

Masahiro UmemuraTitle:

Vice Chairman and Representative
Director (Principal Financial Officer)




- 1 -
II 

116TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 4833 

To amend title 32, United States Code, to authorize cybersecurity operations 

and missions to protect critical infrastructure by members of the National 

Guard in connection with training or other duty. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

OCTOBER 21 (legislative day, OCTOBER 19), 2020 

Ms. HASSAN (for herself and Mr. CORNYN) introduced the following bill; which 

was read twice and referred to the Committee on Armed Services 

A BILL 

To amend title 32, United States Code, to authorize cybersecurity operations and missions to protect critical infrastructure by members of the National Guard in connection with training or other duty. 

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

3 SECTION 1. CYBERSECURITY OPERATIONS AND MISSIONS 

4 TO PROTECT CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE BY 

5 MEMBERS OF THE NATIONAL GUARD IN CON6 NECTION WITH TRAINING OR OTHER DUTY. 

7 Section 502(f)(1) of title 32, United States Code, is 

8 amended by adding after the flush matter at the end the 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 4833 IS

1 following new sentence: ‘‘Such training or other duty may 

2 include cybersecurity operations or missions undertaken 

3 by the member’s unit at the request of the Governor of 

4 the State concerned to protect critical infrastructure (as 

5 that term is defined in the Critical Infrastructures Protec6 tion Act of 2001 (42 U.S.C. 5195c)).’’. 

Æ 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
#### § 102.32 Payment of witness fees and mileage; fees of officer who transcribes deposition or video testimony.

Witnesses summoned before the Administrative Law Judge must be paid the same fees and mileage that are paid witnesses in the courts of the United States, and witnesses whose depositions are taken or who testify by videoconference and the officer who transcribes the testimony shall severally be entitled to the same fees as are paid for like services in the courts of the United States, and those fees shall be paid by the party at whose instance the deposition is taken.

[82 FR 43696, Sept. 19, 2017]
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 Energy

###### Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

          - [Docket No. RP97-29-004]

Take notice that on May 2, 2000, Panhandle Eastern Pipe Line Company (Panhandle) tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, First Revised Volume No. 1, Second Revised Sheet No. 273 and First Revised Sheet No. 273A, to be effective June 2, 2000.

Panhandle asserts that the purpose of this filing is to comply with the Commission's Order on Remand issued on April 12, 2000 in Docket No. RP97-29-003 (April 12 Order), 91 FERC ¶61,037, to reflect modifications to Section 13 of the General Terms and Conditions, Policy For Construction on New Receipt or Delivery Facilities. The April 12 Order affirms previous orders in the subject proceeding in which the Commission accepted Panhandle's interconnect policy as stated on tariff sheets filed on April 21, 1997. The April 12 Order also requires Panhandle to conform its interconnect policy as necessary to reflect the five conditions in the Commission's new interconnect policy as announced in the April 12 Order.

Panhandle states that copies of this filing are being served on all affected customers, applicable state regulatory agencies and parties to this proceeding.

                    Any person desiring to protest this filing should file a protest with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE, Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Section 385.211 of the Commission's Rules and Regulations. All such protests must be filed as provided in Section 154.210 of                           ( print page 31158)                        the Commission's Regulations. Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceedings. Copies of this filing are on file with the Commission and are available for public inspection in the Public Reference Room. This filing may be viewed on the web at http://www.ferc.fed.us/​online/​rims.htm (call 202-208-2222 for assistance).                

David P. Boergers,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 00-12265 Filed 5-15-00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
Comment Info: =================

General Comment:? U.S. DOT/FAA - Notice of proposed rulemaking
United States Court of Appeals

For the Eighth Circuit

___________________________

No. 17-3795

___________________________

United States of America

lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee

v.

Isaias Perez

lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant

____________

Appeal from United States District Court 

for the Northern District of Iowa - Sioux City

____________

Submitted: July 2, 2018

Filed: July 9, 2018

[Unpublished]

____________

Before SHEPHERD, ERICKSON, and STRAS, Circuit Judges.

____________

PER CURIAM.

The district court imposed an above-Guidelines-range sentence upon Isaias 1

Perez, who violated the conditions of his supervised release. Counsel seeks

The Honorable Mark W. Bennett, United States District Judge for the

1

Northern District of Iowa.
permission to withdraw, and has filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S.

738 (1967), challenging the reasonableness of Perez’s sentence. We affirm.

After careful review, we conclude that the district court did not abuse its

discretion in imposing a sentence above the Guidelines range. See United States v.

Miller, 557 F.3d 910, 915-18 (8th Cir. 2009) (applying a deferential

abuse-of-discretion standard to the evaluation of a revocation sentence). The record

reflects that the 36-month prison sentence and 8-year termofsupervised release were

within the relevant statutory maximums, see 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e)(3) (providing for

a maximum prison term of 5 years if the underlying offense is a Class A felony); cf.

United States v. Aguayo-Delgado, 220 F.3d 926, 933 (8th Cir. 2000) (explaining that

the maximum period ofsupervised release for a violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(b)(1)(C)

is life), and the court carefully considered and discussed the relevant section 3553(a)

factors, see United States v. White Face, 383 F.3d 733, 740 (8th Cir. 2004). 

Accordingly, we grant counsel leave to withdraw, and affirmthe district court’s

judgment.

______________________________

-2-
|        |        |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                |
|--------|--------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   | 1.     | Lexicon's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2010, and to which this Certification is attached as Exhibit 32.1 (the “Periodic Report”), fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and |
|   |   |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           |
|   | 2.     | The information contained in the Periodic Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Lexicon.                                                                                                                                      |

|        |        |                                       |
|--------|--------|---------------------------------------|
|   | By:    | /s/ Arthur T. Sands                   |
|   |   | Arthur T. Sands, M.D., Ph.D.          |
|   |   | President and Chief Executive Officer |

|        |        |                                                                             |
|--------|--------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   | By:    | /s/ Jeffrey L. Wade                                                         |
|   |   | Jeffrey L. Wade                                                             |
|   |   | Executive Vice President, Corporate Development and Chief Financial Officer |
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 95 (Tuesday, May 16, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 31197]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-12301]



[[Page 31197]]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION


Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards, Meeting of the 
Subcommittee on Reliability and Probabilistic Risk Assessment; Revised

    The meeting of the ACRS Subcommittee on Reliability and 
Probabilistic Risk Assessment scheduled for May 19, 2000 has been 
rescheduled for Wednesday, June 28 and Thursday, June 29, 2000 at 8:30 
a.m. until the conclusion of business, in Room T-2B3, 11545 Rockville 
Pike, Rockville, Maryland. On June 28, 2000, the Subcommittee will 
discuss the proposed final ASME Standard for PRA quality. On June 29, 
2000, the Subcommittee will discuss the status of risk-informed 
revisions to 10 CFR Part 50, including proposed revision to 10 CFR 
50.44 concerning combustible gas control systems, issues in the Nuclear 
Energy Institute letter dated January 19, 2000 (Option 3), and the 
public comments related to the Advance Notice of Public Rulemaking on 
10 CFR 50.69 and Appendix T (Option 2) and associated plans and 
schedules. All other items pertaining to this meeting remain the same 
as published in the Federal Register on Monday, May 8, 2000 (65 FR 
26644).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Michael T. Markley, cognizant ACRS 
staff engineer (telephone 301/415-6885) between 7:30 a.m. and 4:15 p.m. 
(EDT).

    Dated: May 10, 2000.
Howard J. Larson,
Acting Associate Director for Technical Support, ACRS/ACNW.
[FR Doc. 00-12301 Filed 5-15-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
#### § 1472.301 [Reserved]