alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 23.530 Referral to Chief Administrative Law Judge; amendment of pleadings. ( a ) Upon receipt of a timely request for a hearing under § 23.510 (where the Administrator has determined that relevant facts are in dispute) or § 23.520 (debarment), the Administrator shall refer the case to the Chief Administrative Law Judge by Order of Reference, to which shall be attached a copy of the investigative findings letter from the Administrator and response thereto, for designation of an Administrative Law Judge to conduct such hearings as may be necessary to decide the disputed matters. A copy of the Order of Reference and attachments thereto shall be served upon the respondent. The investigative findings letter from the Administrator and response thereto shall be given the effect of a complaint and answer, respectively, for purposes of the administrative proceedings.
( b ) At any time prior to the closing of the hearing record, the complaint (investigative findings letter) or answer (response) may be amended with the permission of the Administrative Law Judge and upon such terms as he/she may approve. For proceedings pursuant to § 23.510, such an amendment may include a statement that debarment action is warranted under § 23.520. Such amendments shall be allowed when justice and the presentation of the merits are served thereby, provided there is no prejudice to the objecting party's presentation on the merits. When issues not raised by the pleadings are reasonably within the scope of the original complaint and are tried by express or implied consent of the parties, they shall be treated in all respects as if they had been raised in the pleadings, and such amendments may be made as necessary to make them conform to the evidence. The presiding Administrative Law Judge may, upon reasonable notice and upon such terms as are just, permit supplemental pleadings setting forth transactions, occurrences or events which have happened since the date of the pleadings and which are relevant to any of the issues involved. A continuance in the hearing may be granted or the record left open to enable the new allegations to be addressed.
OF THE INTERIOR
TES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY

MORIZONTAL SCALE ____________ | 63,360

WERTICAL SCALE ON RECONNAISSANTE PROFILES AS SHOWN
~~ CONTOUR INTERVAL _____________ 20 GAMMA

a ail

i oapl : Pa { "Ball . ae
4 ' x ’ th
165°00'
2 jo
gs |g &
g
8
s
| )
r ~ )
y
. |
|
|
|
~ | 1
|
|
3
|
~
=
|
g
2
= |
. | |
|
4 -
|
|
|
_ -
* : ;
|
° IN
|
_APPROXIMATE LIMIT OF SURVEY
164°00
_ - AIRBORNE GEOPHYSICAL SURVEYS IN SEWEZ
t+—SERPENTINE HOT SPRINGS
cae : AREA
see NN KOUGAROK: | °°" .
AREA © :
5 ; | {o) t is 3 4
Ne ls as F { E { i bo
166° 30° { 63°30" .
65e1s + 65° 15°
\' INDEX MAP SHOWING DETAILED LOCATION OF 1969
op 4 AIRBORNE GEOPHYSICAL SURVEYS IN SEWARD i
di \ i. PENINSULA, 1968.~ COVERAGE CONFINED TO 7 . ‘
eacas'b ‘Sf eaeas’ AREAS OUTLINED BY DASHED LINES» PLUS ,
AREA ' LETTERED PROFILES .
it “323 a — |
uo |
e+e is: NOME BEACH AREA| eaein’ |
166°30' 9,10, 1] 165°00" 163°30
#### BYKOWSKI v STATE

Ohio Appeals, 8th Dist, Cuyahoga Co

No. 10413.

Decided January 20, 1930

Mr. Moses H. Dixon, Cleveland, for Bykowski.

Mr. Fred W. Garmore, for State.

VICKERY, PJ.

Taking the whole record into consideration we think that the evidence justified the conviction and that there is no error appearing that would warrant us in disturbing the judgment of the municipal court.

Levine, J., concurs. Sullivan, J., not participating.
March 2 4 , 201 5

Docket FAA

- 2001

- 8762 Docket Management Facility US Department of Transportation 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE West Building Ground Floor

Room W12

- 140 Washington, DC 20590

RE: Exemption No. 10248 : R equest for Extension of Exemption

De ar Sir or Madam:

The Regional Airline Association (“ RAA”), on behalf of its member airlines

, petitions pursuant to

Section s 11.61 and 11.63 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (“FARs”) for an extension of Exemption No. 10248

at Docket No. FAA

- 2001

- 8762. This exemption is scheduled to expire on April 30, 201 5

.

Subject to certain conditions and limitations, Exemption No. 10248 provides relief from § 91.203 of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) by permitting RAA member airlines to temporarily operate certain U.S.

- registered aircraft in domestic airline operations without the airworthiness certificate or certificate of aircraft registration, or both, onboard the aircraft.

The conditions and reasons relative to public interest and safety that f ormed the basis for granting the original exemption have not changed and granting the requested relief will not set precedent

. For these reasons, RAA s ubmits that a findin g of good cause exists for waiving publication in the Federal Register.

Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions or require additional information.

Respectfully submitted,

Stacey Bechdolt

Vi ce President , Safety & Op erations Regulatory Counsel Regional Airline Association2025 M Street, NW, Suite 800 Washington, DC 20036

202

- 367

- 1252 Bechdolt@raa.org
[No. 20760-9-III.

Division Three.

November 21, 2002.]

#### The State of Washington, *Respondent,*v. Christopher David Briskey, *Appellant.*

Appeal from a judgment *of*the Superior Court for Yakima County, No. 00-1-01603-0, Michael W. Leavitt, J., entered December 6, 2001. *Affirmed*by unpublished opinion per Schultheis, J., concurred in by Kato, A.C. J., and Sweeney, J.
<PAGE>   1






                                                                    Exhibit 21


                           LANCASTER COLONY CORPORATION
                      SIGNIFICANT SUBSIDIARIES OF REGISTRANT
                      --------------------------------------


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                   State             Percent Of
       Name                                  Of Incorporation         Ownership
       ----                                  ----------------         ---------
<S>                                             <C>                      <C>
Colony Printing & Labeling, Inc.                 Indiana                  100%
Dee Zee, Inc.                                    Ohio                     100%
Fostoria Glass, LLC                              Ohio                     100%
Indiana Glass Company                            Indiana                  100%
LRV Acquisition Corp.                            Ohio                     100%
LaGrange Molded Products, Inc.                   Delaware                 100%
Lancaster Colony Commercial
 Products, Inc.                                  Ohio                     100%
Lancaster Glass Corporation                      Ohio                     100%
New York Frozen Foods, Inc.                      Ohio                     100%
Pretty Products, Inc.                            Ohio                     100%
T. Marzetti Company                              Ohio                     100%
The Quality Bakery Company, Inc.                 Ohio                     100%
Reames Foods, Inc.                               Iowa                     100%
Waycross Molded Products, Inc.                   Ohio                     100%
</TABLE>


All subsidiaries conduct their business under the names shown.
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Con. Res. 20 Engrossed in Senate (ES)]

  1st Session
S. CON. RES. 20

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Whereas under Article II, Section 2, of the Constitution of the United States, 
        the President is the ``commander in chief of the Army and Navy of the 
        United States'', and in such capacity the President has the command of 
        the Armed Forces, including the authority to deploy troops and direct 
        military campaigns during wartime;
Whereas under Article I, Section 8, of the Constitution of the United States, 
        Congress has the power of the purse specifically as it relates to the 
        Armed Forces, and in such capacity Congress has the responsibility to 
        fully and adequately provide funding for United States military forces, 
        especially when they are at war and are defending the Nation; and
Whereas when United States military forces are in harm's way and are protecting 
        our country, Congress and the Nation should give them all the support 
        they need in order to maintain their safety and accomplish their 
        assigned missions, including the equipment, logistics, and funding 
        necessary to ensure their safety and effectiveness, and such support is 
        the responsibility of both the Executive Branch and the Legislative 
        Branch of Government: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives concurring), 
That it is the sense of Congress that Congress should not take any 
action that will endanger United States military forces in the field, 
including the elimination or reduction of funds for troops in the 
field, as such action with respect to funding would undermine their 
safety or harm their effectiveness in pursuing their assigned missions.

            Passed the Senate March 15, 2007.

            Attest:

                                                             Secretary.
110th CONGRESS

  1st Session

                            S. CON. RES. 20

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

  Expressing the sense of Congress that no funds should be cut off or 
    reduced for American troops in the field which would result in 
 undermining their safety or their ability to complete their assigned 
                               missions.
```
**Exhibit 31.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION**

 

I, Dan W. Snyder, certify that:

 

1.          I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of Kenilworth Systems Corporation;

 

2.          Based on my knowledge, this annual report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements are made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this annual report;

 

3.          Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this annual report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this annual report;

 

4.          The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I am responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

 

a)             Designed such disclosure controls and procedures or caused such disclosure controls to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this annual report is being prepared;

 

b)            Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

 

c)             Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and

 

5.          The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

 

a)             All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

 

b)            Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.

 
| Date:    March 30, 2011 | By:    | /s/   Dan W. Snyder       |
|-----------------------------------|--------|---------------------------|
|                              |   | Chief   Executive Officer |

 

1

----
H î"

H

î"

H

î

"

H

H

îî"

"

H î "

H î "

H

H H

H

H

H

î

î

î î

î

î

"

" "

"

"

"

H

î

"

Hî "

H î "

H

î

"

H î

"

H

î

"

850

800

850

850

800

850

900

900

750

700

850

900

850

900

900

900

900

850

850

850

850

850

850

850

850

800

900

900

900

900

800

850

900

850

900

900

900

900

900

900

900

900

800

750

800

900

900

800

900

750

900

800

750

800

800

800

850

800

900

FM-649 RANCH ROAD 649

CASA BLANCA RANCH RD

ZAPATA CO

WEBB CO

Z

A

P

AT

A

C

O

JIM

H

O

G

G

C

O

WEBB CO

JIM HOGG CO

Arro

yo

Grande

Agua Azul Cr

Albercas Cr

Albercas Cr

Albercas

de

San

Felipe

Spring

Glen Oil Field

Quien Sabe Oil Field

Albercas Ranch

San Jose Ranch

Chargos

Creek

Agua Azul

Creek East

Thompsonville

Bruni Mirando

City Oilton

Armstrong

Ranch

Albercas

Ranch

Bruni

SE

17'

30

30

55'

30

20'

18

57'

98°

98°

5

000

52'

52'

30

27° 30" 5

17'

020

15' 15'

17

99°

22' 5

16

E

18

27°

30"

17

17

11

23

16

15

08

00'

27

30"

30

000m

000m

5

09

15

03

30

30

30

30

30

30"

21

24

5

000

25

20

06 09

E

30

5

30"

01 5

20'

5 27°

5

24

08 12

5

N

990

02

00'

30

16

10 5

30

06

30

27°

22' 03

19

000m

FEET

30

FEET

99°

30 000m

10

23

000

5

30

26

55'

02

000

01 FEET 07

05

FEET

5

830

860

5

30

30

30"

07 11

30

57'

5

5

22

5 5

30"

5

27

30"

19

30

12

30

26

30

5 05

21

5

30

30

5

30

22

20

N

25

TEXAS

ADJOINING 7.5' QUADRANGLES

QUADRANGLE LOCATION

ALBERCAS RANCH QUADRANGLE

TEXAS

7.5-MINUTE SERIES

ALBERCAS RANCH, TX

2013

Interstate Route State Route

ROAD CLASSIFICATION

Ramp 4WD

US Route Local Road

WX Interstate Route /. US Route H State Route

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

U. S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY

Imagery..................................................NAIP, April 2010

Roads..............................................©2006-2012 TomTom

Names..........................................................GNIS, 2012

Hydrography....................National Hydrography Dataset, 2010

Contours............................National Elevation Dataset, 2004

Boundaries....................Census, IBWC, IBC, USGS, 1972 - 2012

North American Datum of 1983 (NAD83)

World Geodetic System of 1984 (WGS84). Projection and

1 000-meter grid: Universal Transverse Mercator, Zone 14R

Produced by the United States Geological Survey

10 000-foot ticks: Texas Coordinate System of 1983 (south zone)

This map was produced to conform with the

National Geospatial Program US Topo Product Standard, 2011.

A metadata file associated with this product is draft version 0.6.7

CONTOUR INTERVAL 10 FEET

NORTH AMERICAN VERTICAL DATUM OF 1988

SCALE 1:24 000

1 0.5 0

MILES

1

1000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000

FEET

1000 500 0 METERS 1000 2000

1 0.5 0 KILOMETERS 1 2

U.S. National Grid

100,000-m Square ID

Grid Zone Designation

NR

14R

×

Ù

MN

GN

UTM GRID AND 2013 MAGNETIC NORTH

DECLINATION AT CENTER OF SHEET

0° 2 ́

1 MILS

5° 1 ́

89 MILS
# Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida Opinion filed February 1, 2023. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

________________ No. 3D22-0069 Lower Tribunal No. 18-26789

________________ 

### Mar y Sol Restrepo Tobon, et al. ,

Appellants,
vs. 

### Amulen, LLC , et al., Appellees.
An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Valerie R. Manno Schurr, Judge. Troutwine Law Group, LLC, and Tonia M. Troutwine, for appellants. The Bravo Law Firm, PLLC, and Jason Bravo, for appellees. Before FERNANDEZ, C.J., and SCALES, and LINDSEY, JJ. PER CURIAM. Affirmed.
II 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 917 

To clarify the authority of the Secretary of the Interior with regard to 

management of elk in Rocky Mountain National Park. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MARCH 19, 2007 

Mr. ALLARD introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred 

to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

A BILL 

To clarify the authority of the Secretary of the Interior 

with regard to management of elk in Rocky Mountain 

National Park. 

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

3 SECTION 1. MANAGEMENT OF ELK IN ROCKY MOUNTAIN 

4 NATIONAL PARK. 

5 (a) DEFINITIONS.—In this section: 

6 (1) MANAGEMENT PLAN.—The term ‘‘manage7 ment plan’’ means the elk and vegetation manage8 ment plan for the Park described in the draft envi9 ronmental impact statement dated April 2006. 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMBILLS
2 

•S 917 IS

1 (2) PARK.—The term ‘‘Park’’ means Rocky 

2 Mountain National Park. 

3 (3) QUALIFIED INDIVIDUAL.—The term ‘‘quali4 fied individual’’ means any individual who pos5 sesses— 

6 (A) a valid resident big-game hunting li7 cense issued by the State of Colorado; and 

8 (B) such other qualifications as the Sec9 retary, in consultation with the Colorado Divi10 sion of Wildlife, may establish. 

11 (4) SECRETARY.—The term ‘‘Secretary’’ means 

12 the Secretary of the Interior. 

13 (b) USE OF SERVICES.—Nothing in section 4 of the 

14 Act of March 2, 1929 (16 U.S.C. 198c), or any other ap15 plicable law, prohibits the Secretary from using the serv16 ices of qualified individuals, as volunteers or pursuant to 

17 a contract with the Secretary, to assist in carrying out 

18 the management plan by using lethal means to reduce the 

19 population of elk within the Park. 

20 (c) CONSULTATION.—The Secretary shall consult 

21 with the Colorado Division of Wildlife regarding potential 

22 participation by the Division of Wildlife in carrying out 

23 the management plan. 

24 (d) LIMITATION.—Nothing in this section applies to 

25 a taking of wildlife (within the meaning of section 3 of 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMBILLS
3 

•S 917 IS

1 the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1532)) 

2 within the Park for any purpose other than the implemen3 tation of the management plan. 

Æ 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMBILLS
#### § 13.27 Timing of pay.

The contractor shall compensate an employee for time during which the employee used paid sick leave no later than one pay period following the end of the regular pay period in which the paid sick leave was used.
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia Clerk's Office, Atlanta, February 17, 2017. I certify that the above is a true extract from the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia. Witness my signature and the seal of said court hereto affixed the day and year last above written. , Clerk. 

# Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia
ATLANTA, February 17, 2017 The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order A17D0275. ARON REXHEPI v. THE STATE. Upon consideration of the Application for Discretionary Appeal, it is ordered that it be hereby DENIED.
LC NUMBERS: 13B02824
#### § 2700.11 Withdrawal of pleading.

A party may withdraw a pleading at any stage of a proceeding with the approval of the Judge or the Commission.
#### § 2570.150 Scope of rules.

The rules of practice set forth in this subpart H apply to “section 3(40) Finding Proceedings” (as defined in § 2570.152(g)), under section 3(40) of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA or the Act). Refer to 29 CFR 2510.3-40 for the definition of relevant terms of section 3(40) of ERISA, 29 U.S.C. 1002(40). To the extent that the regulations in this subpart differ from the regulations in subpart A of 29 CFR part 18, the regulations in this subpart apply to matters arising under section 3(40) of ERISA rather than the rules of procedure for administrative hearings published by the Department's Office of Administrative Law Judges in subpart A of 29 CFR part 18. These proceedings shall be conducted as expeditiously as possible, and the parties shall make every effort to avoid delay at each stage of the proceedings.
§ 1977.1 Introductory statement. ( a ) The Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 (29 U.S.C. 651, *et seq.*), hereinafter referred to as the Act, is a Federal statute of general application designed to regulate employment conditions relating to occupational safety and health and to achieve safer and healthier workplaces throughout the Nation. By terms of the Act, every person engaged in a business affecting commerce who has employees is required to furnish each of his employees employment and a place of employment free from recognized hazards that are causing or likely to cause death or serious physical harm, and, further, to comply with occupational safety and health standards promulgated under the Act. See part 1975 of this chapter concerning coverage of the Act.
( b ) The Act provides, among other things, for the adoption of occupational safety and health standards, research and development activities, inspections and investigations of workplaces, and recordkeeping requirements. Enforcement procedures initiated by the Department of Labor, review proceedings before an independent quasi-judicial agency (the Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission), and express judicial review are provided by the Act. In addition, States which desire to assume responsibility for development and enforcement of standards which are at least as effective as the Federal standards published in this chapter may submit plans for such development and enforcement of the Secretary of Labor.
( c ) Employees and representatives of employees are afforded a wide range of substantive and procedural rights under the Act. Moreover, effective implementation of the Act and achievement of its goals depend in large part upon the active but orderly participation of employees, individually and through their representatives, at every level of safety and health activity.
( d ) This part deals essentially with the rights of employees afforded under section 11(c) of the Act. Section 11(c) of the Act prohibits reprisals, in any form, against employees who exercise rights under the Act.
#### § 1902.48 The proceeding.

Whenever, as a result of his reconsideration, the Assistant Secretary proposes to revoke his affirmative 18(e) determination, he shall follow the procedures in the remaining sections of this subpart.