alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Con. Res. 9 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

110th CONGRESS
  1st Session
S. CON. RES. 9

 Celebrating the contributions of the architectural profession during 
                    ``National Architecture Week''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            February 6, 2007

 Ms. Landrieu submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was 
               referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 
 Celebrating the contributions of the architectural profession during 
                    ``National Architecture Week''.

Whereas the architectural profession has made unique contributions to the 
        history, texture, and quality of life in the United States;
Whereas the beginning of an organized architectural profession in the United 
        States was signified by the founding of the American Institute of 
        Architects 150 years ago;
Whereas today there are approximately 281,000 individuals in the United States 
        who work in the profession of architecture;
Whereas architects express the richness of the Nation's heritage and the 
        vitality of its spirit through the vigilant stewardship of great 
        architectural and historic treasures;
Whereas architects improve the quality of life for all individuals in the United 
        States by combining advances in building technology with design 
        innovation to build healthy, safe, livable, and sustainable buildings 
        and communities; and
Whereas the week beginning April 8, 2007, has been designated by the American 
        Institute of Architects as ``National Architecture Week'' to bring 
        attention to the importance of the architectural profession to the 
        United States: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives concurring), 
That--
            (1) it is the sense of the Congress that the contributions 
        of the architectural profession should be recognized and 
        celebrated during ``National Architecture Week''; and
            (2) the Congress encourages the people of the United States 
        and interested organizations to observe ``National Architecture 
        Week'' with appropriate ceremonies and activities.
                                 <all>
```
Exhibit 32

                   CONTINENTAL BEVERAGE AND NUTRITION, INC.
                              (Formerly Known as)
                   ADIRONDACK PURE SPRINGS MT.WATER CO., INC.

     Certification Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

In connection with the Quarterly  Report of Continental  Beverage and Nutrition,
Inc.,  (the  "Company")  on Form 10-QSB of the period  ended  August 31, 2004 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof,  I, David
Sackler, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant
to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:  (1) the
quarterly  report fully complies with the  requirements  of section 13(a) of the
Securities  Exchange  Act of  1934;  and (2) the  information  contained  in the
quarterly  report  fairly  presents,  in all material  respects,  the  financial
condition and results of operations of the Company.

Date: October 21, 2004

/s/ David Sackler
President and Chief Executive Officer

A signed  original  of this  written  statement  required  by Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley  Act has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the
Company and  furnished to the  Securities  and Exchange  Commission or its staff
upon request.
§ 471.12 What are the procedures to be followed when a violation is found during a complaint investigation or compliance evaluation? ( a ) If any complaint investigation or compliance evaluation indicates a violation of the Executive Order or this part, the Director of OFCCP will make reasonable efforts to secure compliance through conciliation.
( b ) Before the contractor may be found to be in compliance with the Executive Order or this part, the contractor must correct the violation found by the Department (for example, by posting the required employee notice, and/or by amending its subcontracts or purchase orders with subcontractors to include the employee notice clause), and must commit, in writing, not to repeat the violation.
( c ) If a violation cannot be resolved through conciliation efforts, the Director of OFCCP will refer the matter to the Director of OLMS, who may take action under § 471.13.
( d ) For reasonable cause shown, the Director of OLMS may reconsider, or cause to be reconsidered, any matter on his or her own motion or in response to a request.
----

----

----

----

I Informacija

Komisija

----

Menjalni tečaji evra (1)

21. oktobra 2004

(2004/C 260/01)

1 euro= 

----

(1)

Vir: referenčni menjalni tečaj, ki ga objavlja ECB.

----

----

Predhodna priglasitev koncentracije

(Št. primera COMP/M.3571 – IBM/MaerskData/DMData)

(2004/C 260/02)

(Besedilo velja za EGP)

----

(1)UL L 24, 29.1.2004, str. 1.

----

----

Predhodna priglasitev koncentracije

(Št. primera COMP/M.3607 – Sabanci/DuPont SA)

Primer za poenostavljeni postopek

(2004/C 260/03)

(Besedilo velja za EGP)

----

(1)UL L 24, 29.1.2004, str. 1.

(2)  Dostopno na spletni strani DG COMP:

http://europa.eu.int/comm/competition/mergers/legislation/consultation/simplified_tru.pdf.

----

Popravek

----

Popravek razpisa za zbiranje predlogov za posredne dejavnosti RTD v okviru posebnega programa (Euratom) za raziskave in usposabljanje na področju jedrske energije

(Uradni list Evropske Unije C 315 z dne 17. decembra 2002 in sprememba C 273 z dne14. novembra 2003)

(2004/C 260/04)

Na strani 82, v oddelku 6:

namesto:

„12. oktober 2004“,

beri:

„18. oktober 2004“.

----

----

Popravek razpisov za zbiranje predlogov za posredne dejavnosti RTD v okviru posebnega programa za raziskave, tehnološki razvoj in predstavitve: „Oblikovanje Evropskega raziskovalnega prostora“

(Uradni list Evropske unije C 315 z dne 17. decembra 2002 in popravek v C 227 z dne 23. septembra 2003)

(2004/C 260/05)

Na strani 72, v oddelku 6:

namesto:

„14. oktober 2004“,

beri:

„19. oktober 2004“;

Na strani 73, v oddelku 6:

namesto:

„14. oktober 2004“,

beri:

„19. oktober 2004“.

----

----

Popravek razpisa za predloge za posredne dejavnosti RTD v okviru posebnega programa za raziskave, tehnološki razvoj in predstavitev: „Povezovanje in krepitev Evropskega raziskovalnega prostora“

(Uradni list Evropske unije C 158 z dne 15. junija 2004)

(2004/C 260/06)

Na strani 18, v oddelku 6:

namesto:

„14. oktober 2004“,

beri:

„19. oktober 2004“;

Na strani 21, v oddelku 6:

namesto:

„14. oktober 2004“,

beri:

„19. oktober 2004“;

Na strani 24, v oddelku 6:

namesto:

„14. oktober 2004“,

beri:

„19. oktober 2004“;

Na strani 25, v oddelku 6:

namesto:

„14. oktober 2004“,

beri:

„19. oktober 2004“.

----

----

Popravek razpisa za predloge za posredne dejavnosti RTD v okviru posebnega programa za raziskave, tehnološki razvoj in predstavitev: „Oblikovanje Evropskega raziskovalnega prostora“

(Uradni list Evropske unije C 170 z dne 30. junija 2004)

(2004/C 260/07)

Na strani 10, v oddelku 6:

namesto:

„15. oktober 2004“,

beri:

„20. oktober 2004“;

Na strani 12, v oddelku 6:

namesto:

„15. oktober 2004“,

beri:

„20. oktober 2004“.

----
[L. A. No. 1044.

In Bank.

December 24, 1901.]

#### MARY MAUDE SHATTUCK, Respondent, v. CHARLES E. SHATTUCK, Appellant.

Divorce—Maintenance of Children—Omission in Decree—Loss of Jurisdiction.—Where a decree of divorce makes no provision for the maintenance of the children of the marriage, the court is without jurisdiction subsequently to make any order compelling either party to pay the other for such maintenance.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. W. P. Fitzgerald, Judge.

*193The facts are stated in the opinion.

John Satterwhite, and J. Marion Brooks, for Appellant.

H. T. Gordon, and Goodrich *&*McCutchen, for Respondent.

HARRISON, J.

A decree of divorce between the parties hereto was rendered by the superior court of the county of Los Angeles, September 4,1895, and, by the judgment, certain property was awarded to the plaintiff, and it was also “ordered, adjudged, and decreed that the custody and control of Ethel Shattuck, a minor child of the plaintiff and defendant, be and the same is hereby awarded to said plaintiff.” No provision was made in the decree in reference to the maintenance or support of the child. November 23, 1899, the plaintiff filed a petition in said cause, and presented the same to the superior court, asking for an order requiring the defendant to contribute a reasonable amount of money, to be determined by the court, for the support of the minor child. In response to said petition, the defendant pleaded that the court was without jurisdiction to make the order prayed for, by reason of the fact that the original decree of divorce contained no provision or reservation in reference to the maintenance of the child. After hearing the petition, the court made an order requiring the defendant to contribute the sum of twenty dollars,per month for the support of the minor child. Prom the judgment entered upon this order the defendant has appealed.

The question presented herein was fully considered by this court in *McKay*v. *McKay,*125 Cal. 65, and it was there held, that if the decree of divorce makes no provision for the maintenance of the children of the marriage, the court is without jurisdiction subsequently to make any order compelling either party to pay to the other for such maintenance; that the provision in section 138 of the Civil Code authorizing the court to vary or modify its decree “after judgment” is limited to the directions therein for the “custody, care, and education” of the children, and that its power to provide for their “maintenance” must be exercised at the time the decree of divorce is granted; that if it is not exercised at that time, and the decree is silent upon the subject, it can have no jurisdiction *194afterwards to make such' provision. Under the authority of that case, it must be held that the superior court was without jurisdiction to rerider the judgment appealed from.

The judgment is reversed.

Garoutte, J., Van Dyke, J., McFarland, J., Temple, J., and Henshaw, J., concurred.
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 100 (Tuesday, May 23, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 33336]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-12893]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Cancer Institute; Notice of Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(a) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice is hereby given of a meeting of 
the President's Cancer Panel.
    The meeting will be open to the public, with attendance limited to 
space available. Individuals who plan to attend and need special 
assistance, such as sign language interpretation or other reasonable 
accommodations, should notify the Contact Person listed below in 
advance of the meeting.

    Name of Committee: President's Cancer Panel.
    Date: June 15-16, 2000.
    Time: 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m.
    Agenda: Improving Cancer Care for All: Real People--Real 
Problems.
    Place: Doubletree Hotel, Omaha, NE.
    Contact Person: Maureen O. Wilson, Phd, Executive Secretary, 
National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, 31 Center 
Drive, Building 31, Room 4A48, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301/496-1148.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.392, 
Cancer Construction; 93.393, Cancer Cause and Prevention Research; 
93.394, Cancer Detection and Diagnosis Research; 93.395, Cancer 
Treatment Research; 93.396, Cancer Biology Research; 93.397, Cancer 
Centers Support; 93.398, Cancer Research Manpower; 93.399, Cancer 
Control, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

    Dated: May 16, 2000.
LaVerne Y. Stringfield,
Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 00-12893 Filed 5-22-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-M
#### § 452.74 Expenditures permitted.

The Act does not prohibit impartial publication of election information. Thus, it would not be improper for a union to sponsor a debate at which all candidates for a particular office are afforded equal opportunity to express their views to the membership prior to an election. Similarly, a union may issue information sheets containing biographical data on all candidates so long as all candidates are given equal opportunity to submit such data.
§ 4262.9 Application for a plan with a partition. ( a ) *In general.* This section applies to a plan partitioned under section 4233 of ERISA that is eligible for special financial assistance under § 4262.3(a)(2). A partitioned plan is in priority group 2 for purposes of § 4262.10(d)(2).
( b ) *Filing requirements.* A plan sponsor of a partitioned plan filing an application for special financial assistance must— ( 1 ) File one application for the original plan and the successor plan.
( 2 ) Include in the application— ( i ) A statement that the plan was partitioned under section 4233 of ERISA;
( ii ) A copy of the plan document and other executed amendments required under paragraph (c)(2) of this section; and
( iii ) The information required in §§ 4262.6 through 4262.8.
( 3 ) If a plan sponsor has already filed with PBGC any of the required information described in paragraph (b)(2)(iii) of this section, the plan sponsor is not required to file that information with its application for special financial assistance. For any such information not filed with the application, the plan sponsor must note on the checklist described under § 4262.6(a) when the information was filed.
( c ) *Rescission of partition order.* Effective when special financial assistance is paid under § 4262.12, and in a manner consistent with the application procedure determined under paragraph (b) of this section— ( 1 ) PBGC will rescind the partition order; and
( 2 ) The plan sponsor must amend the plan to remove any provisions or amendments that were required to be adopted under the partition order.
#### § 417.1 Purpose and scope.

Section 401(h) of the Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act of 1959 (29 U.S.C. 481) provides that if, upon application of any member of a local labor organization, the Secretary of Labor finds, after hearing in accordance with the Administrative Procedure Act, that the constitution and bylaws of such labor organization do not provide an adequate procedure for the removal of an elected officer guilty of serious misconduct, such officer may be removed for cause shown and after notice and hearing, by the members in good standing voting in a secret ballot. Section 401(i) (29 U.S.C. 481) requires the Secretary to promulgate rules and regulations prescribing minimum standards and procedures for determining the adequacy of the removal procedures referred to in section 401(h). Section 402(a) (29 U.S.C. 482) provides that a member of a labor organization who has exhausted the available internal remedies of such organization and of any parent body, or who has invoked such remedies without obtaining a final decision within three months, may file a complaint with the Secretary within one month thereafter alleging violation of section 401 (including violation of the constitution and bylaws of the labor organization pertaining to the removal of officers). Section 402(b) (29 U.S.C. 482) provides that upon suit initiated by the Secretary, a Federal court may direct the conduct of a hearing and vote upon the removal of officers under the supervision of the Secretary, and in accordance with such rules and regulations as the Secretary may prescribe. It is the purpose of this part to implement those sections by prescribing regulations relating to the procedures and standards for determining the adequacy of removal procedures and the procedures for holding elections for the removal of officers.
Exhibit 10.27

 

June 26, 2002

 

Alison B. Fleming 

136 Ithaca Road, Apt 4

Candor, NY 13743

 

Dear Alison,

 

Collegium Pharmaceutical is very pleased to present you with the following offer to join the Collegium Team. We hope that you find the terms acceptable and would like to express our desire that you come aboard!

 

Position: Project Manager- Scientist

 

Reports to: Founders (initially)

 

Responsibilies: Responsible for all facets of project management (on an assigned project) required to commercialize Collegium’s intellectual property. This includes, but is not limited to, background research, patent filings, protocol development, project tracking, budgeting, negotiating contracts, working in the lab, customer presentations, etc.

 

Compensation:

 

1)    Salary- $65,000 annually

2)    Cash Bonus- eligible for up to 25% of base salary in annual bonus

 

Stock Options: 25,000 shares at fair market value at the time of hire (initial grant)

 

Benefits: Company will provide or reimburse you for your health benefits (30% employee contribution). The company expects to continue to offer benefits commensurate with companies its size as it grows.

 

Start Date: TBD. Goal: Oct 1, 2002. (as soon as possible)

 

Alison, as you have heard from the founders and Alex Klibanov, we are all very excited about the potential of Collegium. We have built an impressive IP portfolio, in addition to

 











 

assembling a group of “world class” Scientific Partners in a very short period of time. We now need to build the critical infrastructure that will assist us to commercialization of this portfolio. We believe your impressive accomplishments and demonstrated skill set would be a valuable asset to the company. We expect it will be an intellectually challenging environment where we can all learn from each other. We believe that you would be able to jump in immediately and add value to the company.

 

Please let me know if you have any questions, and we will be in touch in the next few days to answer your questions and hopefully plan the next steps.

 

 

	
Best Regards,
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
Mike Heffernan
    	
 
    


 

 

CC: Jane Hirsh, Mark Hirsh, Michael Rothman
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 13 (Thursday, January 20, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 3210]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-1309]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Office of the Secretary


Executive Committee Meeting of the Defense Advisory Committee on 
Women in the Services (DACOWITS)

AGENCY:  Advisory Committee on Women in the Services, Department of 
Defense.

ACTION:  Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY:  Pursuant to Section 10(a), Public Law 92-463, as amended, 
notice is hereby given of a forthcoming Quarterly Executive Committee 
Meeting of the Defense Advisory Committee on Women in the Services 
(DACOWITS). The purpose of the Executive Committee Meeting is to review 
the responses to the recommendations and request for information 
adopted by the committee at the DACOWITS 2000 Fall Conference.

DATES:  February 7, 2000, 9:15 a.m.-4 p.m.

ADDRESSES:  SECDEF Conference Room 3E869, The Pentagon, Washington, DC.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:  Major Susan E. Kolb, ARNGUS, DACOWITS 
and Military Women Matters, OASD (Force Management Policy), 4000 
Defense Pentagon, Room 3D769, Washington, DC 20301-4000; telephone 
(703) 697-2122.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:  Meeting agenda:

Monday February 7, 2000

Time and Event

9:15-9:29 a.m.--Introductions (3E869--SecDef Conf Rm) (Open to Public)
9:30-10:29 a.m.--Pay and Compensation Briefing (Open to Public)
10:30-11:29 a.m.--TRICARE Follow up Briefing (QOL, RFI #1) (Open to 
Public)
11:30-2:14 p.m.--Lunch for Executive Committee Members, Military Staff 
(By invitation only)
2:15-2:59 p.m.--Child Care Briefing (QOL RFI #2) (Open to Public)
3:00-3:29 p.m.--Future Issues (Open to Public)
3:30-3:59 p.m.--Review 2000 Mission, Vision and Goals Review Upcoming 
DACOWITS events Wrap up (Open to Public)
4 p.m.--DACOWITS members depart

    Dated: January 13, 2000.
Patricia L. Toppings,
Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
[FR Doc. 00-1309 Filed 1-19-00; 8:45 a.m.]
BILLING CODE 5001-10-M
#### NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Petitioner, v. ELCO CORPORATION, Respondent.

No. 21298.

United States Court of Appeals Ninth Circuit.

May 5, 1967.

Arnold Ordman, Gen. Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Associate Gen. Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Elliott Moore, Robert M. Lieber, Attys., N. L. R. B., Washington, D. C., Ralph E. Kennedy, Director, N. L. R. B., Los Angeles, Cal., for appellant.

John E. Carroll, Long Beach, Cal., James D. Hughes, La Mirada, Cal., for appellee.

Before BARNES and BROWNING, Circuit Judges, and SMITH,* District Judge.

*

 Russell E. Smith, United States District Judge, District of Montana, sitting by designation-

PER CURIAM:

Had this court been called upon to pass originally on the merits of this case, we might have disagreed with the ultimate conclusion of the Board, but that is not the test for reversal. There exists in the record, in our opinion, sufficient evidence sufficiently substantial to sustain the Board’s conclusion.

The order will be enforced.
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has issued draft NUREG-1717, “Systematic Radiological Assessment of Exemptions for Source and Byproduct Materials.” This report is an assessment of potential radiation doses associated with the current exemptions for byproduct and source material in Title 10, of the                     *Code of Federal Regulations*                     (CFR). Doses were estimated for the normal life cycle of a particular product or material, covering distribution and transport, intended or expected routine use, and disposal using dose assessment methods consistent with the current requirements in 10 CFR Part 20. In addition, assessments of potential doses due to accidents and misuse were estimated. Also presented is an assessment of potential radiological impacts associated with selected products containing byproduct material that currently may only be used under a general license and may be potential candidates for exemption from licensing requirements.                 

                    Licensees, Agreement States and all other interested parties are encouraged to submit comments and relevant data on this report. Comments and suggestions on this NUREG should be submitted by June 30, 2000, to assist the staff in developing the final NUREG-1717. Comments may be submitted in writing directly to David L. Meyer, Chief, Rules and Directives Branch, Office of Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, T-6 D-59, Washington, DC 20555-0001, or hand-delivered to 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD between 7:30 a.m. and 4:15 p.m. on Federal workdays. Comments may also be submitted while viewing this report on the Internet at the following URL:                     *http://www.nrc.gov/​NRC/​NUREGS/​SR1717/​DRAFT/​index.html*.                 

Issued NUREGs may be purchased from both the Government Printing Office (GPO) and the National Technical Information Service (NTIS). Details on this service may be obtained by writing either the GPO at The Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, P.O. Box 37082, Washington, DC 20402-9328 or the NTIS, 5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield, VA 22161. NUREGs are not copyrighted, and Commission approval is not required to reproduce them.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 11th day of January 2000. 

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 

Thomas L. King, 

Director, Division of Risk Analysis and Applications, Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research. 

[FR Doc. 00-1302 Filed 1-19-00; 8:45 am] 

BILLIING CODE 7590-01-P