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

NEW NATIONAL SIDE OF EURO CIRCULATION COINS

(2004/C 298/02)

National side of the new EUR 2 commemorative circulation coin issued by the Republic of San Marino

Euro circulation coins have legal tender status throughout the euro area. With a view to informing the parties professionally handling coins and the public at large, the Commission publishes all new euro coin designs (1). In accordance with the relevant Council conclusions of 8 December 2003 (2), Member States and countries that have concluded a Monetary Agreement with the Community providing for the issuance of euro circulation coins are allowed to issue certain quantities of commemorative euro circulation coins under the condition that only a single new coin design at most is issued per country and per year and that the EUR 2 denomination is used. These coins correspond to the technical features of normal euro circulation coins, but bear a commemorative feature on the obverse national side.

Issuing State: Republic of San Marino.

Commemorative feature: Bartolomeo Borghesi (historian, numismatist).

Factual description of the design: the twelve stars of the European Union positioned around the outer circle of the coin and the issuing year ‘2004’, positioned bottom centre, surround the bust of Bartolomeo Borghesi. To the left of the bust is the inscription ‘Bartolomeo Borghesi’, and one above the other are the letter ‘R’ and the engraver's initials ‘E.L.F.’. To the right of the bust is the word ‘San Marino’.

Issuing volume: maximum 110 000 coins.

Approximate issuing period: December 2004.

----

(1)  See OJ C 373, 28.12.2001, p. 1 for a reference to all national sides that have been issued in 2002.

(2)  See conclusions of the General Affairs Council of 8 December 2003 on changes in the design of national sides of euro coins. See also Commission Recommendation of 29 September 2003 on a common practice for changes to the design of national obverse sides of euro circulation coins (OJ L 264, 15.10.2003, p. 38).

----
#### In the Matter of New York State Electric and Gas Corporation et al., Appellants, against Public Service Commission of the State of New York et al., Respondents.

Argued May 17, 1937;

decided June 8, 1937.

*593
      *Warwick J. Kernan*and *Henry W. Killeen*for appellants.

*Gay H. Brown*and *Laurence J. Olmsted*for respondents.

Order affirmed, with costs; no opinion.

Concur: Crane, Ch. J., Lehman, O’Brien, Httbbs, Loughran, Finch and Rippey, JJ.
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 100 (Tuesday, May 23, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 33315]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-12860]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RP96-129-011]


Trunkline Gas Company; Notice of Compliance Filing

May 17, 2000.
    Take notice that on May 11, 2000, Trunkline Gas Company (Trunkline) 
tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, First Revised 
Volume No. 1, the following pro forma tariff sheets:

Pro Forma Sheet No. 79

    Trunkline states that the purpose of this filing is to comply with 
the Commission's Opinion No. 441 and Order on Initial Decision, 90 FERC 
para. 61,017 (2000) in the above referenced proceeding. This filing 
reflects Trunkline's proposal to liberalize the current directional 
limitations on its TABS-1 transfer service.
    Trunkline 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 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).

Linwood A. Watson, Jr.,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 00-12860 Filed 5-22-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 100 (Tuesday, May 23, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Pages 33294-33295]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-12978]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

Foreign-Trade Zones Board

[Order No. 1094]


Approval for Extension of Authority of Board Order 828; Foreign-
Trade Zone 21 Hubner Manufacturing Corporation (Industrial Bellows/
Molded Parts); Charleston, South Carolina

    Pursuant to its authority under the Foreign-Trade Zones Act of June 
18, 1934, as amended (19 U.S.C. 81a-81u), the Foreign-Trade Zones Board 
(the Board) adopts the following Order:
    Whereas, Board Order 828 (61 FR 33094, 6-26-96) granted authority 
on behalf of Hubner Manufacturing Corporation (HMC) to manufacture of 
textile/rubber industrial bellows and plastic/rubber molded parts under 
FTZ procedures subject to the following restrictions: 1) privileged 
foreign status (19 CFR 146.41) shall be elected on all foreign 
merchandise admitted to the zone for the HMC operation; and, 2) initial 
approval for a period of three years from the date of activation of FTZ 
procedures at the HMC plant (expires 8-7-2000), subject to extension;
    Whereas, the South Carolina State Ports Authority, grantee of FTZ 
21, has requested authority, on behalf of HMC, to extend its 
manufacturing authority on a permanent basis by removing Restriction 
#2;
    Whereas, notice inviting public comment was given in the Federal 
Register (64 FR 27959, 5-24-99);
    Whereas, the Board adopts the findings and recommendations of the 
examiner's report, and finds that the requirements of the FTZ Act and 
the Board's regulations are satisfied, and that approval of the request 
would be in the public interest if approval were subject to the 
restriction listed below;
    Now Therefore, the Board hereby approves the request subject to the 
FTZ Act and the Board's regulations, including Sec. 400.28, and further 
to a restriction requiring that privileged foreign status (19 CFR 
146.41) shall be elected on all foreign-origin merchandise admitted to 
FTZ 21 for the HMC activity. HMC will continue to

[[Page 33295]]

destroy all foreign status scrap materials in the zone, per Board Order 
828.

    Signed at Washington, DC, this 8th day of May, 2000.
Troy H. Cribb,
Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Import Administration, Alternate 
Chairman, Foreign-Trade Zones Board.
Dennis Puccinelli,
Acting Executive Secretary.
[FR Doc. 00-12978 Filed 5-22-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
(75 South. 1007)

#### SIDES v. STATE.

(6 Div. 278.)

(Court of Appeals of Alabama.

May 8, 1917.)

Appeal from Circuit Court, Walker County; J. J. Curtis, Judge.

W. L. Martin, Atty. Gen., for the State.

BROWN, P. J.

Appeal dismissed.
<PAGE>
 
                                                                      EXHIBIT 23

                   CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS



  As independent public accountants, we hereby consent to the incorporation of
  our reports included in this Form 10-K, into the Company's previously filed
  Registration Statements on Form S-8 pertaining to the Company's 1984 and 1991
  Stock Option Plans, filed on April 15, 1993, the 1995 Stock Option Plan, filed
  on January 31, 1997, the Summa ESOP and Summa 401(k) Stock Option Plan, filed
  on September 8, 1997 and the Calnetics Acquisition Stock Option Plan, filed on
  October 21, 1997 with the Securities and Exchange Commission under the
  Securities Act of 1993.

 

                                              /s/ Arthur Andersen LLP
                                              ARTHUR ANDERSEN LLP


  Los Angeles, California
  November 6, 1997
-82 -80 -78 -76 -74

 36

 38

 40

★

▲

▲

▲

▲

★ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲

 500

 1000

 1500

 100

18 12 06 00

07/21

NOAA HYSPLIT MODEL

 Backward trajectory ending at 2300 UTC 21 Jul 06

 EDAS Meteorological Data

Source

★ at 38.81 N 76.74 W Meters AGL
United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 96-3381

___________

Glenn R. Waite, *

*

Appellant, *

*

v. * Appeal from the United States

* District Court for the

Regional West Medical Center; * District of Nebraska.

Scottsbluff Internal Medicine Group; *

W. Scott Carpenter; Nancy Adams, * [UNPUBLISHED]

*

Appellees. *

___________

 Submitted: September 19, 1997

 Filed: September 25, 1997

___________

Before McMILLIAN, BEAM, and MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Glenn R. Waite brought this action under the Declaratory Judgment Act, 28

U.S.C. § 2201, seeking a declaration that under the United States and the Nebraska

constitutions he was entitled to an opportunity for a hearing before an impartial

decision-maker on pending motions in two state court negligence cases. The district
The Honorable Richard G. Kopf, United States District Judge for the District 1

of Nebraska.

-2-

court dismissed his complaint, and denied his motions to alter or amend the judgment. 1

We affirm.

Upon our careful review of the record, we find no abuse of discretion by the

district court in refusing to entertain this declaratory judgment action. See Wilton v.

Seven Falls Co., 115 S. Ct. 2137, 2143 (1995) (standard of review). It is not for the

federal court to determine the finality and status of state court cases; the state courts

are better able to resolve and adjudicate the issues. See Glover v. State Farm Fire &

Cas. Co., 984 F.2d 259, 261 (8th Cir. 1993) (important factor in exercising declaratory

judgment jurisdiction is whether another, more appropriate remedy is available).

Although the district court&s procedures in dismissing this action were improper,

see Porter v. Fox, 99 F.3d 271, 273-74 (8th Cir. 1996) (per curiam), we conclude that

the error here was harmless. We also conclude the district court did not abuse its

discretion in denying Waite leave to file a third amended complaint. See Perkins v.

Spivey, 911 F.2d 22, 34 (8th Cir. 1990) (standard of review), cert denied, 499 U.S. 920

(1991).

Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court.

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
Exhibit 4.3


 


Consent of Independent Registered
Public Accounting Firm


We consent to the
reference made to our firm under the caption “Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm” in Part B of the Prospectus
and to the use of our report dated April 14, 2015, in this Registration Statement (Form S-6 No. 333-202303) of Smart Trust, Zacks
GARP Composite 35 Trust, Series 5.


 


	 	/s/ Grant Thornton LLP


 


Chicago, Illinois


April 14, 2015
§ 4050.203 Options and duties of plan. ( a ) *Options.* A subpart B plan that is closing out upon plan termination may (but need not) elect, by filing under § 4050.205, that the subpart B plan— ( 1 ) Will be a “transferring plan,” that is, will pay a benefit transfer amount to PBGC for each distributee who is missing upon close-out of the plan and will be bound by the provisions of this subpart B to the extent that they apply to transferring plans, or
( 2 ) Will be a “notifying plan,” that is, will notify PBGC of the disposition of the benefits of each distributee identified in the filing who is missing upon close-out of the plan and will, with respect to those distributees, be bound by the provisions of this subpart B to the extent that they apply to notifying plans.
( b ) *Diligent search* — ( 1 ) *In general.* Except as provided in paragraph (b)(2) of this section, for each distributee whose location the plan does not know with reasonable certainty upon close-out of a subpart B plan, the plan must have conducted a diligent search as described in § 4050.204.
( 2 ) *Notifying plans.* For a notifying plan, the requirement of paragraph (b)(1) of this section applies only to distributees identified in the filing with PBGC.
( c ) *Filing with PBGC* — ( 1 ) *In general.* Except as provided in paragraph (c)(2) of this section, for each distributee who is missing upon close-out of a subpart B plan, the plan must file with PBGC as described in § 4050.205.
( 2 ) *Notifying plans.* For a notifying plan, the requirement of paragraph (c)(1) of this section applies only to distributees identified in the filing with PBGC.
III 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. RES. 11 

Electing Terrance W. Gainer as the Sergeant at Arms and Doorkeeper of 

the Senate. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JANUARY 4, 2007 

Mr. REID (for himself and Mr. MCCONNELL) submitted the following 

resolution; which was considered and agreed to 

RESOLUTION 

Electing Terrance W. Gainer as the Sergeant at Arms and 

Doorkeeper of the Senate. 

1 Resolved, That Terrance W. Gainer of Illinois be, and 

2 he is hereby, elected Sergeant at Arms and Doorkeeper 

3 of the Senate. 

Æ 


ccoleman on PROD1PC71 with BILLS
§ 531.37 Overtime workweeks. ( a ) Section 7 requires that the employee receive compensation for overtime hours at “a rate of not less than one and one-half times the regular rate at which he is employed.” When overtime is worked by an employee who receives the whole or part of his or her wage in facilities and it becomes necessary to determine the portion of wages represented by facilities, all such facilities must be measured by the requirements of section 3(m) and subpart B of this part. It is the Administrator's opinion that deductions may be made, however, on the same basis in an overtime workweek as in nonovertime workweeks (*see* § 531.36), if their purpose and effect are not to evade the overtime requirements of the Act or other law, providing the amount deducted does not exceed the amount which could be deducted if the employee had only worked the maximum number of straight-time hours during the workweek. Deductions in excess of this amount for such articles as tools or other articles which are not “facilities” within the meaning of the Act are illegal in overtime workweeks as well as in nonovertime workweeks. There is no limit on the amount which may be deducted for “board, lodging, or other facilities” in overtime workweeks (as in workweeks when no overtime is worked), provided that these deductions are made only for the “reasonable cost” of the items furnished. These principles assume a situation where bona fide deductions are made for particular items in accordance with the agreement or understanding of the parties. If the situation is solely one of refusal or failure to pay the full amount of wages required by section 7, these principles have no application. Deductions made only in overtime workweeks, or increases in the prices charged for articles or services during overtime workweeks will be scrutinized to determine whether they are manipulations to evade the overtime requirements of the Act.
( b ) Where deductions are made from the stipulated wage of an employee, the regular rate of pay is arrived at on the basis of the stipulated wage before any deductions have been made. Where board, lodging, or other facilities are customarily furnished as additions to a cash wage, the reasonable cost of the facilities to the employer must be considered as part of the employee's regular rate of pay. *See Walling* v. *Alaska Pacific Consolidated Mining Co.,* 152 F.2d 812 (9th Cir. 1945), *cert. denied,* 327 U.S. 803.
[76 FR 18855, Apr. 5, 2011]
#### § 458.61 Transfer and consolidation of cases.

In any matter arising pursuant to the regulations in this subchapter, whenever it appears necessary in order to effectuate the purposes of the CSRA or FSA or to avoid unnecessary costs or delay, the District Director may consolidate cases within his own area or may transfer such cases to any other area, for the purpose of consolidation with any proceedings which may have been instituted in, or transferred to, such area.

[45 FR 15158, Mar. 7, 1980; 45 FR 28322, Apr. 29, 1980. Redesignated at 50 FR 31311, Aug. 1, 1985, as amended at 59 FR 15117, Mar. 31, 1994; 62 FR 6094, Feb. 10, 1997]
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 07-1906

JOYCE E. ROWLEY,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

CITY OF NORTH MYRTLE BEACH; JOHN SMITHSON,

City Manager; JOEL DAVIS, Assistant City

Manager; KEVIN BLAYTON, Public Works Director;

DOUGLAS MADDOCK, Planning and Development

Director; individually and in their

representative capacities as employees of the

City North Myrtle Beach,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

South Carolina, at Florence. Terry L. Wooten, District Judge.

(4:06-cv-01873-TLW)

Submitted: December 13, 2007 Decided: December 18, 2007

Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Joyce E. Rowley, Appellant Pro Se. Derwood Lorraine Aydlette, III,

Christopher Wofford Johnson, GIGNILLIAT, SAVITZ & BETTIS, Columbia,

South Carolina, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Joyce E. Rowley seeks to appeal the district court order

consolidating her two cases and denying as moot several pending

motions. This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final

orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (2000), and certain interlocutory and

collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (2000); Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b);

Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541 (1949). The

order Rowley seeks to appeal is neither a final order nor an

appealable interlocutory or collateral order. Accordingly, we deny

Rowley’s motion for stay of proceedings and dismiss the appeal for

lack of jurisdiction. We dispense with oral argument because the

facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the

materials before the court and argument would not aid the

decisional process.

DISMISSED
§ 38.67 Methods by which a recipient may show cause why enforcement proceedings should not be instituted. A recipient may show cause why enforcement proceedings should not be instituted by, among other means: ( a ) Correcting the violation(s) that brought about the Notice to Show Cause and entering into a Conciliation Agreement, under §§ 38.91 and 38.93;
( b ) Demonstrating that CRC does not have jurisdiction; or
( c ) Demonstrating that the violation alleged by CRC did not occur.
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Res. 145 Agreed to Senate (ATS)]

110th CONGRESS
  1st Session
S. RES. 145

  Congratulating Zach Johnson on his victory in the 2007 Masters golf 
                              tournament.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             April 10, 2007

   Mr. Grassley (for himself and Mr. Harkin) submitted the following 
             resolution; which was considered and agreed to

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
  Congratulating Zach Johnson on his victory in the 2007 Masters golf 
                              tournament.

Whereas, on April 8, 2007, Zach Johnson, a native Iowan, won the Masters 
        Tournament at the Augusta National Golf Club in Augusta, Georgia;
Whereas, the Masters has been won by some of golf's greatest champions, 
        including Byron Nelson, Sam Snead, Ben Hogan, Arnold Palmer, Gary 
        Player, Jack Nicklaus, Tiger Woods, Phil Mickelson, and many others;
Whereas, Zach Johnson's final round of three-under-par 69 for a total score of 
        289 was two strokes better than that of any other competitor;
Whereas, in a final day on which six different players led, Zach Johnson showed 
        great skill, patience and will to withstand the challenge of the weather 
        and the course;
Whereas, Zach Johnson is the first Iowan to win the Masters, and the first Iowan 
        to win a major championship in golf since Jack Fleck's playoff victory 
        over Ben Hogan in the 1955 U.S. Open; and
Whereas, Zach Johnson has brought great pride and honor to his family, friends, 
        and the citizens of Iowa with his victory: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the Senate congratulates Zach Johnson on his 
outstanding accomplishment in winning the 2007 Masters golf tournament.
                                 <all>
```
#### § 4901.3 Electronic reading room.

PBGC will maintain an electronic reading room on its website, *www.pbgc.gov,* where persons may inspect in an electronic format all records made available for such purposes under this part.

[82 FR 26991, June 13, 2017; as amended at 87 FR 43994, July 25, 2022]
§ 515.5 Additional requirements. ( a ) The State Agency shall follow the procedure set forth in the Inspection Manual for the enforcement of the act and such supplements to or provisions thereof as may be issued from time to time by the Division or the Secretary of Labor; use official forms for recording findings; make reports as required; and carry on the work connected with the administration of the Acts in conformity with the plans and budget agreed upon and with the instructions and policies of the Division and the Secretary of Labor.
( b ) Representatives of the Division and the Secretary of Labor may at any time, upon notifying the State agency, make such inspections and investigations and secure such information as may be necessary for the administration of the Acts.
§ 500.100 Vehicle safety obligations. ( a ) *General obligations.* Each farm labor contractor, agricultural employer and agricultural association which uses, or causes to be used, any vehicle to transport a migrant or seasonal agricultural worker shall ensure that such vehicle conforms to vehicle safety standards prescribed by the Secretary of Labor under the Act and with other applicable Federal and State safety standards. Each farm labor contractor, agricultural employer and agricultural association shall also ensure that each driver of any such vehicle has a currently valid motor vehicle operator's permit or license, as provided by applicable State law, to operate the vehicle.
( b ) *Proof of compliance with vehicle safety standards.* Prima facie evidence that safety standards have been met will be shown by the presence of a current State vehicle inspection sticker. Such sticker will not, however, relieve the farm labor contractor, agricultural employer or agricultural association from responsibility for maintaining the vehicle in accordance with § 500.104 or § 500.105, as applicable.
( c ) *Uses or causes to be used.* The term “uses or causes to be used” as set forth in paragraph (a) of this section does not include carpooling arrangements made by the workers themselves, using one of the workers' own vehicles. However, carpooling does not include any transportation arrangement in which a farm labor contractor participates or which is specifically directed or requested by an agricultural employer or an agricultural association.
S. Con. Res. 68 Agreed to February 28, 2008

One Hundred Tenth Congress

of the

United States of America 

AT THE SECOND SESSION 

Begun and held at the City of Washington on Thursday, 

the third day of January, two thousand and eight 

Concurrent Resolution

Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives concurring),

SECTION 1. USE OF THE ROTUNDA OF THE CAPITOL BY THE JOINT 

CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEE ON INAUGURAL CEREMONIES. 

The rotunda of the United States Capitol is authorized to 

be used on January 20, 2009, by the Joint Congressional Committee 

on Inaugural Ceremonies in connection with the proceedings and 

ceremonies conducted for the inauguration of the President-elect 

and the Vice President-elect of the United States. 

Attest:

Secretary of the Senate.

Attest:

Clerk of the House of Representatives.