alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
WILKERSO N HOZUBI N 31 0K STRBCT, SUIT

E40 5 ANCHORAGE , A

K 9950 1 TEL : (907 ) 27M29 7 FAX: (907 ) 276-529 1 

## u. s O F TRANS P )f.p F HEARING S OFM'^lld.'t^TON , D C I n th e Matte r of ;
TG I FREIGH T 

# .^€EIVE D

^^ K2 6 20t l 

# BEARIN G DOCKE T 2^)5 2 ) 

### )FA ADocke t No . CP10NM001 2 )DM S NO . FAA-2010-107 9 )Judg e RICHAR D C . GOODWI N STIPULATIO NT O EXTEN D DEADLINE S Th e parties , throug hrespectiv e counsel , hereb yagre e t o exten d discover yfro mMa y2 , 2011 , th e curren t deadline , t o Jun e 3 , 2011 , t o accommodat e deposition s tha t coul d no t b e schedule d withi nth e curren t deadline . Becaus e o f this , th e partie s als o agre e tha t th e Procedura l an d Discover ySchedul e shoul d b e modifie d a s follows ; Clos e o f Discover y Witnes s List s Motio n Matter s Exchang e o f Exhibit s Intende d t o b e Offere d a t Hearin g Objection s t o Exhibit s Pre-Hearin g Brie f 6/3/1 1 6/15/1 1 6/16/1 1 6/16/1 1 6/23/1 1 6/23/1 1

DAT E D thi s I S da yo f April , 2011 . WILKERSO NHOZUBI N Attorney s fo r TG I Freigh t By :

### WILKERSON HOZUBIN 31 0K STREET , SUIT

E40 5 ANCHORAGE , A

X9950 1 TEL : (907 ) 276-529 7 FAX: (907 ) 27^529 1 ^ ^


### DAT E 

### D thi s VO > da yo f April , 2011 . FEDERA L AVIATIO NADMINISTRATIO N Complainan t
CherylM . Jone s

ORDE R 

## Th eparties ' modifie dJoin t Procedura lan dDiscover y Schedul ei s GRANTED
. DATE D thi s da yo f , 2011
.

Honorabl eRichar dC
. Goodwi n U.S
. Administrativ eLa w Judg e

Stipulatio nr eDeadline s I nth eMatte r

o f TG IFreigh t Docke t No
. CP10NM001 2 Pag e2WILKERSO N HOZUBI N 31 0K STRQT , SUIT

E40 5 ANCHORAGE , A

K 9950 1 TEL : (907 ) 276-529 7 FAX : (907 ) 276^29 1 CERTIFICAT E O F SERVIC E it o n th e

, 2011 , a tru e I hereb ycert i 

### /?'* ' da yo f an d correc t cop' yo f th e foregoin g wa s serve d o n th e following : Origina l Plu s 1 Copy-VI AFacsimil e an d U.S . Mai l Federa l Aviatio nAdministratio n 80 0 Independenc e Avenue , S.W . Washington , D C 2059 1 Attn : Hearin g Docke t Clerk , AGC-43 0 Wilbu r Wrigh t Building-Suit e 2W100 0 (202 ) 493-514 2 - fa x 1 Copy—VI AFacsimil e Th e Honorabl e Richar d C . Goodwin , Administrativ e La wJudg e U.S . Department o f Transportatio n Offic e o f Hearings , M-2 0 120 0 Ne wJerse yAvenue , S.E . Eas t Building , Groun d Floor , Roo mE12-32 0 Washington , D C 2059 0 (202 ) 366-753 6 - fa x On e Copy-VI AU.S . Mai l Howar d L . Martin , Jr . Regiona l Counsel , Offic e o f Regiona l Counsel , AAL- 7 Alask a Regio n Federa l Aviatio nAdministratio n 22 2 West 7 ' Anchorage ,

''* > Avenu e #1 4 A K 99513-758 7 On e Copy-VI AU.S . Mai l Chery l M . Jones , Sr . Attorne y Offic e o f Regiona l Counse l Alask a Regio n Federa l Aviatio nAdministratio n 22 2 Wes t 7'^* ' Avenu e #1 4 Anchorage , A K 99513-758 7 VIILKERS(MHOZUBI N By : ^,^ ,

Carol

- L
. Mcfi>le4s' ^ giOO/g'ja/plead/Sti p r eDiscover y

Stipulatio nr eDeadline s I nth eMatte r

o f TG IFreigh t Docke t No , Pag e3 CP10NM001 2
#### Brian Maginniss, Respondent, v City of New York, Respondent, and Patrick Rafferty, Appellant, et al., Defendant.

Submitted July 31, 1995;

decided September 21, 1995

Motion, insofar as it seeks leave to appeal as against respondent City of New York denied; motion, insofar as it seeks leave to appeal as against respondent Maginniss dismissed upon the ground that as to that party the order sought to be appealed from does not finally determine the action within the meaning of the Constitution.
CONSULTINGAGREEMENT

 

       This Consulting Agreement for the exchange of consulting services for fees is byand between Twin Faces East Entertainment Corporation (TFAC), a NevadaCorporation located at 94 Arthur Hills Court, Henderson, NV. 89074, and M SquareTrust (MSquare), a corporation, located at 17383 Sunset Blvd. Suite A-450,Pacific Palisades, CA 90272, collectively referred to as "TheParties".

 

       WHEREAS, TFAC is a developer of intellectual and entertainment properties, and

 

       WHEREAS, Msquare has various connections and networking contacts in theentertainment business,

 

       NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants provided herein, TheParties agree as follows:

 

       MSquare shall provide services to TFAC on an as requested basis and in anycapacity as requested by TFAC for development of its strategic marketing planfor its entertainment business.

 

       TFAC shall compensate MSquare for these services as follows:

-  Reimbursement    for all direct company related expenses for any travel or pre-approved    business expense other than usual travel and related expenses within 50    miles of the MSquare office.Fifty    Thousand Dollars ($50,000) in fees payable the earlier of May 1, 2003 or the    Company's receipt of funding in the amount of $2 million or greater.
       The term of this Agreement is for the year 2003 at which time all obligationsunder this agreement shall cease.

 

       IN WITNESS THEREOF, the Parties have executed this Agreement effective as of thedate signed below.

 

       **/S/Michael Smolanoff  **                                                                                        **April 15, 2003**
       Michael Smolanoff,President                                                                                   Date

       Twin Faces East Entertainment Corporation

 

       **/S/Michael Wojciechowski  **                                                                                **April 15, 2003**
       Michael Wojciechowski,Trustee                                                                             Date

       MSquare Trust
§ 510.24 Governmental entities eligible for minimum wage phase-in. ( a ) The Commonwealth government of Puerto Rico has been determined to be eligible for treatment under Tier 2, on the basis of wage data supplied to the Department.
( b ) Appendix C of this part contains a listing of Commonwealth government corporations, indicating the phase-in tier which applies. Entities which do not appear on the list are those for which no wage data were supplied. These entities are therefore categorized under Tier 1, and are ineligible for an extended phase-in.
( c ) Appendix D of the part contains a listing of municipalities, indicating the phase-in tier which applies. Municipalities categorized under Tier 1 are those which failed to supply wage data.
( d ) Employees of municipalities who have reason to believe that the municipality by which they are employed has been incorrectly categorized, e.g., categorized under Tier 3 instead of Tier 2, may no later than June 1, 1990, file with the Administrator a petition for review. The petition shall be accompanied by any information the employee may have to support a determination that the municipality is incorrectly categorized. In the event the Administrator determines that a tier other than that listed in appendix D of this part applies, the affected municipality shall be liable for retroactive payment of any back wages found to be due.
( e ) Certain employees of municipalities or government corporations in which the average wage is less than $4.00 per hour are eligible to be paid under Tier 4, rather than Tier 3. Tier 4 applies only to those employees employed by municipalities or government corporations who are principally engaged in one or more of the “traditional” functions listed in § 510.24 (a) or (b). All other employees of such entities must be paid in accordance with Tier 3.
[55 FR 12120, Mar. 30, 1990; 55 FR 12778, Apr. 5, 1990]
#### § 780.1016 Use of evergreens and forest products.

Harvesting of evergreens and other forest products is exempt only when these products will be “used in making such wreaths.” The phrase “used in making such wreaths” places a definite limitation on the purpose for which evergreens may be harvested under section 13(d). Harvesting of these materials for a use other than making wreaths is nonexempt. Also, such harvesting is nonexempt when the evergreens are used for wreathmaking by persons other than the homeworkers (see *Mitchell* v. *Hunt,* 263 F. 2d 913). For example, harvesting of evergreens for sale or distribution to an employer who uses them in his factory to make wreaths is not exempt.
<HTML>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#C0C0C0" link="#0000FF" vlink="#551A8B" alink="#FF
0000">

<center><b>Exhibit No. 21</b>
<p><b>Madison Gas and Electric Co. and Consolidated Subsidiaries</b>
<p><b>SUBSIDIARIES OF THE REGISTRANT</b></center>

<p><br>
<p>As of Dec. 31, 1999, the Company owned 100% of the voting securities
of the following subsidiaries (all Wisconsin corporations):
<p>- MAGAEL INC. - holds title to property acquired by the Company for
future utility plant expansion and nonutility property.
<p>- Central Wisconsin Development Corporation - assists new and expanding
businesses throughout Central Wisconsin by participating in planning, financing,
property acquisition, joint ventures, and associated activities.
<p>- Great Lakes Energy Corp. - Inactive.
<p>- Wisconsin Resources Corporation - Inactive.
<p>- North Central Technologies, Inc. - Inactive.
<p>- Mid America Technologies, Inc. - Inactive.
<p>As of Dec. 31, 1999, Great Lakes Energy Corp. owned 100% of the voting
securities of the following subsidiary (a Wisconsin corporation):
<p>- American Energy Management, Inc. - Inactive.
<br> 
</body>
</HTML>
(79 South. 878)

#### SEAY et al. v. CARRUTHERS-IRWIN SHOE CO.

(6 Div. 513.)

(Court of Appeals of Alabama.

May 7, 1918.)

Appeal from Circuit Court, Lamar County; H. B. Foster, Judge.

E. B. & K. V. Fite, of Hamilton, for appellee.

BRICKEN, J.

Affirmed on certificate.
#### Commonwealth v. Krause

*Ward F. Clark,*Assistant District Attorney, for Commonwealth.

*Harry J. Liederbach,*for defendant.

October 3, 1958.

Satterthwaite, J.,

— Defendant has appealed from his conviction in summary proceeding before a justice of the peace of violation of section 820.1 of The Vehicle Code of May 1, 1929, P. L. 905, as added by the Act of August 24, 1951, P. L. 1350, 75 PS §407.1. This section provides as follows:

> “Every commercial motor vehicle, and every combination of a commercial motor vehicle and trailer, or of a truck tractor and semi-trailer, when used on a highway, shall be so constructed or equipped as to bar water or other road surface substances thrown from *318the rear wheels of such vehicle or combination at tangents exceeding twenty-two and one-half (22%) degrees, measured from the road surface, from passing in a straight line to the rear of such vehicle or combination.”

The alleged offense arose out of defendant’s operation of a truck tractor on a public highway without wheel flaps or other devices meeting the physical requirements of this section. He contends, however, that the statute simply does not apply to his factual situation since a truck tractor, operated alone, is not a commercial vehicle and, inasmuch as the tractor was not hitched to a trailer or semi-trailer, no combination was involved.

We believe that defendant’s position must be sustained. Both “commercial motor vehicle” and “truck tractor” are technical phrases with particular meanings as specifically defined in section 102 of The Vehicle Code, 75 PS §2. A “truck tractor” as therein contemplated is a vehicle “designed and used primarily for drawing other vehicles, and not so constructed as to carry a load, other than a part of the weight of the vehicle and load so drawn.” Defendant’s vehicle was within this description and hence was obviously not a “commercial motor vehicle” which, subject to exceptions not presently material, is defined in section 102 as one “designed for carrying freight or merchandise.”

Penal statutes must be strictly construed. While there might be differences of opinion as to whether or not mud flaps should be required on truck tractors when operated as a separate vehicle, all we hold is that the legislature has not so provided.

And now, October 3, 1958, defendant’s appeal is sustained, the summary conviction is reversed and set aside and defendant is found not guilty, costs to be paid by the county.
- All
            - Title
            - Author
            - Subject
            - Date
            - Full-Text

            -                              Explore                            ******                - Educational Resources
              - Archival Collections
              -                                      Themes                                    ******                  - Economic Data
                - Federal Reserve
                - View all 
              - Timelines 
            -                              Browse                            ******                - Titles
              - Authors
              - Subjects
              - Dates 
            -                              About                            ******                - About FRASER
              - FAQ
              - Contact Us
              -                                      FRASER API                                    ******                  - REST API
                - OAI-PMH 
            - Inside FRASER Blog

            - **

Home                 > Browse by Title > A Study of a Change From One Shift of 9 Hours to Two Shifts of 6 Hours Each

              																	United States. Women's Bureau					 and 	Best, Ethel L. (Ethel Lombard). 						*A Study of a Change From One Shift of 9 Hours to Two Shifts of 6 Hours Each : Women's Bureau Bulletin, No. 116*,												Washington: 								Govt. Print. Off., 										1934,									https://fraser.stlouisfed.org/title/5414,			accessed on September 25, 2024.						    

        - **FRASER**
        - About
        - FAQ
        - Legal and Privacy
        - FRASER API

          -                              @FedFRASER 
          - ** Contact Us
          -  **  What's New  
          -  **  Inside FRASER
EXHIBIT 32.2

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Pick-Ups Plus (the "Company") on Form
10-QSB for the quarter ended March 31, 2006 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned, in the
capacities and on the dates indicated below, hereby certifies pursuant to 18
U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, that to his knowledge: 1. The Report fully complies with the
requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;
and 2. The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operation of the Company.

Date:  May 22, 2006                          By:      _______________________
                                             Name:    Robert White
                                             Title:   Chief Financial Officer



A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other
document authentications, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature
that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written
statement required by Section 906, has been provided to Pick-Ups Plus, Inc. and
will be retained by Pick-Ups Plus, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and
Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.



                                       20
Exhibit 10-S

Amendment No. 1 to Employment Agreement

AGREEMENT by and betweenADC Telecommunications, Inc.,a Minnesota corporation
("ADC" or the "Company"), andRichard R. Roscitt(the
"Executive"), dated effective as of November 27, 2002.

Recitals

NOW
THEREFORE, the parties agree as follows:

1.Definitions.Unless otherwise defined in this Amendment, initially capitalized terms shall have the meanings
assigned to such terms in the Employment Agreement. References to fiscal years are based upon ADC's fiscal year, which ends on October 31 of each year.

2.Section 3 of Employment AgreementCompensation.

Section 3(g)(ii) of
the Employment Agreement is hereby amended as follows:



---



3.Section 5 of Employment AgreementCompensation and Payments Upon Termination.

Section 5(a)
is amended to add new subparagraphs (vi) as follows:



Section 5(b)
is amended to add a new subparagraph (vi) as follows:



4.Section 6 of Employment AgreementChange In Control.

Section 6(c)
is amended and restated in its entirety to read a follows:



5.Miscellaneous.

(a)  This
Amendment shall be governed by, and construed in accordance with, the laws of the State of Minnesota, without reference to its conflict of law rules.

(b)  The
captions of this Amendment are not part of the provisions hereof and shall have no force or effect.

(c)  All
terms of the Employment Agreement which are not expressly modified in this Amendment shall remain unchanged and in full force and effect. This Amendment may not be
amended or modified except by a written agreement executed by the parties hereto or their respective successors.

(d)  This
Amendment may be executed in several counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, and said counterparts shall constitute but one and the same
instrument.

[signature page follows]

2

---

IN
WITNESS WHEREOF, the Executive and the Company have executed this Amendment No. 1 to Employment Agreement as of the day and year first above written.

|ADC Telecommunications, Inc. |  | Richard R. Roscitt             
|---------------------------- |  | -------------------------------
|By                           |  | /s/ LAURA N. OWEN              
|Its                          |  | Vice President, Human Resources
|                             |  |                                
|Date                         |  | November 27, 2002              
|                             |  |                                

3

---

QuickLinks
REPORT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS

To ADC Telecommunications, Inc.:

We
have audited in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards, the financial statements of ADC Telecommunications, Inc. and Subsidiaries included in this Form 10-K and have issued our
report thereon dated November 24, 1999. Our audit was made for the purpose of forming an opinion on the basic financial statements taken as a whole. The Schedule II is the responsibility of the
company's management and is presented for purposes of complying with the Securities and Exchange Commissions rules and is not part of the basic financial statements. This schedule has been subjected
to the auditing procedures applied in the audit of the basic financial statements and, in our opinion, fairly states in all material respects the financial data required to be set forth therein in
relation to the basic financial statements taken as a whole.

ARTHUR
ANDERSEN LLP

Minneapolis,
Minnesota,
November 24, 1999

Schedule IIValuation and Qualifying Accounts

|Description (In thousands)                                                             |  | Balance at
Beginning
of Period |  | Charged to
Costs and
Expenses |        | Deductions |   | Balance
at End of
Period
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |  | ------------------------------ |  | ----------------------------- | ------ | ---------- | - | ------------------------
|Year 1999                                                                              |  |                                |  |                               |        |            |   |                         
|Reserves related to business restructuring, including force and facility consolidation |  |                               |  | $                             | 39,000 |            | $ | 30,000                  
|Year 1998                                                                              |  |                                |  |                               |        |            |   |                         
|Reserves related to business restructuring, including force and facility consolidation |  |                               |  |                               |       |            |   |                        
|Year 1997                                                                              |  |                                |  |                               |        |            |   |                         
|Reserves related to business restructuring, including force and facility consolidation |  |                               |  |                               |       |            |   | 
<PAGE>   1
                                   EXHIBIT 23


INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT



MAPCO Inc.:

We consent to the incorporation by reference in MAPCO Inc.'s Post-Effective
Amendment No. 1 to Registration Statement Nos. 33-13090 and 33-29044 on Form
S-8, Registration Statement No. 33-33217 on Form S-8, and Registration
Statement Nos. 33-34044 and 333-20837 on Form S-3, of our report dated January
27, 1998 (March 3, 1998 as to Notes 2 and 16) with respect to the
consolidated financial statements and financial statement schedules of MAPCO
Inc., which report includes explanatory paragraphs relating to certain
litigation to which the Company is a defendant and the Company's change in its
method of accounting for business process reengineering activities to conform
to the consensus reached by the Emerging Issues Task Force in Issue No. 97-13,
appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of MAPCO Inc. for the year ended
December 31, 1997.


Deloitte & Touche LLP
Tulsa, Oklahoma
March 4, 1998
POWER OF ATTORNEY
   Signature
    
    Title/s/ Robert E. Switz

Robert E. Switz
    
    Chairman, President and Chief Executive 
(principal
executive officer)/s/ James G. Mathews

James G. Mathews
    
    Vice President, Chief Financial Officer 
(principal
financial officer)/s/ Steven G. Nemitz

Steven G. Nemitz
    
    Vice President, Controller 
(principal
accounting officer)/s/ William R. Spivey, Ph.D.

William R. Spivey, Ph.D.
    
    Independent Lead Director/s/ John J. Boyle III

John J. Boyle III
    
    Director/s/ Mickey P. Foret

Mickey P. Foret
    
    Director/s/ Lois M. Martin

Lois M. Martin
    
    Director/s/ Krish A. Prabhu, Ph.D.

Krish A. Prabhu, Ph.D.
    
    Director




---



##### 



Signature
    
    Title/s/ John E. Rehfeld

John E. Rehfeld
    
    Director/s/ David A. Roberts

David A. Roberts
    
    Director/s/ Larry W. Wangberg

Larry W. Wangberg
    
    Director/s/ John D. Wunsch

John D. Wunsch
    
    Director