alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 97.43 Enforcement. ( a ) *Remedies for noncompliance.* If a grantee or subgrantee materially fails to comply with any term of an award, whether stated in a Federal statute or regulation, an assurance, in a State plan or application, a notice of award, or elsewhere, the awarding agency may take one or more of the following actions, as appropriate in the circumstances: ( 1 ) Temporarily withhold cash payments pending correction of the deficiency by the grantee or subgrantee or more severe enforcement action by the awarding agency,
( 2 ) Disallow (that is, deny both use of funds and matching credit for) all or part of the cost of the activity or action not in compliance,
( 3 ) Wholly or partly suspend or terminate the current award for the grantee's or subgrantee's program,
( 4 ) Withhold further awards for the program, or
( 5 ) Take other remedies that may be legally available.
( b ) *Hearings, appeals.* In taking an enforcement action, the awarding agency will provide the grantee or subgrantee an opportunity for such hearing, appeal, or other administrative proceeding to which the grantee or subgrantee is entitled under any statute or regulation applicable to the action involved.
( c ) *Effects of suspension and termination.* Costs of grantee or subgrantee resulting from obligations incurred by the grantee or subgrantee during a suspension or after termination of an award are not allowable unless the awarding agency expressly authorizes them in the notice of suspension or termination or subsequently. Other grantee or subgrantee costs during suspension or after termination which are necessary and not reasonably avoidable are allowable if: ( 1 ) The costs result from obligations which were properly incurred by the grantee or subgrantee before the effective date of suspension or termination, are not in anticipation of it, and, in the case of a termination, are noncancell- able, and,
( 2 ) The costs would be allowable if the award were not suspended or expired normally at the end of the funding period in which the termination takes effect.
( d ) *Relationship to debarment and suspension.* The enforcement remedies identified in this section, including suspension and termination, do not preclude grantee or subgrantee from being subject to “Debarment and Suspension” under E.O. 12549 (see § 97.35).
#### Gammon, *Appellant,*v. Lafayette County.

1. Public Officers: their compensation. The right of a public officer to compensation for his services is derived from the statute. Unless that gives it he must perform his duties without compensation.

2. Probate Judges: pees. Probate judges are not entitled to fees for entering orders opening and adjourning court.

*Appeal from Lafayette Circuit*Court.—Hon. Wm. T. Wood, Judge.

Affirmed.

*Alex. Graves*for appellant.

*John S. Blackwell*and *William Young*for respondent.

Henry, J.

Plaintiff sued the county before a justice of the peace on an account for $9.25, the aggregate of fees claimed by him as clerk of the probate court of said county, for opening and adjourning orders of said court entered of record from April 8th to July 10th, 1878, inclusive, except Sundays. Defendant had judgment both in the jus*676tice’s court and the circuit court, and plaintiff has appealed to this coiirt. It is agreed that plaintiff was judge' and *ex-officio*clerk of the probate court of Lafayette county, and the only question to be determined is whether plaintiff is entitled by law to the fees claimed.

The right of a public officer to- fees is derived from the statute. He is entitled to no fees for services he may perform, as such officer, unless the statute gives it. When the statute fails to provide a fee for service he is required to perform as a public officer, he has no claim upon the State for compensation for such service.

Sections 6, '7 and 8, Wagner’s Statutes, 620, 621, 622, leave no doubt in our minds that plaintiff is not entitled to the fees claimed. Section 6 schedules the fees allowed clerks of county courts, and section 7 those allowed clerks of county courts for services, “ in probate and other business relating to settlements of guardians, curators, idiots and lunatics.” By section 6 a fee of fifteen cents is allowed the clerk of the county court “ for all orders not otherwise provided for,” and that entitles him to a fee for each opening and adjourning order. No such provision is found in the schedule of fees allowed the clerk of that court for services in probate ’business, and section 8 provides that “judges of probate shall have such fees for their services as are allowed by law to clerks of county courts for like services.” That the county had previously paid plaintiff and others for similar services, is immaterial. A misconception of the statute by the county court, no matter how long it may have been acted upon by that tribunal, will not change the law.

All concurring,

the judgment is affirmed.
(80 South. 895)

#### FARLEY v. STATE.

(1 Div. 309.)

(Court of Appeals of Alabama.

Dec. 17, 1918.)

Appeal from Circuit Court, Mobile County; Claude A. Grayson, Judge. Prank Parley was convicted of violating the prohibition law, and he appeals.

Affirmed.

C. W. Tompkins, of Mobile, for appellant. P. Loyd Tate, Atty. Gen., and E. S. Thigpen, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.

SAMPORD, J.

The defendant was tried and convicted of a violation of the prohibition law, and from the judgment of conviction he appeals. There is no bill of exceptions in the record, and there is a certificate of the presiding judge that no bill of exceptions has been presented and that the time for presenting same has expired. We find no error in the record, and the judgment is affirmed. Affirmed.
Browsing Category

# Annual Reports of the Office of Economic Research

## 			Annual Report for the Office of Economic Research, FY 2022		

Sep 21, 2023

## 			Annual Report Of The Office Of Economic Research, FY 2021		

Sep 8, 2022

## 			Annual Report of the Office of Economic Research, FY 2020		

Mar 31, 2022

## 			Annual Report of the Office of Economic Research, FY 2019		

Jan 21, 2021

## 			Annual Report of the Office of Economic Research, FY 2018		

Aug 12, 2019

## 			Annual Report of the Office of Economic Research, FY 2017		

Jan 1, 2018

## 			Annual Report of the Office of Economic Research, FY 2016		

Jan 1, 2017

## 			Annual Report of the Office of Economic Research, FY 2015		

Dec 5, 2015

**				Loading ...							Load More Posts			**				No More Posts 			

Stay Connected            

The Office of Advocacy supports businesses with less than 500 employees, non-profit organizations, and independent contractors. On behalf of small entities in our country, our mission is to help small businesses as regulations are developed.

REGULATION     RESEARCH     OUTREACH     NEWS     RESOURCES     ABOUT
Regulatory Alerts     Letters to Agencies     Agency Roundtables     State Profiles     Accessibility**
Exhibit (32)(a)

CERTIFICATION OF PERIODIC REPORT

I, Dennis J. Kuester, certify, pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that to my knowledge:



| | (1) | the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Marshall & Ilsley Corporation (the Company) for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2006 (the Report) fully
complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (14 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and
| | --- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (2) | the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dated: February 23, 2007.



/s/ Dennis J. KuesterDennis J. KuesterChairman of the Board and Chief Executive OfficerMarshall & Ilsley Corporation


This certification accompanies this Annual Report on Form 10-K pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not be deemed filed by Marshall & Ilsley Corporation for purposes of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
Argued and submitted April 5,

reversed and remanded June 2, 1993

#### FRANK E. VOTH, *Appellant, v.*Manfred (Fred) MAASS, Superintendent, Oregon State Penitentiary, *Respondent.*

(92C12000; CA A77097)

852 P2d 969

Garrett A. Richardson, Portland, argued the cause and filed the brief for appellant.

Stephanie S. Andrus, Assistant Attorney General, Salem, argued the cause for respondent. With her on the brief were Theodore R. Kulongoski, Attorney General, and Virginia L. Linder, Solicitor General, Salem.

Before Deits, Presiding Judge, and Riggs and Durham, Judges.

RIGGS, J.

*576RIGGS, J.

Petitioner appeals from a judgment dismissing, *sua sponte,*his petition for a writ of *habeas corpus.*ORS 34.370(6). We reverse.

In his petition, petitioner alleged that he suffers from a foot problem. He further alleged that an orthopedic doctor at the Eastern Oregon Correctional Institution prescribed orthopedic shoes and socks, which he wore in prison until his transfer to the Oregon State Penitentiary (OSP). •Upon arrival, he alleges, the orthopedic shoes were confiscated. The OSP doctor declined to prescribe special footwear. Petitioner alleges that confiscation of his orthopedic shoes has caused pain and difficulty in walking, and has aggravated an already serious foot condition.

A condition that exposes an inmate to a serious health hazard justifies *habeas corpus*relief. *Bedell v. Schiedler,*307 Or 562, 570, 770 P2d 909 (1989). In *Bedell,*the Supreme Court said that a petitioner who suffered severe headaches, a sore throat and sinus problems did not have to wait months and or even years for relief through other legal proceedings but could, instead, seek *habeas corpus*relief. 307 Or at 569. Here, petitioner’s health problems are as serious as those in *Bedell.*It is particularly noteworthy that, according to the petition, the Department of Corrections apparently considered petitioner’s foot condition serious enough to provide medical treatment through the use of the special shoes and socks before the institutional transfer. Petitioner need not endure pain and aggravation of his condition while pursuing slower, more cumbersome legal relief. *Habeas corpus*is an appropriate remedy in these circumstances.

Reversed and remanded.
§ 459.4 Service of pleading and other papers under this subchapter. ( a ) *Method of service.* Notices of hearing, decisions, orders and other papers may be served personally or by registered or certified mail or by telegraph. When service is by mail, the date of service shall be the day when the matter served is deposited in the United States mail.
( b ) *Upon whom served.* All papers, except as herein otherwise provided, shall be served upon all counsel of record and upon parties not represented by counsel or by their agents designated by them or by law and upon the Director, or his designated officer, or agent or Administrative Law Judge where appropriate. Service upon such counsel or representative shall constitute service upon the party, but a copy also shall be transmitted to the party.
[45 FR 15165, Mar. 7, 1980. Redesignated at 50 FR 31311, Aug. 1, 1985, as amended at 78 FR 8027, Feb. 5, 2012]
Exhibit 21-a

                          SUBSIDIARIES OF THE COMPANY

The following list of subsidiaries of the Company identifies the name of the
subsidiary, the state or other jurisdiction of incorporation or organization
and the name under which such subsidiaries do business:

                            ADC VIDEO SYSTEMS, INC.
                   formerly American Lightwave Systems, Inc.
                            A Delaware corporation
                            AVS, ADC Video Systems
                                       
                             FIBERMUX CORPORATION
                           A California corporation
                            Fibermux, ADC Fibermux
                                       
                           KENTROX INDUSTRIES, INC.
                            A Delaware corporation
                             Kentrox, ADC Kentrox
                                       
                                 ADC EUROPE NV
                                    Belgium
                                ADC, ADC Europe
                                       
                           ADC INTERNATIONAL LIMITED
                                    Jamaica
                                       
                          ADC de MEXICO, S.A. de C.V.
                                    Mexico
                                       
                            ADC TELECOM CANADA INC.
                                    Canada
                                       
           ADC TELECOMMUNICATIONS AUSTRALIA (HOLDINGS) PTY. LIMITED
                                   Australia
                                       
                 ADC Telecomunications Australia Pty. Limited
                                   Australia
                                       
                               AOFR Pty. Limited
                                   Australia
                                       
                 ADC TELECOMMUNICATIONS SINGAPORE PTE. LIMITED
                                   Singapore
                                       
                         ADC TELECOMMUNICATIONS UK LTD
                                United Kingdom
                          ADC, ADC Telecommunications
                                       
                    ADC TELECOMUNICACIONES VENEZUELA, S.A.
                                   Venezuela
                                       
                              AOFR AMERICAS, INC.
                            A Delaware corporation
                                       
                               AOFR EUROPE GmbH
                                    Germany
                          ADC, ADC Telecommunications
                                       
           SHANGHAI ADC TELECOMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT CO. LTD. (50%)
                          People's Republic of China
#### § 794.111 General characteristics of the statutory enterprise.

As defined in the Act, the term “enterprise” is roughly descriptive of a business rather than of an establishment or of an employer although on occasion the three may coincide. The enterprise, however, is not necessarily coextensive with the entire business activities of an employer. The enterprise may consist of a single establishment which may be operated by one or more employers; or it may be composed of a number of establishments which may be operated by one or more employers. On the other hand, a single employer may operate more than one enterprise. The Act treats as separate enterprises different businesses which are unrelated to each other and lack any common business purpose, even if they are operated by the same employer.
-80 -79 -78 -77 -76 -75 -74

 39

 40

 41

 42

★

▲

▲

▲

▲

★

▲

▲

▲ ▲ 500

 1000

 1500

 500

18 12 06 00

07/17

NOAA HYSPLIT MODEL

 Backward trajectory ending at 2300 UTC 17 Jul 07

 EDAS Meteorological Data

Source

★ at 39.44 N 77.04 W Meters AGL
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
This  schedule  contains  summary  information   extracted  from  the  Company's
Financial Statements as of December 31, 1998 and is qualified in its entirety by
reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<CIK>          0000061004                         
<NAME>         Lynch Corporation               
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                   DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                          28,153
<SECURITIES>                                       967
<RECEIVABLES>                                   58,988
<ALLOWANCES>                                     1,305
<INVENTORY>                                     46,563
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               162,622
<PP&E>                                         264,454
<DEPRECIATION>                                  77,930
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 480,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          143,854
<BONDS>                                        246,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         5,139
<OTHER-SE>                                      34,654
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   480,000
<SALES>                                        514,526
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               514,526
<CGS>                                          444,745
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  490,506
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              27,722
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  3,457
<INCOME-TAX>                                    (1,412)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              3,357
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     3,357
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     2.37
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     2.37
        


</TABLE>
§ 785.16 Off duty. ( a ) *General.* Periods during which an employee is completely relieved from duty and which are long enough to enable him to use the time effectively for his own purposes are not hours worked. He is not completely relieved from duty and cannot use the time effectively for his own purposes unless he is definitely told in advance that he may leave the job and that he will not have to commence work until a definitely specified hour has arrived. Whether the time is long enough to enable him to use the time effectively for his own purposes depends upon all of the facts and circumstances of the case.
( b ) *Truck drivers; specific examples.* A truck driver who has to wait at or near the job site for goods to be loaded is working during the loading period. If the driver reaches his destination and while awaiting the return trip is required to take care of his employer's property, he is also working while waiting. In both cases the employee is engaged to wait. Waiting is an integral part of the job. On the other hand, for example, if the truck driver is sent from Washingtion, DC to New York City, leaving at 6 a.m. and arriving at 12 noon, and is completely and specifically relieved from all duty until 6 p.m. when he again goes on duty for the return trip the idle time is not working time. He is waiting to be engaged. (*Skidmore* v. *Swift,* 323 U.S. 134, 137 (1944); *Walling* v. *Dunbar Transfer & Storage,* 3 W.H. Cases 284; 7 Labor Cases para. 61,565 (W.D. Tenn. 1943); *Gifford* v. *Chapman,* 6 W.H. Cases 806; 12 Labor Cases para. 63,661 (W.D. Okla., 1947); *Thompson* v. *Daugherty,* 40 Supp. 279 (D. Md. 1941))
###### Editorial Note on Part 8

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 8 appear at 61 FR 19985, May 3, 1996.

#### § 8.13 Right to counsel.

Each interested party shall have the right to appear in person or by counsel or other representative in any proceeding before the Board.
1IncreasesincirculatorMSPwillresultfromtwodistinctsources:1.Increasedmotorcost•SwitchingfromPermanentSplitCapacitor(PSC)wet‐rotortoECMwillincreasepurchased‐partsand/orlaborcosts•Motorsareeithermanufacturedin‐house,orbuilt‐to‐specoutofhouse.Circulatormotorscannotbeboughtoff‐the‐shelf.•ThereisnopublicallyavailabledataonPSCwet‐rotormotorcost,andwehavenotreceivedenoughdatatoaggregate-Inarulemaking,wemaybeabletoreverseengineermotorcosts-Forthisexercise,weextrapolatefromoff‐the‐shelfmotorsintheCRErulemaking2.Increasedmanufacturermarkuptocovermanufacturerredesignandconversioncosts.IncrementalCostsforCirculators2CRE rulelookedatoff‐the‐shelfPSC andECM motorcostsforshaftpowersrangingfrom6to16Watts.Asmall,1/25HPcirculatorpumprequiresashaftwattageof29.8Watts.•Approximately90WattsofdrawforaPSC and45WattsforanECM.TheCRE costcurvescanbeextrapolatedto29.8Watts,withtheresults:•PSC:$15.77•ECM:$30.87•RatioofECM toPSC cost:2.0Basedonmanufacturerprovideddata,theshipments‐weighted‐averagecostfora3‐Speed,WetRotor,PSC Circulatormotoris:•PSC (wet‐rotor):$29.50Assumingthe2.0costratioholds:•ECM (wet‐rotor):$59.00ApproximateIncrementalCostsof$29.50BaselineMotors: CostExtrapolation$30.87$15.773Manufacturersweresurveyedonestimatedredesignandconversioncost,brokenoutbycirculatortypeandHPrange.Baseonsurveyresults,weestimatethefollowing:Manufacturer RedesignandConversionCosts≤1/4HPAggregate IndustryConversionCost$39,000,000AnnualShipments1,500,000EstimatedPaybackPeriod(Years)4ShipmentsoverPaybackPeriod6,000,000IncrementalCostpershipment$6.504TotalIncremental Cost:≤1/4HPMotorCostConversionCostIncrementalCost$29.50$6.50MFG Markup1.35NotApplicableDistribution Markup(Preliminary)1.55 1.55Incremental CosttoCustomer$61.73 $10.08TOTALIncrementalCosttoCustomer$71.81
```

[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 205 (Tuesday, October 23, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 64837-64838]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-26034]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Fourth Meeting: RTCA Special Committee 227, Standards of Navigation 
Performance

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), U.S. Department of 
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Meeting Notice of RTCA Special Committee 227, Standards of 
Navigation Performance.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is issuing this notice to advise the public of the 
fourth meeting of the RTCA Special Committee 227, Standards of 
Navigation Performance.

DATES: The meeting will be held November 12-16, 2012 from 9:00 a.m.-

[[Page 64838]]

5:00 p.m. Contact Dave Nakamura by telephone at 425-965-6896 or email 
dave.nakamura@boeing.com.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at RTCA, 1150 18th Street NW., 
Suite 910, Washington, DC 20036.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The RTCA Secretariat, 1150 18th Street 
NW., Suite 910, Washington, DC 20036, or by telephone at (202) 330-0662 
or (202) 833-9339, fax at (202) 833-9434, or Web site at http://www.rtca.org.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant to section 10(a)(2) of the Federal 
Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. No. 92-463, 5 U.S.C., App.), notice is 
hereby given for a meeting of Special Committee 227. The agenda will 
include the following:

November 12-16, 2012

     Welcome/Introductions/Administrative Remarks
     Agenda Overview
     Review Minutes and Action Items
      Update/Approve Minutes
     Review of Planned Work Program for the Week
     Plenary Review/Acceptance of MASPS changes
     Technical Requirements Breakout Session (Every day as 
appropriate)
     Other Business
     Next Meeting Discussion
     Adjourn
    Attendance is open to the interested public but limited to space 
availability. With the approval of the chairman, members of the public 
may present oral statements at the meeting. Persons wishing to present 
statements or obtain information should contact the person listed in 
the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. Members of the public may 
present a written statement to the committee at any time.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on October 15, 2012.
Kathy Hitt,
Management Analyst, Business Operations Group, Federal Aviation 
Administration.
[FR Doc. 2012-26034 Filed 10-22-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
```