alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Regulatory Evaluation Docket No. FAA- Direct orate Identifier: 20 15
-CE-035-AD Add the work hours. por i.\ cost , and 1111111ht!r 

### ()/u.s · . l'l!gi.\tt!red pruduc!s /()the tuhie he/ow. ll ht!n FOil ore 

### ji11ished. click 

### on 1he ·· l_i pJate Field.\., huff 

### on 10 wacnuatiw!/y.fi/1 in !he 

### total.\ . 

### Update Fields 

# I
Estimated Costs: Action Costs per Product (e.g., aircraft, engine, (e.g., Inspection , propeller, appliance) Work-hours Labor Parts Cost Total Costs Number of Total Cost replacement) (include cost (labor+ 

## u.s . for U.S. Fleet Do not include oncondition costs here access , testing, (@$85/h parts) Registered and close-up) our) Products Inspection .5 $42.50 0 $ 42.50 60 $2,550.00 Replacement of $$ cushion edging with 3 255.00 $200.00 $200 .00 60 $12 , 000.00 four wear pads.

I

f

The known number of products in compliance: 0 Total Costs ofcompliance for U .S . fleet: $29 ,850 Costs covered under warranty (if known) $29,850 On-Condition Costs: 

# G Action Work-hours Labor cost Parts Cost Cost per Product (e.g., Inspection, ( include access, (@$85/hour)

replacement) testing, and closeup) Replace after inspection I $85 $20 $ 105.00 if necessary. 

### 7

### Special considerations for Economic Analysis (Use thisfield to explain anything in the Es timated Costs table that was assumed or might not be obvious. This field can also be used to explain warranty costs): Quest will prov i de one service kit ot replace the four wear pads per SB 15-01. Quest warranty will reimburse some operators for certain l abor costs . 

### Executive Order 12866: Could the AD be considered a " significant regulatory action''? @ YES* 

### 0 NO 

### IZl * Explanation: 

### DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedur es : I s the AD significant? 

# fi» YES* 

### 0 NO 

### IZl *Explanation: 

### Regulatory Flexibility Act: Will the AD have a significant economic impact on 

### a substantial number of small entities? Explain for either a Yes or No answer. 

## @ YES 

### 0 NO IZl Explanation: 

### Intrastate Aviation in Alaska: This AD cou l d affect intrastate aviation in Alaska. Is it appropriate to include specific requirements for aircraft operated in Alaska where aviation might be the only mode oftransportation? 

# G YES * IZl NO 

### 0 *Explanation: 

### This is an aircraft which is used 

### in Alaska.



### 8
**Exhibit 32.2**

**SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATIONS**

In connection with the Annual Report of Magellan Petroleum Corporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the period ending June 30, 2011 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commissionon the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Antoine J. Lafargue, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer of the Company, do hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that: 

(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements ofsection 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and 

(2) The informationcontained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company. 

 

Dated: September 20, 2011
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except

under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

February 23, 2006

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 05-40792

Conference Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

VICTOR MONTES-FLORES, also known as Simon Blanco-Carriyo,

Defendant-Appellant.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 1:04-CR-900-ALL

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

Before GARZA, DENNIS, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Victor Montes-Flores (Montes) appeals his guilty-plea

conviction and sentence for being illegally present in the United

States following removal subsequent to a conviction for an

aggravated felony. Montes argues that the district court erred

by requiring him to cooperate in the collection of a DNA sample

from him as a condition of his supervised release. In United

States v. Riascos-Cuenu, 428 F.3d 1100, 1101-02 (5th Cir. 2005),

petition for cert. filed (Jan. 9, 2006) (No. 05-8662), this court
No. 05-40792

-2-

considered an indistinguishable challenge and held that it was

not ripe for review because the possibility that the defendant’s

DNA sample would be collected by the Bureau of Prisons rendered

the possibility that his DNA sample would be collected while on

supervised release conjecture. Accordingly, this portion of

Montes’s appeal is dismissed.

Montes’s constitutional challenge is foreclosed by

Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224, 235 (1998). 

Although Montes contends that Almendarez-Torres was incorrectly

decided and that a majority of the Supreme Court would overrule

Almendarez-Torres in light of Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S.

466 (2000), we have repeatedly rejected such arguments on the

basis that Almendarez-Torres remains binding. See United States

v. Garza-Lopez, 410 F.3d 268, 276 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 126

S. Ct. 298 (2005). Montes properly concedes that his argument is

foreclosed in light of Almendarez-Torres and circuit precedent,

but he raises it here to preserve it for further review. 

JUDGMENT AFFIRMED; APPEAL DISMISSED IN PART.
EXHIBIT 12.1
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 104 (Tuesday, May 30, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Pages 34498-34499]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-13435]


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

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Drug Enforcement Administration


Manufacturer of Controlled Substances; Notice of Registration

    By Notice dated February 10, 2000, and published in the Federal 
Register on February 17, 2000, (65 FR 8207), Noramco of Delaware, Inc., 
Division of McNeilab, Inc., which has changed its name to Noramco of 
Delaware, Inc., Division of Ortho-McNeil, Inc., 500 Old Swedes Landing 
Road, Wilmington, Delaware 19801, made application by renewal to the 
Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) to be registered as a bulk 
manufacturer of the basic classes of controlled substances listed 
below:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                    Drug                               Schedule
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Codeine (9050).............................  II
Oxycodone (9143)...........................  II

[[Page 34499]]

 
Hydrocodone (9193).........................  II
Morphone (9300)............................  II
Thebaine (9333)............................  II
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The firm plans to manufacture the listed controlled substances for 
distribution to its customers as bulk product.
    DEA has considered the factors in Title 21, United States Code, 
Section 823(a) and determined that the registration of Noramco of 
Delaware, Inc. to manufacture the listed controlled substances is 
consistent with the public interest at this time. DEA has investigated 
Noramco of Delaware, Inc. on a regular basis to ensure that the 
company's continued registsration is consistent with the public 
interest. These investigations have included inspection and testing of 
the company's physical security systems, audits of the company's 
records, verification of the company's compliance with state and local 
laws, and a review of the company's background and history. Therefore, 
pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 823 and 28 CFR 0.100 and 0.104, the Deputy 
Assistant Administrator, Office of Diversion Control, hereby orders 
that the application submitted by the above firm for registration as a 
bulk manufacturer of the basic classes of controlled substances listed 
above is granted.

    Dated: May 19, 2000.
John H. King,
Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of Diversion Control, Drug 
Enforcement Administration.
[FR Doc. 00-13435 Filed 5-26-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-09-M
TS- AMID10/20/40

Attachment #6

Pt. 2, Sec. A, 3

Environmental Release and Disposal Information on the New Chemical Substance s at Industrial Sites Controlled by the Submitter

– Manufacture and Processing
EIGINAL 

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA 

DA 22-0018 

S.W. , a minor, by and through her Guardian 

Jeffrey Ferguson, OCT 1 8 2022 

Bowen Greenwood 

Clerk of Supreme Court Plaintiff State of luiorrtana and Appellee, 

v. 

STATE OF MONTANA, by and through the 

Montana Department of Public Health and Human 

Services, 

Defendant and Appellant. 

ORDER 

On October 11, 2022, Montana Association of Counties (MACo) filed a motion for 

leave to file an amicus brief in this appeal. The motion indicated that the Appellant State of 

Montana did not object but that counsel for Plaintiff and Appellee S.W. opposed the motion. 

The Court entered an order the same day, granting MACo leave to file on or before 

November 3, 2022. 

Wilson responded the following day, asking the Court either to reconsider or to grant 

leave to file a sur-response brief confined to new matters raised by MACo. Wilson pointed 

out that she had filed her Appellee's Response Brief well before MACo filed its motion and 

would be left unable to respond to its arguments. Good cause appearing, 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellee S.W. is granted leave to file an additional 

brief, limited to arguments made in MACo's amicus brief. The brief shall be filed on or 

before November 17, 2022, and shall not exceed 3,000 words. 

The Clerk is directed to provide a copy of this Order to all counsel of record. 

DATED this l eta;Of October, 2022. 

1 Justice 

10/18/2022

Case Number: DA 22-0018
t€ 

L,.4 4/ -1"1 "4 %.

Justict 

9
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 104 (Tuesday, May 30, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Pages 34447-34452]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-13405]


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

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Office of the Secretary


Revised Non-Foreign Overseas per Diem Rates

AGENCY: DoD, Per Diem, Travel and Transportation Allowance Committee.

ACTION: Notice of revised non-foreign overseas per diem rates.

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

SUMMARY: The Per Diem, Travel and Transportation Allowance Committee is 
publishing Civilian Personnel Per Diem Bulletin Number 217. This 
bulletin lists revisions in the per diem rates prescribed for U.S. 
Government employees for official travel in Alaska, Hawaii, Puerto 
Rico, the Northern Mariana Islands and Possessions of the United 
States. AEA changes announced in Bulletin Number 194 remain in effect. 
Bulletin Number 217 is being published in the Federal Register to 
assure that travelers are paid per diem at the most current rates.

EFFECTIVE DATE:  June 1, 2000.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:  This document gives notice of revisions in 
per diem rates prescribed by the Per Diem Travel and Transportation 
Allowance Committee for non-foreign areas outside the continental 
United States. It supersedes Civilian Personnel Per Diem Bulletin 
Number 216. Distribution of Civilian Personnel Per Diem Bulletins by 
mail was discontinued. Per Diem Bulletins published periodically in the 
Federal Register now constitute the only notification of revisions in 
per diem rates to agencies and establishments outside the Department of 
Defense. For more information or questions about per diem rates, please 
contact your local travel office. The text of the Bulletin follows:
BILLING CODE 5001-10-M

[[Page 34448]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30MY00.015


[[Page 34449]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30MY00.016


[[Page 34450]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30MY00.017


[[Page 34451]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30MY00.018



[[Page 34452]]


    Dated: May 23, 2000.
L.M. Bynum,
Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
[FR Doc. 00-13405 Filed 5-26-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 50001-10-C
ex10_1.htm










Bonds.com 8-K


Exbibit 10.1


 


 


BONDS.COM GROUP, INC.







SECOND AMENDMENT TO 2011 EQUITY PLAN







Dated May 30, 2012







In accordance with Section 16(a) of the 2011 Equity Plan (the “Plan”) of Bonds.com Group, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the “Company”), the Company amends the Plan as set forth below.







1. Amendment to Section 3(a) the Plan. The first sentence of Section 3(a) of the Plan is hereby amended to increase the number of shares available for issuance pursuant to the Plan by deleting the number “125,000,000” and replacing it with the number “200,000,000”.







2. Amendment to Section 3(b) the Plan. The first sentence of Section 3(b) of the Plan is hereby amended by deleting the number “125,000,000” and replacing it with the number “200,000,000”.







3. No Other Amendments.  Except as specifically set forth in this Second Amendment to the Plan, no other changes or amendments are made to the Plan.







4. Effective Date; Shareholder Approval. This Second Amendment to the Plan is effective on the date set forth above.







* * * * *







Adopted by the Board of Directors on May 30, 2012


 





	  	  	
BONDS.COM GROUP, INC.


	 	 	a Delaware corporation
	  	  	  
	  	  	
By:

	
/s/ John Ryan


	  	  	
Name:

	John Ryan
	  	  	
Title:

	Chief Financial Officer
# EPA Registration

1043

- 125Pages 155 - 159 * Confidential Statement of Formula may be entitled to confidential treatment *Page 162 - * Confidential Statement of Formula may be entitled to confidential treatment *
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 104 (Tuesday, May 30, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 34437]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-13387]


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

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service


Willamette Provincial Advisory Committee (PAC); Meeting

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Action of meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The Willamette Province Advisory Committee (PAC) will meet on 
Thursday, June 15, 2000. The meeting is scheduled to begin at 9 a.m., 
and will conclude at approximately 2 p.m. The meeting will be held at 
the Salem Office of the Bureau of Land Management, 1717 Fabry Road SE, 
Salem, Oregon, (503) 375-5646. The tentative agenda includes: (1) 
Information sharing by PAC members, (2) Threatened and Endangered 
Species update--spotted owl, Canada lynx, (3) Public forum, (4) 
Presentation and discussion on FS Roadless area conservation DEIS, (5) 
PAC discussion and advice on rechartering membership.
    The Public Forum is tentatively scheduled to begin at 10:30 a.m. 
Time allotted for individual presentations will be limited to 3-4 
minutes and the total time allotted for the Public Forum will be 40 
minutes. Written comments may be submitted prior to the June 15 meeting 
by sending them to Designated Federal Official Neal Forrester at the 
address given below.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For more information regarding this 
meeting, contact Designated Federal Official Neal Forrester; Willamette 
National Forest; 211 East Seventh Avenue; Eugene, Oregon 97401; (541) 
465-6924.

    Dated: May 23, 2000.
Darrell L. Kenops,
Forest Supervisor.
[FR Doc. 00-13387 Filed 5-26-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M
Argued and submitted July 13, 1992,

affirmed February 17,

reconsideration denied April 14,

petition for review denied May 25, 1993 (316 Or 528)

#### STATE OF OREGON, Respondent, *v.*KENNETH N. HARTRAMPF, *Appellant.*

(89-5707; CA A70906)

847 P2d 856

J. Michael Alexander, Salem, argued the cause for appellant. With him on the brief was Burt, Swanson, Lathen, Alexander & McCann, Salem.

Robert B. Rocklin, Assistant Attorney General, Salem, argued the cause for respondent. With him on the brief were Charles S. Crookham, Attorney General, and Virginia L. Linder, Solicitor General, Salem.

Before Richardson, Chief Judge, and Deits and Durham, Judges.

DEITS, J.

*239DEITS, J.

This case involves the execution of a search warrant at Big Meadow Farm in Columbia County on May 21, 1989. The facts are set out in a companion case decided this date, *State v. Albee,*118 Or App 212, 847 P2d 858 (1993). In *Albee,*the defendant was convicted of involvement in animal fighting under ORS 167.355. We upheld his conviction under a challenge to the statute based on vagueness and overbreadth. We also upheld the trial court’s denial of his motion to suppress.

Defendant here appeals his conviction for attempted involvement in animal fighting. ORS 167.355; ORS 161.405. He makes the same challenges to ORS 167.355 as those addressed in *Albee,*and we reject them for the same reasons we identified there. In addition, defendant argues that, when the statute is combined with the attempt statute, ORS 161.405, its defects are more pronounced. He explains:

> “If it can possibly be saved from direct attack, it is certainly unconstitutional when coupled with ORS 161.405, criminalizing attempted involvement in animal fighting. Under such analysis a person can be convicted of attempting to intentionally, knowingly, recklessly, or negligently be a spectator at preparations for an animal fight. Under the principles discussed above, such prohibition is both vague and overbroad, and could encompass wide levels of acceptable and Constitutionally protected activity.”

Defendant makes no First Amendment challenge and identifies no constitutionally protected activity proscribed by the statutes at issue. Therefore, the issue is whether defendant’s conduct in this case falls within the statutes’ prohibitions. Defendant stipulates that he knowingly was among the .spectators at the farm hosting a cockfighting event. Fights were about to begin, admission was being charged and people were placing wagers on the fights. Under ORS 161.405, in order to be convicted of an attempt to commit a crime, a person must “intentionally engag[e] in conduct which constitutes a substantial step toward commission of the crime.” A person of common intelligence could discern that defendant’s conduct here constituted a substantial step toward involvement in animal fighting. We conclude that the statutes establishing the offense of attempted *240involvement in animal fighting are not unconstitutionally vague in violation of the Federal Due Process Clause or Article I, sections 20 and 21, of the Oregon Constitution.

Affirmed.
Editorial Note on Part 7
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 7 appear at 61 FR 19985, May 3, 1996.

§ 7.8 Disposition by the Administrative Review Board. ( a ) The Board may decline review of any case whenever in its judgement a review would be inappropriate or because of lack of timeliness, the nature of the relief sought, or other reasons.
( b ) The Board shall decide the case upon the basis of all relevant matter contained in the entire record before it. The Board shall notify interested persons participating in the proceeding of its decision.
( c ) Decisions of the Board shall be by majority vote. A case will be reviewed upon the affirmative vote of one member.
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



The undersigned hereby certifies, in his capacity as Chief Executive Officer of Modtech Holdings, Inc. (the Company), for purposes of 18
U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that based on his knowledge:



| |  |  | the Quarterly Report of the Company on Form 10-Q/A for the quarter ended June 30, 2005, (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
| | - |  | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



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



Dated: October 13, 2005



/s/ DENNIS L. SHOGRENDennis L. ShogrenChief Financial Officer and Chief Accounting Officer
```

[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 153 (Thursday, August 8, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Page 48539]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-19251]

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

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice 8415]

Designation of Bahawal Khan, Also Known as Salahuddin Ayubi, Also 
Known as Bahwal Khan, as a Specially Designated Global Terrorist 
Pursuant to Section 1(b) of Executive Order 13224, as Amended

    Acting under the authority of and in accordance with section 1(b) 
of Executive Order 13224 of September 23, 2001, as amended by Executive 
Order 13268 of July 2, 2002, and Executive Order 13284 of January 23, 
2003, I hereby determine that the individual known as Bahawal Khan, 
also known as Salahuddin Ayubi, also known as Bahwal Khan, committed, 
or poses a significant risk of committing, acts of terrorism that 
threaten the security of U.S. nationals or the national security, 
foreign policy, or economy of the United States.
    Consistent with the determination in section 10 of Executive Order 
13224 that ``prior notice to persons determined to be subject to the 
Order who might have a constitutional presence in the United States 
would render ineffectual the blocking and other measures authorized in 
the Order because of the ability to transfer funds instantaneously,'' I 
determine that no prior notice needs to be provided to any person 
subject to this determination who might have a constitutional presence 
in the United States, because to do so would render ineffectual the 
measures authorized in the Order.
    This notice shall be published in the Federal Register.

     Dated: July 18, 2013.
John F. Kerry,
Secretary of State.
[FR Doc. 2013-19251 Filed 8-7-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-10-P
```
#### § 780.601 Statutory provision.

Section 13(b)(13) of the Fair Labor Standards Act exempts from the overtime provisions of section 7:

Any employee with respect to his employment in agriculture by a farmer, notwithstanding other employment of such employee in connection with livestock auction operations in which such farmer is engaged as an adjunct to the raising of livestock, either on his own account or in conjunction with other farmers, if such employee (A) is primarily employed during his workweek in agriculture by such farmer, and (B) is paid for his employment in connection with such livestock auction operations at a wage rate not less than that prescribed by section 6(a)(1).