alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 5.219 Broadcasting emergency information. ( a ) In an emergency where normal communication facilities have been disrupted or destroyed by storms, floods or other disasters, a broadcast experimental radio station may be operated for the purpose of transmitting essential communications intended to alleviate distress, dispatch aid, assist in rescue operations, maintain order, or otherwise promote the safety of life and property. In the course of such operation, a station of any class may communicate with stations of other classes and in other services. However, such operation shall be conducted only on the frequency or frequencies for which the station is licensed and the used power shall not exceed the maximum authorized in the station license. When such operation involves the use of frequencies shared with other stations, licensees are expected to cooperate fully to avoid unnecessary or disruptive interference.
( b ) Whenever such operation involves communications of a nature other than those for which the station is licensed to perform, the licensee shall, at the earliest practicable time, notify the FCC in Washington, DC of the nature of the emergency and the use to which the station is being put and shall subsequently notify the same offices when the emergency operation has been terminated.
( c ) Emergency operation undertaken pursuant to the provisions of this section shall be discontinued as soon as substantially normal communications facilities have been restored. The Commission may at any time order discontinuance of such operation.
384P15

#### State v. Sherry Endoleen Austin

Def’s PDR under N.C.G.S. § 7A-31 (COA15-44)

Denied
#### § 5.53 Station authorization required.

No radio transmitter shall be operated in the Experimental Radio Service in the United States and its Territories except under and in accordance with a proper station authorization granted by the Commission.
EXHIBIT 23



INDEPENDENT AUDITORS CONSENT



To the Stockholders and Board of Directors

Vie Financial Group, Inc.



We hereby consent to
incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements (Nos. 333-106749, 333-95717 and 333-95735) on Forms S-8 of and the Registration Statement (No. 333-100194) on Form S-3 of our report dated June 3, 2004, on the consolidated balance sheets of
Vie Financial Group, Inc. and Subsidiaries as of March 31, 2004 and 2003, and the related consolidated statements of operations, stockholders deficiency and comprehensive loss, and cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended
March 31, 2004, which appears in the Companys annual report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2004.



|                                              
|----------------------------------------------
|                                              
|/s/ Goldstein Golub Kessler LLP               
|                                              
|GOLDSTEIN GOLUB KESSLER LLP New York, New York



July 14, 2004
EXHIBIT
32.1











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 Angel Acquisition Corp., a Nevada
corporation (the "Company"), on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31,
2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
(the "Report"), I, Steve Bonenberger, President, Chief Executive Officer and
Director of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:





(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 result of
operations of the Company.








Dated:
      May 19, 2008
            By:
            /s/ Steve
      BonenbergerSteve
      BonenbergerPresident,
      Chief Executive Officer and Director
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS 

AUSTIN 
523 

Honorable Jaok Hooh, pgo rC 

Of euu8limtioa of any oab of l a id unit*, md 

oofopenBatlo8 to bo Sired and barno pslw$b b7 

Dh. tkrea taxa unlta. 

Thlr proposal inrolroo the ooaotruotioa of 

&tlolo lb, tkotioa 40, of tha Conotitutioa of 

Toxar, whloh provl&ao that with o uta ia l xrp 

tiozu, no puroa ohm11 hold at the aasto tlmo 

ohor* thaa one olril off100 of m0luaeiat, and tha 

rub at OoIpMll lau tb 4 O the l M0 mooa o a mo t 

hold o? l xuoiae two inoompatfblo offiro#, 

"Your opialoa is reopertfully rbquosted oa 

the following quootioao, to-wit8 

*l. Wo o ull a r b er r h i~ 08 l Joint boub of 

wma lix a tiol a r ving two or a o r * mob o vul8p p la g 

ta x lnunita 6 oonotituto tho holdlug or l ruoi~iag 

at thr same time of more thu, one aivil offioe or 

omolumoat wham l aah metabs? of ouoh board rooeiro4 

Only auoh ooaponutfoa &I ho night bo l lfowod for 

l udng o a the l wmliut~o~ board o f a a f o aa o ? o uo h 

uAi88? 

*a . w4 ?Uid -h ip OA a jOhIbt OUe Of 

AQUA&$AAtiOA AoxVi~ tro Or -0 l uoh 0-h 

tdi^ag unlw eoaotltut* the bolelag or 

ow 

mu0 P 8ing 

of insompatlblo 0fri0w 

*IA th. OY4lUt it is fOW O@iOA th4t th0 

firat QU~OtiOA 8hoa be -rod iii the UrirnatlVe, 

your oplaloa on tho 800084 qtmtion till not bo 

amoumry.a 

Ymm the grollmlaary *ta+*at la your latter, we 

t&k0 it to bo that t&e u~eduo Of the BOOard Of mlld,iUtiOA fOr 

l ob OS a0 r*opeot;ve t8xlng Blaarlo8a hold Offloeo Of amlu- 

&ant WitbiA tb. ~VitbAO Af h68iOA 60, &%iOlO m Of tb. 

Constitutlan froa rlrioh it uvuld follow u of ooum. 110 perooa aould hob mmbowhip 15 aore thaa oao of the botrda ot 

l qUdiXAtiOA. 

Bowwu the TMX QuotiOA pSUOntd by your iaQUA 18 not that 0) U-1 oiiioo hdlddfo#, urrdu 3eotion 40 but 

rather it im tha quostlon ef whather or not tho law author f sU 

tbo UOabiOA Of l board Of AQUAliSAtfOA, WhOA. dUtiU mt& 

to the l puall,rrtloe ,mf the Val~a Of WOpOrtY fOr the thrU 

taxlag unlu noationo& . 7 f 
Tudry unlta, sock aa you asntlws, -* aruturu 

of the aU&uto, and 

r0m0d llpm thao by L 

05000 just auoh pwua so are evnSad liOA* other, Th. law ax~oo 

authvritra l&e eroation of boar48 of l q u6llutloror a am T 

auoh reapaot1** taxiag UAtt Ma deflnaa a-lo duties vf 8uvh 

boar48. Thoaa dutlao part& to the affairs or tb partlouluu!dtwkIohthy aurn* Tbue Is no atatuta authvrfxlng 

the a r utivoa f a b a ud o f l swliratioa with pamo la reqaot 

to prvputy la any mnlaipali8~ or dlotrIot other than the 

oae eraU%ng Uha bvu&-aera turitvrlal pvwua~ &oh a pro- 

~Ialon i5 the La al&t ba a wioo 000 iron the otmdpolnt of 

SovAmy aAd ualfvdty ia T8luauloA or paw-, but w ire 

no8 oonoua86 wltb U!!t quoattoh We are a~ertna8 only dth 

intorpraui~ the hw a8 it is written,
#### § 30.208 Operability.

Mobile and transportable stations that operate on any portion of frequencies within the 27.5-28.35 GHz or the 37-40 GHz bands must be capable of operating on all frequencies within those particular bands. Mobile and transportable stations that operate on any portion of either the 24.25-24.45 GHz or 24.75-25.25 GHz bands must be capable of operating on all frequencies within both of those bands.

[83 FR 34492, July 20, 2018]
State of New York

Supreme Court, Appellate Division

Third Judicial Department

Decided and Entered: April 30, 2015 105545 

________________________________

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF 

NEW YORK,

Respondent,

v MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

MICHAEL ALMEIDA,

Appellant.

________________________________

Calendar Date: March 26, 2015

Before: Peters, P.J., Lahtinen, Rose and Devine, JJ.

__________

James P. Milstein, Public Defender, Albany (Theresa M.

Suozzi of counsel), for appellant.

P. David Soares, District Attorney, Albany (Vincent Stark

of counsel), for respondent.

__________

Devine, J.

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court (Teresi, J.),

rendered October 9, 2012 in Albany County, convicting defendant

upon his plea of guilty of the crime of criminal contempt in the

first degree.

Defendant waived indictment, pleaded guilty to a superior

court information charging him with criminal contempt in the

first degree and waived his right to appeal. He was thereafter

sentenced, as a second felony offender, to a prison term of 11⁄2 to

3 years. Defendant appeals.

We affirm. Initially, we reject defendant's contention

that his waiver of the right to appeal was invalid. Supreme
-2- 105545 

Court distinguished the waiver of the right to appeal from the

rights automatically forfeited upon a guilty plea. Defendant

further acknowledged that he understood the rights he was waiving

and had an opportunity to discuss the waiver with counsel, and he

executed a written waiver in open court. Accordingly, we find

that he knowingly, intelligently and voluntarily waived the right

to appeal his conviction and sentence (see People v Smith, 123

AD3d 1375, 1375-1376 [2014]; People v Chavis, 117 AD3d 1193,

1193-1194 [2014]). In light of his valid appeal waiver, his

assertion that his sentence is harsh and excessive is precluded

(see People v Balbuena, 123 AD3d 1384, 1386 [2014]; People v

White, 119 AD3d 1286, 1287 [2014], lv denied 24 NY3d 1222

[2015]). 

Turning to defendant's claims that his guilty plea was not

knowing, intelligent and voluntary and that he was denied the

effective assistance of counsel, these issues are unpreserved for

our review, inasmuch as the record does not indicate that he made

an appropriate postallocution motion (see People v Lewis, 118

AD3d 1125, 1125 [2014], lv denied 24 NY3d 1003 [2014]; People v

Vandemark, 117 AD3d 1339, 1340 [2014], lv denied 24 NY3d 965

[2014]). Moreover, with respect to the plea, defendant did not

make any statements during the plea allocution that cast doubt

upon his guilt or negated a material element of the crime so as

to trigger the narrow exception to the preservation requirement

(see People v Waite, 120 AD3d 1446, 1447 [2014]; People v

Trombley, 115 AD3d 1114, 1114 [2014], lv denied 23 NY3d 1068

[2014]). 

Peters, P.J., Lahtinen and Rose, JJ., concur.
-3- 105545 

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

ENTER:

Robert D. Mayberger

Clerk of the Court
Exhibit 10.37
 TOYS R US, INC.
 RESTRICTED STOCK AGREEMENT
   
 (Grantee)
 Company
  Plan Agreement
    TOYS R US, INC.
    
    
    
    Grant Date:By:
    
    
    
    
    
    Accepted by Grantee:Its:
    Authorized Officer
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    Name




---



##### 



TERMS AND CONDITIONS
 Restrictions
 Expiration and Termination of Restrictions
   Restricted Stock Certificates
 Stockholder Rights
 No Right of Continued Employment




---



##### 



Payment of Taxes
 Plan Controls
+

!

+

!

?

150

150

300

200

200

300

300

300

300

200

200

300

200

200

200

200

300

200

200

300

200

300

200

200

200

200

200

200

300

300 200

200

200

200

200

200

200

200

200

200

200

300

300

200

§ ̈¦8

§ ̈¦8

§ ̈¦8

§ ̈¦8

C O A C H E L L A C A N A L R D

A C C E S S R D

G R AY S W E L L R D

E V A N H E W E S H W Y

CALIFORNIA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

ESTADOS UNIDOS MEXICANOS

IMPERIAL CO

Coachella

Ca

n

al

All American Canal

All American Canal

All American Canal

Imperial

Valley

Gordons

Well

Grays

Well

Drop

One

Gadsden

Ogilby

Grays

Well

Glamis

SE Cactus

Midway

Well

Grays

Well NE

13

3614

36

3617

19

36

36

15

36

21

36

20

36

3618

16

23

24

36

3622

36

36

13

36

15

25

36

16

14

36

12

36

36

36 000mN

19

36

18

20

17

36

36

36

22

36

23

36

3624

36

12000mN

25

6 690 691 692 693 694 695 696 697

689 92

88

690 691 6 693 694 695 696

000 FEET

000m 6 E 97 6980000 FEET

6 950

88 6

30"

FEET

40'

42'

40'

30" 55'

45'

115°

42'30"

00' 57'

00'

32°

115°

30" 55'

57'

32°45'

52'30"

52'

114°

114°

32°37'30" 30"

30"

32°37'

3621

1850000

1810000

FEET

699 E 698 000m

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

U. S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY

CALIFORNIA

ADJOINING 7.5' QUADRANGLES

QUADRANGLE LOCATION

GRAYS WELL, CA-BCN

2012

Interstate Route State Route

ROAD CLASSIFICATION

Ramp 4WD

US Route Local Road

WX Interstate Route /. US Route H State Route

GRAYS WELL QUADRANGLE

CALIFORNIA-BAJA CALIFORNIA NORTE

7.5-MINUTE SERIES

This map was produced to conform with the

National Geospatial Program US Topo Product Standard, 2011.

A metadata file associated with this product is draft version 0.6.1

CONTOUR INTERVAL 20 FEET

NORTH AMERICAN VERTICAL DATUM OF 1988

SCALE 1:24 000

1 0.5 0

MILES

1

1000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000

FEET

1000 500 0 METERS 1000 2000

1 0.5 0 KILOMETERS 1 2

Imagery.....................................................NAIP, April 2010

Roads................................................©2006-2011 TomTom

Names...............................................................GNIS, 2011

Hydrography.................National Hydrography Dataset, 2010

Contours.............................National Elevation Dataset, 2006

Boundaries..............Census, IBWC, IBC, USGS, 1972 - 2010

North American Datum of 1983 (NAD83)

World Geodetic System of 1984 (WGS84). Projection and

1 000-meter grid: Universal Transverse Mercator, Zone 11S

Produced by the United States Geological Survey

10 000-foot ticks: California Coordinate System of 1983

(zone 6)

U.S. National Grid

100,000-m Square ID

Grid Zone Designation

PS

11S

×

Ù

MN

GN

UTM GRID AND 2012 MAGNETIC NORTH

DECLINATION AT CENTER OF SHEET

1° 7 ́

20 MILS

11° 33 ́

205 MILS
#### § 0.301 [Reserved]
exv10w21



 





EXHIBIT 10.21




BASE SALARIES FOR NAMED EXECUTIVE OFFICERS OF SEMCO ENERGY, INC.




          Effective March 24, 2007, the following are the base salaries (on an annual basis) of the
named executive officers (as defined in Item 402(a)(3) of Regulation S-K) of SEMCO Energy, Inc.:




	 	 	 
	 	 	Base Salary
	 	 	Effective
	Name and Position	 	March 24, 2007
	George A. Schreiber, Jr.

President and Chief Executive Officer
	 	$575,000
	 
	 	 
	Michael V. Palmeri

Senior Vice President, Treasurer and Chief Financial Officer
	 	$305,000
	 
	 	 
	Eugene N. Dubay

Senior Vice President of Operations
	 	$295,000
	 
	 	 
	Peter F. Clark

Senior Vice President and General Counsel
	 	$275,000
	 
	 	 
	Lance S. Smotherman

Senior Vice President of Human Resources and Administration
	 	$253,000
### SAT Report PMN Number: P-15-0671 SAT Date: 8/14/2015 Print Date: 9/1/2015

Related cases : Yes Health related cases: Ecotox related cases:

Concern levels : Type of Concern: Health Eco Comments Level of Concern: 1-2 3

Persistence Bioaccum Toxicity Comments 1 11

Exposure Based Review : Health: Ecotox: N o
Routes of exposure : Health: Inhalation Ecotox: All releases to water Fate: ; Keywords : Keywords: LUNG; IRR-E,MM,L; AQUATOX
Summary of Assessment :

Fate : Fate Summary: P-15-0671 FATE: Estimations for covalent ion pair, C18H38ClN, MW 303.96 Solid log Kow = 4.31 (E) S = Disp. (E) VP < 1.0E-6 torr at 25 °C (E) BP > 400 °C (E) H < 1.00E-8 (E) log Koc = 5.55 (E) log Fish BCF = 1.85 (E) log Fish BAF = 2.42 (E)POTW removal (%) = 90 via sorption and biodeg; OECD 301D (Closed Btl): Analog: CAS 112-90-3: 44%/28d, 72%/42d. Time for complete ultimate aerobic biodeg = wk Sorption to soils/sediments = v.strong PBT Potential: P1B1 *CEB FATE: Migration to ground water = negl

Health : Health Summary: N ot absorbed through the skin, p oor absorption from the GI tract; moderate absorption from the lung (analog). Concern for surfactant effects on the lung; irritation to eye, mucous membranes and lung based on surfactant properties of the compounds.

Ecotox :

Test Organism Test Type Test End Point Predicted Measured Comments

fish 96-h LC50 * 0.11 CASRN 112-90-3 / SIDS daphnid 48-h LC50 * 0.011 CASRN 112-90-3 / SIDS green algal 96-h EC50 0.001 0.03 CASRN 112-90-3 / SIDS (biomass) fish

_ chronic value 0.001

daphnid

_ chronic value 0.001

algal

_ chronic value 0.001 0.008 ACR of 4 (CASRN 112-90-3 / SIDS) Sewage Sludge 3-h EC50

_ Sewage Sludge _ Chronic Value _

Ecotox Values Comments: Predictions are based on SARs for aliphatic amines; SAR chemical class = aliphatic amine; MW 304; S = dispersible in water at 20 C (P); log Kow = 7.49 (EPI, free amine); p H7; effective concentrations based on 100% active ingredients and mean measured concentrations; hardness <180.0 mg/L as CaCO3; and TOC <2.0 mg/L;

Factors Values Comments Assessment Factor 10 Concentration of Concern ( p pb) Acute 2

Concentration of Concern 1
Exhibit 32  CERTIFICATION  PURSUANT TO THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002   I, Jeffrey Flammang, Chief Executive Officer of eNotes Systems, Inc. (the Company) do hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to my knowledge:  1.  This Quarterly Report on 10QSB of the Company for the period ended June 30, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (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 operations of the Company. Date:  August 18, 2006  /s/ Jeffrey Flammang _______________________  Jeffrey Flammang Chief Executive Officer
#### § 300-70.3 When must we report pertinent travel, transportation, and relocation data?

All travel, transportation, and relocation data are due by the date prescribed in § 300-70.1. The head of your agency is responsible for ensuring this data is complete and accurate before submitting it to GSA.

[FTR Amdt. 2017-01, 83 FR 604, Jan. 5, 2018]
#### JOHN JAMES COLE, Respondent, *v.*WILLIAM P. COLE, Jr., Executor, etc., of JOHN R. COLE, Deceased, Appellant.

*Examination of witness*— *conditionally, pending the trial of the action —proper.*

Appeal from a judgment in favor of the plaintiff and from an order denying a motion made on the judge’s minutes for a new trial, also from an order denying a motion for a new trial made on the ground of newly-discovered evidence, in an action tried at the Hlster Circuit. During the trial of the cause, plaintiff’s counsel stated that Lizzie Cole, a material witness, was ill and unable to be present at the trial, and offered in evidence her deposition, with the affidavits, etc., upon which the order to take the same was granted, taken during the pendancy of the trial, which deposition, against defendant’s objection, was received in evidence.

In regard to the evidence taken conditionally of Lizzie Cole, the court at General Term said : “No objections were made on account of defects in the affidavit or any thing of the kind. The only obje^ tion was that testimony could not be thus taken pending a trial, tno illness of the witness having been of six weeks continuance prior to the trial.

There is nothing in the statute which thus limits the power of the judge. (2 R. S. [m. p.], 391, § 1 *et seq.)*If the application is collusive, that maybe shown. (§ 4.) If the examination is not fair, that may be shown. (§ 8.) Generally, such examinations are had prior to the trial. But we do not think that the power may not be exercised while the trial is proceeding. Greater caution may be needed in granting the application at such a time.”

*374
      *L>. M. De Witt,*for the appellant.

*A. Schoomnalcer, Jr.,*for the respondent.

Opinion by

Learned, P. J.

Present — Learned, P. J., Bockes and Boardman, JJ.

Judgment and order reversed, new trial granted, costs to abide event.

Order denying new trial, on- the ground of newly-discovered evidence, affirmed.
§ 400.8 Continuing compliance. ( a ) A grant recipient must submit on an annual basis 30 days after the end of each fiscal year during which grant funds are available, the certification set forth in Appendix C of this part if a State, or Appendix D of this part if a Tribal Organization, making the same certification concerning the diversion of designated 911 charges.
( b ) In accordance with 47 U.S.C. 942(c), where a recipient knowingly provides false or inaccurate information in its certification related to the diversion of designated 911 charges, the recipient shall— ( 1 ) Not be eligible to receive the grant under this part;
( 2 ) Return any grant awarded under this part during the time that the certification was not valid; and
( 3 ) Not be eligible to receive any subsequent grants under this part.
No. 11-9170.

#### Gresham *v.*Martel, Warden, et al.

C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.
093A93-4

#### State v. Jaime Duarte Sierra El-Bey

Def’s *Pro Se*Petition for *Writ of Certiorari*to Review Order of COA (COAP15-800)

Dismissed
June 11, 2015 

Mr. Kevin Condrey 

509 State Street 

Marion, NC 28752 

Dear Mr. Condrey: 

This letter is to inform you that we are unable to process your request for an exemption. It 

explains why we can not process your request and what you should do in the next 30 days. 

Why We Can Not Process Your Request 

We entered your May 26, 2015, exemption request into the public docket (No. FAA-2015-

1915), but we are unable to process your request any further. The information you sent does 

not comply with the requirements of § 11.81 (copy enclosed). For us to consider the request 

any further, you must send us all of the following: 

 The specific section or sections of 14 CFR from which you seek relief, the extent of the 

relief you seek, and the reason you seek relief. 

 The reasons why the exemption would not adversely affect safety or how the exemption 

would provide a level of safety at least equal to that provided by the rule from which you 

seek an exemption. 

 Any additional information, views, or arguments available to support your request. 

What You Should Do 

If you want us to process your request any further, you must send the information described 

earlier to reach us within 30 days. Please note that § 11.63(d) requires you to send your 

petition for exemption at least 120 days before the proposed effective date of the exemption. 
2 

If We Do Not Hear From You 

If we do not hear from you within 30 days, we will close the docket without notifying you 

further. If you have any questions or require additional time, you may call (202) 267-9677. 

Sincerely, 

/s/ 

Brenda Robeson 

Program Analyst, Airmen and 

 Airspace Rules Division 

Enclosure