alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 63.501 Contents of applications to sever physical connection or to terminate or suspend interchange of traffic with another carrier. The application shall contain: ( a ) The name and address of each applicant;
( b ) The name, title, and post office address of the officer to whom correspondence concerning the application is to be addressed;
( c ) Nature of the proposed change;
( d ) Identification of community or part of community involved and date on which applicant desires to make proposed discontinuance, reduction, or impairment effective; if for a temporary period only, indicate the approximate period for which authorization is desired;
( e ) Proposed new tariff listing, if any, and differences, if any, between present charges to the public and charges for the service to be substituted;
( f ) Description of the service area affected including population and general character of business of the community;
( g ) Name of any other carrier or carriers providing telephone service to the community;
( h ) Statement of the reasons for proposed discontinuance, reduction, or impairment;
( i ) Statement of the factors showing that neither present nor future public convenience and necessity would be adversely affected by the granting of the application;
( j ) Description of any previous discontinuance, reduction, or impairment of service to the community affected by the application, which has been made by the applicant during the 12 months preceding filing of application, and statement of any present plans for future discontinuance, reduction, or impairment of service to such community;
( k ) Name of other carrier;
( l ) Points served through such physical connection or interchange;
( m ) Description of the service involved;
( n ) Statement as to how points served by means of such physical connection or interchange will be served thereafter;
( o ) Amount of traffic interchanged for each month during preceding 6-month period;
( p ) Statement as to whether severance of physical connection or termination or suspension of interchange of traffic is being made with consent of other carrier.
[28 FR 13229, Dec. 5, 1963, as amended at 82 FR 48777, Oct. 20, 2017]
§ 80.1123 Watch requirements for ship stations. ( a ) While at sea, all ships must maintain a continuous watch: ( 1 ) On VHF DSC channel 70, if the ship is fitted with a VHF radio installation in accordance with § 80.1085(a)(2);
( 2 ) On the distress and safety DSC frequency 2187.5 kHz, if the ship is fitted with an MF radio installation in accordance with § 80.1089(a)(2) or § 80.1091(a)(3);
( 3 ) On the distress and safety DSC frequencies 2187.5 kHz and 8414.5 kHz also on at least one of the distress and safety DSC frequencies 4207.5 kHz, 6312 kHz, 12577 kHz, or 16804.5 kHz appropriate to the time of day and the geographical position of the ship, if the ship is fitted with an MF/HF radio installation in accordance with § 80.1091(a)(2)(ii) or § 80.1093(a) of this part (this watch may be kept by means of a scanning receiver limited to six distress and safety DSC frequencies); and
( 4 ) For satellite shore-to-ship distress alert, if the ship is fitted with an INMARSAT ship earth station in accordance with § 80.1091(a)(1).
( b ) While at sea, all ships must maintain radio watches for broadcasts of maritime safety information on the appropriate frequency or frequencies on which such information is broadcast for the area in which the ship is navigating.
( c ) Every ship while at sea must maintain, when practicable, a continuous listening watch on VHF Channel 16. This watch must be kept at the position from which the ship is normally navigated or at a position which is continuously manned.
( d ) On receipt of a distress alert transmitted by use of digital selective calling techniques, ship stations must set watch on the radiotelephone distress and safety traffic frequency associated with the distress and safety calling frequency on which the distress alert was received.
( e ) Ship stations with narrow-band direct printing equipment must set watch on the narrow-band direct-printing frequency associated with the distress alert signal if it indicates that narrow-band direct-printing is to be used for subsequent distress communications. If practicable, they should additionally set watch on the radiotelephone frequency associated with the distress alert frequency.
[57 FR 9065, Mar. 16, 1992, as amended at 68 FR 46981, Aug. 7, 2003; 73 FR 4492, Jan. 25, 2008]
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 165 (Friday, August 25, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 50391-50392]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 06-7145]


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

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Office of the Secretary

[No. DOD-2006-OS-0187]


Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request

ACTION: Notice.

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

    The Department of Defense has submitted to OMB for clearance, the 
following proposal for collection of information under the provisions 
of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35).

DATES: Consideration will be given to all comments received by 
September 25, 2006.
    Title, Associated Form and OMB Number: DoD Educational Loan 
Repayment Program (LRP); DD Form 2475; OMB Control Number 0704-0152.
    Type of Request: Extension.
    Number of Respondents: 17,500.
    Responses Per Respondents: 1.
    Annual Responses: 17,500.

[[Page 50392]]

    Average Burden Per Response: 10 minutes (approximately).
    Annual Burden Hours: 2,917.
    Needs and Uses: Military Services area authorized to repay eligible 
student loans for individuals who meet certain criteria and who enter 
active military service or enter the Selected Reserves for a specified 
obligation period. Legislation requires that the Services verify the 
status of the loan prior to payment. This form collects the necessary 
verification data from lending institutions.
    Affected Public: Business or other for-profit.
    Frequency: Annually.
    Respondent's Obligation: Required to obtain or retain benefits.
    OMB Desk Officer: Ms. Hillary Jaffe.
    Written comments and recommendations on the proposed information 
collection should be sent to Ms. Jaffe at the Office of Management and 
Budget, Desk Officer for DoD, Room 10236, New Executive Office 
Building, Washington, DC 20503.
    You may also submit comments, identified by docket number and 
title, by the following method:
    <bullet> Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. 
Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
    Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency 
name, docket number and title for this Federal Register document. The 
general policy for comments and other submissions from members of the 
public is to make these submissions available for public viewing on the 
Internet at http://www.regulations.gov as they are received without 
change, including any personal identifiers or contact information.
    DOD Clearance Officer: Ms. Patricia Toppings
    Written requests for copies of the information collection proposal 
should be sent to Ms. Toppings at WHS/ESD/Information Management 
Division, 1777 North Kent Street, RPN, Suite 11000, Arlington, VA 
22209-2133.

    Dated: August 18, 2006.
Patricia L. Toppings,
Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
[FR Doc. 06-7145 Filed 8-24-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001-06-M
**Exhibit
32.1**





**CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF**


**THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 (SUBSECTIONS (a) AND (b)**


**OF
SECTION 1350, CHAPTER 63 OF TITLE 18, UNITED STATES CODE)**





Pursuant
to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (Subsections (a) and (b) of
Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code), I, Robert L. Long,
President and Chief Executive Officer of Transocean Inc., a Cayman Islands
company (the “Company”), hereby certify, to my knowledge, that:





(1)
    the
      Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31,
      2005 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a)
      or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;
and





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





Dated:May
      3, 2005
    /s/
      Robert L. LongName:
      Robert L. LongPresident
      and Chief Executive Officer





The
foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (Subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63
of Title 18, United States Code) and is not being filed as part of the Report or
as a separate disclosure document.





A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to
Transocean Inc. and will be retained by Transocean Inc. and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
- 440 -

Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets

305 Nebraska Reports

REVEIZ v. EL-KASABY

Cite as 305 Neb. 440

Elena Reveiz, appellant, v. 

Bassel El-Kasaby, appellee.

___ N.W.2d ___

Filed April 3, 2020. No. S-19-278.

Appeal from the District Court for Douglas County: J 

Russell Derr, Judge. Affirmed.

Denise E. Frost, of Johnson & Mock, P.C., L.L.O., for 

appellant.

Cathy S. Trent-Vilim, and, on brief, Stacy L. Morris and 

Kate Geyer Johnson, of Lamson, Dugan & Murray, L.L.P., for 

appellee.

Heavican, C.J., Miller-Lerman, Cassel, Stacy, Funke, 

and Freudenberg, JJ.

Per Curiam.

The February 19, 2019, order of the Douglas County District 

Court is affirmed by an equally divided court.

Affirmed.

Papik, J., not participating.

Nebraska Supreme Court Online Library

www.nebraska.gov/apps-courts-epub/

05/01/2020 01:07 AM CDT
§ 32.4110 Net current deferred nonoperating income taxes. ( a ) This account shall include the balance of income tax expense resulting from comprehensive interpreted tax allocation which has been deferred to later periods.
( b ) As other assets or liabilities which generated the deferred income tax are reclassified from long-term or noncurrent status to current, the appropriate deferred income tax shall be reclassified from Account 4350, Net Noncurrent Deferred Nonoperating Income Taxes, to this account.
( c ) This account shall be debited or credited with the amount being credited or debited to Account 7400, Nonoperating taxes, in accordance with that account's description and § 32.22.
( d ) This account shall also include the balance of the income taxes (Federal, state and local) related to current extraordinary items which have been deferred to later periods resulting from comprehensive interperiod tax allocation.
( e ) As the extraordinary item which generated the deferred income tax becomes current, the appropriate deferred income tax shall be reclassified from Account 4350, Net Noncurrent Deferred Nonoperating Income Taxes, to this account.
( f ) This account shall be debited or credited with the amount being credited and debited to Account 7600, Extraordinary Items.
( g ) The classification of deferred income taxes as current or noncurrent shall follow the classification of the asset or liability that gave rise to deferred income tax. If there is no related asset or liability, classification shall be based on the expected turnaround of the temporary differences.
( h ) Subsidiary record categories shall be maintained in order that the company may separately report the amounts contained herein that are property related and those that are nonproperty related. Such subsidiary record categories shall be reported as required by part 43 of this Commission's Rules and Regulations.
[51 FR 43499, Dec. 2, 1986, as amended at 59 FR 9419, Feb. 28, 1994; 67 FR 5689, Feb. 6, 2002]
#### § 53.401 [Reserved]
No. 11-8669.

#### Charros *v.*Massachusetts.

App. Ct. Mass. Certiorari denied.
No. 11-9664.

#### Graves *v.*Wetzel, Secretary, Pennsylvania Department of Corrections, et al.

C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.
II

103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 4635

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

JUNE 28 (legislative day, JUNE 7), 1994

Received

AN ACT

To extend the Export Administration Act of 1979.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 That section 20 of the Export Administration Act of 1979

4 (50 U.S.C. App. 2419) is amended by striking ‘‘June 30,

5 1994’’ and inserting ‘‘August 20, 1994’’.

Passed the House of Representatives June 27, 1994.

Attest: DONNALD K. ANDERSON,

Clerk.
§ 80.1103 Equipment authorization. ( a ) All equipment specified in § 80.1101 must be certified in accordance with subpart J of part 2 of this chapter specifically for GMDSS use, except for equipment used in the INMARSAT space segment which must be type-approved by INMARSAT and are subject to Supplier's Declaration of Conformity pursuant to the procedures in subpart J of part 2 of this chapter specifically for GMDSS use. The technical parameters of the equipment must conform to the performance standards as specified in § 80.1101. For emergency position-indicating radiobeacons operating on 406.0-406.1 MHz (406.0-406.1 MHz EPIRBs) that were authorized prior to April 15, 1992, and meet the requirements of § 80.1101, the manufacturer may attest by letter that the equipment (indicate FCC ID#) meets the requirements of § 80.1101 and request that it be denoted as approved for GMDSS use.
( b ) Applicants for certification must submit with their applications measurement data sufficiently complete to ensure compliance with the technical parameters. The application must include the items listed in 47 CFR 2.1033. Additional measurement data or information may be requested depending upon the equipment. For items not listed in § 2.1033 of this chapter, the applicant must attest that the equipment complies with performance standards as specified in § 80.1101 and, where applicable, that measurements have been made that demonstrate the necessary compliance. Submission of representative data demonstrating compliance is not required unless requested by the Commission.
( c ) Applicants using Supplier's Declaration of Conformity must attest that the equipment complies with performance standards as specified in § 80.1101 and, where applicable, that measurements have been made that demonstrate the necessary compliance. Submission of representative data demonstrating compliance is not required unless requested by the Commission. An application must include the items listed in §§ 2.931 and 2.938 of this chapter and a copy of the type-approval certification indicating that equipment meets GMDSS standards and includes all peripheral equipment associated with the specific unit under review. Note 1 to paragraph ( c
):
The verification procedure has been replaced by Supplier's Declaration of Conformity. Equipment previously authorized under subpart J of part 2 of this chapter may remain in use. See § 2.950 of this chapter.
( d ) Submission of a sample unit is not required unless specifically requested by the Commission.
( e ) In addition to the requirements in part 2 of this chapter, equipment specified in § 80.1101 shall be labeled as follows: “This device complies with the GMDSS provisions of part 80 of the FCC rules.” Such a label is not required for emergency position-indicating radiobeacons operating on 406.0-406.1 MHz (406.0-406.1 MHz EPIRBs) that were authorized prior to April 15, 1992.
[57 FR 9065, Mar. 16, 1992, as amended at 57 FR 44702, Sept. 29, 1992; 63 FR 36607, July 7, 1998; 68 FR 46980, Aug. 7, 2003; 69 FR 64680, Nov. 8, 2004; 73 FR 4491, Jan. 25, 2008; 82 FR 50837, Nov. 2, 2017]
No. 11-9154.

#### Santiago-Perez *v.*United States.

C. A. 1st Cir. Certiorari denied.
282P15

#### Harvey D. Kohn, M.D. v. FirstHealth of the Carolinas, Inc. d/b/a Moore Regional Hospital

Pit’s PDR Under N.C.G.S. § 7A-31 (COA14-1210)

Denied
PUBLIC LAW 112–188—OCT. 5, 2012 126 STAT. 1433 

Public Law 112–188 

112th Congress 

An Act 

To amend title 28, United States Code, to realign divisions within two judicial 

districts. 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 

the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Divisional Realignment Act 

of 2012’’. 

SEC. 2. REALIGNMENT WITHIN THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI. 

Section 105(a) of title 28, United States Code, is amended— 

(1) in paragraph (1), by striking ‘‘Iron,’’ and ‘‘Saint Genevieve,’’; and 

(2) in paragraph (3)— 

(A) by inserting ‘‘Iron,’’ after ‘‘Dunklin,’’; and 

(B) by inserting ‘‘Saint Genevieve,’’ after ‘‘Ripley,’’. 

SEC. 3. REALIGNMENT WITHIN THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI. 

Section 104 of title 28, United States Code, is amended by 

striking subsection (a) and inserting the following: 

‘‘(a) The northern district comprises three divisions. 

‘‘(1) The Aberdeen Division comprises the counties of 

Alcorn, Chickasaw, Choctaw, Clay, Itawamba, Lee, Lowndes, 

Monroe, Oktibbeha, Prentiss, Tishomingo, Webster, and Winston. 

‘‘Court for the Aberdeen Division shall be held at Aberdeen, 

Ackerman, and Corinth. 

‘‘(2) The Oxford Division comprises the counties of Benton, 

Calhoun, DeSoto, Lafayette, Marshall, Panola, Pontotoc, 

Quitman, Tallahatchie, Tate, Tippah, Tunica, Union, and 

Yalobusha. 

‘‘Court for the Oxford Division shall be held at Oxford. 

‘‘(3) The Greenville Division comprises the counties of 

Attala, Bolivar, Carroll, Coahoma, Grenada, Humphreys, 

Leflore, Montgomery, Sunflower, and Washington. 

‘‘Court for the Greenville Division shall be held at Clarksdale, Cleveland, and Greenville.’’. 

Divisional 

Realignment Act 

of 2012. 

28 USC 1 note. 

Oct. 5, 2012 

[H.R. 5512] 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with PUBLIC LAWS
126 STAT. 1434 PUBLIC LAW 112–188—OCT. 5, 2012 

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY—H.R. 5512: 

HOUSE REPORTS: No. 112–497 (Comm. on the Judiciary). 

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 158 (2012): 

May 30, considered and passed House. 

Sept. 21, considered and passed Senate. 

Æ 

SEC. 4. EFFECTIVE DATE. 

The amendments made by this Act take effect on the 60th 

day after the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Approved October 5, 2012. 

28 USC 104 note. 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with PUBLIC LAWS
```

[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 40 (Tuesday, March 1, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Page 11210]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-4683]

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

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION

Sunshine Act Meetings

AGENCY HOLDING THE MEETING: Commodity Futures Trading Commission.

TIME AND DATE: 11 a.m., Friday March 18, 2011.

PLACE: 1155 21st St., NW., Washington, DC, 9th Floor Commission 
Conference Room.

STATUS: Closed.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: Surveillance and Enforcement Matters.

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: Sauntia S. Warfield, 202-418-5084.

Sauntia S. Warfield,
Assistant Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2011-4683 Filed 2-25-11; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 6351-01-P
```
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit","provider_url":"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov","author_name":"25005pwpadmin","author_url":"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov\/author\/25005pwpadmin\/","title":"20-2314: SHOCKWAVE MEDICAL, INC. v. CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS, INC. [RULE 36 JUDGMENT], Nonprecedential - U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"uN6Cx4ZRpp\"><a href=\"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov\/01-18-2022-20-2314-shockwave-medical-inc-v-cardiovascular-systems-inc-rule-36-judgment-20-2314-rule_36_judgment-1-18-2022_1893795\/\">20-2314: SHOCKWAVE MEDICAL, INC. v. CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS, INC. [RULE 36 JUDGMENT], Nonprecedential<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov\/01-18-2022-20-2314-shockwave-medical-inc-v-cardiovascular-systems-inc-rule-36-judgment-20-2314-rule_36_judgment-1-18-2022_1893795\/embed\/#?secret=uN6Cx4ZRpp\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“20-2314: SHOCKWAVE MEDICAL, INC. v. CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS, INC. [RULE 36 JUDGMENT], Nonprecedential” — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit\" data-secret=\"uN6Cx4ZRpp\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n<\/script>\n","description":"RULE 36 JUDGMENT Posted: SHOCKWAVE MEDICAL, INC. v. CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS, INC. [RULE 36 JUDGMENT](pdf) Appeal Number: 20-2314 Origin: PTO Nonprecedential To see more opinions and orders, follow this link: Opinions and Orders."}
#### BURNHAM et al. v. ABEGGLEN.

No. 12648.

United States Court of Appeals Ninth Circuit.

March 23, 1951.

*1022J. D. Skeen, Perry H. Burnham, Salt Lake City, Utah, for appellants.

Grover A. Giles, Salt Lake City, Utah and Jess B. Hawley, Jr., Boise, Idaho, for appellee.

Before ORR and POPE, Circuit Judges, and FEE, District Judge.

PER CURIAM.

The Trial Court found Abegglen was employed by the Burnhams by “contract in writing to sell certain real and personal property,” as agent, for $140,000, providing he “should receive a commission of $6,000 in the event he sold said property,” that Abegglen interested the Randalls, and an agreement was executed between the Burnhams and the Randalls for sale and purchase of said property at the price asked, that “plaintiff [Abegglen] was free from misconduct, concealment or misrepresentation in all of his dealings with defendants [Burnhams].” After learning of a supposed inadequate security for performance on the part of one of the Ran-dalls, the contract of purchase and sale was modified by mutual consent of the Burn-hams and the Randalls, and subsequently, for a consideration moving to the Burn-hams, a rescission of the modified contract of purchase and sale was entered between the Burnhams and the Randalls, “without the knowledge, consent or approval of the plaintiff [Abegglen].”

If these facts are found, there are no questions of law raised upon the record. The findings are supported by substantial evidence and are not “clearly erroneous.” Therefore, these are binding upon us, and the judgment stands. Based on the findings, plaintiff was awarded commission in full.

We affirm upon the basis of the excellent opinion of the Trial Court, 91 F.Supp. 61.
No. 11-5876.

#### Fulgencio, aka Guzman Ortiz *v.*United States.

C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.