alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4838 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4838

   To authorize the issuance of a certificate of documentation with 
    appropriate endorsement for the vessel, FIREBIRD, and for other 
                               purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             July 26, 1994

  Mr. Manton introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
               Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To authorize the issuance of a certificate of documentation with 
    appropriate endorsement for the vessel, FIREBIRD, and for other 
                               purposes.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled, That notwithstanding 
sections 12106 and 12107 of title 46, United States Code, section 27 of 
the Merchant Marine Act, 1920, the Act of June 19, 1986 (46 App. U.S.C. 
289), as applicable on the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary 
of Transportation may issue a certificate of documentation for the 
vessel FIREBIRD (Official Number 253656): Provided, That an application 
for inspection in accordance with Public Law 103-206 filed within 
thirty days of enactment of this Act shall be deemed in compliance with 
paragraph (1) of subsection 513(a) of Public Law 103-206.
                                 <all>
```
#### § 13.5 Licensed commercial radio operator required.

Rules that require FCC station licensees to have certain transmitter operation, maintenance, and repair duties performed by a commercial radio operator are contained in parts 80 and 87 of this chapter.

[78 FR 23152, Apr. 18, 2013]
§ 73.1650 International agreements. ( a ) The rules in this part 73, and authorizations for which they provide, are subject to compliance with the international obligations and undertakings of the United States. Accordingly, all provisions in this part 73 are subject to compliance with applicable requirements, restrictions, and procedures accepted by the United States that have been established by or pursuant to treaties or other international agreements, arrangements, or understandings to which the United States is a signatory, including applicable annexes, protocols, resolutions, recommendations and other supplementing documents associated with such international instruments.
( b ) The United States is a signatory to the following treaties and other international agreements that relate, in whole or in part, to AM, FM or TV broadcasting: ( 1 ) The following instruments of the International Telecommunication Union: ( i ) Constitution.
( ii ) Convention.
( iii ) Radio Regulations.
( 2 ) Regional Agreements for the Broadcasting Service in Region 2: ( i ) MF Broadcasting 535-1605 kHz, Rio de Janeiro, 1981.
( ii ) MF Broadcasting 1605-1705 kHz, Rio de Janeiro, 1988.
( 3 ) Bi-lateral Agreements between the United States and Canada relating to: ( i ) AM Broadcasting.
( ii ) FM Broadcasting.
( iii ) TV Broadcasting.
( 4 ) Bi-lateral Agreements between the United States and Mexico relating to: ( i ) AM Broadcasting.
( ii ) FM Broadcasting.
( iii ) TV Broadcasting.
( 5 ) Bi-lateral Agreement between the United States and the Bahama Islands relating to presunrise operations by AM stations.
( 6 ) North American Regional Broadcasting Agreement (NARBA), which, for the United States, remains in effect with respect to the Dominican Republic and the Bahama Islands.
( 7 ) The documents listed in this paragraph (b) are available for inspection in the office of the Chief, Office of International Affairs, FCC, Washington, DC.
[54 FR 39737, Sept. 28, 1989, as amended at 56 FR 64872, Dec. 12, 1991; 60 FR 5333, Jan. 27, 1995; 88 FR 21447, Apr. 10, 2023]
Hillsborough

No. 81-208

#### William J. Streit *& a.*v. Michael F. Callahan d/b/a Callahan Construction, Inc.

March 10, 1982

*245
      *Stephen E. Borofsky,*of Nashua, by brief and orally, for the plaintiffs.

*Robert J. Moses,*of Amherst, by brief and orally, for the defendant.

Memorandum Opinion

Following a view of the premises and a trial *{Flynn,*J., presiding), a jury returned a verdict for the plaintiffs in the amount of $13,000.

The claims against the defendant, a builder who (according to his own testimony) has been involved in hundreds of construction projects, were that he breached his contract to build a house for the plaintiffs by failing to perform some of the construction in a workmanlike manner. The principal dispute centered on a set of stairs that the plaintiffs alleged were inadequate. The stairs were constructed with a nine-inch tread, but, because the angle between the tread and the riser was less than ninety degrees, the distance between the leading edge of one tread and a plane perpendicular to the leading edge of the next tread was only six inches.

The defendant has preserved only two issues for appeal. The first issue, in essence, is whether the issuance of a certificate of occupancy by a town building inspector precluded a finding of liability, as a matter of law. The second issue is whether there was sufficient evidence to support the verdict.

We hold that the issuance of a certificate of occupancy is not conclusive on the issue of compliance with a town building code. The certificate of occupancy merely provides evidence that the town building inspector believed that the structure was in compliance. The plaintiffs presented expert testimony that the stairs did not comply with the code. Given the conflict at trial over the question of compliance with the building code, we need not decide whether actual compliance with the building code would preclude recovery by the plaintiffs. *See generally Lemery v. O’Shea Dennis, Inc.,*112 N.H. 199, 200-01, 291 A.2d 616, 617-18 (1972).

Furthermore, there was sufficient evidence introduced at trial for the jury to conclude that the stairs were constructed in an unworkmanlike manner. The plaintiffs’ expert testified that, according to his interpretation of the building code, the stairs were negligently designed. The defendant’s expert admitted that the code was susceptible to various interpretations. The jury had a view of the premises and was able to weigh the testimony introduced at trial. It is clear that there was sufficient evidence to sus*246tain the verdict. *See Rogers v. Public Service Co.,*121 N.H. 956, 959, 437 A.2d 263, 265-66 (1981).

*Affirmed.*

King, C.J., did not sit.
**HOME | 	  ABOUT US | 	  CONTACT | 	  REGIONAL MANAGERS**Nautical Charts & Pubs****Surveys & Wrecks****GIS & Other Products****Research & Development****Customer Service****Business Opportunities****Education****NGA Chart: 91100          Scale: 200,000          Edition: 3          Edition Date: 30-SEP-95          CORRECTED TO NTM:  1995/47**Notice ListingOCVLeftIndex-  **Click the +/- buttons and drag the slider tool (solid triangle) 				to zoom in and out.** 
-  **Click the arrow buttons to pan left/right and up/down.** 
-  **Drag 				the navigation box in the upper left hand corner to move around 				the chart image.								This chart display or derived product can be used as a planning or analysis tool and may not be used as a navigational aid. 								NOTE: Use the official, full scale NGA nautical chart for real navigation whenever possible.  These are available from authorized 				NGA nautical chart sales agents.  Screen captures of the on-line viewable charts available here do NOT fulfill chart carriage 				requirements for regulated commercial vessels under Titles 33 and 46 of the Code of Federal Regulations.								Adobe Flash Player		  		is required to view the chart image.				Powered by Zoomify.** 
Privacy  |  Disclaimer  |  NOAA's National Ocean Service  |  NOAA  |  U.S. Department of Commerce **
#### § 73.29 Class C stations on regional channels.

No license will be granted for the operation of a Class C station on a regional channel.

[ 56 FR 64857, Dec. 12, 1991]
#### § 5.81 Discontinuance of station operation.

In case of permanent discontinuance of operation of a station in the Experimental Radio Service prior to the license expiration date, the licensee shall notify the Commission. Licensees who willfully fail to do so may be subject to disciplinary action, including monetary fines, by the Commission.

[78 FR 25162, Apr. 29, 2013]
#### § 65.701 Period of review.

For both exchange and interexchange carriers subject to this part, interstate earnings shall be measured over a two year period to determine compliance with the maximum allowable rate of return. The review periods shall commence on January 1 in odd-numbered years and shall end on December 31 in even-numbered years.

[60 FR 28546, June 1, 1995]
§ 80.877 Controls and indicators required for VHF radiotelephone installation. The controls and indicators used on equipment of the VHF radiotelephone installation must meet the following standards: ( a ) The size of controls must easily permit normal adjustment. The function and the setting of the controls must be clearly indicated.d
( b ) Controls must be illuminated to permit satisfactory operation of the equipment.
( c ) Means must be provided to reduce to extinction any light output from the equipment which could affect safety of navigation.
( d ) An on/off switch must be provided for the entire installation with a visual indication that the installation is switched on.
( e ) The equipment must indicate the channel number, as given in the Radio Regulations, to which it is tuned. It must allow the determination of the channel number under all conditions of external lighting. Channel 16 must be distinctively marked.
( f ) The receiver must have a manual volume control and a squelch control.
( g ) If the external controls are on a separate control unit and more than one such control unit is provided, the one on the bridge must have priority over the others. When there is more than one control unit, indication must be given to the other(s) that the transmitter is in operation.
---

Consent of Independent Registered Public  Accounting Firm



We hereby consent to  the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement on Form F-3
  (N◦ 333-161564) of PolyMet Mining Corp. of our report dated May 6, 2011  relating to the consolidated financial statements and the effectiveness of the  Company’s internal control over financial reporting, which appears in the  Annual Report to Shareholders, which is incorporated in this Annual Report on  Form 20-F.



(signed) PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

Chartered  Accountants
  Vancouver, British Columbia
  May 6, 2011





“PwC” refers to PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, an Ontario limited liability partnership, which is a member firm of PricewaterhouseCoopers International Limited, each member firm of which is a separate legal entity.

---
EXHIBIT 32   CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER 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 Annual Report of CytoGenix, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-K for the year ending December 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Malcolm H. Skolnick, Chief Executive Officer 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 to the best of my knowledge:  (1) The Annual Report of CytoGenix, Inc. on form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2006 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 such Annual Report of CytoGenix, Inc. on Form 10-K fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.  /s/ Malcolm H. Skolnick  MALCOLM H. SKOLNICK CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER April 14, 2008
ADDENDUM 



EMPLOYMENT AND
NON-COMPETE AGREEMENT 



DANIEL TURISSINI 



This Agreement is made as of October
25, 2006, between WidePoint Corporation (WidePoint) and Daniel E. Turissini (Employee),
and represents an Addendum to the Employment and Non-Compete Agreement between the parties
executed in October, 2004. This Addendum is intended to clarify and supplement, and not
replace, the provisions of the executed and existing Employment and Non-Compete Agreement. 



	 	1.	The
Employment Agreement shall be annually renewable, as defined in Paragraphs 1
          and 4 of the original Agreement, with such Employment Period continuing
          hereunder, with the current term of Employee’s employment through October
          31, 2009. 






	 	2.	This
Addendum specifically confirms that the Agreement is hereby extended for           its
third consecutive annual period, through and including October 24, 2007. 






	 	3.	The
Compensation and Benefits provisions (Paragraph 2) of the original Agreement
          shall remain unchanged for the third year of the Agreement. This includes Base
          Salary, Benefits, and Expenses. A Senior Management Incentive Program will be
          separately developed for calendar year 2007, including Cash and Stock award
          opportunities tied to performance metrics. 






	 	4.	The
Termination and Non-Compete provisions (Paragraphs 4 and 5) shall remain
          unchanged and in effect. 






In witness whereof, the parties have
executed this Agreement Addendum on the day and year first written above. 



	EMPLOYEE:	WIDEPOINT CORPORATION:
	

/s/ Daniel Turissini	/s/ Steve L. Komar
	Daniel Turissini, CEO, ORC	Steve L. Komar, CEO
310P15

#### State v. Stephanie Jean Holanek

Def’s PDR Under N.C.G.S. § 7A-3I (COA14-951)

Denied
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS 

WASHINGTON, DC 

TRAVEL GROUP, INC., D/B/A REPUBLIC AIR TRAVEL 

AND SCOT SPENCER 

: ~. ' i 

; ;. 

AIRLIFT GROUP, INC. 

AND RICHARD BERNARD 

DOT-OST-1995-272 

formerly Docket 49233 

Unauthorized Air Transportation, 

Unfair and Deceptive Practices and Unfair Methods of 

Competition, and Violations of Public Charter Rules 

EXPRESS ONE INTERNATIONAL, INC. 

Unfair and Deceptive Practices and Unfair Methods of 

Competition, and Violations of Public Charter Rules 

Enforcement Proceeding 

STATUS REPORT 

The Office of the Assistant General Counsel for Aviation Enforcement and 

Proceedings ("Enforcement Office"), pursuant to Your Honor's March 22, 2006, Order 

staying this proceeding, files this report detailing the current status of this proceeding and 

settlement negotiations. 

The Department has not ruled on the outstanding motions filed by Respondents 

and opposed by the Enforcement Office in Ascend Aviation Group, Docket OST-2004-

17486. 
2 

There have been no further settlement discussions. 

Date: May 31,2013 

Respectfully submitted, 

.. -~ 

~odbe;esky-. Assistant General Counsel for 

Aviation Enforcement and Proceedings 

Vinh Q. Nguyen 

Senior Trial Attorney 

. United States Department of Transportation 

Office of Aviation Enforcement and Proceedings 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. 

Room 96-429 

Washington, D.C. 20590 

TEL: 202-366-9342 

FAX: 202-366-7152 
3 

Docket No. DOT-OST-1995-272 

I hereby certify that on this 31th day of May, 2013, a true and correct copy of the 

foregoing Status Report was served in the following manner to the following: 

Original 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

Docket Operations, M-30 

West Building Ground Floor 

Room W12-140 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. 

Washington, D.C. 20590 

By First Class Mail 

The Honorable Ronnie A. Yoder 

Chief Administrative Law Judge 

Office of Hearings, M-20 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

Washington, D.C. 20590 

TEL: (202) 366-2142 

FAX: (202) 366-7536 

By First Class Mail 

Scot Spencer 

SBD Aircraft Services 

255 S Leland Norton Way 

Sam Bernardino, CA 92408
§ 27.1604 Reimbursement of relocation expenses of non-Federal radiolocation incumbents. ( a ) *Relocation reimbursement contribution.* Each entity granted an initial license (not a renewal) in the 3.45 GHz Service (Licensee) must pay a *pro rata* portion to reimburse the costs incurred by authorized non-Federal, secondary radiolocation licensees for relocating from the 3.3-3.55 GHz band. These costs include the cost of a clearinghouse's administration of the reimbursement, which the radiolocation licensees will pay initially and include in their reimbursable costs.
( b ) *Pro rata share.* A Licensee's *pro rata* share of relocation costs will be determined by dividing the total actual costs of such relocation, as approved by the clearinghouse selected pursuant to § 27.1605, by the total number of 3.45 GHz Service licenses granted, multiplied by the number of such licenses the Licensee will hold.
( c ) *Timing of payment.* A Licensee's relocation reimbursement contribution share must be paid to the clearinghouse by the date(s) and subject to procedures specified by public notice.
###### Editorial Note on Part 74

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 74 appear at 64 FR 4055, Jan. 27, 1999.

#### § 74.785 Low power TV digital data service pilot project.

Low power TV stations authorized pursuant to the LPTV Digital Data Services Act (Public Law 106-554, 114 Stat. 4577, December 1, 2000) to participate in a digital data service pilot project shall be subject to the provisions of the Commission *Order* implementing that Act. FCC 01-137, adopted April 19, 2001, as modified by the Commission *Order on Reconsideration,* FCC 02-40, adopted February 12, 2002.

[67 FR 9621, Mar. 4, 2002]
§ 65.702 Measurement of interstate service earnings. ( a ) For exchange carriers, earnings shall be measured separately for each access service category for purposes of determining compliance with the maximum allowable rate of return. The access service categories shall be: an aggregated category consisting of Special Access, § 69.113, and Contribution Charges for Special Access Expanded Interconnection, § 69.122; Connection Charges for Expanded Interconnection, § 69.121; Common Line, §§ 69.104-69.105; and an aggregated category consisting of Line Termination, § 69.106, Intercept, § 69.108, Local Switching, § 69.107, Transport, §§ 69.110-69.112, 69.124, 69.125, and Information, § 69.109. The Billing and Collection access element shall not be included in any access service category for purposes of this part. The Commission will also separately review exchange carrier overall interstate earnings subject to this part for determining compliance with the maximum allowable rate of return determined by § 65.700(b).
( b ) For exchange carriers, earnings shall be measured for purposes of determining compliance with the maximum allowable rates of return separately for each study area; provided, however, that if the carrier has filed or concurred in access tariffs aggregating costs and rates for two or more study areas, the earnings will be determined for the aggregated study areas rather than for each study area separately. If an exchange carrier has not utilized the same level of study area aggregation during the entire two-year earnings review period, then the carrier's earnings will be measured for the entire two-year period on the basis of the tariffs in effect at the end of the second year of the two-year review period; provided, however, that if tariffs representing a higher level of study area aggregation were not in effect for at least eight months in the second year, then the carrier's earnings will be measured on the basis of the study area level of aggregation in effect for the majority of the two-year period; provided further, that any carrier that was not a member of the National Exchange Carrier Association or other voluntary pools for both years of the two-year review period will have its earnings reviewed individually for the full two-year period.
[51 FR 11034, Apr. 1, 1986, as amended at 57 FR 54719, Nov. 20, 1992; 58 FR 48763, Sept. 17, 1993; 60 FR 28546, June 1, 1995]
No. 10-10819.

#### Hutson *v.*United States.

C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.
Exhibit 32.2

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

In connection with the Annual Report of Depomed, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-K for the period ending
December 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Tammy L. Cameron, Interim Principal Accounting Officer of the Company, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §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 results of operations of the Company.

Date: March 8, 2010/s/ TAMMY L. CAMERON Tammy L. Cameron Vice President, Finance and
Principal Accounting Officer


---



QuickLinks
§ 80.753 Signal strength requirements at the service area contour. ( a ) The requirements for reception by a marine VHF shipboard receiver are satisfied if the field strength from the coast station, calculated in accordance with § 80.771 is at least + 17 dBu above one microvolt.
( b ) These field strengths, voltages and powers at the receiver input are equivalent: ( 1 ) −132 dBW (decibels referred to 1 watt).
( 2 ) 1.8 microvolts across 50 ohms.
( 3 ) + 17 dBu (decibels referred to 1 microvolt per meter).
( 4 ) 7 microvolts per meter.
----

            COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 1022/2005

of 30 June 2005         

fixing the rates of refunds applicable to certain products from the sugar sector exported in the form of goods not covered by Annex I to the Treaty

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1260/2001 of 19 June 2001 on the common organisation of the market in sugar (1), and in particular Article 27(5)(a) and (15),

Whereas:

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

The rates of the refunds applicable to the basic products listed in Annex A to Regulation (EC) No 1520/2000 and in Article 1(1) and (2) of Regulation (EC) No 1260/2001, and exported in the form of goods listed in Annex V to Regulation (EC) No 1260/2001, are fixed as set out in the Annex to this Regulation.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on 1 July 2005.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 30 June 2005.

For the Commission

Günter VERHEUGEN            

Vice-President

----

(1)OJ L 178, 30.6.2001, p. 1. Regulation as last amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 39/2004 (OJ L 6, 10.1.2004, p. 16).

(2)OJ L 177, 15.7.2000, p. 1. Regulation as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 886/2004 (OJ L 168, 1.5.2004, p. 14).

----

ANNEX

Rates of refunds applicable from 1 July 2005 to certain products from the sugar sector exported in the form of goods not covered by Annex I to the Treaty (1)

----

(1)  The rates set out in this Annex are not applicable to exports to Bulgaria, with effect from 1 October 2004, and to the goods listed in Tables I and II to Protocol No 2 to the Agreement between the European Community and the Swiss Confederation of 22 July 1972 exported to the Swiss Confederation or to the Principality of Liechtenstein with effect from 1 February 2005.

----