alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Editorial Note on Part 74
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 74 appear at 64 FR 4055, Jan. 27, 1999.

§ 74.451 Certification of equipment. ( a ) Applications for new remote pickup broadcast stations or systems or for changing transmitting equipment of an existing station will not be accepted unless the transmitters to be used have been certificated by the FCC pursuant to the provisions of this subpart, or have been certificated for licensing under part 90 of this chapter and do not exceed the output power limits specified in § 74.461(b).
( b ) Any manufacturer of a transmitter to be used in this service may apply for certification for such transmitter following the certification procedure set forth in part 2 of the Commission's rules and regulations. Attention is also directed to part 1 of the Commission's rules and regulations which specifies the fees required when filing an application for certification.
( c ) An applicant for a remote pickup broadcast station or system may also apply for certification for an individual transmitter by following the certification procedure set forth in part 2 of the Commission's rules and regulations.
( d ) All transmitters marketed for use under this subpart shall be certificated by the Federal Communications Commission. (Refer to subpart J of part 2 of the Commission's Rules and Regulations.)
( e ) Remote pickup broadcast station equipment authorized to be used pursuant to an application accepted for filing prior to December 1, 1977, may continue to be used by the licensee or its successors or assignees: *Provided, however,* If operation of such equipment causes harmful interference due to its failure to comply with the technical standards set forth in this subpart, the Commission may, at its discretion, require the licensee to take such corrective action as is necessary to eliminate the interference.
( f ) Each instrument of authority which permits operation of a remote pickup broadcast station or system using equipment which has not been certificated will specify the particular transmitting equipment which the licensee is authorized to use.
(Sec. 5, 48 Stat. 1068; 47 U.S.C. 155)
[41 FR 29686, July 19, 1976, as amended at 42 FR 14728, Mar. 16, 1977; 42 FR 43636, Aug. 30, 1977; 43 FR 14661, Apr. 7, 1978; 45 FR 28142, Apr. 28, 1980; 63 FR 36604, July 7, 1998; 68 FR 12765, Mar. 17, 2003]
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Energy

###### Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

          - [Docket No. RP96-383-005]

      ( print page 41648)    
Take notice that on June 26, 2000, Dominion Transmission, Inc. (DTI) (formerly CNG Transmission Corporation) tendered for filing to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission the following tariff sheet for disclosure of a recently negotiated rate transaction:

Original Sheet No. 399A

DTI requests an effective date of May 19, 2000, for this negotiated rate agreement.

DTI states that copies of the filing have been served on all parties on the official service list created by the Secretary in this proceeding, DTI's customers, and interested state commissions.

Any person desiring to be heard or to protest said filing should file a motion to intervene or a protest with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE, Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Sections 385.214 or 385.211 of the Commission's Rules and Regulations. All such motions or protests must be filed in accordance with Section 154.210 of the Commission's Regulations. Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceedings. Any person wishing to become a party must file a motion to intervene. Copies of this filing are on file with the Commission and are available for public inspection in the Public Reference Room. This filing may be viewed on the web at http://www.ferc.fed.us/​online/​rims.htm (call 202-208-2222 for assistance).

David P. Boergers,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 00-16994  Filed 7-5-00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Defense

###### Office of the Secretary

# AGENCY:

Department of Defense Education Activity (DoDEA).

# ACTION:

 Open Meeting Notice.

# SUMMARY:

                        Pursuant to the Federal Advisory Committee Act, Appendix 2 of title 5, United States Code, Public Law 92-463, notice is hereby given that a meeting of the Advisory Council on Dependents' Education (ACDE) is scheduled to be held on September 26, 2006, from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. The meeting will be held at the DoDEA Headquarters Building, 4040 N. Fairfax Drive, Arlington, Virginia 22203. The purpose of the ACDE is to recommend to the Director, DoDEA, general policies for the operation of the Department of Defense Dependents Schools (DoDDS); to provide the Director with information about effective educational programs and practices that should be considered by DoDDS; and to perform other tasks as may be required by the Secretary of Defense. The meeting emphases will be the current operational qualities of schools and the institutionalized school improvement processes, as well as other educational matters. For further information contact Mr. Jim Jarrard at 703-588-3121, or at                         *James.Jarrard@hq.dodea.edu.*

Dated: August 18, 2006.

L.M. Bynum, 

OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, DoD.

[FR Doc. 06-7157 Filed 8-24-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 5001-06-M
United States Court of Appeals 

for the Federal Circuit

UNDER SEAL (NON-PUBLIC ORDER)

__________________________

IN RE COMPLAINT NO. 23-90015

__________________________

Before MOORE, Chief Judge, PROST and TARANTO, Circuit 

Judges.

PER CURIAM. 

ORDER

Judge Newman’s request to the Committee to reconsider the decision to not permit her law firm to bring its 

summer associates to the hearing and to not permit her to 

bring her chambers staff to the hearing is denied. Judge 

Newman’s request to be permitted to record the hearing or 

that a recording be provided to her counsel at the hearing’s 

conclusion is also denied. A transcript of the hearing will 

be provided to Judge Newman’s counsel in due time and 

under appropriate protective measures as the Rules allow 

or require. 

Accordingly, 

IT IS ORDERED THAT: 

(1) Judge Newman’s chambers staff and summer associates at Judge Newman’s attorneys’ law firm may not attend the hearing; and

(2) Counsel is not permitted to record any portion of 

the hearing. 
IN RE COMPLAINT NO 23-90015

2

SO ORDERED: July 12, 2023.
§ 80.407 Operator authorization. This section contains information and rules pertinent to the application for and posting of radio operator authorizations. Rules applicable to radio operator requirements are contained in subpart D of this part and other rules pertinent to commercial radio operators are contained in part 13 of this chapter. ( a ) *Application.* Detailed information about application forms, filing procedures, and places to file applications for radio operator authorizations is contained in the bulletin “Commercial Radio Operator Licenses and Permits.” This bulletin is available from any Commission District Office or from the FCC, Washington, DC 20554.
( b ) *Posting.* When a Commission-authorized operator is required, the original authorization of each operator must be posted at the principal control point of the station. In lieu of posting, an operator who holds a restricted radiotelephone operator permit or a higher class operator license may have the operator authorization or a photocopy thereof available for inspection upon request by authorized Commission employees when operating the following: ( 1 ) A voluntary station;
( 2 ) Any class of ship station when the operator is on board solely to service the radio equipment; or
( 3 ) A portable station.
FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF FLORIDA

_____________________________

No. 1D17-1058

_____________________________

DOMINIQUE R. BLUE,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Duval County.

Angela M. Cox, Judge.

January 3, 2019

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

WETHERELL, ROWE, and WINOKUR, JJ., concur.

_____________________________

Not final until disposition of any timely and 

authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 

9.331.

_____________________________
2

Andy Thomas, Public Defender, and Maria Ines Suber, Assistant 

Public Defender, Tallahassee, for Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Heather Flanagan Ross,

Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
**EXHIBIT 32.2**

 

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

 

I, James G. Murphy, Chief Financial Officer ofImmunicon Corporation (the “Company”), hereby certify, that:

 

(1) The Company’s quarterly report on Form 10-Q forthe quarterly period ended March 31, 2004, as amended by Amendment No. 1 to thequarterly report on Form 10-Q/A (collectively, the “Report”), fully complieswith the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,as amended; and

 

(2) The information contained in the Report fairlypresents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results ofoperations of the Company.

 

 
| /s/ James G. Murphy     |   |
|-------------------------|--------|
| James G. Murphy         |
| Chief Financial Officer |
| June 16, 2004           |

 

----
EXHIBIT 10.12


        AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO CONSULTING AGREEMENT OF PHILLIP ERIC POWELL


      This is  the  First Amendment  ("First  Amendment") to  the  Consulting
 Agreement  of  Phillip Eric Powell entered  into as of  January 1, 2005 (the
 "Agreement"), by  and  between  First  Cash  Financial  Services,  Inc. (the
 "Company"),  a   Delaware  corporation,   and  Phillip   Eric  Powell   (the
 "Consultant").  This  First  Amendment  shall  apply  prospectively  and  is
 effective as of March 9, 2007.

      WHEREAS, Consultant is presently serving the Company as an  independent
 contractor pursuant to  the Agreement  between the  parties (said  Agreement
 including all previous amendments and/or addenda,  if any), and the  parties
 desire to modify the Agreement as set forth below.

      NOW,  THEREFORE,  in   consideration  of  the   mutual  covenants   and
 obligations  hereinafter   set   forth,   and  other   good   and   valuable
 consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby  acknowledged,
 the parties agree as follows:

     1. In paragraph 7(a) of the Agreement, after the term "$500,000"  insert
        the phrase  "until January  1, 2007, at  which time  the annual  rate
        shall be increased to $600,000."

     2. Except  as modified  herein,  the remainder  of the  Agreement  shall
        remain unchanged.

      CONSULTANT ACKNOWLEDGES  THAT  HE HAS  BEEN  GIVEN THE  OPPORTUNITY  TO
 DISCUSS THIS FIRST AMENDMENT WITH HIS PRIVATE LEGAL COUNSEL AND HAS  AVAILED
 HIMSELF OF THAT OPPORTUNITY.


 FIRST CASH FINANCIAL SERVICES, INC.           CONSULTANT


 By:_____________________________              ______________________________
    Richard T. Burke                           Phillip Eric Powell
    Director
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 Amended Annual Report of BSML, Inc. on Form 10-K/A for the period ending December 29, 2007, as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), Marc Applebaum, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certifies, 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 results of operations of the Company.

Date: April 28, 2008



|                                            
|--------------------------------------------
|/s/ Marc Applebaum                          
|Marc Applebaum                              
|Chief Financial Officer                     
|(Principal Accounting and Financial Officer)
SCPW-24-0000150
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI ʻ I

________________________________________________________________ RICHARD RAPOZO , Petitioner,

vs.
STATE OF HAWAI ʻ I, Respondent.

________________________________________________________________ ORIGINAL PROCEEDING (CASE NO. 1PR141000016)
ORDER DENYING PETITION ( By: Recktenwald, C.J., McKenna , Eddins, and Devens, JJ . , and Circuit Judge Nakamoto, in place of Ginoza, J., recused )

Upon consideration of the “Motion to Compel Discharge of Movant Pursuant to Ex Parte Lange, 85 U.S. 163 (1874) in effect May 16, 1979” (Motion), filed on March 11, 2024, and the record, we construe the Motion as a petition for writ of habeas corpus. So construed, Petitioner has not demonstrated a special reason for this court to invoke its original jurisdiction in a habeas corpus proceeding. See Oili v. Chang, 57 Haw. 411, 412, 557 P.2d 787, 788 (1976). Electronically Filed Supreme Court SCPW-24-0000150 21-MAY-2024 11:05 AM Dkt. 10 ODDP2 It is ordered that the petition is denied. DATED: Honolulu, Hawai ʻ i, May 21, 2024. /s/ Mark E. Recktenwald /s/ Sabrina S. McKenna /s/ Todd W. Eddins /s/ Vladimir P. Devens /s/ Henry T. Nakamoto
EXHIBIT 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

PURSUANT TO

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Andrew Rudnick, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Annual Report of
BSML, Inc. on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 29, 2007 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15 (d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Annual Report on Form
10-K fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and results of operations of BSML, Inc.

Date: April 14, 2008



|    |  |                                                                                  
|--- |  | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|    | 
|By: |  | /s/ Andrew Rudnick                                                               
|    |  | Andrew Rudnick Chief Executive Officer and Director (Principal Executive Officer)
EX-10.36



 


Exhibit 10.36



AMENDMENT NO. 1

TO

UNFAIR COMPETITION AND NONSOLICITATION AGREEMENT



     This Amendment No. 1 to Unfair Competition and Nonsolicitation Agreement
(“Amendment”), is made as of August 21, 2006, by and between Automotive Lease
Guide (alg), Inc. (formerly known as Santa Acquisition Company). (“ALG”), and
Raj Sundaram (“Employee”).



     WHEREAS, ALG and Employee entered into that certain Unfair Competition And
Nonsolicitation Agreement, dated as of May 25, 2005 (the “Agreement”); and



     WHEREAS, ALG and Employee desire to amend certain provisions of the
Agreement as provided below;



     NOW THEREFORE, for good and valuable consideration and in consideration of
the promises and conditions contained herein, the parties hereby agree as
follows:



     1.     Section 1(b) is hereby amended by deleting the words “following the
termination of Mr. Sundaram’s employment with the Company” and inserting
the following:




		
	 	     “after Mr. Sundaram’s cease to be employed by the Company or any
of its affiliates, including but not limited to DealerTrack
Holdings, Inc. and DealerTrack, Inc.



     2.     No Other Modification. Except as expressly provided herein, this
Amendment does not in any way change, modify, delete or amend any of the
provisions of the Agreement, and all such provisions shall remain in full
force and effect.



     3.     Governing Law. This Agreement shall be governed by California law.



     4.     Counterparts. This Amendment may be executed in two or more
counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, but all of which
together shall constitute one and the same instrument.








 



IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Amendment to be
executed and delivered by their respective duly authorized officers as of the
date first above written.




	 	 
	 	Automotive Lease Guide (alg), Inc.
	 	 
	 	 
	 	By:             
            
            

        Name:

        Title:
	 	 
	 	 
	 	/s/ Raj Sundaram     

     Rajesh Sundaram
1 ... S eeTe x. R. App . P. 47. 4. 

# COURT OF APPEALS SE CONDDIS T RICTOFT EXAS

FORT W ORTH NO. 2 - 08 - 38 7- CR E DDYF AB R I CI O C AR DON A AP P E L L ANT V . THE STATE OF TE XA S STATE

----- ----- FR O M CO UN TY CRI M I NA LCO URT NO . 8 OF T ARRA NT CO UN TY

----- ----- 

### MEMORANDU M OPI NI ON 1 

### AND J UDGME NT

----- ----- W e h aveco ns i der ed app el l ant ’ s “M ot i on To Di sm i ss . ” T he m ot i on com pl i esw i t h r ul e 42. 2( a) of t he r ul esofap pel l at e p r oce dur e. Tex . R. A pp. P. 42 . 2( a) . N o deci si on of t hi s courthavi ng be e n d el i ver ed bef or e w e r ecei ved th i sm o ti o n , w e g ra n t th e m o ti o n a n d d i s m i s sth e a p p e a l . S ee Tex. R. A pp. P. 4 2 .2 (a ), 4 3 .2 (f). P E R CU R I AM PA N EL: L I V I N G STO N , D A U PH I N O T, an d GA RD N ER, JJ. DO NO T P UBLI SH Tex. R. A pp. P. 47. 2( b) DEL I VERE D: J ul y 30, 2009
{"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":"2018-2167: Indivior Inc. v. Dr. Reddy's Laboratories, S.A. - U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"fmRpoK1KQa\"><a href=\"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov\/10-04-2018-2018-2167-indivior-inc-v-dr-reddys-laboratories-sa-audio-uploaded\/\">2018-2167: Indivior Inc. v. Dr. Reddy’s Laboratories, S.A.<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov\/10-04-2018-2018-2167-indivior-inc-v-dr-reddys-laboratories-sa-audio-uploaded\/embed\/#?secret=fmRpoK1KQa\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“2018-2167: Indivior Inc. v. Dr. Reddy’s Laboratories, S.A.” — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit\" data-secret=\"fmRpoK1KQa\" 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":"Oral argument audio posted: Indivior Inc. v. Dr. Reddy’s Laboratories, S.A. (mp3) Appeal Number: 2018-2167 To listen to more oral argument recordings, follow this link: Listen To Oral Arguments."}