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.

§ 74.651 Equipment changes. ( a ) Modifications may be made to an existing authorization in accordance with §§ 1.929 and 1.947 of this chapter.
( b ) Multiplexing equipment may be installed on any licensed TV broadcast STL, TV relay or translator relay station without authority from the Commission.
( c ) Permissible changes in equipment operating in the bands 18.3-18.58 GHz and 19.26-19.3 GHz. Notwithstanding other provisions of this section, licensees of stations that remain co-primary under the provisions of § 74.602(g) may not make modifications to their systems that increase interference to satellite earth stations, or result in a facility that would be more costly to relocate.
[28 FR 13718, Dec. 14, 1963, as amended at 38 FR 6827, Mar. 13, 1973; 47 FR 55938, Dec. 14, 1982; 49 FR 7131, Feb. 27, 1984; 58 FR 19776, Apr. 16, 1993; 61 FR 4368, Feb. 6, 1996; 63 FR 36605, July 7, 1998; 65 FR 54173, Sept. 7, 2000; 68 FR 12771, Mar. 17, 2003; 68 FR 16967, Apr. 8, 2003]
103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 4950

AMENDMENT
In the Senate of the United States,

September 30 (legislative day, September 12), 1994.

Resolved, That the bill from the House of Representatives (H.R. 4950) entitled ‘‘An Act to extend the authorities

of the Overseas Private Investment Corporation, and for

other purposes’’, do pass with the following

AMENDMENT:

Strike out all after the enacting clause and insert:

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

2 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘OPIC Amendments Act

3 of 1994’’.

4 SEC. 2. RAISING CEILING ON INSURANCE.

5 Section 235(a)(1) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961

6 (22 U.S.C. 2195(a)(1)) is amended by striking

7 ‘‘$9,000,000,000’’ and inserting ‘‘$12,000,000,000’’.

8 SEC. 3. RAISING CEILING ON INVESTMENT GUARANTEES.

9 Section 235(a)(2) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961

10 (22 U.S.C. 2195(a)(2)) is amended—

11 (1) by striking subparagraph (B);
2

HR 4950 EAS

1 (2) by striking ‘‘(A)’’ after ‘‘GUARANTEES.—’’;

2 and

3 (3) by striking ‘‘$2,500,000,000’’ and inserting

4 ‘‘$5,000,000,000’’.

5 SEC. 4. EXTENDING ISSUING AUTHORITY.

6 Section 235(a)(3) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961

7 (22 U.S.C. 2195(a)(3)) is amended by striking ‘‘1994’’ and

8 inserting ‘‘1995’’.

9 SEC. 5. ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES.

10 Section 235 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22

11 U.S.C. 2195) is amended by striking subsection (g).

Attest:

Secretary.
- TN 1972
§ 54.1011 5G Fund. ( a ) The Commission will use competitive bidding, as provided in part 1, subpart AA, of this chapter, to determine the recipients of support available through the 5G Fund and the amount(s) of support that they may receive for specific geographic areas, subject to applicable post-auction procedures.
( b ) 5G Fund support will be awarded in two phases using multi-round, descending clock auctions.
( c ) Areas eligible for 5G Fund Phase I support will be those areas identified by the Office of Economics and Analytics and Wireline Competition Bureau in a public notice as showing a lack of 4G Long Term Evolution (LTE) and 5G coverage on an unsubsidized basis based on the mobile broadband coverage maps created by the Commission using coverage data submitted in the Digital Opportunity Data Collection pursuant to § 1.7004(c)(3).
( d ) The Commission will incorporate an adjustment factor into the 5G Fund auction design that will assign a weight to each geographic area eligible in the 5G Fund Phase I auction using the adjustment factor values adopted by the Office of Economics and Analytics and Wireline Competition Bureau and announced in a public notice.
( e ) The Commission will incorporate an adjustment factor into the methodology for disaggregation of high-cost legacy support pursuant to § 54.307(e)(5)(iii) and (e)(5)(iv) that will assign a weight to each geographic area using the adjustment factor values adopted by the Office of Economics and Analytics and Wireline Competition Bureau and announced in a public notice.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AND THE CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                          17,294
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   52,733
<ALLOWANCES>                                     2,121
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                       1,358,807
<DEPRECIATION>                                 235,832
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,241,019
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                        568,699
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         1,065
<OTHER-SE>                                     450,834
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,241,019
<SALES>                                        153,341
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               303,415
<CGS>                                          135,115
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  220,843
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   257
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              39,988
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 42,584
<INCOME-TAX>                                    17,343
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             25,241
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    25,241
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .24
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .24


</TABLE>
§ 76.1904 Encoding rules for defined business models. ( a ) Commercial audiovisual content delivered as unencrypted broadcast television shall not be encoded so as to prevent or limit copying thereof by covered products or, to constrain the resolution of the image when output from a covered product.
( b ) Except for a specific determination made by the Commission pursuant to a petition with respect to a defined business model other than unencrypted broadcast television, or an undefined business model subject to the procedures set forth in § 76.1906: ( 1 ) Commercial audiovisual content shall not be encoded so as to prevent or limit copying thereof except as follows: ( i ) To prevent or limit copying of video-on-demand or pay-per-view transmissions, subject to the requirements of paragraph (b)(2) of this section; and
( ii ) To prevent or limit copying, other than first generation of copies, of pay television transmissions, non-premium subscription television, and free conditional access delivery transmissions; and
( 2 ) With respect to any commercial audiovisual content delivered or transmitted in form of a video-on-demand or pay-per-view transmission, a covered entity shall not encode such content so as to prevent a covered product, without further authorization, from pausing such content up to 90 minutes from initial transmission by the covered entity (e.g., frame-by-frame, minute-by-minute, megabyte by megabyte).
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 127 (Friday, June 30, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 40703]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-16652]


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

NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION


Advisory Committee for Small Business Industrial Innovation, 
Committee of Visitors; Notice of Meeting

    In accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-
463, as amended), the National Science Foundation announces the 
following meeting:

    Name: Advisory Committee for Small Business Industrial 
Innovation, Committee of Visitors (61).
    Date/Time: July 25-27, 2000--8:30 a.m.-5:00 p.m. each day.
    Place: Room 365, NSF, 4201 Wilson boulevard, Arlington, VA.
    Type of Meeting: Part-Open--(see Agenda, below).
    Contact Person: Dr. Kesh Narayanan, Acting Division Director for 
Design, Manufacture, and Industrial Innovation, National Science 
Foundation, 4201 Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, VA 22230. Telephone: 
(703) 306-1330.
    Purpose of Meeting: To carry out Committee of Visitors (COV) 
review, including program evaluation, GPRA assessments, and access 
to privileged materials.

Agenda

    Closed: July 25 and 26 from 8:30-5:00 each day--To review the 
merit review processes covering funding decisions made during the 
immediately preceding three fiscal years of the Design, Manufacture, 
and Industrial Innovation Programs.
    Open: July 27 from 8:30-5:00--To assess the results of NSF 
program investments in the Design, Manufacture, and Industrial 
Innovation Division. This shall involve a discussion and review of 
results focused on NSF and grantee outputs and related outcomes 
achieved or realized during the preceding three fiscal years. These 
results may be based on NSF grants or other investments made in 
earlier years.
    Reason for Closing: During the closed session, the Committee 
will be reviewing proposal actions that will include information of 
a proprietary or confidential nature, including technical 
information; financial data, such as salaries, and personal 
information concerning individuals associated with the proposals. 
These matters are exempt under 5 U.S.C. 552b(c), (4) and (6) of the 
Government in the Sunshine Act.


    Dated: June 27, 2000.
Karen J. York,
Committee Management Officer.
[FR Doc. 00-16652 Filed 6-29-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7555-01-M
No. 10-10854.

#### Sims *v.*Nebraska.

Sup. Ct. Neb. Certiorari denied.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS AT JUNE 30, 2000 AND THE CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF
OPERATIONS FOR THE SIX MONTHS ENDED JUNE 30, 2000 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                           2,035
<SECURITIES>                                    10,392
<RECEIVABLES>                                    5,662
<ALLOWANCES>                                       393
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                18,333
<PP&E>                                          10,338
<DEPRECIATION>                                   3,141
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  31,373
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            9,970
<BONDS>                                            122
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           142
<OTHER-SE>                                      21,139
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    31,373
<SALES>                                         11,225
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                15,668
<CGS>                                              441
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   15,127
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   156
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  41
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (3,308)
<INCOME-TAX>                                        80
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (3,388)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (3,388)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.24)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.24)


</TABLE>
§ 302-15.2 What are the purposes of the property management services allowance? The purposes of the property management services allowance are to: ( a ) Reduce overall Government relocation costs by using the property management services allowance in place of allowances for the sale of the employee's residence; and
( b ) Relieve employees transferred to OCONUS duty stations from the costs of maintaining a home in CONUS during their tour of duty.
[FTR Amdt. 2011-01, 76 FR 18344, Apr. 1, 2011]
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4937 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4937

To authorize the Secretary of Transportation to issue a certificate of 
   documentation with appropriate endorsement for employment in the 
               coastwise trade for the vessel FIFTY ONE.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            August 10, 1994

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

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To authorize the Secretary of Transportation to issue a certificate of 
   documentation with appropriate endorsement for employment in the 
               coastwise trade for the vessel FIFTY ONE.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled, That notwithstanding 
section 27 of the Merchant Marine Act, 1920 (46 App. U.S.C. 883), the 
Act of June 19, 1886 (46 App. U.S.C. 289), and section 12106 of title 
46, United States Code, the Secretary of Transportation may issue a 
certificate of documentation with appropriate endorsement for 
employment in the coastwise trade for the vessel FIFTY ONE (United 
States official number 1020419).
                                 <all>
```
Exhibit 10.15


In 2007, all Directors,
other than Kirk C. Doyle and Steven C. Oldham, will be compensated by a fee of
$1,250 per month and $1,250 for each Board meeting they attend ($625 if
participation is by telephone). Directors also receive $625 for each Committee
meeting they attend ($1,250 if the meeting is on a day different than a
Directors’ meeting, but $625 if participation is by telephone).  Committee Chairmen also receive a fee of
$5,000 annually, with the exception of the Audit Committee Chairman, for whom
the annual retainer is $10,000.


The non-employee
Directors of the Company are entitled to participate in the SureWest
Communications 2000 Equity Incentive Plan (the “2000 Plan”). Pursuant to the
2000 Plan, prior to 2004 options to purchase 1,250 shares of Common Stock were
automatically granted to each non-employee Director upon the conclusion of each
regular annual meeting of the Company’s shareholders. The Board of Directors in
2004 amended the 2000 Plan by eliminating the automatic option grant.
Non-employee Directors are also eligible to receive other grants under the 2000
Plan.  The Company in 2006 provided the
continuing Board members with grants of 1,000 vested stock units,  effective on the date of the Annual Meeting
of Shareholders. Each vested stock unit 
is convertible into one share of Company common stock upon the recipient’s
cessation of service as a Director of the Company.
No. 11-5714.

#### Koehler *v.*Disciplinary Counsel of Ohio.

Sup. Ct. Ohio. Certiorari denied.
PUBLISH 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT 

_________________________________ 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

 Plaintiff - Appellee, 

v. 

GEORGE ANTHONY AUTOBEE, 

 Defendant - Appellant. 

No. 17-1082 

(D.C. No. 1:16-CV-01526-LTB 

and 1:05-CR-00054-LTB-1) 

(D. Colo.) 

_________________________________ 

ORDER

_________________________________ 

Before PHILLIPS, McKAY, and McHUGH, Circuit Judges. 

_________________________________ 

This matter is before us on Appellant George Autobee’s Unopposed Motion for 

14-Day Extension of Time to File Petition for Panel Rehearing. 

Under Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 40(a)(1), a party may file a petition for 

panel rehearing in most cases, including criminal cases, within 14 days after entry of 

judgment. But in a civil case, when the United States is a party, the time to petition for 

rehearing is 45 days. Fed. R. App. P. 40(a)(1)(B). 

We entered our Order Denying Certificate of Appealability in this 28 U.S.C. 

§ 2255 appeal on July 6, 2017. Assuming that the 14-day period applies, Appellant 

FILED 

United States Court of Appeals 

Tenth Circuit 

July 18, 2017

Elisabeth A. Shumaker 

Clerk of Court
2 

requests an extension of time to file a petition for panel rehearing from July 20, 2017, to 

August 3, 2017. 

There is no question that the United States is a party to the litigation. The question 

is only whether a § 2255 proceeding is a civil case for purposes of Rule 40. This court 

has not specifically decided this question. At least one of our sister circuits has assumed 

that the 45-day period applies. See Kusay v. United States, 62 F.3d 192, 193 (7th Cir. 

1995) (noting the extra time to seek rehearing in a § 2255 appeal because it involves civil 

litigation to which the United States is a party). We have said that § 2255 proceedings are 

civil for purposes of the time to appeal under Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 4. 

United States v. Pinto, 1 F.3d 1069, 1070 (10th Cir. 1993); see also Rules Governing 

§ 2255 Proceedings, Rule 11(b) (“Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 4(a) governs the 

time to appeal an order entered under these rules.”); Rule 11(b) advisory committee’s 

note to 1979 amendment.1

 

We see no sound legal basis to treat a § 2255 proceeding as civil for purposes of 

calculating a deadline under one rule of appellate procedure but as criminal for purposes 

of calculating a deadline under another rule. Accordingly, we conclude that § 2255 

proceedings are civil cases for purposes of Rule 40. As a result, the time to petition for 

 1

 The rules governing proceedings in the United States District Courts under 28 

U.S.C. § 2255, as approved by the Judicial Conference of the United States, were 

prescribed by the United States Supreme Court and transmitted to Congress pursuant to 

18 U.S.C. §§ 3771, 3772, and 28 U.S.C. § 2072, by order dated April 26, 1976. 
3 

rehearing is 45 days and Appellant’s motion is denied as unnecessary. 

Entered for the Court 

ELISABETH A. SHUMAKER, Clerk
Manchester District Court

No. 81-452

#### *In re*Joan L. *& a.*

May 17, 1982

*Gregory H. Smith,*attorney general *(Peter T. Foley,*attorney, on the brief), by brief for the State.

*454
      *James A. Manning,*assistant city solicitor, of Manchester, by brief for the City of Manchester.

Per CURIAM.

In this case, we decide which governmental entity is responsible for payment of attorney’s fees when counsel is appointed to represent a juvenile alleged to be a child in need of services.

Attorney John Dubiansky was appointed to represent a child alleged to be in need of services. The district court approved his bill for services and forwarded it to the City of Manchester Welfare Department for payment. The City of Manchester refused to pay his fee, asserting that the State was liable for the cost of representation. Attorney Dubiansky filed a “Motion to Compel Payment” in Manchester District Court and *Capistran,*J., transferred the following questions of law to this court:

> A. Are the services rendered by assigned counsel under RSA 169-D an obligation of a town, city, or county, and if not, are they an obligation of the State?

> B. If they are an obligation of the town, city, or county, does a district court have the authority to compel a town, city, or county to pay the attorney’s fees?

RSA 169-D:12 (Supp. 1981) provides that the court shall appoint counsel for a child alleged to be in need of services at the time of the initial appearance. RSA 169-D:29 (Supp. 1981), which addresses liability for expenses, is identical to RSA 169-C:27 (Supp. 1981), including the sentence that states:

> “Whenever an order creating liability for expenses is issued by the court under this chapter, any expenses incurred shall be payable by the town in which the child resides at the time the petition is filed or, if the residence cannot be determined, by the town in which the child is taken into custody.”

In *In re Heather D.,*121 N.H. 547, 431 A.2d 789 (1981), a case involving RSA ch. 169-C, we construed this language to require the town where the child resided to compensate counsel for representing indigent parents in a child-neglect case. *Id.*at 551, 431 A.2d at 792. Accordingly, we reach the same conclusion with regard to the costs of legal representation arising under RSA ch. 169-D (Supp. 1981). The legislature has chosen to make towns liable for legal fees when counsel is appointed to represent a *child*in a proceeding brought under RSA ch. 169-D (Supp. 1981).

*455The second transferred question asks whether a district court has authority to compel a town to pay those fees. We need not answer this question because we assume that “[w]hen the law is settled it will be obeyed.” *Brouillard v. Governor and Council,*114 N.H. 541, 544, 323 A.2d 901, 903 (1974) (citations omitted); *see New Hampshire-Vermont Health Service v. Commissioner of Insurance,*122 N.H. 268, 276, 444 A.2d 508, 512 (1982).

*Remanded.*
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





Pursuant to 10 U.S.C.  Section  1350 as adopted  pursuant to Section 1350 of the

Sarbanes-Oxley  Act  of  2002,  in  connection  with  the  Quarterly  Report  of

Electronic Game Card, Inc. on Form 10-QSB/A for the period ending June 30, 2005,

as filed with the  Securities  and Exchange  Commission  on the date hereof (the

"Report") for Electronic  Game Card,  Inc.,  (the  "Company"),  the  undersigned

hereby certifies that:



(1)      to the  best of my  knowledge,  the  Report  fully  complies  with  the

requirements  of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities  Exchange Act

of 1934; and



(2)      to the best of my knowledge,  the  information  contained in the Report

fairly presents, in all material respects,  the financial condition and

result of operations of the Company.



February 3, 2006





/S/ LEE COLE

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

LEE COLE

ACTING PRESIDENT AND ACTING

CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER