alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
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 Health and Human Services

###### Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

# AGENCY:

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).

# ACTION:

Notice. 

# SUMMARY:

The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) gives notice concerning the final effect of the HHS decision to designate a class of employees at the Pacific Proving Grounds, Enewetak Atoll, as an addition to the Special Exposure Cohort (SEC) under the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act of 2000. On June 26, 2006, as provided for under 42 U.S.C. 7384q(b), the Secretary of HHS designated the following class of employees as an addition to the SEC: 

Department of Energy (DOE) employees or DOE contractor or subcontractor employees who worked at the Pacific Proving Grounds (PPG) from 1946 through 1962 for a number of work days aggregating at least 250 work days, either solely under this employment or in combination with work days within the parameters (excluding aggregate work day requirements) established for other classes of employees included in the SEC, and who were monitored or should have been monitored. 

                    This designation became effective on July 26, 2006, as provided for under 42 U.S.C. 7384*l*                    (14)(C). Hence, beginning on July 26, 2006, members of this class of employees, defined as reported in this notice, became members of the Special Exposure Cohort.                

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        Larry Elliott, Director, Office of Compensation Analysis and Support, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, 4676 Columbia Parkway, MS C-46, Cincinnati, OH 45226, Telephone 513-533-6800 (this is not a toll-free number). Information requests can also be submitted by e-mail to                         *OCAS@CDC.GOV.*

Dated: August 1, 2006.

John Howard, 

Director, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

[FR Doc. 06-6681 Filed 8-3-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4163-19-M
No. 11-6092.

#### McClain *v.*United States.

C. A. 3d Cir. Cer-tiorari denied.
§ 17.2 Scope of regulations. ( a ) The regulations of this part apply only to endangered and threatened wildlife and plants, except for § 17.22(b) and (c) and § 17.32(b) and (c), which may apply to wildlife and plant species that are not listed as endangered or threatened if they meet the definition of “covered species.”
( b ) Permits authorized under this part include: ( 1 ) Scientific purposes or enhancement of propagation or survival permits for take associated with research, captive propagation programs, or conservation activities to enhance and recover populations of covered species; and
( 2 ) Incidental take permits for take that is incidental to otherwise lawful activities.
( c ) By agreement between the Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service, the jurisdiction of the Department of Commerce has been specifically defined to include certain species, while jurisdiction is shared in regard to certain other species. Such species are footnoted in subpart B of this part, and reference is given to special rules of the National Marine Fisheries Service for those species.
( d ) The provisions in this part are in addition to, and are not in lieu of, other regulations of this subchapter B which may require a permit or prescribe additional restrictions or conditions for the importation, exportation, and interstate transportation of wildlife.
( e ) The examples used in this part are provided solely for the convenience of the public, and to explain the intent and meaning of the regulation to which they refer. They have no legal significance.
( f ) Certain of the wildlife and plants listed in §§ 17.11 and 17.12 as endangered or threatened are included in Appendix I, II or III to the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora. The importation, exportation and reexportation of such species are subject to additional regulations provided in part 23 of this subchapter.
[40 FR 44415, Sept. 26, 1975, as amended at 42 FR 10465, Feb. 22, 1977; 89 FR 26094, Apr. 12, 2024]
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 Quarterly Report of Interactive Intelligence, Inc. (the
"Registrant") on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ending September 30,
2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
hereof (the "Report"), I, Stephen R. Head, Chief Financial Officer, Vice
President of Finance and Administration, Secretary and Treasurer of the
Registrant, 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
      Report, to which this certification is attached as Exhibit 32.2,
      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
      Registrant.








/s/ Stephen R.
Head


Stephen
R. Head


Chief
Financial Officer, Vice President of Finance and Administration,


Secretary
and Treasurer


(Principal
Financial Officer and Principal Accounting Officer)


November
6, 2009
§ 69.801 Definitions. ( a ) *Business data services.* The dedicated point-to-point transmission of data at certain guaranteed speeds and service levels using high-capacity connections.
( b ) *Competitive market test.* The competitive market test is defined in § 69.803.
( c ) *County.* A county or county equivalent as defined in § 10.10 of this chapter. County-equivalents include parishes, boroughs, independent cities, census areas, the District of Columbia, and various entities in the territories.
( d ) *End user channel termination.* A dedicated channel connecting a local exchange carrier end office and a customer premises, offered for purposes of carrying special access traffic.
( e ) *Grandfathered market.* A county that does not satisfy the competitive market test set forth in § 69.803 for which a price cap local exchange carrier obtained Phase II relief pursuant to § 69.711(c).
( f ) *Market deemed competitive.* A county that satisfies the competitive market test set forth in § 69.803.
( g ) *Market deemed non-competitive.* A county that does not satisfy the competitive market test set forth in § 69.803.
( h ) *Non-disclosure agreement.* A non-disclosure agreement is a contract, contractual provision, or tariff provision wherein a party agrees not to disclose certain information shared by the other party.
( i ) *Special access data collection.* The special access data collection refers to the data and other information the Commission collected from business data services providers and purchasers pursuant to its December 18, 2012 Report and Order in WC Docket 05-25.
( j ) *Transport* includes interoffice facilities, channel terminations between the serving wire center and point of presence, and all special access services that are described in § 69.114 other than end user channel terminations.
§ 73.7004 Petitions to deny tentative selectee(s). ( a ) For mutually exclusive applicants subject to the selection procedures in subpart K of this part, Petitions to Deny will be accepted only against the tentative selectee(s).
( b ) Within thirty (30) days following the issuance of a public notice announcing the tentative selection of an applicant through fair distribution (§ 73.7002) or point system (§ 73.7003) procedures, petitions to deny that application may be filed. Any such petitions must contain allegations of fact supported by affidavit of a person or persons with personal knowledge thereof.
( c ) An applicant may file an opposition to any petition to deny, and the petitioner a reply to such opposition. Allegations of fact or denials thereof must be supported by affidavit of a person or persons with personal knowledge thereof. The time for filing such oppositions shall be 10 days from the filing date for petitions to deny, and the time for filing replies shall be 5 days from the filing date for oppositions.
( d ) If the Commission denies or dismisses all petitions to deny, if any are filed, and is otherwise satisfied that an applicant is qualified, the application will be granted. If the Commission determines that the points originally claimed were higher than permitted, but that there is no substantial and material question of fact of applicant qualifications, it will compare the revised point tally of the tentative selectee to the other mutually exclusive applicants and, either grant the original application or announce a new tentative selectee, as appropriate. If an applicant is found unqualified, the application shall be denied, and the applicant(s) with the next highest point tally named as the new tentative selectee.
No. 11-10104.

#### Outlaw *v.*United States.

C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.
Amendment No. 4 to Agreement, effective as of January 1, 2007



 GRAFTECH INTERNATIONAL LTD. HAS CLAIMED CONFIDENTIAL 
 TREATMENT OF PORTIONS OF THIS AGREEMENT IN ACCORDANCE WITH 
 RULE 24B-2 UNDER THE SECURITIES
EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 
 Exhibit 10.27.2 
 [Humber Agreement - Amendment] 
 CERTAIN PORTIONS OF THIS EXHIBIT HAVE BEEN OMITTED BASED ON A 
 REQUEST FOR CONFIDENTIAL TREATMENT 
 OMITTED PORTIONS HAVE
BEEN SEPARATELY FILED WITH THE 
 SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION 
 AMENDMENT NO. 4 
 THIS AMENDMENT is made effective as of January 1, 2007 (“The Effective
Date”) by and among (1) CONOCOPHILLIPS (U.K.) LIMITED (“Seller”), formerly known as Conoco (U.K.) Limited, of Portman house, 2 Portman St, London W1H 6DU, united Kingdom and (2) UCAR S.A. (“Buyer”) of
Route de Renens 1, 1030 Bussigny-pres-Lausanne, Switzerland (each a “Party” and together “the Parties”) and amends an Agreement (the “Agreement”) among the Parties entered as of January 1, 2001, in the following
particulars: 
 1. Section 5.3.1B of the Agreement is amended by adding the following: 
 For the year * the prices to be used for invoicing and payment for Coke supplied under this Agreement will be fixed at the following: 

Grade * - * per metric ton 
 Grade * - * per metric ton 
 Grade * - * per metric ton 
 If, during any * consecutive *, the average of the daily quotes for Brent Blend published by Platt’s (excluding days during such * period on
which Platt’s does not publish such quotes) is over * per barrel, then either party may notify the other party, in writing, that it wishes to renegotiate the prices for all grades of coke sold pursuant to this Agreement. If the parties fail to
agree upon revised pricing within * of the date of such a notice, then either party may terminate this Agreement upon not less than * advance written notice. 
 2. Section 5.4 of the Agreement (Additional Procedures) is deleted in its entirety. 
 Except as provided above, the Agreement and the
Amendments remain in full force and effect according to their terms. 







 CERTAIN PORTIONS OF THIS EXHIBIT HAVE BEEN OMITTED BASED ON A 
 REQUEST FOR CONFIDENTIAL TREATMENT 
 Signed and executed by duly
authorized representatives of Seller and buyer respectively, 
  

									
	CONOCOPHILLIPS (U.K.) LIMITED	 	 	 	UCAR S.A.
					
	By:	 	 /s/ P.N. Higgins
	 	 	 	By:	 	 /s/ Giuseppe Autieri

	Date:	 	 26 Feb 2007
	 	 	 	Date:	 	 March 5, 2007
NOTICE OF APPEAL Page 1 of 2 NO. CA -15 -016

SAPHC, LLC, A TEXAS LIMITED

LIABILITY COMPANY

Plaintiff

, §

§

§ IN THE COUNTY COURT AT LAW

§

V. § NO. 1

§

RR ROYAL RANCH COMPANY, A

TEXAS CORPORATION, AND ALL

OTHER OCCUPANTS §

§

§

Defendant

s

. § PARKER COUNTY, TEXAS

NOTICE OF APPEAL

Defendants, RR Royal Ranch Company and All Other Occupants, parties to this case, file

this Notice of Appeal seeking to alter the trial court's judgment or other appealable order.

1. The trial court, trial court case number and style of this matter are shown in the

above caption.

2. The judgment or order appealed from was signed on December 3, 2015.

3. RR Royal Ranch Company and All Other Occupants desire to appeal because (a)

Defendants ’ d id not receive proper or timely notice of the hearing and the trial court denied

Defendants ’ Motion for Continuance to allow Defendants ’ counsel adequate time to prepare for

the h earing; (b) Defendants ’ Motion for Abatement was denied by the trial court even though a

separate action regarding ownership of the Property is currently pending in the Second Court of

Appeals of Texas ; (c) ownership to the Property was not established by Plaintiff ’ s counsel as is

required by the Texas Property Code in a forcible detainer action; and (d) the award of attorney ’ s

fees and damages were excessive.

4. This appeal is being taken to the Second Court of Appeals of Texas.

5. This notice is being filed by RR Royal Ranch Company and All Other Occupants. Misti Glasscock Filed: 12/8/2015 11:54:57 AM

Jeane Brunson

County Clerk

Parker County, TexasNOTICE OF APPEAL Page 2 of 2 Respectfully submitted,

D ORSETT J OHNSON & S WIFT

, LLP

J. C. Johnson

Texas Bar No. 24067412

jcjohnson@dorsettjohnson.com

C. J. de Vilder, Jr.

Texas Bar No. 24065130

cjdevilder@dorsettjohnson.com

Robyn Trosper

- Murrell

Texas Bar N o. 24090441

rtrosper@dorsettjohnson.com

109 East Third Street, Suite 350

Fort Worth, Texas 76102

Telephone: (817) 900

- 8202

Facsimile: (817) 882

- 8526

ATTORNEYS FOR D EFENDANTS

RR ROYAL RAN CH AND ALL OTHER

OCCUPANTS

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

Pursuant to Texas Rules of Civil Procedure 21 and 21a, I certify that on D ecember 8

, 2015 a true and correct copy of D efendants ' Notice of Appeal was served to each person listed

below by the method indicated.

Via Electronic Filing Manager

Michael Brinkley

BRINKLEY LAW PLL C

P.O. Box 820711

Fort Worth, Texas 76182

- 0711

Michael@brinkleypllc.com

Attorney for Plaintiff

C. J. de Vilder, Jr.
No. 11-5810.

#### In re Jackson.

Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed *in forma pauperis*denied, and petition for writ of mandamus dismissed. See this Court’s Rule 39.8.

Justice Kagan took no part in the consideration or decision of this motion and this petition.
**Exhibit 31.1**     CERTIFICATIONSI, Randy K. Ferrell, certify that:1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Fauquier Bankshares, Inc.;2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a materialfact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light ofthe circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to theperiod covered by this report;3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial informationincluded in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition,results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periodspresented in this report;4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e)and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:     a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosurecontrols and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, ismade known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period inwhich this report is being prepared;     b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this reportbased on such evaluation; and     c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter(the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that hasmaterially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting; and5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors andthe audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing theequivalent functions):     a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operationof internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adverselyaffect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financialinformation; and     b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employeeswho have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting.        Date: November 10, 2005 /s/  Randy K. Ferrell   Randy K. Ferrell    President and Chief Executive Officer
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

ANTHONY C. WEIMER,

Plaintiff

- Appellant,

v.

MICROSOFT CORPORATION, a

Washington Corporation; GOOGLE, LLC , a Delaware limited liability company,

Defendants

- Appellees. No. 22

- 35246

D.C. No. 9:21

- cv

- 00078

- BMM

MEMORANDUM *

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Montana

Brian M. Morris, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted June 26, 2023 * *

Before: CANBY, S.R. THOMAS, and CHRISTEN, Circuit Judges.

Anthony C. Weimer appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment

dismissing his act ion alleging various federal claims regarding his exposure to

obscene online materials. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36

- 3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). Weimer’s request s for oral

argument, set forth in the opening and reply brief s

, are denied. 

# FILED

JUL 5 2023

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS2 22

- 35246

review de novo a dismissal on the basis of res judicata

. Mpoyo v. Litton Electro

Optical Sys. , 430 F.3d 985, 987 (9th Cir. 2005). We affirm.

The district court properly dismissed Weimer ’s action as barred by the

doctrine of res judicata because Weimer’s claims were raised or could have been

raised in his prior federal action between the parties or their privies that resulted in

a final judgment on the merits

. See id. ( elements of res judicata under federal law ) ;

Tahoe

- Sierra Pres. Council, Inc. v. Tahoe Reg'l Plan. Agency , 322 F.3d 1064,

1077

- 78 (9th Cir. 2003) (explaining that “imaginativ e” parties may not “avoid

preclusion by attaching a different legal label to an issue that has, or could have,

been litigated ”)

.

AFFIRMED.
UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS, EASTERN DIVISION

The undersigned, a duly qualified attorney admitted to practice before this Court, hereby 

enters an appearance in the within captioned matter on behalf of U.S. BANK TRUST 

NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, NOT IN ITS INDIVIDUAL CAPACITY BUT SOLELY AS 

QUEEN'S PARK OVAL ASSET HOLDING TRUST, and/or its assigns and requests all notices, 

pleadings, motions, orders, applications and other documents filed and/or served in this case be 

sent to them at the following address:

Berton J. Maley ARDC#6209399 

Rachael A. Stokas ARDC#6276349 

Gloria C. Tsotsos ARDC#6274279 

Jose G. Moreno ARDC#6229900 

Peter C. Bastianen ARDC#6244346 

Joel P. Fonferko ARDC#6276490

Codilis & Associates, P.C.

15W030 North Frontage Road, Suite 100 

Burr Ridge, IL 60527

(630) 794-5300

C&A FILE (14-16-09811)

Dated August 4, 2016.

By: /s/ Joel Fonferko

NOTE: This law firm is a debt collector.

ENTRY OF APPEARANCE AND REQUEST FOR ALL NOTICES

IN RE:

Demetrio John Hernandez

Debtor(s)

Case No.: 16-24543

Chapter: 13

Judge Timothy A. Barnes

Case 16-24543 Doc 11 Filed 08/04/16 Entered 08/04/16 14:13:21 Desc Main

 Document Page 1 of 1
I

103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 5187

To amend section 7(m) of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 to eliminate

the partial overtime exemption for employees that perform services necessary and incidental to the sale and processing of green and cigar

leaf tobacco.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

OCTOBER 5, 1994

Mr. KILDEE introduced the following bill; which was referred to the

Committee on Education and Labor

A BILL

To amend section 7(m) of the Fair Labor Standards Act

of 1938 to eliminate the partial overtime exemption for

employees that perform services necessary and incidental

to the sale and processing of green and cigar leaf tobacco.

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Tobacco Workers Eq5 uity Act’’.

6 SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

7 The Congress finds that—
2

•HR 5187 IH

1 (1) there are no reasons why employees en2 gaged in the handling and processing of green leaf

3 and cigar leaf tobacco should be excluded from the

4 full protections of the overtime provisions of the

5 Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938; and

6 (2) the special retention of the partial overtime

7 exemption for employees that perform services nec8 essary and incidental to the sale and processing of

9 green and cigar leaf tobacco can no longer be justi10 fied by reasons of public policy or any other consid11 eration.

12 SEC. 3. AMENDMENT.

13 Section 7(m) of the Fair Labor Standards Act of

14 1938 (2 U.S.C. 207(m)) is repealed.

Æ