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

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 5550 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 5550

To amend the mission statement of the United States Military Academy to 
              include the phrase ``Duty, Honor, Country''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

            December 17 (legislative day, December 16), 2024

Mr. Cruz (for himself, Mr. Scott of Florida, and Mrs. Britt) introduced 
the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee 
                           on Armed Services

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend the mission statement of the United States Military Academy to 
              include the phrase ``Duty, Honor, Country''.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Maintaining Academy Culture and 
Assuring Retention of Tradition, Honor, and Unity of the Republic Act 
(MACARTHUR) Act''.

SEC. 2. SENSE OF CONGRESS.

    It is the sense of Congress that the principles of ``Duty, Honor, 
Country'' should be--
            (1) deeply embedded in the ethos of the United States 
        Military Academy; and
            (2) instilled in each cadet.

SEC. 3. MODIFICATION OF UNITED STATES MILITARY ACADEMY MISSION 
              STATEMENT.

    Not later than 30 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, 
the Secretary of the Army shall amend the mission statement of the 
United States Military Academy to include the phrase ``Duty, Honor, 
Country''.
                                 <all>
```
Exhibit 16



SELLERS & ANDERSEN, L.L.C.

941 East 3300 South, Suite 202

Certified Public Accountants and Business Consultants

Salt Lake City, Utah 84106

Member SEC Practice Sections of the AICP                                              Telephone 801 486-0096

Fax 801 486-0098











June 2, 2004







United States Securities and Exchange Commission

Division of Corporate Finance

450 Fifth Street, N.W.

Washington, D.C.  20549



To Whom It May Concern:



We have read Item 8 of Form 10-KSB dated June 2, 2004, of T-Bay Holdings,  Inc. and are in agreement with the statements contained therein.  We have no basis to agree or disagree with other statement of the registrant contained in the Form 10-KSB.



Very truly yours,







/s/Sellers & Andersen, L.L.C.
<PAGE>

                                                                EXHIBIT 10.11(c)

               AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT DATED DECEMBER 1, 1995
                                    BY AND BETWEEN
                              RURAL CELLULAR CORPORATION
                                         AND
                                 RICHARD P. EKSTRAND


     THIS AMENDMENT entered into this 18th day of December, 1997, by and between
Rural Cellular Corporation ("RCC" or "Company") and Richard P. Ekstrand (the
"Employee").

     WHEREAS, RCC and the Employee entered into a written Employment Agreement
on December 1, 1995 (the "Employment Agreement");

     WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 14 of the Employment Agreement, RCC and the
Employee desire to amend the Employee's Employment Agreement to extend the term
of the Agreement and to increase certain payments to Employee in the event of a
change in control of RCC;

     NOW, THEREFORE, it is AGREED as follows:

     1.   The Employee's term of employment as set forth in Section 5 of the
Employment Agreement is hereby extended to December 31, 2000.

     2.   The amount to be paid to the Employee in the event of the involuntary
termination of his employment, absent Just Cause, in connection with, or within
twelve (12) months after, any change in control of RCC, as stated in Section
11(a) of the Employment Agreement, shall be equal to the product of 2.99 times
the Employee's "base amount" as defined in Section 280G(b)(3) of the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the "Code") and the rgulations promulgated
thereunder.

     3.   Capitalized terms used but not defined herein shall have the meanings
ascribed to such terms in the Employment Agreement.

     4.   All other terms, conditions and provisions of the Employment Agreement
remain in full force and effect.


                                   RURAL CELLULAR CORPORATION


                                   By: /s/  Richard P. Ekstrand
                                       ------------------------
                                       Richard P. Ekstrand
                                       President and Chief Executive Officer


Richard P. Ekstrand                -----------------------------------------
i'ruatr nf tqr luitrb ~tutrs NINETIETH CONGRESS 

FIRST SESSION-Began January 10, 1967 

EXECUTIVE CALENDAR 

Pre pared under the direction of FRANCIS R. V ALEO, Secretary of the Senate 

By GERALD A. HACKETT, Executive Clerk 

Monday, March 13, 1967 

UNANIMOUS-CONSENT AGREEMENT 

Ordered, That, effective on Tuesday, March 14, 1967, at the conclusion of any routine morning business 

under order of the Senate, during the further consideration of the treaty Ex. D, 88th Cong., 2d sess., a consular 

convention with the U.S.S.R., debate on Executive Reservation No. 1, intended to be proposed by the Senator 

from South Dakota (Mr. Mundt), shall be limited to 4 hours, to be equally divided and controlled by Mr. Mund; 

and the Senator from Arkansas (Mr. Fulbright); debate on Executive Reservation No. 2, intended to be proposed 

by Mr. Mundt shall be limited to 6 hours, to be equally divided and controlled by Mr. Mundt and Mr. Fulbright; and debate on Executive Understanding No. 1, intended to be proposed by the Senator from Maine 

(Mrs. Smith), shall be limited to 1 hour, to be equally divided and controlled by Mrs. Smith and Mr. Fulbright. 

(March 9, 196'1) 

TREATY 

Date of Calendar Treaty No. Subject Action of committee 

report No 

1967 

Mar. 3 11 Ex. D, 88th Cong., Consular convention with the U.S.S.R------ Reported favorably by 

2d sess. Mr. Fulbright, from 

the Committee on 

Foreign Relations, 

with a printed report 

together with individual views. (See Ex. 

Rept. No. 4, 90th 

Cong., 1st sess.) 

65-022~7--No 20 II 5 GOVERHIUNT PRINTUII OffiCI a tilt
* This order and judgment is not binding precedent, e xcept under the

doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and col lateral estoppel. The court generally disfavors the citation of orders and judg ments; nevertheless, an order and judgment may be cited under the terms and condi tions of 10th Cir. R. 36.3. 

## F I L E D United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit 

### MAY 9 2000 

### PATRICK FISHER Clerk UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,
v. ROSS CLINGER,

Defendant-Appellant. No. 99-1432 (D.C. No. 95-WY-2058-WD)

(D. Colo.)

ORDER AND JUDGMENT *
Before KELLY , McKAY , and HENRY , Circuit Judges.

After examining the briefs and appellate record, th is panel has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materiallyassist the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2); 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). T he case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. This appeal arises from the government’s foreclosur e and sale of certain property in satisfaction of a tax lien. The partie s are aware of the facts involved-2-

in this case, and we need not repeat them here. Pl aintiff appeals from the district court’s denial of his postjudgment motions filed pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b), in which he asked the district court to set aside the sale and its judgment. We review the district court’s denial of the Rule 6 0(b) motions for an abuse of discretion, mindful that relief under Rule 60(b) is extraordinary and reserved for only exceptional circumstances. See Stubblefield v. Windsor Capital Group , 74 F.3d 990, 994 (10th Cir. 1996). We have reviewe d the record in this case, and we conclude that the district court was entirely wi thin its discretion to deny plaintiff’s Rule 60(b) motions for postjudgment rel ief. AFFIRMED.

Entered for the Court
Paul J. Kelly, Jr. Circuit Judge
Dolan Chemical Laboratory 4001 Bixby Road Groveport, OH 43125 T: 614-836-4221, Audinet 210-4221 F: 614-836-4168, Audinet 210-4168 http://aepenv/labs 

### Water Analysis Form REP-702 Rev. 0, 4/2012



### Location: Mountaineer Plant Report Date: 8/1/2013 Sample Number: 132946-001 Date Collected:07/10/2013 08:15 Date Received:7/19/2013 

### Plant Outfall #001 Units Parameter Result RL Analysis By Analysis Date/Time Method MDL ng/L Mercury, Hg 6.0 1.0 TLT EPA 1631E 0.40 07/30/2013 

### Sample Number: 132946-002 Date Collected: 07/19/2013 08:30 Date Received:7/19/2013 

### Plant Outfall #001 Units Parameter Result RL Analysis By Analysis Date/Time Method MDL ng/L Mercury, Hg 3.8 1.0 TLT EPA 1631E 0.40 07/30/2013 

### Sample Number: 132946-003 Date Collected:07/17/2013 08:00 Date Received:7/19/2013 

## CPS Effluent Units Parameter Result RL Analysis By Analysis Date/Time Method MDL ng/L Mercury, Hg 67.4 20 TLT EPA 1631E 8.0 07/30/2013 

### Sample Number: 132946-004 Date Collected:07/19/2013 08:00 Date Received:7/19/2013 

### Bioreactor Effluent Units Parameter Result RL Analysis By Analysis Date/Time Method MDL ng/L Mercury, Hg 7.4 1.0 TLT EPA 1631E 0.40 07/30/2013 

### Sample Number: 132946-005 Date Collected:07/12/2013 Date Received:7/19/2013 

## Trip Blank Units Parameter Result RL Analysis By Analysis Date/Time Method MDL ng/L Mercury, Hg < 0.5 0.50 TLT EPA 1631E 0.20 07/30/2013 

### Sample Number: 132946-006 Date Collected:07/19/2013 08:30 Date Received:7/19/2013 

### Field Blank Units Parameter Result RL Analysis By Analysis Date/Time Method MDL ng/L Mercury, Hg < 0.5 0.50 TLT EPA 1631E 0.20 07/30/2013

Mountaineer Plant, 132946 Page 1 of 2

### Location: Mountaineer Plant Report Date: 8/1/2013

THIS TEST REPORT RELATES ONLY TO THE ITEMS TESTED AND SHALL NOT BE REPRODUCED EXCEPT IN FULL WITHOUT WRITTEN APPROVAL OF THE LABORATORY. ALL TEST RESULTS MEET ALL OF THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE ACCREDITING AUTHORITY, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.

Brian Snyder, Chemist II Email bssnyder@aep.com Tel. 614-836-4224 Fax 614-836-4168 Audinet 210-4224

Mountaineer Plant, 132946 Page 2 of 2
# EUR-Lex - 12004V161 - EN

Important legal notice

*|*

# 12004V161

**Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe - PART III — THE POLICIES AND FUNCTIONING OF THE UNION - TITLE III — INTERNAL POLICIES AND ACTION - CHAPTER I — INTERNAL MARKET - Section 5 — Rules on competition - Subsection 1 — Rules applying to undertakings - Article III-161 **

*
Official Journal 310 , 16/12/2004 P. 0068 - 0069 *

Article III-161

1. The following shall be prohibited as incompatible with the internal market: all agreements between undertakings, decisions by associations of undertakings and concerted practices which may affect trade between Member States and which have as their object or effect the prevention, restriction or distortion of competition within the internal market, and in particular those which:

(a) directly or indirectly fix purchase or selling prices or any other trading conditions;

(b) limit or control production, markets, technical development, or investment;

(c) share markets or sources of supply;

(d) apply dissimilar conditions to equivalent transactions with other trading parties, thereby placing them at a competitive disadvantage;

(e) make the conclusion of contracts subject to acceptance by the other parties of supplementary obligations which, by their nature or according to commercial usage, have no connection with the subject of such contracts.

2. Any agreements or decisions prohibited pursuant to this Article shall be automatically void.

3. Paragraph 1 may, however, be declared inapplicable in the case of:

- any agreement or category of agreements between undertakings,

- any decision or category of decisions by associations of undertakings,

- any concerted practice or category of concerted practices,

which contributes to improving the production or distribution of goods or to promoting technical or economic progress, while allowing consumers a fair share of the resulting benefit, and which does not:

(a) impose on the undertakings concerned restrictions which are not indispensable to the attainment of these objectives;

(b) afford such undertakings the possibility of eliminating competition in respect of a substantial part of the products in question.

--------------------------------------------------
Document















May 6, 2020
By Email
[NAME]
[EMPLOYEE ADDRESS]
Dear [NAME]:
This letter (this “Agreement”) memorializes the agreement between you and comScore, Inc. (the “Company”), that, effective as of May 16, 2020, your base salary will be reduced by [●]% such that, as of such date, your annualized base salary will be $[●], less applicable taxes and other withholdings.
This temporary reduction is a response to the economic downturn caused by the COVID-19 pandemic and its impact on our business. By signing below, you are agreeing to this future salary reduction and waiving any notice period that may be required by your state of residence and/or employment. Nothing herein will change the at-will nature of your employment, as you and the Company each remain free to end the employment relationship at any time.
Your annualized base salary will revert to $[●] (your previous salary) upon the earliest of (i) September 30, 2020; (ii) the execution of definitive documentation providing for a “Qualifying Change in Control” of the Company, which is defined as a Change in Control according to the comScore, Inc. 2018 Equity and Incentive Compensation Plan (the “Plan”) excluding clauses (b) and (d) of such Plan definition; or (iii) the execution of definitive documentation providing for the refinancing of all or substantially all of the Company’s outstanding senior secured convertible notes.
The Company commits to revisit this salary reduction as soon as practicable if and when its financial circumstances change, including consideration of (i) an earlier return to your previous salary, and (ii) a discretionary bonus up to the full amount of the salary reduction.
Notwithstanding the foregoing or anything to the contrary in your Change of Control and Severance Agreement(s), or any other agreement, plan or policy with the Company to which you are subject, for the limited purpose of determining any severance pay for which you may become eligible, your base salary when calculating any such severance pay shall be deemed to be your base salary in effect immediately prior to the effective time of the salary reduction described in this Agreement, or $[●]. Moreover, the salary reduction set forth in this Agreement shall not constitute constructive termination or “Good Reason” under your Change of Control and Severance Agreement(s) or any other agreement, plan or policy with the Company to which you are subject.









Please sign below to acknowledge your agreement to these terms. We appreciate your continued service to the Company and your continued leadership during these challenging times.
												
			COMSCORE, INC.	
				
				
				
			By:	Sara Dunn
			Title:	Chief People Officer
				
	AGREED AND ACCEPTED:			
				
				
				
	Name:	[NAME]		
				



         Page 2
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr., Chief Justice

Stephen J. Markman

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano

Richard H. Bernstein, Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

 April 23, 2015

p0416

Order 

Clerk

April 23, 2015

149671

_________________________________________

In re FILIBECK Estate.

_________________________________________

HEIDI J. FILIBECK, Personal Representative of 

the ESTATE of STEPHEN J. FILIBECK,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 149671

COA: 315107

Menominee PC: 2011-000065-CZ

LAURA J. BEAL,

Defendant-Appellant.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the June 5, 2014 

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is GRANTED. The parties shall 

include among the issues to be briefed: (1) whether a constructive trust was properly 

imposed where the defendant raised funds from third party donors to defray a relative’s 

unexpected medical expenses for a life threatening condition, and those funds were 

placed in a credit union account in the defendant’s own name, which she later withdrew 

for her personal benefit before the relative’s death; (2) whether the decedent-beneficiary 

of the donated funds made a valid inter vivos or causa mortis gift of the funds to the 

defendant, including delivery of the funds to the defendant; and (3) if there was no such 

valid gift, whether the trial court erred in concluding that the remaining balance of 

donated funds must be paid to the decedent-beneficiary’s estate, cf Matter of Gonzalez, 

262 NJ Super 456, 460-463; 621 A 2d 94 (Ch Div 1992).
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


            In connection with the Quarterly Report of Salon Media Group, Inc.
(the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended December 31, 2004, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
I, Elizabeth Hambrecht, Chief Executive Officer and President 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:

          (1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a)
or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and

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



                                           /s/ Elizabeth Hambrecht
                                           -------------------------------------
          February 14, 2005                Elizabeth Hambrecht
                                           Chief Executive Officer and President
§ 665.161 Definitions. As used in §§ 665.160 through 665.169: *American Samoa precious coral ecosystem component species (American Samoa precious coral ECS)* means those species identified as ECS in the American Samoa FEP.
*American Samoa precious coral permit area* means the area encompassing the precious coral beds within the U.S. EEZ around American Samoa. Each bed is designated by a permit area code and assigned to one of the following four categories: ( 1 ) Established beds. [*Reserved*]
( 2 ) Conditional beds. [*Reserved*]
( 3 ) Refugia. [*Reserved*]
( 4 ) Exploratory Area. Permit Area X-P-AS includes all coral beds, other than established beds, conditional beds, or refugia, in the EEZ seaward of American Samoa.
[75 FR 2205, Jan. 14, 2010, as amended at 84 FR 2771, Feb. 8, 2019]
No. ________________

TO THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TEXAS

Adrian Deshawn Patton

Petitioner

v.

The State of Texas

Respondent

On Appeal from the 75th District Court of Liberty County, in Cause No. CR29871, 

the Hon. Mark Morefield, Presiding, and the February 15, 2015, Opinion of the 

14th Court of Appeals in Case No. 14-14-00102-CR

 

1st MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME

FOR FILING (OUT OF TIME) PETITION FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW

TO THE HONORABLE JUDGES OF THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS:

Now comes ADRIAN DESHAWN PATTON, Petitioner in the above 

captioned cause, and moves the Court to extend the time for filing Petitioner’s 

Petition for Discretionary Review and/or to file an out of time Petition for 

Discretionary Review, and in support of this Motion would show the following:

1. Petitioner’s Petition for Discretionary Review is currently due on March 7, 

2015.

2. Appointed Appellate Counsel inadvertently missed sending Appellant notice 

of his appellate deadlines with regard to filing of a PDR and a copy of the 

Court of Appeals’ Memorandum Opinion as called for under Rule 48.4.

3. Given the lapse of the time for Appellant/Petitioner to receive the notice of 

deadlines and his ability to request the PDR timely, Appointed Appellate 

Counsel is filing this request for an extension of time/out of time PDR on Mr. 

PD-0683-15

COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

AUSTIN, TEXAS

Transmitted 6/3/2015 4:46:25 PM

Accepted 6/4/2015 11:49:26 AM

ABEL ACOSTA

CLERK
Patton’s behalf, but is not otherwise making an appearance of counsel for the 

purposes of the filing or litigating of a PDR.

4. For the foregoing reasons, undersigned Appellant/Petitioner Patton requests 

a 30 day extension from today’s date to complete his Petition for 

Discretionary Review.

5. No previous extensions have been requested in this case.

6. This request is not for delay, but so justice may be done.

7. Contact information for future notices to Pro Se Appellant/Petitioner Adrian 

Deshawn Patton can be forwarded to: 

Adrian Patton 1899028

Darrington Unit

59 Darrington Rd.

Rosharon, TX 77583

WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, Appellant/Petitioner prays that 

the Court grant this Motion for Extension of Time and/or Out of Time PDR and all 

other relief the Court deems fit.

Respectfully submitted,

Dan P. Bradley

Attorney at Law

P.O. Box 7107

Houston, Texas 77248

Tel. 713-819-5529

Fax: 877-655-2797

dbradleylaw@gmail.com

By: /s/ Dan P. Bradley

Dan P. Bradley

State Bar No. 00783703
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

This is to certify that a true and correct copy of the above and foregoing “1st

Motion for Extension of Time for Filing (Out of Time) Petition for Discretionary 

Review” was this day hand-delivered, eFiled, mailed postage pre-paid or 

transmitted via telecopier (fax) to the office of the District Attorney of Liberty

County, 1923 Sam Houston, Liberty, TX 77575; and to office of the Hon. Lisa 

McMinn, State's Prosecuting Attorney, via eFile, on June 3, 2015.

/s/ Dan P. Bradley

Dan P. Bradley
§ 219.58 Timing of a plan, plan amendment, or plan revision decision. ( a ) The responsible official may not issue a decision document concerning a plan, plan amendment, or plan revision subject to the provisions of this subpart until the reviewing officer has responded in writing to all objections.
( b ) A decision by the responsible official approving a plan, plan amendment, or plan revision must be consistent with the reviewing officer's response to objections.
( c ) When no objection is filed within the allotted filing period, the reviewing officer must notify the responsible official. The responsible official's approval of the plan, plan amendment, or plan revision in a plan decision document consistent with § 219.14, may occur on, but not before, the fifth business day following the end of the objection-filing period.