alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 131.855 Lifeboats and rescue boats. ( a ) The following must be plainly marked or painted on each side of the bow of each lifeboat and rescue boat in block capital letters and numbers: ( 1 ) The name of the vessel.
( 2 ) The number of the boat. (The boats on each side of the vessel must be numbered from forward to aft. If there are boats on both sides of the vessel, the odd numbers must be on the starboard side.)
( 3 ) For each vessel in ocean service, the name of the port whose marking on the stern is required by § 67.123 of this chapter.
( b ) The following must be plainly marked or painted on each side of the bow of each lifeboat and rescue boat in block capital letters and numbers: ( 1 ) The length and beam of the boat.
( 2 ) The number of persons the boat will hold. This number must— ( i ) Be the number of persons the boat is equipped for; and
( ii ) Not be greater than the number of persons the boat is approved for, as shown on its nameplate.
( c ) The following must be plainly marked or painted on each lifeboat and rescue boat, visible from above the boat: ( 1 ) The number of the boat.
( 2 ) The name of the vessel.
( d ) Each lifeboat and rescue boat must be marked with Type II retro-reflective material approved under subpart 164.018 of this chapter. The arrangement of the retro-reflective material must comply with IMO Resolution A.658(16).
#### § 144.410 Separation of machinery and fuel tank spaces from accommodation spaces.

Machinery and fuel tank spaces must be separated from accommodation spaces by bulkheads. Doors may be installed provided they are the self-closing type.
# C_2008057EN.01000901.xml

| 1.3.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 57/9 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

1.3.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 57/9

---

Opinion of the Advisory Committee on restrictive practices and dominant positions given at its meeting of 16 November 2007 regarding a draft decision relating to Case COMP/38.432 — Professional videotapes

(2008/C 57/07)

| 1. | The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission on the basic amount of the fines. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission on the basic amount of the fines.

| 2. | The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission on the increase of the basic amount due to aggravating circumstances. |
| --- | --- |

2.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission on the increase of the basic amount due to aggravating circumstances.

| 3. | The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission on the increase of the fine to ensure a sufficient deterrent effect. |
| --- | --- |

3.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission on the increase of the fine to ensure a sufficient deterrent effect.

| 4. | The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission on the reductions of the fines based on the 2002 Leniency Notice. |
| --- | --- |

4.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission on the reductions of the fines based on the 2002 Leniency Notice.

| 5. | The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission on the final amounts of the fines. |
| --- | --- |

5.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission on the final amounts of the fines.

| 6. | The Advisory Committee recommends the publication of its opinion in the Official Journal of the European Union. |
| --- | --- |

6.

The Advisory Committee recommends the publication of its opinion in the Official Journal of the European Union.

Official Journal of the European Union

---
No. 6287.

#### Frederick Juniper *v.*The State.

Complaint—Information—Variance.—The complaint impleads *John*Juniper, and the information *Frederick*Juniper. *Held,*that the variance is fatal to the information.

Appeal from the County Court of Dallas. Tried below before the Hon. E. G. Bower.

The appellant was convicted for maintaining a nuisance in violation of the public health laws; his penalty was assessed at a fine of one hundred dollars.

*Evans & Gooch,*for appellant.

*W. L. Davidson,*Assistant Attorney General, for the State.

*479Opinion delivered April 20, 1889.

Willson, Judge.

There is no complaint in the record to support the information. The information charges *Frederick*Juniper. There is a complaint in the record charging *John*Juniper, but none charging *Frederick*Juniper, with the offense charged in the information. This variance between the complaint and the information is fatal and requires the conviction to be set aside. (McDevro v. The State, 23 Tex. Ct. App., 429.) This defect is confessed by the Assistant Attorney General.

The judgment is reversed and the cause is remanded for such further proceedings as the State may see proper to pursue.

*Reversed and remanded.*
Agenda for Siloxanes Meeting

August 8, 2013 from 1p-2p EST

Call in Number: 1-866-299-3188, Conference code: 2025642901#

1. Meeting Introduction

2. Enforceable Consent Agreemen t (ECA) Progress to Date

3. Explanation of the Current ECA Draft

4. Next Steps
The Honorable G. Thomas Eisele, United States District Judge for the Eastern *

District of Arkansas, sitting by designation.

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

_____________

No. 97-3791EM

_____________

Tammy Kwikkel-Elliott; *

*

Plaintiff, *

*

William Elliott, * Appeal from the United States

* District Court for the Eastern

Plaintiff-Appellant, * District of Missouri.

*

v. * [UNPUBLISHED]

*

Aid Association for Lutherans, *

*

Defendant-Appellee. *

_____________

 Submitted: March 13, 1998

Filed: March 18, 1998

_____________

Before FAGG and ROSS, Circuit Judges, and EISELE, District Judge. *

_____________

PER CURIAM.

William Elliott appeals the district court's adverse grant of summary judgment in

this retaliation-based employment discrimination action. Having reviewed the record

and the materials submitted by the parties, we see no error by the district court. The
-2-

district court has written a well-reasoned opinion in this fact-intensive case, and we

conclude that an extended discussion is unnecessary. We believe the district court is

correct, and we affirm on the basis of the district court's memorandum and order. See

8th Cir. R. 47B.

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
#### Morning Telegraph Company, Respondent, *v.*The City of New York, Appellant.

*Morning Telegraph Go.*v. *Oily of New*York, 132 App. Div. 634, affirmed.

(Argued December 7, 1909;

decided January 4, 1910.)

Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered June 8, 1909, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered -upon a verdict directed by the court in an action to recover the price of advertising certain election notices.

*Francis K. Pendleton, Corporation Counsel (Terence Farley*and *Theodore Connoly*of counsel), for appellant.

*Thomas W. Churchill*and *Ernest W. Marlow*for respondent.

Judgment affirmed, with costs ; no opinion.

Concur: Cullen, Ch. J., Gray, Haight, Vann, Werner, Willard Bartlett and Hiscock, JJ.
###### Editorial Note on Part 154

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 154 appear part 154 appear by CGD-95-072, 60 FR 50466, Sept. 29, 1995, CGD-96-041, 61 FR 50732, Sept. 27, 1996, USCG-2009-0702, 74 FR 49235, Sept. 25, 2009, and USCG-2012-0832, 77 FR 59785, Oct. 1, 2012.

#### § 154.1360 Oxygen analyzer.

The vessel must have a portable analyzer that measures oxygen levels in an inert atmosphere.
```

[Federal Register: April 16, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 73)]
[Notices]               
[Page 20031]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr16ap10-144]                         

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice 6956]

 
Culturally Significant Objects Imported for Exhibition 
Determinations: ``The Spectacular Art of Jean-L[eacute]on 
G[eacute]r[ocirc]me''

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given of the following determinations: 
Pursuant to the authority vested in me by the Act of October 19, 1965 
(79 Stat. 985; 22 U.S.C. 2459), Executive Order 12047 of March 27, 
1978, the Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act of 1998 (112 
Stat. 2681, et seq.; 22 U.S.C. 6501 note, et seq.), Delegation of 
Authority No. 234 of October 1, 1999, Delegation of Authority No. 236 
of October 19, 1999, as amended, and Delegation of Authority No. 257 of 
April 15, 2003 [68 FR 19875], I hereby determine that the objects to be 
included in the exhibition ``The Spectacular Art of Jean-L[eacute]on 
G[eacute]r[ocirc]me,'' imported from abroad for temporary exhibition 
within the United States, are of cultural significance. The objects are 
imported pursuant to loan agreements with the foreign owners or 
custodians. I also determine that the exhibition or display of the 
exhibit objects at the J. Paul Getty Museum, Los Angeles, California, 
from on or about June 15, 2010, until on or about September 12, 2010, 
and at possible additional exhibitions or venues yet to be determined, 
is in the national interest. I have ordered that Public Notice of these 
Determinations be published in the Federal Register.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information, including a 
list of the exhibit objects, contact Paul W. Manning, Attorney-Adviser, 
Office of the Legal Adviser, U.S. Department of State (telephone: 202-
632-6469). The mailing address is U.S. Department of State, SA-5, L/PD, 
Fifth Floor (Suite 5H03), Washington, DC 20522-0505.

    Dated: April 8, 2010.
Maura M. Pally,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Professional and Cultural Exchanges, 
Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs, Department of State.
[FR Doc. 2010-8784 Filed 4-15-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-05-P
```
TransportAzumah Proposal For Essential Air Service

June 29, 2012

Markets:
Franklin PA DOT

- OST

- 1997

- 2523

Jamestown NY DOT

- OST

- 2003

- 14950
Bradford PA DOT

- OST

- 2003

- 14528
DuBois PA DOT

- OST

- 2004

- 17617

TransportAzumah is submitting a proposal which can be implemented under the Alternate Essential Air Service program. We believe that these markets will benefit most from spending some time in the Alternate program in order to create solutions that will raise enplanements in these markets.

Option 1: Essential Bus Service TransportAzumah proposes to provide free bus service from the EAS market to a medium or large hub airport. It is cheaper to provide free bus service than to continue to subsidize the current flights to e ach market. United Airlines currently operates a bus between Allentown PA and Newark Airport and the service provides profitable feed to their network. In addition, there are many towns in the United States whose connection to the national air transportati on network is provided by ground transportation. Essential Bus Service would allow airports to recapture their leakage by collecting passengers at the airport for onward transportation to their destinations. Eventually, this would increase the base to a

po int where air service can be a cost effective option.

Some airports will have a problem with the concept of essential bus service because they are an airport. However, it should be noted that the passengers most EAS markets leak are lost to other airports via roads. Travelers have no problem getting in their cars in order to get to better air service and the status quo does not work for a lot of people. It is estimated that most EAS airports leak 80% or more of their

passengers.

Routes for new EBS network EAS Airport Medium/Large

Hub Airport Miles Travel Time Daily Frequency

Franklin PA (FKL) Pittsburgh PA (PIT) 93 1:44 3x

Jamestown NY (JHW) Buffalo NY (BUF) 75 1:33 4x

DuBois PA (DUJ) Pittsburgh PA (PIT) 105 2:17 4x Bradford PA (BFD) Buffalo NY (BUF) 95 1:54 3x

Annual Subsidy for new EBS network

EBS Route EBS Subsidy Current Subsidy Savings
Bradford PA

– Buffalo

NY $832,200 $1,087,306 $255,106

DuBois PA

– Pittsburgh

PA $1,226,400 $2,228,996 $1,002,596

Franklin PA

– Pittsburgh

PA $814,680 $915,101 $100,421

Jamestown NY

– Buffalo $876,000 $1,639,254 $763,254NY

Potential Ridership

EBS Route EBS Ridership Current Ridership Increase
Bradford PA

– Buffalo

NY 8,000 5,495 2,505

DuBois PA

– Pittsburgh

PA 15,000 11,836 3,164

Franklin PA

– Pittsburgh

PA 5,000 2,531 2,469

Jamestown NY

– Buffalo

NY 9,000 6,895 2,105

Sample Equipment To Be Used on EBS Routes

5% of the fi rst year’s subsidy would be provided upfront to offset start

- up costs for the EBS network. All of the markets in Option 1 are sepa rable.

Contact:
Joel Anabilah

- Azumah

347

- 927

- 0750
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 12**  **- 7888** 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee ,
v. CEDRIC MONTE LITTLE , Defendant

- Appellant
.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina , at Greenville
. Malcolm J. Howard , Senior District Judge. ( 4:05

- cr - 00050

- H

- 1; 4:12

- cv - 00182

- H )

Submitted : February 21 , 2013 Decided: February 26, 2013

Before AGEE and DAVIS , Circuit Judges , and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge
.
Dismissed by un published per curiam opinion
. Cedric Monte Little, Appellant Pro Se. Jennifer P. May

- Parker, Assistant United States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in t his circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Cedric Monte Little seeks to appeal the district court’s order d ismissing without prejudice his 28 U.S.C. A. § 2255 ( West Supp. 2012 ) motion as successive and without authorization from this court. The order is not appealable unl ess a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (B) (200 6 ). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (200 6 ). When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U. S. 473, 484 (2000); see Miller

- El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336

- 38 (2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable, and that the motion states a d ebatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Slack , 529 U.S. at 484

- 85. We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Little has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. Additionally, we construe Little’s notice of appeal and informal brief as an application to file a second or3 successive § 2255 motion. United States v. Winestock , 340 F.3d 200, 208 (4th Cir. 2003). In order to obtain authorization to file a s uccessive § 2255 motion, a prisoner must assert claims based on either: (1) newly discovered evidence, not previously discoverable by due diligence, that would be sufficient to establish by clear and convincing evidence that, but for constitutional error, no reasonable factfinder would have found the movant guilty of the offense; or (2) a new rule of constitutional law, previously unavailable, made retroactive by the Supreme Court to cases on collateral review. 28 U.S.C.A.
§ 2255(h) (West Supp. 2012). Li ttle’s claims do not satisfy either of these criteria. Therefore, we deny authorization to file a successive § 2255 motion. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before th is court and argument would not aid the decisional
process. DISMISSED
#### § 15.910 Towing vessels.

No person may serve as a master or mate (pilot) of any towing vessel without meeting the requirements of §§ 15.805(a)(5) or 15.810(d) of this part.

[USCG-2006-24371, 74 FR 11263, Mar. 16, 2009]
NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.

United States Court of Appeals 

for the Federal Circuit ______________________

KONINKLIJKE KPN N.V., 

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

TELEFONAKTIEBOLAGET LM ERICSSON, 

ERICSSON, INC., 

Defendants-Appellants

______________________

2023-2327

______________________

Appeal from the United States District Court for the 

Eastern District of Texas in No. 2:21-cv-00113-JRG, Chief 

Judge J. Rodney Gilstrap.

______________________

O R D E R

The parties having so agreed, it is ordered that:

(1) The proceeding is DISMISSED under Fed. R. App. 

P. 42 (b).

Case: 23-2327 Document: 23 Page: 1 Filed: 01/24/2024
KONINKLIJKE KPN N.V. V. TELEFONAKTIEBOLAGET LM

ERICSSON 

2

(2) Each side shall bear their own costs.

FOR THE COURT

January 24, 2024

Date

ISSUED AS A MANDATE: January 24, 2024

Case: 23-2327 Document: 23 Page: 2 Filed: 01/24/2024
Exhibit 10.2


 


AMENDMENT TO


MILLENDO THERAPEUTICS, INC.


2019
EQUITY INCENTIVE plan


 


Whereas,
the Board of Directors (the “Board”) of Millendo Therapeutics, Inc. (the “Company”)
previously approved and adopted the 2019 Equity Incentive Plan (the “Plan”);


 


Whereas,
the Board has delegated authority to the Compensation Committee of the Board (the “Committee”) to administer
the Plan;


 


Whereas,
the Committee has determined that it is in the best interest of the Company to amend the Plan as set forth in this Amendment;
and


 


Whereas,
the Committee has the authority to amend the Plan pursuant to Section 2(b)(vi) of the Plan.


 


Now,
Therefore, the Plan is hereby amended as follows:


 


1.                  
Section 9(c) of the Plan is hereby amended to add the following paragraph to the end thereof:


 


“Notwithstanding
the foregoing, if the surviving corporation or acquiring corporation (or its parent company) does not assume or continue outstanding
Stock Awards or substitute similar awards for such outstanding Stock Awards, then the vesting and exercisability of any Stock
Awards that are subject to time-based vesting requirements will be accelerated in full to a date prior to the effective time of
such Transaction (contingent upon the effectiveness of the Transaction) as the Board determines (or, if the Board does not determine
such a date, to the date that is 15 days prior to the effective time of the Transaction). If a Stock Award becomes fully vested
and exercisable in lieu of assumption or substitution in the Transaction, the Board shall notify the impacted Participants in
writing or electronically thereof, and the Stock Award shall terminate if not exercised (if applicable) at the effective time
of the Transaction (contingent upon the effectiveness of the Transaction).”


 


2.                  
All other terms and conditions of the Plan shall remain in full force and effect.


 


3.                  
Capitalized terms used herein and not otherwise defined herein shall have the meanings set forth in the Plan.


 


I hereby certify that
the foregoing Amendment to the Plan was duly adopted by the Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors of the Company as
of June 17, 2020.


 


	 	/s/
    Tamara Joseph
	 	Tamara Joseph
	 	General Counsel
---

---

Exhibit 10.1

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT
REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

We hereby consent
to the incorporation by reference in the previously filed Registration
Statements on Form F-3 (No 333-130048) and Form S-8 (No 333-136957, 333-110696, 333-100971 and
333-11650) of B.O.S. Better Online Solutions Ltd. (BOS) of our report dated March 27, 2006, with
respect to the amended consolidated financial statements of B.O.S. Better Online Solutions Ltd.
included in this Annual Report on Form 20-F/A for the year ended December 31, 2005.

|Tel Aviv, Israel September 7 , 2006 | /S/ Kost Forer Gabbay & KasiererKost Forer Gabbay & Kasierer A Member of Ernst & Young Global
|----------------------------------- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



---

---
**EXHIBIT 32.2**

 

**CERTIFICATION**

 

I, Peter E. Williams III, Chief Financial Officer of Saba Software, Inc. (the “Company”) hereby certify, as of the date hereof, solely for purposes of Section906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that to the best of my knowledge: 

 

(1) the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the fiscal quarter ended August 31, 2004 (the “Report”) fully complies with therequirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and 

 

(2) the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company atthe dates and for the periods indicated. 

 

A signed original of this writtenstatement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided tothe Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request. 

 

This Certification has not been, and shall not be deemed, “filed” with the Securities and Exchange Commission. 

 

Date: October 15, 2004
I 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2127 

To amend title 38, United States Code, to eliminate the income eligibility 

and service-connected disability rating requirements for the veterans beneficiary travel program administered by the Secretary of Veterans Affairs. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 27, 2009 

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

Committee on Veterans’ Affairs 

A BILL 

To amend title 38, United States Code, to eliminate the 

income eligibility and service-connected disability rating 

requirements for the veterans beneficiary travel program 

administered by the Secretary of Veterans Affairs. 

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 ‘‘Veterans Travel Equity 

5 Act of 2009’’. 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with BILLS
2 

•HR 2127 IH

1 SEC. 2. ELIMINATION OF INCOME ELIGIBILITY AND SERV2 ICE-CONNECTED DISABILITY RATING RE3 QUIREMENTS FOR VETERANS BENEFICIARY 

4 TRAVEL PROGRAM. 

5 Section 111 of such title is amended by adding at 

6 the end the following: 

7 ‘‘(i) Effective beginning on the 90th day following the 

8 date of enactment of this subsection, the Secretary may 

9 not impose any income or pension eligibility requirement, 

10 or require any service-connected disability rating, for a 

11 veteran to be eligible for an allowance or reimbursement 

12 under this section and shall eliminate any such require13 ments in effect before such 90th day.’’. 

Æ 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with BILLS
§ 670.27 Specific issuance criteria. Permits authorizing entry into any Antarctic Specially Protected Area designated in § 670.29 may only be issued if: ( a ) The entry and activities to be engaged in are consistent with an approved management plan, or
( b ) A management plan relating to the area has not been approved by the Antarctic Treaty Parties, but ( 1 ) There is a compelling scientific purpose for such entry which cannot be served elsewhere, and
( 2 ) The actions allowed under the permit will not jeopardize the natural ecological system existing in such area.