alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
P.1 

OAR Box 1834 

Prepped by Keeia Richards 

Document Number: 

41) IV-E-14 

Docket Number: 

A-90-07 

Printed 11/10/2008 2:14:35 PM Sheet 41 of 61 
P.2 

T

4 

iSEZ-j 

4-90-07-

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY "W"£~ / 4 

ANN ARBOR. MICHIGAN 48105 

II 8 111 1 OFFICE OF 

AIR AND RADIATION 

MAY 2 T 1994 

EPA AIR DOCKET MAY 2 6 1994 

MEMORANDUM 

SUBJECT: Meeting on April 21, 1994 with the American Petroleum 

Institute (API) regarding the Fuels and Fuel Additives 

(F/FA) Registration (Health Effects testing) Program 

FROM: Judith Gray, Senior Project Manage 

Special Regulatory Projects Branch, 

TO: Docket A-90-07 

Attending the meeting were the following: 

From API: William Frick, Anita Ducca, Robert Wilkenfeld, 

Robert Drew, John Thornton 

From EPA/OMS: Richard Wilson, Chester France, Carl 

Fulper, David Kortum, Ines Figueroa, Robert Johnson, 

Judith Gray 

From EPA/OGC: Lorie Schmidt, Mary Ellen Levine 

API representatives met with EPA officials at API's request to 

discuss the F/FA testing rule. API reiterated a number of the 

points made in its previous written comments to the proposed rule, 

emphasizing the alternative testing scheme presented therein. API 

argued that Tier 2 testing within three years is impossible, noting 

that its alternative testing scheme would take at least four years 

for just one group to complete. API further argued that it was not 

sound science to compare tests conducted in different laboratories, 

and that it was not possible to test the numerous endpoints 

required in the proposed rule on the same set of animals.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

CHARLES F. LONGNECKER, II,

Plaintiff,

v.

COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY,

Defendant. /

Case No. 15-11705

Honorable John Corbett O’Meara

ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE GRAND’S

MAY 25, 2016 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

The court, pursuant to Rule 72(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C. §

636(b)(1)(B), and LR 72.1(E.D. Mich. March 1, 2010), has reviewed Magistrate Judge David R.

Grand's May 25, 2016 Report and Recommendation, as well as Plaintiff's June 14, 2016 objections;

Defendant's June 17, 2016 objections; and Plaintiff's June 28, 2016 response to Defendant's

objections.

After conducting a de novo review of the matter, the court hereby ORDERS that Magistrate

Judge Grand's May 25, 2016 Report and Recommendation is ADOPTED.

It is further ORDERED that Defendant’s motion for summary judgment is DENIED.

It is further ORDERED that Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment is GRANTED IN

PART, and that this matter is REMANDED for further proceedings consistent with the Report and

Recommendation.

s/John Corbett O'Meara 

United States District Judge

Date: July 19, 2016

I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was served upon the parties of record

on this date, July 19, 2016, using the ECF system and/or ordinary mail.

s/William Barkholz 

Case Manager

5:15-cv-11705-JCO-DRG Doc # 62 Filed 07/19/16 Pg 1 of 1 Pg ID 1135
# C_2012098EN.01001201.xml

| 31.3.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 98/12 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

31.3.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 98/12

---

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the College van Beroep voor het bedrijfsleven (Netherlands), lodged on 4 January 2012 — Maatschap L.A. and Others v Staatssecretaris van Economische Zaken, Landbouw en Innovatie

(Case C-11/12)

2012/C 98/17

Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Referring court

College van Beroep voor het bedrijfsleven

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicants: Maatschap L.A., D.A.B. Langestraat, P. Langestraat-Troost

Applicants:

Defendant: Staatssecretaris van Economische Zaken, Landbouw en Innovatie

Defendant:

Question referred

Question referred

Must Article 23(1) of Regulation (EC) No 73/2009 (1) be interpreted as imposing a reduction or an exclusion on the farmer who has submitted an aid application, such as that which would be imposed, in respect of established non-compliance, on the actual offender, to whom or by whom the land was transferred, if that offender had himself submitted the application? Or does the provision mean solely that the established non-compliance is to be attributed to the person submitting the aid application, but that, in the determination of the (level of the) reduction or exclusion, it is still necessary to establish the extent to which there has been negligence, fault or intent on the part of the farmer himself?

1

---

(1)  Council Regulation of 19 January 2009 establishing common rules for direct support schemes for farmers under the common agricultural policy and establishing certain support schemes for farmers, amending Regulations (EC) No 1290/2005, (EC) No 247/2006, (EC) No 378/2007 and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 (OJ 2009 L 30, p. 16).

1

---
Editorial Note on Part 160
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 160 appear by USCG-2012-0832, 77 FR 59785, 59786, Oct. 1, 2012.

§ 160.062-7 Procedures for acceptance of repair facility. ( a ) Before a repair facility is accepted by the Commandant to perform the services required in § 160.062-4(f), it must be inspected by the cognizant Officer in Charge, Marine Inspection, to determine if it has— ( 1 ) The testing apparatus to perform all the tests required in § 160.062-4;
( 2 ) A source of supply of replacement parts for a hydraulic release, evidenced by a signed agreement between the facility and his source of supply, or the parts for it; all replacement parts must be in compliance with applicable specifications and standards contained in § 160.062-1; and
( 3 ) Employees competent to perform the services required in this paragraph. Each employee who is engaged in serving a hydraulic release must demonstrate his competence to the Officer in Charge, Marine Inspection by— ( i ) Disassembling a hydraulic release;
( ii ) Making all necessary repairs to the disassembled unit;
( iii ) Reassembling the unit in conformance with the specifications and standards contained in § 160.062-1(a); and
( iv ) Showing that the reassembled unit meets the buoyant capacity and release depth requirements contained in § 160.062-3 (b) and (c) after being inspected and tested in conformance with the requirements contained in § 160.062-4(f).
( b ) Based on the report of the Officer in Charge, Marine Inspection, regarding the inspection required in paragraph (a) of this section, the Commandant notifies the facility that— ( 1 ) It is an accepted repair facility for the reconditioning and testing of hydraulic releases; or
( 2 ) It is not accepted as a repair facility, lists each discrepancy noted by the Officer in Charge, Marine Inspection, and describes the procedure for reinspection if applicable corrections are made.
[CGD 73-153R, 40 FR 4422, Jan. 30, 1975]
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                         342,680
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                       1,234,402
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                             7,930,000
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                          0
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                         344,190
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                           344,083
<LOANS>                                      2,043,972
<ALLOWANCE>                                     20,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              11,732,901
<DEPOSITS>                                   5,804,365
<SHORT-TERM>                                         0
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                             13,997
<LONG-TERM>                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         6,163
<OTHER-SE>                                   6,112,318
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>              11,732,901
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                 27,526
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                2,033
<INTEREST-OTHER>                               176,393
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                               205,952
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                              27,002
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              41,863
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                          144,089
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                   20,000
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                431,602
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (281,537)
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (197,077)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     (.32)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     (.32)
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    1.67
<LOANS-NON>                                          0
<LOANS-PAST>                                         0
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                     0
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                        0
<RECOVERIES>                                         0
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                               20,000
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                            20,000
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0


</TABLE>
Exhibit
31.2
  CERTIFICATIONS
 
 I Barbara
Hughes, certify that:
 
 1. I have
reviewed this quarterly report of Fusion Telecommunications International,
Inc.
 
 2. Based
on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material
fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in
light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading
with respect to the period covered by this report;
 
 3. Based
on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information
included 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 periods presented in this report;
 
 4. The
registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and
maintaining 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 disclosure
controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that
material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated
subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities particularly
during the period in which this report is being prepared:
 
 (b)
Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and
procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness
of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered
by this report based on such evaluation; and
 
 (c)
Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over
financial 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 has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the
registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and
 
 5. The
registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most
recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the
registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of registrant’s board of directors
(or persons performing the equivalent functions):
 
 (a) All
significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of
internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to
adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and
report financial information; and
 
 (b) Any
fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who
have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial
reporting.
 
 ****Dated: May 16, 2005
    
    /s/ Barbara
  HughesBarbara HughesVice
      President of Finance and PrincipalAccounting
      and Financial Officer
§ 401.300 Authorization for establishment of pools. Cross Reference
Link to an amendment published at 89 FR 76350 , Sept. 17, 2024.
( a ) Voluntary associations of U.S. registered pilots will be authorized to establish a pool or pools in the following areas of the U.S. waters of the Great Lakes designated by the President in Proclamation No. 3385 of December 22, 1960, as amended by Proclamation No. 3855 of June 10, 1968, or in such other areas as the Director may deem necessary to assure adequate and efficient pilotage services for the U.S. waters of the Great Lakes: ( 1 ) *District No. 1.* All United States waters of the St. Lawrence River between the international boundary at St. Regis and a line at the head of the river running (at approximately 127° True) between Carruthers Point Light and South Side Light extended to the New York shore.
( 2 ) *District No. 2.* All United States waters of Lake Erie westward of a line running (at approximately 026° True) from Sandusky Pierhead Light at Cedar Point to Southeast Shoal Light; all waters contained within the arc of a circle of one mile radius eastward of Sandusky Pierhead Light; the Detroit River; Lake St. Clair; the St. Clair River, and Northern approaches thereto south of latitude 43°05′30′′ N.
( 3 ) *District No. 3.* All U.S. waters of the St. Marys River, Sault Sainte Marie Locks and approaches thereto between latitude 45°59′ N. at the southern approach and longitude 84°33′ W. at the northern approach.
( b ) The Director shall determine the number of pools that will be authorized for establishment by voluntary associations of United States registered pilots in order to assure adequate and efficient pilotage services for the United States waters of the Great Lakes.
[26 FR 952, Jan. 31, 1961, as amended at 32 FR 14221, Oct. 13, 1967; CGFR 68-78, 33 FR 9823, July 9, 1968. Redesignated at 61 FR 32655, June 25, 1996, and further redesignated by USCG-1998-3976, 63 FR 35139, June 29, 1998]
## COURT OF APPEALS
SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH

NO. 02

- 16

- 00276

- CR

RUBEN D. MARQUEZ APPELLANT

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS STATE

----------
FROM THE 297TH DISTRICT COURT OF TARRANT COUNTY

TRIAL COURT NO. 1357 251R

----------


### MEMORANDUM OPINION 1

---------- Appellant Ruben D. Marquez attempts to appeal from his c onviction for the

third

- degree felony of accident in volving serious bodily injury. See Tex. Transp.
Code Ann. § 550.021(c)(1)(B) (West Supp. 2015 ). Marquez pleaded guilty
pursuant to a plea bargain, and in accordance with the plea bargain, the trial

cour t sentenced him to ten years’ confinement. The tr ial court’s certification of

1 See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4.2

his right to appeal s tates that this “is a plea

- bargain case, and the defendant has
NO right of appeal .” See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(a)(2).

On July 19 , 2016, we notified Marquez t hat th is appeal could be dismissed

based on the trial court’s certification unless he or any party desiring to continue
the appeal file d a response on or before July 25 , 2016, showing grounds for
continuing the appeal. 2 See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(d), 44.3

. No response has

been filed.

In accordance with the trial court’s certification, we therefore dismiss this
appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(d), 43.2(f).

PER CURIAM

PANEL: WALKER, MEIER, and GABRIEL, JJ.

DO NOT PUBLISH Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b)

DELIVERE D: August 18, 2016

2 That same day, we also notified Marquez that it appeared we lacked jurisdiction over this appeal because his notice of appeal was not timely filed. See Tex. R. App. P. 26.2(a). We also noted in the letter that Marquez’s motion for shock probation was granted by the trial court after he filed his notice of appeal and asked Marquez to notify this court if he wished to continue this appeal and, if so, to specify the grounds for doing so. S ee Pippi n v. State
, 271 S.W.3d 861, 863

– 64 (Tex. App.

— Amarillo 2008, no pet.) (dismissing for want of jurisdiction appeal of order granting shock probation in state

- jail felony case).
§ 196.15-60 Firefighting equipment, general. ( a ) It shall be the duty of the owner, master, or person in charge to see that the vessel's firefighting equipment is at all times ready for use and that all such equipment required by the regulations in this subchapter is provided, maintained, and replaced as indicated.
( b ) It shall be the duty of the owner, master, or person in charge to require and have performed at least once in every 12 months the tests and inspections of all hand portable fire extinguishers, semiportable fire extinguishing systems, and fixed fire extinguishing systems on board as described in Tables 189.25-20(a)(1) and 189.25-20(a)(2) in § 189.25-20(a) of this subchapter. The owner, master, or person in charge shall keep records of such tests and inspections showing the dates when performed, the number and/or other identification of each unit tested and inspected, and the name(s) of the person(s) and/or company conducting the tests and inspections. Such records shall be made available to the marine inspector upon request and shall be kept for the period of validity of the vessel's current certificate of inspection. Where practicable these records should be kept in or with the vessel's logbook. The conduct of these tests and inspections does not relieve the owner, master, or person in charge of his responsibility to maintain this firefighting equipment in proper condition at all times.
Director Compensation










 
Exhibit 10.1










Magellan GP, LLC



Summary of Independent Director Compensation Program






 



 



 



	
	


Compensation
	


Timing of Payment(1)

	


Annual Board Retainer:



    Cash



    Common Units
	






 



$30,000



$50,000



(number of units determined on the semi-annual payment date)
	





 



Semi-annual payment of all retainers as of January 1st and July 1st 

	


Chairman Retainer Fees: 



    Audit Committee



    Compensation Committee



    Conflicts Committee
	






 



$15,000



$10,000



$10,000
	





 



Semi-annual payment of all retainers as of January 1st and July 1st

	


Meeting Fees: 



    Board Meeting Fees



    Committee Meeting Fees
	






 



$1,500 per meeting



$1,500 per meeting
	





 



Semi-annual payment of all meeting fees as of June 30th and December 15th











 
(1)  For newly elected directors, the annual unit and cash retainers are payable pro-rata for the year of election.  Directors who resign prior to a payment date will receive a pro-rate retainer at time of resignation.
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 13 (Monday, January 22, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Page 2713]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 07-260]


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

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Parole Commission

[6P04091]


Public Announcement; Sunshine Act Meeting

Pursuant To The Government In The Sunshine Act (Pub. L. 94-409) [5 
U.S.C. 552b].

AGENCY HOLDING MEETING: Department of Justice. United States Parole 
Commission.

TIME AND DATE: 10 a.m., Wednesday, January 24, 2007.

PLACE: 5550 Friendship Blvd., Fourth Floor, Chevy Chase, MD 20815.

STATUS: Open.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: The following matters have been placed on the 
agenda for the open Parole Commission meeting:

    1. Approval of Minutes of Previous Commission Meeting.
    2. Reports from the Chairman, Commissioners, Chief of Staff, and 
Section Administrators.
    3. Proposed Amendment to 28 CFR 2.25.
    4. Proposed Amendment to 28 CFR 2.66.

AGENCY CONTACT: Thomas W. Hutchison, Chief of Staff, United States 
Parole Commission, (301) 492-5990.

    Dated: January 17, 2007.
Rockne Chickinell,
General Counsel, U.S. Parole Commission.
[FR Doc. 07-260 Filed 1-18-07; 10:20 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-31-M
<PAGE>   1
                                                                   Exhibit 10.11


           SECOND AMENDMENT TO PROMISSORY NOTE DATED FEBRUARY 1, 1991


         THIS AMENDMENT (the "Amendment"), dated as of December 20, 1996, by
and between Legacy Software, Inc., a Delaware corporation ("Borrower"), and
Stanley Wojtysiak to that certain Promissory Note, dated as of February 1,
1991, by Borrower in favor of Lender, as amended by the Addendum dated March 1,
1995 and the Amendment dated November 10, 1995, (the "Note").

                                 R E C I T A L

         A.      Lender has made certain loans under the note to Borrower.

         B.      Subject to the terms and conditions contained herein, the
parties desire to amend the Note to extend the commencement date of repayment
of the principal to March 31, 1998.

         C.      Except as otherwise provided herein, all capitalized terms
used in the Amendment shall have the meanings set forth in the Note (after
giving effect to this Amendment).

                 NOW, THEREFORE, for good and valuable consideration, the
receipt and adequacy of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties hereto agree
as follows:

         1.      Sections 1 and 2 of the Note are hereby amended so that all
references to "July 1, 1996" shall be deleted and replaced with March 31, 1998.

         2.      There are no other amendments, changes or modifications to the
Note and all other sections thereof shall remain unaffected by this Amendment.

                 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this
Amendment as of the date first written above.

                                        LEGACY SOFTWARE, INC.,
                                        a Delaware corporation



                                        By: /s/ Ariella Lehrer
                                            -----------------------------------
                                        Name:  Ariella Lehrer
                                        Title: President

AGREED TO AND ACCEPTED
BY "LENDER":



/s/ Stanley Wojtysiak
----------------------------------------
Stanley Wojtysiak