alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
June 2, 1977



### “Office under the United States”—National Commission on Neighborhoods

You have asked for our opinion concerning the question of whether service by a State official as a member of the National Commission on Neighborhoods would constitute holding an office under the authority of the United States. It is our opinion that it would not be so construed under the Federal Constitution. Article I, Section 6, Clause 2 provides in part that “no Person holding any Office under the United States, shall be a Member of either House during his Continuance in Office.” The legislation establishing the agency itself includes as members two Members of the Senate and two Members of the House. Obviously, it was not intended that they must relinquish their congressional offices. The practice of Presidents in appointing Members of Congress ascommissioners to negotiate treaties and agreements with foreign governments is noted in Constitution of the United States of America,Revised and Annotated, 1972, p. 523: Such appointments “are ordinarily merely temporary and for special tasks, and hence do not fulfill the
tests of ‘office’ in the strict sense.” The classic definition of an office in
the constitutional sense is found in United States v. Hartwell, 6 Wall. 385, 393 (1867):
An office is a public station, or employment, conferred by the appointment of government. The term embraces the ideas of tenure, duration, emolument, and duties.

The Court determined that Hartwell, a clerk in the office of the Assistant Treasurer of the United States, was an officer, in part because“his duties were continuing and permanent, not occasional and temporary.” Your attention is also invited to the discussion (in an 1899 House Judiciary Committee report (Rep. No. 2205, 55th Cong., 3rd Sess.)) of whether holding positions on certain commissions constituted holding office within the meaning of the Constitution.

L e o n U l m a n Deputy Assistant Attorney General

Office of Legal Counsel 

### 77-32 MEMORANDUM OPINION FOR THE COUNSEL TO THE PRESIDENT

125
From: Linda J

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Re: Women"s Preventive Healthcare

Date: Friday, August 19, 2011 4:31:41 PM

I join with the American Association of University Women (AAUW) in asking you to accept the

recommendations of the Institute of Medicine as pertain to coverage of preventive care under

the new health care law, and to reject any exemptions for "religious employers." These

preventive services are a critical element of the new law and would provide countless women

better access to necessary health care.

While AAUW believes that "religious refusal" exemptions unjustly deny women access to

contraceptive services, others, driven by an ideological distaste for all contraceptive services,

are pushing the government to make exemptions even larger. Indeed, some groups are pushing

for the exemption to apply to religiously-run health providers, so Catholic hospitals would be

exempt from the coverage requirement, even though they employ people of all faiths and

ideologies. If granted, this larger exemption would deny access to thousands of women just

because of where they work.

I urge you to ensure women have access to quality preventive care by accepting IOM's

recommendations and rejecting the proposed religious refusal exemption provisions.

Thank you.
##### 



CERTIFICATE OF
PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER
OF
DOBSON COMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION
  a.
    
    fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a)
or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; andb.
    
    the information contained in the Report fairly
presents, in all material respects, the financial
condition of the Company at June 30, 2007, and the
results of the Companys operations for the period
ended June 30, 2007.
  /s/ Steven P. DussekSteven P. DussekChief Executive Officer and Director(principal executive officer)
**EXHIBIT 23.1**

 

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT****REGISTEREDPUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

 

We consent to theincorporation by reference in the Registration Statements (Form S-8, No. 333-60928,Form S-8, No. 333-57948 and Form S-8, No. 33-34476 )pertaining to the 1995 Stock Option Plan of Intrusion Inc., as amended,the Registration Statements (Form S-8, No. 333-90408 and Form S-8,No. 333-04484) pertaining to the 1995 Non-employee Director Stock OptionPlan of Intrusion Inc., as amended, the Registration Statement (Form S-8,No. 33-42927) pertaining to the 1997 Employee Stock Purchase Plan ofIntrusion Inc., and the Registration Statement (Form S-8, No. 333-125816)pertaining to the Intrusion Inc. 2005 Stock Incentive Plan of our report dated March 27,2009, with respect to the consolidated financial statements ofIntrusion Inc. included in its Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the yearended December 31, 2008.

 

 

 
| **/s/ KBA  Group LLP** |
|------------------------|
| Dallas, Texas          |
| March 27,  2009   |

 

----
#            

# CATERPILLAR FINANCIAL SERVICES CORPORATION

POWERNOTES (R)

With Maturities of 9 months or more from Date of Issue

Registration No.  333-109182

Filed Pursuant to Rule 424 (b) (3)

PRICING SUPPLEMENT NO.  472                                                                   Trade Date:  08/23/04

(To Prospectus Supplement dated November 6, 2003 &

  Prospectus dated October 15,2003)                                                              Issue Date:   08/26/04

The Date of this Pricing SupplementAugust 23, 2004

SUBJECT TO REDEMPTION OR REPAYMENT

 CUSIP                                                                                                                                   Date and terms of redemption or

     or       Stated                                                                   Interest                                       repayment (includingany

Common  Interest                      Price to  Discounts &        Payment     Survivors                  applicable regular or special

  Code      Rate (1)   Maturity  Public (2) Commissions       Frequency       Option  Yes/No     record dates)

14911QVR9  4.6%            08/15/13           100%              1.42%                 Quarterly                      YES         NO                                                                                                                                                                                                               

                                                                                                                                                                                                                       

Principal                                                                                 1st Payment             Day         

Amount                  Proceeds                  Dealer                           Date                   Count

$1,235,000.00         $1,217,463.00         ABN AMRO Inc.        11/15/04                               30/360    

Original Issue DiscountNote:                                                                          Total Amount of OID:

____  Yes                X   No                                                                                  N/A

The interest rates on the PowerNotes (R) may be changed by Caterpillar Financial Services Corporation from time to time, but any such change will not affect the interest rate on any PowerNotes (R) offered prior to the effective date of the change.  Prior to the date of this Pricing Supplement, $143.143 mm principal amount of the PowerNotes (R) were sold at interest rates then in effect.  Subsequent offerings of PowerNotes (R) will be made under the Prospectus Supplement and Prospectus dated October 15,2003.

Expressed as a percentage of aggregate principal amount.  Actual Price to Public may be less, and will be determined by prevailing market prices at the time of purchase as set forth in the confirmation sheet.
#### Francis S. Driscoll, Respondent, v. Thomas H. Robbins, Appellant.

Older reversed and motion granted, with ten dollars costs and disbursements.
EXHIBIT 32.2



Section 1350 Certification by the Chief Financial Officer



I, Katie Fung, the chief financial officer of Peak International Limited (the Company), certify for the purposes
of section 1350 of chapter 63 of title 18 of the United States Code that, to the best of my knowledge,



(i) the Quarterly Report of the Company on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2005 (the Report), fully complies with the requirements of
section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and



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



|                      |  |  |  |                        
|--------------------- |  |  |  | -----------------------
|Date: August 15, 2005 |  |  |  | /S/    KATIE
FUNG      
|                      |  |  |  | Katie Fung             
|                      |  |  |  | Chief Financial Officer
Here's how you know
 **Official websites use .mil** .mil
 **Secure .mil websites use HTTPS** lock () https://


Skip to main content (Press Enter).
 Toggle navigation
            
            U.S. Central Command
                CENTCOM
        Search
                    Search CENTCOM:
                        Search
                Search CENTCOM:
                    Search
    Home

    ABOUT US
    
        COMMAND PRIORITIES

    LEADERSHIP

    COMPONENT COMMANDS

    HISTORY

    POSTURE STATEMENT

    CENTCOM AOR
    
        CENTCOM COALITION

    OPERATIONS AND EXERCISES
    
        USMTM

    CONTACT
    
        OPERATIONAL CONTRACT SUPPORT

    COMMUNITY RELATIONS

    THEATRE MEDICAL CLEARANCE

    INNOVATION VENDOR PORTAL

    MILITARY MEMBER INNOVATION PORTAL

    MEDIA
    
        SOCIAL MEDIA

    NEWS ARTICLES

    PRESS RELEASES

    STATEMENTS

    IMAGERY

    VIDEOS

    TRANSCRIPTS

    VISITORS AND PERSONNEL
    
        FAMILY CENTER

    FAMILY READINESS

    CENTCOM WEBMAIL

    SOCIAL MEDIA SECURITY

    ACCOUNTABILITY

    EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS

    USCENTCOM UNCLASSIFIED REGULATIONS

    FOIA LIBRARY

    INNOVATION OASIS

    WELCOME GUIDE  Search
 Search
 All Images All ImagesCommunity RelationsOtherPreviousCommanders
 Upload Date Upload DatePhoto DateTitle
  Share
  
 Small () Medium () Full Size (0.19 MB)
 Photo Gallery
 About UsCommand PrioritiesLeadershipComponent
   CommandsHistoryPosture Statement
   Area of
   ResponsibilityCENTCOM Coalition
   Operations And
   ExercisesOperation Inherent
   ResolveResolute Support
   MediaSocial MediaNews ArticlesPress ReleasesVideo And Imagery
   Visitors And
   PersonnelFamily ReadinessCENTCOM WebmailSocial MediaSecurityAccountabilityEmergency
   Preparedness
   ContactCommunity Relations
                    Stay Connected
                
                Privacy & Security  Inspector General  FOIA  Privacy Act
            

Hosted by Defense Media Activity - WEB.mil
### NUM BER 13-0 9-00 133- CR 

## COURT OF A PP EA LS T H I R T E E N T H D I S T R I C T O F T E X AS CORPUS CHRI ST I -E DI NBURG

____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ PEN NY CH A M BL ESS, A pp ellan t, v . TH E STA

TE OF T EXAS, A pp ellee.

____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ On a p p ea l fro m th e 94 th D is tr ic t C o u rt of N ue ces Co un ty , T exas .

____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ M EM ORA ND UM OPIN ION Be fo re Ju stice s R od rigu ez, Garza, a nd Ve la M emo rand um Opin ion Pe r Cu riam Appel lan t, Penny

C hamble ss , by

and throug h her

att o rn e y, has filed a mot ion to dis mis s h er

appeal bec ause she no lo n gerd e si re s t o prosec ute i t. SeeT EX . R. A PP . P. 42. 2(a). W ithou t passin g on th e me rits of the case , we gran tt h e m o t io n t o dism iss pursuantto Tex as Rul e of Appel lat e Procedu re 42.2 (a ) a n d di smi ssthe appeal
. Hav ing

### 2

dis mis sed the a ppeal at a p p e llant 'sreq uest , no moti on for re hear ing w il l be ent ertai ned, and our mandate w il l is sue forthw it h. PERC UR IAM
Do not p ubl is h. T EX . R. A PP . P. 4 7.2( b)
. Me moran dum Opi nio n del ivered and filed thi s 2 0th d ay

of Aug ust , 200 9.
[if !vml]>[endif]>
[if !vml]>[endif]>
You have reached the FederalDepository Library Program Electronic Collection (FDLP/EC) Archive. Thisarchive assures ongoing access to publications in the FDLP/EC. Access topublications in the archive is available through GPO's suite of cataloging andlocator services, including the Catalog of U.S. Government Publications. Archived copies of publications are retrieved in the event that publicationsare no longer available from the original publishing agency site. (Historicalpurposes)
**Title:Focus.**** 
SuDoc Number:ED 1.49/2-2:
Item Number:0455-B-10
CGP systemNumber:000345762
 
 
No.01 Bilingualism and Bilingual Education: A ResearchPerspective. 1990.
No.02 Early Childhood Programs for Language MinorityChildren. 1990.
No.03 Bilingual Education: A Focus on Current Research.1991.
No.04 Teaching and Testing Achievement: The Role ofLanguage Development. 1991.
No.05 Programs for Secondary LEP Students: A CaliforniaStudy. 1992.
No.06 Re-Thinking the Education of of Teachers of LanguageMinority Students. 1991.
No.07 School Readiness and Language Minority Students.1993.
No.08 Distance Learning: The Challenge for MulticulturalSociety. 1993.
No.09 Bilingual Education: A Look to the Year 2000.1994.
No.10 For All Students: Limited English Proficient Studentsand Goals 2000. 1994.
No.11 Implementing Bilingual Programs is Everybody'sBusiness. 1995.
No.12 Mentoring Bilingual Teachers. 1995.
 
February 21,2020**
COURT OF APPEALS

	SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

	FORT WORTH

					NO. 2-07-255-CR

PHILLIP A. WINTERS				   		                APPELLANT

	V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS	STATE

	----------

	FROM COUNTY CRIMINAL COURT NO. 10 OF TARRANT COUNTY

	----------

	MEMORANDUM OPINION1 AND JUDGMENT

						----------

	We have considered the “Appellant’s Withdrawal Of Notice Of Appeal.”  The motion complies with rule 42.2(a) of the rules of appellate procedure.  Tex. R. App. P. 42.2(a).  No decision of this court having been delivered before we received this motion, we grant the motion and dismiss the appeal.  See id.; Tex. R. App. P. 43.2(f). 								 										PER CURIAM

PANEL D:	WALKER, J.; CAYCE, C.J.; and MCCOY, J.

DO NOT PUBLISH

Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b)

DELIVERED: August 23, 2007
From: jmlandxtwriter@comcast.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 12:42:06 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing today to ask in the strongest way possible that you rescind the unjust and coercive

mandate that all "contraceptives" and sterilization procedures be covered by private health insurance

with no co-pay to patients." If you do not reverse course, I ask you to expand conscience protections

for any organizations that provide individual and group insurance and have moral or religious objections.

I strongly oppose the government forcing free insurance coverage on Americans - especially for drugs

and devices that I oppose - because some of these can cause an abortion (such as ella and Plan B).

I also ask you to reconsider your definition of religious employer and offer an authentic conscience

protection for any organization and business that has moral or religious objection to providing such

insurance to their employees. This legal mandate clearly violates the spirit of conscience laws which

prohibit government discrimination against those who object to various health services on moral or

religious grounds. The definition of "religious employer" in the regulation is so narrow as to only include

churches, but will still mean that a host of businesses and organizations that have conscience objections

will be required to choose between either violating their conscience or not being able to offer employees

health insurance.

Please protect the conscience rights of insurers, providers and people like me who object to being

forced by the federal government to offer or subsidize contraceptives and sterilization services, especially

when some of these drugs can take the life of early unborn children. No Americans should be forced by

the federal government to essentially subsidize services they object to. I again urge you in the strongest

way possible to reverse course and remove contraceptives and sterilizations from the list of mandatory

preventive services.

Sincerely,

Jeanette Land

North Palm Beach, FL 33408
JOHN ELIAS BALDACCI 

GOVERNOR 

January 3, 2008 

David Conroy, Chief 

Air Programs Branch 

U.S . EPA Region I 

1 Congress St., Suite 1100 

Boston, Ma. 02114-2023 

RE: Certification of Required SIP Elements Under Section 110(a)(1) and (2) for the 

8-hour Ozone NAAQS 

I am pleased to submit the enclosed documentation that the Maine State Implementation 

Plan for air quality adequately meets the Clean Air Act (CAA) "infrastructure 

requirements of section 110a(1) and (2). 

As you know, pursuant to sections 110(a)(1) and (2) of the CAA, all states are required to 

submit plans to provide for the implementation, maintenance and enforcement of the 8-

hour ozone and PM2.5 standards. Sections 110(a)(1) and (2) require states to address 

basic SIP requirements, including emissions inventories, monitoring, and modeling to 

assure attainment and maintenance of the standards no later than three years after the 

promulgation of a new standard (July 2000). 

In March of 2004, a lawsuit was initiated against EPA for failure to take action against 

states that had not made SIP submissions to meet the requirements of sections 110(a)(1) 

and (2). EPA subsequently entered into a consent decree that obligated it to determine 

whether states have made the submissions necessary to meet the section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) 

requirements relating to interstate transport no later than March 15, 2005, and the section 

110(a)(1) and (2) requirements for ozone by December 15, 20071'2 . 

The Maine Department of Environmental Protection is submitting this document to 

certify that its existing SIP already satisfies all section 110(a)(1) and (2) requirements 

with the exception of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)3 . The initial Maine State Implementation 

Plan was approved by EPA on October 28, 1972, and has subsequently been revised and 

' This date has been extended until January 8, 2008. 

2 The section 110(a)(1) and (2) requirements for PM 2.5 must be met by October 5, 2008 . 

3 The Department has posted its section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) submittal to a 30-day comment period with 

AUGUSTA opportunity to request a public hearing. The comment deadline is February 4, 2008. 

17 STATE HOUSE STATION BANGOR 

AUGUSTA, MAINE 04333-0017 106 HOGAN ROAD 

(207) 287-7688 FAX: (207) 287-7826 BANGOR, MAINE 04401 

RAY BLDG., HOSPITAL ST. (207) 941-4570 FAX: (207) 941-4584 

STATE OF MAINE 

DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

DAVID P. LITTELL 

COMMISSIONER 

PORTLAND PRESQUE ISLE 

312 CANCO ROAD 1235 CENTRAL DRIVE, SKYWAY PARK 

PORTLAND, MAINE 04103 PRESQUE ISLE, MAINE 04769-2094 

(207) 822-6300 FAX: (207) 822-6303 (207) 764-0477 FAX: (207) 760-3143 

web site : www.maine .gov/dep printed on recycled paper 
expanded on numerous occasions. The infrastructure elements required by section 

110(a)(2) are fully addressed by existing Maine statutes, regulations and plans. 

If you should have any questions, please contact Jeff Crawford at 207-287-2437. 

Sincerely, 

ames P. Brooks, Director 

Bureau of Air Quality 

Attachments (7) 

cc: Ann Arnold 

Rich Burkhart 

Jeff Crawford 

SIP file (w/encl.) 

EPA file
EXHIBIT 31.1302 CERTIFICATIONI, Robert H. Youngjohns, certify that: 1. I have reviewed this quarterly report of Callidus Software Inc. on Form 10-Q;  2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state amaterial fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements weremade, 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, fairlypresent in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant asof, and for, the periods presented in this report;  4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controlsand 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 thatmaterial information relating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this report is being prepared;  (b) Paragraph omitted pursuant to SEC Release Nos. 33-8238 and 34-47986;  (c) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectivenessof the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period coveredby this report based on such evaluation; and  (d) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscalquarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of this annualreport) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materiallyaffect, 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 internalcontrol over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board ofdirectors (or persons performing the equivalent functions): (a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operationof internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely toadversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize andreport financial information; 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: August 14, 2006                                                                                                                /s/ ROBERT H. YOUNGJOHNS   *Robert H. Youngjohns*   *President and Chief Executive Officer*
EXHIBIT 21


                             LIST OF SUBSIDIARIES OF
                       FRONTIER ADJUSTERS OF AMERICA, INC.





<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
Name                                          State of Incorporation            Parent Company
----                                          ----------------------            --------------

<S>                                           <C>                               <C>
Frontier Adjusters of Arizona, Inc.           Arizona                           Frontier Adjusters of America, Inc.




Frontier Adjusters, Inc.                      Colorado                          Frontier Adjusters of Arizona, Inc.




Frontier Adjusters Co., Ltd.                  Alberta, Canada                   Frontier Adjusters, Inc.




Frontier Adjusters Corp.                      Puerto Rico                       Frontier Adjusters, Inc.
</TABLE>