alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
July 6, 2015

Mr. Richard Gersh

T errafugia, Inc.

23 Rainin Road

Woburn, MA 01801

Dear Mr. Gersh :

This letter is to inform you that we are unable to process your request for an exemption from

part 21

, Subpart H ; § § 45.23(b)

, 61.113(a) and (b)

, 61.133(a)

, 91.7(a)

, 91.9(b)(2)

, 91.105

, 91.109

, 91.119

, 91.121 , 91.151(a) and (b), 91.203(a) and (b)

, 91.405(a)

, 407(a)(1) , and

409( a)(2) , 417(a) of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR). It ex plains why we

can not process your request and what you should do in the next 30 days.

Why We Can n o t Process Your Request

We entered your April 21, 2015

, exemption request on behalf of Terrafugia, Inc. into the

public docket (No. FAA− 2015

− 1382 ), but we are unable to process your request any further.

The information you sent does no t comply with the requirements of § 11.81 (copy enclosed).

For us to consider the request any further, you must send us all of the following:

 The reasons why granting the request would be in the public interest; that is, how it would

benefit the public as a whole.

 Any additional information, views, or arguments available to support your request.

What You Should Do

If you want us to process your request any further, you mu st send the information described

earlier to reach us within 30 days. Please note that § 11.63(d) requires you to send your

petition for exemption at least 120 days before the proposed effective date of the exemption.2

If We Do No t Hear From You

If we do not hear from you within 30 days, we will close the docket without notifying you

further. If you have any questions or require additional time, you may call (202) 267

- 9677.

Sincerely,

Brittany Newton

Program Analyst, Airmen and

Airspace Rules Division

Enclosure
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Surface Transportation Board

The Surface Transportation Board has received a request from Monroe County Planning and Development (WB23-55—10/11/23) for permission to use data from the Board's annual 2021 masked Carload Waybill Sample. A copy of this request may be obtained from the Board's website under docket no. WB23-55.

The waybill sample contains confidential railroad and shipper data; therefore, if any parties object to these requests, they should file their objections with the Director of the Board's Office of Economics within 14 calendar days of the date of this notice. The rules for release of waybill data are codified at 49 CFR 1244.9.

*Contact:*                     Alexander Dusenberry, (202) 245-0319.                

Tammy Lowery,

Clearance Clerk.

[FR Doc. 2023-23900 Filed 10-27-23; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4915-01-P
contrctagrmtbarrs10.5




	
Independent Contractor Agreement    10/02/03 





 

 

Independent Contractor Agreement 

Amendment 







Agreement made this 8th day of June, 2002 by and between California News Tech (hereinafter referred to as "Company") and Martin Barrs (hereinafter referred to as "Contractor") with its principal place of business at 517 Hickory Street, San Francico Ca 94102. 




WEHREAS, the Contractor provides services to the general public in an independent capacity; 

WEHREAS, the Company is in the business of Internet advertising and 

WEHREAS, the Contractor desires to utilize Contractor services at its own offices and as required, the Company's location, it is therefore 




AGREED AS FOLLOWS: 







Paragraph 7, Confidential Information, is amended as follows: 




All information (pertaining to any of Company's inventions, designs, tools, equipment, unpublished written materials, plans, processes, costs, methods, systems, improvements, or other private or confidential materials) which is obtained by Contractor in the performance of Contractor's work and which is not publicly disclosed by Company shall be considered as confidential and proprietary to Company. 

The terms of Contractor's assignment including the Contractor's compensation and the assignment terms of other Company's employees and the scope of Contractor's work shall be considered confidential. 

Contractor shall not at any time during or after such employment, disclose such information nor the nature of the service which Contractor renders to Company, except to authorized representative of Company. 

All programming code and computer software developed by Contractor for the Company under the terms of the contract, is considered pay for hire and the property of the Company and it is owned 100% by the Company. 







IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have hereunto set their hands and seals on the date first above written. 







Approval: 




California News Tech                Attn:   Martin Barrs 

Marian Munz 




By:_/s/__Marian Munz                                                                                                                    By:  /s/  Martin Barrs 




Title: President                                                                                                                                    Title:   CEO
# L_2022301EN.01002001.xml

| 22.11.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 301/20 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.11.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 301/20

---

COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) 2022/2280

of 15 November 2022

entering a name in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications (‘Salacgrīvas nēģi’ (PGI))

THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

Having regard to Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 November 2012 on quality schemes for agricultural products and foodstuffs (1), and in particular Article 52(2) thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | Pursuant to Article 50(2)(a) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012, Latvia’s application to register the name ‘Salacgrīvas nēģi’ was published in the Official Journal of the European Union (2). |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Pursuant to Article 50(2)(a) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012, Latvia’s application to register the name ‘Salacgrīvas nēģi’ was published in the Official Journal of the European Union (2).

| (2) | As no statement of opposition under Article 51 of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 has been received by the Commission, the name ‘Salacgrīvas nēģi’ should therefore be entered in the register, |
| --- | --- |

(2)

As no statement of opposition under Article 51 of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 has been received by the Commission, the name ‘Salacgrīvas nēģi’ should therefore be entered in the register,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

The name ‘Salacgrīvas nēģi’ (PGI) is hereby entered in the register.

The name specified in the first paragraph denotes a product in Class 1.7. Fresh fish, molluscs and crustaceans and products derived therefrom, as listed in Annex XI to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 668/2014 (3).

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on the twentieth day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 15 November 2022.

For the Commission,

On behalf of the President,

Janusz WOJCIECHOWSKI

Member of the Commission

---

(1)  
  OJ L 343, 14.12.2012, p. 1.

1

(2)  
  OJ C 281, 22.7.2022, p. 9.

2

(3)  Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 668/2014 of 13 June 2014 laying down rules for the application of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council on quality schemes for agricultural products and foodstuffs (OJ L 179, 19.6.2014, p. 36).

3

---
Case No. 8,314.

#### In re LEWIS.

[14 N. B. R. 144.] 1

District Court, S. D. New York.

Oct., 1874.

Bankruptcy —Composition—Satisfactory Bond.

A resolution of composition, which provides that the payment shall be guaranteed by a satisfactory bond to certain persons, as a committee of creditors, may be confirmed.

[In the matter of Solomon Lewis and others.]

James Dunn, for debtors.

1

 [Reprinted by permission.]

BLATCHFORD, District Judge.

The resolution of composition in this case, after providing for a composition of thirty-seven and a half cents on the dollar, to be paid in cash, as follows: one-half in sixty days after the filing of the statement and the recording of the composition, goes on to provide that such payment shall be guaranteed, by the giving of a satisfactory bond in the penal sum of twenty thousand dollars,, to three persons who are named in the resolution, and are stated therein to be the committee appointed by the creditors in the investigation of the affairs of the debtors, within five days after the filing of the statement, and the recording of the resolution. This is a sufficient provision. It must be understood from it that the bond is not only to be given to the three persons named, but is to be satisfactory to them, and that they and they alone are to decide upon its satisfactory character. This obviates the objection in the case of In re Reiman [Case No. 11,673], to the confirmation of the resolution of composition in that case.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr., Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Stephen J. Markman

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano, 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.

 July 30, 2013

p0722

Order 

Clerk

July 30, 2013

147014

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 147014

COA: 312150

Kalamazoo CC: 1991-001491-FC

JOSE ALEJANDRO VELASQUEZ, Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the February 19, 2013 

order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because the defendant has 

failed to meet the burden of establishing entitlement to relief under MCR 6.508(D).
Before the Third Division,

January 11, 1951

No. 55103.

#### Louis Ruhe, Inc. *v.*United States,

protest 163075-K (New York).

Opinion by

Cline, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of live birds similar in all material respects to those the subject of *Alfred Mazer*v. *United States*(25 Cust. Ct. 67, C. D. 1265), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
<PAGE>
                                                                               .
                                                                               .
                                                                               .


                                                                   EXHIBIT 12(A)

               COMPUTATION OF RATIO OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES
                                  SALTON, INC.


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                       26 WEEKS
                                                         ENDED
                                                        1/1/2005                                    YEAR ENDED
(IN THOUSANDS, EXCEPT RATIOS)                          (UNAUDITED)    2004          2003        2002       2001
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<S>                                                     <C>         <C>          <C>         <C>         <C>
Fixed Charges
  Interest and amortization of debt issuance costs
  on all indebtedness                                   $  26,845   $  40,192    $  41,008   $  43,357   $  39,043
  Add interest element implicit in rentals                  1,752       3,557        3,807       3,040       3,724
                                                        ----------------------------------------------------------
    Total fixed charges                                 $  28,597   $  43,749    $  44,815   $  46,397   $  42,767

Income (Loss)
  Income (Loss) before income taxes                     $   4,889   $(100,387)   $  10,916   $  44,541   $  73,846
  Add fixed charges                                        28,597      43,749       44,815      46,397      42,767
                                                        ----------------------------------------------------------
  Income (Loss) before fixed charges and income taxes   $  33,486   $ (56,638)   $  55,731   $  90,938   $ 116,613
                                                        ==========================================================
Ratio of earnings to fixed charges                           1.17       (1.29)        1.24        1.96        2.73

</TABLE>


                                       35
<PAGE>   1
                                                                   Exhibit 23.3J

               CONSENT OF ERNST & YOUNG LLP, INDEPENDENT AUDITORS


     We consent to the reference to our firm under the caption "Experts" and to
the use of our report on the consolidated financial statements of Janex
International, Inc. as of December 31, 1998 and for the year then ended dated
April 7, 1999, in Amendment No. 2 to the Registration Statement (Form S-4 No.
333-80131) and related Prospectus of Futech Interactive Products, Inc.


                                             /s/ Ernst & Young LLP


Phoenix, Arizona
August 4, 1999
Case No. 7,749.

#### KEYSER v. ARTHUR.2

Circuit Court, S. D. New York.

Oct., 1878.

Customs Duties — Notice op Dissatisfaction— Time within which to File.

[A protest within ten days after the collector has liquidated the duties upon goods imported, and an appeal within thirty days thereafter, is valid as to time, although the liquidation is subsequently revised.]

2

 [Decided by Shipman, District Judge. Nowhere reported; opinion not now accessible. Statement of the points determined, taken from an opinion by Mr. Justice Gray in Davies v. Miller, in 130 U. S. 284, 9 Sup. Ct. 560.]

Two distinct entries of goods for immediate consumption were made, the one September 15, and the other October 10, 1873, and the duties were estimated by the collector and paid forthwith. The notice of dissatisfaction with the collector’s decision was given as to the first entry, October 1st, and as to the second entry, October 24, 1873, and each entry was stamped as finally liquidated, November 6, 1873. Judge SHIPMAN held the protests or notices of dissatisfaction with the collector’s decisions to be seasonable, saying: “When the collector had officially and in writing upon the entry ascertained and liquidated the duties upon the goods named in such entry at a certain rate of duty, a protest within ten days after such ascertainment and liquidation, and an appeal within thirty days thereafter, are good and valid as to time, although, subsequently to the date of such ascertainment, liquidation, appeal, and protest, the collector revises the amount of such liquidation, and makes a final ascertainment and liquidation at the same rate of duty. The first ascertainment and liquidation is, in fact, a final one as to rate. A protest and appeal within the statutory time after the final liquidationsarealso good and valid. The uniform practice in this port for many years, as to time of protest and appeal, in conformity with this rule, which practice has been sanctioned by all the officers of the government, is of much importance in the decision of this question.”
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-2001
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-2000
<CASH>                                               0
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   83,813
<ALLOWANCES>                                     2,121
<INVENTORY>                                     65,036
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 8,822
<PP&E>                                          51,251
<DEPRECIATION>                                  29,145
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 473,978
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           81,938
<BONDS>                                        100,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           192
<OTHER-SE>                                     119,122
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   473,978
<SALES>                                        434,821
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               434,821
<CGS>                                          277,086
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  383,970
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 7,497
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   575
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              21,110
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 22,244
<INCOME-TAX>                                    10,227
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             12,017
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    12,017
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .65
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .65


</TABLE>
No. 55766.

protests 170964-K, etc. (New York).

#### Heller Hope Co. et al. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Oliver, C. J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of synthetic stones the same in all material respects as those the subject of S. *Nathan & Co., Inc.*v. *United States*(37 C. C. P. A. 99, C. A. D. 426), the claim at 10 percent under paragraph 1528 was sustained.
<Page>

INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT

We consent to the use in this Post-Effective Amendment No. 2 to Registration
Statement No. 333-105259 of Hartford Life and Annuity Insurance Company
Separate Account One on Form N-4, of our report dated March 26, 2003 of
Hartford Life and Annuity Insurance Company relating to the statutory
financial statements as of and for the year ended December 31, 2002 and of
our report dated February 21, 2003 of Hartford Life and Annuity Insurance
Company Separate Account One relating to the financial statements as of and
for the year ended December 31, 2002, appearing in the Statement of
Additional Information, which is a part of such Registration Statement, and
to the reference to us under the headings "Experts" in such Statement of
Additional Information.

Deloitte & Touche LLP
Hartford, Connecticut
October 6, 2003
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.1

                               SHOPKO STORES, INC.


                   CERTIFICATION OF PERIODIC FINANCIAL REPORT
                       PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350


         Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned officer of ShopKo Stores,
Inc. (the "Company") certifies that, to his knowledge, the Quarterly Report on
Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarter ended May 3, 2003 fully complies with
the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 and the information contained in the Report fairly
presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of the Company.



Dated: June 17, 2003
                                         SHOPKO STORES, INC.


                                                     /s/ Sam K. Duncan
                                                     -----------------
                                                     Sam K. Duncan
                                                     Chief Executive Officer,
                                                     President



         This certification accompanies this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not be
deemed filed by the Company for purposes of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to ShopKo Stores, Inc. and will be retained by ShopKo Stores, Inc. and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.





                                       26
OFFlCE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS 

AUSTIN 

Honorable Dar&d Cole 

County Auditor 

Stephens County 

Breokenridge, Texas 

Dear Sir: 

utaa, reads am 

reties, in the sum 

payable to the oounty 

4 rafthrul perronneno4 

on4 in writtng, stating that 

y cualiried under the proriremente or this title, end g.i*lq 

ions or private or publia trust 

ro held, end the length Of 8~~104 

e shall rurther inolude in hfe 

oath that & ~111 not perrbnally be Interested 

in any dontreot with the countysw, 

-. 

~h15 article we hotion 4 0r Senate Bill 258 of 

the 29th Legislature or Tsxee, Regular Seselon 1905, aad 

was olearly within the caption of the aot. Beeider the same 

wea oodlriad as Article 1049, Rsrfaed Civil Statutse, in thr 

revision or the statutes in 1925. It her not been emended 

SlILO4. 

2 

-_.-- ._ _..~ .-.._.. -.. --....-.. . . . . ..__ .___-.,--- _-y. .---“.“^*Y--.. ---.--- .__._..“. 
. . 

Honorable DaTld Cole, Page 8 

,- --.. 

124 . 

The Ease or Amerloan Indamnitp Company vb Red 

River HatIonal'%nk, 133 S. W. (Zd) 4773, holds that ArtIole 1649, Revised Civil Statutes, riqulres the oountp 

audItor to take the'reguler oath end a spsoial oath. ThIe 

ease also holds that the pux!poee of Article 1648, Revised 

civil Stetutea (whloh presorlbes the qualIriaatIon8 of 

the county auditor), was to proteot the Intsrentr or the 

county. 

Yie do not find that any oiths provIsIons or our 

State Constitution hare been violated by this artiole. . 

It Is our opinion that the artfole Is oonstltutlonal and mandatory. 

Vsrp truly. yours 

ATTORNXY @ENFiX.% CG’ TlXAS
EXHIBIT 23.2

                         CONSENT OF ARTHUR ANDERSEN LLP






<PAGE>

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS



As independent public accountants, we hereby consent to the incorporation by
reference in this registration statement of our report dated February 3, 2001
included in Waypoint Financial Corp.'s Form 10-K for the year ended December 31,
2000.


Arthur Andersen LLP

Lancaster, PA



December 18, 2001

<PAGE>
Before the Third Division,

October *30,*1958

No. 62417.

#### Empire Liquor Corp. et al. *v.*United States,

protests 290811-K, etc. (New York).

*395Opinion by

Johnson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise and issues are similar in all material respects to those involved in *United States*v. R. *C. Williams & Co., Inc.*(40 C. C. P. A. 130, C. A. D. 508), and *Austin, Nichols & Co., Inc.*v. *United States*(22 Cust. Ct. 33, C. D. 1155), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.