alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UNITEDSTATESENVIRONMENTALPROTECTIONAGENCYREGIONIII1650ArchStreetPhiladelphia,Pennsylvania19103-2029SEP022008TheHonorableJohnHanger,ActingSecretaryPennsylvaniaDepartmentofEnvironmentalProtectionRachelCarsonStateOfficeBuildingP.O.Box2063Harrisburg,PA17105-2063DearMr.Hanger:OnJuly1,2008,EPAreceivedarevisiontothePennsylvaniaStateImplementationPlan(SIP)fromyourofficeonbehalfoftheAlleghenyCountyHealthDepartmentpertainingtotheCounty’sPreventionofSignificantDeterioration(PSD)regulations.EPAhasdeterminedthatthesubmittalisadministrativelyandtechnicallycomplete,andisreviewingittoprepareaNoticeofProposedRulemaking(NPR).Ifmembersofyourstaffhaveanyquestions,theymaydirectthemtoSharonMcCauley,PermitsandTechnicalAssessmentBranch,at(215)814-3376.Sheistheprincipalcontactforthisrulemaking..Ktz,DctorAirProtectionDivisioncc:Ms.JoyceE.Epps,PADEPMr.JamesE.Thompson,ACHDfWPrintedon100%recycled/recyclablepaperwith100%post-consumerfiberandprocesschlorinefree.CustomerServiceHotline:1-800-438-2474
Before the First Division,

February 1, 1951

No. 55187.

#### Kittay & Blitz, Inc. *v.*United States,

protest 150772-K (New York).

Opinion by

Oliver, C. J.

Following the authorities cited in Abstract 15400 the court dismissed the protest.
EXHIBIT (10.7(iii))

AMENDMENT NO. 2 
TO THE 
ECOLAB SUPPLEMENTAL EXECUTIVE RETIREMENT PLAN 
(As Amended and Restated effective as of January 1, 2014)
WHEREAS, Ecolab Inc. (the “Company”) has established and currently maintains the Ecolab Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan (As Amended and Restated effective as of January 1, 2014) (the “Plan”); and
WHEREAS, the Company desires to amend the Plan to timely reflect proposed regulations under Section 162(m) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended.
NOW, THEREFORE, pursuant to Section 5.1 of the Ecolab Inc. Administrative Document for Non-Qualified Benefit Plans (the “Administrative Document”) and subject to Section 6.1 of the Plan, the Company hereby amends the Plan as set forth below. Words used herein with initial capital letters that are defined in the Plan or the Administrative Document are used herein as so defined.
Section 6.5 is amended effective December 31, 2020, by adding the following sentence to the end thereof:
“Notwithstanding the foregoing, this Section 6.5 shall no longer apply effective December 31, 2020 to the extent this Section 6.5 is inconsistent with any proposed or final regulations issued under Code Section 162(m) or Code Section 409A and on which regulations the Company may reasonably rely as of the date of any potential application of this Section 6.5.”  
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Ecolab Inc. has executed this Amendment No. 2 this 2nd day of December, 2020.
​
	​


	​


	​


	


	​
	​
	​
	ECOLAB INC.

	​
	​
	​
	​

	​
	​
	​
	​

	​
	​
	​
	/s/ Laurie M. Marsh

	​
	​
	​
	Laurie M. Marsh

	​
	​
	​
	Executive Vice President, Human Resources

	​
	​
	​
	​

	​
	​
	​
	​

	ATTEST:
	​
	​
	​

	​
	​
	​
	​

	​
	​
	​
	​

	/s/ Michael C. McCormick
	​
	​
	​

	Michael C. McCormick
	​
	​
	​

	Secretary
	​
	​
	​



​
Case No. 8,359.

#### LINDENBERGER v. BEALE.

Bills and Notes — Demand of Payment — Grace.

TCited in Beeding v. Pic, Case No. 1,227. to the point that demand of payment of a promissory note on the day after the third day of grace is too late, and in Auld v. Mandeville, Id. 653, to the point that notice to the indorser on the third day is too soon.)

[Nowhere reported: opinion not now accessible.)

[NOTE. The supreme court, in reversing this case. — 6 Wheat. (19 U. S.) 304. — said: “After demand of the maker on the third day of grace, notice to the indorser on the same day was sufficient, by the geneial law merchant; and that evidence of the letter containing notice having been put into the post office, directed to the defendant. at his place of residence, was sufficient proof of the notice to be left to the jury, and that it was unnecessary to give notice to the defendant to produce the letter before such evidence could be admitted.”]
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### A PPEAL 

### O F 

### T HE 

### S TATE 

### O F 

### F LORIDA

F OURTH D ISTRICT

WILLIE JAMES MCCANTS

, Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA

, Appellee

.

No. 4D 20

- 1846

[ January 7, 2021 ]

Appeal of order denying rule 3.850 motion from the Circuit Court for

the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm Beach County ; Rosemarie Scher

, Judge; L.T. Case No. 502016CF012797AXXXWB

.

Willie James McCants, Madison, pro se

.

No appearance required for appellee.

P ER C URIAM

.

Affirmed.

G ROSS

, F ORST

, and K LINGENSMITH

, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
# C_2016335EN.01005402.xml

| 12.9.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 335/54 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.9.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 335/54

---

Action brought on 29 July 2016 — ZZ v EIB

(Case F-37/16)

(2016/C 335/71)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: ZZ (represented by: B. Maréchal, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Investment Bank (EIB)

Defendant:

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

The annulment of the decision, rendered in the framework of the Dignity at work investigation procedure regarding sexual harassment allegations, rejecting the complaint filed by the applicant as well as the compensation of the moral prejudice and of the medical costs incurred by the applicant.

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

| — | Cancel the decision dated 16 October 2015 rendered in the framework of the Dignity at Work investigation procedure launched by the applicant dated 20 May 2015 against her supervisor, as investigated by the Investigation Panel and annulment of the Report by the Investigation Panel dated 14 September 2015 related to the Dignity at Work request filed by the applicant, in which her complaint has been rejected and inappropriate recommendations have been included, including a sanitization of the report; |
| --- | --- |

—

Cancel the decision dated 16 October 2015 rendered in the framework of the Dignity at Work investigation procedure launched by the applicant dated 20 May 2015 against her supervisor, as investigated by the Investigation Panel and annulment of the Report by the Investigation Panel dated 14 September 2015 related to the Dignity at Work request filed by the applicant, in which her complaint has been rejected and inappropriate recommendations have been included, including a sanitization of the report;

| — | Compensate for medical costs as a result of the damage suffered from the applicant in an amount of (i) 977 EUR to date (including VAT) and (ii) a provisional amount of 5 850 EUR for future medical costs; |
| --- | --- |

—

Compensate for medical costs as a result of the damage suffered from the applicant in an amount of (i) 977 EUR to date (including VAT) and (ii) a provisional amount of 5 850 EUR for future medical costs;

| — | Grant damages in relation to the moral prejudice suffered by the applicant amounting 20 000 EUR; |
| --- | --- |

—

Grant damages in relation to the moral prejudice suffered by the applicant amounting 20 000 EUR;

| — | Order the defendant to bear the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

Order the defendant to bear the costs.

---
LUIS P. DIAZ, Esq.

1118 Lombard Street

Suite 5

Philadelphia, PA 19147

Phone: (215) 733-0293 Fax: (215) 627-3183

FAX:

FROM:

Luis P. Diaz, Esq.

TO:

C. Reginal Johnson,

Esq.

School District of

Philadelphia

ADDRESS

Fifth Floor

2130 Arch Street

Philadelphia, PA 

19134

Pages

Including

Cover

16

PHONE:

215 299-7676

FAX:

215 299-4678

Re: Attorney's Fees in Camacho V. School District

Date: May 10, 2004

MESSAGE:

Attached, please find PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR RULE

54 (FRCP) POST JUDGEMENT I.D.E.A. ATTORNEYS’ FEES FOR THE

COST OF LITIGATING THE UNDERLYING FEE PETITION, filed

with the Court this day.

enclosure:

Case 2:02-cv-04336-JF Document 26-4 Filed 05/10/2004 Page 1 of 1
|Agere Subsidiaries
|------------------

|Domestic (U.S.) Companies              | Jurisdiction of  Organization
|-------------------------------------- | -----------------------------
|                                      
|Agere Systems American Parkway, L.P.   | Delaware                     
|Agere Systems Asia Pacific Inc.        | Delaware                     
|Agere Systems EMEA Inc.                | Delaware                     
|Agere Systems Holdings Inc.            | Delaware                     
|Agere Systems International LLC        | Delaware                     
|Agere Systems LVCC LLC                 | Delaware                     
|Agere Systems Management Services Inc. | Delaware                     
|Agere Systems Receivables Funding LLC  | Delaware                     
|Enable Semiconductor Inc.              | California                   
|Mustang Acquisition Corp.              | Delaware                     
|Optical Insurance Co.                  | Vermont                      
|Ortel Corp.                            | Delaware                     

|Foreign Companies                          |            
|------------------------------------------ | -----------
|                                          
|Agere Systems (Shanghai) Co. Ltd.          | China      
|Agere Systems Canada Corp.                 | Canada     
|Agere Systems de Mexico, S. de R.L. de C.V | Mexico     
|Agere Systems Deutschland GmbH & Co. KG    | Germany    
|Agere Systems Deutschland Verwaltungs GmbH | Germany    
|Agere Systems Espana SL                    | Spain      
|Agere Systems Hong Kong Ltd.               | Hong Kong  
|Agere Systems India Pvt. Ltd.              | India      
|Agere Systems Japan Ltd.                   | Japan      
|Agere Systems Korea Ltd.                   | Korea      
|Agere Systems Limited                      | U.K.       
|Agere Systems Management S.L               | Spain      
|Agere Systems Microelectronics (Thai) Ltd. | Thailand   
|Agere Systems Nederland B.V                | Netherlands
|Agere Systems Singapore Pte. Ltd.          | Singapore  
|Agere Systems Investments Pte. Ltd.        | Singapore  
|Optimay GmbH                               | Germany    
|Ortel BVI Ltd.                             | BVI        
|Ortel GmbH                                 | Germany    
|Ortel SARL                                 | France
##### 



Exhibit 31.2 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO RULE 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a),
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 I, David N. Gill, certify that:  1.
    I have reviewed this Annual Report Amendment on Form 10-K/A of CTI Molecular Imaging, Inc.
(this report); and  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; Date: January 28, 2005 /s/ David N. GillDavid N. GillCorporate Vice President & Chief Financial
Officer 1
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA : CRIMINAL ACTION NO. 04-768

:

v. :

:

DANNY HARRISON, a/k/a “Danny White” : CIVIL ACTION NO. 13-3320

ORDER

AND NOW, this 6th day of May, 2015, upon consideration of Defendant Danny 

Harrison’s “Motion to Vacate, Set Aside or Correct a Sentence by a Person in Federal Custody” 

(the “§ 2255 Motion”) (Crim. Docket No. 185), and all documents filed in connection therewith, 

and following an evidentiary hearing on April 15, 2015, for the reasons stated in the accompanying 

Memorandum, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED as follows:

1. The § 2255 Motion is DENIED.

2. As Defendant has failed to make a substantial showing of the denial of a 

constitutional right, there is no basis for the issuance of a certificate of 

appealability.

3. The Clerk is directed to CLOSE Civil Action No. 13-3320 

BY THE COURT:

/s/ John R. Padova, J.

____________________________

John R. Padova, J.

Case 2:04-cr-00768-JP Document 224 Filed 05/07/15 Page 1 of 1
No. 48445.

#### Protests 798357-G, etc., of Abels Wasserberg & Co. et al. (New York).

Opinion by

Keefe, J.

Following the authorities cited in Abstract 15400 the court dismissed the protests.
No. 65435.

#### A. V. Olsson Trading Co., Inc. *v.*United States,

protest 60/26665 (New York).

*418Opinion by

Donlon, J.

in accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of bread similar in all material respects to that the subject of *United States*v. *Nordic Baking & Importing Co., Inc.*(47 C.C.P.A. 78, C.A.D. 733), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
No. 55863.

petition 6742-R (San Francisco).

#### Manuel Valdes *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Oliver, C. J.

Section 489, *supra,*provides that additional duties shall not be remitted nor payment thereof in any way avoided, except in the case of a clerical error, upon the order of the Secretary of the Treasury, or in any case upon the finding of the United States Customs Court, upon a petition filed at any time after final appraisement and before the expiration of 60 days after liquidation. An appeal for reappraisement was filed and same had not been disposed of prior to the filing of this petition. It appearing from the record that the petition was premature inasmuch as the final appraised value had not yet been determined by the court, the petition was dismissed as untimely.
Exhibit 31.1
**CERTIFICATIONS**
**Certification of Chief Executive Officer**
I, Thomas W. Rabaut, certify that:
1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of United DefenseIndustries, Inc.;
2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement ofa material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make thestatements 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 financialinformation included in this report, fairly present in all material respectsthe financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrantas of, and for, the periods presented in this report;
4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined inExchange 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) 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
c) disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal controlover financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recentfiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely tomaterially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting;and
5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on ourmost recent evaluation of internal controls over financial reporting, to theregistrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board ofdirectors (or persons performing the equivalent function):
a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design oroperation of internal controls over financial reporting which are reasonablylikely 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 otheremployees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting.
Date: August 2, 2004              /s/ Thomas W. Rabaut   Title: President and Chief Executive Officer
Exhibit G 

Case 2:05-cv-01099-ER Document 112-7 Filed 07/21/15 Page 1 of 2
Case 2:05-cv-01099-ER Document 112-7 Filed 07/21/15 Page 2 of 2
##### 



EXHIBIT 99(b)

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Amended Quarterly Report of Northland Cable
Television, Inc. and Subsidiary (the Company) on Form 10Q/A for the
period ended March 31, 2002 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the Form 10-Q/A), I, Gary Jones,
President of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that;



| |  |  | (1) The Form 10-Q/A fully complies with the requirements of Section
13 (a) or (15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C.
78m or 78(d)); and   
| |  |  | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
| |  |  | (2) The information contained in the Form 10-Q/A fairly presents in
all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of the Company.

Dated: November 8, 2002

| |  |     |  |                                                                     
| |  | --- |  | --------------------------------------------------------------------
| |  | BY: |  | /s/ GARY S. JONES                                                   
| |  |     |  |                                                                     
| |  |     |  | Gary S. Jones
President
(Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)
Case 2:02-cv-20143-HB     Document 11      Filed 05/21/2004     Page 1 of 7

Case 2:02-cv-20143-HB     Document 11      Filed 05/21/2004     Page 2 of 7

Case 2:02-cv-20143-HB     Document 11      Filed 05/21/2004     Page 3 of 7

Case 2:02-cv-20143-HB     Document 11      Filed 05/21/2004     Page 4 of 7

Case 2:02-cv-20143-HB     Document 11      Filed 05/21/2004     Page 5 of 7

Case 2:02-cv-20143-HB     Document 11      Filed 05/21/2004     Page 6 of 7

Case 2:02-cv-20143-HB     Document 11      Filed 05/21/2004     Page 7 of 7
----

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.4141 — Linde/BOC)

(2006/C 181/05)

(Text with EEA relevance)

On 6 June 2006, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(2) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

----
How do I subscribe to warrant email notifications? 

Where do I locate the Email Notification feature in the ATM 

Authority Services Module?

In the AAS module, select Posted Transaction (option) then Authority Transaction 

options. Select the Email notification option under the Go To menu. 

Central Accounting and Reporting System (CARS) 

Subscription to Email Notifications 

FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS (FAQ)

Subscribe in the CARS ATM Authority Services (AAS) Module. If you have access to 

the ATM Authority Services (AAS) Module, only an email account is needed. If you 

don’t have access to AAS, getting get access first is required. This can be done by 

filling out the CARS Enrollment form and forwarding it to the Treasury Support 

Center at GWA@STLS.frb.org for processing.

Is the subscription notification service for warrants only, or are 

NETs and other types of transactions included?

Good news! For now, the service is only for warrants but will include NETs and 

other transactions in future releases. 

Do I need to subscribe to all Transaction Types listed in the 

AAS Module?

No, you can select which type of warrants you would like to receive notifications.

1 Contact the Treasury Support Center at 1 (877) 440-9476 or 

GWA@STLS.frb.org

Who should I call if I have questions about the signing up for 

the subscription service?
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

**AMARA CHAUDHRY KRAVITZ,**

**Petitioner**

**v.**

**STEVEN T. O'NEILL,**

**Respondent :** 

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**: No. 93 MM 2016** 

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW **, this 27th day of October, 2016, the Application for Leave to File** 

**Original Process is** GRANTED **, and the Petition for Writ of Mandamus is** DENIED

**.**

**The Prothonotary is** DIRECTED **to strike the name of the jurist from the caption.**
### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 17

- 10573

DEMETRIA GRAY, on behalf of D.S., a Minor,

Plaintiff

- Appellant

v.

CROWLEY INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT,

Defendant

- Appellee

Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas
USDC No. 4:15

- CV

- 908

Before REAVLEY, JONES, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges

.
PER CURIAM: *

The court has carefully considered this appeal in light of the briefs, oral

argument, and per tinent portions of the record. Having done so, we find no

reversible error of la w. The district court’s judgment is therefore AFF IRMED

.

* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited c ircumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit 

### FILED
May 22, 2018

Lyle W. Cayce
Clerk Case: 17-10573 Document: 00514483271 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/22/2018
Exhibit 14.2



LOGO



CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT
ACCOUNTANTS



We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the
Registration Statement (Form F-3 No. 333-120202) of América Móvil, S.A. de C.V. (América Móvil) and Radiomóvil Dipsa, S.A. de C.V. of our report dated February 20, 2003, except for Note 17, which is
dated March 4, 2003, with respect to the consolidated financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2002 of America Central Tel, S.A. and Subsidiaries included in the Annual Report (Form 20-F) of América Móvil for the year ended
December 31, 2004.



LOGO



Guatemala,

June 24, 2005
No. 57215.

protests 959408-G, etc. (New York).

#### W. J. Byrnes & Co. of N. Y., Inc., et al. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Oliver, C. J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the kidskin plates are similar in all material respects to those the subject of *Kung Chen Fur Corpn.*v. *United States*(29 Cust. Ct. 266, C. D. 1480), the claim for free entry under paragraph 1681’ was sustained.

Ford, J., concurred.

Mollison, J., dissented for the reasons set forth in his dissenting opinion in C. D. 1480, *supra.*