alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>

                                                                  EXHIBIT 10(nn)

                               SECOND AMENDMENT TO
                              EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT

         The Employment Agreement by and between FLEET FINANCIAL GROUP, INC.
(now FleetBoston Financial Corporation), a Rhode Island Corporation (the
"Company"), and Henrique Meirelles (the "Executive"), dated as of March 14, 1999
as amended effective as of March 14, 2000 (the "Agreement"), is hereby further
amended, effective as of April 22, 2002, as set forth below.

         The following is hereby added at the end of Section 10(a) of the
Agreement:

         Notwithstanding the above, the Executive may designate a beneficiary
         who will be entitled to any portion of the payments under Section 5
         (a)(i) to which the Executive is entitled in the event of his death.
         The beneficiary may be designated or changed by the Executive (without
         the consent of any prior beneficiary) on a form provided by the Company
         and delivered to the Company before his death. If no such beneficiary
         shall have been designated, or if no designated beneficiary shall
         survive the Executive, such payments , if not previously paid, shall be
         paid to the Executive's estate.

         IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Executive and the Company have caused this
Amendment to the Agreement to be entered into, as of the day and year as set
forth above.

                                             /s/ HENRIQUE MEIRELLES
                                             --------------------------
                                             Executive Signature

                                             FLEETBOSTON FINANCIAL CORP.

                                             /s/ M. ANNE SZOSTAK
                                             --------------------------
                                             By: M. Anne Szostak

                                             Title: Executive Vice President
<PAGE>

                                                                   EXHIBIT 10(l)

                                 AMENDMENT FOUR
                                       TO
                      THE FLEETBOSTON FINANCIAL CORPORATION
                   EXECUTIVE DEFERRED COMPENSATION PLAN NO. 2
                               (1997 RESTATEMENT)

         Section 6.1 of the Plan is amended effective October 15, 2002, to read
as follows:

         6.1      INTEREST EQUIVALENT FACTORS.

(a)   IN GENERAL. From time to time the Committee shall determine annual
      interest equivalent factors that apply to Deferrals made in each calendar
      year. The Committee may determine different interest equivalent factors
      for Deferrals made in different calendar years, and except as otherwise
      provided herein, the Committee may change each year the interest
      equivalent factor applicable to Deferrals made in a specified calendar
      year.

(b)   PRE-1998 DEFERRALS. Except as otherwise provided in Sections 6.2 and 6.3,
      the annual interest equivalent factor for Vested Participants for pre-1998
      Deferrals shall be 12 percent; provided that, unless the Committee decides
      otherwise, the annual interest equivalent factor for pre-1998 Deferrals
      for Participants who are Vested pursuant to Section 8.5(c) shall be 8%
      beginning at termination of employment.

(c)   1998 AND LATER DEFERRALS. Except as otherwise provided with respect to a
      Change in Control, the annual interest equivalent factors for Deferrals
      after 1997 may be changed from time to time by the Committee.

(d)   AFTER DEATH. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the annual interest equivalent
      factors applicable to a Participant's Deferrals (i) at the time of the
      Participant's death shall continue to apply until the Participant's
      Account is entirely distributed and (ii) shall be consistent with any
      severance or other agreement between the Company and the Participant.

<PAGE>

         IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Amendment Four was adopted by the Human
Resources and Board Governance Committee at its October 15, 2002 meeting and is
executed by a duly authorized officer of the Company.

                             FLEETBOSTON FINANCIAL CORPORATION

                                   By:  /s/ M. ANNE SZOSTAK
                                        --------------------------------
                                        M. Anne Szostak
                                        Executive Vice President and
                                        Director of Human Resources
Case 2:05-cv-04401-JD Document 5 Filed 01/23/06 Page 1 of 1
No. 62522.

#### Beer Stern Import Corp. *v.*United States,

protests 295783-K, etc. (New York).

*426Opinion by

Foed, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that certain items of the merchandise consist of narrow woven fabrics of cotton similar in all material respects to those the subject of *Beer Stern Import Corp.*v. *United States*(39 Cust. Ct. 294, C. D. 1944), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
Case 2:02-cv-04435-AB Document 103 Filed 12/14/2004 Page 1 of 8
Case 2:02-cv-04435-AB Document 103 Filed 12/14/2004 Page 2 of 8
Case 2:02-cv-04435-AB Document 103 Filed 12/14/2004 Page 3 of 8
Case 2:02-cv-04435-AB Document 103 Filed 12/14/2004 Page 4 of 8
Case 2:02-cv-04435-AB Document 103 Filed 12/14/2004 Page 5 of 8
Case 2:02-cv-04435-AB Document 103 Filed 12/14/2004 Page 6 of 8
Case 2:02-cv-04435-AB Document 103 Filed 12/14/2004 Page 7 of 8
Case 2:02-cv-04435-AB Document 103 Filed 12/14/2004 Page 8 of 8
### THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

13

- 18

- 00543

- CV
In the Interest of E.S. and B.S., children
On Appeal from the 36th District Court of Live Oak County , Texas Trial Cause No. L

- 17

- 0051

- CV

- A

JUDGMENT THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, having considered th is cause on appeal, concludes that the judgment of the trial court should be AFFIRMED . The Court orders the judgment of the trial court AFFIRMED

. No c osts are assessed as each appellant filed an affidavit of inability to pay costs. We further order this decision certified below for observance. February 28, 2019
Part 1 DRAFT

SUPPLEMENT

Edit Rule Number: 98

Rule Name:

Description:

Type:

Operand:

Fatal Period:

Proposed Analytical 

Period:

Statement Line Number Operand Statement Line Number Operand

SF 133: Report on Budget 

Execution and Budgetary 

Resources

4010 - Outlays from new 

discretionary authority

+ SF 133: Report on Budget 

Execution and Budgetary 

Resources

2170 - New obligations, 

unexpired accounts

+

SF 133: Report on Budget 

Execution and Budgetary 

Resources

4100 - Outlays from new 

mandatory authority

+

USSGL Complex Account 4010 - Offset to SF133 Line 

4010 for Expired TAS

+

USSGL Complex Account 4100 - Offset to SF133 line 

4100 for Expired TAS

+

Total gross outlays from new budget authority (sum of Lines 4010 and 4100, unexpired TAS only) should not exceed new 

obligations incurred (Line 2170).

Fiscal Year 2019 Reporting

Section VII

U.S. Standard General Ledger

Data Edits - Detail Report

Gross Outlays from New Budget Authority vs New Obligations Incurred (Unexpired TAS)

Statement Line / Statement Line

Less Than Or Equal (<=)

11,12

01,02,03,04,05,06,07,08,09,10

Left Side Attribute Combination Right Side Attribute Combination

Bulletin No. 2019-10 DRAFT VII EDR - 1 IRC Handout 4/23/19
Part 1 DRAFT

SUPPLEMENT

Edit Rule Number: 99

Rule Name:

Description:

Type:

Operand:

Fatal Period:

Proposed Analytical 

Period:

USSGL ACCOUNT 

NUMBER Begin/End

USSGL ACCOUNT 

NUMBER Begin/End

109000 E 309000 E

Fund Balance with Treasury While Awaiting a Warrant (USSGL account 109000) must equal Unexpended 

Appropriations While Awaiting a Warrant (USSGL account 309000).

Fiscal Year 2019 Reporting

Section VII

U.S. Standard General Ledger

Data Edits - Detail Report

Fund Balance with Treasury vs Unexpended Appropriations While Awaiting a Warrant

USSGL / USSGL

Equal (=)

11,12

01,02,03,04,05,06,07,08,09,10

Left Side Attribute Combination Right Side Attribute Combination

Bulletin No. 2019-10 DRAFT VII EDR - 2 IRC Handout 4/23/19
No. 66759.

#### Teigh, Inc. *v.*United States,

protests 61/1928, 61/3553, and 61/7487 (New York).

Opinion by

Wilson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of glass balls similar in all materials respects to those the subject of *Joseph Markovits, Inc.*v. *United States*(45 Cust. Ct. 151, C.D. 2216), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
No. 52541.

protest 124836-K (New. York).

#### Meiselman & Weinstein *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Mollison, J.

It was stipulated that the merchandise consists of platinum fox fur skins, undressed, similar in all material respects to those the subject of *United States*v. *O. Brager-Larsen*(36 C. C. P. A. 1, C. A. D. 388). The claim for free entry under paragraph 1681 was therefore sustained.
No. 63606.

protests 58/23323 and 59/3085 (Los Angeles).

#### United Merchandising Corp., and Frank P. Dow Co., Inc., of L.A. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Lawrence, J.

The protests were dismissed.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Elias CONTRERAS, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 00-4340.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted March 30, 2001.

Decided June 18, 2001.

Michael Hursey, Michael Hursey, P.A., Fort Lauderdale, FL, for appellant. J. Rene Josey, United States Attorney, A. Bradley Parham, Assistant United States Attorney, Florence, SC, for appellee.

Before MICHAEL, MOTZ, and KING, Circuit Judges.

OPINION

PER CURIAM.

Elias Contreras pled guilty to conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute cocaine and cocaine base. His sentencing range was properly calculated as 97 to 121 months and he was sentenced to 120 months imprisonment. Contreras raises two issues on appeal.

First, he alleges that the district court misunderstood its ability to sentence him below the statutory minimum sentence of ten years. We find insufficient factual support for this contention and note that this court will not review a sentencing court’s decision as to where to impose a sentence within a properly calculated guideline range. *United States v. Porter,*909 F.2d 789, 794 (4th Cir.1990).

Second, because Contreras was sentenced below the statutory maximum, his conviction and sentence are unaffected by *Apprendi v. New Jersey,*530 U.S. 466, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000). *See id.*at 2362-63; *see also United States v. Kinter,*235 F.3d 192, 199-202 (4th Cir.2000), ce*rt. denied,*— U.S. —, 121 S.Ct. 1393, 149 L.Ed.2d 316, 2001 WL *147185105 (U.S. Mar. 19, 2001); *United States v. Lewis,*235 F.3d 215, 218-19 (4th Cir.2000).

Accordingly, we affirm the sentence and conviction. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*AFFIRMED.*
# sec5_snc_2018

&L&"Arial"&10&BBulletin No. 2018-05	&"Arial,Bold"&10V SNC - &P	&R&"Arial"&10&BJune 2018
July 1, 2013

Mr. Neil Blainey

New York Helicopter, Inc.

Downtown Manhatton Heliport, Pi e r 6

New York, NY 10004

Dear Mr. Blainey :

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

part 120 of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR). It explains why we can not

process your request and what you should do in the next 30 days.

Why We Can No t Process Your Request

We entered your June 17, 2013 , exemption request on behalf of New York Helicopter, Inc.

into the public docket (No. FAA

- 20 13

- 0537 ), 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 specific section or sections of 14 CFR from which you seek relief, the extent of the

relief you seek, and the reason you seek relief.

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

benefit t he public as a whole.

• The reasons why the exemption would no t adversely affect safety or how the exemption

would provide a level of safety at least equal to that provided by the rule from which you

seek an exemption.

• 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 must send the information described

earlier to reach us within 30 days. We will consider the docket on your request open until we

rec eive this required information from you. Please note that § 11.63(d) requires you to send2

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

exemption.

If We Do No t Hear From You

If we do not hear from you within 30 d ays, 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,

Ida M. Klepper

Manager, Airmen and

Airspace Rules Division

Enclosure3

Project No.: AAM

- 13

- 419

- E

Project Officer: _______________

ARM

- 10 1 : KJone s: 7/1/2013:Doc#36260

ARM

- 1/100/104:Program Offic e AFS

- 200

MR NEIL BLAINEY

NEW YORK HELICOPTER INC

DOWNTOWN MANHATTON HELIPORT PEIR 6

NEW YORK NY 10004
(1)
    
    The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and(2)
    
    The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Trust.
 MERRILL LYNCH PREFERRED CAPITAL TRUST IIIBy:
    /s/  MARLENE DEBELName:
    Marlene Debel*Title:
    Regular Trustee  *
    
    Marlene Debel functions as the equivalent of the Chief Executive Officer
and Chief Financial Officer of the Trust for purposes of Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
EXHIBIT 32.2

                            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 Quarterly Report of IQ Biometrix, Inc. (the "Company") on
Form 10-QSB/A for the period ending December 31, 2004 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Michael
Walsh, Chief Financial Officer 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 Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or
      15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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


                                                  /s/ Michael Walsh
                                                  -----------------------------
                                                  Michael Walsh

April 12, 2005


                                       28
**Exhibit 32.2**

**CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICERPURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

I, Brian R.Ervine, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuantto Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the QuarterlyReport of Evolving Systems, Inc. on Form 10-Q for the quarterlyperiod ended June 30, 2007 fully complies with the requirements ofSection 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934and that information contained in such Form 10-Q fairly presents in allmaterial respects the financial condition and results of operations of EvolvingSystems, Inc.
| /s/ BRIAN R. ERVINE                                                      |   |
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
| Brian R. Ervine                                                          |
| Executive Vice President and Chief Financial and  Administrative Officer |
| August 8, 2007                                                           |

 

This certification is furnished with this QuarterlyReport on Form 10-Q pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002and shall not, except to the extent required by such Act, be deemed filed forpurposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “ExchangeAct”). Such certification will not be deemed to be incorporated by referenceinto any filing under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the ExchangeAct, except to the extent that we specifically incorporate it by reference.

----
Exhibit 23.1



CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM



We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on Form S-3 (No 333-107355) and Form S-8 (No. 333-82012)
of ZymoGenetics, Inc. of our report dated March 11, 2005, relating to the financial statements, managements assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, and the effectiveness of internal control over financial
reporting, which appear in this Form 10-K.



PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS LLP



|                              
|------------------------------
|/s/ PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS LLP
|                              
|Seattle, Washington           
|March 11, 2005
' N 

!..... 

(]) 

0.0 

c 

ro 

I 

0.0 

c 

.j...J 

V'l 

>< 

LU 

Boston Executive Helicopters proposed hangar reconstruction and fuel 

Norwood Municipal Airport (KOWD) 

June 27,2013 

Aircraft+ 

Parking 

...... tlO'+ 4- c ro ·- "- ..:X:: u "-

·= ro <( 0.. 

r--------, I I 

........... 

~ro 

·- Q) ""0 "-

ro ro 

0 tlO 

- c 

+-'tlO+ 1u -~ "- ..:X:: u "-

·= <(Q_ ro 

..:X::·-

u-o 

:::::1 ro 

"- 0 

...... 

-

- c 

Q)::::> :::::1 

LL 

L---------

AREA A 

...... 

4- 

Lf) 

N 

rl 

-l DF

-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·---·~

Taxiway Object Free Area (TOFA) I 57.5ft 

Taxi lane center line
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 221 (Friday, November 17, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 80335-80336]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-25469]


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

INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION

[Investigation No. 731-TA-472 (Fifth Review)]


Silicon Metal From China; Determination

    On the basis of the record \1\ developed in the subject five-year 
review, the United States International Trade Commission 
(``Commission'') determines, pursuant to the Tariff Act of

[[Page 80336]]

1930 (``the Act''), that revocation of the antidumping duty order on 
silicon metal from China would be likely to lead to continuation or 
recurrence of material injury to an industry in the United States 
within a reasonably foreseeable time.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The record is defined in Sec.  207.2(f) of the Commission's 
Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 207.2(f)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Background

    The Commission instituted this review on May 1, 2023 (88 FR 26595) 
and determined on August 4, 2023 that it would conduct an expedited 
review (88 FR 61613, September 7, 2023).
    The Commission made this determination pursuant to section 751(c) 
of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1675(c)). It completed and filed its 
determination in this review on November 14, 2023. The views of the 
Commission are contained in USITC Publication 5473 (November 2023), 
entitled Silicon Metal from China: Investigation No. 731-TA-472 (Fifth 
Review).

    By order of the Commission.

    Issued: November 14, 2023.
Lisa Barton,
Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2023-25469 Filed 11-16-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020-02-P
Effluent Limitations Guidelines and Standards for 

the Oil and Gas Extraction Point Source Category 

CBI REPLACEMENT PAGE 

EPA-HQ-OW-2014-0598

DCN: SGE01170 

THE FOLLOWING HAS BEEN REMOVED BECAUSE IT 

CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL BUSINESS INFORMATION 

(CBI) PER 40 CFR PART 2, SUBPART B.
**Exhibit
        32.1**
 
 **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 Quarterly Report of Flagship Global Health, Inc. (the
        "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the three and six month periods ended June
        30,
        2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
        (the "Form 10-QSB"), I, Fred F. Nazem, Chief Executive Officer of the Company,
        certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of
        the
        Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that;
 
 (1) The
        Form 10-QSB complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
        Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
 
 (2) The
        information contained in the Form 10-QSB fairly presents, in all material
        respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
        Company.
 
 
 
 Dated: August 13, 2007/s/ Fred
                  F.
                  NazemFred F. Nazem, Chief Executive
                  Officer
No. 59988.

#### Railway Express Agency *v.*United States,

protest 265292-K (San Francisco).

Opinion by

Oliver, C. J.

An examination of the record failing to disclose any evidence sufficient to overcome the presumption of correctness attaching to the collector’s action, the protest was overruled.
# C_2018013EN.01001702.xml

| 15.1.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 13/17 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.1.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 13/17

---

Order of the General Court of 9 November 2017 — Bowles v ECB

(Case T-564/16) (1)

1

((Civil service - ECB Staff - Remuneration - Salary increase - Members of the Staff Committee - Eligibility - Action for annulment - No need to adjudicate - Action for damages - Action manifestly lacking any foundation in law))

(2018/C 013/29)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Carlos Bowles (Frankfurt am Main, Germany) (represented by: initially by L. Levi and A. Tymen, and subsequently by L. Levi, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Central Bank (ECB) (represented by: F. Malfrère and E. Carlini, acting as Agents, and by B. Wägenbaur, lawyer)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Application under Article 270 TFEU seeking, first, annulment of (i) the decision of 24 February 2015, communicated to staff on 13 March 2015, whereby the ECB refused to grant the applicant an additional salary increase for the year 2015 and (ii) the decision dismissing the special appeal of 9 July 2015, and, second, compensation for the damage which the applicant claims to have suffered.

Operative part of the order

Operative part of the order

| 1. | There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the claim for annulment. |
| --- | --- |

1.

There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the claim for annulment.

| 2. | The action is dismissed as to the remainder, as manifestly lacking any foundation in law. |
| --- | --- |

2.

The action is dismissed as to the remainder, as manifestly lacking any foundation in law.

| 3. | Each party is ordered to bear its own costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Each party is ordered to bear its own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 16, 18.1.2016 (Case initially registered before the European Union Civil Service Tribunal as Case F-130/15 and transferred to the General Court of the European Union on 1 September 2016).

1

---