alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 159 (Monday, August 18, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 44001]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-21794]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY


Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board, Oak Ridge 
Reservation

AGENCY: Department of Energy.

ACTION: Notice of open meeting.

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

SUMMARY: Pursuant to the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee 
Act (Pub. L. 92-463, 86 Stat. 770) notice is hereby given of the 
following Advisory Committee meeting: Environmental Management Site-
Specific Advisory Board (EM SSAB), Oak Ridge Reservation.

DATES: Friday, August 28, 1997, 6:00 p.m.-9:30 p.m.

ADDRESSES: Comfort Inn, 433 South Rutgers Avenue, Oak Ridge, Tennessee.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sandy Perkins, Site-Specific Advisory 
Board Coordinator, Department of Energy Oak Ridge Operations Office, 
105 Broadway, Oak Ridge, TN 37830, (423) 576-1590.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Purpose of the Board

    The purpose of the Board is to make recommendations to DOE and its 
regulators in the areas of environmental restoration, waste management, 
and related activities.

Tentative Agenda

    This Board meeting has been specially called and will focus on 
approval to spend Board funds to have an independent consultant review 
the permitting and operations of the Toxic Substances Control Act 
incinerator.

Public Participation

    The meeting is open to the public and comments will be taken during 
the meeting. Written statements may be filed with the Committee either 
before or after the meeting. Individuals who wish to make oral 
statements pertaining to agenda items should contact Sandy Perkins at 
the address or telephone number listed above. Requests must be received 
5 days prior to the meeting and reasonable provision will be made to 
include the presentation in the agenda. The Designated Federal Official 
is empowered to conduct the meeting in a fashion that will facilitate 
the orderly conduct of business. Each individual wishing to make public 
comment will be provided a maximum of 5 minutes to present their 
comments.

Minutes

    The minutes of this meeting will be available for public review and 
copying at the Freedom of Information Public Reading Room, 1E-190, 
Forrestal Building, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20585 
between 9:00 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday-Friday, except Federal holidays. 
Minutes will also be available at the Department of Energy's 
Information Resource Center at 105 Broadway, Oak Ridge, TN between 8:30 
am and 5:00 pm on Monday, Wednesday, and Friday; 8:30 am and 7:00 pm on 
Tuesday and Thursday; and 9:00 am and 1:00 pm on Saturday, or by 
writing to Sandy Perkins, Department of Energy Oak Ridge Operations 
Office, 105 Broadway, Oak Ridge, TN 37830, or by calling her at (423) 
576-1590.

    Issued at Washington, DC on August 12, 1997.
Rachel M. Samuel,
Deputy Advisory Committee Management Officer.
[FR Doc. 97-21794 Filed 8-15-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-U
C OURT OF A PPEALS FOR THE F IRST D ISTRICT OF T EXAS AT H OUSTON

O RDER

Cause Number: 01

- 20

- 00 18 9

- C V
Style: KVAC Holding Company et al v. Steadfast Funding, LLC et al
Type of document: Appell ee s ’ sur

- reply brief

Date document filed: April 19

, 20 2 1
Document filed by: Appell ee s

On April 27 , 2021, appellant s filed a motion to strike appellees ’ sur

- reply brief which was filed on April 19, 2021

. After considering the motion, w e grant appell ants’ motion and we strike appellees’ April 19 sur

- reply brief

. All other relief requested in appellants ’ motion to strike is denied

.

It is so ORDERED

. Judge’s signature:

___

/s/ Sherry Radack

_________  Acting individually Acting for the Court

Date:_

____ May 11, 2021

__________________
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                          22,919
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  397,477
<ALLOWANCES>                                    50,000
<INVENTORY>                                    443,991
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               880,408
<PP&E>                                         476,946
<DEPRECIATION>                                 129,164
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,479,672
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,228,167
<BONDS>                                        648,621
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         7,694
<OTHER-SE>                                   1,516,434
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,479,672
<SALES>                                      1,949,743
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,949,743
<CGS>                                        1,310,486
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                2,574,387
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                52,353
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                20,000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              43,800
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (671,038)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (671,038)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (671,038)
<EPS-BASIC>                                        (0)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      (0)



</TABLE>
Before the First Division,

February 13, 1941

No. 45389.

#### Petition 5930-R of Univis Lens Co. (Cleveland).

Brown, Judge:

This case, which is a petition for the remission of additional duties, arose at Dayton, Ohio, and was there tried.

The president and general manager of the plaintiff company testified that in 1935 the plaintiff company received a shipment of laminated lens blanks, otherwise known as safety lens. This was a new item from the Reinforced Glass Co. in England that they intended to introduce into the United States market, this being the first shipment of this particular merchandise.

This concern was a rather extensive importer over a period of 14 years and had paid several million dollars in duties and had never had any problem of importation except this case.

The merchandise was entered at two shillings nine pence, the price actually paid for these sample blanks. These lenses were sent to the plaintiff, not to be *542resold but to be used as samples. The plaiptiff company was to complete the grinding of the lenses and send them out as samples to test the market. They laminated the blanks but found that due to some disintegration the laminated material had separated from the lenses and all the lenses were defective and beyond any use at all, in other words, commercially worthless. They immediately packed them up and sent them back to England. None were ever used in this country.

The appraiser made a very heavy advance in value, resulting in substantial additional duties.

There was an appeal to reappraisement at which the importer apparently appeared without counsel and did not seriously contest the appraiser’s valuation, so that it was sustained.

The importing concern made a full disclosure of all the information it had to the customs officials before making entries.

There is also made part of the record (1) a special agent’s report investigating the matter which states:

There was no intention to defraud on the part of anyone connected with the petitioner.

And (2) a letter from the customs agent in charge, approved by the supervising customs agent, in which it is stated:

The investigation made by me does not reveal fraudulent intent on the part of the importer’s concern, or any individual connected therewith.

In our opinion the facts and circumstances disclosed by this record completely negative any intention to defraud or deceive on the part of the plaintiff.

The petition for remission is therefore granted. Judgment will issue accordingly
Sacramento Regional 

8-Hour Ozone Attainment And 

Reasonable Further Progress Plan 

Public Comments and Staff Responses at the Public Hearing 

Board Meeting 

Placer County Air Pollution Control District 

February 19, 2009 
PUBLIC COMMENTS 

Public Hearing Comments (Auburn, February 19, 2009) 

Comment 1: Jason Crow, Senior Planner of Sacramento Area Council of Governments 

(SACOG)

 SACOG supports the adoption of the SIP documents. The SIP is especially important 

since all of the SACOG transportation plans and programs adopted for the region must 

demonstrate conformity. Without the SIP budgets, SACOG cannot demonstrate 

conformity and the region will enter into a conformity lapse. Basically, the conformity 

lapse means federal transportation dollars will be cut off and federal agencies cannot 

approve environmental documents. The potential impacts of not acting would be huge 

and SACOG feels that the timing is critical. SACOG anticipates the federal approval of 

the economic stimulus package and reauthorization of the federal transportation bill 

within this next year. The region does not want to jeopardize these two opportunities 

for funding and improving the region’s transportation infrastructure. SACOG 

understands the important role of emissions coming from the transportation sector and 

SACOG has taken that into account in developing the region’s transportation plan. This 

SIP is important to meet the clean air goals for the region as well as implementing the 

region’s transportation plan and program. 

Response: Comment noted.

Comment 2: Rick Bettes, Breathe California Sacramento Emigrant Trails 

Breathe California strongly supports the Board to approve the Plan and urge them to 

do so. Mr. Bettes agreed with the previous speakers on the benefits of this Plan. Some 

of the measures that reduce vehicle miles traveled (VMT) and overall emissions will 

also have a secondary benefit of reducing particulate matter and greenhouse gases. 

They are critical issues that we have to face up to very shortly. 

Response: Comment noted.

Comment 3: Camile Kustin, Environmental Defense Fund

 Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) strongly supports the Board’s adoption of the SIP 

and Transportation Control Measures (TCM). The air districts’ analysis of feasible 

measures to include in the Plan has been comprehensive and thorough. The 

combination of the control measures the air districts selected are cost effective and will 

achieve the needed reduction for the region to meet the federal clean air requirements 

and protect public health. 

Response: Comment noted.

Comment 4: Angela Shepard, Cleaner Air Partnership

 Clean Air Partnership supports adoption of the proposed SIP documents. 

Response: Comment noted.
#### Kevin McCLOUD, Petitioner, v. Louie L. WAINWRIGHT, Director, Division of Corrections, Respondent.

No. 75-1891.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

May 9, 1978.

Rehearing Denied June 21, 1978.

Richard L. Jorandby, Public Defender, and Frank B. Kessler, Asst. Public Defender, and Charles D. Peters, Legal Intern, West Palm Beach, for appellant.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Benedict P. Kuehne, Asst. Atty. Gen., West Palm Beach, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

The question on appeal is whether the judgment and sentence should be reversed and a new trial ordered because the court allowed the introduction into evidence of a confession without first having specifically found it to have been voluntarily and freely given. A hearing was held to determine the voluntariness of the confession and the Appellant testified he was coerced. The court denied his objection to the admission of the confession but the judge did not say he found the confession to have been freely and voluntarily given as is required in *McDole v. State,*283 So.2d 553 (Fla.1973); *Wilson v. State,*304 So.2d 119 (Fla.1974); *Sims v. State of Georgia,*385 U.S. 538, 87 S.Ct. 639, 17 L.Ed.2d 593 (1967); *Jackson v. Denno,*378 U.S. 368, 84 S.Ct. 1774, 12 *11L.Ed.2d 908 (1964); *Land v. State,*293 So.2d 704 (Fla.1974); *Danahey v. State,*298 So.2d 444 (Fla. 4 DCA 1974).

REVERSED and REMANDED for new trial, including a hearing and proper order on Appellant’s objection to the introduction of the alleged confession.

CROSS, DOWNEY and DAUKSCH, JJ., concur.
<PAGE>   1
                                                                   Exhibit 10.23



                                 April 7, 1995



TO:      ________________

         RE:     CHANGE IN CONTROL AGREEMENT DATED __________

Dear ________:

         This has reference to the Change in Control Agreement (the
"Agreement") dated ___________ between you and Maxus Energy Corporation
("Maxus").  Notwithstanding anything in the Agreement to the contrary, you and
Maxus agree that a "Change in Control," as defined in the Agreement, occurred
on April 5, 1995 and a significant adverse change in the nature and scope of
the authorities or duties of your position with Maxus has occurred.
Consequently, you have given notice of your intention to terminate your
employment with Maxus immediately pursuant to paragraph 4(b)(ii) of the
Agreement.  Maxus recognizes its obligation to pay and agrees to pay you
severance compensation, including benefits, to the full extent provided for in
paragraph 5 of the Agreement within five days after the amount payable
thereunder is determined (but not later than __________) without reduction for
any payments contemplated below except as provided herein.  In order to
facilitate the transition required by these events, you and Maxus agree as
follows:  (a) Maxus agrees to employ you at your current position, at your
current job site, at your current rate of base pay and with employee plan
benefits at the levels and on the terms currently provided to you until
___________ and (b) you agree to work for Maxus in such position and on such
terms and conditions until June 30, 1995.  If you terminate your employment
prior to ____________ without the written consent of Maxus, an amount equal to
the base salary paid to you from the date hereof through your termination date
will be deducted from the amount payable to you under the Agreement and either
refunded by you or deducted from any amounts Maxus may owe you.

         Please indicate your agreement to the foregoing by dating, signing and
returning a copy of this letter to the undersigned.

                                        Sincerely,
<PAGE>   2




AGREED TO THIS
__ DAY OF APRIL, 1995



--------------------------------
[Executive]



Agreed to by YPF Sociedad Anonima and YPF Acquisition Corp., who agree that
this agreement does not constitute a breach of Maxus' representations,
warranties or covenants contained in the Agreement of Merger dated as of
February 28, 1995.

YPF Sociedad Anonima                       YPF Acquisition Corp.



By:                                        By:
    ---------------------------                ----------------------------
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 Big Sky Industries V, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Ramon Chimelis, Treasurer 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 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.



Dated: February 18, 2009



/s/ Ramon Chimelis

Ramon Chimelis, Treasurer

Big Sky Industries V, Inc.
Exhibit 10.36


 


AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO TRADEMARK CONSENT AGREEMENT


 


WHEREAS, the undersigned parties are parties to a Trademark
Consent Agreement dated July 31, 2003 ("Consent Agreement");


 


WHEREAS, said parties wish to amend the Consent Agreement to include Application Serial
No. 85/414,445 on Schedule A and Application Serial No. 85/645,831 on Schedule B;


 


NOW THEREFORE, for good and valuable consideration, the parties agree and state as follows:


 


1. Schedule A to the Consent Agreement is hereby amended to include: Trademark
ZIG ZAG & Head Design, Application No. 85/414,445, dated September 2, 2011 for "loose tobacco, cigars; cigarillos,
chewing tobacco, snuff, cigarettes, cigar wraps" in Class 34.


 


2. Schedule B to the Consent Agreement is hereby amended to include: Trademark
ZIG ZAG Application No. 85/645,831, dated June 7, 2012 for "electronic cigarettes" in Class 34.


 


3. Bolloré, as owner of the marks
set forth on Schedule B, namely, Registration Nos. 610,530, 1,127,946, 1,247,856, 2,169,549, 2,309,274, 2,309,438, 2,888,068,
and 3,404,458 hereby consents to the registration by NAOC of the marks set forth in Schedule A, as amended, to the Consent
Agreement.


 


4. NAOC, as owner of the marks set forth on Schedule A, as amended, to the Consent Agreement,
namely, Registration Nos. 1,133,291, 1,472,580, 1,775,416, 2,122,646, 2,582,490, 2,780,643, and 3,867,900 hereby consents to the
registration by Bolloré of the marks set forth in Schedule B, as amended, to the Consent Agreement.


 



    	 



    	 



    

 








IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this
Amendment No. 2 to Trademark Consent Agreement on the day and year written below.


 





	BOLLORÉ, S.A.	 	NORTH ATLANTIC OPERATING COMPANY, INC. 




	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	 	 	 
	By:	/s/ Cédric Bolloré	 	By:	/s/ LeAnne Moore
	Name:	Cédric Bolloré	 	Name:	LeAnne Moore
	Title:	Director Industrial Activities	 	Title:	Asst General Counsel
	Date:	December 12, 2012	 	Date:	December 12, 2012
#### Jack F. HAYES v. TAC AMUSEMENT COMPANY, INC. and Operator Sales, Inc.

No. 60804.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Nov. 4, 1977.

In re: Tac Amusement Co., Inc. and Operator Sales, Inc., applying for certiorari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, Parish of Orleans. 349 So.2d 340.

Denied.
No. 99-7997.

#### Masciandaro *v.*United States.

C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.
Exhibit 10.1

 

Amendment Number 011 dated 30th September, 2015

 

TO Contract number 8006340 (“Contract”)

 

	
Between   
    	
(1) British   Telecommunications plc (‘BT’)   and
    
	
 
    	
(2) Virtusa UK Limited
    


 

BT and the Supplier agree that:

 

·       the Contract is amended as set out below;

·       all other Contract provisions remain unchanged.

 

Amendment details:

 

The expiry date of the Contract is extended from 30th September 2015 to 31st October 2015.

 

BT reserves the right to re-negotiate and amend this Contract prior to the end date indicated above, provided any such amendment is mutually agreed by the parties.

 

	
SIGNED for   and on behalf of BT
    	
SIGNED for and on behalf of the Supplier
    
	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    
	
Signed:   
    	
/s/   Peter Sillett
    	
 
    	
Signed
    	
/s/ Shanaka Jayawardena
    
	
Name:   
    	
Peter   Sillett 
    	
 
    	
Name
    	
Shanaka Jayawardena
    
	
Position: 
    	
Procurement Manager
    	
 
    	
Position:
    	
Finance   Director
    


 

	
Peter Sillett
    	
Shanaka Jayawardena
    
	
E-signed 2015-10-01   10:26AM GMT
    	
E-signed 2015-10-01   12:49PM GMT+1
    
	
peter.sillett@bt.com
    	
shanaka@virtusa.com
    
	
BT
    	
Finance Director
    
	
Procurement Manager
----

**Exhibit      32**

**Statement      of Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer Pursuant to Section      906      of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**

|   | 1. | the                Report fully complies with the requirements of Sections 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                as of the dates and for the periods covered by the                Report. |
|--------|----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Date:                March 15, 2007 | /s/                Richard B. Collins                                         |
|-------------------------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                                | Richard                B. Collins                                                  |
|                                | Chief                Executive Officer and President                               |
|                                |                                                                               |
|                                |                                                                               |
| Date:                March 15, 2007 | /s/                Mark A. Roberts                                            |
|                                | Mark                A. Roberts                                                     |
|                                | Executive                Vice President and Chief Financial                Officer |

----