alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
2d) 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE
oe Washington, DC 20590
US.Department

of Transportation

Federal Highway
Administration

AUG 9 8 2018 In Reply Refer To: HCR-20
DOT# 2017-0387

Subject: Dismissal of Complaint DOT# 2017-0387

Dear

This letter is to inform you that the Federal Highway Administration’s (FHWA) Office of Civil
Rights has determined that it will dismiss the above complaint, which alleged violations of Title
VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VI) and USDOT’s implementation regulations at 49
C.F.R. Part 21 and/or 23 C.F.R. Part 200. To be accepted for investigation, a complaint must
meet the jurisdictional requirements described in FHWA’s Investigations Manual, which
conforms to the U.S. Department of Justice’s procedures and standards for investigating
complaints of discrimination. First, the complaint must be in writing. Second, it must describe an
alleged discriminatory act that, if true, would fall under FHWA’s jurisdiction and potentially
violate FHWA’s nondiscrimination regulations. Finally, it must be filed within 180 calendar days
of the alleged discriminatory act.

After careful consideration, the FHWA has concluded that it must dismiss this complaint. Title
VI prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin in programs and
activities receiving Federal financial assistance.

You alleged that the California Department of Transportation (CALTRANS) discriminated
against you and other residents in Sonoma County when it removed access via a frontage road,
which caused you to suffer increased commute times. Due to these actions, you alleged
CALTRANS created a disparate impact, potentially in violation of Title VI. However, the
allegations and facts in your complaint do not meet the minimum criteria from which FHWA
could establish a case of disparate impact under Title VI. For these reasons, this complaint will
be dismissed by FHWA and closed with no further action,

If you have any questions, please contact Nichole McWhorter at (202) 366-1396.


Sincerely,

Yell He

Nichole McWhorter
Title VI Team Leader
Office of Civil Rights

Cc: Vincent Mammano, Division Administrator, FHWA California Division Office
Paul Schneider, Chief Operating Officer, FHWA California Division Office
Will McClure, Equal Opportunity Specialist, FHWA California Division Office
James Esselman, Senior Attorney-Advisor, FHWA Office of the Chief Counsel
Kevin Resler, National Title VI Program Manager, FHWA Office of Civil Rights

Yvette Rivera, Director, Equal Employment Opportunity Programs Division, Departmental
Office of Civil Rights

Page 2 of 2
**Exhibit
      13.1**











**Certificate
      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 Annual Report on Form 20-F of Grupo Casa Saba S.A. de C.V.
      (the “Company”) for the year ended December 31, 2004 as filed with the
      Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), Manuel
      Saba Ades, as Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and Alejandro Sadurni
      Gomez, as Chief Financial Officer of the Company, each hereby certifies,
      pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
      Act of 2002, that, to the best of his knowledge:




(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.













By: /s/
      Manuel Saba Ades


Name:
      Manuel Saba Ades


Title:
      Chief Executive Officer


Date:
      June 30 ,
      2005











By: /s/
      Alejandro Sadurni Gomez


Name:
      Alejandro Sadurni Gomez


Title:
      Chief Financial Officer


Date:
      June 30 ,
      2005








This
      certification accompanies the Report pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
      of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley
      Act
      of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of §18 of the Securities
      Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.




A
      signed
      original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided
      to
      the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities
      and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Exhibit 32.1

Certification of Periodic Financial Report  Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350

Each of the undersigned officers of Dyax Corp. (the "Company") certifies, under the standards set forth in and solely for the purposes of 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the year ended
December 31, 2007 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and information contained in that Form 10-K
fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

|Date: February 29, 2008 |  |                                                                   
|----------------------- |  | ------------------------------------------------------------------
|                        |  | /s/ Henry E. BlairHenry E. Blair Chief Executive Officer          
|Date: February 29, 2008 |  |                                                                   
|                        |  | /s/ Stephen S. GallikerStephen S. Galliker Chief Financial Officer

---



QuickLinks
June 15, 2015

Mr. Jace Nelson

3561 North 350 East North Ogden, UT 84414

Dear Mr. Nelson:

This letter is to inform you that we are unable to process your request for an exemption. It explains why we can not process your request and what you should do in the next 30 days.

Why We Can Not Process Your Request

We entered your May 15, 2015, exemption request into the public docket (No. FAA-2015- 1702), but we are unable to process your request any further. The information you sent does not 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 the public as a whole.

 The reasons why the exemption would not 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.2

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. 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.

If We Do Not 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,

/s/

Brenda Robeson Program Analyst, Airmen and Airspace Rules Division

Enclosure
#### Leon Johnson BUTLER, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 76-2008.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Aug. 9, 1977.

Rehearing Denied Sept. 22, 1977.

Richard L. Jorandby, Public Defender, and Craig S. Barnard, Asst. Public Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellant.

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

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

ALDERMAN, C. J. and LETTS, J., concur.

DAUKSCH, J., dissents, with opinion.

DAUKSCH, Judge,

dissenting:

I must respectfully dissent because I do not feel the judge who took the Defendant’s plea even attempted to comply with the dictates of *State v. Lyles,*316 So.2d 277 (Fla.1975). At best the factual basis for the plea shows the Defendant may have committed a trespass after he had been drinking and had an accident. It should have been obvious to the trial judge the Defendant was attempting to “excuse” his conduct by alleging his intoxication at the time he was found in the building. Further, there was no showing the Defendant “entered without breaking with the intent to commit a misdemeanor”; there was only a showing that the Defendant was found in a building. Additionally, there should have been a determination whether the Defendant had discussed the intoxication defense with his court appointed attorney. Entering without breaking is an intent crime and intent can be vitiated by voluntary intoxication. *Cirack v. State,*201 So.2d 706 (Fla.1967).

I feel this case is squarely within the *Lyles,*supra, rule and the matter should at least be remanded as happened in *Lyles,*supra.

I do not suggest any error arose thru Judge Sample since he only sentenced the Appellant and did not take the plea.
**Exhibit 23.1**

 

**INDEPENDENT AUDITORS’CONSENT**

 

We consent tothe incorporation by reference in Registration Statement No. 333-108941 ofWashington Group International, Inc. on Form S-8 of our report dated March 2,2004 (which report expresses an unqualified opinion and includes explanatoryparagraphs relating to the Company’s plan of reorganization and a change inaccounting for goodwill and other intangible assets) appearing in this AnnualReport on Form 10-K of Washington Group International, Inc. for the year endedJanuary 2, 2004.

 

 
| /s/ DELOITTE  & TOUCHE LLP |   |
|--------------------------------|--------|
|                           |
| Deloitte  & Touche LLP     |
| Boise, Idaho                   |
| March 4,  2004                 |

 

----
<PAGE>

                                                                    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 Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period
ending March 31, 2003, of El Paso CGP Company (the "Company") as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, D.
Dwight Scott, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, certify (i)
that the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and (ii) that the
information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.


                                          /s/ D. Dwight Scott
                                          --------------------------------------
                                          D. Dwight Scott
                                          Executive Vice President and
                                          Chief Financial Officer
                                          (Principal Financial Officer)

                                          May 15, 2003



A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to El Paso CGP Company and will be retained by El Paso CGP Company and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Order entered April 22, 2020

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-20-00113-CV

GREAT HANS, LLC, Appellant

V.

LIBERTY LIFE SERVICE CORP. AND BRADFORD A. PHILLIPS,

Appellees

On Appeal from the 192nd Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. DC-16-05564

ORDER

Before the Court is appellant’s written verification of payment for the clerk’s 

record. Accordingly, we ORDER Dallas County District Clerk Felicia Pitre to file 

the clerk’s record no later than May 6, 2020.

We DIRECT the Clerk of the Court to send a copy of this order to Ms. Pitre 

and the parties.

/s/ ERIN A. NOWELL 

JUSTICE
Exhibit 10(aa)

                                 AMENDMENT TO
                             EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT
                                      OF
                               RICHARD H. IRVING


     THIS AGREEMENT made and entered into as of this 14th day of February,
2002, by and between BLOUNT INTERNATIONAL, INC. (the "Company") and RICHARD H.
IRVING ("Executive");

                             W I T N E S S E T H :


     WHEREAS, the Company and Executive entered into an Employment Agreement,
dated as of April 18, 1999 ("Employment Agreement", which Agreement became
effective on August 19,1999; and

     WHEREAS, the parties now desire to amend the Employment Agreement in the
manner hereinafter provided;

     NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and the mutual covenants
and agreements contained herein and in the Employment Agreement, the parties
hereby agree to amend the Employment Agreement as follows:

                                      1.

     Section 3(b) is hereby amended effective for fiscal years beginning on
and after January 1, 2002, by deleting the present section in its entirety and
substituting the following in lieu thereof.

               "(b) Executive shall be eligible to participate in the
          Executive Management Target Incentive Plan and such other annual
          incentive plans as may be established by the Company from time to
          time for its executive officers. The Board, Committee of the Board
          or the Chief Executive Officer will establish goals each year under
          the incentive plans, and Executive's annual Target Bonus shall be
          50% of Base. Salary; the maximum award for exceeding the performance
          goals (which will be determined in accordance with the current plan
          design) shall be 100% of Base Salary. The annual incentive bonus
          payable under this subsection (b) shall be payable as a lump sum at
          the time bonuses are paid to other senior


<PAGE>


          executives after certification by the Compensation Committee of the
          Board that the applicable performance objectives have been met,
          unless Executive elects to defer all or a portion of that amount
          pursuant to any deferral plan established by the Company for such
          purpose."

                                      2.

     Except as hereby modified, the provisions of the Employment Agreement
shall remain in full force and effect.

     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Amendment as of the
date first written above.

                                                  COMPANY:
                                                  BLOUNT INTERNATIONAL, INC.


                                                  By:
                                                      -------------------------



                                                  EXECUTIVE:


                                                  -----------------------------
                                                  RICHARD H. IRVING






                                      2
**President**

**Section 906 Certification under Sarbanes Oxley Act**

 

 

 

I, Michael G. Clark, certify that: 

 

| 1. | I have reviewed this report, filed on behalf of DWS Strategic Income Fund, on Form N-CSR; |
|----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

| 2. | Based on my knowledge and pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, the periodic report on Form N-CSR (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of § 13 (a) or §15 (d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. |
|----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

 

 

| December 29, 2008 | /s/Michael G. Clark       |
|-------------------|---------------------------|
|              | Michael G. Clark          |
|              | President                 |
|              | DWS Strategic Income Fund |

 

 

 

 

 

**Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer**

**Section 906 Certification under Sarbanes Oxley Act**

 

 

 

I, Paul Schubert, certify that: 

 

| 1. | I have reviewed this report, filed on behalf of DWS Strategic Income Fund, on Form N-CSR; |
|----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

| 2. | Based on my knowledge and pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, the periodic report on Form N-CSR (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of § 13 (a) or § 15 (d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. |
|----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

 

| December 29, 2008 | /s/Paul Schubert                      |
|-------------------|---------------------------------------|
|              | Paul Schubert                         |
|              | Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer |
|              | DWS Strategic Income Fund             |
# EUR-Lex - 32005M3714 - EN

Important legal notice

*|*

# 32005M3714

**Commission Decision of 08/03/2005 declaring a concentration to be compatible with the common market (Case No IV/M.3714 - BRIDGEPOINT / ATTENDO) according to Council Regulation (EEC) No 4064/89 (Only the English text is authentic) **

*

*

| |Brussels, 08.03.2005

SG-Greffe(2005) D/201017

To the notifying party

Dear Sirs,

Subject : Case No. COMP/M.3714 – BRIDGEPOINT / ATTENDO Notification of 07/02/2005 pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No. 139/2004 [1] Publication in the Official Journal of the European Union No. C38, 15/02/2005, p. 12

1. On 07/02/2005, the Commission received notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No. 139/2004 by which the investment fund Bridgepoint Europe II (“BE II”), belonging to Bridgepoint Capital Group Limited (“Bridgepoint”, UK), acquires within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Council Regulation control of the whole of the undertaking Attendo AB (“Attendo”, Sweden), by way of purchase of shares.

2. The business activities of the undertakings concerned are :

- for Bridgepoint : Management of private equity funds;

- for Attendo : Care services for elderly and disabled; social alarm and communication systems and response.

2. After examination of the notification, the Commission has concluded that the notified operation falls within the scope of Council Regulation (EC) No. 139/2004 and of paragraph 5, subparagraph c, of the Commission Notice on a simplified procedure for treatment of certain concentrations under Council Regulation (EC) No139/2004[2].

3. For the reasons set out in the Notice on a simplified procedure, the Commission has decided not to oppose the notified operation and to declare it compatible with the common market and with the EEA Agreement. This decision is adopted in application of Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No. 139/2004.

For the Commission

signed Neelie KROES Member of the Commission

[1] OJ L 24, 29.1.2004 p. 1

[2] Available on DG COMP website: http://europa.eu.int/comm/competition/mergers/legislation/consultation/simplified_tru.pdf.

MERGER PROCEDURE

ARTICLE 6(1)(b) DECISION

SIMPLIFIED PROCEDURE

PUBLIC VERSION
#### Rudolph COOPER v. STATE of Mississippi.

No. 49990.

Supreme Court of Mississippi.

Nov. 30, 1977.

Dan A. McIntosh, III, Collins, for appellant.

A. F. Summer, Atty. Gen. by Wayne Snuggs, Sp. Asst. Atty. Gen., Jackson, for appellee.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Covington County; George B. Grubbs, Judge.

Before INZER, P. J., and WALKER and BROOM, JJ.

AFFIRMED.

PATTERSON, C. J., SMITH, P. J., and ROBERTSON, SUGG, LEE and BOWLING, JJ., concur.
*Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the Court has determined that this

opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under

the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

For the Fifth Circuit

No. 97-60164

Summary Calendar

FRONA AUSBORN,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

VERSUS

GILMORE MEMORIAL HOSPITAL; PAT HOLLOWAY;

KATHY MCSHAN; CHARLES STEWART,

Defendants-Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court

For the Northern District of Mississippi

(1:95-CV-352-D-D)

July 29, 1997

Before JONES, DeMOSS, and PARKER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Ausborn sued her former employer, Gilmore Memorial Hospital,

under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act for Gilmore’s

refusal to rehire her after her employment was terminated in

January 1995 because she refused to continue to serve as "on call
2

recovery room nurse" in the hospital. Gilmore moved for summary

judgment and the district court granted such motion. We have

carefully reviewed the briefs, the reply brief, the record excerpts

and relevant portions of the record itself. For the reasons stated

by the district court in its Memorandum Opinion filed under date of

February 24, 1997, we AFFIRM the Order granting Gilmore’s Motion

for Summary Judgment entered under date of February 24, 1997.

AFFIRMED.