alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Sur La Table Ltd., Appellant, v Rosenthal AG. et al., Respondents.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (William Davis, J.), entered on or about February 15, 1991, which denied plaintiffs motion for a preliminary injunction, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

Plaintiff failed to demonstrate that it was entitled to an injunction barring the defendants from terminating an exclusive distributorship agreement between the parties for the distribution of "Rosenthal” tableware and chinaware. Plaintiff had the burden of establishing the likelihood of ultimate success on the merits, irreparable injury absent the grant of a preliminary injunction, and a balancing of equities in plaintiffs favor *(Grant Co. v Srogi,*52 NY2d 496). Where, as in the case at bar, there exist sharp factual disputes as to whether the agreement was terminated by a notice transmitted in accordance with its terms, whether the plaintiff, as the exclusive distributor, had utilized its best efforts to promote the product, and as to whether plaintiff had failed to pay a contractually specified administrative fee, injunctive relief *326should be denied *(Merrill Lynch Realty Assocs. v Burr,*140 AD2d 589), especially since plaintiff can be compensated by money damages.

We have reviewed the plaintiffs remaining claims and find them to be without merit. Concur—Murphy, P. J., Sullivan, Ellerin, Ross and Rubin, JJ.
2 

The name and the address of the applicant are: 

Suffolk Construction Company, Inc. 

Wendy Venoit 

Vice President, General Counsel 

PH: 617- 517-5351 

65 Allerton Street 

Boston, MA 02119 

wvenoit@suffolk.com

Regulations from which the exemption is requested: 

14 C.F.R. Part 21 

14 C.F.R. 45.23 (b) 

14 C.F.R. 61.113 (a) & (b) 

14 C.F.R. 61.101 (e) (4) (5) 

14 C.F.R. 61.23 (a) (c) 

14 C.F.R. 61.315 (a) 

14 C.F.R. 91.7 (a) 

14 C.F.R. 91.9 (b) (2) 

14 C.F.R. 91.103 

14 C.F.R. 91.109 

14 C.F.R. 91.119 

14 C.F.R. 91.121 

14 C.F.R. 91.151 (a) 

14 C.F.R. 91.203 (a) & (b) 

14 C.F.R. 91.405 (a) 

14 C.F.R. 91.407 (a) (1) 

14 C.F.R. 91.409 (a) (2) 

14 C.F.R. 91.417 (a) & (b) 

I. PUBLIC INTEREST & SAFETY BENEFITS 

Suffolk has been privileged to work on some of the most recognizable and high profile 

construction projects in the nation, including partnerships with world renowned healthcare 

systems, distinguished universities, and private developers seeking to transform communities 

throughout the country with innovative construction projects. As a design build and construction 

management firm, Suffolk is responsible for managing large complex construction sites. The use of 

sUAS would be beneficial for Suffolk’s inspections of projects during the preconstruction, 

construction and even the post construction phases to prevent conflicts, ensure quality, minimize 

risk and ensure safety of workers and the general public. 

The use of sUAS on construction sites supports Suffolk’s “Build Smart” approach, which 

utilizes innovation and technology to construct all projects regardless of size. Suffolk’s primary goal 

for its use of sUAS is to reduce the risk of construction-related accidents while inspecting, surveying 

and monitoring the site, including inspections of roof tops, building envelopes, and other areas of 

buildings that are otherwise inaccessible or can only be accessed with specialized equipment and at
**Exhibit
      32.2**







**RAVEN
      GOLD CORP.**





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 Raven Gold Corp. on Form 10-QSB for
      the
      period ended January 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
      Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Bashir Virji, Chief Financial
      Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.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.





A
      signed
      original of this written statement req  uired
      by
      Sect ion
      906
      has bee  n
      provided to Raven Gold Corp. and will be retained by Raven Gold Corp. and
      furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
      request.











*/s/
      Bashir Virji*


Bashir
        Virji


Chief
      Financial Officer


March
      21,
      2007
Colstrip Units 1 and 2 (Google Earth)Created July 6, 2012
# L_2006154EN.01002001.xml

| 8.6.2006 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 154/20 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.6.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 154/20

---

DECISION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL

of 27 April 2006

on the mobilisation of the EU Solidarity Fund according to point 3 of the Interinstitutional Agreement of 7 November 2002 between the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission on the financing of the European Union Solidarity Fund supplementing the Interinstitutional Agreement of 6 May 1999 on budgetary discipline and improvement of the budgetary procedure

(2006/397/EC)

THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Interinstitutional Agreement of 7 November 2002 between the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission on the financing of the European Union Solidarity Fund supplementing the Interinstitutional Agreement of 6 May 1999 on budgetary discipline and improvement of the budgetary procedure (1), and in particular point 3 thereof,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 2012/2002 of 11 November 2002 establishing the European Union Solidarity Fund (2),

Having regard to the proposal from the Commission,

Whereas:

| (1) | The European Union has created a European Union Solidarity Fund (the Fund) to show solidarity with the population of regions struck by disasters. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

The European Union has created a European Union Solidarity Fund (the Fund) to show solidarity with the population of regions struck by disasters.

| (2) | The Interinstitutional Agreement of 7 November 2002 allows the mobilisation of the Fund within the annual ceiling of EUR 1 billion. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

The Interinstitutional Agreement of 7 November 2002 allows the mobilisation of the Fund within the annual ceiling of EUR 1 billion.

| (3) | Regulation (EC) No 2012/2002 contains the provisions whereby the Fund may be mobilised. |
| --- | --- |

(3)

Regulation (EC) No 2012/2002 contains the provisions whereby the Fund may be mobilised.

| (4) | Bulgaria, Romania and Austria submitted applications to mobilise the Fund, concerning five disasters caused by flooding, |
| --- | --- |

(4)

Bulgaria, Romania and Austria submitted applications to mobilise the Fund, concerning five disasters caused by flooding,

HAVE DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:

Article 1

For the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2006, the European Union Solidarity Fund shall be mobilised to provide the sum of EUR 106 357 627 in commitment and payment appropriations.

Article 2

This Decision shall be published in the Official Journal of the European Union.

Done at Brussels, 27 April 2006.

For the European Parliament

The President

J. BORRELL FONTELLES

For the Council

The President

H. WINKLER

---

(1)  
  OJ C 283, 20.11.2002, p. 1.

1

(2)  
  OJ L 311, 14.11.2002, p. 3.

2

---
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Jorge Restrepo, Also Known as Hernan Dario Perez, Appellant.

Appeal by the defendant from two judgments of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Leahy, J.), both rendered July 12, 1989, convicting him of manslaughter in the first degree under Indictment No. 2061/88, and criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree under Indictment No. 4831/ 88, upon his pleas of guilty, and imposing sentences. The appeals bring up for review the denial, after a hearing, of that branch of the defendant’s omnibus motion which was to suppress physical evidence.

Ordered that the judgments are affirmed.

Prior to entering his pleas of guilty, the defendant moved to suppress the gun in question as the product of an illegal search and seizure. At the *Mapp*hearing, Detective Angelo Garcia testified that on March 18, 1988, at approximately 8:30 *653p.m., he received an anonymous telephone call that a male, approximately five feet, nine inches to six feet tall, wearing a jacket with a green back, a white front, and a blue hood, was standing on the corner of 93rd Street and 37th Avenue in Elmhurst, Queens, and carrying a gun. Based on his experience, Detective Garcia knew the northeast corner of this intersection to be the site of narcotics-related activity. Immediately after receiving the call, Detective Garcia and his partner responded to the location, and not seeing anyone on the northeast corner entered the restaurant which was located there and was open for business. The two officers observed the defendant, the only person in the restaurant to match the description, sitting by himself at a table inside. Detective Garcia approached the defendant, identified himself as an officer, and asked the defendant to accompany him outside for the purpose of the officers’ own safety. Once outside Detective Garcia observed a bulge in the defendant’s waistband. He then conducted a pat-down search, felt what he thought to be a gun, and reached under the defendant’s jacket and retrieved a revolver.

In light of the testimony that was found to be credible by the hearing court, that branch of the defendant’s omnibus motion which was to suppress physical evidence was properly denied. Under these circumstances, the detective’s independent observations in the vicinity of the reported location corroborated the very detailed description furnished in the anonymous phone call, in conjunction with the fact that it was nighttime in an area known to be the site of narcotics-related transactions, gave the detective sufficient cause to interfere with the defendant so as to secure the safety of the officers and others in the restaurant *(see, People v Salaman,*71 NY2d 869; *People v Benjamin,*51 NY2d 267; *People v De Bour,*40 NY2d 210). The detective’s belief that the defendant was armed was further justified after he observed the waistband bulge, and a frisk for weapons was permissible *(People v De Bour, supra*at 221; *People v Milton,*115 AD2d 666).

The sentences imposed were not excessive. Kunzeman, J. P., Balletta, Miller and O’Brien, JJ., concur.
# L_2006138EN.01002201.xml

| 25.5.2006 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 138/22 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.5.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 138/22

---

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 791/2006

of 24 May 2006

fixing the maximum export refund for skimmed-milk powder in the framework of the standing invitation to tender provided for in Regulation (EC) No 582/2004

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1255/1999 of 17 May 1999 on the common organisation of the market in milk and milk products (1), and in particular the third subparagraph of Article 31(3) thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | Commission Regulation (EC) No 582/2004 of 26 March 2004 opening a standing invitation to tender for export refunds for skimmed-milk powder (2) provides for a permanent tender. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Commission Regulation (EC) No 582/2004 of 26 March 2004 opening a standing invitation to tender for export refunds for skimmed-milk powder (2) provides for a permanent tender.

| (2) | Pursuant to Article 5 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 580/2004 of 26 March 2004 establishing a tender procedure concerning export refunds for certain milk products (3) and following an examination of the tenders submitted in response to the invitation to tender, it is appropriate to fix a maximum export refund for the tendering period ending on 23 May 2006. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

Pursuant to Article 5 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 580/2004 of 26 March 2004 establishing a tender procedure concerning export refunds for certain milk products (3) and following an examination of the tenders submitted in response to the invitation to tender, it is appropriate to fix a maximum export refund for the tendering period ending on 23 May 2006.

| (3) | The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Milk and Milk Products, |
| --- | --- |

(3)

The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Milk and Milk Products,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

For the permanent tender opened by Regulation (EC) No 582/2004, for the tendering period ending on 23 May 2006, the maximum amount of refund for the product and destinations referred to in Article 1(1) of that Regulation shall be 7,00 EUR/100 kg.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on 25 May 2006.

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

Done at Brussels, 24 May 2006.

For the Commission

J. L. DEMARTY

Director-General for Agriculture and Rural Development

---

(1)  
  OJ L 160, 26.6.1999, p. 48. Regulation as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1913/2005 (OJ L 307, 25.11.2005, p. 2).

1

(2)  
  OJ L 90, 27.3.2004, p. 67. Regulation as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 409/2006 (OJ L 71, 10.3.2006, p. 5).

2

(3)  
  OJ L 90, 27.3.2004, p. 58. Regulation as amended by Regulation (EC) No 1814/2005 (OJ L 292, 8.11.2005, p. 3).

3

---
<PAGE>   1
                                                                     EXHIBIT 12


                       UNION PACIFIC RESOURCES GROUP INC.
               COMPUTATION OF RATIO OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES
                      (AMOUNTS IN MILLIONS, EXCEPT RATIOS)
                                  (UNAUDITED)

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                                      YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31,
                                                                 --------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                    1999         1998          1997         1996        1995
<S>                                                              <C>          <C>           <C>          <C>          <C>
Earnings from continuing operations before income taxes ....     $  (51.2)    $ (1,488.3)   $  418.9     $  366.1     $  368.3

Add (deduct) distributions greater (to extent less) than
       income of unconsolidated affiliates .................          0.9           (5.8)       (3.8)        (4.2)         2.3

Fixed charges from below ...................................        226.1          262.3        49.0         45.9         17.8

Capitalized interest included in fixed charges .............         (0.4)          (0.9)       (2.0)          --         (0.8)
                                                                 --------     ----------    --------     --------     --------

       Earnings available for fixed  charges................     $  175.4     $ (1,232.7)   $  462.1     $  407.8     $  387.6
                                                                 ========     ==========    ========     ========     ========
Fixed charges:
       Interest expense ....................................     $  218.7     $    249.8    $   39.5     $   38.9     $    9.5
       Portion of rentals representing an interest factor...          7.0           11.6         7.5          7.0          7.5
       Interest capitalized ................................          0.4            0.9         2.0           --          0.8
                                                                 --------     ----------    --------     --------     --------
                Total fixed charges ........................     $  226.1     $    262.3    $   49.0     $   45.9     $   17.8
                                                                 ========     ==========    ========     ========     ========
Ratio of earnings to fixed charges .........................          0.8           (4.7)        9.4          8.9         21.8
                                                                 ========     ==========    ========     ========     ========
</TABLE>


For the year ended December 31, 1999, earnings are insufficient by $50.7
million in order to cover fixed charges.

For the year ended December 31, 1998, earnings are insufficient by $1,495
million in order to cover fixed charges.
```

[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 204 (Tuesday, October 22, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Page 62588]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-24707]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY COMMISSION

Sunshine Act Meeting

TIME AND DATE: Tuesday, October 22, 2013, 10 a.m.-12 p.m.

PLACE: Hearing Room 420, Bethesda Towers, 4330 East-West Highway, 
Bethesda, Maryland.

STATUS: Commission Meeting--Open to the Public

Matters To Be Considered 

Hearing: Magnet Sets NPR--Oral Presentations

    A live webcast of the Meeting can be viewed at www.cpsc.gov/live.
    For a recorded message containing the latest agenda information, 
call (301) 504-7948.

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: Todd A. Stevenson, Office of the 
Secretary, U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, 4330 East West 
Highway, Bethesda, MD 20814, (301) 504-7923.

    Dated: October 17, 2013.
Todd A. Stevenson,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-24707 Filed 10-18-13; 11:15 am]
BILLING CODE 6355-01-P
```
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2020 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

111th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 2020

To extend the temporary duty suspension on certain capers in immediate 
            containers each holding more than 3.4 kilograms.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            October 29, 2009

 Mr. Menendez introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
                  referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To extend the temporary duty suspension on certain capers in immediate 
            containers each holding more than 3.4 kilograms.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. CERTAIN CAPERS IN IMMEDIATE CONTAINERS EACH HOLDING MORE 
              THAN 3.4 KILOGRAMS.

    (a) In General.--Heading 9902.10.28 of the Harmonized Tariff 
Schedule of the United States (relating to capers prepared or preserved 
by vinegar in immediate containers each holding more than 3.4 
kilograms) is amended by striking the date in the effective period 
column and inserting ``12/31/2011''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
with respect to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for 
consumption, on or after the 15th day after the date of the enactment 
of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
p.1 

OAR Box 1828 

Prepped by Ollie Stewart 

Document Number: 

12)ll-K-(A)-25 

Docket Number: 

A-83-27 

Printed 11/12/2008 11:12:48 AM Sheet 12 of 325 
P.2 

II-K-(A)-25 

PROJECTED ENVIRONMENTAL, COST AND ENERGY IMPACTS OF ALTERNATIVE NSPS 

FOR INDUSTRIAL FOSSIL FUEL-FIRED BOILERS. 

EEA, Inc. 

November 27, 1985. 

THIS INFORMATION CAN BE FOUND IN DOCKET A-79-02, ITEM 

IV-K-(A)-4.
II 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 2064 

To extend the temporary suspension of duty on mixtures of poly[[6-[(1,1,3,3- 

tetramethylbutyl)amino]-1,3,5-triazine-2,4-diyl] [2,2,6,6-tetramethyl-4- 

piperidinyl)imino]-1,6-hexanediyl[(2,2,6,6-tetramethyl-4- 

piperidinyl)imino]]) and bis(2,2,6,6-tetramethyl-4-piperidyl) sebacate. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

OCTOBER 29, 2009 

Mr. CARPER introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred 

to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To extend the temporary suspension of duty on mixtures 

of poly[[6-[(1,1,3,3-tetramethylbutyl)amino]-1,3,5-triazine-2,4-diyl] [2,2,6,6-tetramethyl-4-piperidinyl)imino]- 

1,6-hexanediyl[(2,2,6,6-tetramethyl-4-piperidinyl)imino]]) 

and bis(2,2,6,6-tetramethyl-4-piperidyl) sebacate. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 2064 IS

1 SECTION 1. MIXTURES OF POLY[[6-[(1,1,3,3- 

2 TETRAMETHYLBUTYL)AMINO]-1,3,5-TRIAZINE3 2,4-DIYL] [2,2,6,6-TETRAMETHYL-4- 

4 PIPERIDINYL)IMINO]-1,6-HEXANEDIYL[(2,2,6,6- 

5 TETRAMETHYL-4-PIPERIDINYL)IMINO]]) AND 

6 BIS(2,2,6,6-TETRAMETHYL-4-PIPERIDYL) SEBA7 CATE. 

8 (a) IN GENERAL.—Heading 9902.24.10 of the Har9 monized Tariff Schedule of the United States (relating to 

10 mixtures of poly[[6-[(1,1,3,3-tetramethylbutyl)amino]- 

11 1,3,5-triazine-2,4-diyl] [2,2,6,6-tetramethyl-4- 

12 piperidinyl)imino]-1,6-hexanediyl[(2,2,6,6-tetramethyl-4- 

13 piperidinyl)imino]]) and bis(2,2,6,6-tetramethyl-4- 

14 piperidyl) sebacate) is amended by striking ‘‘12/31/2009’’ 

15 and inserting ‘‘12/31/2011’’. 

16 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

17 subsection (a) applies to goods entered, or withdrawn from 

18 warehouse for consumption, on or after the 15th day after 

19 the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with BILLS
Exhibit 32.1 - Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer
Certification (Section 906)

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


I am the Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer of
Raven Gold Corp., a Nevada corporation (the "Company").  I am delivering
this certificate in connection with the Form 10-Q of the Company for the
quarter ended October 31, 2010 and filed with the U. S. Securities and
Exchange Commission ("Form 10-Q").

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, I hereby certify that, to the best of my
knowledge, the Form 10-Q fully complies with the requirements of Section
13(a) or Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the
information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.


/s/ Mike Wood
------------------------
    Mike Wood
    Principal Executive Officer
    Principal Financial Officer


Date  December 13, 2010
      -----------------


<PAGE>