alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of the Treasury

###### Internal Revenue Service

# AGENCY:

Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury.

# ACTION:

Notice of meeting.

# SUMMARY:

An open meeting of the Taxpayer Advocacy Panel's Toll-Free Phone Lines Project Committee will be conducted. The Taxpayer Advocacy Panel is soliciting public comments, ideas, and suggestions on improving customer service at the Internal Revenue Service. This meeting will be held via teleconference.

# DATES:

The meeting will be held Thursday, November 14, 2024.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Kelvin Johnson at 1-888-912-1227 or 504-202-9679.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    Notice is hereby given pursuant to Section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App. (1988) that an open meeting of the Taxpayer Advocacy Panel Toll-Free Phone Lines Project Committee will be held Thursday, November 14, 2024, at 4:00 p.m. Eastern Time. The public is invited to make oral comments or submit written statements for consideration. Due to limited time and structure of meeting, notification of intent to participate must be made with Kelvin Johnson. For more information, please contact Kelvin Johnson at 1-888-912-1227 or 504-202-9679, or write TAP Office, 1555 Poydras Street, Suite 12 New Orleans, LA 70112 or contact us at the website:                     *http://www.improveirs.org.*                     The agenda will include TAP 2024 committee project focus areas.                

      ( print page 81991)    
Dated: October 1, 2024.

Shawn Collins,

Director, Taxpayer Advocacy Panel.

[FR Doc. 2024-23312 Filed 10-8-24; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4830-01-P
```

[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 182 (Wednesday, September 19, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 58114-58115]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-23098]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy

SunShot Prize: Race to the Rooftop

AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Department of 
Energy.

ACTION: Notice; Release of competition rules and processes to compete.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces the release of the SunShot Prize: Race 
to the Rooftop competition. This competition offers $10 million in 
prizes to those who can lower the non-hardware installation cost of 
rooftop solar energy systems.

DATES: Registration opened on September 12, 2012, and will run through 
October 31, 2014. Participants can submit Phase I materials through 
December 31, 2014, and Phase II materials through December 31, 2015.

ADDRESSES: Interested persons are encouraged to learn about the SunShot 
Prize: Race to the Rooftop competition rules at eere.energy.gov/solar/sunshot/prize.html. Teams that wish to enter the competition can 
register at eere.energy.gov/solar/sunshot/prize.html. Questions about 
the prize competition can be sent to:
    Email: SunShot.Prize@ee.doe.gov.
    Mail: Solar Energy Technologies Program, U.S. Department of Energy, 
1000 Independence Ave. SW., Washington, DC 20585.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Minh Le, Solar Energy Technologies 
Program, U.S. Department of Energy, 1000 Independence Ave. SW., 
Washington, DC 20585. Email: SunShot.Prize@ee.doe.gov

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The America COMPETES Reauthorization Act of 
2010, Public Law 111-358, enacted January 4, 2011, authorizes, among 
other things, Federal agencies to issue competitions to stimulate 
innovations in technology, education, and science. The $10 million 
SunShot Prize: Race to the Rooftop competition challenges the ingenuity 
of America's businesses and communities to make it faster, easier, and 
cheaper to install rooftop solar energy systems. Successful competitors 
will deploy domestically and in two phases, at least 6,000 new rooftop 
photovoltaic (PV) installations

[[Page 58115]]

at an average pre-subsidy non-hardware cost of $1 per watt. Winners 
will break this significant price barrier, considered to be 
unachievable a decade ago, and prove that they can repeatedly achieve a 
$1 per watt non-hardware cost using innovative, verifiable processes 
and business practices.
    As required by the America COMPETES Reauthorization Act of 2010, 
the Secretary of Energy has approved this competition.
    Today's notice announces the SunShot Prize and the release of prize 
rules.

    Issued in Washington DC, on September 12, 2012.
Rachel Tronstein,
Deputy Director, SunShot Initiative, Energy Efficiency and Renewable 
Energy .
[FR Doc. 2012-23098 Filed 9-18-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
```
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 02-20397 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus JAVIER RAMIREZ-SOSA, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. H-01-CR-722-ALL

-------------------- February 20, 2003 Before WIENER, EMILIO M. GARZA, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Javier Ramirez-Sosa was convicted after a guilty plea to illegal reentry into the United States after deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. He appeals his conviction and sentence; finding no error, we affirm. Ramirez argues that the district court erred by applying U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(1)(C) at his sentencing. He argues that his prior felony conviction for possession of cocaine did not merit the eight-level adjustment provided in § 2L1.2(b)(1)(C) for anNo. 02-20397 -2- aggravated felony and that he should have received only the four-level adjustment provided in § 2L1.2(b)(1)(D) for “any other felony.” Ramirez’s arguments regarding the definitions of “drug trafficking offense” and “aggravated felony” for purposes of the sentencing guidelines were recently rejected by this court in United States v. Caicedo-Cuero , 312 F.3d 397, 706-11 (5th Cir. 2002). Ramirez also argues that 8 U.S.C. §§ 1326(b)(1) and (b)(2) are unconstitutional because they treat a prior conviction for an aggravated felony as a sentencing factor and not an element of the offense. Ramirez concedes that this argument is foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v. United States , 523 U.S. 224 (1998), but he seeks to preserve the issue for Supreme Court review in light of Apprendi v. New Jersey , 530 U.S. 466 (2000). Apprendi did not overrule Almendarez-Torres
. See Apprendi , 530 U.S. at 489-90;

see also United States v. Dabeit , 231 F.3d 979, 984 (5th Cir. 2000). Accordingly, this argument lacks merit.
AFFIRMED.
##### Table of Contents



UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
 Washington, D.C. 20549
 FORM 8-K
 CURRENT REPORT
Pursuant to Section 13 OR 15(d) of
The Securities Exchange Act of 1934
  Encysive Pharmaceuticals Inc.
  Delaware
    
    0-20117
    
    13-3532643(State or other jurisdiction
    
    (Commission
    
    (IRS Employerof incorporation)
    
    File Number)
    
    Identification No.)4848 Loop Central Drive, Suite 700, Houston, Texas
    
    77081(Address of principal executive offices)
    
    (Zip Code)
 713-796-8822
  (Former name or former address, if changed since last report.)
  o
 o
 o
 o




---



TABLE OF CONTENTS  Item 7.01. Regulation FD DisclosureItem 9.01. Financial Statements and ExhibitsSIGNATURESEXHIBIT INDEXPresentation    Table of Contents  
 Item 7.01. Regulation FD Disclosure.
     
 Item 9.01. Financial Statements and Exhibits
  99.1
    
    Presentation dated September 24, 2007.
 [SIGNATURE PAGE FOLLOWS]




---



##### Table of Contents



SIGNATURES
  ENCYSIVE PHARMACEUTICALS INC.
(Registrant)Date: September 24, 2007
    
    /s/ Paul S. ManierrePaul S. ManierreVice President, General Counsel




---



##### Table of Contents



Exhibit No.
    
    Description99.1
    
    Presentation dated September 24, 2007.
##### 



Exhibit 5
  
     JONES, WALKER, WAECHTER, POITEVENT, CARRÈRE &
DENÈGRE, L.L.P.By:
    
    /s/ MARGARET F. MURPHYMargaret F. MurphyPartner
EX-10.2



 Exhibit 10.2 

FORM OF AMENDMENT TO 

AMENDED AND RESTATED EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT 

THIS AMENDMENT No. 1 (the “Amendment”), dated November 13, 2017, to the Amended and Restated Employment
Agreement (the “Agreement”), effective as of July 11, 2015, by and among Aleris International, Inc., a Delaware corporation (together with its successors and assigns, the “Company”) and Sean Stack (the
“Executive”). 
 WHEREAS, the Compensation Committee of the Company previously authorized and approved changes in the
Executive’s Annual Base Salary and Target Bonus percentage (the “Compensation Changes”); and 
 WHEREAS, the
Compensation Committee of the Company previously authorized and approved an amendment to the Agreement that, changed the multiplier used in calculating the Executive’s Severance Payment in the event that the Company terminates the
Executive’s employment thereunder without Cause, or the Executive terminates his employment thereunder with Good Reason (the “Severance Multiplier Change”); and 

WHEREAS, the parties desire to amend the Agreement to acknowledge the Compensation Changes and Severance Multiplier Change as set forth
herein; and 
 NOW, THEREFORE, for good and valuable consideration, the Executive and the Company agree as follows: 

1. Amendments. 
 A.
Section 2(a) is hereby amended by adding the following sentence at the end of the paragraph: 
 Effective as of November 13, 2017,
Executive’s Base Salary shall be at the rate of $             per anum. 

B. Section 2(b) is hereby amended by adding the following sentence at the end of the paragraph: 

Effective as of November 13, 2017, Executive’s Target Bonus shall be     % of Base Salary, up to a
maximum of     % of Base Salary. 







 C. Section 5(a)(i)(C) is hereby deleted in its entirety and replaced as follows: 

(C) a cash payment equal to three (3) times the sum of (i) the annual Base Salary as of the Date of Termination (disregarding, for
this purpose, any reduction in Base Salary that occurred after the Amendment Effective Date) and (ii) the annual Target Bonus as of the Date of Termination (disregarding, for the purpose of determining the Target Bonus, any reduction in Base
Salary that occurred after the Amendment Effective Date) (such payment, the “Severance Payment”); and 
  

	 	2.	Other. Except as amended hereby, the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. 


[Signature Page Follows] 







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

  

	
	EXECUTIVE
	
	   

	Sean Stack


  

			
	ALERIS INTERNATIONAL, INC.


 
			
		
	By:	 	 


 [Signature
Page to the Amendment to Amended and Restated Employment Agreement]
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Postal Service

# AGENCY:

                        Postal ServiceTM.                    

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.

# DATES:

*Date of required notice:*                         October 2, 2024.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Sean C. Robinson, 202-268-8405.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    The United States Postal Service® hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on September 17, 2024, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a                     *USPS Request to Add Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail & USPS Ground Advantage® Contract 348 to Competitive Product List*. Documents are available at                     *www.prc.gov,*                     Docket Nos. MC2024-694, CP2024-703.                

Sean C. Robinson,

Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.

[FR Doc. 2024-22619 Filed 10-1-24; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
#### SPICER v. STATE.

No. 14713.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Feb. 17, 1932.

John N. Gauntt and Joe W. Taylor, both of Waco, for appellant.

Lloyd W. Davidson, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State. *

HAWKINS, J.

Conviction is for burglary, punishment being two years in the penitentiary.

Appellant and Carl Sims were separately indicted, but by agreement were jointly tried. Each party appealed and brought his case here by separate record. The case of Sims v. State, 45 S.W.(2d) 579, was reversed in an opinion delivered on January 20,1932.

The cases of both appellant and Sims were submitted in a joint charge, and the verdict returned was in the following language: “We, the jury, find the defendants guilty as charged in the indictment and assess their punishment at confinement in the penitentiary for two years.” In the motion for new trial objection is directed at the verdict because it is in form joint, instead of being a separate verdict against each of them. This objection is not tenable. Davidson and Thompson v. State, 40 Tex. Cr. R. 285, 40 S. W. 372, 50 S. W. 365.

The facts are fully set out in the opinion in Sims’ Case, and it is not necessary to repeat them here. Ás was said in that opinion, the arrest and search were illegal and the testimony of the officers as to finding in appellant’s car the goods taken from the burglarized store should not have been received. The reversal of the Sims Case was based on the error of the trial court in admitting such testimony. Spicer does not occupy the same relation to the matter as did Sims, who did not testify. Spicer did testify in his own behalf. Sims did not call Spicer as a witness, and could not, he being under indictment for the same criminal act. Neither did the state call Spicer as a witness; he took the stand in his own behalf. Spicer’s testimony would not bind Sims, and under the circumstances of the trial could not be considered a waiver by Sims of the error in admitting the testimony of the officers. While testifying in his own behalf, Spicer admitted the presence in his car of the stolen goods, but claimed to have bought them. Having himself put in evidence the same facts testified to by the officers regarding the possession of the stolen goods, a reversal of the judgment as to Spicer cannot be predicated on the error of the court in admitting the testimony of the officers to the same effect. McLaughlin v. State, 109 Tex. Cr. R. 307, 4 S.W.(2d) 54; Machado v. State, 112 Tex. Cr. R. 538, 17 S.W.(2d) 1060; Stone v. State, 113 Tex. Cr. R. 371, 22 S.W.(2d) 140.

Appellant’s claim of purchasing the stolen property was submitted to the jury in an appropriate charge, and the issue was decided against him.

The judgment is affirmed.
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order
Lansing, Michigan
December 27, 2005

129344

CARL VENDITTELLI, Plaintiff,

v
ATTORNEY GRIEVANCE COMMISSION, Defendant.

________________ _______________ __________/ SC: 129344 AGC: 1706/05 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice
Michael F. Cavanagh Elizabeth A. Weaver Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markman, Justices

On order of the Court, th e complaint for superintendi ng control is considered. Relief is DENIED, because the Court is not p ersuaded that it should grant the requested relief.

s1219 I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

December 27, 2005
Clerk
#### GREEN v. STATE.

No. 19519.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

March 9, 1938.

State’s Rehearing Granted April 20, 1938.

Rehearing Denied June 8, 1938.

*1076Eugene F. Mathis, of San Angelo, for appellant.

Lloyd W. Davidson, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

KRUEGER, Judge.

The offense is possession of intoxicating liquor in a dry area for the purpose of sale; the punishment a fine of $250.

No complaint appears anywhere in the record before this court. Hence no jurisdiction is shown in the county court. See article 415, Vernon’s Ann.C.C.P.; Olivares v. State, 127 Tex.Civ.R. 316, 76 S.W.2d 140.

The judgment is reversed and the prosecution ordered dismissed.

PER CURIAM.

The foregoing opinion of the Commission of Appeals has been examined by the judges of the Court of Criminal Appeals and approved by the court.

On Motion for Rehearing.

GRAVES, Judge.

This cause has heretofore been ordered reversed and dismissed because of the failure of a complaint to be incorporated in the record before us. The record has been completed relative to such complaint by a supplemental transcript showing such complaint to have been properly filed, but left out of the original transcript by mistake and inadvertence upon the part of the county clerk.

The corrected transcript now containing a properly filed complaint, the order dismissing this cause is set aside, and we proceed to consider such case upon its merits.

The complaint and information appear to be regular, and such as we have heretofore upheld.

The statement of facts shows a search of appellant’s premises in Runnels county on the 9th day of July, 1937, by officers, and the finding of 216 twelve-ounce cans of beer of more than one-half of 1 per cent, of alcohol by' volume, and that Runnels county was, what is known as a “dry area.”

There are no bills of exception, and, the record now appearing to be regular, the complaint and information in proper form, charging possession of liquor for sale in a dry area, and the facts being deemed sufficient, this judgment is affirmed.
OPM.gov / Retirement / Pre-Retirement

Skip to main content

### In this section

- My Annuity and Benefits Toggle submenu   - Services Online
  - Life Events
  - Annuity Payments
  - Healthcare & Insurance
  - Medicare
  - Thrift Savings Plan
  - Related Federal Benefits
  - Retirement Eligibility Surveys
  - Representative Payees
- CSRS Information Toggle submenu   - Eligibility
  - Computation
  - Creditable Service
  - Planning and Applying
  - Types of Retirement
  - Survivors
  - Military Retired Pay
  - Service Credit
  - Former Employees
- FERS Information Toggle submenu   - Eligibility
  - Computation
  - Creditable Service
  - Planning & Applying
  - Types of Retirement
  - Survivors
  - Military Retired Pay
  - Service Credit
  - Former Employees
- Phased Retirement
- Retirement Statistics
- Special Notices
- Federal Ball Park Estimator
- FEGLI Calculator
- Tax Information for Annuitants
- Publications & Forms Toggle submenu   - Pamphlets
  - Retirement & Insurance Forms
  - Benefits Administration Letters
  - Financial Management Letters
  - Payroll Office Letters
  - CSRS/FERS Handbook
- Benefits Officers Center Toggle submenu   - List of Benefits Officers
  - Tools
  - Aids
  - FERS Election Options
  - Training
  - Reference Materials
- Pre-Retirement
- Post-Retirement
- Leaving the Government
- Survivor Benefits
- How to Make a Payment
- Quick Guide
- Contact Retirement
- Retirement Information Center
- Application Tips

### Resources For

          - New / Prospective Employees
          - Federal Employees
          - Retirees or Family Members
          - Benefits Officers

# Pre-Retirement
# 0

0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007**S O** **2 E** **m i** **s s** **i o** **n s** **( l** **b /** **m m** **B t** **u )** 



# Year 

# Figure 1.a. NPPD

**- Gerald Gentleman SO2 Rate** 

Unit #1 SO2_RATE

Unit #2 SO2_RATE

# 0

2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 16000 18000

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007**S O** **2 E** **m i** **s s** **i o** **n s** **( t** **o n** **s /** **y e** **a r** **)**



# Year 

# Figure 1.b. NPPD

**- Gerald Gentleman SO2 Mass** 

Unit #1 SO2_MASS

Unit #2 SO2_MASS

# 0

0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35 0.4 0.45 0.5

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007**N O** **x E** **m i** **s s** **i o** **n s** **( l** **b /** **m m** **B t** **u )** 



# Year 

# Figure 1.c. NPPD

**- Gerald Gentleman NOx Rate** 

Unit #1 NOX_RATE

Unit #2 NOX_RATE

# 0

2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 16000

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007**N O** **x E** **m i** **s s** **i o** **n s** **( t** **o n** **s /** **y r** **)**



# Year 

# Figure 1.d. NPPD

**- Gerald Gentleman NOx Mass** 

Unit #1 NOX_MASS

Unit #2 NOX_MASS
RENT-2014.06.30-EX10.1






EXHIBIT 10.1


AMENDMENT NO. 4 TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT


This Amendment No. 4 to Employment Agreement (this "Amendment") is entered into as of July 24, 2014, between WILLIAM P. LIVEK ("Executive") and RENTRAK CORPORATION, an Oregon corporation ("Corporation").
WHEREAS, Executive and Corporation are parties to an Employment Agreement dated as of June 15, 2009, amended as of November 6, 2011, October 1, 2013, and June 10, 2014 (the "Agreement");
WHEREAS, Executive and Corporation desire to enter into this Amendment in order to secure Executive's services to the Corporation over a longer term of employment than is provided in the Agreement, and containing the additional terms set forth herein;
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual agreements contained herein and for other valuable consideration, the parties hereby agree as follows:
1.    Term.  Section 1.2 of the Agreement is amended to provide that the Term will expire on June 30, 2024.
2.    Compensation Review.  Executive and the Corporation intend to review Executive’s compensation payable pursuant to Section 2 of the Agreement during calendar year 2019 for the purpose of making  increases to such compensation as may be mutually agreed upon by Executive and the Corporation for the remaining five years of the agreement.
3.    General.  Except as specifically amended hereby, the Agreement shall continue in force and effect under its existing terms.
The parties have executed this Amendment as of the date stated above.


	
					
	 
	 
	RENTRAK CORPORATION
	 

	 
	 
	 
	 
	 

	/s/ William P. Livek
	 
	By:
	/s/ David I. Chemerow
	 

	William P. Livek
	 
	Name:
	David I. Chemerow
	 

	 
	 
	Its:
	COO & CFO