alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# Residue and Tillage Management, No-Till (Ac.) (329) Conservation Practice Standard

## Breadcrumb

-  Home 
-  Resources 
-  Residue and Tillage Management, No-Till (Ac.) (329) Conservation Practice Standard 

Download the national conservation practice standard document and supporting documents for Residue and Tillage Management, No-Till (Ac.) (329).

## National Standard Document

NOTICE - National conservation practice standards should not be used to plan, design or install a conservation practice. To find these documents at the local level, visit our Field Office Technical Guide website.

Conservation Practice Name (Units) (Code) (Date Issued)

Residue and Tillage Management, No-Till (Ac.) (329) (9/16) Standard Document(179.29 KB)

###   Supporting Documents

Residue and Tillage Management, No-Till (Ac.) (329) Overview(394.96 KB)

Residue and Tillage Management, No-Till (Ac.) (329) CPPE(26.22 KB)

Residue and Tillage Management, No-Till (Ac.) (329) Network Diagram(207.64 KB)

##   Additional Information

### Conservation Practice Standards

On this page find links to national conservation practice standards and supporting documents.
Learn More

### Conservation Practice Standards Information

Learn about the information provided in conservation practice standards and supporting documents, such as overviews, worksheets, and network effects diagrams.
Learn More
# C_2004239EN.01002301.xml

| 25.9.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 239/23 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.9.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 239/23

---

ORDER OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

ORDER OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

of 7 June 2004

in Case T-230/02: X v Commission of the European Communities (1)

1

(Action for damages - Prior complaint through official channels - Action in part devoid of any legal basis and in part inadmissible)

(2004/C 239/49)

Language of the case: French

In Case T-230/02: X, a former official of the European Communities, residing at Hellerup (Denmark), represented by G. Bouneou and F. Frabetti, lawyers, with an address for service in Luxembourg, against Commission of the European Communities (Agents: C. Berardis-Kayser and D. Martin, with an address for service in Luxembourg) — application for compensation for the non-material damage allegedly suffered by the applicant as a result of the Commission's failure to comply with the judgments of the Court of First Instance and of the conduct of the applicant's line manager — the Court of First Instance (Third Chamber), composed of J. Azizi, President, M. Jaeger and F. Dehousse, Judges; H. Jung, Registrar, has made an order on 7 June 2004, in which it:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders the parties to bear their own costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders the parties to bear their own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 247 of 12.10.2002.

1

---
#### Bahrke, Appellant, vs. Industrial Commission and Milwaukee Structural Steel Company and another, Respondents.

For the appellant: *Olin & Butler*of Madison.

For the respondent Industrial Commission: The *Attorney General*and *Mortimer Levitan,*assistant attorney general.

For the Milwaukee Structural Steel Company *et*al.: *Quarles,- Spence & Quarles,*attorneys, and *Arthur B. Doe*of counsel, all of Milwaukee.

*By the Court.*—

Judgment affirmed.
**Exhibit 32.1**





**CERTIFICATION
      OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER**


**PURSUANT
      TO**


**18
      U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**


**AS
      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**


**SECTION
      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**





I,
      Gilbert Hu, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
      pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the
      Quarterly Report of AltiGen Communications, Inc. on Form 10-Q
      for the
      quarter ended June 30, 2005, fully complies with the requirements of
      Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that
      information contained in such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q fairly presents
      in
      all material respects the financial condition and results of operations of
      AltiGen Communications, Inc.








Date:
                August 15, 2005
            By:
            /s/
                Gilbert HuName:
            Gilbert
                HuTitle:
            Chief
                Executive Officer
HomeNRC LibraryDocument CollectionsNUREG-Series PublicationsPublications Prepared by NRC Staff

# Annual Evaluation Plan (NUREG-2250)

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Thursday, February 29, 2024
#### Showskey, by guardian *ad*litem, Respondent, vs. Cohodas and others, Appellants.

For the appellants: *Bitker, Tierney & Puchner*of Milwaukee, attorneys, and *Ed. Duquaine*of Green Bay of counsel.

For the respondent: *Kittell,*Joseph, *Young & Everson*of Green Bay.

*By the Coturt.*

Judgment affirmed.
AMENDMENT TO
TELETECH HOLDINGS, INC.
RESTRICTED STOCK UNIT AGREEMENT
 Amendment Agreement Company  Grantee
 WHEREAS Section 409A
 WHEREAS Plan Committee
 NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED
 Section 409A
 17.
    
    Section 409A. Notwithstanding any provision herein to the contrary,
for purposes of determining whether Grantee has a termination of employment for
purposes of Section 3A hereof, Grantee will not be treated as having terminated
employment unless such termination constitutes a separation from service as defined
for purposes of Section 409A of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (Section
409A). If Grantee has a separation from service following a Change in Control
pursuant to Section 3A(a)(ii), the RSUs vesting as a result of such separation from
service will be paid on a date determined by the Company within 5 days of Grantees
separation from service. If Grantee is a specified employee (within the meaning of
Section 409A) with respect to the Company at the time of a separation from service
and Grantee becomes vested in RSUs as a consequence of a separation from service, the
delivery of property in settlement of such vested RSUs shall be delayed until the
earliest date upon which such property may be delivered to Grantee without being
subject to taxation under Section 409A.




---



##### 



IN WITNESS WHEREOF
 TeleTech Holdings, Inc.By:Title:
#### A. FITCH *vs.*MARY PORTER.

■To support a declaration in an action of debt upon a judgment; the exemplification of the judgment itself must be produced ; it is not sufficient *te*slieW a *scieri facias*to shew cause why execution should not issue *oí%*the judgment and an award of execution according to the *sci, fa.*

Appeal from the Superior Court of Law of Mecklen-burg County, at tbe Spring Term, 1848, his Honox Judge1 Manly presiding.

*512This was an action of debt upon a judgment obtained by the'plaintiff against the defendant in the Court of Common Pleas for Richland District in the State of South Carolina. Plea, *nul tiel record.*Upon an inspection of the exemplification of the record produced by the plaintiff, it appeared to be an execution issued the 10th day of June, 1829, on a judgment recited therein to have been confessed by the defendant to the- plaintiff for the sum of $260 50-100 with interest and costs; and two *scire faciases*issued in the years 1845 and 1846 against the defendant, to show cause why the plaintiff should not have his execution against her upon the said judgment, with the sheriff’s returns of *“nihil”*thereon, and then an award of execution by the Court. The Court below adjudged that there was no such record and the plaintiff appealed.

*Bynum*and *Wilson,*for the plaintiff.

*Osborne,*for the defendant.

Battle, J.

The Court below was undoubtedly right in deciding, that there was no such judgment as that upon which the plaintiff declared. The exemplification of the record produced showed no judgment at all, but merely an award of execution upon a judgment recited therein to have been before rendered, but the judgment itself was not produced. The plea of *nul tiel record*put in issue the judgment declared upon, and the plaintiff was bound to produce an exemplification of it in support of the affirmative of his plea. The judgment must be affirmed.

Per Curiam. Judgment affirmed.
# C_2004262EN.01005901.xml

| 23.10.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 262/59 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.10.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 262/59

---

Action brought on 2 September 2004 by FG Marine S.A. against the Commission of the European Communities

(Case T-360/04)

(2004/C 262/108)

Language of the case: French

An action against the Commission of the European Communities was brought before the Court of First Instance of the European Communities on 2 September 2004 by FG Marine S.A., established in Roissy (France), represented by Marie-Aline Michel, lawyer, with an address for service in Luxembourg.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | order the Commission, which incurred non-contractual liability by adopting Decision 2000/513/EC of 8 September 1999 on aid granted by France to Stardust Marine (OJ 1999 L 206, p. 6), to compensate the applicant and to find that the compensation to which it is legitimately entitled may not be lower than FF 200 000 000 (EUR 30 489 803.44). |
| --- | --- |

—

order the Commission, which incurred non-contractual liability by adopting Decision 2000/513/EC of 8 September 1999 on aid granted by France to Stardust Marine (OJ 1999 L 206, p. 6), to compensate the applicant and to find that the compensation to which it is legitimately entitled may not be lower than FF 200 000 000 (EUR 30 489 803.44).

Pleas in law and main arguments:

The applicant company in the present case, a majority partner in Stardust Marine, submits that the Community incurred non-contractual liability arising from the losses it claims to have suffered as a result of the Commission's decision of 8 September 1999, which declared incompatible with the common market the capital increases, advances on current account and recapitalisations effected within Stardust Marine by Consortium de Réalisation (CDR) as part of Crédit Lyonnais' restructuring plans, and ordered recovery thereof.

The recovery order contained in the aforementioned decision is the reason for Stardust Marine's having tabled its balance sheet, which deprived the applicant of the benefits of the restructuring it effected.

FG Marine states in support of its contentions that the decision contested in the present case disregarded the private investor criterion and was annulled by the Court in its judgment of 16 May 2002 in Case C-482/99 French Republic v Commission. (1) In addition, in adopting the decision, the Commission did not place itself in the context as it existed at the time and did not view Crédit Lyonnais and its subsidiaries as shareholders in Stardust Marine, but rather as its bankers. Lastly, the decision at issue here disregarded completely any prospects for recovery which Stardust Marine might have.

1

---

(1)  [2002] ECR I-4397.

1

---
# C_2004300EN.01003501.xml

| 4.12.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 300/35 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.12.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 300/35

---

Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Korkein oikeus by order of that court of 6 October 2004 in the case of Jan-Erik Anders Ahokainen and Mati Leppik against Virallinen syttäjä

(Case C-434/04)

(2004/C 300/66)

Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the European Communities by order of the Korkein oikeus (Supreme Court) (Finland)) of 6 October 2004, which was received at the Court Registry on 11 October 2004, for a preliminary ruling in the case of Jan-Erik Anders Ahokainen and Mati Leppik against Virallinen syttäjä (Public Prosecutor).

The Korkein oikeus asks the Court of Justice to give a preliminary ruling on the following questions:

| 1. | Is Article 28 EC to be interpreted as precluding legislation of a Member State under which non-denatured ethyl alcohol of over 80 % (spirits) may be imported only by a person who has obtained a licence to do so? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Is Article 28 EC to be interpreted as precluding legislation of a Member State under which non-denatured ethyl alcohol of over 80 % (spirits) may be imported only by a person who has obtained a licence to do so?

| 2. | If the above question is answered in the affirmative, is the licence system to be regarded as permitted under Article 30 EC? |
| --- | --- |

2.

If the above question is answered in the affirmative, is the licence system to be regarded as permitted under Article 30 EC?

---
CERTIFICATE OF MERGER

                            PINNACLE MERGER SUB, INC.

                                      INTO

                           360 COMMUNICATIONS COMPANY

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

                     Pursuant to Section 251 of the General
                    Corporation Law of the State of Delaware

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


         360 Communications Company, a Delaware Corporation, hereby certifies as
follows  with  respect to the  merger of  Pinnacle  Merger  Sub,  Inc.  into 360
Communications Company (the "Merger"):

         FIRST:  The names of the  constituent  corporations  to the  Merger are
Pinnacle  Merger Sub,  Inc. and 360  Communications  Company.  Each  constituent
corporation is incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware.

         SECOND:  An  Agreement  and Plan of Merger,  dated as of March 16, 1998
(the "Merger Agreement"),  has been approved, adopted,  certified,  executed and
acknowledged by each  constituent  corporation in accordance with Section 251 of
the General Corporation Law of the State of Delaware.

         THIRD:  The name of the  surviving  corporation  of the  Merger is "360
Communications Company" (the "Surviving Corporation").

         FOURTH:  The Amended and  Restated  Certificate  of  Incorporation  and
Amended and Restated Bylaws of 360 Communications  Company in effect on the date
hereof shall be the  certificate of  incorporation  and by-laws of the Surviving
Corporation.

         FIFTH:  An  executed  copy of the  Merger  Agreement  is on file at the
principal place of business of the Surviving Corporation,  8725 W. Higgins Road,
Chicago, Illinois 60631.

         SIXTH:  A  copy  of the  Merger  Agreement  will  be  furnished  by the
Surviving  Corporation on request and without cost to any  stockholder of either
constituent corporation.

         SEVENTH:  That the Merger shall be effective as of 12:01 a.m.,  eastern
time, on July 1, 1998.

         IN WITNESS WHEREOF, 360 Communications  Company caused this Certificate
of Merger to be executed in its corporate  name by its President as of this 30th
day of June, 1998.

                                       360 COMMUNICATIONS COMPANY


                                       By:   /s/ Dennis E. Foster
                                                Dennis E. Foster
                                                President
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ENACTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the
annual report on Form 10-K/A of Hub International Limited (the "Company") dated April 26, 2007 containing the financial statements of the Company for the year ended December 31, 2006 (the "Report") filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof, I, Martin P. Hughes, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as enacted, certify pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



| | 1. | the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) 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 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.



|                                         |  |                        
|---------------------------------------- |  | -----------------------
|By:                                      |  | /S/    MARTIN P. HUGHES
|Martin P. Hughes Chief Executive Officer

Date: April 26, 2007
NRCS CONSERVATION PRACTICE EFFECTS - NETWORK DIAGRAM July 2021

Sprinkler System (442)

(New System)

C.2 (+/-) Income and 

income stability

(individuals and community)

Initial setting: Agricultural land where 

irrigation/chemigation is needed to enhance 

plant growth and/or to improve the efficiency 

of the current system.

Start

1. Installed sprinkler irrigation system. Sprinkler 

nozzles may be fixed in place, moved periodically, or 

moved continuously.

D.4 (+) Agrichemicals 

delivery to crop

D.2 (+) Water 

delivery to crop

D.5 (+) Erosion 

potential; 

(+) potential for 

deep 

percolation

I.8 (+) Agrichemical use 

efficiency

C.1 (+/-) Fish and wildlife habitat and 

biodiversity

C.3 (+/-) Quality of 

receiving waters

Nutrient Management (590)

Pest Management Conservation

System (595)

Residue and Tillage Management, 

Reduced Till (345)

Irrigation Water Management (449)

I.1 (-) Water for other 

downstream uses

D.3 (+) Cost of 

installation, 

operation, and 

maintenance

I.9 (-) 

Energy 

use

I.3 (+) Crop vigor 

and production

Irrigation Water 

Management (449)

D.1 (+/-) Water 

use potential

I.6 (+) Potential 

income 

I.7 (+/-) Net return

I.5 (+) Soil 

health

I.4 (+) 

Biomass

I.2 (+/-) 

Potential 

energy use

Residue and Tillage Management, 

No Till (329)

D. Direct effect

#. Created by practice

I. Indirect effect

C. Cumulative effect

Pathway

Notes:

Effects are qualified with a plus 

(+) or minus (-). These symbols 

indicate only an increase (+) or a 

decrease (-) in the effect upon 

the resource, not whether the 

effect is beneficial or adverse.

LEGEND

Mitigating practice

Associated practice
| 1.   | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and |
|----------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

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

| Date: April 30, 2010 | By:    | /s/ Mark E. Schwarz                                                           |
|----------------------|--------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                 | Name:  | Mark E. Schwarz                                                               |
|                 | Title: | Chief Executive Officer andChairman of the Board(Principal Executive Officer) |
# Forest Stand Improvement (Ac.) (666) Conservation Practice Standard

## Breadcrumb

-  Home 
-  Resources 
-  Forest Stand Improvement (Ac.) (666) Conservation Practice Standard 

Download the national conservation practice standard document and supporting documents for Forest Stand Improvement (Ac.) (666).

## National Standard Document

NOTICE - National conservation practice standards should not be used to plan, design or install a conservation practice. To find these documents at the local level, visit our Field Office Technical Guide website.

Conservation Practice Name (Units) (Code) (Date Issued)

Forest Stand Improvement (Ac.) (666) (11/22) Standard Document(47.69 KB)

###   Supporting Documents

Forest Stand Improvement (Ac.) (666) Overview(105.41 KB)

Forest Stand Improvement (Ac.) (666) CPPE(26.96 KB)

Forest Stand Improvement (Ac.) (666) Network Effects Diagram(81.34 KB)

## Conservation at Work: Forest Stand Improvement

This video explores how John Chandler in Camino, CA, is using this practice to thin his forest, improving its usability and reducing the risk of fire.

##   Additional Information

### Conservation Practice Standards

On this page find links to national conservation practice standards and supporting documents.
Learn More

### Conservation Practice Standards Information

Learn about the information provided in conservation practice standards and supporting documents, such as overviews, worksheets, and network effects diagrams.
Learn More
#### Lang, Appellant, vs. Industrial Commission and others, Respondents.

For the respondent Industrial Commission: *Orland S. Loomis,*attorney general, and *Mortimer Levitan,*assistant attorney general.

For the respondents Joseph Boehm and James Boehm: *Winter & Koehler*of Shawano.

For the respondents Employers Mutual Liability Insurance Company and Joseph Boehm, an individual, its insured: *Quarles Spence & Quarles,*attorneys, and *Kenneth Grubb*and *Arthur Larson*of counsel, all of Milwaukee.

*By the Court.*

Judgment affirmed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM CHILDTIME
LEARNING CENTERS, INC. FORM 10-Q/A NO. 1 FOR THE QUARTERLY PERIOD ENDED OCTOBER
10, 1997 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (AS RESTATED) 
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   OTHER
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                           APR-3-1998<F1>
<PERIOD-START>                             MAR-29-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               OCT-10-1997
<CASH>                                           4,010
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    2,838
<ALLOWANCES>                                       205
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 9,253
<PP&E>                                          43,387
<DEPRECIATION>                                   8,827
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  54,143
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            8,214
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        29,364
<OTHER-SE>                                         (1)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    54,143
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                50,067
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   46,617
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 (125)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 136
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  3,439
<INCOME-TAX>                                     1,325
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              2,114
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     2,114
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .39
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .39
<FN>
<F1>THIS AMENDMENT NO.1 TO THE REGISTRANT'S QUARTERLY REPORT ON FORM 10-Q FOR THE
QUARTERLY PERIOD ENDED OCTOBER 10, 1997 IS BEING PROVIDED TO AMEND ITEMS 1 AND
2 TO REFLECT THE PREVIOUSLY DISCLOSED RECOGNITION OF SCHEDULED RENT INCREASES
ON A STRAIGHT-LINE BASIS OVER THE TERM OF THE RELATED LEASE.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>