alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA No. 21

- 0598 Filed June 30, 2021
IN THE INTEREST OF A.S., A.S. and D.S., Minor Children, D.S., Father, Appellant,

________________________________________________________________ Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Sioux County, Daniel P. Vakulskas, District Associate Judge

.

A fa ther appeals the juvenile court’ s order regarding permanency review and removal

. AFFIRMED.

Jared Weber, Orange City, for appellant father. Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General and Mary A. Triick, Assistant Attorney General, for a ppellee State. Kelsey Bauerly Langel of Bauerly & Langel, P.L.C. , Le Mars, a ttorney and
g uardian ad l item for minor child ren

.

Considered by Doyle, P.J. , and Tabor and Mullins, JJ.2

MULLINS , Judge
. A father appeals the juvenile court ’ s order regarding permanency review and removal, alleging the district court erred in (1) not forcing a child to appear in violation of Iowa Code section 232.91 (202 0 ) and (2) finding clear and convincing evidence of imminent harm leading to removal. “We generally review [child

- in

need

- of

- assistance] proceedings and termination of parental rights proceedings de novo.” In re J.C. , 857 N.W.2d 495, 500 (Iowa 2014). Petitions o n appeal must “substantially comply with form 5 in rule 6.1401. ” Iowa R. App. P. 6.201(1)(d). Rule 6.1401

– Form 5 specifically directs the petition on appeal to “include supporting legal authority for each issue raised, including authority contrary to [th e] case, if known.” Accord Iowa R. App. P. 6.903(2)(g)(3) (requiring arguments in briefs to contain reasoning, citations to authorities, and references to pertinent parts of the record). The petition on appeal raises two issues, and each issue cites one code section the father alleges was violated. The father cites no case law or other legal authority. In the course of the “findings of fact or conclusions of law with which you disagree” section s of his petition he cites to no supporting legal authority for any part of his arguments. On the first issue, he complains the children were not forced to appear in violation of Iowa Code section 232.91. His argument focuses on his right under section 232.91 to have them appear. He cites no authority in suppor t of his apparent claim that section affords him such a right. Thus, he has waived that issue. See Iowa R s . App. P. 6.201(1)(d), .903(2)(g)(3) , .1401

– Form 5. On the second issue, other than the bare citation to section 232.95, he cites no legal authority in support of the arguments he asserts concerning burden of3

proof or imminent risk of physical harm. 1 We find the father has waived this issue as well. See I owa R. App. P. 6.201(1)(d), .903(2)(g)(3), .1401

– Form 5. We affirm

. AFFIRMED.

1 In comparison, the State’s response to the petition cites case law and statutes in support of its response.
# C_2005129EN.01000201.xml

| 26.5.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 129/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.5.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 129/2

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.3543 — PKN Orlen/Unipetrol)

(2005/C 129/02)

(Text with EEA relevance)

On 20 April 2005, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | from the Europa competition web site (http://europa.eu.int/comm/competition/mergers/cases/). This web site provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

from the Europa competition web site (http://europa.eu.int/comm/competition/mergers/cases/). This web site provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website under document number 32005M3543. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law. (http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/lex) |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website under document number 32005M3543. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law. (http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/lex)

---
Conservation Stewardship Program - Grassland Conservation Initiative Fiscal Year 2024 United States Department of Agriculture

Natural Resources Conservation Service

Code Practice Component Units Unit Cost

E300GCI Grassland Conservation Initiative Grassland Conservation Initiative Activity AC $18.00

CSP-Grassland Conservation Itiative Page 1 of 1 Oklahoma - Fiscal Year 2024
```

[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 15 (Tuesday, January 24, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 3544]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-1321]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Meeting and Webinar on the Active Traffic and Demand Management 
and Intelligent Network Flow Optimization Operational Concepts; Notice 
of Public Meeting

AGENCY: Research and Innovative Technology Administration, U.S. 
Department of Transportation.

ACTION: Notice.

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

    The U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT) Intelligent 
Transportation System Joint Program Office (ITS JPO) will host a series 
of free public meetings and webinars to obtain stakeholder input on the 
Active Traffic and Demand Management (ADTM) and Intelligent Network 
Flow Optimization (INFLO) operational concepts. The ADTM meeting is 
scheduled for February 7, 2012, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. followed by the 
INFLO meeting on February 8, 2012, 8:30 to 4:30 p.m. The location for 
both meetings is the Hall of States, 444 North Capitol Street NW., 
Washington, DC 20001, (202) 624-5490.
    Persons planning to attend any part of the public meetings and/or 
webinars should register by January 31, 2012 using the following link: 
http://www.itsa.org/index.php?option=com_forme&fid=7. For additional 
questions, please contact Tyler Messa at tmessa@itsa.org.

Background

    INFLO is a collection of high-priority transformative applications 
identified by the USDOT's Mobility program that relate to improving 
roadway throughput and reducing crashes through the use of frequently 
collected and rapidly disseminated multi-source data drawn from 
connected travelers, vehicles, and infrastructure. The program's goal 
is to support the research and refinement of the INFLO bundle of 
applications and the potential deployment of an operational system.
    ATDM involves market-ready technologies and innovative operational 
approaches for managing traffic congestion within the existing 
infrastructure. The vision for ATDM research is to allow transportation 
agencies to increase traffic flow, improve travel time reliability, and 
optimize available capacity throughout the transportation network.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on the 18th day of January 2012.
John Augustine,
Managing Director, ITS Joint Program Office.
[FR Doc. 2012-1321 Filed 1-23-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-HY-P
```
```

[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 38 (Friday, February 26, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Page 9927]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-04218]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Notice of Opportunity for Public Comment on Disposal of Airport 
Property at Berlin Regional Airport in Milan, NH

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Request for public comments.

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

SUMMARY: Under the provisions of Title 49, U.S.C. Section 47153(d), 
notice is being given that the FAA is considering a request from Berlin 
Regional Airport in Milan, NH to dispose of a parcel of land 
approximately 7.0 acres at Berlin Regional Airport on Milan, NH.
    The subject parcel is currently undeveloped and is not contiguous 
to the airport proper. The land is physically separated from the main 
airport property by State Route 16 and has no aviation development 
potential. The airport has been approached by the abutting land owner 
to purchase the property to expand his commercial property. The funds 
from the sale of the property, which has been valued at Fair Market 
Value, will be deposited into the Airport's dedicated fund and will be 
used for continued operation and maintenance of the airport.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before March 28, 2016.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments using any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov, and follow the instructions on providing comments.
     Fax: 202-493-2251.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket 
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W 12-140, 1200 New 
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: Deliver to mail address above between 9 
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    Interested persons may inspect the request and supporting documents 
by contacting the FAA at the address listed under FOR FURTHER 
INFORMATION CONTACT.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Jorge E. Panteli, Compliance and 
Land Use Specialist, Federal Aviation Administration New England Region 
Airports Division, 1200 District Avenue, Burlington, Massachusetts, 
Telephone 781-238-7618.

    Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on February 16, 2016.
Mary T. Walsh,
Manager, Airports Division.
[FR Doc. 2016-04218 Filed 2-25-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE P
```
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1




                             CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT
                          CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS


TIB Financial Corp.
Key Largo, Florida


We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference of our report dated
February 19, 1999, relating to the consolidated financial statements of TIB
Financial Corp. and subsidiaries included in the Company's Annual Report on Form
10-K as of and for the year ended December 31, 1998, in the Registration
Statement on Form S-8 pertaining to the TIB Financial Corp. Incentive Stock
Option Plan and Nonstatutory Stock Option Plan as Amended.





                                               /s/   BDO Seidman, LLP
                                              --------------------------
                                              BDO Seidman, LLP




Duluth, Georgia
March 26, 1999
#### Will of Deterville: Barrett and another, Appellants, vs. Shemick and another, Respondents.

For the appellants: *Minaban, McCormick & Thiele*of Green Bay.

For the respondents : *Evans & Merrill*of Green .Bay.

*By the Court.*

Judgment affirmed; the taxable costs of both parties to be paid out of the estate.
Exhibit 32.1

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

Each of the undersigned hereby certifies, in his capacity as an officer of Channell Commercial Corporation (the "Company"), for purposes of 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of his knowledge:



Date:
March 4, 2004

|                                                                                                       |  | 
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ |  | 
|/s/WILLIAM H. CHANNELL, JR.Name: William H. Channell, Jr.
Title: President and Chief Executive Officer |  | 
|/s/THOMAS LIGUORIName: Thomas Liguori
Title: Chief Financial Officer                                   |  | 

---

QuickLinks
### Regulatory Evaluation

Docket No. FAA- 

### 2013-0882 Directorate Identifier: 

### 2013-NE-29 -AD

If you make changes to the values in the table below, you must ensure the totals update accordingly. If

they do not, click (or Tab) into and then out of the changed cell

.

Estimated Costs:

Action

(e.g., Inspection,

replacement)

Do not include oncondition costs here Costs per Product (e.g., aircraft, engine,

propeller, appliance)

Work-hours

(include

access, testing,

and close-up) Labor

cost

(@$85/h

our) Parts Cost Total Costs

(labor +

parts) Number of

U.S.

Registered

Products Total Cost

for U.S. Fleet



### BR700 FMU

replacement 6 .0 $ 510.00 $293,960 $294,470.00 

### 24 $7,067,280.0

0

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 

### 0 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 

### 0 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 

### 0 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 

### 0 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 

### 0 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 

### 0 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 

### 0 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00



### The known number of products in compliance:

Total Costs of compliance for U.S. fleet: $7,067,280



### Costs covered under warranty ( if known ) $

On-Condition Costs:

Action

(e.g., Inspection,

replacement) Work-hours

(include access,

testing, and closeup) Labor cost

(@$85/hour) Parts Cost Cost per Product

$ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00



### Special considerations for Economic Analysis (Use this field to explain anything in the Estimated Costs table

that was assumed or might not be obvious. This field can also be used to explain warranty costs) 

### : 

### ASE Estimate

based on COS database and OEM FMU cost

### Executive Order 12866:

Could the AD be considered a “significant regulatory action”?

YES* NO

*Explanation:

DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures:

Is the AD significant?

YES* NO

*Explanation:

Regulatory Flexibility Act:

Will the AD have a significant economic impact on a s ubstantial number of small entities? Explain for

either a Yes or No answer.

YES NO

Explanation:

Intrastate Aviation in Alaska:

This AD could affect intrastate aviation in Alaska. Is it appropriate to include specific requirements for

aircraft operated in Alaska where aviation might be the only mode of transportation?

YES* NO



### * Explanation 

### :
#### Estate of Shinoe: Shinoe, Claimant, Respondent, vs. Estate of Shinoe and another, Appellants.

For the appellants : *Kopp & Brunckhorst*of Platteville.

For the respondent: *Carthew & Meyer*of Lancaster.

*By the Court.*— Judgment affirmed.
# CropFlex - Version 1

## Breadcrumb

-  Home 
-  Resources 
-  CropFlex - Version 1 

CropFlex is a management system for irrigated crops. The goal of CropFlex is to provide irrigation and fertility management advice to assist farmers in maintaining or increasing yields while minimizing the potential of leaching nitrates.

### Download Software

              - CropFlex_2005.msi
# C_2005106EN.01002103.xml

| 30.4.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 106/21 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.4.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 106/21

---

Removal from the register of Case C-69/04 (1)

1

(2005/C 106/43)

(Language of the case: Italian)

(Language of the case: Italian)

By order of 4 February 2005, the President of the Court of Justice of the European Communities has ordered the removal from the register of Case C-69/04 (Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale di Civitavecchia (Italy)): Ligabue Gate Gourmet Roma SpA, in liquidation v LSG Sky Chefs SpA. and European Avia Service SpA v Abela Italia SpA.

---

(1)  OJ C 94 of 17.04.2004.

1

---
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.1

                 CERTIFICATION OF JANICE P. ANDERSON 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 of Onyx Software Corporation (the Company)
on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2005, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), I, Janice P. Anderson, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 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.

Date: March 14, 2006                         /s/ JANICE P. ANDERSON
                                             ----------------------
                                             Janice P. Anderson
                                             Chief Executive Officer,
                                             President and Chairman of the Board
# C_2005115EN.01002301.xml

| 14.5.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 115/23 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.5.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 115/23

---

Action brought on 4 February 2005 by SP Entertainment Development GmbH against the Commission of the European Communities

(Case T-44/05)

(2005/C 115/44)

Language of the case: German

An action against the Commission of the European Communities was brought before the Court of First Instance of the European Communities on 4 February 2005 by SP Entertainment Development GmbH, Norderfriedrichskoog (Germany), represented by C. Demleitner, lawyer.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul Commission Decision D/57536 of 20 October 2004; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul Commission Decision D/57536 of 20 October 2004;

| — | order the Commission to pay the necessary costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the Commission to pay the necessary costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In the contested decision the Commission called upon Germany to reclaim a loan which was granted to a predecessor company of the applicant by an associated company of the City of Bremen. The applicant claims that this decision was based on the unfounded assumption of the Commission that the loan in question had not yet been repaid. According to the applicant, repayment had already been made by means of transfer of a stake in the company to which the loan was granted to the company which granted the loan. This repayment by means of ‘payment instead of performance’ does not constitute State aid for the purposes of Article 87(1) EC that is contrary to Community law since the value of the assigned stake amounts at least to the sum of the loan. Additionally, interest was paid up to 31 December 2003. From this date the applicant did not have to pay any interest since the transfer of the stake was delayed due to reasons for which the applicant was not responsible.

---
November 2022

Natural Resources Conservation Service

Helping People Help the Land 

USDA is an equal opportunity provider, employer, and lender.

Conservation Practice Overview

Early Successional Habitat Development/Management (Code 647) 

Early successional habitat development/management

involves manipulating a stand of plants to create and

maintain early successional attributes that benefit desired

wildlife and/or natural communities. 

Practice Information 

Ecological succession is a term used to describe the

predictable changes that take place in an ecological community following disturbance. After a site is

disturbed the composition of plants and animals changes over time. The habitat associated with the

early stages of succession is, by nature, temporary. Vegetation management is generally required to

maintain the wildlife and other ecological benefits unique to the early stages of succession. This

practice increases plant community diversity and provides habitat for early successional plant and

animal species. This is usually accomplished by periodic vegetative disturbance, which may be

mechanical, chemical, biological, or a combination of these techniques. 

Conservation benefits may include but are not limited to: 

• Creation of a desired plant community. 

• Reduced soil erosion and sedimentation. 

• Iimproved water quality. 

• Increased streamflow. 

• Improved wildlife habitat. 

• Improved forage. 

• Reduced wildfire hazard. 

Common Associated Practices 

Early Successional Habitat Development/Management (647) is commonly applied with conservation

practices such as Field Borders (386), Forage Harvest Management (511), Land Clearing (460),

Integrated Pest Management (595), Tree/Shrub Establishment (612), and Upland Wildlife Habitat

Management (645). 

For further information, contact your local NRCS field office.
<PAGE>





                                                                    Exhibit 23.1

            CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

The Board of Directors
Onyx Software Corporation:

We consent to the incorporation by reference in registration statements (Nos.
333-72235, 333-55414, 333-63214, 333-115854 and 333-127310) on Form S-8 and
registration statements (Nos. 333-50428, 333-103230, 333-105769 and 333-115853)
on Form S-3 of Onyx Software Corporation of our reports dated March 13, 2006,
with respect to the consolidated balance sheets of Onyx Software Corporation and
subsidiaries as of December 31, 2005 and 2004, and the related consolidated
statements of operations, shareholders' equity and comprehensive loss, and cash
flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 2005 and
the related financial statement schedule, management's assessment of the
effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting as of December 31,
2005 and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting as of
December 31, 2005 and the effectiveness of Internal control over financial
reporting as of December. 31, 2004, which reports appear in the December 31,
2005 annual report on Form 10-K of Onyx Software Corporation.

/s/ KPMG LLP

Seattle, Washington
March 13, 2006