alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 34 (Friday, February 20, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Page 9267]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-03463]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-9922-98-Region 6]


Underground Injection Control Program; Hazardous Waste Injection 
Restrictions; Petition for Exemption Reissuance--Class I Hazardous 
Waste Injection; Lucite International, Inc. Beaumont Site, Nederland, 
TX

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of a final decision on a no migration petition 
reissuance.

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

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that a reissuance of an exemption to 
the land disposal Restrictions, under the 1984 Hazardous and Solid 
Waste Amendments to the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, has 
been granted to Lucite International, Inc. for two Class I hazardous 
injection wells located at their Beaumont site located in Nederland, 
TX. The company has adequately demonstrated to the satisfaction of the 
Environmental Protection Agency by the petition reissuance application 
and supporting documentation that, to a reasonable degree of certainty, 
there will be no migration of hazardous constituents from the injection 
zone for as long as the waste remains hazardous. This final decision 
allows the continued underground injection by Lucite, of the specific 
restricted hazardous wastes identified in this exemption reissuance, 
into Class I hazardous waste injection wells WDW-100 & 101 until 
December 31, 2030, unless EPA moves to terminate this exemption. 
Additional conditions included in this final decision may be reviewed 
by contacting the Region 6 Ground Water/UIC Section. A public notice 
was issued December 18, 2014. The public comment period closed on 
February 2, 2015. No comments were received. This decision constitutes 
final Agency action and there is no Administrative appeal. This 
decision may be reviewed/appealed in compliance with the Administrative 
Procedure Act.

DATES: This action is effective as of February 5, 2015.

ADDRESSES: Copies of the petition reissuance and all pertinent 
information relating thereto are on file at the following location: 
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 6, Water Quality Protection 
Division, Source Water Protection Branch (6WQ-S), 1445 Ross Avenue, 
Dallas, Texas 75202-2733.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Philip Dellinger, Chief Ground Water/
UIC Section, EPA--Region 6, telephone (214) 665-8324.

    Dated: February 5, 2015.
William K. Honker,
Director, Water Quality Protection Division.
[FR Doc. 2015-03463 Filed 2-19-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
# C_2005019EN.01003301.xml

| 22.1.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 19/33 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.1.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 19/33

---

Removal from the Register of Case T-259/99 (1)

1

(2005/C 19/69)

(Language of the case: Dutch)

(Language of the case: Dutch)

By order of 9 November 2004, the President of the Second Chamber (Extended Composition) of the Court of First Instance of the European Communities has ordered the removal from the Register of Case T-259/99, Tankstation Jagt B.V. v Commission of the European Communities.

---

(1)  OJ C 6 of 8.1.2000.

1

---
# Fourth Court of Appeals

**San Antonio, Texas**

JUDGMENT

No. 04

- 17

- 00487

- CV

Dawn JOURDAN

, Appellant

v.

Wallace T. JACOBS

, Appellee

From the 379th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2014

- CI

- 05596 Honorable Antonia Arteaga, Judge Presiding

BEFORE CHIEF JUSTICE MARION

, JUSTICE ANGELINI , AND JUSTICE RIOS

In accordance with this Court’s opinion of this date, the judgment of the trial court is

MODIFIED as follows:

It is ORDERED that “the principal amount due” be decreased from $24,743.25 to $6,022.62.

As modified, the judgment of the trial court is AFFIRMED. It is ORDERED that costs of appeal are taxed against the party incurring same.

SIGNED August 1, 2018.

_____________________________ Karen Angelini, Justice
EX-10.1





Exhibit 10.1


Fiscal Year 2009 Disk Drive Components Division Management Bonus Plan

of Hutchinson Technology Incorporated


     We have a fiscal year 2009 management bonus plan that covers executive officers and certain
other management-level employees of our Disk Drive Components Division. The plan is designed to
create an incentive for management of our Disk Drive Components Division to achieve goals that our
board of directors believes align with the interests of our long-term shareholders. The plan
design includes an annual corporate financial goal as well as
additional division strategic goals. Individual bonus targets, expressed as a percentage of base salary,
are approved for all executive officers by our board of directors upon the recommendation of the
board’s compensation committee.


     Fifty percent of the bonus target is dependent on our achievement of an annual corporate
financial goal, which is set giving consideration to both near- and long-term financial performance. For fiscal year 2009, earnings before taxes (EBT)
will be the corporate financial goal. The award amount to be paid based on EBT is determined
based on whether actual EBT for the fiscal year is above (subject to a ceiling, above which no
further amounts are awarded) or below (subject to a floor, below which no amounts are awarded) the
pre-established goal for EBT. In addition, a pre-established minimum threshold EBT must be
achieved in order for our chief executive officer and chief financial officer (both of
whom participate in this plan) to receive any bonus amount for fiscal year 2009.


     The
remainder of the bonus target is dependent on achievement of certain
division strategic goals in the areas of market position and business stature, long-term growth and
innovation, quality and service and manufacturing proficiency. As with the corporate financial
goal, the award amount to be paid based on these strategic goals is subject to a ceiling (above
which no further amounts are awarded) and a floor (below which no amounts are awarded) in relation
to achievement of certain pre-established thresholds. Fifty percent of the
annual cash incentive opportunity for executive officers who provide corporate support to both of
our business divisions is based on the achievement of division strategic goals, divided equally between
the strategic goals established by this plan and by our
Fiscal Year 2009 BioMeasurement Division Management Bonus Plan.


     The decision to pay bonuses is made annually by our board of directors upon the recommendation
of the compensation committee of our board. Bonuses are paid in cash in the first quarter of the
following fiscal year. The actual total bonus amount paid to any participant may not exceed 200%
of the participant’s bonus target, and the actual total bonus amounts paid to all participants
under this plan and under our Fiscal Year 2009 BioMeasurement Division Management Bonus
Plan may not exceed 25% of actual EBT for the fiscal year.
----

            COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 882/2006

of 15 June 2006         

concerning tenders notified in response to the invitation to tender for the export of common wheat issued in Regulation (EC) No 1059/2005

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1784/2003 of 29 September 2003 on the common organisation of the market in cereals (1), and in particular Article 13(3) thereof,

Whereas:

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

No action shall be taken on the tenders notified from 9 to 15 June 2006 in response to the invitation to tender for the refund for the export of common wheat issued in Regulation (EC) No 1059/2005.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on 16 June 2006.

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

Done at Brussels, 15 June 2006.

For the Commission

J. L. DEMARTY            

Director-General for Agriculture and Rural Development

----

(1)OJ L 270, 21.10.2003, p. 78. Regulation as amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 1154/2005 (OJ L 187, 19.7.2005, p. 11).

(2)OJ L 174, 7.7.2005, p. 15.

(3)OJ L 147, 30.6.1995, p. 7. Regulation as last modified by Regulation (EC) No 777/2004 (OJ L 123, 27.4.2004, p. 50).

----
Exhibit 32B

                            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 AutoInfo, Inc. (the "Company") on
Form 10-QSB for the quarter ending September 30, 2004 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
William Wunderlich, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to
18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 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 result of operations of the
Company.

A signed original of this written statement has been provided to the Company and
will be retained by the Company and furnished to the SEC or its staff upon
request.


/s/ William Wunderlich
----------------------
William Wunderlich
Chief Financial Officer
November 9, 2004


                                       21
An official website of the United States government         Here's how you know         
**Official websites use .gov**
A **.gov** website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
**Secure .gov websites use HTTPS**
 A **lock (lock )** or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Skip to main content (Press Enter).

National Security Agency/Central Security Service

Search
Search

Search

-  About    -  Leadership             
  -  Mission & Combat Support             
  -  Cybersecurity             
  -  Signals Intelligence             
  -  Central Security Service             
  -  Locations             
  -  Research             
  -  Diversity, Equity, Inclusion & Accessibility             
  -  Cybersecurity Collaboration Center      -  Collaborative Partnerships             
    -  Enduring Security Framework             
    -  DIB Cybersecurity Services             
    -  Standards and Certifications             
    -  Artificial Intelligence Security Center 
-  Press Room    -  Press Releases & Statements             
  -  News & Highlights             
  -  Declassification & Transparency Initiatives             
  -  Cybersecurity Advisories & Guidance             
  -  Telework and Mobile Security Guidance             
  -  DoD Microelectronics Guidance             
  -  Research Publications 
-  Careers    -  Unique Pathways             
  -  Innovation 
-  History    -  National Cryptologic Museum             
  -  Cryptologic History             
  -  National Cryptologic Memorial 

HomeHistoryCryptologic HistoryHistorical FiguresHistorical Figures View

# NSA Historical Figures

                Download            

# Sarah Botsai

"Sally" Botsai started work at NSA in 1957 shortly after her college graduation. She continued her education eventually earning her Ph.D. in International Relations in 1972. 

Dr. Botsai spent twelve years in Operations before she was selected for a tour as the NSA representative in the White House Situation Room. She was the first NSA woman to hold this position. After her two-year tour  she was asked to return as the Deputy Director of the White House Situation Room. She held this position until 1976. She also attended the National War College  again the first NSA woman to do so  graduating in 1977. 

Dr. Botsai received the Meritorious Civilian Service Award in 1976 and the Director's Distinguished Service Medal in 1998. 

**                    SHARE                

**                    PRINT                

Biographyhistorical figureSarah Botsaiwomen in cryptology
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE BALANCE
SHEET AT MARCH 31, 1997 (UNAUDITED) AND THE STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS FOR THE
QUARTERLY PERIOD ENDED MARCH 31, 1997 (UNAUDITED) AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS INCLUDED AS PART OF ITS
QUARTERLY REPORT ON FORM 10-Q FOR THE PERIOD MARCH 31, 1997
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                         507,946
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  207,617
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               715,563
<PP&E>                                       2,794,369
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,939,647
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,570,285
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                   1,570,285
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,570,285
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               107,741
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   10,092
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                144,666
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   144,666
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
AGREEMENT FOR SALE OF SHARES
                          ----------------------------


         This Agreement is made at Calcutta on this 29th day of May, 2000,

         between

         Mr. Anup Das son of Mr. Sasanka S. Das resident of GD 337, Salt Lake,
Calcutta 700 091 hereinafter called the Seller (which expression shall unless
repugnant to law and the context or meaning of the agreement be deemed to mean
and include its nominees, legal heirs, executors, administrators and assigns and
successors in interest) being the party of the FIRST PART

         AND

         NetGuru India Pvt. Ltd., a company incorporated under the Indian
Companies Act having its Principal office at E2-4, Block GP, Sector-V, Calcutta
900 091 hereinafter called the Purchaser (which expression shall unless
repugnant to law and the context or meaning of the agreement be deemed to mean
and include its nominees, legal heirs, executors, administrators and assigns and
successors in interest) being the party of the SECOND PART.

         Whereas the Seller is desirous of selling his 99,730 equity shares held
in Interra Global Limited and Purchaser has agreed to buy the same for a
consideration of INR 9,973,000.00 (Rupees Nine million nine seventy three
thousand only) on the following terms:

         1. That the 99,730 Equity Shares shall be transferred by the Seller to
the Purchaser for a consideration of INR 9,973,000.00 (Rupees nine million nine
hundred seventy three thousand only) for which Seller shall execute the share
transfer deeds and hand over the same along with original share certificates for
99,730 shares to the Purchaser at the time of receipt of the said consideration.

         2. That the said sale consideration of INR 9,973,000.00 shall be paid
and the transaction shall be closed in one or more lots but not later than 31st
July 2000.

         3. The Seller shall have no right, title, claim or interest whatsoever
in the aforesaid shares which, upon payment of the sale consideration, shall
absolutely belong to the Purchaser. The Purchaser shall then become the absolute
owner of the said Shares mentioned herein above.

         4. The Seller has relinquished all its rights, interests and title to
the aforesaid Shares.

<PAGE>

         AND IN WITNESS WHEREOF THE PARTIES (the Seller and the Purchaser)
hereto have signed this Agreement on the day, month and year first above written
at New Delhi.

         Signed and delivered by the Seller

         /s/ Anup Das
         ------------

         (ANUP DAS)
         Seller

         Signed and delivered by the Purchaser

         /s/ Gurudas Sarkar
         ------------------

         (GURUDAS SARKAR)
         CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER
         NETGURU INDIA PVT. LTD.

         Witness:

         1.       Shobha Rani Chaudhury
                  5/1 Radhanath Chowdhury Road
                  Calcutta - 700015

         2.       S.N. Swamy
                  BL-412 Greenview Apartments
                  Dum Dum Park, Calcutta

                                      -2-
#### Laugesen vs. Sanford and others, Respondents: W. S. Patterson Company, Appellant.

*March 12*

March *31, 1908.*

*Mechanic’s lien: Amendment of judgment.*

Where a judgment, in an action to foreclose a mechanic’s lien, was entered in accordance with the petition for lien, complaint, and proof made at the trial, which judgment was the identical one the court was asked to pronounce and which it intended to pronounce, and the record was made up accordingly, the court cannot at a subsequent term, more than a year after the rendition, modify it so as to exclude a part of the premises described therein and include other land.

Appeal from an order of the circuit court for Waupaca1 county: Ohas. M. Webb, Circuit Judge.

*Affirmed.*

*F. G.*Weed, for the appellant.

Eor the respondents the cause was submitted on the brief of *Oliver II. Fay.*

Kebwix, J.

This is an appeal from an order denying an application to amend the petition for lien, complaint, and judgment entered in a mechanic’s lien foreclosure. The motion was made after the term and more than a year after the rendition of judgment. The amendment asked is to modify the judgment and proceedings so as to exclude a part of the premises described in the judgment, claim for lien, and complaint, and include other land. The contention of appellant is that the premises are not properly described in the judgment and proceedings leading up to the judgment and therefore the court should so modify the judgment as to include other premises.

There is no question made in the case hut that judgment was entered in accordance with the claim for lien, complaint, and proof made on the trial. The court pronounced the *253identical judgment which it was asked to pronounce and which it intended to pronounce, and the record was made up accordingly. It was clear, therefore, that the court at a subsequent term, and more than a year after the rendition of the judgment, had no authority to modify it in the manner prayed for by appellant. It follows that the court below was right in denying the application.

*By the Gourt.*— The order of the court below is affirmed.
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not

be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 07-20100

Summary Calendar

ANNETTE LEWIS, Individually and as next friend of and as representative

of the estate of Toddrick Deon Lewis, deceased,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.

PAULINE IGWE, d/b/a/ Human Services Center, and HARRIS COUNTY

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION,

Defendants-Appellees.

Appeals from the United States District Court for the

Southern District of Texas

4:05-CV-03320

Before KING, DAVIS and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges..

PER CURIAM:*

Plaintiff, Annette Lewis, challenges the district court’s order granting

summary judgment to defendant in this § 1983 case. The district court agreed

with and accepted the magistrate judge’s recommendations, concluding that

plaintiff failed to produce summary judgment evidence to allow a fact finder to

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

October 26, 2007

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk
No. 07-20100

2

find a causal link between a custom or policy of Harris County Department of

Education (HCDE) and any violation of federal law suffered by plaintiff’s son.

Plaintiff’s 21-year- old sonToddrick Lewis was a special education student

attending school at HCDE’s ABC West campus in Houston, Texas. This is a

school for mentally retarded and emotionally disturbed students. Toddrick

grabbed a meat patty off the plate of another student, placed it whole in his

mouth and began to choke. Several staff members responded by performing the

Heimlich maneuver and made other efforts to dislodge the food from Toddrick’s

throat but, unfortunately, were unsuccessful, and he died.

We affirm the district court’s judgment for the following reasons:

1. We agree with the magistrate judge and district court that appellant

has failed to demonstrate a policy, practice, or custom enacted or known to the

HCDE board that was causally related to Toddrick’s injury and death. 

2. The district court did not err in declining to consider plaintiff’s

supplemental evidence that was nottendered to the magistrate judge before her

decision. Appellant never sufficiently explained her delay in obtaining and

submitting this evidence. See Freeman v. County of Bexar, 142 F.3d 848 (5th

Cir. 1998).

Therefore, for these reasons and those set forth in the careful November

2, 2006 Memorandum and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, we affirm

the district court judgment.

AFFIRMED.