alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 73 (Wednesday, April 16, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 18589-18590]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-9739]


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

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Office of the Secretary


Defense Science Board Task Force on Deep Attack Weapons Mix Study 
(DAWMS), Phase II

ACTION: Notice of advisory committee meetings.

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

SUMMARY: The Defense Science Board Task Force on Deep Attack Weapons 
Mix Study (DAWMS), Phase II will meet in closed session on April 24, 
1997 at the Pentagon, Arlington, Virginia.
    The mission of the Defense Science Board is to advise the Secretary 
of Defense through the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and 
Technology on scientific and technical matters as they affect the 
perceived needs of the Department of Defense. At this meeting the Task 
Force will develop an independent assessment of the analytic

[[Page 18590]]

tools and models employed in the DoD internal DAWMS effort. 
Specifically, the Task Force will (1) assess the analysis developed in 
part one of the study, (2) evaluate the soundness of the analytic 
approach proposed for part two, and (3) review the alternatives--
developed in part two to ensure that they are balanced and 
representative.
    In accordance with Section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee 
Act, P.L. No. 92-463, as amended (5 U.S.C. App. II, (1994)), it has 
been determined that this DSB Task Force meeting concerns matters 
listed in 5 U.S.C. Sec. 552b(c)(1) (1994), and that accordingly this 
meeting will be closed to the public.

    Dated: April 10, 1997.
L.M. Bynum,
Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
[FR Doc. 97-9739 Filed 4-15-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5000-04-M
March 19, 2013

Brian E. Foont, Esq. Counsel for Mesa Airlines, Inc. The Foont Law Firm, LLC 11909 Reynolds Avenue Potomac, MD 20854

Dear Mr. Foont:

This is in response to your February 22, 2013 letter sent to the public docket (No. FAA-2013-0200) petitioning the Federal Avia tion Administration on behalf of Mesa Airlines, Inc., for an exemption from § 121.803(c)(3) of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR). That exemption, if granted, would provide relief from the requirement to include Dextrose in an Emergency Medical Kit (EMK).

On March 14, 2013, the FAA issued Exemption No. 10721 (copy enclosed) to Airlines for America, National Air Carrier Association, Re gional Airline Association, its members, and similarly situated air carriers.

Because the relief you seek is now covered under Exemption No. 10721, we will take no further action on your petition.

Sincerely,

/s/ Ida M. Klepper Manager, Airmen and Airspace Rules Division

Enclosure
# C_2021232EN.01007501.xml

| 16.6.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 232/75 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.6.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 232/75

---

P9_TA(2019)0063

Nomination of a member of the Court of Auditors — Alex Brenninkmeijer

European Parliament decision of 26 November 2019 on the nomination of Alex Brenninkmeijer as a Member of the Court of Auditors (C9-0126/2019 — 2019/0813(NLE))

(Consultation)

(2021/C 232/18)

The European Parliament,

| — | having regard to Article 286(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Council consulted Parliament (C9-0126/2019), |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to Article 286(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Council consulted Parliament (C9-0126/2019),

| — | having regard to Rule 129 of its Rules of Procedure, |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to Rule 129 of its Rules of Procedure,

| — | having regard to the report of the Committee on Budgetary Control (A9-0028/2019), |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to the report of the Committee on Budgetary Control (A9-0028/2019),

| A. | whereas Parliament’s Committee on Budgetary Control proceeded to evaluate the credentials of the nominee, in particular in view of the requirements laid down in Article 286(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union; |
| --- | --- |

A.

whereas Parliament’s Committee on Budgetary Control proceeded to evaluate the credentials of the nominee, in particular in view of the requirements laid down in Article 286(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union;

| B. | whereas at its meeting of 12 November 2019 the Committee on Budgetary Control heard the Council’s nominee for membership of the Court of Auditors; |
| --- | --- |

B.

whereas at its meeting of 12 November 2019 the Committee on Budgetary Control heard the Council’s nominee for membership of the Court of Auditors;

| 1. | Delivers a favourable opinion on the Council’s nomination of Alex Brenninkmeijer as a Member of the Court of Auditors; |
| --- | --- |

1.

| 2. | Instructs its President to forward this decision to the Council and, for information, to the Court of Auditors, the other institutions of the European Union and the audit institutions of the Member States. |
| --- | --- |

2.

---
#### State v. McWilliams

105,292

06/14/13

Denied. ...

Unpublished
xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?


C\_2019011EN.01000801.xml


| | | | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 11.1.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 11/8 |

---

Prior notification of a concentration

(Case M.9170 — EPIC SNCF Mobilités/Ceetrus/JV)

Candidate case for simplified procedure

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2019/C 11/05)

1.

On 21 December 2018, the Commission received notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 [(1)](#ntr1-C_2019011EN.01000801-E0001).

This notification concerns the following undertakings:

| | |
| --- | --- |
| — | SNCF Mobilités (France), controlled by the French State, |

| | |
| --- | --- |
| — | Ceetrus France (‘Ceetrus’, France), controlled by the holding company Suraumarché. |

SNCF Mobilités and Ceetrus acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) and 3(4) of the Merger Regulation joint control of a single-purpose semi-public company (société d’économie mixte à opération unique — SEMOP) called ‘Gare du Nord 2024’, the purpose of which is to execute a concession contract and an agreement for temporary occupation of publicly-owned property constituting rights in rem, authorising the SEMOP to occupy areas in stations used for activities of shops and services.

The concentration is accomplished by way of purchase of shares in a newly created company constituting a joint venture.

2.

The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:

—   SNCF Mobilités: transport of passengers and goods and, through its branch Gares & Connexions, management and development of the 3 000 French passenger stations,

—   Ceetrus: mixed real estate development.

3.

On preliminary examination, the Commission finds that the notified transaction could fall within the scope of the Merger Regulation. However, the final decision on this point is reserved.

Pursuant to the Commission Notice on a simplified procedure for treatment of certain concentrations under Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 [(2)](#ntr2-C_2019011EN.01000801-E0002) it should be noted that this case is a candidate for treatment under the procedure set out in the Notice.

4.

The Commission invites interested third parties to submit to it their possible observations on the proposed operation.

Observations must reach the Commission no later than 10 days following the date of publication of this notification. The following reference should always be specified:

M.9170 — EPIC SNCF Mobilités/Ceetrus/JV

Observations can be sent to the Commission by email, by fax, or by post. Please use the contact details below:

| |
| --- |
| Email: COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu |
| Fax +32 22964301 |
| Postal address: |
| European Commission |
| Directorate-General for Competition |
| Merger Registry |
| 1049 Bruxelles/Brussel |
| BELGIQUE/BELGIË |

---

[(1)](#ntc1-C_2019011EN.01000801-E0001)  [OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1](http://publications.europa.eu/resource/oj/JOL_2004_024_R_TOC) (the ‘Merger Regulation’).

[(2)](#ntc2-C_2019011EN.01000801-E0002)  [OJ C 366, 14.12.2013, p. 5](http://publications.europa.eu/resource/oj/JOC_2013_366_R_TOC).

---
#### Lingenfelter v. State

108,459

02/12/14

Denied

Unpublished
# C_2019352EN.01000701.xml

| 18.10.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 352/7 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

18.10.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 352/7

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.9529 — BC Partners/Vista Equity Partners/Advanced Computer Software Group)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2019/C 352/07)

On 26 September 2019, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). 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:

| — | in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website 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 (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32019M9529. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32019M9529. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

---
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### A PPEAL 

### O F 

### T HE 

### S TATE 

### O F 

### F LORIDA

F OURTH D ISTRICT

GARY SIFFORT

, Appellant,

v.

DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT,

and VALENCIA JOSEPH, Appellee s

.

No. 4D2023

- 2992

[ July 3, 2024 ]

Appeal from the State of Florida, Department of Revenue

, Child Support Program, L.T. Case No. 2001812161; CC Depository No. 06230009647CA

.

Gary Siffort, Oakland Park, pro se.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee

, and Toni C. Bernstein, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Tallahasse e, for appellee s

.

P ER C URIAM

.

Affirmed

.

C IKLIN
, L EVINE and C ONNER

, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 62 (Tuesday, April 1, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 15474]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-8152]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
[Docket No. RP97-238-001]


Mojave Pipeline Company; Notice of Compliance Filing

March 26, 1997.
    Take notice that on March 21, 1997, Mojave Pipeline Company 
(Mojave), pursuant to the Commission's order dated February 26, 1997 at 
Docket No. RP97-238-000, tendered for filing and acceptance the 
following revised tariff sheet to its FERC Gas Tariff, First Revised 
Volume No. 1, to become effective December 31, 1996:

Substitute First Revised Sheet No. 111

    Mojave states that it has revised this sheet to state that if 
Mojave charges less than the maximum rate for transportation service 
provided under Rate Schedules included in Mojave's FERC Gas Tariff, 
Mojave will discount the GRI surcharge first, followed by the base 
rate.
    Any person desiring to protest said filing should file a protest 
with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, N.E., 
Washington, D.C. 20426, in accordance with Section 385.211 of the 
Commission's Rules and Regulations. All such protests should be filed 
in accordance with Section 154.210 of the Commission's Regulations. 
Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the 
appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants 
parties to the proceeding. Copies of this filing are on file with the 
Commission and are available for public inspection in the Public 
Reference Room.
Lois D. Cashell,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 97-8152 Filed 3-31-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
##### 



Exhibit 10.24
 LONG TERM INCENTIVE COMPENSATION PLAN AND AGREEMENT
WITH DAVID W. DUGGAR
  RECITALS:
    ARTICLE I
 EMPLOYMENT
 Section 1.1 Employment




---



##### 



ARTICLE II
 BENEFIT
 Section 2.1 Amount and Payment of Long Term Incentive Compensation
  th
 - 2 -




---



##### 



In addition, notwithstanding anything in this Agreement to the contrary,
in the event Participants employment with the Company terminates for any reason whatsoever prior
to September 30, 2008 (other than due to death or permanent disability), including, but not
limited to, termination by the Company without cause, Participant shall forfeit all rights
hereunder to any payment, including any amounts that have otherwise vested.
 Section 2.2 Accretion to Account
  Section 2.3 No Right to Specific Assets
  - 3 -




---



##### 



ARTICLE III
 MISCELLANEOUS
 Section 3.1 Governing Law
  Section 3.2 Void Language
  Section 3.3 Agreement Binding
  Section 3.4 Amendment
  Section 3.5 Claims for Benefit
  Section 3.6 Request for Review of Denial of Claim
  - 4 -




---



##### 



Section 3.7 Decision on Review of Denial of Claim
  Section 3.8 No Assignment
  Section 3.9 Entire Agreement
  - 5 -




---



##### 



STANLEY MARTIN COMPANIES, INC.By:
    
    /s/ Steven B. AlloyName: Steven B. AlloyTitle: PresidentPARTICIPANT/s/ David W. DuggarDavid W. Duggar
 - 6 -
### THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

13

- 21

- 00376

- CR
Ex parte Omar Alonso

On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 1 of Hidalgo County , Texas Trial Cause No. CR

- 16

- 05952

- A

JUDGMENT THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, having considered this cause on appeal , concludes that the judgment of the trial court should be reversed and the cause remanded to the trial court. The Court orders the judgment of the trial court REVERSED and REMANDED for further proceedings in accordance with its opinion

. We further order t his decision certified below for observance. April 6 , 2023
# C_2019210EN.01001901.xml

| 21.6.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 210/19 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

21.6.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 210/19

---

Prior notification of a concentration

(Case M.9406 — Lone Star — Stark Group/Saint-Gobain BDD)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2019/C 210/10)

1.

This notification concerns the following undertakings:

| — | Lone Star (USA), |
| --- | --- |

—

Lone Star (USA),

| — | Stark Group Holding Germany GmbH (Germany) (‘Stark’), controlled by Lone Star, |
| --- | --- |

—

Stark Group Holding Germany GmbH (Germany) (‘Stark’), controlled by Lone Star,

| — | Saint-Gobain Building Distribution Deutschland GmbH (Germany) (‘SGBDD’), belonging to Compagnie de Saint-Gobain S.A. (France). |
| --- | --- |

—

Saint-Gobain Building Distribution Deutschland GmbH (Germany) (‘SGBDD’), belonging to Compagnie de Saint-Gobain S.A. (France).

Lone Star, through its subsidiary Stark, indirectly acquires within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation control of the whole of SGBDD.

The concentration is accomplished by way of purchase of shares.

2.

| — | Lone Star is a private equity firm that invests globally in real estate, equity, credit and other financial assets, |
| --- | --- |

—

Lone Star is a private equity firm that invests globally in real estate, equity, credit and other financial assets,

| — | Stark is a retailer and distributor of building materials, |
| --- | --- |

—

Stark is a retailer and distributor of building materials,

| — | SGBDD is a building materials merchant that operates a network of physical retail outlets in Germany and sells mostly third-party products to SME and larger construction companies and, to a smaller part, to private and DIY consumers. |
| --- | --- |

—

SGBDD is a building materials merchant that operates a network of physical retail outlets in Germany and sells mostly third-party products to SME and larger construction companies and, to a smaller part, to private and DIY consumers.

3.

On preliminary examination, the Commission finds that the notified transaction could fall within the scope of the Merger Regulation. However, the final decision on this point is reserved.

4.

Observations must reach the Commission not later than 10 days following the date of this publication. The following reference should always be specified:

M.9406 — Lone Star — Stark Group/Saint-Gobain BDD

Observations can be sent to the Commission by email, by fax, or by post. Please use the contact details below:

| Email: COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu |
| --- |
| Fax +32 22964301 |
| Postal address: |
| European Commission |
| Directorate-General for Competition |
| Merger Registry |
| 1049 Bruxelles/Brussel |
| BELGIQUE/BELGIË |

Email: COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu

Fax +32 22964301

Postal address:

European Commission

Directorate-General for Competition

Merger Registry

1049 Bruxelles/Brussel

BELGIQUE/BELGIË

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1 (the ‘Merger Regulation’).

1

---
|                                                                                                   
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                                   
|View History:  Monthly  Annual Download Data (XLS File)                                           
|View History:  Monthly  Annual                                                                     
|View History:  Monthly  Annual                                                                     
|View History:                                                                                      
|                                                                                                   
|Natural Gas Delivered to Consumers in South Carolina (Including Vehicle Fuel)  (Million Cubic Feet)
|                                                                                                   
|                                                                                                   
|Natural Gas Delivered to Consumers in South Carolina (Including Vehicle Fuel)  (Million Cubic Feet)
|                                                                                                   

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0  | Year-1  | Year-2  | Year-3  | Year-4  | Year-5  | Year-6  | Year-7  | Year-8  | Year-9 
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------- | ------- | ------- | ------- | ------- | ------- | ------- | ------- | ------- | -------
|1990's                                                                                                                            |         |         |         |         |         |         |         | 150,978 | 156,295 | 159,338
|2000's                                                                                                                            | 156,975 | 138,866 | 181,648 | 143,833 | 161,283 | 169,605 | 172,514 | 173,092 | 167,473 | 188,081
|2010's                                                                                                                            | 216,783 | 226,089 | 241,434 | 229,768 | 228,116 | 273,217 | 273,172 | 276,582 | 327,664 | 336,564
|2020's                                                                                                                            | 331,134 | 336,876 | 348,327 | 336,572 |         |         |         |         |         |        
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 7/31/2024                                                                                                          
|Next Release Date: 8/30/2024
Order entered July 23, 2015 

In The 

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-15-00831-CR 

No. 05-15-00832-CR 

ERIK MANUEL ORELLANO, Appellant 

V. 

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee 

On Appeal from the 363rd Judicial District Court 

Dallas County, Texas 

Trial Court Cause Nos. F13-57132-W, F15-23717-w 

ORDER 

Before Justices Francis, Lang-Miers, and Whitehill 

Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, we DIRECT the Clerk of this Court to issue 

the mandates in these appeals INSTANTER

/s/ MOLLY FRANCIS 

 JUSTICE
No. 12-5784.

#### Vondal *v.*Frink, Warden, et al.

C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.
Exhibit 32(b)

Certification of the CFO Pursuant to

18 U.S.C. Section 1350,

As Adopted Pursuant to

Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002*

This certification is provided
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, and accompanies the annual report on Form 10-K (the Form 10-K) for the year ended January 2, 2011 of Tim Hortons
Inc. (the Issuer).

I, Cynthia J. Devine, the Chief Financial Officer of the Issuer certify that, to the best of my knowledge:

(i) the Form 10-K fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or section 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m(a) or 78o(d)); and

(ii) the information contained in the Form 10-K fairly
presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Issuer.

Dated: February 25, 2011



/s/ CYNTHIA J. DEVINEName: Cynthia J. Devine




|* | This certification is being furnished as required by Rule 13a-14(b) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the Exchange Act) and Section 1350 of
Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code, and shall not be deemed filed for purposes of Section 18 of the Exchange Act or otherwise subject to the liability of that section. This certification shall not be deemed to be
incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933 or the Exchange Act, except to the extent that the Company specifically incorporates this certification therein by reference.
|- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

IN THE MATTER OF

JOSEPH S. CHIZIK :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 2427 Disciplinary Docket No. 3

Board File No. C1

- 17

- 287

(Supreme Court of New Jersey, D

- 76 September Term 2016)

Attorney Registration No. 24776

(Out of State)

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 1 st day of February , 201 8

, having failed to respond to a Notice

and Order directing him to provide reasons against the imposition of reciprocal

di scipline, Joseph S. Chizik is disbarred from the practice of law in the Commonwealth

of Pennsylvania. He shall comply with all the provisions of Pa.R.D.E. 217.
#### State v. Gould

105,637

07/30/13

Denied.

Unpublished