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

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

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of the Interior

###### Bureau of Land Management

          - [LLCAC00000-L07770900-XZ0000]

# ACTION:

Notice of public meeting.

# SUMMARY:

In accordance with the Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA) and the Federal Advisory Committee Act of 1972 (FACA), the U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Central California Resource Advisory Council Off-Highway Vehicle (OHV) Subcommittee will meet as indicated below.

# DATES:

The Bureau of Land Management Central California Resource Advisory Council Off-Highway Vehicle Subcommittee will meet April 18, 2009, in the Merced County Board of Supervisors Board Chambers. The room is located on the third floor of the County Administration Building, 23rd and M streets (2222 M Street), Merced, CA. The meeting will run from about from 10 a.m. to noon. Members of the public are welcome to attend the meeting. The subcommittee will conduct organizational business and discuss OHV issues for the subcommittee to address.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

BLM Central California Public Affairs Officer David Christy, both at (916) 985-4474.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The twelve-member Central California RAC advises the Secretary of the Interior, through the BLM, on a variety of public land issues associated with public land management in the Central California. The RAC approved formation of an OHV Subcommittee in April 2007. The meeting is open to the public. Individuals who plan to attend and need special assistance such as sign language interpretation or other reasonable accommodations should contact the BLM as indicated above.

Dated: March 3, 2009.

David Christy,

Public Affairs Officer.

 [FR Doc. E9-5101 Filed 3-10-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310-40-P
**Exhibit 23.1****CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement No’s. 333-63637, 333-72134,333-72296, 333-130773 and 333-130774 on Form S-8 of Synergetics USA, Inc. (the “Company”) of ourreports dated October 12, 2007, on the consolidated financial statements of the Company for theyear ended July 31, 2007, management’s assessment of the effectiveness of the Company’s internalcontrol over financial reporting as of July 31, 2007 and the effectiveness of the Company’sinternal control over financial reporting as of July 31, 2007, which appear in the Company’s AnnualReport on Form 10-K for the year ended July 31, 2007./s/UHY LLPSt. Louis, Missouri
Description of compensation arrangements for non-employee directors



 Exhibit 10.13 
 DESCRIPTION OF COMPENSATION ARRANGEMENTS FOR NON-EMPLOYEE DIRECTORS 
 For the period
beginning on the date of the 2010 Annual Meeting until the 2011 Annual Meeting, directors who are not employees of State Street or the Bank received the following compensation: 

 

	 	•	 	 Annual retainer—$75,000, payable at their election in shares of the Registrant’s common stock or in cash; 



 

	 	•	 	 Meeting fees—$1,500 for each Board and committee meeting attended, payable in cash; 



 

	 	•	 	 A deferred stock award in an amount equal to $110,000 divided by the closing price of the stock on May 19, 2010 (together with additional stock
amounts to reflect dividend and distribution amounts paid during deferral); 


  

	 	•	 	 An additional annual retainer for the Lead Director of $75,000, payable at his or her election in shares of the Registrant’s common stock or in
cash; 


  

	 	•	 	 An additional annual retainer for the Examining and Audit Committee Chair and Risk and Capital Committee Chair of $25,000, payable at his or her
election in shares of the Registrant’s common stock or in cash; 


  

	 	•	 	 An additional annual retainer for each other Committee Chair of $15,000, payable at their election in shares of the Registrant’s common stock or
in cash; and 


  

	 	•	 	 An additional annual retainer for each member of the Examining and Audit Committee and the Risk and Capital Committee, other than the Chair, of $10,000
payable at their election in shares of the Registrant’s common stock or in cash. 


 Pursuant to State Street’s
Deferred Compensation Plan for Directors, directors may elect to defer the receipt of 50% or 100% of their (i) retainers, (ii) meeting fees, and/or (iii) annual award of shares of common stock. Directors also may elect to receive all
of their retainers in cash or shares of common stock. Directors who elect to defer the cash payment of their retainers and/or meeting fees may also make notional investment elections with respect to such deferrals, with a choice of one or more of
five notional investment fund returns, including one that tracks the performance of State Street common stock. To the extent the amounts are deferred, they will be paid (i) on the date elected by the director, either the date of his or her
termination of service on the Board or a future date specified, and (ii) in the form elected by the director as either a lump sum or in installment over a two- to ten-year period.
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 48 (Friday, March 13, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 10995]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-5503]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

United States Mint


Notification of Pricing for United States Mint 2009 Lincoln Cent 
Two-Roll Set

ACTION: Notification of Pricing for United States Mint 2009 Lincoln 
Cent Two-Roll Set.

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

SUMMARY: The United States Mint is announcing the price of the 2009 
Lincoln Cent Two-Roll Set.
    The 2009 Lincoln Cent Two-Roll Set will contain one roll of coins 
struck at the United States Mint at Philadelphia and one roll of coins 
struck at the United States Mint at Denver. Four sets will be sold 
throughout the year, one set for each of the four designs of one-cent 
coins minted in 2009. Each set will be priced at $8.95.
    The first 2009 Lincoln Cent Two-Roll Set will be offered for sale 
on March 13, 2009.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: B.B. Craig, Associate Director for 
Sales and Marketing; United States Mint; 801 Ninth Street, NW.; 
Washington, DC 20220; or call 202-354-7500.

    Authority: 31 U.S.C. 5111, 5112 & 9701; Public Law 109-145, 
Title III (Dec. 22, 2005).

    Dated: March 9, 2009.
Edmund C. Moy,
Director, United States Mint.
[FR Doc. E9-5503 Filed 3-12-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4810-37-P
### Page 1 of 3 **Disposition Comments Docket No:**  

### FAA - 2012 - 0502 These comments are in **Directorate ID:** 

### 2010 - SW - 097 - AD response to an SNPRM Originating Office Tracking No.: **Next Step:** FRAN SNPRM 

### N o C omments/Only

Supportive Comments Received

– If this box is checked, no signatures are required. No 

### Has the reference d service information been revised since the NPRM was issued? I f ye s, lis t latest revision and attach a cop y. Note that changes beyond the scope of the previously published NPRM will require a new notice. Contact the Directorate focal point for guidance. Instructions: Summarize all comments **by issue** (not by commenter) and provide your recommended resolution of each issue. **All comments relating to the sam e issue should be discussed together.**  Do not list all of the issues from one commenter togeth er. If changes to the AD are required based on the comments received, explain why and describe in detail what change(s) you recommend. Reference FAA - IR- M - 8040.1C Chapter 9. **ISSUE 1:** Select one o

f the following : If other, explain : Commenter(s): What change to the AD action is requested? Why is the change requested or how is it justified? Do we agree? If **YES,** we agree because Make the following changes to the AD: If **PARTIALLY AGREE** , we agree with because We disagree with because

Make the following changes to the AD: If **NO** , we don’t agree because **ISSUE 2**  **:** Select one of the following :

If other, explain : Commenter(s): What change to the AD action is requested? Why is the change requested or how is it justified? Do we agree? If **YES,** we agree because Make the following changes to the AD: If **PARTIALLY AGREE** , we agree with because We disagree with because Make the following changes to the AD:

### Page 2 of 3

If **NO** , we don’t agree because **For additional issues, do uble**  **- click**  **here**

### Page 3 of 3 **S ignature Section**  Signature indicates concurrence with this action. Originating Office Tracking No.: **ASE** Printed Name **: Date** 

**Branch M anager**  **Date**
STATE v. Danny Corey WILLIAMS

351P19-1

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

September 5, 2019

Danny Corey Williams, For Williams, Danny Corey

N. Lorrin Freeman, District Attorney, For the State of North Carolina

***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the application filed by Petitioner on the 5th of September 2019 in this matter for Writ of Habeas Corpus, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the Superior Court, Wake County:

"Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 5th of September 2019."
CHARLESTON.

#### State *v.*Elihu Baker

(No. 5436.)

Submitted April 27, 1926.

Decided May 11, 1926.

Criminal *Law*— Warrant *Charging Commission of Misdemeanor, Such as Carrying Pistol, More Than One Year Prior to Issuance Thereof Should be Quashed (Code,*c. *148,*§ 7, c. *152*§ *10).*

A warrant charging the commission of a misdemeanor more than one year prior to the issuance thereof should be quashed.

Hatcher, Judge, absent.

(Criminal Law, 16 C. J. § 341.)

(Note: Parenthetical references by Editors, C. J. — Cyc. Not part of syllabi.)

*618Error to Circuit Court, Mingo County.

Elihu Baker was convicted of carrying a pistol contrary to law, and he brings error.

*Judgment reversed; verdict set aside; defendant discharged.*

*8. U. G. Rhodes,*for plaintiff in error.

*Howard B. Lee,*Attorney General, and *J. Luther Wolfe,*Assistant Attorney General, for the State.

LlTZ, PRESIDENT :

The defendant was convicted in the circuit court of Mingo county, on an appeal from a justice, for carrying a pistol in violation of Section 7, Chapter 148, Code.

It appears from the supplemental record that the original papers in the case, including the warrant on which the defendant was tried, were lost or mislaid after the writ of error had been granted; and that upon the petition of defendant before the trial court they were subsequently supplied. The warrant thus established, and which the defendant moved to quash before trial, reads:

> “State of West Virginia,

> County of Mingo, to-wit:

> To any Constable of said County:

> “Whereas Crit Hall of said County, this day made complaint and information on oath before me, J. L. Justice, a Justice of the Peace of Magnolia District, in said County, that . did commit a . in this that the said Elihu Baker on the 1st day of December, 1921, in the said County did carry about his person a pistol without having a State License therefor. •

> ‘ ‘ Therefore, we command you in the name of the State of West Virginia, forthwith to apprehend the said Elihu Baker and bring him before me at my office or some other Justice of said County in the District of Magnolia in said County, to answer the complaint, and to be further dealt with according to law.

> ‘ ‘ Given under my hand, in my said District, this the 2nd day of December, 1924.

> “J. L. Justice, J. P.”

*619The trial court should have sustained the motion to quash if for no other reason than that the warrant charges a misdemeanor committed more than one year prior to its issuance. Section 10, Chapter 152, Code.

The judgment of the circuit court will therefore be reversed, the verdict of the jury set aside, and the defendant discharged.

*Judgment reversed; ver did set aside; defendant discharged.*
#### City of Elgin v. Melissa W. Welch.

*Evidence—Bill of Exceptions in Former Trial—Municipal Corporations —Flooding Private Premises—Damages.*

1. A bill of exceptions is not admissible to show what the evidence of a witness was at a former trial. Such evidence must be shown by the testimony of sworn witnesses.

2. In an action against a municipal corporation to recover damages for flooding the plaintiff's premises, the damages assessed by the jury are held not to be excessive, but merely compensatory.

[Opinion filed May 27, 1887.]

Appeal from the Circuit Court of Kane County ; the Hon. Isaac G-. Wilson, Judge, presiding.

Messrs. Frank Cbosby and F. W. Joslyn, for appellant

Messrs. Botsfobd & Wayne, for appellee.

Baker, P. J.

This is a case for wrongfully flooding the dwelling house and premises of appellee with surface water, caused, it is claimed, by the tortious act of the City of Elgin in making and permitting to be made, an obstruction to the natural flow of such surface water over the streets of the city, by which it was thrown back upon said house and premises. The suit has once before been in this court on appeal, and is reported in 16 Ill. App. 483. Ho objections are now made to the instructions of the court; and only two grounds are relied upon for a reversal of the present judgment. One of these is, that the Circuit Court refused to admit in evidence, for the purpose of contradicting and impeaching several of the witnesses for appellee, the bill of exceptions taken upon the former trial and purporting to contain their testimony as given at that trial. There was no error in this ruling and action *186of the court. A bill of exceptions is evidence only for the purpose for which it is signed and sealed by the Judge, and its sole office is to afford opportunity for review in an appellate tribunal of the proceedings in the particular trial in or with reference to which it is made. It is not evidence to *ñ*show in a pending trial what the evidence of a witness was at a former trial; such evidence must be shown by the testimony of sworn witnesses. Roth v. Smith, 54 Ill. 431; Stern v. People, 102 Ill. 540.

The damages assessed by the jury in this case, and for which the judgment of the court was rendered, are $375. Appellant insists, as its second ground urged for a reversal, that their assessment of damages is excessive and not warranted by the evidence.

We have carefully examined the testimony in the record, and are of opinion it justifies the assessment made, and that no more than compensatory damages were allowed by the verdict.

Finding no error, we affirm the judgment.

*Judgment affirmed/.*
**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**

The undersigned, Barry Lamperd, President and a director of Lamperd Less Lethal Inc. (Principal Executive Officer), hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

(1)  the quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Lamperd Less Lethal Inc. for the interim period ended June 30, 2007 (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 Lamperd Less Lethal Inc.

Dated:  August 13, 2007

 

/s/ Barry Lamperd                                    

Barry Lamperd

President and Director

(Principal Executive Officer, Principal

Financial Officer and Principal Accounting Officer)

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to Lamperd Less Lethal Inc. and will be retained by Lamperd Less Lethal Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Note to Docket EPA - HQ - OAR - 2009 - 0837

In an April 7, 2008 telephone call between John Schakenbach (EPA) and Steve Mandel (Spectra Gases, a small specialty

gas company

(now a part of L inde Electronics and Specialty Gases, a large compan y) ), Steve Mandel s tated that if companies needed to meet ISO 17025, it would increase EPA Protocol gas cylinder costs by $250 - $300 per cy linder.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK>        0000839092
<NAME>       MEDICAL EQUIPMENT INCOME FUND LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
<MULTIPLIER> 1
       
<S>                           <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                 YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>             DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                  DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                        814709 
<SECURITIES>                  0
<RECEIVABLES>                 105760
<ALLOWANCES>                  0
<INVENTORY>                   0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>              920469
<PP&E>                        0
<DEPRECIATION>                0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                920469
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>         21310
<BONDS>                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>         0
<PREFERRED>                   0
<COMMON>                      899159
<OTHER-SE>                    0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>  920469
<SALES>                       61817
<TOTAL-REVENUES>              61817
<CGS>                         0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                 32354
<OTHER-EXPENSES>              0
<LOSS-PROVISION>              0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>            0
<INCOME-PRETAX>               29463
<INCOME-TAX>                  0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>           0
<DISCONTINUED>                0
<EXTRAORDINARY>               0
<CHANGES>                     0
<NET-INCOME>                  29463
<EPS-PRIMARY>                 0
<EPS-DILUTED>                 0
        


</TABLE>
O'NAN v. NATIONWIDE INSURANCE COMPANY, et al.

275P19-1

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

July 18, 2019

Elizabeth M.T. O'Nan, For O'Nan, Elizabeth M.T.

Lucienne H. Peoples, Attorney at Law, For Servpro Industries, Inc., et al.

Mason Freeman, Attorney at Law, Raleigh, For Nationwide Insurance Company, et al.

Gemma L. Saluta, Attorney at Law, Winston-Salem, For Nationwide Insurance Company, et al.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 15th of July 2019 by Plaintiff for Temporary Stay:

"Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 18th of July 2019."
Exhibit 31.1

CERTIFICATIONS

I, Michael L. Campbell, Chief Executive Officer of Regal Entertainment Group, certify that:

1.     I
have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Regal Entertainment Group;

2.     Based
on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in
light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3.     Based
on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition,
results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4.     The
registrant's other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act
Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and
15d-15(f)) for the registrant and have:



5.     The
registrant's other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant's
auditors and the audit committee of registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent function):



Date:
August 9, 2005

| |  | By: |  | /s/MICHAEL L. CAMPBELLMichael L. Campbell
Chief Executive Officer
| |  | --- |  | -----------------------------------------------------------------

---



QuickLinks
<PAGE>

                                                                    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


In connection with the Quarterly Report of Lease Equity Appreciation Fund I,
L.P. (the "Fund") on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2004 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), I, Crit DeMent, Chief Executive Officer of the Fund, 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 Fund.


                                 /s/ Crit DeMent
                                 ----------------------------------------------
                                 Crit DeMent
                                 Chief Executive Officer of the General Partner
                                 August 13, 2004
First Amendment to The Progressive Corporation 2010 Gainsharing Plan



 Exhibit 10.7 
 FIRST AMENDMENT 
 TO 

THE PROGRESSIVE CORPORATION 
 2010 GAINSHARING PLAN 
 WHEREAS, The Progressive Corporation 2010
Gainsharing Plan (the “Plan”) is currently in effect; and 
 WHEREAS, the Compensation Committee of the Board of
Directors of The Progressive Corporation (the “Committee”) has the authority pursuant to the provisions of the Plan to amend the Plan in its discretion; 
 WHEREAS, all capitalized terms used in this First Amendment shall have the meanings ascribed to them in the Plan; 
 NOW, THEREFORE, the Plan is hereby amended as follows: 
 1. Section 6(E) of
the Plan is hereby deleted in its entirety and the following is substituted in its place: 
  

	 	E.	Limitations 

 The
performance score for the Direct Business Unit can vary from 0 to 3.0, and for each other Business Unit can vary from 0 to 2.0, determined under the procedures described above, based on actual performance. If, however, the performance score for the
Direct Business Unit exceeds 2.0, such score shall be rounded down to 2.0 before the weighting thereof and the calculation of the Performance Factor as described above. The final Performance Factor cannot exceed 2.0, regardless of the results of any
individual matrix. 
 2. Except as herein expressly provided, the terms and conditions of the Plan shall remain unchanged and in
full force and effect.