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.                  

###### Commodity Futures Trading Commission

# AGENCY:

Commodity Futures Trading Commission.

# ACTION:

Notice of availability.

# SUMMARY:

The Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) is publishing this notice to advise the public of the availability of CFTC's Fiscal Year 2019 Service Contract Inventory.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        Questions regarding the service contract inventory should be directed to Kathryn Rison, Contracting Officer, at 202-418-5419 or                         *krison@cftc.gov.*

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    In accordance with section 743 of division C of the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2010, Public Law 111-117, 123 Stat. 3034, CFTC is publishing this notice to advise the public of the availability of the Fiscal Year (FY) 2019 Service Contract Inventory. CFTC has posted its inventory documents on the agency website at the following link:                     *https://www.cftc.gov/​About/​CFTCReports/​index.htm.*

                    This inventory provides information on service contracts above the Simplified Acquisition Threshold ($150,000), as determined by the base and all options value, that were awarded in FY 2019. CFTC's service contract inventory data is included in the government-wide inventory, which can be filtered to display the CFTC-specific data. A link to the government-wide inventory is included in the posting on the CFTC website, or it can be accessed directly at                     *https://www.acquisition.gov/​service-contract-inventory.*

The inventory documents posted on the CFTC website also include the CFTC FY 2018 Service Contract Inventory Analysis (dated February 20, 2020). This report provides information about the Product Service Codes that the CFTC analyzed from the 2018 inventory.

Dated: July 13, 2021.

Christopher Kirkpatrick,

Secretary of the Commission.

[FR Doc. 2021-15166 Filed 7-15-21; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6351-01-P
EXHIBIT 31.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In
connection with the filing of the Annual Report on Form 10-K/A for the year ended December 31, 2002 (the 'Report') by META Group, Inc. (the 'Company'), each of the undersigned hereby
certifies that:

| | /s/ Alfred J. AmorosoAlfred J. Amoroso
President and Chief Executive Officer                   
| | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| | /s/ John A. PiontkowskiJohn A. Piontkowski
Executive Vice President and Chief
Financial Officer

Dated:
October 31, 2003

---

QuickLinks
# C_2019295EN.01000601.xml

| 2.9.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 295/6 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

2.9.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 295/6

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Amtsgericht Erding (Germany) lodged on 28 May 2019 — E.M., M.S. v Eurowings GmbH

(Case C-414/19)

(2019/C 295/09)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Amtsgericht Erding

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicants: E.M., M.S.

Defendant: Eurowings GmbH

Question referred

In the case of an air route consisting of several segments, are flights that carry connecting passengers and have not been affected by a disruption to the connecting flight also to be taken into account when determining the distance pursuant to Article 7(1) of Regulation (EC) No 261/2004? (1)

---

(1)  Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 February 2004 establishing common rules on compensation and assistance to passengers in the event of denied boarding and of cancellation or long delay of flights, and repealing Regulation (EEC) No 295/91 (OJ 2004 L 46, p. 1).

---
##### 



Exhibit 32.1

OFFICERS CERTIFICATE

The undersigned officers of Inveresk Research
Group, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the Company),
hereby certify that (i) the Companys Form 10-K
for the year ended December 31, 2003 fully complies with
the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 and (ii) the information contained in
the Companys Form 10-K for the year ended
December 31, 2003 fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
the Company.



| |                    
| | -------------------
| | /s/ WALTER S. NIMMO
| |                    

| |        |                         
| | ------ | ------------------------
| | Name:  | Walter S. Nimmo         
| | Title: | Chief Executive Officer,

| |                       
| | ----------------------
| | President and Director

Date: February 20, 2004



| |                       
| | ----------------------
| | /s/ D.J. PAUL E. COWAN
| |                       

| |        |                                      
| | ------ | -------------------------------------
| | Name:  | D.J. Paul E. Cowan                   
| | Title: | Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer

Date: February 20, 2004
#### River Park Associates, Doing Business as River Park Towers, Appellant-Respondent, v Meyerbank Electric Co., Inc., Respondent-Appellant.

In an action to recover damages for breach of contract, plaintiff appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Meade, J.), dated June 11, 1984, as denied its motion to strike the defendant’s answer and censure defendant’s former attorney, and defen*710dant cross-appeals from so much of the same order as denied its motion for summary judgment.

Order affirmed, without costs or disbursements, on condition that defendant’s former attorney pay plaintiff the sum of $1,000 within 30 days after service upon him of a copy of the order to be made hereon, with notice of entry; if defendant’s former attorney fails to pay said amount, defendant may pay the penalty imposed within 60 days of service upon it of a copy of the order to be made hereon, with notice of entry; if such condition is not complied with, then order modified, in the exercise of discretion, by deleting the provision thereof which denied that branch of the plaintiff’s motion which sought to strike defendant’s answer, and substituting therefor a provision granting that branch of the motion, and as so modified, order affirmed, with costs to plaintiff.

The contract which is the subject of this action is ambiguous and subject to different interpretations. Where the intent of the parties depends upon a choice between reasonable inferences to be drawn from extrinsic evidence, interpretation of the contract must be determined by the trier of fact *(see, Hartford Acc. & Indent. Co. v Wesolowski,*33 NY2d 169, 172). At bar, the supporting and opposing papers do not unequivocally clarify the parties’ intent. In such a situation, summary judgment is inappropriate *(see, Mallad Constr. Corp. v County Fed. Sav. & Loan Assn.,*32 NY2d 285, 291; *Yogurts Inti, v Grand Union Co.,*92 AD2d 936).

While we agree with Special Term that the striking of defendant’s answer was not an appropriate sanction in this case (CPLR 3126), we do find that the conduct of defendant’s former attorney in impeding and unduly delaying the discovery process warrants the imposition of a financial sanction against him *(Goldstein v Peter C. Barbone, P. C,*114 AD2d 837; *Mineroff v Macy’s & Co.,*97 AD2d 535). Brown, J. P., Rubin, Lawrence and Kooper, JJ., concur.
```

Exhibit 99.1

                            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 Form 10-KSB Annual Report of GenoMed, Inc. (the
"Company") for the period ended December 31, 2002, as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned
hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

o    the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d)
     of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

o    the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
     respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

May 5, 2003

By: /s/ David Moskowitz
David Moskowitz
President, Principal Executive Officer, Principal Financial Officer, and
Principal Accounting Officer
```
#### In re KENYON.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department.

March 13,1912.)

In the matter of the application of Charles H. Kenyon to compel the delivery of books and papers in the possession of John Martin. No opinion. Order affirmed, with costs, without passing upon the validity of petitioner’s title to the office.
Exhibit 4.141


 


Exhibit 4.141



			
	

	Nevada Geothermal Power Inc.


	 
	 

	Suite 900

	Tel: 604-688-1553


	409 Granville St.

	Fax: 604-688-5926


	Vancouver, B.C

	Toll: 866-688-0808


	Canada VC6 1T2

	Web: www.nevadageothermal.com





 

 

 

 

AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT – WALENCIAK, EFFECTIVE AS OF APRIL 16, 2007

THIS AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT (“Agreement”) is made and entered into effective as of April 16, 2008 (the “Effective Date”), by and between Nevada Geothermal Power Company, a Nevada corporation (the “Company”) and Max Walenciak (“Employee”), with reference to the following: THE ABOVE REFERENCED

AGREEMENT IS AMENDED AS FOLLOWS:

1. Clause 4.1(c) is amended as follows: “For the additional period up to December 31, 2009, the Company will pay $1,100.00 per month towards the cost of interim Reno rental accommodation.”

2. Clause 4.1(d) is amended by extending the period of time for reimbursement of moving expenses to December 31, 2009.

 

 

THE REMAINDER OF THIS PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK.





EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT – WALENCIAK Page 2

     In Witness Whereof, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be duly executed as of the day and year first above written.

			
		NEVADA GEOTHERMAL POWER CO.	
		 	
		Per: Signed	
		Authorized Signatory: Brian Fairbank	
		President & CEO	



				
	SIGNED, SEALED and DELIVERED by	)		
	MAX WALENCIAK in the presence of:	)		
	 	)		
	 	)		
	Sharon L. DeSimoni	)		
		)		
	February 02, 2009	)	Signed	
	 	)	Max Walenciak	
	 	)		
	 	)		
	 	)		
	 	)		
	 	)		
	Signed	)
I 

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 997 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

NOVEMBER 3, 2011 

Referred to the Committee on Natural Resources 

AN ACT 

To authorize the Secretary of the Interior to extend a water 

contract between the United States and the East Bench 

Irrigation District. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

S 997 RFH

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

2 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘East Bench Irrigation 

3 District Water Contract Extension Act’’. 

4 SEC. 2. AUTHORITY TO EXTEND WATER CONTRACT. 

5 The Secretary of the Interior may extend the contract 

6 for water services between the United States and the East 

7 Bench Irrigation District, numbered 14–06–600–3593, 

8 until the earlier of— 

9 (1) the date that is 4 years after the date on 

10 which the contract would have expired if this Act 

11 had not been enacted; or 

12 (2) the date on which a new long-term contract 

13 is executed by the parties to the contract. 

Passed the Senate November 2, 2011. 

Attest: NANCY ERICKSON, 

Secretary. 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
# C_2019399EN.01002801.xml

| 25.11.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 399/28 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.11.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 399/28

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Amtsgericht Erding (Germany) lodged on 2 September 2019 — EUflight.de GmbH v Eurowings GmbH

(Case C-648/19)

(2019/C 399/32)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Amtsgericht Erding

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: EUflight.de GmbH

Defendant: Eurowings GmbH

Question referred

In order to have a right to compensation under Article 7 of Regulation No 261/2004, (1) is it a condition that the passenger boards the flight even where it is established prior to departure that there will be a long delay to that flight?

---

(1)  Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 February 2004 establishing common rules on compensation and assistance to passengers in the event of denied boarding and of cancellation or long delay of flights, and repealing Regulation (EEC) No 295/91 (OJ 2004 L 46, p. 1).

---
#### Augusto Leyva, Respondent, v Cora Realty Co., LLC, Appellant.

[944 NYS2d 712] —

An appeal having been taken to this Court by the above-named appellant from an order of the Supreme Court, Bronx County (Patricia Anne Williams, J.), entered on or about January 25, 2011, and said appeal having been argued by counsel for the respective parties; and due deliberation having been had thereon, and upon the stipulation of the parties hereto dated May 3, 2012, it is unanimously ordered that said appeal be and the same is hereby withdrawn in accordance with the terms of the aforesaid stipulation. Concur — Mazzarelli, J.P., Saxe, Catterson, Acosta and Román, JJ.
Exhibit 32.2

                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 Minera Andes Inc. (the
"Corporation"), on Form 10-QSB for the six-month period ended June 30, 2004 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), I, Bonnie L. Kuhn, Chief Financial Officer of the Corporation,
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 as adopted pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge:

     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 Corporation.


                                            MINERA ANDES INC.


Date: August 13, 2004                       By:  /s/  Bonnie L. Kuhn
     ----------------                          --------------------------------
                                                      Bonnie L. Kuhn
                                                      Chief Financial Officer
                                                      and Secretary
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Raymond Rivera, Appellant.

Main, J.

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Chemung County (Danaher, Jr., J.), rendered October 17,1983, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of attempted promoting prison contraband in the first degree.

While defendant was an inmate at Elmira Correctional Facility, he was accused of possessing a razor blade and was, consequently, indicted on April 15, 1983 for knowingly and unlawfully possessing dangerous contraband. Upon his arraignment, defendant pleaded not guilty and was assigned an attorney. The matter was then adjourned until May 23,1983, so as to give the assigned counsel and defendant an opportunity to discuss the situation and prepare for whatever course of action was indicated. On May 23, defendant’s counsel moved to dismiss the indictment on double jeopardy grounds, pointing out that defendant had already been subject to disciplinary proceedings at the prison and, as a result, had been given 45 days’ confinement in the special housing unit and assessed a 60-day loss of good time credit. Defendant also moved for dismissal upon the further ground that Penal Law § 205.25 (2) was unconstitutional because of vagueness. When both motions were denied by County Court, defendant pleaded guilty to attempted promoting prison contraband in the first degree and now appeals.

The judgment of County Court should be affirmed. The administrative trial did not result in the imposition of an additional sentence upon defendant, but rather resulted in his loss of certain privileges under the sentence he was already serving. Such proceedings and punishment cannot form a predicate for the charge of double jeopardy upon the trial of defendant for the *426alleged crimes which those acts constitute *(Matter of Escobar v Roberts,*29 NY2d 594, *cert denied*404 US 1047; *People v Briggs,*108 AD2d 1058).

Regarding defendant’s second contention, we have recently decided this precise point in holding that Penal Law § 205.25 (2) is not unconstitutionally vague *(People v Miller,*106 AD2d 787).

Judgment affirmed. Mahoney, P. J., Main, Casey, Mikoll and Yesawich, Jr., JJ., concur.
EXHIBIT 32.1


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


In connection with the quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Americare Health
Scan, Inc. (the "Company") for the quarter ended March 31, 2008, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
I, Dr. Joseph P. D'Angelo, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company,
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge:

(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: October 23, 2008       /s/  Dr. Joseph P. D'Angelo
      ----------------      ---------------------------
                            Dr. Joseph P. D'Angelo, President, Chief
                            Executive Officer

      October 23, 2008       /s/  Robert Cano
      ----------------      --------------------
                            Robert Cano, Chief Financial Officer
**Exhibit 32.1**

** **

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT 2002**

 

This certification is not to be deemed filed pursuant to the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934, as amended, and does not constitute a part of theQuarterly Report of UTStarcom, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q/A for theperiod ending March 31, 2004 as filed with the Securities andExchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”).

 

In connection with the Report, we, Hong Liang Lu and Michael J. Sophie,certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant toSection 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

(1)                                  TheReport fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

(2)                                  Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.

 

Dated:  May 14, 2004

 
| By:    | /s/ Hong Liang Lu                                                   |   |
|--------|---------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
|   | Name: Hong Liang Lu                                                 |
|   | Title: President and Chief Executive Officer                        |
|   |                                                                |
| By:    | /s/ Michael J. Sophie                                               |   |
|   | Name: Michael J. Sophie                                             |
|   | Title: Senior Vice President of Finance and Chief Financial Officer |

 

----
# C_2020077EN.01001301.xml

| 9.3.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 77/13 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

9.3.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 77/13

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Sąd Rejonowy dla Warszawy-Woli w Warszawie (Poland) lodged on 5 July 2019 — P. J. v (X) S.A.

(Case C-513/19)

(2020/C 77/18)

Language of the case: Polish

Referring court

Sąd Rejonowy dla Warszawy-Woli w Warszawie

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: P.J.

Defendant: (X) S.A.

By order of 7 November 2019, the Court of Justice (Ninth Chamber) ruled that the request for a preliminary ruling is manifestly inadmissible.

---
EXHIBIT 32.2
 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
(18 U.S.C. §1350)
  (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 Oriental.
 In witness whereof, I execute this certification in San Juan, Puerto Rico, this 6th
day of May, 2011.
 By:
    /s/  Norberto GonzálezNorberto GonzálezExecutive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
#### In the Matter of John Mahoney et al., Respondents, v Robert Kraut, Appellant.

Order of the Supreme Court, New York County, Special Term, Part I (Kirschenbaum, J.), entered March 12, 1984, denying respondent-appellant’s motion for an order dismissing petitioners’ CPLR article 78 proceeding, is unanimously reversed, on the law, and the motion to dismiss granted, without costs and disbursements.

On May 4,1982, a determination of a tax deficiency was made against the petitioners in the sum of $6,955.59 by appellant New York City Department of Finance. The final determination, dated January 3, 1983, was mailed to petitioners on January 3, 1983 by certified mail, receipt of which was acknowledged on January 13; 1983. Petitioners then moved by an order to show cause, dated May 4,1983, for an order or judgment pursuant to CPLR article 78 directing a prompt judicial hearing to review the action of appellant. This petition should be dismissed as it was not timely commenced.

Administrative Code of the City of New York § T46-70.0 (a) provides that a taxpayer’s application to review a personal income tax determination made by an administrative agency shall be made “within four months after notice of the decision is sent by certified or registered mail to the taxpayer.” Petitioners commenced their proceeding four months and one day from the certified mailing date of the final determination and are, therefore, time-barred by section T46-70.0 (a) from making their application. Concur — Kupferman, J. P., Carro, Bloom and Rosenberger, JJ.