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 Housing and Urban Development

          - [Docket No. FR-4644-N-22]

# AGENCY:

Office of the Assistant Secretary for Community Planning and Development, HUD.

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

This Notice identifies unutilized, underutilized, excess, and surplus Federal property reviewed by HUD for suitability for possible use to assist the homeless.

# EFFECTIVE DATE:

June 1, 2001.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Clifford Taffet, Department of Housing and Urban Development, Room 7262, 451 Seventh Street SW., Washington, DC 20410; telephone (202) 708-1234; TTY number for the hearing- and speech-impaired (202) 708-2565, (these telephone numbers are not toll-free), or call the toll-free Title V information line at 1-800-927-7588.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    In accordance with the December 12, 1988 court order in                     *National Coalition for the Homeless*                     v.                     *Veterans Administration,*                     No. 88-2503-OG (D.D.C.), HUD publishes a Notice, on a weekly basis, identifying unutilized, underutilized, excess and surplus Federal buildings and real property that HUD has reviewed for suitability for use to assist the homeless.                

Today's Notice is for the purpose of announcing that no additional properties have been determined suitable or unsuitable this week.

Dated: May 24, 2001.

John D. Garrity,

Director, Office of Special Needs Assistance Programs.

[FR Doc. 01-13573 Filed 5-31-01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4210-29-M
# C_2018063EN.01001601.xml

| 19.2.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 63/16 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.2.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 63/16

---

Action brought on 14 December 2017 — Schokker v EASA

(Case T-817/17)

(2018/C 063/21)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Boudewijn Schokker (Hoofddorp, Netherlands) (represented by: S. Orlandi and T. Martin, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Aviation Safety Agency

Defendant:

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

| — | Declare and rule:






  — | That the EASA shall pay the applicant the sum of EUR 80 000 as compensation for the non-pecuniary harm which he has suffered; |
| --- | --- | --- |

—

Declare and rule:

—

That the EASA shall pay the applicant the sum of EUR 80 000 as compensation for the non-pecuniary harm which he has suffered;

| — | That the EASA shall pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

That the EASA shall pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on four pleas in law, seeking to establish that EASA’s authority empowered to conclude contracts (‘the AECC’) committed a number of administrative errors.

| 1. | First plea in law, alleging that the AECC made an unlawful offer of employment to the applicant which, due to that fact, he was unable to accept unconditionally. |
| --- | --- |

1.

First plea in law, alleging that the AECC made an unlawful offer of employment to the applicant which, due to that fact, he was unable to accept unconditionally.

| 2. | Second plea in law, alleging that the AECC refused to correct that offer of employment, despite the fact that it was manifestly vitiated by illegality. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Second plea in law, alleging that the AECC refused to correct that offer of employment, despite the fact that it was manifestly vitiated by illegality.

| 3. | Third plea in law, alleging that the abrupt withdrawal of the offer of employment by the AECC resulted in the definitive closure of the procedure to recruit the applicant. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Third plea in law, alleging that the abrupt withdrawal of the offer of employment by the AECC resulted in the definitive closure of the procedure to recruit the applicant.

| 4. | Fourth plea in law, alleging that the AECC failed to have regard to the purpose of the pre-litigation procedure by systematically frustrating all proposals for an out-of-court resolution to the dispute. |
| --- | --- |

4.

Fourth plea in law, alleging that the AECC failed to have regard to the purpose of the pre-litigation procedure by systematically frustrating all proposals for an out-of-court resolution to the dispute.

---
**Exhibit 4.5**

 

**SUEZ**

 

**EXTRACT OF**

 

**THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING**

 

**OF MARCH 5, 2003**

 

[...] 

 

5. 2003 Compensation 

 

The Committee proposed that the fixed part of the Chief Executive Officer’s compensationpaid by Group entities in France remain at the same level in 2003. 

 

TheCommittee suggested that the variable part of this compensation in 2003 be set according to the qualitative criteria of the action plan in addition to existing economic criteria. The variable part of compensation is to be determined: 

 

•    25% on the basis of EBITDA achieved by the Energy andEnvironment activities excluding the effect of change in scope of consolidation 

 

•    25% on the basis of net earnings per share accounted for by the Energy and Environment activities excluding the effect of change in scope of consolidation 

 

•    50% on the basis of a qualitative evaluation of achievementsrelated to debt reduction, free cash flow and cost reduction. 

 

The Board ofDirectors gave its approval to these proposals. 

[...]
UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549



---

FORM 8-K

---



CURRENT REPORT

Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Act of 1934



Date of Report (Date of earliest event reported):  November 20, 2006



---

THE VALSPAR CORPORATION

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)



Delaware
        1-3011
        36-2443580(State or other jurisdiction
of incorporation)
        (Commission
File Number)
        (I.R.S. Employer
Identification No.)






1101 Third Street South, Minneapolis, Minnesota
        55415(Address of principal executive offices)
        (Zip Code)






Registrants telephone number, including area code:(612) 332-7371



Not Applicable

(Former name or former address, if changed since last report)



---

Check the appropriate box below if the Form 8-K filing is intended to simultaneously satisfy the filing obligation of the registrant under any of the following provisions (seeGeneral Instruction A.2. below):



oWritten communications pursuant to Rule 425 under the Securities Act (17 CFR 230.425)



oSoliciting material pursuant to Rule 14a-12 under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.14a-12)



oPre-commencement communications pursuant to Rule 14d-2(b) under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.14d-2(b))



oPre-commencement communications pursuant to Rule 13e-4(c) under the Exchange Act(17 CFR 240.13e-4(c))







---



Item 2.02. Results of Operations and Financial Condition.



On November 20, 2006, the Company issued the press release attached as Exhibit 99.1, which sets out the Companys results of operations for the fourth quarter of fiscal 2006 and for the full year.



Item 9.01 Financial Statements and Exhibits.



(d)
        Exhibits




99.1
        Fourth Quarter Earnings Press Release dated November 20, 2006






SIGNATURE



Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned thereunto duly authorized.





THE VALSPAR CORPORATIONDated:  November 20, 2006
        /s/ Rolf EnghName:
        Rolf EnghTitle:
        Secretary






---
##### 



Exhibit 21
  Corporation Name
    
    DomicileAirgas Canada, Inc.
    
    CanadaAirgas Carbonic, Inc.
    
    DEAirgas Data, LLC
    
    DEAirgas East, Inc.
    
    DEAirgas Gaspro, Inc.
    
    DEAirgas Great Lakes, Inc.
    
    DEAirgas Gulf States, Inc.
    
    DEAirgas Intermountain, Inc.
    
    COAirgas Investments, Inc.
    
    DEAirgas Mid America, Inc.
    
    DEAirgas Mid South, Inc.
    
    DEAirgas Nor Pac, Inc.
    
    DEAirgas Northern California & Nevada, Inc.
    
    DEAirgas North Central, Inc.
    
    DEAirgas S.A. de C.V.
    
    MexicoAirgas Safety, Inc.
    
    DEAirgas South, Inc.
    
    DEAirgas Southwest, Inc.
    
    DEAirgas Specialty Gases, Inc.
    
    TXAirgas West, Inc.
    
    CAAirgas West, S.A.de C.V.
    
    MexicoATNL, Inc.
    
    DEMissouri River Holdings, Inc.
    
    KSNitrous Oxide Corp.
    
    DERadnor Funding Corp.
    
    DERed-D-Arc, Inc.
    
    NVRed-D-Arc Limited
    
    CanadaRed-D-Arc S.A.de C.V.
    
    MexicoTool Plus, Inc.
    
    CA
Exhibit 32.1

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

In connection with the Annual Report of Vascular Solutions, Inc. (the
Company) on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(the Report), I, Howard Root, 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.
|-- |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| |                                        
| | ---------------------------------------
|
|
| |                                        
| | Howard Root                            
| | Chief Executive OfficerJanuary 31, 2006

---
**EXHIBIT 23.1**

**CONSENT OFINDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

Weconsent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement on Form S-8(No. 333-73966) pertaining to the Fifth Amended and Restated 1999Stock Option Plan, the dj Orthopedics, Inc. 2001 Omnibus Plan, the dj Orthopedics, Inc.Employee Stock Purchase Plan, and the dj Orthopedics, Inc. 2001Non-Employee Directors’ Stock Option Plan in the Registration Statements on Form S-3(No. 333-111465, No. 333-112943 and No. 333-115768)of DJO Incorporated, of our reports dated February 26, 2007, with respectto the consolidated financial statements and schedule of DJO Incorporated, DJOIncorporated management’s assessment of the effectiveness of internal controlover financial reporting, and the effectiveness of internal control overfinancial reporting of DJO Incorporated, included in the Annual Report (Form 10-K)for the year ended December 31, 2006.
|                        | /s/ ERNST &  YOUNG LLP |
|------------------------|---------------------------------|
| San Diego,  California |                            |
| February 26, 2007 |                            |

 

----
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

EASTERN DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

J.H.F.,

Petitioner

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 507 EAL 2021

Petition for Allowance of Appeal 

from the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 9th day of May, 2022, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is 

DENIED.
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

JASON STONE,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

No. 4D2023-1906

[February 8, 2024]

Appeal of order denying rule 3.850 motion from the Circuit Court for 

the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County; Hon. Bernard I. Bober, 

Judge; L.T. Case No. 03-000215CF10A.

Jason Stone, Bonifay, pro se.

No appearance required for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

GERBER, CONNER and ARTAU, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
Exhibit 32(b)

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE

SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and in connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Zep Inc. (the Corporation) for the quarter ended November 30, 2007, as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the undersigned, the Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the Corporation, certifies 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
Corporation.



|                                                    
|----------------------------------------------------
|/s/ Mark R. Bachmann                                
|Mark R. Bachmann                                    
|Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
|January 10, 2008                                    

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Zep Inc. and will be
retained by Zep Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 106 (Friday, June 1, 2001)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 29691]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-13673]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Airspace Docket No. 01-ACE-2]


Amendment to Class E Airspace; Phillipsburg, KS

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Direct final rule; confirmation of effective date.

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

SUMMARY: This document confirms the effective date of a direct final 
rule which revises Class E airspace at Phillipsburg, KS.

EFFECTIVE DATE: 0901 UTC, July 12, 2001.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kathy Randolph, Air Traffic Division, 
Airspace Branch, ACE-520C, DOT Regional Headquarters Building, Federal 
Aviation Administration, 901 Locust, Kansas City, MO 64106; telephone: 
(816) 329-2525.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FAA published this direct final rule 
with a request for comments in the Federal Register on March 2, 2001 
(66 FR 13011). The FAA uses the direct final rulemaking procedure for a 
non-controversial rule where the FAA believes that there will be no 
adverse public comment. This direct final rule advised the public that 
no adverse comments were anticipated, and that unless a written adverse 
comment, or a written notice of intent to submit such an adverse 
comment, were received within the comment period, the regulation would 
become effective on July 12, 2001. No adverse comments were received, 
and thus this notice confirms that this direct final rule will become 
effective on that date.

    Issued in Kansas City, MO, on May 9, 2001.
Richard L. Day,
Acting Manager, Air Traffic Division, Central Region.
[FR Doc. 01-13673 Filed 5-31-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-M
### Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,
Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanag h

Elizabeth A. Weave r

Maura D. Corriga n Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markma n Diane M. Hathaway,

J ustices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

_______________________________________ __ Clerk August 6, 2009

d0720 

# Order

August 6, 2009

138704

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 138704 COA: 289798 Livingston CC: 07-017023-FH EDWARD WESLEY CARPENTER, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application fo r leave to appeal th e February 25, 2009 order of the Court of Appeals is consider ed, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
<PAGE>
                                                             Page 13 of 14 Pages

                                                                   EXHIBIT 99(f)

REPORT ON ASSERTIONS ON COMPLIANCE WITH SPECIFIED
KEY ALTERNATIVE LOAN PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS -
KEYCORP STUDENT LOAN TRUST 2001 - A
GREAT LAKES EDUCATIONAL LOAN SERVICES, INC.

Period ended December 31, 2001
<PAGE>
                                                                   Page 14 of 14



                        Report of Independent Accountants


We have examined management's assertion, included in the accompanying Report of
Management on Compliance with Specified Key Alternative Loan Program
Requirements, that Great Lakes Educational Loan Services, Inc. (Great Lakes)
complied with the specified requirements of the Subservicing Agreement (KeyCorp
Student Loan Trust 2001-A) between Key Bank USA, National Association and Great
Lakes dated as of September 1, 2001 (Subservicing Agreement) during the period
September 1, 2001 through December 31, 2001. Management is responsible for Great
Lakes' compliance with those requirements. Our responsibility is to express an
opinion on management's assertion about Great Lakes' compliance based on our
examination.

Our examination was conducted in accordance with attestation standards
established by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants and,
accordingly, included examining, on a test basis, evidence about Great Lakes'
compliance with those requirements and performing such other procedures, as we
considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our examination
provides a reasonable basis for our opinion. Our examination does not provide a
legal determination on Great Lakes' compliance with specified requirements.

In our opinion, management's assertion that Great Lakes complied with the
aforementioned requirements during the period September 1, 2001 through December
31, 2001, is fairly stated, in all material respects.

This report is intended solely for the information and use of the audit
committee and management of Great Lakes Educational Loan Services, Inc.; Bank
One, National Association; Bankers Trust Company; Moody's Investor Services,
Inc.; Standard and Poor's Ratings Services; Fitch IBCA; and Key Bank USA,
National Association, and is not intended to be and should not be used by anyone
other than these specified parties.

                                               /s/ ERNST & YOUNG LLP

January 4, 2002
NO. 07-03-0099-CR IN THE COUR

T OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVEN TH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

AT AMARILLO PANEL A MARCH 19, 2003

______________________________ JAMES GABRIEL RIVERS, APPELLA NT

V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, A PPELLEE

_________________________________ FROM THE 181 ST DISTRIC T COURT O F RANDALL COUNTY; NO. 12,748-B; H ONORABLE JOH N BOARD, J UDGE

_______________________________ Before JOHNSON, C.J., and REAVIS and CAMPBELL, JJ. MEMORAND UM OPINION Appellant

James Gabriel Rivers filed a Mot ion to Dismi ss Appeal on M arch 14, 2003, stating tha the desires to withdraw his appeal . The Motion to D ismiss issigned by both appellant and h is attorney . Without passing on the merits of the case , we grant appellant’s motion for voluntary dismissal and here by dismis s th e appeal. Tex. R. App. P. 42.2. Having dismissed the2

appeal at appellant’s

personal req uest, we w ill not enter tain a motion for r

ehearing, and our mandate will issue forthw ith. James T. Campbell Justice

Do not publish .
Exhibit 14

|ERNST & YOUNG ET  AUTRES
41, rue Ybry 
92576 Neuilly-sur-Seine Cedex
S.A.S. à capital variable minimal de € 37.000
Commissaire aux Comptes 
Membre de la Compagnie de Versailles | DELOITTE & ASSOCIES185, avenue Charles de Gaulle 
BP 136 
92203 Neuilly-sur-Seine Cedex
S.A. au capital de € 1.723.040
Commissaire aux Comptes 
Membre de la Compagnie de Versailles
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------





CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRMS

We
  consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statements Nos. 333-114880,
  333-102522, 333-83120, 333-100153, 333-83222, 333-118726, 333-125196,  333-128169
  and 333-135862 on Form S-8 of our report on the consolidated financial statements
  of Suez dated April 5, 2006 (except for notes 40.1, 42, 43 and 44 as to which
  the date is June 26, 2006), appearing in this Annual Report on Form 20-F/A
  of Suez for the year ended December 31, 2005. This report expresses an unqualified
  opinion and includes two explanatory paragraphs relating to 1) Suez change
  in the method of accounting for financial instruments in 2005 and 2) that International
  Financial Reporting Standards as adopted by the European Union vary in certain
  significant respects from accounting principles generally accepted in the United
  States of America. Information relating to the nature and effect of such differences
  is presented in Notes 42, 43 and 44 of the consolidated financial statements.



|ERNST & YOUNG ET
          AUTRES/s/ Christian CHOCHON | DELOITTE & ASSOCIES/s/ Jean-Paul PICARD
|------------------------------------------------------ | ---------------------------------------



Neuilly-sur-Seine, France

January 31,
  2007