alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 211 (Wednesday, November 2, 2005)]
[Presidential Documents]
[Page 66745]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-22015]



[[Page 66743]]

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

Part VII





The President





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



Notice of November 1, 2005--Continuation of the National Emergency With 
Respect to Sudan


                        Presidential Documents 



Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 211 / Tuesday, November 2, 2005 / 
Presidential Documents

___________________________________________________________________

Title 3--
The President

[[Page 66745]]

                Notice of November 1, 2005

                
Continuation of the National Emergency With 
                Respect to Sudan

                On November 3, 1997, by Executive Order 13067, the 
                President declared a national emergency with respect to 
                Sudan pursuant to the International Emergency Economic 
                Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701-1706) to deal with the 
                unusual and extraordinary threat to the national 
                security and foreign policy of the United States 
                constituted by the actions and policies of the 
                Government of Sudan. Because the actions and policies 
                of the Government of Sudan continue to pose an unusual 
                and extraordinary threat to the national security and 
                foreign policy of the United States, the national 
                emergency declared on November 3, 1997, and the 
                measures adopted on that date to deal with that 
                emergency must continue in effect beyond November 3, 
                2005. Therefore, consistent with section 202(d) of the 
                National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1622(d)), I am 
                continuing for 1 year the national emergency with 
                respect to Sudan.

                This notice shall be published in the Federal Register 
                and transmitted to the Congress.

                    (Presidential Sig.)B

                THE WHITE HOUSE,

                    November 1, 2005.

[FR Doc. 05-22015
Filed 11-1-05; 11:19 am]
Billing code 3195-01-P
Exhibit 10.33
EXHIBIT B TO UNANIMOUS WRITTEN CONSENT DATED NOVEMBER 10, 2021
MEMORANDUM
To:[Recipient] (“Recipient”)
From:[Manager]
Date:[Date]
Re:Retention Bonus Award


This memorandum confirms the Retention Bonus Award approved by the Board of Directors of Entasis Therapeutics Holdings Inc. on November 10, 2021, as follows:
	​


	​


	​



	Award Amount(1)
	Payment Date
	Conditions to Award

	$ XXXX
	50% on six month anniversary of Change in Control
50% on twelve month anniversary of Change in Control
	In the event of a Change in Control, each installment of the Award Amount will become due and payable as soon as practicable after each Payment Date, on the condition that the Recipient maintains Continuous Service through each Payment Date.
In the event Recipient incurs a Change in Control Termination(2), any portion of the Award Amount that has not been paid as of the date of the Change in Control Termination shall be paid as soon as practicable after such date. 



​
This Retention Bonus Award is being issued under the 2018 Equity Incentive Plan (the “Plan”).  All of the terms and conditions of the Plan, which is attached hereto, are incorporated herein in their entirety.  Capitalized terms not defined herein but defined in the Plan will have the same definitions as in the Plan.  If there is any conflict between this award agreement and the Plan, the terms of the Plan will control.
(1)  Represents gross amount of award. Applicable tax withholdings and deductions will be calculated on the date of payment.
(2)  Change in Control Termination has the meaning set forth in the Amendment to Option Award dated November 10, 2021 under the Plan.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT RICKY A. PIERCE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. No. 95-6602 PEGGY JONES; DEBORAH ADLES, Defendants-Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle, District Judge. (CA-94-68-5-BO) Submitted: November 30, 1995 Decided: January 3, 1996 Before NIEMEYER and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge.

_________________________________________________________________ Vacated and remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion.

_________________________________________________________________ COUNSEL Ricky A. Pierce, Appellant Pro Se. Neil Clark Dalton, NORTHCAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellees.

_________________________________________________________________ Unpublished opinions are not binding pr ecedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).OPINION PER CURIAM:Ricky Pierce appeals from the district court's order granting summary judgment to Defendants in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1988) action. The district court awarded summary judgment upon recommendationby a magistrate judge. Although we express no opinion as to the ultimate success of Appellant's claims, we vacate the district court's order and remand for further proceedings. Pierce filed timely objections to the magistrate judge's report and recommendation. Apparently, these objections were not brought tothe attention of the district court. The court's order refers to Defendants' motions to dismiss or for summary judgment, Pierce's motions to transmit the record and to compel, and to the magistrate judge's report. However, there is no mention of Appellant's objections. Under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) (1988), the district court is obligated to review de novo those portions of the magistrate judge's report to which objections are filed. See United States v. Schronce , 727 F.2d 91, 93 (4th Cir.), cert. denied , 467 U.S. 1208 (1984). The district court's order, however, does not state whether it conducted a review of the record as to those objections or made a decision on the disputed issues de novo. Because Pierce made specific, timely objections to the magistrate judge's factual findings, the district court's error was not harmless. Orpiano v. Johnson , 687 F.2d 44, 47 (4th Cir. 1982).Therefore, we vacate the district court's order and remand the matter for the district court to conduct the required de novo review andissue a decision or to state that it conducted such review before rendering its previous decision. We dispense with oral argument becausethe facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. VACATED AND REMANDED
2
**Exhibit 32.3**

 

**Written Statement of the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer**

**Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350**

 

Solely for the purposes of complying with 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, we, the undersigned Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of Wisconsin Power and Light Company (the “Company”), hereby certify, based on our knowledge, that the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarter ended September 30, 2006 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

/s/ William D. Harvey

William D. Harvey

Chairman and Chief Executive Officer

 

/s/ Eliot G. Protsch

Eliot G. Protsch

Chief Financial Officer

 

November 3, 2006
# L_2007249EN.01001001.xml

| 25.9.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 249/10 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.9.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 249/10

---

COUNCIL DECISION

of 18 September 2007

appointing a Finnish member and a Finnish alternate member to the Committee of the Regions

(2007/618/EC)

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Article 263 thereof,

Having regard to the proposal from the Finnish Government,

Whereas:

| (1) | On 24 January 2006 the Council adopted Decision 2006/116/EC (1) appointing the members and alternate members of the Committee of the Regions for the period from 26 January 2006 to 25 January 2010. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

On 24 January 2006 the Council adopted Decision 2006/116/EC (1) appointing the members and alternate members of the Committee of the Regions for the period from 26 January 2006 to 25 January 2010.

| (2) | One member’s seat on the Committee of the Regions has become vacant following the end of Mr MYLLYVIRTA’s mandate. One alternate member’s seat on the Committee of the Regions has become vacant following the end of Ms PEIPONEN’s mandate, |
| --- | --- |

(2)

One member’s seat on the Committee of the Regions has become vacant following the end of Mr MYLLYVIRTA’s mandate. One alternate member’s seat on the Committee of the Regions has become vacant following the end of Ms PEIPONEN’s mandate,

HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:

Article 1

The following are hereby appointed member and alternate member of the Committee of the Regions for the remainder of the current term of office, which runs until 25 January 2010:

| (a) | as member






  — | Mr Jyrki MYLLYVIRTA, Mayor of Lahti (change of mandate); |
| --- | --- | --- |

(a)

as member

—

Mr Jyrki MYLLYVIRTA, Mayor of Lahti (change of mandate);

| (b) | as alternate member






  — | Ms Irja SOKKA, Member of Kuopio city council. |
| --- | --- | --- |

(b)

as alternate member

—

Ms Irja SOKKA, Member of Kuopio city council.

Article 2

This Decision shall be published in the Official Journal of the European Union.

It shall take effect on the date of its adoption.

Done at Brussels, 18 September 2007.

For the Council

The President

R. PEREIRA

---

(1)  
  OJ L 56, 25.2.2006, p. 75.

1

---
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 214 (Monday, November 7, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Page 67456]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-22130]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

[I.D. 061405D]


Marine Mammals; File No. 821-1588-04

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

ACTION: Notice; withdrawal of amendment application.

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

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the Texas A&M University, 
Department of Marine Biology, P.O. Box 1675, Galveston, TX 77551 
(Principal Investigator: Randall W. Davis, Ph.D.) has withdrawn its 
application to amendment Permit No. 821-1588-03 to conduct research 
Northern fur seals (Callorhinus ursinus).

ADDRESSES: The documents related to this action are available for 
review upon written request or by appointment in the following offices:
    Permits, Conservation and Education Division, Office of Protected 
Resources, NMFS, 1315 East-West Highway, Room 13705, Silver Spring, MD 
20910; phone (301)713-2289); fax (301)427-2521; and
    Alaska Region, NMFS, P.O. Box 21668, Juneau, AK 99802-1668; phone 
(907)586-7221; fax (907)586-7249.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ruth Johnson or Tammy Adams, (301)713-
2289.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On June 28, 2005, a notice was published in 
the Federal Register (70 FR 37089) that an application had been filed 
by the above named organization. That application has been withdrawn by 
the applicant.

    Dated: November 1, 2005.
Stephen L. Leathery,
Chief, Permits, Conservation and Education Division, Office of 
Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 05-22130 Filed 11-4-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-S
**Exhibit 31.1**

**CERTIFICATION**

I, John B. Wood, certify that: 

1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of Telos Corporation; 

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material factnecessary 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 allmaterial 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 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: 

a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared; 

b) Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal control over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to provide reasonable assurance regarding thereliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles; 

c) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and 

d) Disclosed in this reportany change in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and 

5. The registrant’s other certifying officer 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’sboard of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions): 

a) All significant deficiencies and materialweaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and 

b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting. 

 

 

83
United States Department of Labor

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

__________________________________________

M.H., Appellant

and

U.S. POSTAL SERVICE, POST OFFICE,

Coppell, TX, Employer

__________________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Docket No. 23-0948

Issued: July 26, 2023

Appearances: Case Submitted on the Record

Appellant, pro se

Office of Solicitor, for the Director

ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL

Before:

ALEC J. KOROMILAS, Chief Judge

VALERIE D. EVANS-HARRELL, Alternate Judge

JAMES D. McGINLEY, Alternate Judge

On June 29, 2023 appellant filed an appeal from a May 24, 2022 merit decision of the 

Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs (OWCP). The Clerk of the Appellate Boards

assigned Docket No. 23-0948.

The Board has duly considered the matter and notes that the Board has jurisdiction to 

review final adverse decisions of OWCP issued under the Federal Employees’ Compensation 

Act.1 For final adverse decisions of OWCP issued on or after November 19, 2008, the Board’s 

review authority is limited to appeals which are filed within 180 days from the date of issuance 

of OWCP’s decision.2

The 180th day following the May 24, 2022 decision was November 20, 2022. As 

appellant did not file an appeal with the Board until June 29, 2023, more than 180 days after the

May 24, 2022 OWCP decision, the Board finds that the appeal docketed as No. 23-0948 is 

untimely filed. The Board is without jurisdiction to review the appeal. Appellant has not 

1

5 U.S.C. § 8101 et seq.; 20 C.F.R. §§ 501.2(c) and 501.3(a).

2

20 C.F.R. § 501.3(e) provides in pertinent part: “Any notice of appeal must be filed within 180 days from the 

date of issuance of a decision of the OWCP.”
2

explained his failure to timely file an appeal with supporting documentation sufficient to 

establish compelling circumstances. Because there is no final adverse decision issued by OWCP 

within 180 days of the filing of the instant appeal, the Board concludes that the appeal docketed 

as No. 23-0948, must be dismissed.3 Accordingly,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the appeal docketed as No. 23-0948 is dismissed.

Issued: July 26, 2023

Washington, DC

Alec J. Koromilas, Chief Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

Valerie D. Evans-Harrell, Alternate Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

James D. McGinley, Alternate Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

3 The Board’s decisions and orders are “final upon the expiration of 30 days from the date of their issuance.” Id.

at § 501.6(d).
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 Pinnacle Foods Group Inc. (the Registrant) on Form 10-Q
for the period ended September 24, 2006, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Jeffrey P. Ansell, Chief Executive Officer of the Registrant, 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 Registrant.
|-- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|      |  |                                          
|----- |  | -----------------------------------------
|Date: |  | November 6, 2006                         
|      | 
|      |  | /s/ JEFFREY P. ANSELL                    
|      |  | Jeffrey P. Ansell Chief Executive
Officer
#### THE STATE OF RHODE ISLAND, MARGUERITE PRINS, Appellants, v. JOHN PRINS, Jr., Respondent.

No. 12359

June 30, 1980

613 P.2d 408

*Robert J. Miller,*District Attorney, and *John B. Squires,*Deputy District Attorney, Clark County, for Appellants.

*Archie & Heggie*for Respondent.

*Richard H. Bryan,*Attorney General and *Nancy Ford Angres,*Deputy Attorney General, amici curiae, urging reversal.

*566OPINION

*Per Curiam:*

This is an appeal by the State of Rhode Island from a judgment that respondent owed no duty of support to his child.

Despite an extension of time to file respondent’s answering brief, no such brief has been filed. The brief is now more than two months overdue. *See*NRAP 31(a). Appellant has moved this court to treat respondent’s failure to timely file his brief as a confession of error, to reverse and to remand this matter to the district court with instructions to determine a reasonable order for support retroactive to July 12, 1979, to continue until the child is emancipated or reaches the age of majority. [Headnote 1]

This court may, in its discretion, treat the failure of a respondent to file his brief as a confession of error, and reverse the judgment without consideration of the merits of the appeal. NRAP 31(c); Kitchen Factors, Inc. v. Brown, 91 Nev. 308, 535 P.2d 677 (1975); Toiyabe Supply Co. v. Arcade, 74 Nev. 314, 330 P.2d 121 (1958).

In our view, this is an appropriate case for such disposition. The judgment in respondent’s favor is reversed and remanded with instructions to determine a reasonable order for support retroactive to July 12, 1979, to continue until the child is emancipated or reaches the age of majority.
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 Commerce

###### Bureau of Industry and Security 

The Transportation and Related Equipment Technical Advisory Committee will meet on November 9, 2005, 9:30 a.m., in the Herbert C. Hoover Building, Room 6087B, 14th Street between Pennsylvania & Constitution Avenues, NW., Washington, DC. The Committee advises the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Export Administration with respect to technical questions that affect the level of export controls applicable to transportation and related equipment or technology.

## Agenda

1. Welcome and Introductions.

                    2. Review of Bureau issues of significance to TRANSTAC members.                          ( print page 60279)    

3. Regulatory overview.

4. Policy issues.

5. Missile Technology Control Regime.

6. Wassenaar proposal status.

7. Jurisdiction working group report.

8. Presentation of papers and comments by the public.

9. Follow-up on open action items.

                    The meeting will be open to the public and a limited number of seats will be available. Reservations are not accepted. To the extent time permits, members of the public may present oral statements to the Committee. Written statements may be submitted at any time before or after the meeting. However, to facilitate distribution of public presentation materials to Committee members, the Committee suggests that presenters forward the public presentation materials to Yvette Springer at                     *Yspringer@bis.doc.gov.*

For more information contact Ms. Springer on (202) 482-4814.

Dated: October 11, 2005.

Yvette Springer,

Committee Liaison Officer

[FR Doc. 05-20692  Filed 10-14-05; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510-JT-M