alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 216 (Wednesday, November 9, 2005)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 67924]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-22112]


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

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

48 CFR Part 252


Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement; Technical 
Amendment

AGENCY: Department of Defense (DoD).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: DoD is making a technical amendment to the Defense Federal 
Acquisition Regulation Supplement to update the Internet address for 
obtaining a list of processes accepted under the DoD Single Process 
Initiative (SPI).

EFFECTIVE DATE: November 9, 2005.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Michele Peterson, Defense 
Acquisition Regulations System, OUSD (AT&L) DPAP (DAR), IMD 3C132, 3062 
Defense Pentagon, Washington, DC 20301-3062. Telephone (703) 602-0311; 
facsimile (703) 602-0350.

List of Subjects in 48 CFR Part 252

    Government procurement.

Michele P. Peterson,
Editor, Defense Acquisition Regulations System.

0
Therefore, 48 CFR part 252 is amended as follows:

PART 252--SOLICITATION PROVISIONS AND CONTRACT CLAUSES

0
1. The authority citation for 48 CFR part 252 continues to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 41 U.S.C. 421 and 48 CFR Chapter 1.

0
2. Section 252.211-7005 is amended by revising the clause date and the 
second sentence of paragraph (b) to read as follows:


252.211-7005  Substitutions for Military or Federal Specifications and 
Standards.

* * * * *

SUBSTITUTIONS FOR MILITARY OR FEDERAL SPECIFICATIONS AND STANDARDS (NOV 
2005)

* * * * *
    (b) * * * A listing of SPI processes accepted at specific 
facilities is available via the Internet at http://guidebook.dcma.mil/20/guidebook_process.htm (paragraph 4.2).
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 05-22112 Filed 11-8-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001-08-P
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
UNAUDITED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AS OF DECEMBER 31, 1996 AND THE
UNAUDITED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS FOR THE THREE MONTHS
AND NINE MONTHS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1996 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY
BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                          16,219
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  103,402
<ALLOWANCES>                                     1,854
<INVENTORY>                                    198,545
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               322,669
<PP&E>                                         182,440
<DEPRECIATION>                                  56,693
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 468,902
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          137,930
<BONDS>                                        288,037
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                      24,700
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   468,902
<SALES>                                        756,070
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               756,070
<CGS>                                          545,285
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  545,285
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                99,179
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 1,844
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              30,492
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  (971)
<INCOME-TAX>                                       225
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (1,196)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (1,196)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 96-6459

TRIBLE LEE JONES, III,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

J. M. JABE, Warden of the Greensville Correctional Center; C. BLUNT, Captain; A. HICKS,

Lieutenant; L. MCINNIE; C. MIZZELL, Officer,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Claude M. Hilton, District

Judge. (CA-95-1331-AM)

Submitted: June 20, 1996 Decided: July 2, 1996

Before HALL, WILKINS, and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Trible Lee Jones, III, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals the district court's order dismissing his

42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1988) complaint. The district court assessed a

filing fee in accordance with Evans v. Croom, 650 F.2d 521 (4th

Cir. 1981), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 1153 (1982), and dismissed the

case without prejudice when Appellant failed to comply with the fee

order. Finding no abuse of discretion, we affirm the district

court's order. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and

legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before

the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
|                                                  |   | Sancon                Resources Recovery, Inc. |
|-------------------------------------------------------|--------|------------------------------------------------|
|                                                  |   |                                           |
|                                                  |   |                                           |
| Date:                November                16, 2007 |   |                                           |
|                                                  |   | By:                /s/ Jack Chen               |
|                                                  |   | --------------------------------               |
|                                                  |   | Jack                Chen                       |
|                                                  |   | Chief                Executive Officer         |
|                                                  |   |                                           |
| Date:                November                16, 2007 |   |                                           |
|                                                  |   | By:                /S/ Klaus Shen              |
|                                                  |   | --------------------------                     |
|                                                  |   | Klaus                Shen                      |
|                                                  |   | Chief                Financial Officer         |
# L_2007284EN.01002601.xml

| 30.10.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 284/26 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.10.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 284/26

---

ADDENDUM

to Council Decision 2007/543/EC of 23 July 2007 concerning the accession of Bulgaria and Romania to the Convention on the establishment of a European Police Office (Europol Convention)

(Official Journal of the European Union L 200 of 1 August 2007)

The Bulgarian and Romanian language versions of the following Convention and Protocols shall be published in a special edition of the Official Journal at a later date.

The Europol Convention and the Protocols of

| — | 24 July 1996, |
| --- | --- |

—

24 July 1996,

| — | 19 June 1997, |
| --- | --- |

—

19 June 1997,

| — | 30 November 2000, |
| --- | --- |

—

30 November 2000,

| — | 28 November 2002, |
| --- | --- |

—

28 November 2002,

| — | 27 November 2003. |
| --- | --- |

—

27 November 2003.

---
#### REALTY CO. v. HIGHWAY COMMISSION.

Case below: 1 N.C. App. 82.

Petition for writ of *certiorari*to North Carolina Court of Appeals denied 14 June 1968.
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 Annual Report on Form 10-K of Unified Western Grocers Inc. (the Company) for the fiscal year ended September 29, 2007, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Alfred A. Plamann, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby 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 Company as of, and for, the periods presented in
the Report.
|--- |  | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Date:     December 13, 2007



/S/    ALFRED A.
PLAMANNAlfred A. PlamannPresident and Chief Executive Officer (Principal executive officer)




A signed original of this written
statement required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
111TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5609 

AN ACT 

To amend the Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995 to prohibit 

any person from performing lobbying activities on behalf 

of a client which is determined by the Secretary of State 

to be a State sponsor of terrorism. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
2 

•HR 5609 EH

1 SECTION 1. PROHIBITING LOBBYING ACTIVITIES ON BE2 HALF OF STATE SPONSORS OF TERRORISM. 

3 The Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1601 

4 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following 

5 new section: 

6 ‘‘SEC. 27. PROHIBITING LOBBYING ACTIVITIES ON BEHALF 

7 OF STATE SPONSORS OF TERRORISM. 

8 ‘‘No person may perform lobbying activities on behalf 

9 of a client which is a country the government of which 

10 the Secretary of State has determined, for purposes of sec11 tion 6(j) of the Export Administration Act of 1979 (as 

12 continued in effect pursuant to the International Emer13 gency Economic Powers Act), section 40 of the Arms Ex14 port Control Act, section 620A of the Foreign Assistance 

15 Act of 1961, or any other provision of law, is a government 

16 that has repeatedly provided support for acts of inter17 national terrorism.’’. 

Passed the House of Representatives July 1, 2010. 

Attest: 

Clerk. 

111TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5609 

AN ACT 

To amend the Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995 to 

of terrorism. by the Secretary of State to be a State sponsor tivities on behalf of a client which is determined prohibit any person from performing lobbying ac-
#### GENERAL ELECTRIC SUPPLY CO., a Division of General Electric Company, a New York Corporation, Appellant, v. MT. WHEELER POWER, INC., a Nevada Corporation, Respondent.

No. 9369

December 20, 1978

587 P.2d 1312

*767[Rehearing denied January 31, 1979]

*Guild, Hagen & Clark, Ltd.,*Reno, for Appellant.

*Vaughan, Hull, Marfisi & Miller, Ltd.,*Elko, for Respondent.

OPINION

*Per Curiam:*

Respondent sought damages resulting from appellant’s breach of contract. At the conclusion of a trial without jury, the district court concluded appellant had breached its contract t- supply material to respondent and awarded respondent costs, plus damages in the amount of $164,460.30.1 Appellant’s only cognizable contentions are (1) the evidence adduced at trial fails to support the district court’s findings; and, (2) the district court erred in awarding damages. We disagree.

1. Appellant contends the district court erred in finding (a) it had breached the contract by failing to make timely deliveries of the material and, (b) respondent had given appellant notice of such breach within a reasonable time, as required by NRS 104.2607(3)(a).

Where a trial court, sitting without a jury, makes factual *768determinations based upon conflicting evidence, those determinations will not be disturbed where, as here, they are supported by substantial evidence. Havas v. Engebregson, 94 Nev. 336, 580 P.2d 122 (1978).

2. Appellant also contends the district court erred by awarding lost profits because respondent was engaged in a new business with no prior history of profits and, thus, lost profits were too speculative, uncertain, and remote. The rule barring recovery of uncertain lost profits is directed against “uncertainty as to the existence of [profits] rather than as to measure or extent.” Fireman’s Fund Ins. v. Shawcross, 84 Nev. 446, 453, 442 P.2d 907, 912 (1968). The record indicates that respondent was an electrical cooperative corporation which took over and expanded upon the electrical services previously provided by two long-established electrical companies — Ely Light and Power Co. and Eureka Light and Power Co. Under these circumstances, we perceive no uncertainty as to the existence of lost profits and, accordingly, the rule barring recovery is not applicable.

Further, appellant argues that the evidence was insufficient to support the award of lost profits. The district court found lost profits were reasonably foreseeable and within the contemplation of the parties at the time the contract was entered into. This finding is supported by the evidence and, thus, it will not be disturbed on appeal. Eaton v. J. H. Inc., 94 Nev. 446, 581 P.2d 14 (1978).

The district court judgment is affirmed.

1

This sum was reduced by a $35,000 settlement with another party to the action in district court.
#### BONE v. INSURANCE CO.

No. 31 PC.

Case below: 10 N.C. App. 393.

Petition for writ of *certiorari*to North Carolina Court of Appeals denied 6 April 1971.
### IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO 1 

### MARTHA DAWSON SWANSON, 2 

### Plaintiff-Appellee, 3 

### v. No. 28,832 4

### ARCHDIOCESE OF SANTA FE 5 

### and FATHER PAUL BACA, 6 

### Defendants-Appellants. 7 

### APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF BERNALILLO COUNTY 8 

### George P. Eichwald, District Judge 9

### Law Offices of Daymon B. Ely 10

### Daymon B. Ely 11 

### Albuquerque, NM 12 for Appellee 13 Arthur O. Beach 14 Albuquerque, NN 15 for Archdiocese of Santa Fe 16 Marchiondo Law Offices, PC 17 William C. Marchiondo 18 Albuquerque, NM 19 Kelley-Streubel, LLC 20 Cody K. Kelley 21 Albuquerque, NM 22 for Father Paul Baca 232 

### MEMORANDUM OPINION 1 

### SUTIN, Judge. 2 Summary dismissal was proposed for the reasons stated in the notice of proposed 3 summary disposition. No memorandum opposing summary dismissal has been filed and the 4 time for doing so has expired. 5 DISMISSED. 6 IT IS SO ORDERED. 7

________________ __________________ 8 JONATHAN B. SUTIN, Judge 9

WE CONCUR: 10

____________________________________ 11 JAMES J. WECHSLER, Judge 12

____________________________________ 13 RODERICK T. KENNEDY, Judge 14
#### DINA BOELE, ADMINISTRATRIX AD PROSEQUENDUM OF THE GOODS AND CHATTELS OF ANTON M. BOELE, DECEASED, PLAINTIFF, v. COLONIAL WESTERN AIRWAYS, A CORPORATION OF DELAWARE, DEFENDANT. MARY HENDERSON, ADMINISTRATRIX AD PROSEQUEN-DUM OF THE GOODS AND CHATTELS OF THOMAS J. HENDERSON, DECEASED, PLAINTIFF, v. COLONIAL WESTERN AIRWAYS, A CORPORATION OF DELAWARE, DEFENDANT.

Decided February 3, 1932.

Por the plaintiffs, *James A. Coolahan*and *William George.*

Por the defendant, *McDermott, Enright Carpenter.*

AoKEBSOsr, C. C. J.

This matter comes before me upon a rule to show cause why the verdicts of $38,000, for the plaintiff, Dina Boele, administratrix, and $33,900 for the plaintiff, Mary Henderson, administratrix, should not be set aside and a new trial granted upon the grounds that the verdicts are against the weight of the evidence and are excessive.

I have carefully read the voluminous transcript of the evidence while the case is still fresh in my mind, and have reached the conclusion that the verdicts are not against the weight of the evidence.

*218In regard to the verdict of $38,000 in favor of Dina Boele, administratrix, it appeared that the deceased, Anton M. Boele, was thirty-seven years of age at the time of his death, and his wife, the plaintiff, twenty-eight. There were no children, and the deceased had been turning over to his wife from sixty ($60) dollars to one hundred ($100) dollars per week for about two years before his death—earned principally from speculating in the stock market. There is no evidence as to the average of such weekly payments, nor how much thereof was required for the living expenses of the deceased. The estate turned over to the widow amounted to approximately $28,000. Taking everything into account, I am convinced that all of this verdict over $25,000 is excessive.

If the plaintiff, Dina Boele, administratrix as aforesaid, will consent to accept a reduction of this verdict to $25,000, she may enter judgment for that amount. Otherwise the rule to show cause will be made absolute and a new trial ordered as to damages only.

In regard to the verdict of $33,900 in favor of Mary Henderson, administratrix, it appeared that she was fifty-eight years old, and her son twenty-seven years at the time of his death. He was unmarried and living with his mother to whom he turned over forty ($40) dollars to fifty ($50) dollars per week, realized principally from speculations in the stock market in partnership with his friend the above-mentioned Anton M. Boele. Here again there is no evidence as to the average of such weekly payments, nor how much thereof was required for the board of the deceased. The estate received by Mrs. Henderson amounted to approximately $25,000. Considering the matter in the most favorable light for Mrs. Henderson, it would appear that the verdict should not exceed $15,000.

If the plaintiff, Mary Henderson, administratrix as aforesaid, will consent to a reduction of this verdict to $15,000, it may stand for that amount. Otherwise the rule to show cause will be made absolute, and a new trial ordered as to damages only.
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 Treasury

# DATES:

Written comments should be received on or before December 12, 2005 to be assured of consideration.

## Internal Revenue Services (IRS)

*OMB Number:*                     1545-1932.                

*Type of Review:*                     Extension.                

*Title:*                     REG-158138-04 (NPRM and Temporary Regulations) Information Returns by Donees Relating to Qualified Intellectual Property Contributions.                

*Description:*                     These proposed and temporary regulations provide guidance for filling information returns by donees relating to qualified intellectual property contributions. The regulations affect donees receiving qualified intellectual property contributions after June 3, 2004.                

*Respondents:*                     Not-for-profit institutions.                

*Estimated Total Burden Hours:*                     2 hours.                

*Clearance Officer:*                     Glenn P. Kirkland, (202) 622-3428, Internal Revenue Service, Room 6516, 1111 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20224.                

*OMB Reviewer:*                     Alexander T. Hunt, (202) 395-7316, Office of Management and Budget, Room 10235, New Executive Office Building, Washington, DC 20503.                

Michael A. Robinson,

Treasury PRA Clearance Officer.

[FR Doc. 05-22418 Filed 11-9-05; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4830-01-P
# L_2007242EN.01001901.xml

| 15.9.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 242/19 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.9.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 242/19

---

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 1062/2007

of 14 September 2007

providing for the rejection of applications for export licences in relation to certain processed products and cereal-based compound feedingstuffs

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1784/2003 of 29 September 2003 on the common organisation of the market in cereals (1),

Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 1342/2003 of 28 July 2003 laying down special detailed rules for the application of the system of import and export licences for cereals and rice (2), and in particular Article 8(1) thereof,

Whereas:

The quantity covered by applications for advance fixing of refunds on potato starch and maize-based products is of great importance and could give rise to speculation. It has therefore been decided to reject all applications for export licences of such products made on 13 September 2007,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

In accordance with Article 8(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1342/2003, applications for export licences with advance fixing of refunds for products falling within CN code 1108 12 00 made on 13 September 2007 shall be rejected.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on 15 September 2007.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 14 September 2007.

For the Commission

Jean-Luc DEMARTY

Director-General for Agriculture and Rural Development

---

(1)  
  OJ L 270, 21.10.2003, p. 78. Regulation as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 735/2007 (OJ L 169, 29.6.2007, p. 6).

1

(2)  
  OJ L 189, 29.7.2003, p. 12. Regulation as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1996/2006 (OJ L 398, 30.12.2006, p. 1).

2

---