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 Health and Human Services

###### National Institutes of Health

Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice is hereby given of the following meeting.

The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

*Name of Committee:*                         National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stoke Special Emphasis Panel, Language Development.                    

*Date:*                         February 28, 2008.                    

*Time:*                         3 p.m. to 5 p.m.                    

*Agenda:*                         To review and evaluate grant applications.                    

*Place:*                         National Institutes of Health, Neuroscience Center, 6001 Executive Boulevard, Rockville, MD 20852, (Telephone Conference Call).                    

*Contact Person:*                         Richard D. Crosland, PhD, Scientific Review Administrator, Scientific Review Branch, Division of Extramural Research, NINDS/NIH/DHHS/Neuroscience Center, 6001 Executive Blvd., Suite 3208, MSC 9529, Bethesda, MD 20892-9529, 301-594-0635,                         *rc218u@nih.gov.*

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.853, Clinical Research Related to Neurological Disorders; 93.854, Biological Basis Research in the Neurosciences, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

Dated: January 14, 2008.

Jennifer Spaeth,

Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. 08-178 Filed 1-18-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4140-01-M
I 

115TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5552 

To require the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency to 

reinstate information about climate change that was removed from, or 

redacted on, the Agency’s website, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 18, 2018 

Mr. CARBAJAL introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Energy and Commerce 

A BILL 

To require the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency to reinstate information about climate 

change that was removed from, or redacted on, the Agency’s website, and for other purposes. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Climate Change is Real 

5 Act’’. 


amozie on DSK30RV082PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 5552 IH

1 SEC. 2. ENSURING UP-TO-DATE INFORMATION ABOUT CLI2 MATE CHANGE AND GLOBAL WARMING ON 

3 THE EPA WEBSITE. 

4 (a) REINSTATING REMOVED AND REDACTED INFOR5 MATION.—Not later than 30 days after the date of the 

6 enactment of this Act, the Administrator of the Environ7 mental Protection Agency (in this section referred to as 

8 the ‘‘Administrator’’) shall reinstate the information about 

9 climate change that was removed from, or redacted on, 

10 the Agency’s website during the period beginning on Janu11 ary 20, 2017, and ending on the date of implementation 

12 of this subsection. 

13 (b) MAINTAINING UP-TO-DATE INFORMATION.—The 

14 Administrator shall maintain on the public website of the 

15 Environmental Protection Agency, and update regularly, 

16 information on climate change, including the following: 

17 (1) Information acknowledging the impact of 

18 human activities on climate and the planet. 

19 (2) Links to materials to assist local govern20 ments, including municipalities, to prepare for rising 

21 temperatures and more severe storms and weather 

22 conditions. 

23 (3) Detailed information and descriptions of cli24 mate change risks, including— 

25 (A) examples of plans to adapt to extreme 

26 weather conditions for States; and 


amozie on DSK30RV082PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 5552 IH

1 (B) various proposals being implemented 

2 by States to curb greenhouse gas emissions. 

Æ 


amozie on DSK30RV082PROD with BILLS
ABRWH 

Work Group on TBD 6000/6001 

December 16, 2009 

9:30 a.m. EST 

Cincinnati Airport Marriott 

AGENDA

Note: One hour lunch break at approximately 12:00 noon. 

 Adjourn by 5:00 p.m. 

1. Call to order and roll call (Paul Ziemer and Ted Katz) 

2. Introductory remarks and review of the agenda (Paul Ziemer) 

3. Update on TBD 6000 Findings Matrix and status of each issue. 

a. NIOSH White Paper on Issue 1 (new) 

i. Initial SC&A response 

ii. Concerns raised by Appendix BB (GSI) petitioner McKeel 

b. Mark Griffon response to previous NIOSH White Paper (on use of Adley 

report) and SC&A Review of October 13, 2009 on Issue 5 

c. Status of Issue 6 (Transfer to Procedures Review Subcommittee) 

4. Appendix BB (General Steel Industries) Issues Matrix 

a. Issue 1 

i. Clarify outcome of NIOSH comparison of FB results with models. 

Also, there may be additional FB results as per recent petitioner 

communication. 

ii. Discuss anticipated changes (if any) of recent source term 

information from petitioner. 

b. Issue 2 

i. Is there a final response from DOL on the issue of the start date for 

the covered period? 

c. Issues 3-11 

i. As for issue 1, the results of the FBs and the models need to be 

clarified for all of these findings. This includes potential changes 

in source terms. 

d. Issue 12 

 1 
 

 2 

i. This item appears to be the same as Issue 6 of the TBD-6000 

Issues Matrix which has been transferred to the Procedures Review 

Subcommittee. 

e. Follow-up on new information provided by petitioner 

f. Preliminary report of interview of a site expert by Paul Ziemer 

5. GSI SEC Petition Evaluation Report an d SC&A Review Matrix (Note: Refer to 

October 12, 2009 PA cleared version of Issue Resolution Matrix. All 10 Issues 

include a NIOSH response and an SC&A reply.) 

a. Review SC&A replies and determine if any further NIOSH response is to 

be provided for any Issues 

b. Consider related petitioner issues and concerns 

c. Identify path forward or action for each item 

6. Initial review of Bliss & Laughlin Steel SEC Petition ER 

a. Determine if SC&A review needed clarify SEC issues 

7. Initial TBD-6001 Review and Appendix C (Electro-Metallurgical Corp.) Petition 

a. Status of SC&A review and path forward 

8. Adjourn
AVID-12.31.2013-Ex 10.17






EXHIBIT 10.17




AVID TECHNOLOGY, INC.
AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO 2005 AMENDED AND RESTATED STOCK OPTION PLAN


Adopted by the Board of Directors, May 10, 2013


Pursuant to Section 3(a) of the Amended and Restated 2005 Stock Option Plan (the “Plan”) of Avid Technology, Inc. (the “Company”), the Plan is hereby amended as set forth below.  Capitalized terms used herein and not defined herein shall have the meanings ascribed to them in the Plan.
The Definition of “Outside Director” in Section 6(a) of the Plan is hereby amended to read as follows:
An “Outside Director” is a member of the Board who is not then (i) an employee of the Company or any subsidiary of the Company, (ii) the beneficial owner of 10% or more of the outstanding Common Stock of the Company (a “Significant Stockholder”) or (iii) a controlling stockholder, member or partner of a Significant Stockholder.
AGENDA 

Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health 

Teleconference Meeting of the 

Weldon Spring Work Group 

February 14, 2012 

Conference Call Number: 1-866-659-0537 Participant Pass Code: 9933701 

10:00 a.m. Welcome and roll-call/introductions 

Work Group Discussion 

1. SC&A review of NIOSH responses concerning the daily weighted exposure data 

2. Rolfes-Clawson correspondence on WS operational dates – thorium processing 

3. Petitioner questions/comments 

4. Report to the Board 

Adjourn
Exhibit 13

CERTIFICATION

Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code), each of the undersigned officers
of CNH Global N.V. (the Company) does hereby certify, to such officers knowledge, that:

The
Annual Report on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2010 of the Company (the Form 20-F) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and information contained in
the Form 20-F fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



By:

/s/ Harold D. BoyanovskyHarold D. BoyanovskyChief Executive OfficerBy:

/s/ Richard TobinRichard TobinChief Financial Officer


Dated March 1, 2011

A signed original of this written statement has been provided to CNH Global N.V. and will be retained by CNH
Global N.V. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

The foregoing
certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C §1350 and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document.
ABRWH

Subcommittee on Procedures

Action Items and Agenda

Cincinnati Airport Marriott Hotel

Teleconference Phone: 866-659-0537; Participant Code: 9933701

October 13, 2010

9:00 a.m. Welcome and introductions Katz

9:15 Status report on database system, linking and IT ‘sharing’ capability NIOSH/SCA

9:45 TIB-0014 review status SC&A

10:00 RPRT-0044 issues and addition to the db SC&A

10:30 Break

10:45 Report on status and action plan for open items NIOSH

11:15 Review of carry-over items

Response due on TIB-0013 SC&A

OTIB-0049-01 and -02 result of tech talk re Pu retained in lung NIOSH/SCA

OTIB-0054 response due NIOSH

PROC-0042 scaling factor, finding -06 status change NIOSH

12:00 p.m. Lunch

1:15 Continuation of carry-over items

Status of TIB-0010-08 after NIOSH MCNP runs provided SC&A

Status of revised OTIB-0029-02 response NIOSH

OTIB-0021 -02 response to calculation differences & sources SC&A

 -04 response to documentation question SC&A

Verify OTIB –0051-01 link is complete and item closed NIOSH

Status of OTIB 0070 – 15 issues Priority SC&A

Status of OTIB 0047-02 NIOSH/SCA

3:00 Break

3:15 Discussion and editing of four 2-page summaries from SC&A All

3:45 Review of PER-12 and -09 issues SC&A 

4:00 Tracking status of OTIB-0019 All

4:15 Administrative detail and calendar All
Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

LARRY EARL STALLWORTH,

Plaintiff,

v. Case No. 3:11cv178/MCR/CJK

AMERICAN FAMILY LIFE ASSURANCE

 COMPANY OF COLUMBUS, et al.,

Defendants.

________________________________________________________________

O R D E R

Upon consideration of the Amended Report and Recommendation of the

Magistrate Judge filed on May 3, 2011, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B), and

after reviewing objections to the Recommendation, if any, the Recommendation is

adopted as the opinion of the Court.

Accordingly, it is now ORDERED as follows:

1. The magistrate judge's report and recommendation is adopted and

incorporated by reference in this order.

2. This action is DISMISSED as follows:

a. Plaintiff’s federal claims are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE

under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii).

b. Plaintiff state law claims are DISMISSED WITHOUT

PREJUDICE to plaintiff filing themin the appropriate state court.

Case 3:11-cv-00178-MCR-CJK Document 6 Filed 06/06/11 Page 1 of 2
Page 2 of 2

3. The clerk is directed to close the file.

DONE AND ORDERED this 6th day of June, 2011.

M. Casey Rodgers

M. CASEY RODGERS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case No: 3:11cv178/MCR/CJK

Case 3:11-cv-00178-MCR-CJK Document 6 Filed 06/06/11 Page 2 of 2
Exhibit 23.01




          CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS



As independent public accountants, we hereby consent to the
incorporation of our reports dated March 5, 1999 included in
this Form 10-K, into Enron Corp.'s previously filed
Registration Statement File Nos. 33-13397 (Savings Plan), 33-
34796 (Savings Plan), 33-52261 (Savings Plan), 33-27893
(1988 Stock Option Plan), 33-52768 (1991 Stock Plan), 33-
52143 (955,640 Shares of Common Stock), 33-60821 (1994 Stock
Plan), 333-22739 (347,793 Shares of Common Stock), 333-19253
(Stock Option Plan for Zond Exchange Agreements), 333-70465
(Debt Securities, Common Stock, Preferred Stock and
Depositary Shares), 333-44133 (244,283 Shares of Common
Stock), 333-38253 (176,634 Shares of Common Stock) and 333-
48193 (1994 Deferral Plan).





                              ARTHUR ANDERSEN LLP





Houston, Texas
March 30, 1999
Exhibit 10(b)


AMENDMENT NUMBER TWO


TO THE


HARRIS CORPORATION


2005 SUPPLEMENTAL EXECUTIVE RETIREMENT PLAN





WHEREAS, Harris Corporation, a Delaware corporation (the “ Corporation ”), heretofore has adopted and maintains the Harris Corporation 2005 Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan, as amended and restated effective November 28, 2011 (the “ Plan ”);


WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 8.1 of the Plan, the Employee Benefits Committee of the Corporation (the “ Employee Benefits Committee ”) has the authority to adopt non-material amendments to the Plan;


WHEREAS, the Employee Benefits Committee desires to amend the Plan to clarify its provisions regarding termination of the Plan; and


WHEREAS, the Employee Benefits Committee has determined that the above-described amendment is non-material.


NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that Section 8.1 of the Plan hereby is amended, effective as of the date hereof, as follows:


Section 8.1.  Amendment and Termination .  Subject to Section 6.7, (i) at any time the Compensation Committee may adopt amendments to the SERP (irrespective of whether such amendments are material or nonmaterial) or may terminate the SERP (in its entirety or in part), and (ii) at any time the Committee may adopt nonmaterial amendments to the SERP or may terminate the SERP with respect to Participants who have experienced a “change in control event” within the meaning of Treasury Regulation §1.409A-3(i)(5).  To the extent consistent with the rules relating to plan termination and liquidation under section 409A of the Code, the Compensation Committee or Committee, as applicable, may provide that following the termination of the SERP (or portion thereof), each impacted Participant or beneficiary shall receive a single sum payment in cash equal to the balance of his or her vested Account.  The single sum payment shall be made within sixty (60) days following the date the SERP (or portion thereof) is terminated and shall be in lieu of any other benefit which may be payable to the Participant or beneficiary under the SERP.  Unless so distributed, in the event of a SERP termination, the Corporation shall continue to maintain Participant Accounts until distributed pursuant to the terms of the SERP.  Notwithstanding the foregoing, no amendment or termination of the SERP shall reduce or cancel any vested amount credited to any Participant’s Account.







---







APPROVED by the HARRIS CORPORATION EMPLOYEE BENEFITS COMMITTEE on this 16 th day of December, 2016.


/s/ Adam HistedAdam Histed, Chairperson








2
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PANAMA CITY DIVISION

RAY CHRIS MOBLEY,

Plaintiff,

vs. Case No: 5:11-cv-205-RH-GRJ

FRANK BAILEY, et al., 

Defendants.

_______________________________/

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

On November 2, 2011, the undersigned ordered Plaintiff to show cause on or

before November 15, 2011, as to why this case should not be dismissed because it is

duplicative of other cases pending in this Court that were docketed prior to the instant

case. See Doc. 11. Plaintiff was warned that failure to comply would result in a

recommendation that this case be dismissed. As of this date, Plaintiff has neither

complied with the Court’s order nor shown cause as to why he is unable to do so.

 Accordingly, it is respectfully RECOMMENDED that this case be dismissed as

duplicative, and for failure to comply with an order of the Court and for failure to

prosecute.

IN CHAMBERS this 17 day of November 2011. 

th

s/Gary R. Jones 

GARY R. JONES

United States Magistrate Judge

NOTICE TO THE PARTIES

A party may file specific, written objections to the proposed findings and

recommendations within 14 days after being served with a copy of this report and

recommendation. A party may respond to another party’s objections within 14 days after being

served with a copy thereof. Failure to file specific objections limits the scope of review of

proposed factual findings and recommendations.

Case 5:11-cv-00205-RH-GRJ Document 12 Filed 11/17/11 Page 1 of 1
AGENDA

Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health – Meeting 101

Teleconference Meeting

September 17, 2014

Teleconference Phone: 866-659-0537

Participant Code: 9933701

11:00 a.m. (Eastern Time) Start

• Roll-call – Mr. Katz, DFO

• Welcome – Dr. Melius, Chair

• Recording Absentee Votes (General Atomics and Simonds Saw and Steel SEC 

petitions) – Mr. Katz, DFO

• NIOSH Update on Implementing 10-Year Review Recommendations – Mr. Stuart 

Hinnefeld, NIOSH

• Special Exposure Cohort (SEC) Petition Status Update – Mr. Rutherford, DCAS

• Updates from Work Groups and Subcommittees (as necessary) – WG/SC Chairs

• Plans for the November 2014 Board Meeting – All Members

• Correspondence – Dr. Melius, Chair
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 01-4861

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

LEROY KELLY, a/k/a Q-Tip, a/k/a James Jones,

a/k/a Lewis Kelly, a/k/a Roy Kelly,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Raymond A. Jackson, District

Judge. (CR-96-55)

Submitted: March 20, 2002 Decided: April 12, 2002

Before NIEMEYER, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

M. Woodrow Griffin, Jr., Hampton, Virginia, for Appellant. Paul J.

McNulty, United States Attorney, Robert J. Krask, Assistant United

States Attorney, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Leroy Kelly pled guilty to conspiracy to defraud the United

States, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 371 (1994). The district court

sentenced Kelly to sixty months imprisonment, followed by a three

year supervised release term. While on supervised release, Kelly

tested positive for cocaine use and violated several other terms of

supervised release. The district court revoked Kelly’s supervised

release and imposed a twenty-two month term of imprisonment,

followed by a fourteen month supervised release term.

On appeal of the supervised release revocation, Kelly argues

the district court abused its discretion in sentencing him to a

term of twenty-two months imprisonment. Finding no abuse of

discretion in the district court’s revocation sentence, we affirm.

See United States v. Davis, 53 F.3d 638 (4th Cir. 1995). 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
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 21
- 0412 STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee, v. THOMAS JOE ELLSWORTH,

Defendant and Appellant.

**ORDER** Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension of time to and including February 25, 2022, within which to prepare, file, and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

January 19 2022

01/19/2022

Case Number: DA 21-0412
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. MIke CLEMONES, Priscilla Scott, Charles Everett Coburn, Jr., Joseph Harold Johnson, and William Alonzo Johnson, Jr., Defendants-Appellants. UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Edward Raymond LeCOMPTE and Kathy Hatmaker, Defendants-Appellees.

Nos. 76-3866, 76-3870.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Nov. 6, 1978.

Robert K. Finnell, Rome, Ga. (Court-appointed), for Clemones.

Harold N. Wollstein, Rome, Ga. (Court-appointed), for Scott and Joseph Harold Johnson.

John E. Sawhill, III, Rome, Ga. (Court-appointed), for Coburn.

W. Benjamin Ballenger, Summerville, Ga., for William A. Johnson, Jr.

A. Cecil Palmour, Summerville, Ga., Robert W. Ritchie, Knoxville, Tenn., for Hat-maker.

Bobby Lee Cook, Summerville, Ga., for LeCompte.

William L. Harper, U. S. Atty., James E. Baker, Asst. U. S. Atty., Atlanta, Ga., for plaintiff-appellee in No. 76-3866.

*1374John W. Stokes, U. S. Atty., James E. Baker, Asst. U. S. Atty., Atlanta, Ga., for plaintiff-appellant in No. 76-3870.

ON PETITIONS FOR REHEARING AND PETITIONS FOR REHEARING EN BANC

(Opinion 8/9/78, 5 Cir., 1978, 577 F.2d 1247).

Before JONES, GODBOLD and GEE, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

The opinion is modified by deleting the following language (p. 1255):

> Once the existence of a conspiracy is shown only slight evidence is required to warrant submitting to the jury the question of a particular defendant’s membership. *See, e. g., U. S. v. Baldarrama,*566 F.2d 560, 566 (CA5, 1978).

The petitions for rehearing filed by Edward Raymond LeCompte, William Alonzo Johnson, Jr., Joseph Harold Johnson, Priscilla Scott and Mike. Clemones are DENIED, and no member of this panel nor Judge in regular active service on the Court having requested that the Court be polled on rehearing en banc, (Rule 35 Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure; Local Fifth Circuit Rule 12) the petitions for rehearing en banc are DENIED.

The petition for panel rehearing filed by Kathy Hatmaker is DENIED.
```

[Congressional Bills 115th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5234 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

115th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5234

 To amend the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002 to expand 
    opportunities for algae-based research, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 8, 2018

   Mr. Soto introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                        Committee on Agriculture

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002 to expand 
    opportunities for algae-based research, and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. EXPANDING OPPORTUNITIES FOR ALGAE-BASED RESEARCH.

    Section 9011(a)(6)(C) of the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act 
of 2002 (7 U.S.C. 8111(a)(6)(C)) is amended--
            (1) by striking clause (iv); and
            (2) by redesignating clauses (v) through (vii) as clauses 
        (iv) through (vi), respectively.
                                 <all>
```