alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 74 (Tuesday, April 18, 1995)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 19386-19387]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-9442]



=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 19387]]

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Indian Affairs

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Indian Health Service

25 CFR Part 900

RINS 0905-AC98: 1076-AC20


Indian Self-Determination and Education Act Amendments

AGENCIES: Departments of the Interior and Health and Human Services.

ACTION: Notice of withdrawal of proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Secretaries of the Department of the Interior and the 
Department of Health and Human Services proposed, in the Federal 
Register of January 20, 1994, (59 FR 3166), a joint rule to implement 
Sections 1 through 9 and Title I, Indian Self-Determination Act and 
Pub. L. 100-472, the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance 
Act Amendments of 1988. This proposed rule is hereby withdrawn. New 
regulations may be issued in accordance with Pub. L. 103-413, 108 Stat. 
4250, Indian Self-Determination Act Amendments of 1994, enacted October 
25, 1994.

    Approved: March 15, 1995.
Ada E. Deer,
Assistant Secretary--Indian Affairs, DOI.
    Dated: March 27, 1995.
Philip R. Lee, M.D.,
Assistant Secretary for Health--DHHS.
    Approved: April 11, 1995.
Donna E. Shalala,
Secretary--DHHS.
[FR Doc. 95-9442 Filed 4-17-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-16-M
#### Pamela MAXIE, Claimant/Appellant, v. BEVERLY ENTERPRISES, d/b/a Delhaven Nursing Home, Employer/Respondent.

No. 62929.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.

June 15, 1993.

Rehearing Denied July 14, 1993.

Ray B. Marglous, Del Phillips, Margulis & Grant, Clayton, for claimant/appellant.

Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, J. Patrick Chassaing, Sp. Asst. Atty. Gen., St. Louis, for employer/respondent.

Before AHRENS, P.J., and REINHARD and CRIST, JJ.

*349ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Claimant appeals the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission’s denial of her claim against the Second Injury Fund. We affirm. The findings and conclusions of the Commission are supported by competent and substantial evidence on the whole record; an extended opinion would have no precedential value. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order affirming the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 85 (Wednesday, May 1, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Page 19270]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-10708]



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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
[Docket No. GT96-58-000]


Trunkline Gas Company; Notice of Proposed Changes in FERC Gas 
Tariff

April 25, 1996.
    Take notice that on April 22, 1996, Trunkline Gas Company 
(Trunkline) tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, First 
Revised Volume No. 1, the following tariff sheets, to be effective May 
23, 1996:

Fifth Revised Sheet No. 3
Twelfth Revised Sheet No. 500

    Trunkline states that the purpose of this filing is to delete the 
Index of Customers from its tariff. The Index of Customers is now filed 
with the Commission in electronic file format and is available on 
Trunkline's electronic bulletin board.
    Trunkline states that copies of this filing are being served on all 
affected customers and applicable state regulatory agencies.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest this filing should 
file a motion to intervene or protest with the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20426, 
in accordance with Sections 385.214 and 385.211 of the Commission's 
Rules and Regulations. All such motions or protests must be filed as 
provided in Section 154.210 of the Commission's Regulations. Protests 
will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate 
action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to 
the proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a motion 
to intervene. Copies of this filing are on file with the Commission and 
are available for public inspection in the Public Reference Room.
Linwood A. Watson, Jr.,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 96-10708 Filed 4-30-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 31.1


                      CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER CERTIFICATION

I, Robert W. Hughes certify that:

1.   I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of OC Financial, Inc.;

2.   Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of
     a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the
     statements made, in light of 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 all material respect
     the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the
     registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4.   I am responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and
     procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) 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 consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to
          us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in
          which this report is being prepared;

     b)   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 and procedures, as of the end
          of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

     c)   Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal
          control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's
          most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is
          reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant's internal
          control over financial reporting; and

5.   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 the registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the
     equivalent functions):

     a)   all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses 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's internal
          control over financial reporting.


Date:  August 15, 2005


/s/ Robert W. Hughes
--------------------
Robert W. Hughes
Chairman, President, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer


                                       22
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 84 (Tuesday, April 30, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Page 19110]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-10672]



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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration


Advisory Circular 21-20B, Supplier Surveillance Procedures

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of availability.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces the availability of Advisory Circular 
21-20B, Supplier Surveillance Procedures. Advisory Circular 21-20B 
provides information and guidance concerning an acceptable means, but 
not the only means, of demonstrating compliance with the requirements 
of Federal Aviation Regulations Part 21, Certification Procedures for 
Products and Parts, regarding Supplier Surveillance Procedures.

ADDRESSES: Copies of AC 21-20B can be obtained from the following: U.S. 
Department of Transportation, Subsequent Distribution Office, Ardmore 
East Business Center, 3341 Q 75th Ave, Landover MD 20785.

    Issued in Washington, DC on April 22, 1996.
Frank Paskiewicz,
Acting Manager, Production and Airworthiness Certification Division.
[FR Doc. 96-10672 Filed 4-29-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-M
#### STATE of Missouri, Plaintiff/Respondent, v. Mark A. VANSICKLE, Defendant/Appellant.

No. 55171.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Four.

Aug. 15, 1989.

Charles C. Schwartz, Jr., Clayton, for defendant/appellant.

William J. Hannah, Pros. Atty., Caroline Komyati, Asst. Pros. Atty., St. Charles, for plaintiff/respondent.

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Defendant, Mark Yansickle, appeals from the trial court’s order revoking his probation and sentencing him to six months in the St. Charles County Jail. The State has filed a motion to dismiss the appeal.

Defendant does not challenge the sufficiency of the charge against him nor the jurisdiction of the trial court. Other asserted errors, as here, in probation revocation proceedings must be challenged by a writ of habeas corpus not by a direct appeal. E.g. *State v. Henderson,*750 S.W.2d 507, 516 (Mo.App.1988); *State v. Morgan,*654 S.W.2d 326 (Mo.App.1983); *Boyer v. State,*646 S.W.2d 388 (Mo.App.1983).

An extended opinion would serve no precedential value. The State’s motion to dismiss is granted. Rule 84.16(b).
Order filed, June 17, 2013

.

In The 

## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________
NO. 14

- 13

- 00493

- CV

____________
MARLENE OCTAVIA KNIG HT , Appellant

V.

WE CARE KIDS CARE, P LLC AND LISA H. CATN EY, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS OWNER OF WE CARE KIDS CARE, PL LC , Appellee

On Appeal from the 281st District Court

Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 2011

- 39498



### ORDER

The reporter’s record in this case was due June 03, 2013

. See Tex. R. App. P. 35.1. The court has not received a request to extend tim e for filing the record. The record has not been filed with the court. Because the reporter’s record has not
been filed timely, we issue the following order.We order Rhonda Armbruster , the official court reporter, to file the record

in this appeal withi n 30 days of the date of this order

.
PER CURIAM
### IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA DA 18 - 0433

_________________ ST ATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee, v. NATHAN MAHSEELAH,

Defendant and Appellant. O R D E R

_________________ Pursuant to the Internal Operating Rules of this Court, this cause is classified for submission on briefs to the Court sitting en banc. The Clerk is directed to provide a copy hereof to all counsel of record and to the Honorable James A. Manley , District Judge . For the Court,

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

July 8 2020

07/08/2020
Case Number: DA 18-0433
Exhibit 10.6


 


 





August 31, 2006


VIA FAX AND FEDERAL EXPRESS 


David L. Snitman, Ph.D.


Chief Operating Officer


Array BioPharma, Inc.


3200
Walnut Street Boulder, CO 80301


	
  RE:

  	
   

  	
  Drug Discovery Collaboration Agreement dated
  September 13, 2002 — Exercise of Option to Extend Funding of Research FTEs

  



 


Dear
Dr. Snitman:


As you know, InterMune, Inc. (“InterMune”) and Array BioPharma
Inc. (“Array”) are parties to that certain Drug Discovery Collaboration
Agreement dated September 13, 2002, as amended by Amendment No.1 dated May 8,
2003, Amendment No.2 dated January 7, 2004, Amendment No.3 dated September 10,
2004, Amendment No.4 dated December 7, 2004, Amendment No.5 dated June 30, 2005,
Amendment No.6 dated February 3, 2006 and effective January 1, 2006, and
Amendment No. 7 dated June 28, 2006 (collectively, the “Agreement”). Any
capitalized term contained herein and not otherwise defined herein shall have
the meaning ascribed to such term in the Agreement.


Section 5.1.1 of the
Agreement provides that the Research FTEs will be funded by InterMune through
August 31, 2006 but that InterMune has an option to extend such funding for an
additional six (6) month period. 
InterMune is hereby notifying Array that it is exercising its option
such that the funding of the Research FTEs will now be funded through February
28, 2007.  In addition, the Parties
hereby acknowledge and agree that Array shall make available and InterMune
shall fund a total of three (3) Research FTEs (as opposed to the two (2) Research
FTEs currently provided for in Section 5.1.1 of the Agreement) from September
31, 2006 through February 28, 2007 (“Research FTE Extension Term”).  During the Research FTE Extension Term, the
three (3) Research FTEs will perform the tasks outlined in that certain
document entitled “Process Research Activities for the InterMune-Array
Collaboration” that is currently in the process of being approved as part of
the Research Plan and will be implemented by the Joint Research Committee.


Please acknowledge your
agreement to the foregoing by having an authorized Array representative
countersign both enclosed copies of this letter where indicated below, and
returning one original to the attention of Lucinda Y. Quan, Director, Legal
Affairs at InterMune. We would be happy to proceed based on receipt of a
facsimile copy while awaiting the original.











 


If you have any questions on
the foregoing, please do not hesitate to contact me.


Sincerely,


 


Robin Steele


Senior
Vice President, General Counsel


	
  cc:

  	
  General Counsel, Array

  
	
   

  	
  Mr. Larry Kahn, InterMune

  
	
   

  	
  Lawrence Blatt, PhD, InterMune

  



Acknowledged and Agreed:


ARRAY BIOPHARMA INC.


 


	
  By:

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
  Name:

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
  Title:
**UN PUBLISHED** 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 10**  **- 7109** 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee ,

v.
EMMETT MADISON GRAHAM, JR. , Defendant

- Appellant

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina , at Wilmington

. James C. Fox , Senior District Judge. ( 7:97

- cr
- 00098

- F

- 1 )

Submitted : November 18, 2010 Decided: December 1, 2010

Before SHEDD and AGEE , Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affir med by un published per curiam opinion

.

Emmett Madison Graham, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Michael Gordon James, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PE R CURIAM:
Emmett Madison Graham, Jr., appeals the district

court ’ s order denying his motion for correction /reduction of

sentence under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2006) or Fed. R. Crim. P.
52(b) . We have reviewed the record and find no reversible

error. Acc ordingly, we affirm

. See 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (permitting the court to reduce a sentence “in the case of a
defendant who has been sentenced to a term of imprisonment based
on a sentencing range that has subsequently been lowered by the Sentencing Commis sion.) ” 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
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 86 (Thursday, May 2, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Page 19644]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-10944]



=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION


Special Emphasis Panel in Materials Research; Notice of Meetings

    In accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-
463 as amended), the National Science Foundation announces the 
following meetings:

    Name: Special Emphasis Panel in Materials Research (DMR) #1203.
    Dates, and Times: May 12, 1996, 6 p.m.-9 p.m.; May 13-17, 1996, 
8 a.m.-9 p.m.; May 19, 6 p.m.-9 p.m.; May 20-24, 1996, 8 a.m.-9 p.m.
    Place: National Science Foundation; 4201 Wilson Blvd., 
Arlington, VA; Rooms 360, 375, 390, & 430.
    Type of Meetings: Closed.
    Contact Person: Dr. W. Lance Haworth, Dr. Carmen Huber, or Dr. 
Ulrich Strom, Program Directors, Materials Research Science and 
Engineering Centers, Division of Materials Research, Room 1065, 
National Science Foundation, Arlington, VA 22230. Telephone (703) 
306-1810.
    Purpose of Meetings: To provide advice and recommendations 
concerning proposals submitted to NSF for financial support.
    Agenda: Review and evaluate proposals as part of the selection 
process to determine finalists considered for Materials Research 
Science and Engineering Center awards.
    Reason for Closing: The proposals being reviewed include 
information of a proprietary or confidential nature, including 
technical information, financial data such as salaries, and personal 
information concerning individuals associated with the proposals. 
These matters are exempt under 5 U.S.C. 552b.(c) (4) and (6) of the 
Government in the Sunshine Act.

    Reason for Late Notice: Times and dates could not be finalized 
until approval by Dr. William C. Harris, Assistant Director, 
Directorate for Mathematical and Physical Sciences. This approval 
was contingent upon Program Director recommendations based upon the 
MRSEC Special Emphasis Panel which met April 15-17, 1996.

    Dated: April 29, 1996.
M. Rebecca Winkler,
Committee Management Officer.
[FR Doc. 96-10944 Filed 5-1-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7555-01-M
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 68 (Monday, April 10, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 18086-18087]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-8654]



=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 18087]]

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Office of the Secretary


Defense Science Board/Defense Policy Board Task Force on Theater 
Missile Defense (TMD)

ACTION: Notice of Advisory Committee Meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The Defense Science Board/Defense Policy Board Task Force on 
Theater Missile Defense (TMD) will meet in closed session on April 19-
20, 1995 at Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC), 
McLean, Virginia.
    The mission of the Defense Science Board is to advise the Secretary 
of Defense through the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and 
Technology on scientific and technical matters as they affect the 
perceived needs of the Department of Defense. At these meetings the 
Task Force will review the purposes of the U.S. theater missile defense 
effort, including the nature of the threat (types and quantities of 
missiles and payloads); how might it evolve; the degree of defense we 
seek; what we wish to defend; under what circumstances; and to what 
levels.
    In accordance with Section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee 
Act, P.L. No. 92-463, as amended (5 U.S.C. App. II, (1988)), it has 
been determined that these DSB Task Force meetings concern matters 
listed in 5 U.S.C. Sec. 552b(c)(1) (1988), and that accordingly these 
meetings will be closed to the public.

    Dated: April 3, 1995.
Patricia L. Toppings,
Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
[FR Doc. 95-8654 Filed 4-7-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5000-04-M
exv10wg



 





EXHIBIT 10.G




AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO THE

EL PASO CORPORATION

EMPLOYEE STOCK PURCHASE PLAN




     WHEREAS, El Paso Corporation (the “Company”) maintains the El Paso Corporation Employee Stock
Purchase Plan, amended and restated effective as of July 1, 2005 (the “Plan”);



     WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 15 of the Plan, the Board of Directors or the “Committee” (as
defined in the Plan) may from time to time make such amendments to the Plan as either of them may
deem proper and in the best interests of the Company;



     WHEREAS, the Company desires to clarify provisions of the Plan to reflect the intent of the
Board of Directors and the Compensation Committee with respect to adjustments in the number of
authorized shares under the Plan.



     NOW THEREFORE, the following amendment shall be made to the Plan:



     Section 3(b) shall be deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following:




     “(b) In the event of a recapitalization, stock split, stock dividend, exchange of
shares, merger, reorganization, change in corporate structure or shares of the Company or
similar event, the Board of Directors or the Committee shall make such adjustments, if any,
as it determines are appropriate and equitable (i) to the number of shares authorized for
issuance under the Plan and (ii) with respect to the number of shares credited to each
Participating Employee’s Plan Account. Any such adjustment shall be final, binding and
conclusive on all persons claiming any right or interest under the Plan.”



     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this amendment has been executed by the undersigned, thereunto duly
authorized, effective as of October 26, 2006.



	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	 	 	EL PASO CORPORATION	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	 	 	By:
	 	/s/ Susan B. Ortenstone	 	 
	 

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	 	 	Susan B. Ortenstone	 	 
	 	 	 	 	Its Senior Vice President, Human Resources and	 	 
	 	 	 	 	Administration	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	ATTEST:	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	By:

	 	/s/David L. Siddall
 

Corporate Secretary