alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 141 (Friday, July 24, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 36678-36679]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-17648]


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

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Department of the Army

[Docket No. USA-2009-0013]


Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request

ACTION: Notice.

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

    The Department of Defense has submitted to OMB for clearance, the 
following proposal for collection of information under the provisions 
of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35).

DATES: Consideration will be given to all comments received by August 
24, 2009.
    Title, Form and OMB Number: Customer Service Survey--Regulatory 
Program, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, ENG FORMS 5065; OMB Control 
Number 0710-0012.
    Type of Request: Extension.
    Number of Respondents: 60,000.
    Responses per Respondent: 1.
    Annual Responses: 60,000.
    Average Burden per Response: 15 minutes.
    Annual Burden Hours: 15,000.
    Needs and Uses: The surveys of applicants who are required to 
obtain permits from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to build on or 
conduct dredge and fill operations in United States waters. Opinions on 
the quality of service are used to make program improvements.
    Affected Public: Business or other for-profit.
    Frequency: On occasion.
    Respondent's Obligation: Voluntary.
    OMB Desk Officer: Mr. Jim Laity.
    Written comments and recommendations on the proposed information 
collection should be sent to Mr. Laity at the Office of Management and 
Budget, Desk Officer for DoD, Room 10236, New Executive Office 
Building, Washington, DC 20503.

[[Page 36679]]

    You may also submit comments, identified by docket number and 
title, by the following method:
    <bullet> Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. 
Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
    Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency 
name, docket number and title for this Federal Register document. The 
general policy for comments and other submissions from members of the 
public is to make these submissions available for public viewing on the 
Internet at http://www.regulations.gov as they are received without 
change, including any personal identifiers or contact information.
    DoD Clearance Officer: Ms. Patricia Toppings.
    Written requests for copies of the information collection proposal 
should be sent to Ms. Toppings at WHS/ESD/Information Management 
Division, 1777 North Kent Street, RPN, Suite 11000, Arlington, VA 
22209-2133.

    Dated: May 31, 2009.
Patricia L. Toppings,
Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
[FR Doc. E9-17648 Filed 7-23-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001-06-P
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v J.W. Hardy, Jr., Appellant.

[856 NYS2d 324]

Memorandum: On appeal from a judgment convicting him, upon a jury verdict, of escape in the second degree (Penal Law § 205.10 [2]), defendant contends that the conviction is not supported by legally sufficient evidence because he was not in custody when he fled the courthouse. We reject that contention. During an appearance before County Court while released on bail and awaiting sentencing on his conviction of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fifth degree, defendant’s bail was increased by the court and defendant was handcuffed by sheriffs deputies and seated in a hallway of the courthouse. Defendant fled the courthouse while the sheriff’s deputies waited for the court clerk to prepare a securing order committing defendant to the Sheriffs custody. We conclude that defendant was in custody for the purposes of section 205.10 (2) at the time that he escaped from the courthouse because, even though the securing order had not yet been signed by the court, he was under “restraint by a public servant pursuant to ... an order of a court” (§ 205.00 [2]).

Defendant waived his contention that he was wrongfully denied the opportunity to appear before the grand jury by failing to move to dismiss the indictment within five days following *1233his arraignment *(see*CPL 190.50 [5] [c]; *People v Beyor,*272 AD2d 929, 930 [2000], *lv denied*95 NY2d 832 [2000]). Contrary to defendant’s further contention, defense counsel’s failure to make a timely motion to dismiss the indictment on that ground, “ ‘without more, is insufficient to demonstrate ineffective assistance, particularly where[, as here, the] defendant fail[s] to demonstrate an absence of strategic or legitimate reasons for counsel’s failure to pursue [that] course of action’ ” *(People v Hibbard,*27 AD3d 1196, 1197 [2006], *lv denied*7 NY3d 790 [2006]). Indeed, the record establishes that defense counsel identified specific strategic reasons for declining to move to dismiss the indictment on that ground and discussed them at length with defendant.

Finally, we reject the further contention of defendant that the court erred in denying his motion to set aside the verdict pursuant to CPL 330.30 (1) based on ineffective assistance of counsel without conducting a hearing. Defendant’s motion did not raise a “ground appearing in the record” (CPL 330.30 [1]) and, to the extent that it concerns matters outside the record on appeal, the proper procedural vehicle is a motion pursuant to CPL 440.10 *(see People v Sweet,*30 AD3d 1080 [2006], *lv denied*7 NY3d 795 [2006]). Present—Scudder, P.J., Hurlbutt, Lunn, Pine and Gorski, JJ.
Exhibit 15.1

   October 16, 2002



   Stratus Properties Inc.
   98 San Jacinto Blvd.
   Austin, TX  78701

   Gentlemen:

   We  are aware that Stratus Properties Inc. has incorporated by
   reference  in its Registration Statements (File Nos. 33-78798,
   333-31059  and  333-52995) its Form 10-Q/A (Amendment  No.  1)
   for  the  quarter  ended  June 30, 2002,  which  includes  our
   report  dated October 15, 2002 covering the unaudited  interim
   financial   information   contained   therein.   Pursuant   to
   Regulation  C  of the Securities Act of 1933 (the  Act),  this
   report   is   not  considered  a  part  of  the   registration
   statements  prepared  or certified by our  firm  or  a  report
   prepared  or  certified  by our firm  within  the  meaning  of
   Sections 7 and 11 of the Act.

   Very truly yours,


   PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
**Exhibit 32.1** **CERTIFICATION    OF PRESIDENT AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER** **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 Home Diagnostics,    Inc. (the “Company”) on    Form 10-Q    for the quarter ended September 30, 2007 as filed with the    Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the    “Periodic Report”), I, Richard Damron, Jr.,    President and Chief Executive Officer, 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 Periodic 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 Periodic Report fairly    presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and    results of operations of the Company.         Date: November 12, 2007 /s/  J.    Richard Damron, Jr.
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 143 (Tuesday, July 28, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 37268]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-17861]


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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION


Sunshine Act Meeting

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the 
Government in the Sunshine Act, Public Law 94-409, that the Securities 
and Exchange Commission Investor Advisory Committee will hold an Open 
Meeting on Monday, July 27, 2009, in the Auditorium, Room L-002. The 
meeting will begin at 10 a.m. and will be open to the public, with 
seating on a first-come, first-served basis. Doors will open at 9:30 
a.m. Visitors will be subject to security checks.
    On July 8, 2009, the Commission published notice of the Committee 
meeting (Release No. 33-9049), indicating that the meeting is open to 
the public and inviting the public to submit written comments to the 
Committee. This Sunshine Act notice is being issued because a majority 
of the Commission plans to attend the meeting. Commissioner Walter, as 
duty officer, determined that no earlier Sunshine Act notice was 
possible.
    The agenda for the meeting includes opening remarks, introduction 
of Committee members, discussion of Committee agenda and organization, 
and discussion of investor views of possible refinements to the 
disclosure regime.
    For further information, please contact the Office of the Secretary 
at (202) 551-5400.

    Dated: July 22, 2009.
Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-17861 Filed 7-27-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8010-01-P
Exhibit 10E CIC Addendum






EXHIBIT 10E






ADDENDUM TO CHANGE IN CONTROL LETTER AGREEMENT
______, 2012
Reference is hereby made to the Change in Control Letter Agreement, dated ______, 20__ (the “Agreement”), by and between LoJack Corporation, a Massachusetts corporation (the “Company”), and ________ (“Executive”).  Capitalized terms used herein and not defined shall have the meanings set forth in the Agreement.
The undersigned hereby agree that, notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in the Agreement:
1.    The Company shall honor any provision of an equity award agreement between the Company and Executive that provides for the automatic vesting of any of Executive's outstanding equity awards upon a Change of Control (as defined in the Company's 2008 Stock Incentive Plan, as amended and restated).
2.    If, within twelve (12) months after a Change in Control of the Company shall have occurred, Executive's employment shall be terminated (a) by the Company other than for Cause, Disability or Retirement or (b) by Executive for Good Reason, then subject to Section 8 of the Agreement, all of Executive's equity awards with time-based vesting that are outstanding as of immediately prior to the Change in Control and did not previously vest in accordance with paragraph 1 above (including any awards assumed by another entity in connection with such Change in Control) shall automatically become fully vested and nonforfeitable.
Except as modified by this Addendum, the Agreement remains in full force and effect, without modification or waiver.


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned have executed this Addendum as of the day and year first written above.
LOJACK CORPORATION                EXECUTIVE:
By: ________________________            _______________________________
       Name:                        [Insert name of Executive]
       Title:
**Exhibit 21**

**Subsidiaries of the Registrant**

OPNET Analysis, Inc. (formerly MIL 3 Analysis,Inc.), a corporation organized under the laws of the State of Delaware. 

OPNET Technologies Societe par Actions Simplifiee,a corporation organized under the laws of France. 

OPNET Technologies Limited, a corporation organized under the laws ofEngland and Wales. 

OPNET Technologies b.v.b.a, (formerly WDM NetDesign, b.v.b.a), a corporation organized under the lawsof Belgium. 

OPNET Technologies Pty Limited, a corporation organized under the laws of Australia. 

OPNET Technologies, GmbH, a corporation organized under the laws of Germany.
**Exhibit 23.1**

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

We have issued our reports dated February 27, 2009,with respect to the consolidated financial statements and internal control over financial reporting of Watsco, Inc. and subsidiaries which are incorporated by reference in the Annual Report of Watsco, Inc. on Form 10-K for the year endedDecember 31, 2008 and accompanying the schedule which is included in the Annual Report of Watsco, Inc. on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008. We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference of said reports in the followingRegistration Statements of Watsco, Inc. on Forms S-3 (No. 33-7758 and No. 33-37982) and on Forms S-8 (No. 333-149467, No. 333-126824, No. 333-86006, No. 333-39380, No. 333-82011, No. 333-80341, No. 333-10363,No. 33-51934 and No. 33-72798). 

/s/ GRANT THORNTON LLP 

Miami, Florida 

February 27, 2009
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan



### September 22, 2008 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanag h Elizabeth A. Weave r 

### 136858 Marilyn Kell y Maura D. Corriga n Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markman, J ustices 

### PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 136858 COA: 277518 Genesee CC: 06-019147-FH DAVID DUANE BREWER, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the June 3, 2008 judgment of the Court of Appeals is consid ered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.

d0915 I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

September 22, 2008

Clerk
April 21, 2016

In accordance with the enclosed Memorandum Opinion, below is the judgment in the numbered cause set out herein to be entered in the Minutes of this Court as of the 21st day of April, 2016.

10-15-00160-CR	SUSAN LADEAN HERRERA v. THE STATE OF TEXAS - ON APPEAL FROM THE 19TH DISTRICT COURT OF McLENNAN COUNTY - TRIAL COURT NO. 2011-2319-C1 - AFFIRMED - Memorandum Opinion by Justice Davis:

	“This cause came on to be heard on the transcript of the record of the Court below, and the same being considered, because it is the opinion of this Court that there was no error in the judgment, it is ordered, adjudged and decreed by the Court that the judgment be in all things affirmed, and that the appellant pay all costs in this behalf expended and that this decision be certified below for observance.”

# image1.png
No. 797.

#### Garrison *v.*Johnston, Warden.

May 6, 1946.

Petitioner *pro se.*

*Solicitor General McGrath, Robert S. Erdahl*and *Beatrice Rosenberg*for respondent.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Circuit Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.
EXHIBIT 32.1



Section 1350 Certification



In connection with the Quarterly Report of SimplePons, Inc. (the
“Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2012 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
“Report”), I, Brian S. John, Chief Executive Officer, and Martin Scott, Chief Financial Officer, of the Company, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 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, as amended,
and                    
|-- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|   |                                                                                                                                                      
|2. | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial conditions and results of operations of the Company.



|Dated:
    August 17, 2012 | /s/Brian
S. John                                                                 
|-------------------------- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                           | Brian S. John, Chief Executive Officer, principal executive officer              
|                           |                                                                                  
|Dated: August 17,
    2012 | /s/ Martin Scott                                                                 
|                           | Martin Scott, Chief Financial Officer, principal financial and accounting officer



A signed original of this written statement required by Section
906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signatures that appear in typed form within the
electronic version of this written statement 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.
ORIGMAL 

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA 

OP 22-0501 

JOHN WESLEY BUCHANAN, 

Petitioner, 

v. 

MONTANA FOURTEENTH JUDICIAL 

DISTRICT COURT, HON. RANDAL I. 

SPAULDING, Presiding, 

Respondent. 

FILED 

SEP 0 6 2022 

Bowen Greenwood 

Clerk of Supreme Court 

State or Montana 

ORDER 

Petitioner John Wesley Buchanan, via counsel, seeks a writ of supervisory control 

directing the Fourteenth Judicial District Court, Meagher County, to dismiss its Cause No. 

DC-21-01 on double jeopardy grounds. Buchanan alleges the District Court erred when it 

denied his motion to dismiss via its July 7, 2022 Order Denying Defendant's Motion to 

Dismiss Information. With this matter set for trial on October 6, 2022, Buchanan further 

moves for a stay of proceedings pending resolution of his petition for writ. 

Having reviewed the Petition and the challenged Order, this Court deems it appropriate 

to obtain a summary response. We further agree with Buchanan that it would be improper to 

hold trial while resolution of the present petition is pending. However, we may have sufficient 

time to rule upon this petition in advance of trial. We will revisit the issue of stay after 

obtaining responses. 

Therefore, in accordance with M. R. App. P. 14(7), 

IT IS ORDERED that the Fourteenth Judicial District Court, and the State of Montana, 

or both, are granted 10 days from the date of this Order to prepare, file, and serve a response(s) 

to the petition for writ of supervisory control in Cause No. DC-21-01. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Buchanan's motion for stay is TAKEN UNDER 

ADVISEMENT. This matter may proceed in the District Court until further order of this 

Court. 

09/06/2022

Case Number: OP 22-0501
The Clerk is directed to provide immediate notice of this Order to counsel for 

Petitioner, all counsel of record in the Fourteenth Judicial District Court, Meagher County, 

Cause No. DC-21-01, and the Honorable Randal I. Spaulding, presiding. 

DATED this tio ay of September, 2022. 

Chief Justice 

(cgtr— LA•e/iti 

2
AMENDMENT NO.1 TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT


 


This Amendment No.1 (the "Amendment")
dated March 18, 2013, to that certain Employment Agreement (the "Agreement"), dated November 28, 2011 between TARGETED
MEDICAL PHARMA, INC. ("Employer") and DAVID SILVER, MD ("Executive").


 


Pursuant to Section 24(C) of the Agreement, Employer and Executive
hereby agree to amend the Agreement, effective on the date hereof, as follows:


 


1. Section l of the Agreement is amended in its entirety as
follows:


 


ENGAGEMENT. TMP shall employ Executive as President and Chief
Operating Officer.


 


2. Section 2 of the Agreement is hereby amended in its entirety
as follows:


 


RESPONSIBILITY. Executive shall report to the Chief Executive
Officer of TMP. Executive shall be responsible for assisting TMP in capacities including, but not limited to: management of day
to day operations of the Employer, representing Employer in presentation to and negotiations with investors and lenders, developing
and supporting clinical trials, marketing and sales support, reviewing of formulations and monographs and attending scientific
meetings.


 


3. NO OTHER AMENDMENTS; GOVERNING LAW; COUNTERPARTS. Except
as specifically set forth in this Amendment, there are no other amendments to the Agreement and the Agreement shall remain unmodified
and in full force and effect. This Amendment shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the internal laws of the State
of [California]. This Amendment may be executed in one or more counterparts. In the event that any signature is delivered by facsimile
transmission or any other form of electronic delivery, such signature shall create a valid and binding obligation of the party
executing (or on whose behalf such signature is executed) with the same force and effect as if such signature page were an original
thereof.


 


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed
this Amendment to the Agreement as of the sate first set forth above.


 


 


	EMPLOYER: 	 
		 
	 	 
	William Shell, MD, CEO 	 
	 	 
	 	 
	EXECUTIVE: 	 
		 
	 	 
	David Silver, MD
No. 1087.

#### Federal Trade Commission *v.*S. Buchsbaum & Co.

May 6, 1946.

*Per Curiam:*

The petition for a writ of certiorari is granted. A trial examiner of the Federal Trade Commission died after having heard some of the witnesses in these proceedings. Respondent moved that the new trial examiner start the proceedings anew and hear all the evidence *de novo.*The Commission denied this motion. In the enforcement proceeding before the Circuit Court of Appeals respondent assigned this denial as one of a number of alleged errors. On that ground alone, and without passing on others urged by petitioner, the Circuit Court of Appeals refused to enforce the Commission’s order. Respondent here moves for leave to file a written waiver of the assigned error relied on by the court below and also moves that the Circuit Court of Appeals judgment be reversed and that the case be remanded for consideration of the other errors assigned below. Motion for leave to file *819written waiver is granted. The judgment of the Circuit Court of Appeals is vacated and the case is remanded for consideration of the other errors assigned below.

*Solicitor General McGrath*for petitioner.

*Walter H. Moses*for respondent.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v David Piepenburg, Appellant.

[852 NYS2d 871]

Present—Hurlbutt, J.P., Martoche, Lunn, Green and Gorski, JJ.