alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### §9449. Cadets: organization; service; instruction

(a) A cadet shall perform duties at such places and of such type as the President may direct.

(b) The course of instruction at the Academy is four years.

(c) The Secretary of the Air Force shall so arrange the course of studies at the Academy that cadets are not required to pursue their studies on Sunday.

(Aug. 10, 1956, ch. 1041, 70A Stat. 566, §9349; renumbered §9449, Pub. L. 115–232, div. A, title VIII, §806(a)(3), Aug. 13, 2018, 132 Stat. 1832; amended Pub. L. 116–283, div. A, title IX, §923(d)(12), Jan. 1, 2021, 134 Stat. 3815.)

| Revised section | Source (U.S. Code) | Source (Statutes at Large) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 9349(a) | 10:1102. | R.S. 1322. |
| 9349(b) | 10:1043. | R.S. 1323. |
| 9349(c)9349(d) | 10:1044.10:1105. | Mar. 30, 1920, ch. 112 (1st par., less provisos, under "Miscellaneous"), 41 Stat. 548.R.S. 1324. |

9349(d)

10:1105.

R.S. 1324.

In subsection (a), the word "commissioned" is inserted for clarity. 10:1105 (2d sentence) is omitted as obsolete.

In subsection (b), the word "perform" is substituted for the words "be subject at all times to do". The words "of such type" are substituted for the words "on such service".

In subsection (e), the words "members of the Air Force" are substituted for the words "private soldier, noncommissioned officer, and officer". The words "taught and" are omitted as surplusage. 10:1105 (less 1st 18 words of last sentence) is omitted as inapplicable to the Air Force.

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

2021—Subsec. (d). Pub. L. 116–283 struck out subsec. (d) which read as follows: "Cadets shall be trained in the duties of members of the Air Force."

2018—Pub. L. 115–232 renumbered section 9349 of this title as this section.

#### **Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries**

#### Effective Date of 2018 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 115–232 effective Feb. 1, 2019, with provision for the coordination of amendments and special rule for certain redesignations, see section 800 of Pub. L. 115–232, set out as a note preceding section 3001 of this title.
|                          |
|--------------------------|
|                          |  |
| 001-10315                | 63-0860407 |
| (Commission File Number) | (IRS Employer Identification No.) |
|                     |   |

|        |
|--------|
|        |  |
| ¨ | Written communication pursuant to Rule 425 under the Securities Act (17 CFR 230.425) |
| ¨ | Soliciting material pursuant to Rule 14a-12 under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.14a-12) |
| ¨ | Pre-commencement communications pursuant to Rule 14d-2(b) under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.14d-2(b)) |
| ¨ | Pre-commencement communications pursuant to Rule 13e-4(c) under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.13e-4(c)) |

----

----

----

----

----

----

|                         |
|-------------------------|
|                         |  |  |
| HEALTHSOUTH CORPORATION |
|                    | By: | /s/  John P. Whittington |
|                    | Name: | John P. Whittington |
|                    | Title: | Executive Vice President, General Counsel and Corporate Secretary |
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

 

In connection with the Quarterly Report of24/7 Real Media, Inc. (the “**Company**”)on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2004 as filed with the Securitiesand Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “**Report**”), I, David J. Moore, Chairman and Chief ExecutiveOfficer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adoptedpursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

(1) The Reportfully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

(2) Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.

 

 

May 14, 2004

 
|   | /s/  David J. Moore             |   |
|--------|--------------------------------------|--------|
|   | Chairman and Chief Executive Officer |
|   | (Principal Executive Officer)        |

 

----
§ 1000.88 Do Tribes/Consortia need Secretarial approval to redesign BIA programs that the Tribe/Consortium administers under an AFA? No, the Secretary does not have to approve a redesign of a program under the AFA, except when the redesign involves a waiver of a regulation. ( a ) The Secretary must approve any waiver, in accordance with subpart J of this part, before redesign takes place.
( b ) This section does not authorize redesign of programs where other prohibitions exist.
( c ) Redesign shall not result in the Tribe/Consortium being entitled to receive more or less funding for the program from BIA.
( d ) Redesign of construction project(s) included in an AFA must be done in accordance with subpart K of this part.
Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation 

76-17 

February 5, 1976 

REFERENCE: 

 [*1] 4022(b)(3) Benefits Guaranteed. General Limitation on Amount of Guarantee 

OPINION: 

 Your letter of January 7, 1976 has been referred to me for reply. In your letter, you state that you are a former

employee of * * * and that you now have a choice of receiving benefits, under a pension plan in one lump-sum or in

monthly payments over the rest of your left. You ask if you choose menthly payments, whether they would be guaranteed

by the federal government for the rest of your life. 

The Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation was established by Congress to guarantee benefits of certain types of

pension plans if the plan is unable to provide benefits. * * * is covered by the guaranty program. 

If you are a participant in that plan, the plan is unable to pay benefits when due, and your benefit under the plan's

benefit formula has not increased during the five years prior to the time the plan terminates, the benefit prescribed by

the plan will be guaranteed by this Corporation up to a statutory limit of $750 per month. This limit, however, is adjusted

for increases and decreases in the social security base. For plans that terminate in 1976, the limit on guaranteed benefits

is $869.32 per month. [*2] If your benefit under the plan's benefit formula has increased during the five years prior to

the plan's termination, the amount of the benefit guaranteed could be reduced depending on the total amount of your

benefit and the length of time the increase has been in effect. 

If you have any further questions, please feel free to contact me.
Dismissed and Opinion Filed July 20, 2016 

# S

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
No. 05-15-01383-CR JAVONTA MCCHEL WILLI AMS, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the 203rd Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. F14-75534-P 

### MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Chief Justice Wright, Ju stice Myers, and Justice Brown Opinion by Chief Justice Wright Javonta Mcchel Williams was charged with aggr avated assault, family violence, with a deadly weapon by shooting the complainant with whom he had a dating relationship. After finding him guilty as charged, the jury assessed punishment at life in prison. Judgment was entered October 22, 2015, and appella nt filed a timely notice of appeal. In January 2016, when no reporter’s record had been filed, this Court abated the case and ordered the trial court to determine whether appellant desired to prosecute the appeal and if so, why the reporter’s record had not been filed. Shortly thereafter, appellant filed a letter informing the Court that he had timely filed a motion for new trial which had been granted as to punishment only.–2– By order dated February 2, 2016, we reinstated the case and ordered appellant to file either a motion to dismiss or a motion to abat e the appeal until appellant had been sentenced following his new punishment hearing. In response, appellant filed a moti on to abate and asked us to remand the case to the tr ial court for the new punishment hearing, stating he did so “to conserve judicial resources and to properly expedite the orderly prog ression of this appeal.” We granted the motion in part by giving the trial court sixty days in which to complete a new punishment hearing. We ordered appellant to file either a motion to reinstate the appeal or written verification that the puni shment hearing had not been co mpleted by the end of the sixtyday period. In April and in May, appellant filed status letters informing the Court that “the parties are still in plea negotiations .” By letter dated May 19, 2016, we directed appellant to file either a motion to reinstate or a motion to di smiss by June 13, 2016. We cautioned appellant no further extensions would be grante d and that his failure to file a motion would result in the case being reinstated and dismissed w ithout further notice. To date, no motion has been received by the Court. On the Court’s own motion, we REINSTATE this appeal. Because no sentence has been imposed, we lack jurisdiction. See T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 26.2(a) (notice of appeal must be filed after sentence imposed).
We DISMISS the appeal.

Do Not Publish T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 47 151383F.U05 /Carolyn Wright/ CAROLYN WRIGHT CHIEF JUSTICE–3– 

# S

Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas JUDGMENT
JAVONTA MCCHEL WILLIAMS, Appellant
No. 05-15-01383-CR V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the 203rd Judicial District Court, Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. F14-75534-P. Opinion delivered by Chief Justice Wright, Justices Myers and Br own participating.
Based on the Court’s opin ion of this date, we DISMISS this appeal.
Judgment entered July 20, 2016.
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 38 (Friday, February 25, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Page 10667]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-4244]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY


Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request

February 18, 2010.
    The Department of the Treasury will submit the following public 
information collection requirement to OMB for review and clearance 
under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13 on or 
after the date of publication of this notice. A copy of the submission 
may be obtained by calling the Treasury Bureau Clearance Officer 
listed. Comments regarding this information collection should be 
addressed to the OMB reviewer listed and to the Treasury PRA Clearance 
Officer, Department of the Treasury, 1750 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., 
Suite 11010, Washington, DC 20220.

DATES: Written comments should be received on or before March 28, 2011 
to be assured of consideration.

Internal Revenue Service (IRS)

    OMB Number: 1545-1205.
    Type of Review: Revision to a currently approved collection.
    Title: Form 8826--Disabled Access Credit.
    Form: 8826.
    Abstract: Code section 44 allows eligible small businesses to claim 
a non-refundable income tax credit of 50% of the amount of eligible 
access expenditures for any tax year that exceed $250 but do not exceed 
$10,250. Form 8826 figures the credit and the tax limit.
    Respondents: Private sector: Businesses or other for-profits.
    Estimated Total Burden Hours: 89,027 hours.
    Bureau Clearance Officer: Yvette Lawrence, Internal Revenue 
Service, 1111 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20224; (202) 
927-4374.
    OMB Reviewer: Shagufta Ahmed, Office of Management and Budget, New 
Executive Office Building, Room 10235, Washington, DC 20503; (202) 395-
7873.

Celina Elphage,
Treasury PRA Clearance Officer.
[FR Doc. 2011-4244 Filed 2-24-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4830-01-P
AeroUAVs LLC 11523 Palmbrush Trail Suite 353 Lakewood Ranch, FL 34202

December 29, 2015

U.S. Department of Transportation 

Docket Management System 

1200 New Jersey Ave., SE 

Washington, DC 20590 

Re: Request for Amendment to Exemption No. 12153, Regulatory Docket No. FAA–2015–1641 under 

Section 333 of the FAA Reform Act and Part 11 of the Federal Aviation Regulations. 

Dear Sir or Madam: 

Pursuant to Section 333 of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (the “Reform Act”) and 14 

C.F.R. Part 11, AeroUAVs, LLC (AeroUAVs), seeks to amend exemption No. 12153, Regulatory Docket No. 

FAA–2015–1641; Submitted by AeroUAVs for review April 20, 2015 and subsequently granted by the 

FAA on July 27, 2015. 

The original exemption made a request to allow operations of 12 different Airframe models for:

 Aerial Photography and Videography for the real estate, construction, and utilities industries 

 Agricultural Surveying and Application 

 sUAS Operator Training 

 Product Demonstrations 

 Research and Development

There have been no changes in the request for exemption from specific regulations or conditions and 

reasons relative to public interest and safety that were the basis for granting the original exemption.

This letter requests the addition of additional Airframe models for commercial use in the 

aforementioned service operations. We are petitioning for exemption to enable AeroUAVs to operate 

additional UAS platforms that have been previously approved by exemption. The Requested UAVs are 

listed in Proprietary/Confidential Appendix A which is filed separately.

All those sUAS all weigh less than 55 lbs, have a built- in capability to limit the height flown above the 

ground, to limit the radius of the distance it flies from the operator and to exclude it from Class B, C and 

D airspace including a no fly zone feature. Each system also has the failsafe function of the autopilot 

system, which means when the communication between the Main Controller and the transmitter is lost, 

the system will automatically trigger Return to Home and will land safely.

This submission does not include the Operating Manuals for models requested, as they have been 

reviewed by the Administrator in granting previous exemptions. Model specifics are listed in the 

AeroUAVs Operating Manual. Copies of all Operating Manuals for the individual models listed will be 

submitted on request.
AeroUAVs LLC 11523 Palmbrush Trail Suite 353 Lakewood Ranch, FL 34202

Accompanying this submission electronically via e-mail are a copies of the Operations Manual and 

Appendix A submitted to 333exemptions@faa.gov. 

Regards,

Timothy Ford

President and CEO

AeroUAVs, LLC

11523 Palmbrush Trail Suite 353

Lakewood Ranch, FL 34202

(314) 397-1110
§ 700.151 Eligibility. ( a ) *General.* All certified eligible heads of household are eligible for moving and related expenses as prescribed in this subpart. A certified eligible head of household who lives on his/her business or farm property may be eligible for both a payment as a dwelling occupant and a payment with respect to the business or farm operation.
( b ) *Least costly approach.* The amount of payment for an eligible expense under this subpart shall not exceed the least costly method, as determined by the Commission, of accomplishing the objective of the payment without causing undue hardship to the certified eligible heads of household.
( c ) *Prior approval.* Written approval of the Commission must be obtained for all moving and search expenses in this subpart. Such approval shall be obtained by each certified eligible head of household prior to incurring any expense from the real estate specialist to whom the case is assigned. If prior approval and the amount thereof is not obtained from the Commission, the Commission thereafter will determine: ( 1 ) Whether the travel was required and the expenses reasonable and;
( 2 ) The amount of reimbursement to be paid, if any.
### §924a. Art. 124a. Bribery

(a) Asking, Accepting, or Receiving Thing of Value.—Any person subject to this chapter—

(1) who occupies an official position or who has official duties; and

(2) who wrongfully asks, accepts, or receives a thing of value with the intent to have the person's decision or action influenced with respect to an official matter in which the United States is interested;

shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.

(b) Promising, Offering, or Giving Thing of Value.—Any person subject to this chapter who wrongfully promises, offers, or gives a thing of value to another person, who occupies an official position or who has official duties, with the intent to influence the decision or action of the other person with respect to an official matter in which the United States is interested, shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.

(Added Pub. L. 114–328, div. E, title LX, §5437, Dec. 23, 2016, 130 Stat. 2952.)

#### **Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries**

#### Effective Date

Section effective on Jan. 1, 2019, as designated by the President, with implementing regulations and provisions relating to applicability to various situations, see section 5542 of Pub. L. 114–328 and Ex. Ord. No. 13825, set out as notes under section 801 of this title.
## Breadcrumb

-  Home 
-  Employers & Practitioners 
-  Mortality, Retirement and PV Max Guarantee 
-  ERISA Section 4044/4050 Mortality Tables 

This page has not been translated. Please go to PBGC.gov's Spanish home page for more information available in Spanish.

Esta página no ha sido traducida. Por favor vaya a la página principal del sitio de español de PBGC para ver información disponible en español.

# ERISA Section 4044/4050 Mortality Tables

November 18, 2022

**ERISA Section 4044 Mortality Table** – This table is used to determine liabilities when a single-employer plan terminates in an involuntary or distress termination (per 29 CFR 4044). It is also used when a multiemployer plan incurs a mass withdrawal (per 29 CFR 4281).

**ERISA Section 4050 Mortality Table** – This table is a unisex version of the ERISA Section 4044 Table. It is used in specified situations to determine the benefit transfer amount under the Missing Participants Program (per 29 CFR 4050).

See links below for the applicable mortality for a given year:
#### § 20.327 When can the Bureau provide Disaster Assistance?

Disaster assistance is immediate and/or short-term relief from a disaster and can be provided to a tribal community in accordance with § 20.328.
### [§2372. Renumbered §3762]
#### § 307.9 Surrender of license.

Any license may be surrendered by the licensee at any time by surrendering to the Board the Government hand seal press and unused certificates of genuineness entrusted to the licensee, accompanied by a copy of the license marked “surrendered” and signed by the licensee. Such surrender shall take effect as of the time that such property and document have been received by the Board.
### [§871. Repealed. Pub. L. 114–328, div. E, title LVIII, §5302(b)(2), Dec. 23, 2016, 130 Stat. 2923]

Section, Aug. 10, 1956, ch. 1041, 70A Stat. 62; Pub. L. 90–632, §2(32), Oct. 24, 1968, 82 Stat. 1342; Pub. L. 98–209, §5(e), Dec. 6, 1983, 97 Stat. 1399; Pub. L. 103–337, div. A, title IX, §924(c)(1), (2), Oct. 5, 1994, 108 Stat. 2831; Pub. L. 113–66, div. A, title XVII, §1702(c)(2), Dec. 26, 2013, 127 Stat. 957, related to execution and suspension of various types of sentences.

#### **Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries**

#### Effective Date of Repeal

Repeal effective on Jan. 1, 2019, as designated by the President, with implementing regulations and provisions relating to applicability to various situations, see section 5542 of Pub. L. 114–328 and Ex. Ord. No. 13825, set out as notes under section 801 of this title.
**EXHIBIT 99.1**

 

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

 

In connectionwith the Quarterly Report of 24/7 Real Media, Inc. (the “**Company**”) on Form 10-Q for the periodending September 30, 2002 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commissionon the date hereof (the “**Report**”),I, David J. Moore, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of the Company,certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

(1) The Reportfully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

(2) Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.

 

 

 
|   | /s/               |
|--------|-------------------|
|   | David J. Moore    |
|   |              |
|   | November 14, 2002 |

 

----
# C_2006197EN.01000902.xml

| 22.8.2006 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 197/9 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.8.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 197/9

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.4258 — IVECO/AFIN)

(2006/C 197/07)

(Text with EEA relevance)

On 11 August 2006, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. The full text of the decision is available only in Italian and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | from the Europa competition website (http://ec.europa.eu/comm/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

from the Europa competition website (http://ec.europa.eu/comm/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website under document number 32006M4258. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law. (http://ec.europa.eu/eur-lex/lex) |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website under document number 32006M4258. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law. (http://ec.europa.eu/eur-lex/lex)

---
## SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK 

## Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

1438 KA 10-02422 PRESENT: SMITH, J.P., FAHEY, PERADOTTO, CARNI, AND SCONIERS, JJ.

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT,

V ORDER
KEITH C. FERRIN, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

WILLIAMS, HEINL, MOODY & BUSCHMAN, P.C., AUBURN (RYAN J. MULDOON OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.
JON E. BUDELMANN, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, AUBURN (CHRISTOPHER T. VALDINA OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT.

Appeal from a judgment of the Cayuga County Court (Thomas G. Leone, J.), rendered October 7, 2010. The judgment convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of grand larceny in the fourth degree and evading or defeating cigarette and tobacco products tax.
It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.

Entered: December 23, 2011 Frances E. Cafarell Clerk of the Court
#### § 39.216 How does ISEF fund residential programs?

Residential programs are funded on a WSU basis using a formula that takes into account the number of nights of service per week. Funding for residential programs is based on the average of the 3 previous years' residential WSUs.