alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### §1512. Participation of a foreign representative in a case under this title

Upon recognition of a foreign proceeding, the foreign representative in the recognized proceeding is entitled to participate as a party in interest in a case regarding the debtor under this title.

(Added Pub. L. 109–8, title VIII, §801(a), Apr. 20, 2005, 119 Stat. 138.)

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

#### Effective Date

Section effective 180 days after Apr. 20, 2005, and not applicable with respect to cases commenced under this title before such effective date, except as otherwise provided, see section 1501 of Pub. L. 109–8, set out as an Effective Date of 2005 Amendment note under section 101 of this title.
### [§2410j. Renumbered §4703]
## Breadcrumb

-  Home 
-  About PBGC 
-  PBGC Policies 

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.

# PBGC Policies

                          - Customer Service Pledge
                          - Privacy @ PBGC
                          - Website Policies
                          - Limited English Proficiency (LEP) Access Plan
                          - PBGC Anti-Harassment Policy Statement  - This statement provides PBGC's principles regarding prevention of workplace harassment.
                          - PBGC EEO Policy Statement  - This statement provides PBGC's principles of promoting equal opportunity and diversity in the workplace.
                          - PBGC’s Procedures for Processing Requests for Reasonable Accommodation (RA) and Personal Assistance Services
                          - Small Business Non-Retaliation Policy

March 6, 2024
#### § 301.6 Stone for ornamentation.

In addition to turquoise, the use of other local stone is permitted. Turquoise, if used, must be genuine stone, uncolored by any artificial means.
### Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.,
Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanag h Marilyn Kell y Stephen J. Markma n Diane M. Hathawa y Mary Beth Kell y Brian K. Zahra,
J ustices

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.

_______________________________________ __ Clerk October 24, 2011

p1017 

# Order

October 24, 2011

143355 & (14)

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 14 3355 COA: 302634 Jackson CC: 10-005315-FC JAMES KALVIN ATCHISON, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application for le ave to appeal the June 3, 2011 order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the question presented should be reviewed by this Court. The motion for ap pointment of
counsel is DENIED.
(©ffice of tqe g}cput- J\tiortte}:J ®eneral 

.l!lu.sl1ington, /.<!!. 20530

ORDER NO. 3915-2017

APPOINTMENT OF SPECIAL COUNSEL 

TO INVESTIGATE RUSSIAN INTERFERENCE WITH THE 

2016 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION AND RELATED MATTERS 

By virtue of the authority vested in me as Acting Attorney General, including 28 U.S.C. 

§§ 509, 510, and 515, in order to discharge my responsibility to provide supervision and 

management of the Department of Justice, and to ensure a full and thorough investigation of the 

Russian govemmenfs efforts to interfere in the 2016 presidential election, I hereby order as 

follows: 

(a) Robert S. Mueller III is appointed t() serve as Specia] Counsel for the United States 

Department of Justice. 

(b) The Special Counsel is authorized to conduct the investigation confinned by then-FBI 

Director James 8. Corney in testimony before the House Permanent Select Committee on 

Intelligence on March 20, 2017, including: 

(i) any links and/or coordination bet ween the Russian government and individuals 

associated with the campaign of President Donald Trump; and 

(ii) any matters that arose or may arise directly from the investigation; and 

(iii) any other matters within the scope of 28 C.F.R. § 600.4(a). 

(c) If the Special Counsel believes it is necessary and appropriate, the Special Counsel is 

authorized to prosecute federal crimes arising from the investigation of these matters. 

(d) Sections 600.4 through 600. l 0 of Title 28 of the Code of Federal Regulations are 

applicable to the Special Counsel. 

Date ' 1
Exhibit 31.3

CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER SECTION 302 CERTIFICATION

I,
David I. Rainer, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this Amendment Number 1 on Form 10-K/A to the Annual Report on Form 10-K of CU BANCORP;

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 the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this annual report;



|                     |  |  |  |  |  |                        
|-------------------- |  |  |  |  |  | -----------------------
|DATE: April 28, 2017 |  |  |  |  |  | /s/ DAVID I. RAINER    
|                     |  |  |  |  |  | DAVID I. RAINER        
|                     |  |  |  |  |  | Chief Executive Officer
#### Michelle Melish, Respondent, v Andrew August Melish, Appellant.

[823 NYS2d 350]

In a matrimonial action in which the parties were divorced by judgment entered October 26,1987, the defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Lebowitz, J.), dated February 4, 2005, which, inter alia, granted that branch of the plaintiffs motion which was to hold him in contempt for failure to pay child support arrears in the sum of $13,846.82 and directed his incarceration for a period of 90 days in the event he failed to pay the sum of $5,000 to purge himself of his contempt.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The determination of the Supreme Court that the appellant was concealing income, that his failure to pay child support was willful, and that means of enforcement other than contempt would be ineffective is supported by credible evidence in the record *(see*Domestic Relations Law § 245; *Higbee v Higbee,*260 AD2d 603 [1999]).

The appellant’s remaining contentions are not properly before this Court.

The circumstances of this case do not warrant the imposition of sanctions upon the appellant for prosecuting this appeal *(see Capuano v Platzner Intl. Group,*5 AD3d 620 [2004]). Ritter, J.P., Goldstein, Rivera and Spolzino, JJ., concur.
Document

Exhibit 10-s

Schedule identifying agreements substantially identical to the Form of Employment Agreement constituting Exhibit 10-r hereto entered into by Meritor, Inc. and each of the following persons:


Chris Villavarayan
Jeffrey A. Craig
Carl D. Anderson II
Timothy Bowes
Ken Hogan
John Nelligan
#### In the Matter of Kevin D., a Person Alleged to be a Juvenile Delinquent, Appellant.

[823 NYS2d 347]

In a juvenile delinquency proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 3, the appeal is from an order of disposition of the Family Court, Queens County (Lubow, J.), dated July 5, 2005, which, upon a fact-finding order of the same court dated May 18, 2005, made after a hearing, finding that the appellant had committed acts which, if committed by an adult, would constitute the crimes of attempted robbery in the first degree, attempted robbery in the second degree, attempted grand larceny in the fourth degree, and criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree, adjudged him to be a juvenile delinquent and placed him on probation for a period of 12 months. The appeal brings up for review the fact-finding order dated May 18, 2005.

Ordered that the appeal from so much of the order of disposition as placed the appellant on probation for a period of 12 months is dismissed as academic, without costs or disbursements, as the period of placement has expired; and it is further,

Ordered that the order of disposition is affirmed insofar as reviewed, without costs or disbursements.

Contrary to the appellant’s contention, the presentment agency demonstrated good cause for an adjournment of the fact-*472finding hearing in order to secure the attendance of the complainant *(see*Family Ct Act § 340.1 [4] [a]; *Matter of Andre P.,*11 AD3d 617, 619 [2004]; *Matter of Barbara S.,*253 AD2d 825 [1998]; *Matter of Paul N.,*244 AD2d 490, 490-491 [1997]; *Matter of Bryant J.,*195 AD2d 463, 464 [1993]). Further, special circumstances existed warranting a successive adjournment *(see*Family Ct Act § 340.1 [6]; *Matter of Jamel C.,*302 AD2d 457, 458 [2003]). Accordingly, the appellant was not deprived of his right to a speedy trial. Miller, J.E, Ritter, Rivera and Lifson, JJ., concur.
### [§§4002, 4003. Omitted]

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

As enacted, Pub. L. 116–283, div. A, title XVIII, §1841(b)(1), Jan. 1, 2021, 134 Stat. 4243, originally transferred sections 2371 and 2371b of this title to sections 4002 and 4003, respectively, to become effective Jan. 1, 2022. Subsequently, Pub. L. 117–81, div. A, title XVII, §1701(u)(2)(B), Dec. 27, 2021, 135 Stat. 2151, amended section 1841(b)(1) of Pub. L. 116–283, effective as if included therein, so as to eliminate those transfers, thereby omitting these sections before they took effect. As amended by section 1701(u)(2)(B) of Pub. L. 117–81, sections 2371 and 2371b were transferred to sections 4021 and 4022 of this title, respectively.
§ 581.6 How do I file a motion for reconsideration? ( a ) Motions for reconsideration may be made only for final decisions on appeal and will only be granted if a party can establish that: ( 1 ) New and material evidence is now available that, despite the party's due diligence, was not available when the record closed;
( 2 ) The final decision was based on an erroneous interpretation of law or there has been an intervening change in the controlling law; or
( 3 ) A manifest injustice, clearly apparent or obvious on its face, will occur if the motion for reconsideration is not granted.
( b ) A motion for reconsideration and accompanying brief shall be filed within 30 days of the date of the Commission's final decision and shall be served on all parties, limited participants, and intervenors, if any. A motion for reconsideration shall explain the circumstances requiring reconsideration.
( c ) A party may file only one motion and accompanying brief for reconsideration.
( d ) Opposition briefs shall be filed within 20 days after the motion is filed.
( e ) A reply brief to the brief in opposition shall be filed within 15 days of service of the brief in opposition.
( f ) The Commission shall issue a decision on reconsideration within 30 days of the filing of the reply brief or of the expiration of the time to file a reply brief, whichever is later. The Commission shall issue a brief statement of the reason(s) for its decision.
( g ) If the Commission grants the motion, it may reverse or modify the decision, in whole or in part, from which reconsideration is sought or may remand to the Chair for further consideration.
( h ) The filing of a motion for reconsideration will not stay the effect of any decision or order and will not affect the finality of any decision or order for purposes of judicial review, unless so ordered by the Commission.
<PAGE>
                                                                    Exhibit 31.1

                                 CERTIFICATIONS

         I, Charles French, certify that:

         1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of River Holding
Corp.;

         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 the 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 respects the
financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as
of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

         4. The registrant's other certifying officer and I are 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 of over financial reporting that occurred during the
registrant's most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant's fourth quarter in the
case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely
to affect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting; and

         5. The registrant's other certifying officer and I have disclosed,
based on our most recent evaluation, to the registrant's auditors and the audit
committee of registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the
equivalent function):

                  a. All significant deficiencies in the design or operation of
internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to affect
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:    November 14, 2003              /s/ Charles French
                                        --------------------------------------
                                        Charles French
                                        Chief Executive Officer and President
### subpart 4—termination and dissolution of institutions

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Pub. L. 100–399, title IV, §408(m), Aug. 17, 1988, 102 Stat. 1002, redesignated subpart 3 as 4.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM DCH'S
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AT MARCH 31, 2000 AND FOR THE THREE
MONTHS THEN ENDED, AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                       4,503,853
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  425,685
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                    152,155
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             5,578,326
<PP&E>                                         299,354
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               6,184,993
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          649,983
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       241,638
<OTHER-SE>                                  15,267,387
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 6,184,993
<SALES>                                        310,675
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               310,675
<CGS>                                          157,683
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,554,148
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              18,939
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (1,382,217)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (1,382,217)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (1,382,217)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.07)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.07)


</TABLE>
particular circumstances of this case and in light of the district court's 

intent to revisit the custody arrangement in the near future, we decline to 

disturb the court's decision. 

Accordingly, we 

ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED. 

, J. 

Hardesty 

a-190% 

Parraguitjr 

C 6.4 t 

Cherry 

cc: Hon. William B. Gonzalez, District Judge, Family Court Division 

Law Office of Shell Mercer 

Kevin J. Adkins 

Eighth District Court Clerk 

SUPREME COURT 

OF 

NEVADA 

(0) 1947A 

I IT-n 

2
04/02/2010 10:14 FAX 2024935142 FAA •> DMS 001/001 

^ 

FOCC6 Corporate l-leadqucirters 

CUSTOMIZED TASTE TECHNOLOGY 

February 23, 2010 

VU FEDERAL EXPRESS 

Hcariug Docket 

Federal Aviation Administration 

600 Independence Avenue, SW 

Wilbur Wright Building - Suite 2W1000 

Washington, DC 20591 ^ 

Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk - AGC - 430 £f//^J/l''/to 3 

:? : '•: 2 m 

t,' 

^i^/o-0f9?^ 

Re: Federal Aviation Administration ("FAA") Request for Hearing 

Case No. 2009 SW 700272 

Dear Sir or Madam: 

This letter serves as Newly Weds Foods, Inc/s ("NWF") request for a hearing in response lo 

the FAA's Final Notice of Proposed Civil Penalty in the above-captioned matter (the "Request"). The 

Request is sent pursuant to 14 CFT^ 13.16(1). Please do not hesitate to contact me if I can provide you 

or another FAA representative vk'ith any additional information. 

Very truly yours, 

NEWLY WEDS FOODS, INC. 

John J. Seely 

Senior Vice President 

JJS/tw 

ce: James Archier, Esq. 

George Winchester 

'11^0 W rulleiTOFTAvc. • Chicago, Illinois 60639 • 771'189 7000 • f;:ix 773'1^9 2799 • \AA/VW.newlywecl.Ttoodr.com
#### Emmons County *vs.*R. B. Mellon.

Opinion filed November 13, 1900.

(84 N. W. Rep. 1117.)

Appeal from District Court, Emmons County; *Winchester,*J.

*George M. Register*and *Cochrane & Corliss,*for appellant.

*H. A. Armstrong*and *Stevens & Allen,*for respondents.

Per Curiam.

The controlling questions in this case were involved and decided in the case of *Emmons Co.*v. *Thompson*(decided this term) 9 N. D. 598, 84 N. W. Rep. 385. The order appealed from is in all things reversed, and the District Court is directed to enter an order reversing the same, and also to enter an order denying the application made herein to vacate said judgment and tax sale, with costs of both courts to appellant.
§ 249.7 Savings provisions. Nothing in this part 249 shall be deemed to: ( a ) Prohibit or restrict any persons from engaging in any fishing activity in any manner which is permitted under state law;
( b ) Deprive any Indian tribe, band, or group of any right which may be secured it by any treaty or other law of the United States;
( c ) Permit any Indian to exercise any tribal fishing right in any manner prohibited by any ordinance or regulation of his tribe;
( d ) Enlarge the right, privilege, or immunity of any person to engage in any fishing activity beyond that granted or reserved by treaty with the United States;
( e ) Exempt any person or any fishing gear, equipment, boat, vehicle, fish or fish products, or other property from the requirements of any law or regulation pertaining to safety, obstruction of navigable waters, national defense, security of public property, pollution, health and sanitation, or registration of boats or vehicles;
( f ) Abrogate or modify the effect of any agreement affecting fishing practices entered into between any Indian tribe and the United States or any State or agency of either.
# C_2006275EN.01003601.xml

| 11.11.2006 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 275/36 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

11.11.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 275/36

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.4208 — Petroplus/European Petroleum Holdings)

(2006/C 275/14)

(Text with EEA relevance)

On 29 May 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 English 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 32006M4208. 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 32006M4208. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law. (http://ec.europa.eu/eur-lex/lex)

---
[if !vml]>[endif]>

[if !vml]>[endif]>

You have reached the FederalDepository Library Program Electronic Collection (FDLP/EC) Archive. Thisarchive assures ongoing access to publications in the FDLP/EC. Access topublications in the archive is available through GPO's suite of cataloging andlocator services, including the Catalog of U.S. Government Publications(CGP).  Archived copies of publications are retrieved in the event thatpublications are no longer available from the original publishing agency site. 
**Title: FY... administration research and development budget priorities.**
 
2019 | 2020
 
SuDoc Number:PREX 2.4/3:R 31/
Item Number:0854-D-02 (online)
CGP systemNumber:001048144
 
April 19, 2018