alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 362.6 Procedure for filing a claim. ( a ) Railroad Retirement Board Form G-108, Employee Claim for Loss or Damage to Personal Property, is the prescribed form for filing claims pursuant to the regulations in this part and must be completed by the employee, the person acting on his behalf, or his survivor and forwarded directly to the General Counsel of the Board for processing. Railroad Retirement Board Form G-108 may be obtained from the Board's Bureau of Law.
( b ) In addition to the information required to complete the form described § 362.6(a), the following information or data must be submitted with each claim: ( 1 ) With respect to claims involving property which is stolen or lost, the purchase receipt, or if not available, statements from the employee estimating the value and what security measures or precautions were taken to protect the property;
( 2 ) With respect to claims involving property which is damaged, an itemized repair estimate from an appropriate commercial source, or, if beyond repair, a statement from an appropriate commercial source or, if such a statement is not available, from the employee, indicating that the damaged property is beyond repair;
( 3 ) With respect to claims involving property stated to be beyond repair in accordance with paragraph (b)(2) of this section, a statement from the employee estimating the value and the purchase receipt, if available;
( 4 ) With respect to claims considered under § 362.10(b)(3), a statement by the employee's supervisor verifying that the supervisor required the employee to provide, or that the supervisor consented to having the employee provide, such property and that the provision of such personal property was in the interest of the Board;
( 5 ) With respect to a claim filed by an agent or survivor of an employee, a power of attorney or other satisfactory evidence of authority to file the claim.
###### Editorial Note on Part 53

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 53 appear by T.D. ATF-447, 66 FR 19088, Apr. 13, 2001.

#### § 53.113 Events subsequent to taxable use of article.

Liability for tax incurred on the use of an article is not extinguished or reduced because of any subsequent sale or lease of the article even if such sale or lease would have been exempt if the article had been so sold or leased prior to use. If a manufacturer, producer, or importer of an article incurs liability for tax on his use thereof, and thereafter sells or leases the article in a transaction which otherwise would be subject to tax, liability for tax is not incurred on such sale or lease.

[T.D. ATF-308, 56 FR 303, Jan. 3, 1991, as amended by T.D. ATF-312, 56 FR 31084, July 9, 1991]
Exhibit 31.2
 CERTIFICATIONS
      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)
    
    Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal
control over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to provide
reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the
preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally
accepted accounting principles;c)
    
    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; andd)
    
    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
(the registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has
materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants
internal control over financial reporting; and




---



##### 



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; andb)
    
    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.
  /s/ Stanley  J. TalbiStanley  J. TalbiExecutive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                             458
<SECURITIES>                                         3
<RECEIVABLES>                                      204
<ALLOWANCES>                                        23
<INVENTORY>                                        169
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                   828
<PP&E>                                            5938
<DEPRECIATION>                                    4674
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                    2185
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                              391
<BONDS>                                            754
<COMMON>                                           248
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                         792
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                      2185
<SALES>                                           2162
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                  2162
<CGS>                                             1690
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                     2371
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  79
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  (254)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              (254)
<DISCONTINUED>                                    (45)
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (299)
<EPS-BASIC>                                    (.02)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.02)


</TABLE>
§ 404.465 Conviction for subversive activities; effect on monthly benefits and entitlement to hospital insurance benefits. ( a ) *Effect of conviction.* Where an individual is convicted of any offense (committed after August 1, 1956) under chapter 37 (relating to espionage and censorship), chapter 105 (relating to sabotage), or chapter 115 (relating to treason, sedition, and subversive activities) of title 18 U.S.C., or under section 4, 112, or 113 of the Internal Security Act of 1950, as amended, the court, in addition to all other penalties provided by law, may order that, in determining whether any monthly benefit is payable to the individual for the month in which he is convicted or for any month thereafter, and in determining whether the individual is entitled to hospital insurance benefits under part A of title XVIII for any such month, and in determining the amount of the benefit for that month, the following are not to be taken into account: ( 1 ) Any wages paid to such individual, or to any other individual, in the calendar quarter in which such conviction occurred or in any prior calendar quarter, and
( 2 ) Any net earnings from self-employment derived by the individual, or any other individual, during the taxable year in which the conviction occurred or during any prior taxable year.
( b ) *Recalculation of benefit.* When notified by the Attorney General that the additional penalty as described in paragraph (a) of this section has been imposed against any individual entitled to benefits under section 202 or section 223 of the Act (see subpart D), the Administration, for the purposes of determining the individual's entitlement to such benefits as of the month in which convicted and the amount of the benefit, will exclude the applicable wages and net earnings in accordance with the order of the court.
( c ) *Effect of pardon.* In the event that an individual, with respect to whom the additional penalty as described in paragraph (a) of this section has been imposed, is granted a pardon of the offense by the President of the United States, such penalty is not applied in determining such individual's entitlement to benefits, and the amount of such benefit, for any month beginning after the date on which the pardon is granted.
#### Anthony Olusegun IROKO, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Albert R. GONZALES, U.S. Attorney General, Respondent-Appellee.

No. 05-60448.

Summary Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Decided March 28, 2006.

Anthony Olusegun Iroko, Houston, TX, pro se.

Thomas Ward Hussey, Director, U.S. Department of Justice Office of Immigration Litigation, John Clifford Cunningham, Cindy S. Ferrier, U.S. Department of Justice Civil Division Immigration Litigation, Alberto R. Gonzales, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, Hipolito Acosta, U.S. Immigration & Naturalization Service, Houston, TX, U.S. Immigration *&*Naturalization Service District Directors Office, New Orleans, LA, for RespondentAppellee.

Before JONES, Chief Judge, and WIENER, and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Anthony Olusegun Iroko (Petitioner) petitions this court to review the order of *682removal entered by the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) on April 26, 2005. For the reasons stated by the BIA in such order, we affirm the decision of the BIA that upheld the decision of the immigration judge on this matter, and we therefore deny the petition for review.

DENIED.

*

 Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
Exhibit 31.2



CERTIFICATIONS

I, Richard Heyse, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this Annual Report on Form 10-K/A of Innophos, Inc. (the registrant); and

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.





|                    |  |     |  |                                                                         
|------------------- |  | --- |  | ------------------------------------------------------------------------
|Dated: May 21, 2008 |  | By: |  | /s/ RICHARD HEYSE                                                       
|                    |  |     |  | Richard Heyse                                                           
|                    |  |     |  | Vice President and Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial Officer)
### SUBCHAPTER II—PERSONNEL
### SUBCHAPTER II—MILITARY ASSISTANCE FOR AFGHANISTAN AND CERTAIN OTHER FOREIGN COUNTRIES AND INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS
### §1650a. Arbitration awards under the Convention

#### (a) Treaty rights; enforcement; full faith and credit; nonapplication of Federal Arbitration Act

An award of an arbitral tribunal rendered pursuant to chapter IV of the convention shall create a right arising under a treaty of the United States. The pecuniary obligations imposed by such an award shall be enforced and shall be given the same full faith and credit as if the award were a final judgment of a court of general jurisdiction of one of the several States. The Federal Arbitration Act (9 U.S.C. 1 et seq.) shall not apply to enforcement of awards rendered pursuant to the convention.

#### (b) Jurisdiction; amount in controversy

The district courts of the United States (including the courts enumerated in section 460 of title 28) shall have exclusive jurisdiction over actions and proceedings under subsection (a) of this section, regardless of the amount in controversy.

(Pub. L. 89–532, §3, Aug. 11, 1966, 80 Stat. 344.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

Chapter IV of the convention, referred to in subsec. (a), contains the Arbitration provisions of the Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes Between States and Nationals of Other States, providing in Section 1 (Art. 36) for Request for Arbitration, Section 2 (Arts. 37 to 40) for Constitution of the Tribunal, Section 3 (Arts. 41 to 47) for powers and functions of the tribunal, Section 4 (Arts. 48, 49) for The Award, Section 5 (Arts. 50 to 52) for interpretation, revision and annulment of the award, and Section 6 (Arts. 53 to 55) for recognition and enforcement of the award.

The Federal Arbitration Act, referred to in subsec. (a), is classified generally to Title 9, Arbitration.
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED JANUARY 15, 2020

NO. 03-19-00234-CV

Dr. Damon C. O’Gan, Appellant

v.

Scott Ogle, Appellee

APPEAL FROM COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 1 OF TRAVIS COUNTY

BEFORE JUSTICES GOODWIN, BAKER, AND KELLY

AFFIRMED IN PART; REVERSED AND REMANDED IN PART—

OPINION BY JUSTICE BAKER

This is an appeal from the interlocutory order signed by the trial court on April 3, 2019. Having

reviewed the record and the parties’ arguments, the Court holds that there was no reversible error 

in that portion of the order granting appellant’s motion to dismiss appellee’s claims of intentional 

infliction of emotional distress and unjust enrichment, as well as that portion of the order 

denying appellant’s motion to dismiss appellee’s claims under the Texas Theft Liability Act.

Therefore, the Court affirms those portions of the trial court’s interlocutory order. The Court 

further holds that there was reversible error in that portion of the order denying appellant’s 

request for attorney’s fees and costs incurred in defending against appellee’s claims of 

intentional infliction of emotional distress and unjust enrichment. Therefore, the Court reverses

that portion of the trial court’s interlocutory order and remands the case to the trial court for a 
determination of fees and costs to which appellant is entitled. Appellee shall pay all costs 

relating to this appeal, both in this Court and in the court below.
### §1641a. Claims funds

#### (a) Establishment; coverage into Treasury; deduction

There are created in the Treasury of the United States five funds to be known as the Bulgarian Claims Fund, the Hungarian Claims Fund, the Rumanian Claims Fund, the Italian Claims Fund, and the Soviet Claims Fund. The Secretary of the Treasury shall cover into each of the Hungarian, Rumanian, and Bulgarian Claims Funds, the funds attributable to the respective country or its nationals covered into the Treasury pursuant to subsections (a) and (b) of section 1631a of this title. The Secretary of the Treasury shall cover into the Italian Claims Fund the sum of $5,000,000 paid to the United States by the Government of Italy pursuant to article II of the Memorandum of Understanding. The Secretary shall cover into the Treasury the funds collected by the United States pursuant to the Litvinov Assignment (including postal funds due prior to November 16, 1933, to the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics because of money orders certified to that country for payment) and shall cover into the Soviet Claims Fund the funds so covered into the Treasury. The Secretary shall deduct from each claims fund 5 per centum thereof as reimbursement to the Government of the United States for the expenses incurred by the Commission and by the Treasury Department in the administration of this subchapter. Such deduction shall be made before any payment is made out of such fund under section 1641i of this title. All amounts so deducted shall be covered into the Treasury to the credit of miscellaneous receipts.

#### (b) Bulgarian and Rumanian fund

The Secretary of the Treasury shall cover into each of the Bulgarian and Rumanian Claims Funds such sums as may be paid by the Government of the respective country pursuant to the terms of any claims settlement agreement between the Government of the United States and the Government of such country.

#### (c) Hungarian fund

The Secretary of the Treasury shall cover into the Hungarian Claims Fund, such sums as may be paid to the United States by the Government of Hungary pursuant to the terms of the United States Hungarian Claims Agreement of March 6, 1973.

(Mar. 10, 1950, ch. 54, title III, §302, as added Aug. 9, 1955, ch. 645, §3, 69 Stat. 571; amended Pub. L. 90–421, §1(8), July 24, 1968, 82 Stat. 422; Pub. L. 93–460, §1(1), Oct. 20, 1974, 88 Stat. 1386.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

1974—Subsec. (c). Pub. L. 93–460 added subsec. (c).

1968—Pub. L. 90–421 designated existing provisions as subsec. (a) and added subsec. (b).
### SUBCHAPTER III—PRIMARY DEALERS
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

N.J.G., a child,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

No. 4D18-1665 

[February 6, 2019]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Nineteenth Judicial Circuit, St. 

Lucie County; Charles A. Schwab, Judge; L.T. Case Nos. 2017CJ000909 

A, 2017CJ000822 A and 2017CJ000821.

Carey Haughwout, Public Defender, and Virginia Murphy, Assistant 

Public Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellant.

No appearance for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

In this Anders1 appeal we affirm the finding of guilt, the adjudication of 

delinquency, and the sentencing, but remand for the trial court to correct 

the delinquency disposition orders to include the maximum penalty 

defined by statute and to specify the amount of time appellant served in 

secure detention before disposition. See Fla. R. Juv. P. 8.115(d). 

Affirmed and remanded.

MAY, LEVINE and KLINGENSMITH, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

1 Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967).
EXHIBIT 3.4
 LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY AGREEMENT
OF
CAPELLA HOLDINGS OF OKLAHOMA, LLC
   ARTICLE I
 OFFICES
   ARTICLE II
 MEMBERS




---



##### 



2




---



##### 



ARTICLE III
 MANAGERS
       3




---



##### 



4




---



##### 



ARTICLE IV
 OFFICERS
    5




---



##### 



6




---



##### 



ARTICLE V
 CONTRACTS, LOANS, CHECKS AND DEPOSITS
  7




---



##### 



ARTICLE VI
 TRANSFER OF PERCENTAGE OWNERSHIP
  ARTICLE VII
 FISCAL YEAR
  ARTICLE VIII
 DISTRIBUTIONS
  ARTICLE IX
 SEAL
  8




---



##### 



ARTICLE X
 WAIVER OF NOTICE
 [/]
 ARTICLE XI
 INDEMNIFICATION OF OFFICERS AND MANAGERS
  ARTICLE XII
 AMENDMENTS
  9




---



##### 



22nd
 CAPELLA HEALTHCARE, INC.
Sole MemberBy:
    
    /s/ D. Andrew SlusserName:
    
    D. Andrew SlusserTitle:
    
    SR. VICE PRESIDENT
 10
### §1818. Repealed. Pub. L. 85–141, §2(e), Aug. 14, 1957, 71 Stat. 356

Section, acts Aug. 26, 1954, ch. 937, title I, §108, 68 Stat. 837; July 8, 1955, ch. 301, §2(g), 69 Stat. 284, authorized, until June 30, 1956, the transfer of military equipment and supplies to Japan.
Electronically Filed

Intermediate Court of Appeals

CAAP-12-0000322

08-OCT-2014

08:08 AM
### §§6053 to 6053e. Repealed. Pub. L. 107–279, title IV, §403(2), Nov. 5, 2002, 116 Stat. 1985

Section 6053, Pub. L. 103–227, title IX, §1001, formerly Pub. L. 89–10, title XIII, §13101, as added Pub. L. 103–382, title I, §101, Oct. 20, 1994, 108 Stat. 3877; renumbered Pub. L. 103–227, title IX, §1001, and amended Pub. L. 107–110, title X, §§1021(a),(b), 1025(a)(2)(A), (17)(A), (B), (19), Jan. 8, 2002, 115 Stat. 1987–1989, authorized program for establishment of comprehensive regional assistance centers.

Section 6053a, Pub. L. 103–227, title IX, §1002, formerly Pub. L. 89–10, title XIII, §13102, as added Pub. L. 103–382, title I, §101, Oct. 20, 1994, 108 Stat. 3878; renumbered Pub. L. 103–227, title IX, §1002, and amended Pub. L. 107–110, title X, §§1021(a),(b), 1025(a)(1), (2)(B), (6), (7), (10), (17)(C), (19), Jan. 8, 2002, 115 Stat. 1987–1989, related to requirements of centers.

Section 6053b, Pub. L. 103–227, title IX, §1003, formerly Pub. L. 89–10, title XIII, §13103, as added Pub. L. 103–382, title I, §101, Oct. 20, 1994, 108 Stat. 3879; renumbered Pub. L. 103–227, title IX, §1003, and amended Pub. L. 107–110, title X, §§1021(a),(b), 1025(a)(8), (10), (16), Jan. 8, 2002, 115 Stat. 1987–1989, related to maintenance of service and application requirements.

Section 6053c, Pub. L. 103–227, title IX, §1004, formerly Pub. L. 89–10, title XIII, §13104, as added Pub. L. 103–382, title I, §101, Oct. 20, 1994, 108 Stat. 3880; renumbered Pub. L. 103–227, title IX, §1004, and amended Pub. L. 107–110, title X, §§1021(a),(b), 1025(a)(9), (18), Jan. 8, 2002, 115 Stat. 1987–1989, related to transition and phase in of centers.

Section 6053d, Pub. L. 103–227, title IX, §1005, formerly Pub. L. 89–10, title XIII, §13105, as added Pub. L. 103–382, title I, §101, Oct. 20, 1994, 108 Stat. 3880; renumbered Pub. L. 103–227, title IX, §1005, Pub. L. 107–110, title X, §1021(a),(b), Jan. 8, 2002, 115 Stat. 1987, authorized appropriations.

Section 6053e, Pub. L. 103–227, title IX, §1006, as added Pub. L. 107–110, title X, §1021(c), Jan. 8, 2002, 115 Stat. 1987, applied section 7801 definitions to this part.
### §2429a–2. Enforcement of nonproliferation treaties

#### (a) Policy

It is the sense of the Congress that the President should instruct the United States Permanent Representative to the United Nations to enhance the role of that institution in the enforcement of nonproliferation treaties through the passage of a United Nations Security Council resolution which would state that, any non-nuclear weapon state that is found by the United Nations Security Council, in consultation with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), to have terminated, abrogated, or materially violated an IAEA full-scope safeguards agreement would be subjected to international economic sanctions, the scope of which to be determined by the United Nations Security Council.

#### (b) Prohibition

Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no United States assistance under the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 [22 U.S.C. 2151 et seq.] shall be provided to any non-nuclear weapon state that is found by the President to have terminated, abrogated, or materially violated an IAEA full-scope safeguard agreement or materially violated a bilateral United States nuclear cooperation agreement entered into after March 10, 1978.

#### (c) Waiver

The President may waive the application of subsection (b) if—

(1) the President determines that the termination of such assistance would be seriously prejudicial to the achievement of United States nonproliferation objectives or otherwise jeopardize the common defense and security; and

(2) the President reports such determination to the Congress at least 15 days in advance of any resumption of assistance to that state.

(Pub. L. 103–236, title V, §530, Apr. 30, 1994, 108 Stat. 479.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

The Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, referred to in subsec. (b), is Pub. L. 87–195, Sept. 4, 1961, 75 Stat. 424, which is classified principally to this chapter (§2151 et seq.). For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 2151 of this title and Tables.

#### Codification

Section was enacted as part of the Foreign Relations Authorization Act, Fiscal Years 1994 and 1995, and not as part of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 which comprises this chapter.

#### **Executive Documents**

#### Delegation of Functions

Functions of President under this section delegated to Secretary of State by par. (1) of Memorandum of President of the United States, Mar. 23, 2007, 72 F.R. 18103, set out in a note under section 635 of Title 12, Banks and Banking.