alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 418.10 Determining the amount of water duty to be delivered. ( a ) Eligible land may receive no more than the amount of water in acre-feet per year established as maximum farm headgate delivery allowances by the decrees. All water use is limited to that amount reasonably necessary for economical and beneficial use under the decrees.
( b ) The annual water duty as assigned by the decrees is a maximum of 4.5 AF per acre for bench lands and a maximum of 3.5 AF per acre for bottom lands. The water duty for fields with a mixture of bench and bottom lands must be the water duty of the majority acreage. Bench and bottom land designations as finally approved by the United States District Court for the District of Nevada will be used in determining the maximum water duty for any parcel of eligible land. The annual water duty for pasture land established by contract is 1.5 AF per acre.
#### Julia M. A. Mandery, Appellant, v. Joseph J. Mandery, Respondent.

Motion for leave to appeal to Court of Appeals denied, with ten dollars costs.
#### § 429.20 Can I get a detailed explanation of the administrative costs?

Yes, you are entitled to receive an explanation of all administrative costs relevant to your specific application. You must request this information in writing from the Reclamation office where you submitted your application.
San Mateo, CA
                                                                   July 31, 2000
                                                                   $175,000

                             SECURED PROMISSORY NOTE

For  value  received,  the  undersigned,  Hypermedia  Communications,   Inc.,  a
California  corporation  ("Borrower") promises to pay MK GVD Fund ("Lender") the
principal sum of one hundred  seventy-five  thousand  dollars  ($175,000),  with
interest  from the date hereof at a rate of ten percent  (10%) per annum,  which
amount shall be secured by all of the assets of Borrower.  Said principal  shall
be due and  payable on demand by Lender,  which  demand may be made at any time,
but in no event shall the principal be paid later than one hundred  eighty (180)
days after the date of this Note.  This Note may be prepaid at any time  without
penalty.

In the event of liquidation,  merger, sale, or winding up of the company, Lender
shall be entitled to receive,  prior and in  preference  to any other holders of
debt or equity securities,  (except as provided in item 1. below), the principal
value of this Note plus accrued interest.

The  following is a statement of the rights of the Borrower of this Note and the
conditions to which this Note is subject,  to which the Borrower and Lender,  by
the acceptance of this Note agree:

         1.  Security  Interest  - Borrower  hereby  grants to Lender a security
interest  in all assets of  Borrower  to secure  repayment  of the  indebtedness
represented  by this Note.  Borrower  hereby  represents and agrees that it will
take all actions  contemplated above including the execution of a UCC1 financing
statement,  which for the purposes of such  execution,  Borrower hereby appoints
Lender as its attorney-in-fact to execute such UCC1 financing statement.

         2. Attorneys' Fees - If any action or proceeding  shall be commenced to
enforce  this Note or any right  arising  in  connection  with  this  Note,  the
prevailing  party in such action or proceeding shall be entitled to recover from
the other party the reasonable  attorneys' fees, costs, and expenses incurred by
such  prevailing   party  in  connection  with  such  action  or  proceeding  or
negotiation to avoid such action or proceeding.  In the event that any provision
of this Note should be deemed unlawful or unenforceable, such provision shall be
struck and the remainder  hereof shall be enforced to the fullest  extent of the
law.

         3.  Governing  Law - This Note is  issued  in and shall be  interpreted
under the laws of the State of California.

Issued this 31 day of July, 2000.

                                         Hypermedia Communications, Inc.



                                         By: __________________

                                         Title: ________________
§ 3475.6 Logical mining unit. ( a ) Criteria for approving or directing establishment of an LMU shall be developed and applied in accordance with § 3487.1 of this title.
( b ) When a lease is included in an LMU with other Federal leases or with interests in non-Federal coal deposits, the terms and conditions of the Federal lease or leases shall be amended so that they are consistent with or are superseded by the requirements imposed on the LMU of which it has become a part.
( c ) The holder of any lease issued or readjusted between May 7, 1976, and the effective date of this regulation, whose lease provides by its own terms that it is considered to be an LMU, may request removal of this provision from any such lease. Such request shall be submitted to the authorized officer.
[47 FR 33151, July 30, 1982, as amended at 50 FR 8627, Mar. 4, 1985]
CERTIFICATIONS
--------------

I, Morton Reed, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB of LitFunding Corp

2. Based on my knowledge, this annual 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;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this annual 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 annual report;

4. The registrant's other certifying officers and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and have:

         a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures 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 annual report is
         being prepared;

         b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls
         and procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of
         this annual report (the "Evaluation Date"); and

         c) presented in this annual report our conclusions about the
         effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our
         evaluation as of the Evaluation Date;

5. The registrant's other certifying officers 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
functions):

         a) all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal
         controls which could adversely affect the registrant's ability to
         record, process, summarize and report financial data and have
         identified for the registrant's auditors any material weaknesses in
         internal controls; and

         b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or
         other employees who have a significant role in the registrant's
         internal controls; and

6. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have indicated in this
annual report whether there were significant changes in internal controls or in
other factors that could significantly affect internal controls subsequent to
the date of our most recent evaluation, including any corrective actions with
regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.


Date: May 21st, 2004



/s/ Morton Reed
---------------------------
Morton Reed, President and Chairman of the Board
SERVED: MAY 23, 2013 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS - . 

WASHINGTON, DC 

IN THE MATTER OF 

HEALTHTEX DISTRIBUTORS, INC. 

FAA DOCKET NO. [TO BE ASSIGNED] 

(Civil Penalty Action) 

FDMS NO. FAA- 2013-0285 

NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT OF PROCEEDING 

This proceeding (heretofore designated as Case No. 2012S0700278) has been assigned to 

Administrative Law Judge J.E. Sullivan. All future pleadings and other communications 

regarding this proceeding shall be served on the Judge, the FAA Hearing Docket, and the other 

persons on the attached Service List. /" ... ----·-:- _..... ........ ... 

. /--

Attachment - Service List 
SERVICE LIST- BY U.S. MAIL 

ORIGINAL & ONE COPY 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue, S.W. 

Washington, DC 20591 

Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2W10001 

Natividad R. Elias, President 

Healthtex Distributors, Inc., Respondent 

3555 N.W. 41st Street 

Miami, Florida 33142 

TEL: 305-633-7900 

FPC(: 305-633-7666 

ONE COPY 

Andrea Michelle Harper, Complainant's Counsel 

Attorney; Office of Regional Counsel 

Southern Region 

Federal Aviation Administration 

P. 0. Box 20636 

Atlanta, GA 30320 

TEL: 404-305-5200 

FAX: 404-305-5223 

Hon. J.E. Sullivan, Administrative Law Judge 

Office of Hearings, M-20 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. (Ell-310) 

Washington, DC 20590 

TEL: 202-366-2132 

FAX: 202-366-7536 

FDMS No. FAA-2013-0285 

(Civil Penalty Action) 

1 Service was by U.S. Mail. For service in person or by expedited courier, use the following address: Federal 

Aviation Administration, 600 Independence Avenue, S.W., Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2W1000, Washington, 

DC 20591; Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430. 

-2-
<Page>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.2

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Matthew Carson, Chief Financial Officer of TouchTunes Music Corporation ("the
Company"), have reviewed the quarterly report of the Company on Form 10-QSB for
the quarter ending March 31, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), and based on the inquiries I have
made or caused to be made in the fulfillment of my responsibilities as the Chief
Financial Officer of the Company, I hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.
1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that for
the periods covered by the Report:

     (1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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

/s/ Matthew Carson
-----------------------
Matthew Carson
Chief Financial Officer

May 17, 2004

THIS CERTIFICATE IS BEING MADE FOR THE EXCLUSIVE PURPOSE OF COMPLIANCE BY THE
CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER OF THE COMPANY WITH THE REQUIREMENT OF SECTION 906, AND
SHALL NOT BE DEEMED TO BE A PART OF THE REPORT OR FILED FOR ANY OTHER PURPOSE. A
SIGNED ORIGINAL OF THIS WRITTEN STATEMENT REQUIRED BY SECTION 906 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.


                                       25
#### § 49.145 Has OMB approved the information collection provisions of this part?

BLM, Reclamation, NPS, and FWS use the information collected under this part to manage and protect paleontological resources on and from Federal land. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) reviewed and approved the information collection requirements contained in this part and assigned OMB Control No. 1093-0008. OMB has approved the information collection requirements for the NPS Research Permit and Reporting System, which includes paleontological permits, and assigned OMB Control No. 1024-0236. A Federal agency may not conduct or sponsor and you are not required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.
### §892. Repealed. Pub. L. 93–197, §3(b), Dec. 22, 1973, 87 Stat. 770

Section, act June 17, 1954, ch. 303, §2, 68 Stat. 250, defined "Tribe" and "Secretary".
**Exhibit 32.1**





Certification
      of Chief Executive Officer pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,


as
      adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
      2002





**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 on Form 10-QSB/A Amendment 1 of M45 Mining
      Resources Inc. (the “Company”) for the quarter ended June 30, 2007, as
      filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
“Report”), I, Andrea M. Cortellazzi, Chief Executive Officer of the Company,
      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
                Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d)
                of
                theSecurities
                Exchange Act of 1934; and(2)
            
            The
                information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
                respects,the
                financial condition and results of operations of the
                Company.


Date:
                June 27, 2008
            /s/Andrea
                M. CortellazziAndrea
                M. Cortellazzi
              Chief
                Executive Officer
#### § 5003.5 Severability.

If a court holds any provisions of the regulations in this subpart or their applicability to any person or circumstances invalid, the remainder of this subpart and its applicability to other people or circumstances will not be affected.
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsVertical Tail Buffeting Alleviation Using Piezoelectric Actuators-Some Results of the Actively Controlled Response of Buffet-Affected Tails (ACROBAT) ProgramBuffet is an aeroelastic phenomenon associated with high performance aircraft especially those with twin vertical tails. In particular, for the F/A-18 aircraft at high angles of attack, vortices emanating from wing/fuselage leading edge extensions burst, immersing the vertical tails in their wake. The resulting buffet loads on the vertical tails are a concern from fatigue and inspection points of view. Recently, a 1/6-scale F-18 wind-tunnel model was tested in the Transonic Dynamics Tunnel at the NASA Langley Research Center as part of the Actively Controlled Response Of Buffet Affected Tails (ACROBAT) Program to assess the use of active controls in reducing vertical tail buffeting. The starboard vertical tail was equipped with an active rudder and the port vertical tail was equipped with piezoelectric actuators. The tunnel conditions were atmospheric air at Mach 0.10. By using single-input-single-output control laws at gains well below the physical limits of the actuators, the power spectral density of the root strains at the frequency of the first bending mode of the vertical tail was reduced by as much as 60 percent up to angles of attack of 37 degrees. Root mean square (RMS) values of root strain were reduced by as much as 19 percent. The results herein illustrate that buffet alleviation of vertical tails can be accomplished using simple active control of the rudder or piezoelectric actuators. In fact, as demonstrated herein, a fixed gain single input single output control law that commands piezoelectric actuators may be active throughout the high angle-of-attack maneuver without requiring any changes during the maneuver. Future tests are mentioned for accentuating the international interest in this area of research.Document ID19970022378Acquisition SourceLangley Research CenterDocument TypeTechnical Memorandum (TM)AuthorsMoses, Robert W.*(NASA Langley Research Center Hampton, VA United States)*Date AcquiredSeptember 6, 2013Publication DateApril 1, 1997Subject CategoryAircraft Design, Testing And PerformanceReport/Patent NumberNAS 1.15:110336NASA-TM-110336Accession Number97N22926Funding Number(s)PROJECT: RTOP 522-32-21-01Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType19970022378.pdfSTIcloud_downloadcontent_copyvisibilityRelated RecordsThere are no records associated with this record.visibility_offNo Preview Available
 No Fear Act | Freedom of Information Act | Office of the Inspector General | Agency Financial ReportsNASA Web Privacy Policy and Important Notices | NASA Guidelines for Quality of InformationDisclaimers, Copyright, Terms of Use | Accessibility | NASA OCIO | USA.gov | NASA.govContact Us | Site MapSTI LogoNASA Official: JoAnne R. Calhoun Site Curator: STI Compliance and Distribution Services Last Modified: September 12, 2024
§ 49.115 Where must a permit application be filed and what information must it include? ( a ) A permit applicant must submit an application to the bureau that administers the Federal land where the proposed activity would be conducted. It is the permit applicant's responsibility to determine which bureau has jurisdiction, use that bureau's permit application form and process, and respond to that bureau's requests for information in a timely manner.
( b ) Required information includes: ( 1 ) The applicant's name, affiliation, and contact information.
( 2 ) A current resume for the applicant and all other persons who oversee work under the permit, and any additional information demonstrating that the applicant possesses the qualifications required by § 49.110.
( 3 ) A description, proposed start and end dates, and maps and other location information for the proposed work.
( 4 ) Purpose, methods, and need for the proposed work, a scope of work or research plan, duration of the proposed work, logistical information, description of any paleontological resource collections that may be made under the permit, description of any existing collections known to have originated in this area, timetable for transfer to the proposed repository, and any additional information that will help the federal land manager identify the extent, nature, and potential impacts of the proposal.
( 5 ) Bonding information, if required by the bureau.
( 6 ) Name, location, and contact information of a proposed repository that agrees to receive the collection made under the permit.
( 7 ) Anticipated costs of the permitted activity, including paleontological resource preparation and curation, and identification of the persons or organizations that will be responsible for these costs if the permit is approved;
( 8 ) List of the applicant's past permits and record of compliance and non-compliance.
( 9 ) An explanation of how the proposed collection would further paleontological knowledge or public education, or management of paleontological resources.
§ 3837.22 How long does a delinquent co-claimant have after notification to contribute a proportionate share of the assessment work, expenditures, or maintenance fees? The delinquent co-claimant must contribute a proportionate share of the assessment work, expenditures, or maintenance fees within 90 days after the date on which— ( a ) The co-claimant received written notice by mail or personal service; or
( b ) The 90-day newspaper publication period ended.
#### Edward Kromer, Appellant, v. Louisa Klett, Individually and as Executrix, etc., of Martin Klett, Deceased, Respondent.

Order affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements. (See decision in *Kromer*v. *Klett, ante,*p. 920, decided herewith.) Jenks, P. J., Thomas, Carr, Stapleton and Putnam, JJ., concurred.
#### § 4130.8 Fees.
#### Elizabeth C. O’Neal, Administratrix, appellee, v. Bellevue Improvement Company, appellant, Impleaded with Amelia P. Lowrie et al., appellees.

Filed December 21, 1904.

No. 13,668.

1. Appeal: Review. It is the settled doctrine of this court that in reviewing a judgment of the district court upon appeal this court will only consider whether or not the pleadings and the evidence are sufficient to justify the judgment of the district court.

2. -: -. Upon an examination of the pleadings and the evidence, *held,*that they fully support the judgment of the district court.

Appeal from the district court for Sarpy county: George A. Day, Judge.

*Affirmed.*

*Harry Z.*Wedgwood, for appellant.

*William B.*Patrick, *contra.*

Letton, C.

This is an appeal from a judgment of the district court for Sarpy county, quieting title in the appellee to certain lots in the village of Bellevue. The action was brought by Elizabeth C. O’Neal, administratrix, as plaintiff, against the appellant and others as defendants. Before the trial a petition in intervention was filed by the appellees, to which answers were filed by the appellant. A demurrer to the plaintiff’s petition was sustained, and the cause was tried upon the issues raised by the petition in intervention and the answers thereto. A number of errors in the proceedings leading up to the trial have been urged as grounds for reversal by appellant, but it is the settled doctrine of this court that, in reviewing a judgment of the district court upon appeal, this court will only consider whether or not the facts as shown by the pleadings and the evidence are sufficient to justify the judgment of the district court. *McNaughton v. Burke,*63 Neb. 704, and cases cited. The *900petition in intervention alleges substantially that the interveners are the only heirs of Hugh M. O’Neal, deceased; that at the time of his death he was the owner in fee simple of the real estate in controversy; that he entered into the possession of the same in 1889, and was in the open, notorious, continuous, exclusive and adverse possession thereof, claiming title thereto, from that time until the time of his death in February, 1900. The petition further sets out that the appellants each claim some title or interest in the premises by virtue of certain tax deeds and other conveyances described therein, and alleges that each and all of said deeds are void, and that they constitute clouds upon the intereveners’ title.

The petition states sufficient facts to constitute a cause of action in *quia timet.*The testimony, offered on the part of the interveners fully supports the allegations of the petition. No evidence was offered on behalf of appellant.

We are of the opinion that the petition and the evidence fully support the judgment of the district court, and we recommend that it be affirmed.

Ames and Oldham, CC., concur.

By the Court:

For the reasons stated in the foregoing opinion, the judgment of the district court is

Affirmed.
§ 9.1 What is the purpose of these regulations? ( a ) The regulations in this part implement Executive Order 12372, “Intergovernmental Review of Federal Programs,” issued July 14, 1982 and amended on April 8, 1983. These regulations also implement applicable provisions of section 401 of the Intergovernmental Cooperation Act of 1968.
( b ) These regulations are intended to foster an intergovernmental partnership and a strengthened Federalism by relying on state processes and on state, areawide, regional and local coordination for review of proposed federal financial assistance and direct federal development.
( c ) These regulations are intended to aid the internal management of the Department, and are not intended to create any right or benefit enforceable at law by a party against the Department or its officers.