alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### §5416. Definitions of package and packaging

For purposes of this subchapter, the term "package" means a bottle, can, keg, barrel, or other original consumer container, and the term "packaging" means the filling of any package.

(Added Pub. L. 85–859, title II, §201, Sept. 2, 1958, 72 Stat. 1390; amended Pub. L. 91–673, §3(e), Jan. 12, 1971, 84 Stat. 2057.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Prior Provisions

A prior section 5416, act Aug. 16, 1954, ch. 736, 68A Stat. 676, consisted of provisions similar to those comprising this section, prior to the general revision of this chapter by Pub. L. 85–859.

#### Amendments

1971—Pub. L. 91–673 substituted definitions of package and packaging for definitions of bottle and bottling.

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

#### Effective Date of 1971 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 91–673 effective on first day of first calendar month which begins more than 90 days after Jan. 12, 1971, see section 5 of Pub. L. 91–673, set out as a note under section 5056 of this title.
§ 5442.1 Bidding. ( a ) Bidding at competitive sales shall be conducted by the submission of sealed bids, written bids, oral bids, or a combination of bidding methods as directed by the authorized officer.
( b ) In sealed bid sales, the bidder submitting the highest sealed bid shall be declared the high bidder. In the event of a tie in high sealed bids, the high bidder shall be determined by lot from among those who submitted the tie bids.
( c ) In oral auction sales, submission of the required minimum bid deposit and a written bid at not less than the advertised appraised price shall be required to participate in oral bidding. The officer conducting the sale shall declare a specific period, prior to oral bidding on each tract, during which bid deposits and written bids may be submitted. Bid deposits and written bids also may be submitted any time prior to the specific period declared by the officer conducting the sale. Oral bidding to determine the high bidder shall begin from the highest written bid after closure of the submittal period. In the event there is a tie in high written bids, and no oral bidding occurs, the bidder who was the first to submit his bid deposit and written bid shall be declared the high bidder. If the officer conducting the sale cannot determine who made the first submission of high tie written bids, the high bidder shall be determined by lot. The declared high bidder must confirm his oral bid in writing immediately after the sale, but failure to do so shall not relieve him of his purchase obligation.
[38 FR 6280, Mar. 8, 1973]
#### David Jaret Co., Inc., Appellant, v. Harold G. Steele, Respondent.

Appeal by plaintiff, on the ground of inadequacy, from a judgment in its favor in an action for brokerage commissions. Judgment unanimously affirmed, with costs. No opinion. Present — Lewis, P. J., Carswell, Adel, Sneed and Wenzel, JJ.
### PART VI—EXTENSION OF TIME FOR FILING RETURNS

Sec.
6081.
Extension of time for filing returns.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                       5,318,491
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   18,124
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                  1,372,592
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             6,882,255
<PP&E>                                       1,298,087
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,046,072
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               7,151,693
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,564,781
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        33,660
<OTHER-SE>                                   5,553,252
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 7,151,693
<SALES>                                        641,989
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               641,989
<CGS>                                          215,458
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,315,018
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                              (95,073)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (793,414)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     9,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (802,414)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (802,414)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.24)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.24)
        

</TABLE>
Document

Exhibit 10.27

Description of Material Terms of Power Solutions International, Inc. LTI Plan 
for the period January 1, 2020 to December 31, 2022
																					
	Item		Explanation	
	Purpose		The primary objectives of this plan are to retain employees and align employees’ incentives with the Company’s long-term goals.	
	Eligibility		Vice President and above or high strategic value. The participants are subject to Board approval.	
	Target Incentive (TI)		The TI is calculated by multiplying each qualifying individual’s Base Salary x LTI level related %.                                                                                                          
	
		LTI Level	TI as % of Base			
		Executive	60%			
		All others	45%			
	Payout %		Payout % spans from 50% to 150% of TI. 50% is the guaranteed payout % and 150% is the maximum payout %.  	
		Payout % is determined by ROA over the three-year performance period.	
	Total Bonus		Total bonus is calculated by multiplying TI and payout %. 	
		The guaranteed payout % is 50%. The guaranteed bonus is 50% of TI after three years (guaranteed bonus).	
						
		Performance Indicator	Performance Range	
		Guaranteed	Plan (100%)	Maximum	
		ROA				
		Payout %	50%	100%	150%	
							
	Vesting Period and Time		1. 1/3 of guaranteed bonus will be vested on December 31, 2020 and paid out at first quarter of 2021.	
		2. 1/3 of guaranteed bonus will be vested on December 31, 2021 and paid out at first quarter of 2022.	
		3. 1/3 of guaranteed bonus and any other performance related bonus will be vested on December 31, 2022. The bonus will be paid out 30 days after 2022 audit results are approved by audit directors.	
	Funding		At the Company’s discretion, payouts under the plan will be made in shares of stock based on the-then market price or in cash.	
	ROA		ROA (return on assets). Formula for ROA, ROA=Net profit/Average monthly Total Asset.
(No. 831

Claimant awarded $379.00.)

#### Peoria & Pekin Union Railway Company, Claimant, *vs.*State of Illinois, Respondent.

*Opinion filed January 19, 1927.*

*Demurrage*— when *State liable.*Where the State through its authorized agent had notice of the delivery of cars of coal shipped to the State’s institution, it is liable for demurrage charges for failure to unload the cars.

Barnes, Magoon & Horton, for claimant.

Oscar E. Carlstrom, Attorney General; Roy D. Johnson, Assistant Attorney General, for respondent.

Mr. Justice Leech

delivered the opinion of the court:

The claimant, the Peoria and Pekin Union Bailway Company, have filed a claim in the sum of $379.00 on account of demurrage on cars of coal shipped to the State Hospital at Bartonville, Illinois. The case hinges on the fact as to whether or not defendant had received notice as to the constructive placement of these cars, under the following provision :

“When delivery of a car consigned or ordered to an industrial interchange track, or to other than a public delivery track cannot be made on account of the inability of the consignee receiving it or because of any other condition attributable to the consignee, such car will be held at destination or, if it cannot reasonably be accommodated there, at the nearest available holding point, and written notice that the car is held and that this railroad is unable to deliver, will be sent or given to the consignee. This will be considered constructive placement.” (Item No. 7, Rule 5, Sec. A. of Rules and Regulations contained in Freight Tariff No. 4D.)

There is a direct conflict in the testimony of J. B. Conway, an employee at the Peoria State Hospital, and three witnesses introduced by claimant. We believe that the preponderance of the evidence proves that notices were given as provided for under said rules and regulations, above cited, and that claimant is entitled to be awarded the amount of its claim.

We therefore award to claimant, the Peoria & Pekin Union Bailway Company, the sum of $379.00.
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 12-60701

Summary Calendar

JAMES MATHEW HARRIS,

Plaintiff–Appellant,

versus

CHRISTOPHER B. EPPS, 

Commissioner, Mississippi Department of Corrections; 

GLORIA PERRY, Doctor; ROBERT MOORE, Doctor; DAISY THOMAS, Doctor;

RONALD WOODALL, Doctor; KEN KAISER, Doctor; JOHN DOE; 

WEXFORD HEALTH SOURCES, INCORPORATED, 

Also Known as Wexford Health Services,

Defendants–Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Mississippi

No. 3:11-CV-26

Before SMITH, PRADO, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

June 14, 2013

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

* 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.

 Case: 12-60701 Document: 00512274012 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/14/2013
No. 12-60701

In this matter tried by consent to a magistrate judge (“MJ”), James Harris,

Mississippi prisoner # 67709, appeals a summary judgment on, and dismissal of,

his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 suit seeking redress for alleged deliberate indifference to his

serious medical needs. A summary judgment, which we review de novo, Xtreme

Lashes, LLC v. Xtended Beauty, Inc., 576 F.3d 221, 226 (5th Cir. 2009), “shall”

be entered “if the movant shows that there is no genuine dispute as to any

material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.” FED.

R. CIV. P. 56(a).

Harris contends that the defendants acted with deliberate indifference to

his serious medical needs by denying him treatment for his Hepatitis C infection

and back problems. The record shows that Harris did receive treatment for

those ailments and that his claim amounts to a disagreement with the treatment

and a desire for more. That is not enough for a viable claim of deliberate indifference. See Domino v. Tex. Dep’t of Crim. Justice, Institutional Div., 239 F.3d

752, 756 (5th Cir. 2001); Banuelos v. McFarland, 41 F.3d 232, 235 (5th Cir. 1995)

(per curiam).

To the extent Harris argues that certain defendants were not entitled to

qualified immunity, there is no error, because the MJ did not consider whether

those defendants were entitled to that immunity. Similarly, Harris’s conclusional assertions attacking the MJ’s discovery and injunction rulings do not

show that the MJ abused his discretion in denying the disputed motions. See

Wiwa v. Royal Dutch Petroleum Co., 392 F.3d 812, 817 (5th Cir. 2004); Women’s

Med. Ctr. of Nw. Houston v. Bell, 248 F.3d 411, 418-19 (5th Cir. 2001). 

Because Harris has shown no error, the judgment is AFFIRMED.

2

 Case: 12-60701 Document: 00512274012 Page: 2 Date Filed: 06/14/2013
Exhibit 4.385

 

/Emblem of the Russian Federation/

 

FEDERAL SERVICE FOR SUPERVISION IN THE SPHERE OF COMMUNICATIONS, INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY AND MASS MEDIA

 

LICENSE

 

No. 180191 dated February 16, 2020

 

For Rendering

 

Telecommunication services for provision of communication channels

 

This License is granted to

 

Limited Liability Company

 

Zelenaya Tochka Lipetsk (Zelenaya Tochka Group)

 

Primary State Registration Number of a Legal Entity 
 (Individual Entrepreneur) (OGRN, OGRNIP)

 

1144827013176

 

Tax Identification Number (TIN)

 

4824081559

 











 

Location address (place of residence):

 

2A, Dovatora str., Lipetsk, Lipetsk region, 398024

 

The territory covered by telecommunications services is specified in the Appendix.

 

This License is granted for a term:

 

until February 16, 2025.

 

This License is granted by decision of the licensing body - Order dated January 23, 2020 No. 25-рчс

 

Appendix being an integral part of this license is executed on 1 sheet.

 

	
Deputy Head
    	
/signature/   A.А. Pankov
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
Stamp here
    	
 
    
	
Official   seal:
    	
 
    
	
MINISTRY OF TELECOM AND   MASS
   COMMUNICATIONS
    	
 
    
	
OF THE RUSSIAN   FEDERATION
    	
 
    
	
FEDERAL SERVICE FOR   SUPERVISION
   IN THE SPHERE
    	
 
    
	
OF   COMMUNICATIONS, INFORMATION
   TECHNOLOGY
    	
 
    
	
AND MASS MEDIA
    	
 
    
	
PSRN 1087746736296
    	
 
    


 

CN 117250
### PART IV—TAXABLE ESTATE

Sec.
2051.
Definition of taxable estate.
[2052.
Repealed.]
2053.
Expenses, indebtedness, and taxes.
2054.
Losses.
2055.
Transfers for public, charitable, and religious uses.
2056.
Bequests, etc., to surviving spouse.
2056A.
Qualified domestic trust.
[2057.
Repealed.]
2058.
State death taxes.

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

**2014**—Pub. L. 113–295, div. A, title II, §221(a)(97)(A), Dec. 19, 2014, 128 Stat. 4051, which directed amendment of part IV of subchapter A of chapter 11 of this title by striking item 2057 from the table of sections for "such subpart", was executed by striking item 2057 "Family-owned business interests" from the table of sections for this part, to reflect the probable intent of Congress.

**2001**—Pub. L. 107–16, title V, §532(c)(14), June 7, 2001, 115 Stat. 75, added item 2058.

**1998**—Pub. L. 105–206, title VI, §6006(b)(1)(F), July 22, 1998, 112 Stat. 808, added item 2057.

**1990**—Pub. L. 101–508, title XI, §11704(a)(39), Nov. 5, 1990, 104 Stat. 1388–520, amended directory language of section 5033(a)(3) of Pub. L. 100–647. See 1988 Amendment note below.

Pub. L. 101–508, title XI, §11704(a)(16), Nov. 5, 1990, 104 Stat. 1388–518, substituted "trust" for "trusts" in item 2056A.

**1989**—Pub. L. 101–239, title VII, §7304(a)(2)(E), Dec. 19, 1989, 103 Stat. 2353, struck out item 2057 "Sales of employer securities to employee stock ownership plans or worker-owned cooperatives".

**1988**—Pub. L. 100–647, title V, §5033(a)(3), Nov. 10, 1988, 102 Stat. 3672, as amended by Pub. L. 101–508, title XI, §11704(a)(39), Nov. 5, 1990, 104 Stat. 1388–520, added item 2056A.

**1986**—Pub. L. 99–514, title XI, §1172(b)(3), Oct. 22, 1986, 100 Stat. 2515, added item 2057.

**1981**—Pub. L. 97–34, title IV, §427(b), Aug. 13, 1981, 95 Stat. 318, struck out item 2057 "Bequests, etc., to certain minor children".

**1976**—Pub. L. 94–455, title XX, §§2001(c)(1)(N)(iv), 2007(b), Oct. 4, 1976, 90 Stat. 1853, 1890, added item 2057 and struck out item 2052 "Exemption".
§ 4.317 Standards of conduct. ( a ) *Inquiries about cases.* All inquiries about any matter pending before the Board must be made to the Chief Administrative Judge of the Board or the administrative judge assigned the matter.
( b ) *Disqualification.* An administrative judge may withdraw from a case in accordance with standards found in the recognized canons of judicial ethics if the judge deems this action appropriate. If, before a decision of the Board, a party files an affidavit of personal bias or disqualification with substantiating facts, and the administrative judge concerned does not withdraw, the OHA Director will determine the matter of disqualification.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Health and Human Services

###### Food and Drug Administration

          - [Docket No. 2004N-0034]

# AGENCY:

Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

The  Food  and  Drug  Administration  (FDA)   is announcing  that  a  collection  of  information  entitled   “Medical Devices;    Current    Good    Manufacturing   Practices   Quality   System Regulation”  has been approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Peggy Robbins, Office of Management Programs (HFA-250),  Food and Drug Administration, 5600 Fishers            Lane,           Rockville,           MD           20857, 301-827-1223.

# SUPPLEMENTARY  INFORMATION:

                    In  the                     **Federal Register**                     of June 14, 2004 (69 FR 33035), the agency  announced that the proposed information collection had been submitted to OMB  for  review  and clearance under  44 U.S.C. 3507.  An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a  person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.  OMB has now approved the information collection and has assigned OMB control number 0910-0073. The  approval  expires  on  September  30, 2007.   A copy of the supporting statement for this information collection  is  available on the Internet at                     *http://www.fda.gov/​ohrms/​dockets*.                

Dated: October 4, 2004.

Jeffrey Shuren,

Assistant Commissioner for Policy.

[FR Doc. 04-22761 Filed 10-8-04; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4160-01-S
#### Vaporate Company, Inc., Appellant, v. Kern Moyse et al., Respondents, et al., Defendants.

No opinion. Present — Peck, P. J., Glennon, Callahan, Van Voorhis and Shientag, JJ.
#### Ralph M. Lauer, Appellant, v. Benjamin L. Marvin et al., Respondents. (Action No. 2.)

—Action for impressment of a trust upon real property in accordance with an oral agreement to convey. Judgment unanimously affirmed, with costs. Ho opinion. Present — Lewis, P. J., Carswell, Johnston, Adel and Sneed, JJ. [See *post,*p. 967.]
FIRST SHENANGO BANCORP, INC.

                                   EXHIBIT 11

          Statement Regarding Computation of Primary Earnings Per Share


                                                 Three Months Ended
                                                      March 31,
                                                 1997           1996
                                             ---------------------------
Weighted average common shares outstanding     2,343,098      2,343,098
Net effect of dilutive stock options              79,960         78,435
Average unallocated ESOP shares                  (66,370)       (75,031)
Average MSBP shares in plan reserve              (10,367)        (9,012)
Weighted average treasury shares                (282,872)       (34,120)
                                             ---------------------------
Common stock equivalents                       2,063,449      2,303,370
                                             ===========================
Net earnings                                 $ 1,137,444    $   948,583
                                             ===========================
Per share amount                             $      0.55    $      0.41
                                             ===========================


Earnings  per share have been  computed  based on the  treasury  stock method in
using average market price for the common stock equivalents.

The Company  accounts for the shares  acquired by the Employee  Stock  Ownership
Plan ("ESOP") in accordance with Statement of Position 93-6;  shares  controlled
by the ESOP are not considered in the weighted average shares  outstanding until
the shares are committed for allocation.
Exhibit 32.2





                                  CERTIFICATION





In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of Integrated Surgical
Systems, Inc. (the "Company") for the period ended June 30, 2007, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
David H. Adams, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. 1350, that:


     (1)  The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
          15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and



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



/s/ David H. Adams
---------------------------------------
David H. Adams, Chief Financial Officer

August 14, 2007
UN PUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 22

- 6630

BRUCE ALLEN BUCKNER , Plaintiff

- Appellant ,

v. RHPD SERGEANT CASTRO, Police Sergeant; RHPD OFFICER KUNDE, Police Officer; RHPD OFFICER ROBIN GANDER, Police Officer; RHPD OFFICER ANDREW HEMS, Police Officer; RHPD OFF ICER JERRY SANDERS, Police Officer , Defendants

- Appellees

. and
ROCK HILL POLICE DEPARTMENT , in their official capacity,
Defendant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina , at Rock Hill

. Terry L. Wooten , Senior District Judge. ( 0:20

- cv - 03253

- TLW )

Submitted : October 13 , 2022 Decided: October 18, 2022

Before NIEMEYER and AGEE, Circuit Judges , and KEENAN , Senior Circuit Judge

.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

. USCA4 Appeal: 22-6630 Doc: 27 Filed: 10/18/2022 Pg: 1 of 32 Bruce Allen Buckner, Appellant Pro Se. Joshua Paul Golson, David Leon Morrison, MORRISON LAW FIRM, LLC, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees.

Unpublis hed opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. USCA4 Appeal: 22-6630 Doc: 27 Filed: 10/18/2022 Pg: 2 of 33 PER CURIAM:
Bruce Allen Buckner appeals the district court’s order and judgment accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing his civil rights complaint without prejudice. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we
affirm

. Buckner v. Sergeant Castro , No. 0:20

- cv - 03253

- TLW (D.S.C. May 9, 2022). We also deny Buckner’s motion s to clarif y and vacate the order

. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED USCA4 Appeal: 22-6630 Doc: 27 Filed: 10/18/2022 Pg: 3 of 3