alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 1107.20 General requirements. ( a ) Manufacturers must submit a sufficient number of samples of a children's product, or samples that are identical in all material respects to the children's product, to a third party conformity assessment body for testing to support certification. The number of samples selected must be sufficient to provide a high degree of assurance that the tests conducted for certification purposes accurately demonstrate the ability of the children's product to meet all applicable children's product safety rules.
( b ) If the manufacturing process for a children's product consistently creates finished products that are uniform in composition and quality, a manufacturer may submit fewer samples to provide a high degree of assurance that the finished product complies with the applicable children's product safety rules. If the manufacturing process for a children's product results in variability in the composition or quality of children's products, a manufacturer may need to submit more samples to provide a high degree of assurance that the finished product complies with the applicable children's product safety rules.
( c ) Except where otherwise specified by a children's product safety rule, component part testing pursuant to 16 CFR part 1109 may be used to support the certification testing requirements of this section.
( d ) If a product sample fails certification testing to the applicable children's product safety rule(s), even if other samples have passed the same certification test, the manufacturer must investigate the reasons for the failure and take the necessary steps to address the reasons for the failure. A manufacturer cannot certify the children's product until the manufacturer establishes, with a high degree of assurance that the finished product does comply with all applicable children's product safety rules.
### **CHAPTER 24—DISPOSAL OF ATOMIC ENERGY COMMUNITIES**

#### SUBCHAPTER I—GENERAL PROVISIONS

Sec.
2301.
Congressional declaration of policy.
2302.
Congressional findings.
2303.
Purpose of chapter.
2304.
Definitions.
2305.
Powers of Atomic Energy Commission.
2306.
Qualification to purchase.
2307.
Form and contents of contracts, mortgages, and other instruments.
2308.
Conclusive evidence of compliance with chapter.
2309.
Administrative review.
2310.
Repossession of property; powers of Commission.
2311.
Community Disposal Operations Fund.
2312.
Authorization of appropriations.
2313.
Transfer of functions.
2314, 2315. Repealed.

#### SUBCHAPTER II—LOTS, APPRAISALS, AND PRICES

2321.
Lots; establishment of boundaries.
2322.
Appraisal of property.
2323.
Basis of appraisal.
2324.
Posting of lists showing appraised value.
2325.
Sales price.
2326.
Deductions from sales price.

#### SUBCHAPTER III—CLASSIFICATION OF PROPERTY AND PRIORITIES

2331.
Classification of property.
2332.
Priorities; uniformity; preferences; impairment of rights.
2333.
Transfer of priorities.

#### SUBCHAPTER IV—SALES OF PROPERTY FOR PRIVATE USE

2341.
Applicability of subchapter.
2342.
Disposal of property.
2343.
Sales.
2344.
Cash sales.
2345.
Deeds; form and provisions.
2346.
Occupancy by existing tenants.
2347.
Sale of lots to lessees or individual owners.
2348.
Priority sale of apartment houses.
2349.
Hanford project; disposal of property.

#### SUBCHAPTER V—FINANCING

2361.
Contract to purchase by priority purchaser.
2362.
Financing by Commission.
2363.
Indemnity obligation of Commission; incorporation by reference in deed.
2364.
Community employment and population.
2365.
Amount of indemnity.
2366.
Conditions of indemnity; purchase of property by Commission.

#### SUBCHAPTER VI—UTILITIES

2371.
Transfer of utilities.
2372.
Date of transfer of utilities.
2373.
Transfer to governmental or other legal entity; determination of transferee.
2374.
Utilities transferable.
2375.
Gift of utility to city; charges and terms for utilities transferred to other transferees.

#### SUBCHAPTER VII—MUNICIPALITIES

2381.
Assistance in organization.
2382.
Transfer of municipal installations.
2383.
Date of transfer.
2384.
Transfer to governmental entity or private nonprofit organization; determination of transferee.
2385.
Installations transferable.
2386.
Transfer of installations without charge.

#### SUBCHAPTER VIII—LOCAL ASSISTANCE

2391.
Assistance to governmental entities.
2392.
Reduction of payments.
2393.
Payments in anticipation of services; withholding of payments.
2394.
Contract to make payments.
§ 930.100 Remedial action for previously reviewed activities. ( a ) Federal and State agencies shall cooperate in their efforts to monitor federal assistance activities in order to make certain that such activities continue to conform to both federal and State requirements.
( b ) The State agency shall notify the relevant Federal agency representative for the area involved of any federal assistance activity which the State agency claims was: ( 1 ) Previously determined to be consistent with the management program, but which the State agency later maintains is being conducted or is having an effect on any coastal use or resource substantially different than originally described and, as a result, is no longer consistent with the management program, or
( 2 ) Previously determined not to be a project affecting any coastal use or resource, but which the State agency later maintains is being conducted or is having an effect on any coastal use or resource substantially different than originally described and, as a result the project affects a coastal use or resource in a manner inconsistent with the management program.
( c ) The State agency notification shall include: ( 1 ) A description of the activity involved and the alleged lack of compliance with the management program;
( 2 ) supporting information; and
( 3 ) a request for appropriate remedial action. A copy of the request shall be sent to the applicant agency and the Director.
( d ) If, after 30 days following a request for remedial action, the State agency still maintains that the applicant agency is failing to comply substantially with the management program, the State agency may file a written objection with the Director. If the Director finds that the applicant agency is conducting an activity that is substantially different from the approved activity, the State agency may reinitiate its review of the activity, or the applicant agency may conduct the activity as it was originally approved.
( e ) An applicant agency shall be found to be conducting an activity substantially different from the approved activity if the State agency claims and the Director finds that the activity affects any coastal use or resource substantially different than originally determined by the State agency and, as a result, the activity is no longer being conducted in a manner consistent with the management program. The Director may make a finding that an applicant agency is conducting an activity substantially different from the approved activity only after providing a reasonable opportunity for the applicant agency and the Federal agency to review the State agency's objection and to submit comments for the Director's consideration.
### SUBCHAPTER III—NATIONAL VOLUNTEER PROGRAMS TO ASSIST SMALL BUSINESSES AND PROMOTE VOLUNTEER SERVICE BY PERSONS WITH BUSINESS EXPERIENCE
Exhibit  12.1

Endeavour International Corporation

Computation of Ratios of Earnings to Fixed Charges

(Amounts in thousands)

 

|                               |   |         |           |   |   |           |   |   |           |
|------------------------------------|--------|--------------|----------------|--------|--------|----------------|--------|--------|----------------|
|                               |   | December 31, |
|                               |   | 2013         |           | 2012   |   | 2011           |
| Earnings:                          |   |         |           |   |   |           |   |   |
| Income (Loss) before Taxes         |   | $            | (89,037)       |   | $      | (111,998)      |   | $      | (103,934)      |
| Add: Fixed charges                 |   |         | 104,516   |   |   | 84,122    |   |   | 44,893    |
| Earnings                           |   | $            | 15,479    |   | $      | (27,876)       |   | $      | (59,041)       |
| Fixed Charges:                     |   |         |           |   |   |           |   |   |           |
| Interest expense                   |   | $            | 104,516   |   | $      | 84,122    |   | $      | 44,893    |
| Capitalized interest               |   |         | 23,991    |   |   | 26,886    |   |   | 14,711    |
| Total fixed charges                |   | $            | 128,507   |   | $      | 111,008   |   | $      | 59,604    |
| Ratio of earnings to fixed charges |   |         |  — |   |   |  — |   |   |  — |

 

For purposes of this computation, earnings are defined as pretax earnings from continuing operations

before adjustment for minority interest and equity losses in entities with oil and gas properties, plus interest expense, and amortization of debt discount and expense related to indebtedness.  Fixed charges are interest expense, including amortization of debt discount and expenses on indebtedness.

 

Earnings were insufficient to cover fixed charges by $113.0 million, $138.9 million and $118.6 million for the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012 and 2011, respectively.

 

----
**EXHIBIT      32.1**

| (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 of the Company as of June 30, 2008                and                results of operations of the Company for the three and six months                ended                June 30, 2008. |
|-----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|                                   | NF                  Energy Saving Corporation of America |
|----------------------------------------|----------------------------------------------------------|
|                                   |                                                     |
| Date:                  August 11, 2008 | By:                                            | /s/                  Gang Li |   |
|                                   |                                                     | Chief                  Executive Officer |

----
#### Marvin Corby, Jr., Respondent-Appellant, v. Charles Epstein et al., Appellants, and Howard Bossard, Respondent.

-Appeal by the defendants Epstein from a judgment of the Supreme Court of Chemung County, entered October 1, 1952, upon the verdict of a jury in favor of the plaintiff and against the defendants Epstein in the amount of $5,000 and against the defendant *803Bossard for $1,000. Cross appeal by the plaintiff on the ground of the inadequacy of the verdict against the defendant Bossard. The evidence sustained the finding of the jury that the defendant Ethel Epstein parked her automobile off the highway approximately at right angles to the highway, but so close to the highway that the rear bumper and fender extended onto the highway. The accident occurred at night; because of the position of the Epstein ear, its lights were not visible to one approaching it on the traveled portion of the highway. The plaintiff, riding a motorcycle, apparently did not see the car in the darkness and collided with it and sustained the injuries for which a recovery was had against the defendants Epstein. While the headlight of the motorcycle was on, and this gave some light, the question of whether the plaintiff was guilty of contributory negligence in failing to see the automobile in time presented only a question of fact which was fairly submitted to the jury. The plaintiff was thrown to the pavement as the result of the collision and, while lying there, he was struck by the ear owned and operated by the defendant Bossard. While the verdict against the defendant Bossard is a low one for the injuries sustained in the second accident, it is not so palpably inadequate as to warrant interference by the court. Judgments appealed from unanimously affirmed, with costs to the plaintiff against the defendants Epstein and with costs to the defendant Bossard against the plaintiff. Present — Foster, P. J., Bergan, Coon, Halpern and Imrie, JJ.
§ 1203.1 Scope, general requirements, and effective date. ( a ) *Scope.* The standard in this subpart describes test methods and defines minimum performance criteria for all bicycle helmets, as defined in § 1203.4(b).
( b ) *General requirements* — ( 1 ) *Projections.* All projections on bicycle helmets must meet the construction requirements of § 1203.5.
( 2 ) *Labeling and instructions.* All bicycle helmets must have the labeling and instructions required by § 1203.6.
( 3 ) *Performance tests.* All bicycle helmets must be capable of meeting the peripheral vision, positional stability, dynamic strength of retention system, and impact-attenuation tests described in §§ 1203.7 through 1203.17.
( 4 ) *Units.* The values stated in International System of Units (“SI”) measurements are the standard. The inch-pound values stated in parentheses are for information only.
( c ) *Effective date.* The standard shall become effective March 10, 1999 and shall apply to all bicycle helmets manufactured after that date. Bicycle helmets manufactured from March 17, 1995 through March 10, 1999, inclusive, are subject to the requirements of Subpart D, rather than this subpart A.
**EXHIBIT 23.2**

**CONSENTOF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

The Board of DirectorsAvistar Communications Corporation:

We consent to the incorporation by reference in theregistration statements (Nos. 333-115755, 333-43944 and 333-63914)on Form S-8 of Avistar Communications Corporation of our reportdated January 28, 2005, except as to Note 2, which is as of April 26,2006, with respect to the consolidated statements of operations, stockholders’equity, and cash flows of Avistar Communications Corporation and subsidiariesfor the year  ended December 31,2004, and the related financial statement schedule for the year ended December 31,2004, which report appears in the December 31, 2006 Annual Report on Form 10-Kof Avistar Communications Corporation. Our report indicates that theconsolidated statements of operations and cash flows of Avistar CommunicationsCorporation and subsidiaries  for theyear ended December 31, 2004 have been restated.
|                           | /s/ KPMG LLP |
|---------------------------|--------------|
|                      |         |
| Mountain View, California |         |
| March 19, 2007       |         |

 

----
#### In the Matter of Martin E. Albert et al., Appellants, against Joseph D. McGoldrick, as State Rent Administrator of the Temporary State Housing Rent Commission, Respondent, and 180 Riverside Corporation, Intervener, Respondent.

No opinion. Present — Peck, P. J., Glennon, Dore, Cohn and Van Yoorhis, JJ.
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 Homeland Security Bureau of Customs and Border Protection
 AGENCY: Bureau of Customs and Border Protection, U.S. Department of Homeland Security.
 ACTION: General notice.
 SUMMARY: Pursuant to section 641 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, (19 U.S.C. 1641) and the Customs Regulations (19 CFR 111.51), the following Customs broker local permits are canceled without prejudice. Name
Permit #
Issuing portEvans, Wood and Mooring, Inc
373
Los Angeles.MEC Transport Services Corp
13618-P
San Francisco.Jose A. Mena
WTH
Miami.South Florida Customs Brokers, Inc
GQ3
Miami.Exel Global Logistics, Inc
20-02-233
New Orleans.Exel Global Logistics, Inc
1101-02-4079
Philadelphia.MEC Transport Services Corp
93031
Los Angeles.Kathleen R. Carlton
52-02-AMC
Miami.World Commerce Services Inc
39-754
Chicago.Howard Fox
MM6
Chicago.Janet Bernal dbaHappy Custom Brokers
52-03-AQB
Miami.Valerie Knapp-Banker
WFG
Miami.J.H. Bachmann, Inc
805
New York.J.H. Bachmann, Inc
39-W82
Chicago.J.H. Bachmann, Inc
01-17-008
Savannah.
 Dated: November 15, 2004. Jayson P. Ahern, Assistant Commissioner, Office of Field Operations.


[FR Doc. 04-26107 Filed 11-24-04; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4820-02-P
§ 894.511 What are the QLEs that are consistent with decreasing my type of enrollment? ( a ) Loss of an eligible *family member* or *TEI family member* due to: ( 1 ) Divorce;
( 2 ) Death; or
( 3 ) Loss of eligibility of a previously enrolled *child* or *TEI child.*
( b ) You are an *enrollee* and your spouse deploys to active military service.
[83 FR 58180, Nov. 19, 2018, as amended at 88 FR 47748, July 25, 2023]
EXHIBIT 32.1

CERTIFICATION

Pursuant to the requirement set forth in Rule 13a-14(b) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the Exchange Act), and Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code (18 U.S.C. § 1350), Timothy S. Jenks, President, Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Board
of Directors of NeoPhotonics Corporation (the Company), and James D. Fay, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, each hereby certifies that, to the best of his knowledge:

1. The Companys Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2011, to which this Certification is attached as Exhibit 32.1 (the Quarterly Report) fully complies with
the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of the Exchange Act, as amended; and

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

In Witness
Whereof, the undersigned have set their hands hereto as of the 12th day of May, 2011.



|                                       |  |  |  |                        
|-------------------------------------- |  |  |  | -----------------------
|/s/ TIMOTHY S. JENKS                   |  |  |  | /s/ JAMES D. FAY       
|Timothy S. Jenks                       |  |  |  | James D. Fay           
|President, Chief Executive Officer and |  |  |  | Chief Financial Officer
|Chairman of the Board of Directors     |  |  |  |                        

This certification accompanies the Report on Form 10-Q to which it relates, is not deemed filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of NeoPhotonics Corporation under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (whether made before or after
the date of this Report on Form 10-Q), irrespective of any general incorporation language contained in such filing.
DISTRIBUTION INRUSSIA -- PART TWO

----
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING

MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

OF FLORIDA

SECOND DISTRICT

MELVIN QUEVEDO, )

)

Appellant, )

)

v. ) Case No. 2D16-3074

)

STATE OF FLORIDA, )

)

Appellee. )

________________________________ )

Opinion filed February 9, 2018.

Appeal from the Circuit Court for Manatee

County; Deno Economou, Judge.

Howard L. Dimmig, II, Public Defender, and

Caroline Joan Picart, Special Assistant

Public Defender, Bartow, for Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General,

Tallahassee, and Cornelius C. Demps, 

Assistant Attorney General, Tampa, for

Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

NORTHCUTT, KELLY, and SALARIO, JJ., Concur.
#### Joseph Baillargeon, Appellant, v. Eugene C. Jacques et al., Respondents. Lauretta Baillargeon, Respondent, v. Eugene C. Jacques et al., Appellants, et al., Defendants.

Foster, P. J., Heffernan, Brewster, Deyo and Santry, JJ., concur.
Exhibit 12.2

Endeavour International Corporation

Computation of Ratios of Earnings to Fixed Charges

And Preference Securities Dividends

(Amounts in thousands)

 

|                                               |   |         |           |   |   |           |   |   |           |
|----------------------------------------------------|--------|--------------|----------------|--------|--------|----------------|--------|--------|----------------|
|                                               |   | December 31, |
|                                               |   | 2013         |           | 2012   |   | 2011           |
| Earnings:                                          |   |         |           |   |   |           |   |   |           |
| Income (Loss) before Taxes                         |   | $            | (89,037)       |   | $      | (111,998)      |   | $      | (103,934)      |
| Add: Fixed charges, excluding capitalized interest |   |         | 106,339   |   |   | 85,945    |   |   | 46,867    |
| Earnings                                           |   | $            | 17,302    |   | $      | (26,053)       |   | $      | (57,067)       |
| Fixed Charges:                                     |   |         |           |   |   |           |   |   |           |
| Interest expense                                   |   | $            | 104,516   |   | $      | 84,122    |   | $      | 44,893    |
| Preferred dividends                                |   |         | 1,823     |   |   | 1,823     |   |   | 1,974     |
| Capitalized interest                               |   |         | 23,991    |   |   | 26,886    |   |   | 14,711    |
| Total fixed charges                                |   | $            | 130,330   |   | $      | 112,831   |   | $      | 61,578    |
| Ratio of earnings to fixed charges                 |   |         |  — |   |   |  — |   |   |  — |

 

For purposes of this computation, earnings are defined as pretax earnings from continuing operations

before adjustment for minority interest and equity losses in entities with oil and gas properties, plus interest expense, and amortization of debt discount and expense related to indebtedness.  Fixed charges are interest expense, including amortization of debt discount and expenses on indebtedness.

 

Earnings were insufficient to cover fixed charges by $113.0 million, $138.9 million and $118.6 million for the years  ended December 31 2013, 2012 and 2011, respectively.

----
### §10344. Coordination with other research

The research program established under section 10342 of this title shall be carried out in coordination with any other related Federal research efforts.

(Pub. L. 102–490, §5, Oct. 24, 1992, 106 Stat. 3143.)