alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### § 1101.13 Public ability to ascertain readily identity of manufacturer or private labeler.

The advance notice and analysis provisions of section 6(b)(1) apply only when a reasonable person receiving the information in the form in which it is to be disclosed and lacking specialized expertise can readily ascertain from the information itself the identity of the manufacturer or private labeler of a particular product. The Commission will provide the advance notice and opportunity to comment if there is a question whether the public could readily ascertain the identity of a manufacturer or private labeler.
Exhibit 31.1

FORM 10-Q CERTIFICATION

I, Steven R. Williams, certify that:

I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of the Registrant;

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;

Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant of, and for, the periods presented in this report.

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

Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

(b)	Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and 

(c)	Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's second fiscal quarter of 2004 that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting; and

5.	The registrant's other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of the board of directors of the Managing General Partner of the registrant;

(a)	all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal controls over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

(b)	any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting.

 

Date:  August 5, 2004               
 /s/ Steven R. Williams                           

Steven R. Williams

Chief Executive Officer of the 

Managing General Partner of the Registrant
EX-10.93



 








Exhibit 10.93




AMENDMENT TO THE BY-LAWS




OF




ERIE INDEMNITY COMPANY



Section 2.01 Annual Meeting. The Annual Meeting of Shareholders shall be held
each year during the month of April, at a day and time fixed by the Board of Directors;
provided that if a majority of the members of the Board of Directors determines that it is
impracticable to hold such meeting during April of such year, then such meeting may be postponed
until May or June of such year; and provided, further, that if a majority of the
members of the Board of Directors further determines that it is impracticable to hold such meeting
during May or June of such year, then such meeting may be postponed until July of such year, but
only with the prior written consent of the holders of a majority of the shares of Class B Common
Stock, no par value, of the corporation (the “Class B Shares”) then outstanding. At the Annual
Meeting, the holders of the Class B Shares (the “Voting Shareholders”) shall elect Directors and
shall transact such other business as may properly be brought before the meeting. In elections for
Directors, voting need not be by ballot, except upon demand made by a Voting Shareholder at the
election and before the voting begins. A Director nominee shall only be elected if the total votes
cast by the Voting Shareholders “FOR” the election of such Director nominee represents a majority
of the Class B Shares outstanding and entitled to vote at such meeting.




47
March 23, 2015

Mr. Dean Penewit

Peneworx LLC

5108 Elton Court

Virginia Beach, VA 23464

Dear Mr. Penewit:

This letter is to inform you that we are unable to process your request for an exemption. It 

explains why we cannot process your request and what you should do in the next 30 days.

Why We Cannot Process Your Request

We entered your January 9, 2015 exemption request into the public docket (No. FAA-2015-

0053), but we are unable to process your request any further. The information you sent does 

not comply with the requirements of § 11.81 (copy enclosed). For us to consider the request 

any further, you must send us all of the following:

• The reasons why granting the request would be in the public interest; that is, how it would 

benefit the public as a whole.

• The reasons why the exemption would not adversely affect safety or how the exemption 

would provide a level of safety at least equal to that provided by the rule from which you 

seek an exemption.

• Any additional information, views, or arguments available to support your request.

What You Should Do

If you want us to process your request any further, you must send the information described 

earlier to reach us within 30 days. Please note that § 11.63(d) requires you to send your 

petition for exemption at least 120 days before the proposed effective date of the exemption.
2

If We Do Not Hear From You

If we do not hear from you within 30 days, we will close the docket without notifying you 

further. If you have any questions or require additional time, you may call (202) 267-9521.

Sincerely,

/s/

Jake Troutman

Program Analyst, Airmen and 

 Airspace Rules Division

Enclosure
§ 1031.9 Purpose and scope. ( a ) This subpart sets forth the Consumer Product Safety Commission's criteria and requirements governing membership and involvement by Commission officials and employees in the activities of voluntary standards development bodies.
( b ) The Commission realizes there are advantages and benefits afforded by greater involvement of Commission personnel in the standards activities of domestic and international voluntary standards organizations. However, such involvement might present an appearance or possibility of the Commission giving preferential treatment to an organization or group or of the Commission losing its independence or impartiality. Also, such involvement may present real or apparent conflict of interest situations.
( c ) The purpose of this subpart is to further the objectives and programs of the Commission and to do so in a manner that ensures that such involvement: ( 1 ) Is consistent with the intent of the Consumer Product Safety Act and the other acts administered by the Commission;
( 2 ) Is not contrary to the public interest;
( 3 ) Presents no real or apparent conflict of interest, and does not result in or create the appearance of the Commission giving preferential treatment to an organization or group or the Commission compromising its independence or impartiality; and
( 4 ) Takes into account Commission resources and priorities.
( d ) Commission employees must obtain approval from their supervisor and the Office of the Executive Director to be involved in voluntary standards activities. They must regularly report to the Voluntary Standards Coordinator regarding their involvement in standards activities, and provide copies of all official correspondence and other communications between the CPSC and the standards developing entities.
( e ) All Commission employees involved in voluntary standards activities are subject to any restrictions for avoiding conflicts of interest and for avoiding situations that would present an appearance of bias.
### SUBCHAPTER II—EXECUTIVE AGENCIES
### §1837. Duration of health care and benefits provided

The Secretary shall provide a covered child with health care and benefits under this chapter—

(1) for the duration of the life of the child; and

(2) notwithstanding any death of a parent of the child that precedes the death of the child.

(Added Pub. L. 118–18, §1(b), Oct. 6, 2023, 137 Stat. 104.)
No. I-14-010 March 21, 2014

Contact: Diane Screnci, 610-337-5330

 Neil Sheehan, 610-337-5331

NRC Proposes $11,200 Fine For Rhode Island Firm For Not Obtaining

Approvals to Perform Work at Naval Facility and in Connecticut

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has proposed an $11,200 civil penalty for a Rhode Island 

firm for performing work on numerous occasions at both a federal facility in the state and in 

Connecticut without first obtaining permission from the NRC to do so.

Rhode Island is an “Agreement State,” which means that under an agreement with the NRC, it 

oversees the use of nuclear materials within its borders that would otherwise be regulated by the NRC. 

However, such activities performed at federal facilities and in Connecticut and other “Non-Agreement 

States” are under the jurisdiction of the NRC and therefore must be approved by the agency.

This requirement is known as “reciprocity.” It means that an individual or company licensed by 

the NRC or an Agreement State to use radioactive material must seek permission before conducting 

activities outside of the jurisdiction covered by the licensing agency.

Geisser Engineering Corp. (GEC), based in Riverside, R.I., did not adhere to that reciprocity 

requirement and used portable nuclear gauges in Connecticut between Oct. 21, 2009, and June 23, 

2011. The company also performed work at the Newport Naval Station, located in Newport, R.I., which 

is also under NRC jurisdiction because it is a federal facility. All told, GEC failed to file for reciprocity 

on 22 occasions prior to performing work at these locations.

“GEC’s failure to file for reciprocity interfered with the NRC’s ability to inspect your activities 

while they were being conducted at sites under NRC jurisdiction to ensure the adequate protection of 

public health and the safe use of radioactive materials,” NRC Region I Administrator Bill Dean wrote 

in a letter to the company notifying it of the enforcement action.

The NRC gathered information about these activities during an unannounced inspection at the 

company’s offices. The agency’s Office of Investigations also conducted an investigation into the 

matter and determined that the firm’s president was aware of the reciprocity requirements and chose not 

to follow them over a protracted period of time.

NRC staff conducted a closed pre-decisional enforcement conference with the president of GEC 

on Nov. 20, 2013, regarding the inspection and investigation findings.

In addition to the fine proposed for GEC, the NRC is also issuing an order prohibiting the 

company’s owner, George Geisser III, from participating in NRC-licensed activities for three years. 

This is because his actions with respect to the lack of reciprocity filing have been determined by the 
Page | 2

NRC to be deliberate, resulting in the “loss of reasonable assurance that you may be relied upon, at this 

time, to comply with NRC requirements,” the order states.

GEC will have 30 days to provide a written response to the enforcement action.
## Breadcrumb

-  Home 
-  Data and Analysis 
-              Browse Data and Analysis           

# Browse Data and Analysis

View Upcoming Reports

Location

Topics

                              - (-)World Production, Markets, and Trade Report(7)

                              - (-)Oilseeds(7) - Oilseeds (excl. soybean)(7)
- Soybeans(7)
 

Programs

                              - 2024(7)

                        -   7 results found 
                        - (-)Oilseeds
                        - (-)World Production, Markets, and Trade Report
                        - Clear all

September 12, 2024

World Production, Markets, and Trade Report
              Oilseeds: World Markets and Trade            

August 12, 2024

World Production, Markets, and Trade Report
              Oilseeds: World Markets and Trade            

July 12, 2024

World Production, Markets, and Trade Report
              Oilseeds: World Markets and Trade            

June 12, 2024

World Production, Markets, and Trade Report
              Oilseeds: World Markets and Trade            

May 10, 2024

World Production, Markets, and Trade Report
              Oilseeds: World Markets and Trade            

April 11, 2024

World Production, Markets, and Trade Report
              Oilseeds: World Markets and Trade            

March 8, 2024

World Production, Markets, and Trade Report
              Oilseeds: World Markets and Trade
Exhibit 32.1


CERTIFICATE PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, SECTION 906 OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

         In connection with the Annual Report of DOBI Medical International,
Inc.(the "Company") on Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 2004 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), we, Phillip C.
Thomas, Chief Executive Officer, and Michael R. Jorgensen, Chief Financial
Officer, 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 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.

April 19, 2005
                                                    /s/Phillip C. Thomas
                                                    ----------------------------
                                                    Phillip C. Thomas
                                                    Chief Executive Officer

                                                    /s/Michael R. Jorgensen
                                                    ----------------------------
                                                    Michael R. Jorgensen
                                                    Executive Vice President and
                                                       Chief Financial Officer
EXHIBIT 32.1


                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT BY
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


         In connection with the Quarterly Report of EMPS Corporation, on Form
10-QSB for the period ending June 30, 2003 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned, Mirgali
Kunayev, Chief Executive Officer and Laird Garrard, Chief Financial Officer of
the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.1350, as adopted pursuant to ss.
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 the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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



Date: August 13, 2003                            By:/s/ Louis Naegle
                                                     ---------------------------
                                                     Louis Naegle,
                                                     Principal Executive Officer



Date: August 13, 2003                            By:/s/ Timothy L. Adair
                                                     ---------------------------
                                                     Timothy L. Adair,
                                                     Principal Financial Officer
Exhibit 31.2

FORM 10-Q CERTIFICATION

I, Darwin L. Stump, certify that:

1.	I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of the Registrant;

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;

Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant of, and for, the periods presented in this report.

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

Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

(b)	Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this  report based on such evaluation; and 

(c)	Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's second fiscal quarter of 2004 that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting; and

5.	The registrant's other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant's auditors auditors and the audit committee of the board of directors of the Managing General Partner of the registrant:

(a)	all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal controls over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

(b)	any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting.

 

Date:  August 5, 2004               
 /s/ Darwin L. Stump                           

Darwin L. Stump

Chief Financial Officer of the 

Managing General Partner of the Registrant
Exhibit 32.1




Certification Pursuant to


18 U.S.C. Section 1350


by Chief Executive Officer





In connection with the Quarterly Report of VSB Bancorp, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2011, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on or about the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Raffaele M. Branca, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 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.




Date: May 10, 2011





/s/ Raffaele M. BrancaRaffaele M. BrancaPresident and CEO





A signed original of this written statement 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.




38
§ 1101.61 Generally. ( a ) *Generally.* In addition to the requirements of section 6(b)(1), section 6(b)(5) of the CPSA imposes further limitations on the disclosure of information submitted to the Commission pursuant to section 15(b) of the CPSA, 15 U.S.C. 2064(b).
( b ) *Criteria for disclosure.* Under section 6(b)(5) the Commission shall not disclose to the public information which is identified as being submitted pursuant to section 15(b) or which is treated by the Commission staff as being submitted pursuant to section 15(b). Section 6(b)(5) also applies to information voluntarily submitted after a firm's initial report to assist the Commission in its evaluation of the section 15 report. However, the Commission may disclose information submitted pursuant to section 15(b) in accordance with section 6(b)(1)-(3) if: ( 1 ) The Commission has issued a complaint under section 15 (c) or (d) of the CPSA alleging that such product presents a substantial product hazard; or
( 2 ) In lieu of proceeding against such product under section 15 (c) or (d), the Commission has accepted in writing a remedial settlement agreement dealing with such product; or
( 3 ) The person who submitted the information under section 15(b) agrees to its public disclosure.
( 4 ) The Commission publishes a finding that the public health and safety requires public disclosure with a lesser period of notice than is required by section 6(b)(1).
[48 FR 57430, Dec. 29, 1983, as amended at 73 FR 72335, Nov. 28, 2008]
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-7834
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus ANDRE JOSEPH ASHTON, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. James C. Turk, Senior District Judge. (CA-03-525-7; CR-99-37) Submitted: February 19, 2004 Decided: February 26, 2004 Before NIEMEYER, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Andre Joseph Ashton, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).- 2 - PER CURIAM: Andre Joseph Ashton seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his motion filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000). The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that his constitutional claims are debatable and that any dispositive procedural rulings by the district court are also debatable or wrong. See Miller-El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee , 252 F.3d 676, 683 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Ashton has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED