alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 210.3-03 Instructions to statement of comprehensive income requirements. ( a ) The statements required shall be prepared in compliance with the applicable requirements of this regulation.
( b ) If the registrant is engaged primarily— ( 1 ) In the generation, transmission or distribution of electricity, the manufacture, mixing, transmission or distribution of gas, the supplying or distribution of water, or the furnishing of telephone or telegraph service; or
( 2 ) In holding securities of companies engaged in such businesses, it may at its option include statements of comprehensive income and cash flows (which may be unaudited) for the twelve-month period ending on the date of the most recent balance sheet being filed, in lieu of the statements of comprehensive income and cash flows for the interim periods specified.
( c ) If a period or periods reported on include operations of a business prior to the date of acquisition, or for other reasons differ from reports previously issued for any period, the statements shall be reconciled as to sales or revenues and net income in the statement or in a note thereto with the amounts previously reported: *Provided, however,* That such reconciliations need not be made ( 1 ) if they have been made in filings with the Commission in prior years or
( 2 ) the financial statements which are being retroactively adjusted have not previously been filed with the Commission or otherwise made public.
( d ) Any unaudited interim financial statements furnished shall reflect all adjustments which are, in the opinion of management, necessary to a fair statement of the results for the interim periods presented. A statement to that effect shall be included. If all such adjustments are of a normal recurring nature, a statement to that effect shall be made; otherwise, there shall be furnished information describing in appropriate detail the nature and amount of any adjustments other than normal recurring adjustments entering into the determination of the results shown.
[45 FR 63687, Sept. 25, 1980. Redesignated at 47 FR 29836, July 9, 1982, and amended at 50 FR 25215, June 18, 1985; 50 FR 49532, Dec. 3, 1985; 57 FR 45292, Oct. 1, 1992; 64 FR 1734, Jan. 12, 1999; 83 FR 50198, Oct. 4, 2018]
### §17351. Definitions

In this part:

#### (1) Board

The term "Board" means the Board of Directors of the Foundation established pursuant to section 17352(c) of this title.

#### (2) Chief Executive Officer

The term "Chief Executive Officer" means the chief executive officer of the Foundation appointed pursuant to section 17352(b) of this title.

#### (3) Foundation

The term "Foundation" means the International Clean Energy Foundation established by section 17352(a) of this title.

(Pub. L. 110–140, title IX, §921, Dec. 19, 2007, 121 Stat. 1732.)

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

#### Effective Date

Section effective on the date that is 1 day after Dec. 19, 2007, see section 1601 of Pub. L. 110–140, set out as a note under section 1824 of Title 2, The Congress.
Untitled Page


		

			

			Exhibit 10.4

			

			

		

		
			ASSIGNMENT OF ALL RIGHTS TO PHOTOGRAPHS

			

			

			

		

		
			This Assignment of All Rights to Photographs (this “Agreement”) is made and effective as of November 30, 2005,

				

				

				BETWEEN:                             Matt Skinner ("Skinner")

				

				AND:                                        University Girls Calendar, Ltd. (the "Assignee")

				

				For good and valuable consideration received and paid in hand, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows:

		

		

		

			All right, title and interest that I have in and to the photographs taken by me in any connection with University Girls are hereby transferred, conveyed, bargained and assigned to the Assignee.  The rights that are transferred and assigned hereunder shall include all of the rights granted to the owner of a copyright under all the applicable copyright laws of any and all countries and jurisdictions throughout the world, and all international conventions and treaties relative to copyright protection.

				

			
	I agree to execute any further documents and take any further reasonable action requested by the Assignee to convey my rights in and to the photographs.
		


		

		IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement as of the date first written above, with full knowledge of its content and significance and intending to be legally bound by the terms hereof.

			

			

			                                                                                     University Girls Calendar, Ltd.

				

				

			                                                                                                                                                             

			Matt Skinner                                                              Authorized Signature
5331.109 Advance agreements.       (h) Pre-contract cost agreements should be reviewed for legal sufficiency (see this template for a sample Pre-contract Cost Agreement). As a condition precedent to the use of a pre-contract cost agreement, the correct type of funds should be available upon issuance of the pre-contract cost agreement. While not legally necessary, prudent business acumen would dictate, that to the maximum extent possible, agreement on terms and conditions also be established prior to issuance of a pre-contract cost agreement. Contracting officers should consult with the designated clearance approval authority prior to agreement on pre-contract costs. The contracting officer should incorporate the pre-contract cost agreement into any resultant contract as an attachment within Section J.     **Parent topic:** Subpart 5331.1 – APPLICABILTY
Exhibit 32.1

Certification of the Chief Executive Officer

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 of Inergy Holdings, L.P. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2010 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, John J. Sherman, Chief Executive Officer of Inergy Holdings, L.P., certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 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.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



/s/ John J. ShermanJohn J. Sherman
Chief Executive OfficerMay 4, 2010


A
signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version 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.



47
UNITED STATES

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-0001 

December 14, 2016 

MEMORANDUM TO: Victor M. McCree 

 Executive Director for Operations 

FROM: Annette L. Vietti-Cook, Secretary /RA/ 

SUBJECT: STAFF REQUIREMENTS – COMSECY-16-0026 – REVISED 

DELEGATION OF AUTHORITY TO THE EXECUTIVE 

DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS TO INITIATE AND SIGN TWO 

FINAL RULES TO AMEND THE NUCLEAR LIABILITY 

INSURANCE AMOUNT AND FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT 

PROVISIONS 

The Commission hereby delegates to the Executive Director for Operations the authority to 

initiate and sign two final rules, one to amend the U.S Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s 

maximum amount of primary nuclear liability insurance, and the other to amend certain 

regulations that relate to the Freedom of Information Act provisions. 

cc: Chairman Burns 

 Commissioner Svinicki 

 Commissioner Baran 

 OGC 

 CFO 

 OCA 

OPA 

ODs, RAs, ACRS, ASLBP (via E-Mail) 

PDR
**Exhibit      32.2**

**Certification**

**Pursuant      to Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the**

**United      States Code as Adopted Pursuant to Section 906**

**of      the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**

| (1) | The                Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d),                as                applicable, 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:                    |                                                                                                                                    |                                |
| October              31, 2007  |                                                                                                                                         | /s/              Robert F. Kendall  |
|                                | Name:                Robert F. Kendall, CPA                                                                                                  |
|                                | Title:                  Chief                Financial Officer    (principal                financial officer) |

----
#### Howard YOUNG, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. TRANS UNION; et al., Defendants-Appellees.

No. 06-16051.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted July 9, 2007 *.

Filed July 16, 2007.

*472Howard Young, San Jose, CA, pro se.

Before: LEAVY, THOMAS, and BERZON, Circuit Judges.

*

 This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Howard Young appeals pro se the dismissal of his complaint against numerous defendants alleging causes of action arising out of his ongoing prosecution in California state court. We review de novo the dismissal of a prisoner’s complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915. *Ramirez v. Galazo,*334 F.3d 850, 853-54 (9th Cir.2003).

The district court correctly determined that *Heck v. Humphrey,*512 U.S. 477, 487-88, 114 S.Ct. 2364, 129 L.Ed.2d 383 (1994), bars Young’s 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claims against various state actors. Though Young’s prosecution was ongoing at the time the district court dismissed his case, *Heck*also applies to “pending criminal charges.” *Harvey v. Waldron,*210 F.3d 1008, 1014 (9th Cir.2000).

The district court also dismissed on *Heck*grounds Young’s claims against several non-state-actor defendants, including Visa USA and credit reporting agencies Experian, Trans Union, and Equifax. In doing so, however, the court did not specifically address whether *Heck*bars civil claims against non-state actors. We therefore reverse the dismissal of these claims and remand to allow the district court to consider this question in the first instance.

We also note that since the district court’s decision, the Supreme Court has decided *Wallace v. Kato,*— U.S. -, 127 S.Ct. 1091, 166 L.Ed.2d 973 (2007). Under *Wallace,*it is not clear, as the district court concluded, that the claims in question would not accrue until Young prevailed in his criminal case. *See id.*at 1097*473(applying to a § 1983 claim the “traditional rule of accrual,” under which “the tort cause of action accrues, and the statute of limitations commences to run, when the wrongful act or omission results in damages.” (citation omitted)). Since the district court did not have the benefit of *Wallace*when it issued its order of dismissal, we remand to allow the court to reconsider Young’s claims against the non-state-actor defendants in light of that opinion.

AFFIRMED in part, REVERSED and REMANDED in part.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
**Exhibit 31.1****CERTIFICATION**     I, Glenn M. Parker, M.D., certify that:     1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of NationsHealth, Inc.;     2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report;     3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information includedin this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;     4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:     a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controlsand procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material informationrelating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us byothers within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is beingprepared;     b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures, 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 financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting; and     5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the auditcommittee of the registrant’s board of directors:     a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect theregistrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and     b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees whohave a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.Date: November 14, 2005By:    /s/ Glenn M. Parker,M.D. Glenn M. Parker, MD
### §16971. Transferred

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section 16971 was editorially reclassified as section 20971 of Title 34, Crime Control and Law Enforcement.
Historical data can be found in: ~\netsite-docs\gpo1229\gpo1229\www2.census.gov\retail\releases\historical\mtis
**Exhibit 32.2**

**CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT RULES 13a-14(b) OR 15d-14(b) AND 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350**

Melvin L. Flanigan herebycertifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

1.     He is theChief Financial Officer of Digital Theater Systems, Inc.

2.     The Form 10-Qreport of Digital Theater Systems, Inc. for the quarterly period ended March 31,2005 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.

3.     The information contained in the Form 10-Qreport of Digital Theater Systems, Inc. for the quarterly period ended March 31,2005 fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition andresults of operations of Digital Theater Systems, Inc.
| Dated: May 10, 2005 |   |                    |
|--------------------------|--------|-------------------------|
|                     | By:    | /s/ MELVIN L. FLANIGAN  |
|                     |   | Melvin L. Flanigan      |
|                     |   | Chief Financial Officer |

 

A signed original of this written statement requiredby Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 has been provided toDigital Theater Systems, Inc. and will be retained by Digital TheaterSystems, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission uponrequest.

----
# C_2012355EN.01002402.xml

| 17.11.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 355/24 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

17.11.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 355/24

---

Judgment of the General Court of 4 October 2012 — Greece v Commission

(Case T-215/10) (1)

1

(EAGGF - Guarantee Section - Expenditure excluded from Community financing - Cotton - Aid to the least well-off - Rural development - Effectiveness of supervision - Proportionality)

2012/C 355/51

Language of the case: Greek

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Hellenic Republic (represented: initially by I. Khalkias, G. Skiani and E. Leftheriotou, subsequently I. Khalkias, E. Leftheriotou and X. Basakou, acting as Agents)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: H. Tserepa-Lacombe and A. Markoulli, acting as Agents, assisted by N. Korogiannakis, lawyer)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Annulment of Commission Decision 2001/152/EU of 11 March 2010 excluding from Community financing certain expenditure incurred by the Member States under the European Agricultural Guarantee Fund (EAGGF), Guarantee Section of the European Agricultural Guarantee Fund (EAGF) and the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) (OJ 2010 L 63, p. 7) as Decision 2001/152/EU, in so far as it excludes certain expenditure incurred by the Hellenic Republic.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders the Hellenic Republic to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders the Hellenic Republic to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 195, 17.7.2010.

1

---
#### Mimi J. Vanderhorst, Appellant, v. Louis F. V. P. Vanderhorst, Respondent.

Order appealed from modified so as to allow counsel fee of $500 and, as so modified, the order is affirmed. On this record an allowance of counsel fee in the sum indicated is justified. Settle order. Present — Peck, P. J., Callahan, Breitel, Bastow and Botein, JJ.
Editorial Note on Part 200
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 200 appear at 76 FR 60371, Sept. 29, 2011.

§ 200.28 Issuance of instructions. ( a ) Within the spheres of responsibilities heretofore set forth, Division and Office Heads, and all Regional Directors may issue such definitive instructions as may be necessary pursuant to this section.
( b ) All existing procedures and authorizations not inconsistent with this section shall continue in effect until and unless modified by definitive instructions issued pursuant to this paragraph.
[27 FR 12712, Dec. 22, 1962, as amended at 73 FR 32224, June 5, 2008]
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 of Edgewater Foods International, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-QSB for the period ending February 28, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Michael Boswell, Acting Chief Financial 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 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 at the dates and for the periods indicated.





Date:  April 13, 2007



/s/  Michael Boswell

Michael Boswell,

Acting Chief Accounting Officer
###### Editorial Note on Part 240

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 240 appear at 57 FR 36501, Aug. 13, 1992, and 57 FR 47409, Oct. 16, 1992.

#### § 240.12f-5 Exchange rules for securities to which unlisted trading privileges are extended.

A national securities exchange shall not extend unlisted trading privileges to any security unless the national securities exchange has in effect a rule or rules providing for transactions in the class or type of security to which the exchange extends unlisted trading privileges.

[60 FR 20896, Apr. 28, 1995]
#### James Holec and Frank Holec, trading as Holec Brothers, Plaintiffs in Error, v. Kate Beranek, Defendant in Error.

Gen. No. 19,529.

(Not to be reported in full.)

Abstract of the Decision.

Assumpsit, action op, § *93*
      ***
      *—when person entitled to recovery for labor performed.*In an action for labor and material in erecting mason work for a building, *held*that recovery should have been allowed for extra work and for a portion of a balance due on the contract which was substantially performed, and a finding and judgment in favor of the defendant was contrary to the evidence.

Error to the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Joseph E. Ryan, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the October term, 1913.

Reversed and remanded.

Opinion filed January 5, 1915.

Statement of the Case.

Action by James Holec and Frank Holec, trading as Holec Brothers, against Kate Beranek to recover $486.87. The action was on a written contract wherein the plaintiffs, for $1,070, agreed to furnish labor and material and to erect mason work for a certain building, the plans being furnished by architects employed by the defendant. The plaintiff’s claim was for $300, being a balance due on the contract, and $190.03 for extra work. The case was tried before the court without a jury and the issues were found in favor of the defendant, whereupon the plaintiffs brought error.

Charles J. Michal, for plaintiffs in error.

F. J. Karasek, for defendant in error.

See Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number.

Mr. Justice Smith

delivered the opinion of the court.