alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### §31110. Subpoenas to officers or members of crew

An officer or member of the crew of a public vessel may not be subpoenaed in a civil action under this chapter without the consent of—

(1) the Secretary of the department or the head of the independent establishment having control of the vessel at the time the cause of action arose; or

(2) the master or commanding officer of the vessel at the time the subpoena is issued.

(Pub. L. 109–304, §6(c), Oct. 6, 2006, 120 Stat. 1522.)

| Revised Section | Source (U.S. Code) | Source (Statutes at Large) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 31110 | 46 App.:784. | Mar. 3, 1925, ch. 428, §4, 43 Stat. 1112. |

Section
Exhibit 32

Certification pursuant to

18 U.S.C. Section 1350,

as adopted pursuant to

Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

Thomas A. Borner, Chief Executive Officer and Robert J. Halloran, Jr.,
President and Treasurer of PSB Holdings, Inc. (the Company) each certify in their capacity as officers of the Company that they have reviewed the annual report of the Company on Form 10-KSB for the fiscal ended June 30, 2006 and
that to the best of their knowledge:



|1. | the report fully complies with the requirements of Sections 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
|-- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|2. | the information contained in the report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
|-- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The purpose of this statement is solely to comply with Title 18, Chapter 63, Section 1350 of the United States Code, as amended by Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to PSB
Holdings, Inc. and will be retained by PSB Holdings, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.



|                  |  |  |  |                                      
|----------------- |  |  |  | -------------------------------------
|September 8, 2006 |  |  |  | /s/    THOMAS A. BORNER              
|Date              |  |  |  | Thomas A. Borner                     
|                  |  |  |  | President and Chief Executive Officer
|                  |  | 
|September 8, 2006 |  |  |  | /s/    ROBERT J. HALLORAN,
JR.       
|Date              |  |  |  | Robert J. Halloran, Jr.              
|                  |  |  |  | President and Treasurer
#### § 213.279 Maximum amount of distributive share.

In no event shall a distributive share of the Participating Reserve Account exceed the aggregate paid scheduled annual premiums of the mortgagor paid to the year of termination of the insurance or to the year of payment of the share, if paid prior to termination.
### §3103. Use of reports, documents, and records

The Secretary may rely, as evidence of compliance with this subtitle, on—

(1) reports, documents, and records of other persons who have been determined by the Secretary to be reliable; and

(2) other methods the Secretary has determined to be reliable.

(Added Pub. L. 104–324, title VI, §603(a), Oct. 19, 1996, 110 Stat. 3930.)
#### In the Matter of the Claim of Helen Olin, Respondent, against Custodis Construction Co., Inc., et al., Appellants. Workmen’s Compensation Board, Respondent.

Appeal from decision of Workmen’s Compensation Board that determined claimant was the legal widow of deceased employee. The claimant testified that she married one Otto Reppin in 1923 while living in Germany. Thereafter she immigrated to this country and for good cause shown, her father in 1928 in Germany had her marriage annulled and sent her a copy of the necessary documents. While still in this country she met decedent and in 1934 they returned to Germany and were married by a Magistrate. Shortly thereafter they returned to this country where they continued to live together in both New York and Florida and were known and accepted as man and wife. At the hearing, the claimant was unable to produce any of the essential papers, such as the annulment and marriage certificates. She testified all such documents were destroyed by fire in a building in which they lived in 1939. The appellants contend claimant has failed to establish her lawful marriage to decedent. This is not a common-law marriage claim where it is encumbent upon the claimant to show there were no impediments but rather the claim is based upon a ceremonial marriage which took place in Germany where the prior marriage was annulled. Sufficient excuse is demonstrated for claimant’s inability to procure copies of the documents which were lost in the fire, which testimony is in no way controverted. Decision and award unanimously affirmed, with costs to the Workmen’s Compensation Board. Present — Bergan, P. J., Coon, Gibson, Herlihy and Reynolds, JJ.
### **CHAPTER 103—FOREIGN AND INTERCOASTAL VOYAGES**

Sec.
10301.
Application.
10302.
Shipping articles agreements.
10303.
Provisions.
10304.
Form of agreement.
10305.
Manner of signing agreement.
10306.
Exhibiting merchant mariners' documents.
10307.
Posting agreements.
10308.
Foreign engagements.
10309.
Engaging seamen to replace those lost by desertion or casualty.
10310.
Discharge.
10311.
Certificates of discharge.
10312.
Settlements on discharge.
10313.
Wages.
10314.
Advances.
10315.
Allotments.
10316.
Trusts.
10317.
Loss of lien and right to wages.
10318.
Wages on discharge in foreign ports.
10319.
Costs of a criminal conviction.
10320.
Records of seamen.
10321.
General penalty.
### §1308. Coast Guard: annual report of the Commandant

The Secretary of the department in which the Coast Guard is operating may authorize the printing of the annual report of the Commandant of the Coast Guard in such editions as the interests of the Government and of the public require.

(Pub. L. 90–620, Oct. 22, 1968, 82 Stat. 1267; Pub. L. 109–241, title IX, §902(d), July 11, 2006, 120 Stat. 567.)

#### Historical and Revision Notes

Based on 44 U.S. Code, 1964 ed., §213 (Jan. 12, 1895, ch. 23, §89, 28 Stat. 622; Mar. 13, 1896, No. 23, 29 Stat. 466; Feb. 14, 1903, ch. 552, §§4, 10, 32 Stat. 826, 829; Mar. 3, 1925, ch. 421, §4, 43 Stat. 1106; 1939 Reorg. Plan No. II, §2(a), eff. July 1, 1939, 4 F.R. 2731, 53 Stat. 1432; Aug. 4, 1949, ch. 393, §§1, 20, 63 Stat. 496, 561; Oct. 15, 1966, Pub. L. 89–670, 80 Stat. 931).

This section incorporates only so much of the third sentence of the second paragraph of former section 213 as relates to the annual report of the Commandant of the Coast Guard. The balance will be found in sections 1102, 1116, 1302, 1309, 1310, 1336 of the revision.

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

2006—Pub. L. 109–241 substituted "Secretary of the department in which the Coast Guard is operating" for "Secretary of the Department of Transportation".

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

#### Transfer of Functions

For transfer of authorities, functions, personnel, and assets of the Coast Guard, including the authorities and functions of the Secretary of Transportation relating thereto, to the Department of Homeland Security, and for treatment of related references, see sections 468(b), 551(d), 552(d), and 557 of Title 6, Domestic Security, and the Department of Homeland Security Reorganization Plan of November 25, 2002, as modified, set out as a note under section 542 of Title 6.
##### 



Exhibit 31.1
 Certification of Principal Executive Officer
Pursuant to Section 302 Of The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
      a.
    
    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.
    
    designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal control
over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to provide reasonable
assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial
statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting
principles;c.
    
    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;
andd.
    
    disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over financial
reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter (the registrants
fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an Annual Report) that has materially affected, or is
reasonable likely to materially affect, the registrants internal control over financial
reporting; and
  a.
    
    all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of
internal control over financial reporting which are reasonable likely to adversely affect
the registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; andb.
    
    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.
  By:
    /s/ John EmeryJohn EmeryChief Executive Officer 45
#### EICHELLS, Respondent, v. CITY OF NEW YORK, Appellant.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department.

March 10, 1905.)

Action by Charles E. Eichells against the city of New York. No opinion. Judgment and order unanimously affirmed, with costs.
CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO 18
U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF
THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Annual Report of FalconTarget,
Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-KSB for the fiscal year
ended June 30, 2006, as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), the
undersigned hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that to the undersigned’s knowledge:

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

and

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

FalconTarget, Inc.

Date: September 22, 2006

By:   /s/   Serge Atlan

Serge Atlan

Chairman

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

* A signed original of this written statement
required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be
retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.
ZUCKERT SCOUTT &- RASENBERGER, L.L.P. 

ATI'ORN E YS P:_T Li~Vv 

888 Seventeenth Street, Nw, Washington, DC 20006-3309 

Telephone [202] 298-8660 Fax [202] 342-0683 

wwwzsrlawcom 

JOHN E. GILLICK 

November 27, 2012 

Via regulations.gov and email 

Esta Rosenberg, Esq. 

Division Chief, U.S. Air Carrier Licensing 

Office of International Aviation 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. 

Washington, D.C. 20590 

DIRECT DIAL (202) 973-7939 

jegillick@zsrlaw.com 

Re: Application of Virgin America for a Statement of Authorization 

under 14 C.F.R. Part 212 (U.S.-Singapore); Docket OST -2012-0201 

Dear Ms. Rosenberg: 

We have polled the air carrier representatives on the attached service list regarding the 

above-referenced Application and received no objections. Accordingly, we respectfully request 

expedited consideration of this Application. 

cc: All parties listed on the attached service list. 

Very truly yours, 

John E. Gillick 

Jonathon H. Foglia 

Counsel to Virgin America Inc. 
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I hereby certify that I caused a copy of the foregoing letter of Virgin America Inc. to be 

served, this 27th day of November, 2012, via email transmission, on the following persons: 

ro bei1. wirick@aa. coin 

rpommer(a),atlasair. coin 

sascha. vanderbellen@delta.conl 

sam etta. c. bamett@delta.com 

chm1ers@evergreenairlines.co1n 

ranjit.seth@evergreenairlines.com 

robert. foster@evergreenairlines.com 

anbird@fedex.cmn 

gbleopard@fedex.com 

kevin.Inontgotnery@polaraircargo.com 

peter. beckett@po laraircargo .com 

j onathan.linde@united.com 

steve.monissey@,united.com 

dan. weiss@united.com 

lhalloway@crowell.com (Counsel for United Air Lines) 

gmurphy@crowell.com (Counsel for United Air Lines) 

anita.mosner@hklaw.com (Counsel for United Parcel Service) 

jennifer.nowak@hklaw.coin (Counsel for United Parcel Service) 

howard kass@usairways.com 

benjamin.slocum@usairways.com 

mlbenge@zsrlaw.com (Counsel for World Airways/North American Airlines) 

john.allen@faa.gov 

urskr@state. gov 

susan.kurland@dot.gov 

esta.rosenberg@dot. gov 

brett.kruger@dot.gov 

todd.homan@dot.gov 

peter .irvine@dot. gov 

john.allen@faa.gov 

info@airl ineinfo .com
ex10_49.htm









Exhibit 10.49


SECOND AMENDMENT


TO THE


EMPLOYMENT AND NON-COMPETITION AGREEMENT







The Sheridan Group, Inc. (the "Employer") and Douglas R. Ehmann (the "Employee") wish to amend the Employee's Employment and Non-Competition Agreement dated April 1, 2007 (the "Agreement") to (i) bring the Agreement into compliance with the requirements of Internal Revenue Code section 409A and the Treasury Regulations and other authoritative guidance issued under that section, pursuant to IRS Notice 2010-6, and (ii) provide additional severance benefits.







Accordingly, the Agreement is amended as follows:







1.  Effective September 1, 2010, a new item (E) is added to Section 6(e)(i) to read as follows:







"and (E) payment of reasonable expenses related to career transition services (outplacement) with a mutually agreed upon provider, in accordance with the Employer's outplacement schedule of benefits."







2.  Effective September 1, 2010, paragraph (ii) of Section 6(e) is amended in its entirety to read as follows:







"(ii) The Employer shall not reduce the amount payable under the provisions of Section 6(e)(i)  if the Employee accepts other employment during the Severance Period."







3.  Effective April 1, 2007, Section 10(g) – Arbitration of Disputes – is amended by deleting the sentence that was added to the end of that Section by Amendment No. 1 and by replacing it in its entirety with the following new language:







"The Employee's right to reimbursement of expenses by the Employer under this Section is available to the Employee during the Employee's lifetime.  The amount of expenses eligible for reimbursement during one calendar year shall not affect the expenses eligible for reimbursement in any other calendar year. Any reimbursement of an eligible expense shall be made to the Employee by the last day of the calendar year following the calendar year in which the expense was incurred."







4.  Effective April 1, 2007, Section 10(i) – Governing Law – is amended by adding the following new sentence to the end of that Section:







"To the extent Code section 409A applies, the terms of this Agreement shall be interpreted as necessary to comply with the requirements of Code section 409A."







In all other respects, the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect.






  





  











  








IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have caused this Amendment to be duly executed, effective as specified herein.








	
ATTEST/WITNESS:

	  	
THE SHERIDAN GROUP, INC.


	  	  	  	  	  
	  	  	  	  	  
	 	/s/ Dale A. Tepp	 	 	/s/ John A. Saxton
	  	  	  	  	  
	
Print Name:

	
Dale A. Tepp

	  	
Print Name:

	
John A. Saxton


	  	  	  	  	  
	  	  	  	
Date:

	
August 31, 2010


	  	  	  	  	  
	 	/s/ Dale A. Tepp	 	/s/ Douglas R. Ehmann
	  	  	  	
Douglas R. Ehmann


	
Print Name:

	
Dale A. Tepp

	  	  	  
	  	  	  	
Date:

	
August 31, 2010
Exhibit 13.2





PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER CERTIFICATION


PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350











In connection with this Annual Report of Top Ships Inc. (the "Company") on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2011 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "SEC") on or about the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Alexandros Tsirikos, 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.





A signed original of this written statement has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the SEC or its staff upon request.





Date: April 11, 2012














/s/ Alexandros Tsirikos


Alexandros Tsirikos


Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer (Principal Financial Officer)
### §§565, 566. Repealed. Pub. L. 103–272, §7(b), July 5, 1994, 108 Stat. 1379

Section 565, Pub. L. 91–518, title IV, §405, Oct. 30, 1970, 84 Stat. 1337; Pub. L. 92–316, §§7, 8, June 22, 1972, 86 Stat. 230; Pub. L. 96–73, title I, §120(a), Sept. 29, 1979, 93 Stat. 547; Pub. L. 97–35, title XI, §§1177(b), 1184, 1188(d), Aug. 13, 1981, 95 Stat. 692, 697, 699; Pub. L. 99–272, title IV, §4016, Apr. 7, 1986, 100 Stat. 110, related to protective arrangements for railroad employees. See sections 24307, 24312, and 24706 of Title 49, Transportation.

Section 566, Pub. L. 91–518, title IV, §406, as added Pub. L. 96–73, title I, §121, Sept. 29, 1979, 93 Stat. 548, related to retention and maintenance of facilities. See section 24309 of Title 49.
#### The People of the State of New York, Appellant, v. Percy Gilmore, Respondent.

Upon conviction in 1938 for murder in the second degree, defendant was sentenced by the County Court of Columbia County to 55 years to life. In 1959, 21 years later, the County Court in a *coram nobis*proceeding vacated the 1938 sentence and resentenced defendant to 25 years to life. The People appeal. We assume that the County Court retains jurisdiction to correct an unlawful sentence imposed by it in a direct proceeding addressed to the sentence. It is clear, however, that the 1938 sentence was not unlawful. The statute then provided an "indeterminate sentence” of a minimum of 20 years and a maximum of life (Penal Law, § 1048). We would agree that if the minimum were so long as to be impossible the sentence would not be indeterminate. Defendant was then 29 years old. His life expectancy by actuarial tables was 35.15 years; but such tables deal with averages, and it was possible that defendant’s life might exceed the minimum of 55 years. It seems settled that the court had the power to impose the sentence complained of. *(People ex rel. Mummiani*v. *Lawes,*258 App. Div. 643; *People ex rel. Schali*v. *Deyo,*181 N. Y. 425; *People ex rel. Pellicer*v. *Jackson,*271 App. Div. 766.) In *People*v. *San Antonio*(277 App. Div. 1136), which was a direct appeal from the judgment of conviction bringing up among other things the exeessiveness of the sentence, the trial court had sentenced appellant to 40 years to life for murder, second degree to begin after a sentence on another crime of 10 to 30 years, so that in the form imposed, the minimum for murder could not be completed in less than 50 years. The validity of the sentence was sustained on appeal; and the court was of opinion, as well, that the sentence was not excessive. No direct appeal from the judgment of conviction was taken to this court in the case now before us. On such an appeal we could have dealt with excessiveness of sentence. We are limited now to examining the legal power of the court in 1938 to impose the sentence; and cannot reach, or deal with, the question of excessiveness. We are of opinion on the record before us that a minimum of 55 years would, on a direct appeal have been regarded as excessive; but the question is one for which an application for executive clemency now seems the remedy. Order reversed on the law and the facts and application denied. Bergan, P. J., Coon, Gibson, Herlihy and Reynolds, JJ., concur. [16 Misc 2d 578.]
Exhibit 32.3



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 Annual Report of Solo Cup Company (the Company) on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
Report), I, Susan H. Marks, as Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge:



| | (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/ Susan H. Marks     
|Susan H. Marks         
|Chief Financial Officer
|March 11, 2005
### §573. Expenses of appraisement and sale; rules and regulations

Reclamation funds are authorized to be appropriated for use in defraying the necessary expenses of appraisement and sale of the lands authorized to be sold under section 571 of this title, and the Secretary of the Interior is authorized to perform any and all acts and to make such rules and regulations as, in his opinion, may be necessary and proper for carrying out the purposes of sections 571 to 573 of this title.

(Mar. 2, 1929, ch. 541, §3, 45 Stat. 1522.)
## SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK 

## Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

**1315 CA 15-00178**  PRESENT: SMITH, J.P., PERADOTTO, CARNI, LINDLEY, AND WHALEN, JJ.

COMPTROLLER OF STATE OF NEW YORK, AS TRUSTEE FOR THE NEW YORK STATE COMMON RETIREMENT FUND, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT,

V MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
LEVEL ACRES LLC, DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT, ET AL., DEFENDANTS. (APPEAL NO. 2.)

MCNAMEE, LOCHNER, TITUS & WILLIAMS, P.C., ALBANY (FRANCIS J. SMITH OF COUNSEL), FOR PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT.
PEKAREK LAW GROUP, P.C., WELLSVILLE (EDWARD PEKAREK OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT.

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Allegany County (Thomas P. Brown, A.J.), entered November 6, 2014. The order denied the motion of plaintiff for summary judgment.
It is hereby ORDERED that said appeal is unanimously dismissed without costs.

Same memorandum as in Comptroller of State of New York v Level Acres LLC ([appeal No. 1] ___ AD3d ___ [Dec. 31, 2015]).

Entered: December 31, 2015 Frances E. Cafarell Clerk of the Court