alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 31.1—Section 302 Certification
I, Ellen Z. Lamale, certify that:
I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K, and all reports on Form 8-K containingdistribution or servicing reports filed in respect of period included in the year covered bythis annual report, of Principal Life Income Fundings Trust 2004-24;
1.  Based on my knowledge, the information in these reports, taken as a whole, does not containany untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make thestatements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, notmisleading as of the last day of the period covered by this annual report; 2.  Based on my knowledge, the distribution or servicing information required to be provided tothe depositor by the trustee under the pooling and servicing, or similar agreement, forinclusion in these reports is included in these reports; 3.  I am responsible for reviewing the activities performed by the depositor and the trusteeunder the pooling and servicing, or similar agreement, and based upon my knowledge and theannual compliance review required under that agreement, and except as disclosed in thereports, the depositor and trustee have each fulfilled its obligations under that agreement;and 4.  The reports disclose all significant deficiencies relating to the compliance by the trusteeand the depositor with the minimum servicing or similar standards based upon the reportprovided by an independent public accountant, after conducting a review in compliance with theUniform Single Attestation Program for Mortgage Bankers or similar procedures, as set forth inthe pooling and servicing, or similar agreements, that is included in these reports.
In giving the certifications above, I have reasonably relied on information provided to me by thefollowing unaffiliated parties: Ernst and Young and Citibank, N.A.
Date: March 29, 2005     By: /s/ Ellen Z. Lamale      Name: Ellen Z. Lamale  Title: Senior Vice President and Chief Actuary
### §825a. Repealed. Pub. L. 99–509, title IV, §4033(c)(6), Oct. 21, 1986, 100 Stat. 1909

Section, Pub. L. 97–468, title IV, §402, Jan. 14, 1983, 96 Stat. 2550, provided for financial assistance to responsible persons for purchase, lease, or rehabilitation of rail lines of Consolidated Rail Corporation.
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsDevelopment of Detonation Modeling Capabilities for Rocket Test Facilities: Hydrogen-Oxygen-Nitrogen MixturesThe objective of the presented work was to develop validated computational fluid dynamics (CFD) based methodologies for predicting propellant detonations and their associated blast environments. Applications of interest were scenarios relevant to rocket propulsion test and launch facilities. All model development was conducted within the framework of the Loci/CHEM CFD tool due to its reliability and robustness in predicting high-speed combusting flow-fields associated with rocket engines and plumes. During the course of the project, verification and validation studies were completed for hydrogen-fueled detonation phenomena such as shock-induced combustion, confined detonation waves, vapor cloud explosions, and deflagration-to-detonation transition (DDT) processes. The DDT validation cases included predicting flame acceleration mechanisms associated with turbulent flame-jets and flow-obstacles. Excellent comparison between test data and model predictions were observed. The proposed CFD methodology was then successfully applied to model a detonation event that occurred during liquid oxygen/gaseous hydrogen rocket diffuser testing at NASA Stennis Space Center.Document ID20160006890Acquisition SourceStennis Space CenterDocument TypeTechnical Publication (TP)AuthorsAllgood, Daniel C.*(NASA Stennis Space Center Stennis Space Center, MS, United States)*Date AcquiredJune 1, 2016Publication DateApril 1, 2016Subject CategoryPropellants And FuelsFluid Mechanics And ThermodynamicsReport/Patent NumberNASA/TP-2016-219220SSTI-8076-0003Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType20160006890.pdfSTIcloud_downloadcontent_copyvisibilityRelated RecordsThere are no records associated with this record.visibility_offNo Preview Available
 No Fear Act | Freedom of Information Act | Office of the Inspector General | Agency Financial ReportsNASA Web Privacy Policy and Important Notices | NASA Guidelines for Quality of InformationDisclaimers, Copyright, Terms of Use | Accessibility | NASA OCIO | USA.gov | NASA.govContact Us | Site MapSTI LogoNASA Official: JoAnne R. Calhoun Site Curator: STI Compliance and Distribution Services Last Modified: September 12, 2024
### §303c. Television program improvement

#### (a) Short title

This section may be cited as the "Television Program Improvement Act of 1990".

#### (b) Definitions

For purposes of this section—

(1) the term "antitrust laws" has the meaning given it in subsection (a) of section 12 of title 15, except that such term includes section 45 of title 15 to the extent that section 45 of title 15 applies to unfair methods of competition;

(2) the term "person in the television industry" means a television network, any entity which produces programming (including theatrical motion pictures) for telecasting or telecasts programming, the National Cable Television Association, the Association of Independent Television Stations, Incorporated, the National Association of Broadcasters, the Motion Picture Association of America, the Community Antenna Television Association, and each of the networks' affiliate organizations, and shall include any individual acting on behalf of such person; and

(3) the term "telecast" means—

(A) to broadcast by a television broadcast station; or

(B) to transmit by a cable television system or a satellite television distribution service.

#### (c) Exemption

The antitrust laws shall not apply to any joint discussion, consideration, review, action, or agreement by or among persons in the television industry for the purpose of, and limited to, developing and disseminating voluntary guidelines designed to alleviate the negative impact of violence in telecast material.

#### (d) Limitations

(1) The exemption provided in subsection (c) shall not apply to any joint discussion, consideration, review, action, or agreement which results in a boycott of any person.

(2) The exemption provided in subsection (c) shall apply only to any joint discussion, consideration, review, action, or agreement engaged in only during the 3-year period beginning on December 1, 1990.

(Pub. L. 101–650, title V, §501, Dec. 1, 1990, 104 Stat. 5127.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section was enacted as part of the Television Program Improvement Act of 1990 and also as part of the Judicial Improvements Act of 1990, and not as part of the Communications Act of 1934 which comprises this chapter.
----

| 1.   | Except as specifically provided herein, all terms and provisions of the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. |
|----------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 2.   | *** Transponder.  Intelsat agrees to provide to Customer and Customer agrees to accept from Intelsat *** (***) *** Transponder (the “*** Transponder”) meeting the performance specifications set forth in Appendix B attached hereto. |
|----------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 3.   | Capacity Term.  The Capacity Term for the *** Transponder Capacity shall commence on ***, *** and continue until the later of (a) 23:59 Greenwich Mean Time on the date that is *** (***) *** (***) ***, or (***) *** (***) ***. |
|----------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 4.   | Monthly Fee.  The Monthly Fee for the *** Transponder Capacity shall be US$***,*** per month. |
|----------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 5.   | Except as specifically set forth in this Amendment, all terms and conditions of the amendment remain in full force and effect. |
|----------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|                                        |   |   |                                          |   |
|---------------------------------------------|--------|--------|-----------------------------------------------|--------|
| /s/ Patricia Casey                          |   |   | /s/ Jimmy R. Sipes                            |   |
| Name: Patricia Casey                        |   |   | Name: Jimmy R. Sipes                          |   |
| Title: Senior VP and Deputy General Counsel |   |   | Title: VP Network Services and Chief Engineer |   |

----
### [§14102. Repealed. Pub. L. 101–595, title VI, §603(12)(A), Nov. 16, 1990, 104 Stat. 2993]

Section, Pub. L. 99–509, title V, §5101(3), Oct. 21, 1986, 100 Stat. 1919, authorized Secretary to prescribe regulations to carry out this part.
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 13**  **- 6518** 

JODY LYNN WARD , Petitioner

- Appellant ,

v. WARDEN OF LIEBER CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION , Respondent

– Appellee, and JON OZMINT, Director SCDC , Respondent

.

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

. R. Bryan Harwell , District Judge. ( 0:11

- cv - 03277

- RBH )

Submitted : July 23, 2013 Decided: August 14, 2013

Before WILKINSON and THACKER , Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by un published per curiam opinion

. Jody Lynn Ward, Appellant Pro Se. Donald John Zelenka, Senior Assistant Attorney General, William Edgar Salter, III, Assistant Attorney General, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.2 Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.3 PER CURIAM: Jody Lynn Ward seeks to appeal the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2006) petition. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability . 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (A) (2006) . 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) (2006)
. When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner sat isfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); see Miller

- El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336

- 38 (2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable, and that the petition states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Slack , 52 9 U.S. at 484

- 85. We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Ward has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We deny Ward’s motion for appointment of counsel. We dis pense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are4 adequately presented in the materials before th is court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
unaudited balance sheets and unaudited statements of earnings found on pages 3
and 4 of the Company's Form 10-QSB for the year to date, and is qualified in
its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                              9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                         645,163
<SECURITIES>                                     2,188
<RECEIVABLES>                                  576,931
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,226,574
<PP&E>                                         505,837
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               7,457,222
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          781,187
<BONDS>                                              0
<COMMON>                                           485
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                   5,466,446
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 7,457,222
<SALES>                                      3,309,977
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             3,497,659
<CGS>                                        1,366,943
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,366,943
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               255,063
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                            (101,533)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              1,869,634
<INCOME-TAX>                                   560,274
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          1,309,360
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 1,309,360
<EPS-BASIC>                                      .28
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .27

</TABLE>
### §1016. Temporary rail banking

During the 180-day period beginning on May 30, 1980, no rail line or facility of the Rock Island Railroad which has been approved for abandonment by the Commission or the bankruptcy court may be downgraded, scrapped, or otherwise disposed of without the approval of the Secretary under this section. In no case before abandonment has been approved and before the 180-day period has elapsed shall the Secretary approve a disposition of such portion of the rail line or related facility to any carrier or other entity not engaged in providing railroad services or not formed for the purpose of providing railroad services. The Secretary, upon application by the Rock Island Railroad, shall grant such approval unless he finds that—

(1) a rail carrier, shipper, State, or other interested party has expressed in writing an interest in purchasing, leasing or rehabilitating the particular rail line or facility for purposes of providing rail service; and

(2) there is a reasonable expectation that such purchase transaction will be consummated.

(Pub. L. 96–254, title I, §121, May 30, 1980, 94 Stat. 409.)

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

#### Abolition of Interstate Commerce Commission and Transfer of Functions

Interstate Commerce Commission abolished and functions of Commission transferred, except as otherwise provided in Pub. L. 104–88, to Surface Transportation Board effective Jan. 1, 1996, by section 1302 of Title 49, Transportation, and section 101 of Pub. L. 104–88, set out as a note under section 1301 of Title 49. References to Interstate Commerce Commission deemed to refer to Surface Transportation Board, a member or employee of the Board, or Secretary of Transportation, as appropriate, see section 205 of Pub. L. 104–88, set out as a note under section 1301 of Title 49.
#### Universal Vending Service Company, appellee, v. Frank Caponigri, also known as F. Caponigri, appellant.

Gen. No. 28,598.

Consolidated with No. 28,578 ante. Appeal from the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Henry M. Walker, Judge, presiding. Heard in the second division of this court for the first district.

Affirmed.

Opinion filed November 27, 1923.

Per Curiam.
#### § 891.785 Adjustment of utility allowances.

In connection with adjustments of contract rents as provided in § 891.780(a), the requirements for the adjustment of utility allowances provided in § 891.440 apply.
EXHIBIT 11.1.  STATEMENT RE: COMPUTATION OF PER SHARE EARNINGS

                                                        Three Months Ended
                                                             March 31,
(Dollars in thousands)                                  2000          1999
                                                        ----          ----

Basic Earnings Per Share

   Net income                                      $     1,826   $    5,744
                                                    ==========    =========

   Weighted average number of common
   and common equivalent shares:                    15,920,869   15,358,749
   ---------------------------------------

   Basic earnings per share                        $      0.11  $      0.37
                                                    ===========   =========

Diluted Earnings Per Share

   Net income                                      $     1,826  $     5,744
                                                    ==========   ==========
   Weighted average number of common
   and common equivalent shares:
   ---------------------------------------
      Average number of shares outstanding          15,920,869   15,358,749

      Net effect of dilutive stock options
      based on treasury stock method                        --       10,973

   Total average shares:                            15,920,869   15,369,722
                                                    ==========   ==========

   Diluted earnings per share                      $      0.11   $     0.37
                                                    ==========    =========

                                       1
#### § 963.1 Purpose.

The purpose of this part is to enhance the economic opportunities of public housing residents by providing public housing agencies with a method of soliciting and contracting with eligible and qualifed resident-owned businesses (as defined in this part) for public housing services, supplies, or construction. The contract award method provided by this part is based on the established procurement procedures set forth in 24 CFR 85.36 (as revised April 1, 2013), with solicitation as provided by these procedures limited to resident-owned businesses. The contract award method provided by this part is not a requirement. It is an alternative procurement method available to public housing agencies, subject to the conditions set forth in this part, and subject to permissibility under State and local laws.

[57 FR 20189, May 11, 1992, as amended at 80 FR 75942, Dec. 7, 2015]
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This Schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
Consolidated Statements of Operations and Consolidated Statements of Financial
Position and is qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial
statements.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                          12,520
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  890,710
<ALLOWANCES>                                    26,645
<INVENTORY>                                    904,989
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,912,345
<PP&E>                                       1,654,693
<DEPRECIATION>                                 967,678
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               3,540,179
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          704,930
<BONDS>                                        687,832
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       145,807
<OTHER-SE>                                   1,684,352
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 3,540,179
<SALES>                                      1,694,979
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             2,539,081
<CGS>                                          990,371
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                2,061,852
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               163,992
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              34,999
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                279,651
<INCOME-TAX>                                    89,287
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            190,364
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                     (12,079)
<NET-INCOME>                                   178,285
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.23
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.23
        

</TABLE>
#### Louis Perna, Appellant, v. Martha Perna, an Infant, by Her Guardian ad Litem, Margaret Maurer, Respondent.

In an action by a husband against his wife to annul the marriage, the husband appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated November 9, 1959, which: (1) granted the wife’s motion to modify the final judgment of annulment entered September 11, 1959, on her default in answering, by changing his visitation rights and by directing him to pay her $20 per week for her support; and which (2) granted her other incidental relief. Order affirmed, without costs. No opinion. Nolan, P. J., Beldock, Kleinfeld, Christ and Pette, JJ., concur.