alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### §821. Legislative power

The legislative authority shall extend to all matters of a legislative character not locally inapplicable, including power to create, consolidate, and reorganize the municipalities so far as may be necessary, and to provide and repeal laws and ordinances therefor; also the power to alter, amend, modify, or repeal any or all laws and ordinances of every character in force in Puerto Rico or municipality or district thereof on March 2, 1917, insofar as such alteration, amendment, modification, or repeal may be consistent with the provisions of this chapter.

(Mar. 2, 1917, ch. 145, §37, 39 Stat. 964; May 17, 1932, ch. 190, 47 Stat. 158.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

This chapter, referred to in text, was in the original "this Act", meaning act Mar. 2, 1917, ch. 145, 39 Stat. 951, known as the Puerto Rican Federal Relations Act and also popularly known as the Jones Act, which is classified principally to this chapter. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 731 of this title and Tables.

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

#### Change of Name

"Puerto Rico" substituted in text for "Porto Rico" pursuant to act May 17, 1932, which is classified to section 731a of this title.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Arlin Jose Abreu-Guzman, Also Known as Jose Abrue and Jose Abreu, Appellant.

[835 NYS2d 90]

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Ira R. Globerman, J.), rendered February 26, 2004, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of manslaughter in the second degree, and sentencing him to a term of 5 to 15 years, unanimously affirmed.

The court, in a thorough, well-reasoned decision, properly denied defendant’s motion to suppress statements he made to the police and an Assistant District Attorney. There is no basis for disturbing the court’s determinations concerning the evaluation of conflicting expert testimony. The record supports the court’s finding that despite defendant’s limited intelligence, he understood the immediate meaning of the *Miranda*warnings and made a knowing and intelligent waiver of his rights (see *People v Williams,*62 NY2d 285 [1984]).

The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence. To the extent that defendant is arguing that his second-degree (reckless) manslaughter conviction must be reversed because the evidence was only consistent with an intentional act, we reject that argument. The evidence, with particular reference to defendant’s statements, permitted the jury to reasonably conclude that even if defendant had originally been part of a plan to kill the victim, he lacked any homicidal intent at the actual time of the shooting, but instead, under pressure from the other participant, fired the fatal shot in the victim’s direction without looking. Thus the jury could have found that defendant’s actions were reckless *(see People v Atkinson,*7 NY3d 765 [2006]; *see also People v Claudio,*135 AD2d 358 [1987]).

The court, which submitted second-degree manslaughter as a lesser included offense of depraved indifference murder, properly declined to further charge criminally negligent homicide. Viewing the evidence in a light most favorable to defendant, there *414was no reasonable view of the evidence to support such charge. Under the view of the evidence discussed above, there was no basis for a finding that defendant’s conduct was anything less than reckless. Defendant nevertheless posits a theory that he did not fire a weapon at all, that he was only hable as an accessory for the other participant’s conduct, and that his culpable mental state in rendering aid to the alleged actual killer was merely criminal negligence. Other than by unfounded speculation, the jury would have had no basis upon which to dissect the evidence and reach such a conclusion *(see People v Negron,*91 NY2d 788, 792-793 [1998]).

The trial court did not err in refusing to charge the jury that it had to determine unanimously that defendant’s statement was voluntarily made *(see Commonwealth v Watkins,*425 Mass 830, 834-836, 683 NE2d 653, 656-658 [1997], *denial of habeas corpus affd on other grounds sub nom. Watkins v Murphy,*292 F3d 70 [1st Cir 2002]; *cf. Richardson v United States, 526*US 813, 817 [1999]; *cf.*CPL 710.70 [3]).

We perceive no basis for reducing the sentence. Concur— Andrias, J.P., Saxe, Marlow, Nardelli and Williams, JJ.
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION WASHINGTON, DC

Anoka Air, Inc., et al Complainant, 

### v. FAA Docket 

### No. 16-11-12 Metropolitan Airports Commission Respondent.

NOTICE OF EXTENSION OF TIME
This matter is before the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) based on the abovereferenced complaint, filed in accordance with FAA Rules of Practice for Federally-Assisted AirportEnforcementProceedings, 14 CFR, Part 16. Pursuant to 14 CFR, Part 16, subpart B, the date by which the Director's Determinationwill be issued inthis matter is hereby extended to March 1, 2015. An extension oftime is necessary and appropriate for a fair and complete determination inthis case.

Randall S. Fiertz Director ofAirport Compliance and

Management Analysis DateCERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

# D

**--c~** 

## a'-17---- rHEREBY CERTIFY that on 

## t - \) ,I caused to beplaced in the United States mail (first class mail, postage paid) a true copy ofthe Notice ofExtension ofTime addressed to: Counsel for Complainant: Steven M. Taber, Esq. Taber Law Group 13 Atlanta Irvine, CA 92620 Facsimile: (714) 707-4282 Counsel for Respondent: Thomas W. Anderson, Esq. General Counsel Metropolitan Airports Commission 6040 28th Avenue South Minneapolis, MN 55450 Facsimile: (612) 726-5306 Pablo 0. Niiesch, Esq. Spiegel & McDiarmid LLP 1333 NewHampshire Ave., NW Washington, DC 20036 Facsimile: (202) 393-2866 Copy to: FAA Part 16 Airport Proceedings Docket FAA Office ofAirport Compliance and Management Analysis, AC0-100 

# q]cud:AA



# (l;J:~ lc audia Roberts

Office ofAirport Compliance

and Management Analysis
### §7113. Exemption from draft

A licensed master, mate, pilot, or engineer of a vessel inspected under part B of this subtitle, propelled by machinery or carrying hazardous liquid cargoes in bulk, is not liable to draft in time of war, except for performing duties authorized by the license. When performing those duties in the service of the United States Government, the master, mate, pilot, or engineer is entitled to the highest rate of wages paid in the merchant marine of the United States for similar services. If killed or wounded when performing those duties, the master, mate, pilot, or engineer, or the heirs or legal representatives of the master, mate, pilot, or engineer, are entitled to all the privileges under the pension laws of the United States provided to members of the Armed Forces.

(Pub. L. 98–89, Aug. 26, 1983, 97 Stat. 541.)

| Revised section | Source section (U.S. Code) |
| --- | --- |
| 7113 | 46:225 |

Section 7113 exempts licensed masters, mates, pilots, and engineers of inspected vessels that are propelled by machinery or carrying hazardous liquid cargo from the Selective Service draft in time of war.

This section also provides that, while serving in that capacity during war, they shall be entitled to the highest rate of pay paid in the U.S. merchant marine for similar services.

If a master, mate, pilot, or engineer is killed or wounded when performing those duties during a war, these individuals, their heirs or legal representatives, are entitled to all the privileges provided to members of the Armed Forces under the pension laws of the United States.
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsThe effects of compressive preloads on the compression-after-impact strength of carbon/epoxyA preloading device was used to examine the effects of compressive prestress on the compression-after-impact (CAI) strength of 16-ply, quasi-isotropic carbon epoxy test coupons. T300/934 material was evaluated at preloads from 200 to 4000 lb at impact energies from 1 to 9 joules. IM7/8551-7 material was evaluated at preloads from 4000 to 10,000 lb at impact energies from 4 to 16 joules. Advanced design of experiments methodology was used to design and evaluate the test matrices. The results showed that no statistically significant change in CAI strength could be contributed to the amount of compressive preload applied to the specimen.Document ID19930003490Acquisition SourceLegacy CDMSDocument TypeTechnical Publication (TP)AuthorsNettles, A. T.*(NASA Marshall Space Flight Center Huntsville, AL, United States)*Lance, D. G.*(NASA Marshall Space Flight Center Huntsville, AL, United States)*Date AcquiredSeptember 6, 2013Publication DateNovember 1, 1992Subject CategoryComposite MaterialsReport/Patent NumberM-701NAS 1.60:3303NASA-TP-3303Accession Number93N12678Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType19930003490.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
### §404. Reports of investigations

Whenever an investigation shall be made by the Commission it shall be its duty to make a report in writing in respect thereto, which shall state the conclusions of the Commission, together with its decision, order, or requirement in the premises; and in case damages are awarded such report shall include the findings of fact on which the award is made.

(June 19, 1934, ch. 652, title IV, §404, 48 Stat. 1094.)
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                      26,869,695
<SECURITIES>                                 8,398,470
<RECEIVABLES>                                7,390,241
<ALLOWANCES>                                   430,000
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            43,499,490
<PP&E>                                       8,741,340
<DEPRECIATION>                             (3,648,089)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              48,756,140
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        8,184,840
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                    52,273,381
<OTHER-SE>                                (13,384,802)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                48,756,140
<SALES>                                     25,695,569
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            25,695,569
<CGS>                                       16,023,617
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               24,004,048
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               240,979
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             204,762
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              1,661,138
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          1,661,138
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 1,661,138
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.23
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.19


</TABLE>
### §1958. Referendum costs

The Secretary of the Interior shall provide such sums as may be necessary for a further referendum on approval of the Compact, if one is required, or other appropriate costs associated with the approval process in Palau.

(Pub. L. 101–219, title I, §109, Dec. 12, 1989, 103 Stat. 1872.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

The Compact, referred to in text, is the Compact of Free Association between the United States and the Government of Palau, which is contained in section 201 of Pub. L. 99–658, set out as a note under section 1931 of this title.

#### Codification

Section was formerly set out as a note under section 1681 of this title.
§ 92.614 Other Federal requirements. ( a ) The following Federal requirements contained in subpart H of this part apply to the ADDI: ( 1 ) *Other Federal requirements and nondiscrimination.* The Federal and nondiscrimination requirements contained in § 92.350 apply to the ADDI.
( 2 ) *Environmental review.* The environmental review requirements contained in § 92.352 apply to the ADDI.
( 3 ) *Affirmative marketing.* The affirmative marketing requirements contained in § 92.351(a).
( 4 ) *Labor.* The labor requirements contained in § 92.354 apply to ADDI.
( 5 ) *Lead-based paint.* The lead-based paint prevention and abatement requirements contained in § 92.355 apply to the ADDI.
( 6 ) *Conflict of interest.* The conflict of interest requirements contained in § 92.356 apply to the ADDI.
( 7 ) *Consultant activities.* The requirements regarding consultant activities contained in § 92.358 apply to the ADDI.
( b ) The following Federal requirements contained in subpart H of this part do not apply to the ADDI: ( 1 ) *Displacement, relocation, and acquisition.* The displacement, relocation, and acquisition requirements implementing the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act (42 U.S.C. 4201-4655) and the implementing regulations at 49 CFR part 24, contained in § 92.353 do not apply to ADDI, except the requirements do apply to FY2003 ADDI funds.
( 2 ) *Executive Order 12372.* The requirements of Executive Order 12372 (entitled “Intergovernmental Review) described in § 92.357.
[69 FR 16766, Mar. 30, 2004, as amended at 78 FR 44683, July 24, 2013]
EXHIBIT 31.1I, Jason Liddell, certify that:     1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K, and all reports on Form 8-Kcontaining distribution or servicing reports filed in respect of periodsincluded in the year covered by this annual report, of Merrill Lynch Depositor,Inc., on behalf of PPLUS Trust Series JPM-1;     2. Based on my knowledge, the information in these reports, taken as a whole,does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state amaterial fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading as of thelast day of the period covered by this annual report;     3. Based on my knowledge, the distribution or servicing information required tobe provided to the depositor by the trustee under the pooling and servicing, orsimilar, agreement, for inclusion in these reports is included in these reports;     4. I am responsible for reviewing the activities performed by the depositor andthe trustee under the pooling and servicing, or similar, agreement and basedupon my knowledge and the annual compliance review required under thatagreement, and except as disclosed in the reports, the depositor and trusteehave each fulfilled its obligations under that agreement; and     5. The reports disclose all significant deficiencies relating to the complianceby the depositor or trustee with the minimum servicing or similar standardsbased upon the report provided by an independent public accountant, afterconducting a review in compliance with the Uniform Single Attestation Programfor Mortgage Bankers or similar procedure, as set forth in the pooling orservicing, or similar, agreement, that is included in these reports.In giving the certifications above, I have reasonably relied on informationprovided to me by the following unaffiliated parties: The Bank of New York andits officers and agents.        Date: March 26, 2007 /s/ Jason Liddell   Vice President
#### Jacob Greenwald, Appellant, v. Max Kavenoff et al., Respondents.

Orders, entered on June 18, 1963, granting motions of defendants Max Kavenoff and Samuel Schnapp to vacate plaintiff’s notices of examination before trial, unanimously reversed, on the law and on the facts, with $20 costs and disbursements to plaintiff-appellant, and the motions denied. The counterclaim for reformation and the defenses present material issues of fact. Settle order on notice fixing date for examination to proceed. Concur — Rabin, J. P., Valente, McNally, Stevens and Eager, JJ.
### §1544. Reports by Governor; jurisdiction of Secretary of the Interior; exceptions

All reports required by law to be made by the Governor to any official of the United States shall hereafter be made to the Secretary of the Interior, and the President is authorized to place all matters pertaining to the government of the Virgin Islands under the jurisdiction of the Secretary of the Interior, except matters relating to the judicial branch of said government which on July 22, 1954 are under the supervision of the Director of the Administrative Office of the United States Courts, and the matters relating to the United States Attorney and the United States Marshal which on July 22, 1954 are under the supervision of the Attorney General.

(July 22, 1954, ch. 558, §30, 68 Stat. 509.)
Exhibit 12.2**CERTIFICATIONS**I, IgalShany, certify that:1. I have reviewed this Annual Report on Form 20-F (the "Report") of Saifun Semiconductors Ltd. (the "Company"): 2. Based on my knowledge, this Report does not contain any untrue statement of amaterial fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statementsmade, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, notmisleading with respect to the period covered by this Report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial informationincluded in this Report, fairly present in all material respects the financialcondition, results of operations and cash flows of the Company as of, and for, theperiods presented in this Report; 4. The Company’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the Company and have: (a) Designed such disclosure controls andprocedures, or caused such disclosurecontrols and procedures to be designedunder our supervision, to ensure thatmaterial information relating to theCompany, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us byothers within those entities,particularly during the period inwhich this Report is being prepared;  (b) Evaluated the effectiveness of theCompany’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in thisReport our conclusions about theeffectiveness of the disclosurecontrols and procedures, as of the endof the period covered by this Reportbased on such evaluation; and  (c) Disclosed in this Report any change inthe Company’s internal control overfinancial reporting that occurredduring the period covered by theAnnual Report that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely tomaterially affect, the Company’sinternal control over financialreporting; and5. The Company’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our mostrecent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the Company’sauditors and the audit committee of the Company’s board of directors (or personsperforming the equivalent functions): (a) All significant deficiencies andmaterial weaknesses in the design oroperation of internal control overfinancial reporting which arereasonably likely to adversely affectthe Company’s ability to record,process, summarize and reportfinancial information; and  (b) Any fraud, whether or not material,that involves management or otheremployees who have a significant rolein the Company’s internal control overfinancial reporting.Date:April 11, 2006       By:  /s/ Igal Shany         Igal Shany    Chief Financial Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                             715
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                           1,929
<DEPRECIATION>                                   (475)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   3,237
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            1,094
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          1
<COMMON>                                            12
<OTHER-SE>                                       2,126
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     3,237
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                              649
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    3,352
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                (94)<F1>
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (3,239)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (3,239)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (3,239)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.28)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.28)
<FN>
<F1>INTEREST INCOME
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
### §2004. Administrative matters

#### (a) Administrative support

The Secretary of the Interior shall provide all necessary administrative support to accomplish the requirements of sections 2002 and 2003 of this title.

#### (b) Authorization of appropriations

There are authorized to be appropriated such sums as may be necessary to carry out the provisions of this chapter.

(Pub. L. 99–239, title III, §304, Jan. 14, 1986, 99 Stat. 1837.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section was formerly set out as a note under section 1681 of this title.
#### In the Matter of Salvatore Alaimo, Jr., an Infant, Appellant. Alex Lagatella, Respondent.

In a proceeding against an infant pursuant to the Children’s Court Act of the State of New York, the infant appeals from a judgment of the Children’s Court, Rockland County, rendered June 8, 1961, after a hearing, which adjudicated him to be a juvenile delinquent by reason of his violation of section 555 of the Penal Law, relating to malicious telephone calls. Judgment reversed on the law and the facts, and petition dismissed. The allegations of the petition were neither established by a preponderance of evidence nor in accordance with the customary rules of evidence (cf. *People*v. *Lewis,*260 N. Y. 171, cert, denied, 289 U. S. 709). Ughetta, Acting P. J., Kleinfeld, Hill, Rabin and Hopkins, JJ., concur.
### §750. Repealed. July 3, 1950, ch. 446, §5(2), 64 Stat. 320

Section, acts Mar. 2, 1917, ch. 145, §38, 39 Stat. 964; Mar. 4, 1927, ch. 503, §6, 44 Stat. 1420; June 24, 1948, ch. 610, §7, 62 Stat. 580, related to grants of franchises, public service commission, etc.

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

#### Effective Date of Repeal

Repeal effective July 25, 1952, see note set out under section 732 of this title.