alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 1907.01 Authority and purpose. ( a ) *Authority:* This Part is issued under the authority of and in order to implement section 1.8 of E.O. 13526, section 102 of the National Security Act of 1947, and section 6 of the CIA Act of 1949.
( b ) *Purpose:* This part prescribes procedures for non-Agency personnel who are authorized holders of CIA information, to challenge the classification status, whether classified or unclassified, based on a good faith belief that the current status of CIA information is improper. This part and section 1.8 of Executive Order 13526 confer no rights upon members of the general public or individuals who are not authorized holders of CIA information.
[76 FR 59031, Sept. 23, 2011]
**EXHIBIT No. 21.1**

**SUBSIDIARIES OF THE REGISTRANT**
|                                       | ** ** | **Percentage Owned**       | ** ** | **State of Incorporation** |
|---------------------------------------|------------|----------------------------|------------|----------------------------|
|                                  |       |                       |       |                       |
| Greene County Bank                    |       | 100%                       |       | Tennessee                  |
|                                  |       |                       |       |                       |
|  Greene County  Capital Trust I  |       | 100% of Common  Securities |       | Delaware                   |
|                                  |       |                       |       |                       |
|  Greene County  Capital Trust II |       | 100% of Common  Securities |       | Delaware                   |

 

**SUBSIDIARIES OF GREENE COUNTY BANK**
| Superior Financial Services, Inc. |   | 100%   |   | Tennessee |
|-----------------------------------|--------|--------|--------|-----------|
|                              |   |   |   |      |
| GCB Acceptance Corporation        |   | 100%   |   | Tennessee |
|                              |   |   |   |      |
| Fairway Title Company             |   | 100%   |   | Tennessee |

 

----
#### In re WEEKS.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department.

January 9, 1903.)

In the matter of the application of C. Louis Weeks for admission to the bar.

No opinion. Application granted.
No. 89-1246.

#### Agan *v.*Georgia.

Sup. Ct. Ga. Certiorari denied.
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 99-2

               Certificate Pursuant to Section 1350 of Chapter 63
               --------------------------------------------------
                      of Title 18 of the United States Code
                      -------------------------------------

     I, Michael Smith, the chief financial officer of Cobra Electronics
Corporation, certify that (i) the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Cobra
Electronics Corporation for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2002 (the "Form
10-Q") fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and (ii) the information contained in the Form
10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
results of operations of Cobra Electronics Corporation and its subsidiaries.


                                                  /s/ Michael Smith
                                                  ------------------------------
                                                  Michael Smith
                                                  August 14, 2002
60

80

100

120

140

160

N

O

x

E

mis

sio

n

s

Condition 2 - NOx Emissions

Stack 1

Stack 2

Stack 3

Stack 4

0

20

40

60

Time
80

100

120

140

160

180

NOx Emissions

Condition 3 - NOx Emissions

Stack 1

Stack 2

Stack 3

Stack 4

0

20

40

60

Time
100

150

200

250

N

O

x

E

mis

sio

n

s

Condition 4 - NOx Emissions

Stack 1

Stack 2

Stack 3

Stack 4

0

50

100

Time
100

150

200

250

N

O

x

E

mis

sio

n

s

Condition 5 - NOx Emissions

Stack 1

Stack 2

Stack 3

Stack 4

0

50

N

100 O

x

E

mis

sio

n

s

Time
60

80

100

120

140

160

N

O

x

E

mis

sio

n

s

Condition 6 - NOx Emissions

Stack 1

Stack 2

Stack 3

Stack 4

0

20

40

60

Time
60

80

100

120

140

N

O

x

E

mis

sio

n

s

Condition 7 - NOx Emissions

Stack 1

Stack 2

Stack 3

Stack 4

0

20

40

Time
80

100

120

140

160

180

NOx Emissions

Condition 8 - NOx Emissions

Stack 1

Stack 2

Stack 3

Stack 4

0

20

40

60

Time
150

200

250

300

N

O

x

E

mis

sio

n

s

Condition 9 - NOx Emissions

Stack 1

Stack 2

Stack 3

Stack 4

0

50

100

Time
150

200

250

300

N

O

x

E

mis

sio

n

s

Condition 10 - NOx Emissions

Stack 1

Stack 2

Stack 3

Stack 4

0

50

100

Time
60

80

100

120

140

160

N

O

x

E

mis

sio

n

s

Condition 11 - NOx Emissions

Stack 1

Stack 2

Stack 3

Stack 4

0

20

40

60

Time
150

200

250

300

350

N

O

x

E

mis

sio

n

s

Condition 12 - NOx Emissions

Stack 1

Stack 2

Stack 3

Stack 4

0

50

100

Time
<PAGE>

                          Independent Auditors' Consent




The Board of Directors
American Technical Ceramics Corp.:


We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement (No.
333-50913) on Form S-8 of American Technical Ceramics Corp. of our report dated
August 24, 1999, relating to the consolidated balance sheets of American
Technical Ceramics Corp. and subsidiaries as of June 30, 1999 and 1998, and the
related consolidated statements of earnings, stockholders equity and cash flows
for each of the years in the three-year period ended June 30, 1999, which report
appears in the June 30,1999 annual report on Form 10-K of American Technical
Ceramics Corp.






Melville, New York
September 22, 1999
U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission Workshop on Potential Ways to Reduce Third

- Party Testing Costs Through Determinations Consistent With Assuring Compliance Sheila A. Millar, Partner
K ELLER AND H ECKMAN LLP

1001 G Street, N.W. Suite 500 West Washington, D.C. 20001 +1 202.434.4143 millar@khlaw.com

April 3, 2014

# Who Is FJATA?



# We make and sell jewelry. • About 225 companies

• Mostly small businesses

• Led drafting of Children’s Jewelry Standard (ASTM F2923

- 11) and Adult Jewelry Standard (ASTM F2999

- 13)

• Leading process to update both standards

# Phthalates Testing Requirements & the Marketplace

• Jewelry items are not toys

• The distribution chain has begun imposing testing requirements that match CPSC’s, even for products that do not require such testing

• Testing is a significant added burden for jewelry items

• Component testing multiplies test costs

# Rigid Plastics Will Not Contain Phthalates

• When phthalates are present, they are added intentionally in amounts far about the trace levels that CPSIA bans

• The limited available data from FJATA member tests shows phthalates either not present or present in levels under 25% of the maximum in tested rigid plastics

# CPSC Rule Needed to Eliminate Unnecessary Test Costs

• Rigid plastics

– materials with a Shore “A” Hardness rating 90

or above

- will not contain phthalates

.

• In fact, most plastics will not contain phthalates



### • Technical data supports, with a high degree of assurance, that these materials will not contain phthalates and CPSC should issue a rule recognizing exclusions from phthalates testing

# Thank you! Sheila A. Millar, Partner
K ELLER AND H ECKMAN LLP

1001 G Street, N.W. Suite 500 West Washington, D.C. 20001 +1 202.434.4143 millar@khlaw.com

April 3, 2014
# Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida Opinion filed December 14, 2022. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

________________ No. 3D22-833 Lower Tribunal No. 20-22163

________________ 

### U.S. Security Associates, Inc., et al. ,

Appellants,

vs. 

### Eduardo Fernandez, et al. ,

Appellees.

An Appeal from a non-final order from the Circuit Court for MiamiDade County, Charles Johnson, Judge. Carlton Fields, P.A., and Matthew J. Conigliaro (Tampa); and Adams | Coogler, P.A., and Robert L. Newman (West Palm Beach), for appellants. Joel S. Perwin, P.A., and Joel S. Perwin; Alan Goldfarb, P.A., and Alan Goldfarb; and Warrior Law, P.A., and Liah Catanese, for appellees.
Before EMAS, HENDON and MILLER, JJ. HENDON, J.2

Affirmed. S. Fla. Coastal Elec., Inc. v. Treasures on Bay II Condo Ass'n, Inc., 89 So. 3d 264, 267 (Fla. 3d DCA 2012) (“In examining whether agency exists, the principal's actions are the primary indication of the relationship, and such examination is generally done by the trier of fact unless there is indisputably no connection between the principal and the agent.”); M.S. v. Nova S.E. Univ. Inc., 881 So. 2d 614, 617 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004) (“If the evidence raises any issue of material fact, if it is conflicting, if it will permit different reasonable inferences, or if it tends to prove the issue, it should be submitted to the jury as a question of fact to be determined by it.”); G4S Secure Sols. (USA), Inc. v. Morrow, 210 So. 3d 92, 94 (Fla. 2d DCA 2016) (holding while agency status is generally a question of fact, it may be decided as a question of law “in those cases where the party opposing summary judgment is unable to point to any conflicting facts or inferences to be drawn from the facts.”); Gradia v. Baptist Hosp., Inc., 345 So. 3d 385, 388 (Fla. 1st DCA 2022) (holding evidence supporting either an independent contractor or an agency relationship precluded summary judgment).
### §3598.1 Federal Bureau of Investigation Reserve Service

(a) Establishment.—The Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation may provide for the establishment and training of a Federal Bureau of Investigation Reserve Service (hereinafter in this section referred to as the "FBI Reserve Service") for temporary reemployment of employees in the Bureau during periods of emergency, as determined by the Director.

(b) Membership.—Membership in the FBI Reserve Service shall be limited to individuals who previously served as full-time employees of the Bureau.

(c) Annuitants.—If an individual receiving an annuity from the Civil Service Retirement and Disability Fund on the basis of such individual's service becomes temporarily reemployed pursuant to this section, such annuity shall not be discontinued thereby. An individual so reemployed shall not be considered an employee for the purposes of chapter 83 or 84.

(d) No Impact on Bureau Personnel Ceiling.—FBI Reserve Service members reemployed on a temporary basis pursuant to this section shall not count against any personnel ceiling applicable to the Bureau.

(e) Expenses.—The Director may provide members of the FBI Reserve Service transportation and per diem in lieu of subsistence, in accordance with applicable provisions of this title, for the purpose of participating in any training that relates to service as a member of the FBI Reserve Service.

(f) Limitation on Membership.—Membership of the FBI Reserve Service is not to exceed 500 members at any given time.

(g) Limitation on Duration of Service.—An individual may not be reemployed under this section for more than 180 days in connection with any particular emergency unless, in the judgment of the Director, the public interest so requires.

(Added Pub. L. 108–458, title II, §2004(a), Dec. 17, 2004, 118 Stat. 3703.)

1 Another section 3598 is set out preceding this section.
### §100754. Relinquishment of legislative jurisdiction

(a) In General.—Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the Secretary may relinquish to a State or a territory (including a possession) of the United States part of the legislative jurisdiction of the United States over System land or interests in land in that State or territory. Relinquishment may be accomplished—

(1) by filing with the chief executive official of the State or territory a notice of relinquishment to take effect on acceptance; or

(2) as the laws of the State or territory may otherwise provide.

(b) Submission of Agreement to Congress.—Prior to consummating a relinquishment under subsection (a), the Secretary shall submit the proposed agreement to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources of the Senate and the Committee on Natural Resources of the House of Representatives. The Secretary shall not finalize the agreement until 60 calendar days after the submission has elapsed.

(c) Concurrent Legislative Jurisdiction.—The Secretary shall diligently pursue the consummation of arrangements with each State or territory within which a System unit is located so that insofar as practicable the United States shall exercise concurrent legislative jurisdiction within System units.

(Pub. L. 113–287, §3, Dec. 19, 2014, 128 Stat. 3111.)

| Revised Section | Source (U.S. Code) | Source (Statutes at Large) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 100754 | 16 U.S.C. 1a–3. | Pub. L. 91–383, §6, as added Pub. L. 94–458, §2, Oct. 7, 1976, 90 Stat. 1939; Pub. L. 103–437, §6(a)(1), Nov. 2, 1994, 108 Stat. 4583. |

Section

In this section, the words "territory (including a possession)" are substituted for "territory, or possession" the 1st time the words appear for clarity, because a possession is a category of territory, that is, one that has very little local autonomy. In subsequent instances, the word "territory" is used in an equivalent sense. The word "Commonwealth" is omitted as being included in "territory (including a possession)".
# C_2012032EN.01001701.xml

| 4.2.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 32/17 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.2.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 32/17

---

Judgment of the General Court of 16 December 2011 — Enviro Tech Europe Ltd and Enviro Tech International v Commission

(Case T-291/04) (1)

1

(Environment and consumer protection - Classification, packaging and labelling of n-propyl bromide as a dangerous substance - Directive 2004/73/EC - Directive 67/548/EEC - Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008 - Action for annulment - Late request to adapt claims - Legal interest in bringing proceedings - Lack of individual concern - Inadmissibility - Non-contractual liability - Judgment of the Court of Justice concerning the validity of Directive 2004/73 - Same subject-matter)

2012/C 32/30

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicants: Enviro Tech Europe Ltd (Kingston upon Thames, United Kingdom); and Enviro Tech International, Inc. (Melrose Park, Illinois, United States) (represented by: C. Mereu and K. Van Maldegem, lawyers)

Applicants:

Defendant: European Commission (represented: initially by X. Lewis, and subsequently by P. Oliver and G. Wilms, Agents)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Application, first, for annulment of Commission Directive 2004/73/EC of 29 April 2004 adapting to technical progress for the twenty-ninth time Council Directive 67/548/EEC on the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions relating to the classification, packaging and labelling of dangerous substances (OJ 2004 L 152, p. 1, amended by OJ L 216, p. 3), in so far as Directive 2004/73 classified n-propyl bromide as a substance having certain dangerous properties and, second, for damages.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

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

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Enviro Tech Europe Ltd and Enviro Tech International, Inc. to pay the costs, including those relating to the interlocutory proceedings. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Enviro Tech Europe Ltd and Enviro Tech International, Inc. to pay the costs, including those relating to the interlocutory proceedings.

---

(1)  OJ C 273, 6.11.2004.

1

---
§ 1657.1 Purpose; definition. ( a ) The provisions of this part apply to the processing of overseas registrants, and, where applicable, they supersede inconsistent provisions in this chapter.
( b ) An overseas registrant is a registrant whose bona fide current address most recently provided by him to the Selective Service System is outside the United States, its territories or possessions, Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, Canada and Mexico.
Map 2-14: Alternative A

Areas Closed to Mineral Material Disposal

Related to Greater Sage Grouse Habitat

0 20 40 60 80

Kilometers

0 20 40 60 80

Miles

1

LUP Amendments Planning Area

Boundary

BLM Field Office Boundaries

Forest Service Planning Unit

Boundaries

Sage Grouse Priority Habitat

Management Area (Core)

Sage Grouse Priority Habitat

Management Area (Connectivity)

Closed to Mineral Material Disposal

Federal Salable Mineral Estate

County Boundaries

NO WARRANTY IS MADE BY THE BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT

FOR USE OF THE DATA FOR PURPOSES NOT INTENDED BY BLM.

Wyoming Sage Grouse Land Use Plan Amendments

Final Environmental Impact Statement - May 2015

W Y O M I N G

M T

I D

M A P A R E A

Crook

Weston

Sundance

Rock Springs

Field Office

§ ̈¦80

U T

C O

N E

S D

Newcastle

Lusk

Douglas

Casper

Cheyenne

Wheatland Torrington

Laramie

Rawlins

Rock Springs

Green River

Evanston

Kemmerer

Pinedale

Rawlins Field Offi ce

Casper Field Offi ce

Newcastle

Field Office

Pinedale

Field Office

Kemmerer

Field Office

Bridger -

Teton

N.F.

Thunder

Basin

N.G.

Thunder

Basin

N.G.

Medicine

Bow

N.F.

Medicine

Bow

N.F.

Medicine

Bow

N.F.

Medicine Bow

N.F.

§ ̈¦25

§ ̈¦25

§ ̈¦90

§ ̈¦80

§ ̈¦80

Platte

G

o

s

h

e

n

Alb

a

n

y

L

a

r

a

mie

C

o

n

v

e

r

s

e

Nio

b

r

a

r

a

Nat rona

Carbon

S

w

e

etw

ate

r

C

a

r

b

o

n

Sublette

Lincoln

T

eto

n

Fr

e

m

o

nt

Wyoming Sage Grouse Land Use Plan Amendments

Note: Identified restrictions displayed on this map

represent the existing management actions

across Greater Sage Grouse core and connectivity

habitat only. Additional closures exist beyond the

boundaries of core and connectivity habitat.
#### § 1704.5 Guidance.

Address all communications to the point of contact as specified in § 1704.3. Clearly describe, list, or label said communication as an MDR Request.
#### (A) In the Matter of the Estate of Simon J. Heigman, Also Known as John Heigman, Deceased. Agnes MacStay; Mary A. Heigman et al. (B) Asiatic Petroleum Corporation v. Overseas Investors, Inc.

[In each action] Motion to dismiss appeal granted, with $10 costs, unless the appellant procures the record on appeal and appellant’s points to be served and filed on or before January 3, 1961, with notice of argument for the February 1961 Term of this court, said appeal to be argued or submitted when reached. Concur — Botein, P. J., Breitel, Stevens, Eager and Noonan, JJ.
### §5927. Advances of pay

(a) Up to three months' pay may be paid in advance—

(1) to an employee upon the assignment of the employee to a post in a foreign area;

(2) to an employee, other than an employee appointed under section 303 of the Foreign Service Act of 1980 (and employed under section 311 of such Act), who—

(A) is a citizen of the United States;

(B) is officially stationed or located outside the United States pursuant to Government authorization; and

(C) requires (or has a family member who requires) medical treatment outside the United States, in circumstances specified by the President in regulations; and

(3) to an employee compensated pursuant to section 408 of the Foreign Service Act of 1980, who—

(A) pursuant to United States Government authorization is located outside the country of employment; and

(B) requires medical treatment outside the country of employment in circumstances specified by the President in regulations.

(b) For the purpose of this section, the term "country of employment", as used with respect to an individual under subsection (a)(3), means the country (or other area) outside the United States where such individual is hired (as described in subsection (a)(3)) by the Government.

(Added Pub. L. 96–465, title II, §2310(a), Oct. 17, 1980, 94 Stat. 2166; amended Pub. L. 106–113, div. B, §1000(a)(7) [div. A, title III, §337], Nov. 29, 1999, 113 Stat. 1536, 1501A–442; Pub. L. 107–228, div. A, title III, §320, Sept. 30, 2002, 116 Stat. 1380.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

Sections 303, 311, and 408 of the Foreign Service Act of 1980, referred to in subsec. (a)(2), (3), are classified to sections 3943, 3951, and 3968, respectively, of Title 22, Foreign Relations and Intercourse.

#### Amendments

2002—Subsec. (a)(3). Pub. L. 107–228, §320(1), amended par. (3) generally. Prior to amendment, par. (3) read as follows: "to a foreign national employee appointed under section 303 of the Foreign Service Act of 1980, or a nonfamily member United States citizen appointed under such section 303 (and employed under section 311 of such Act) for service at such nonfamily member's post of residence, who—

"(A) is located outside the country of employment of such foreign national employee or nonfamily member (as the case may be) pursuant to Government authorization; and

"(B) requires medical treatment outside the country of employment of such foreign national employee or nonfamily member (as the case may be), in circumstances specified by the President in regulations."

Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 107–228, §320(2), substituted "hired" for "appointed".

1999—Pub. L. 106–113 reenacted section catchline without change and amended text generally. Prior to amendment, text read as follows: "Up to three months' pay may be paid in advance to an employee upon the assignment of the employee to a post in a foreign area."

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

#### Effective Date

Section effective Feb. 15, 1981, except as otherwise provided, see section 2403 of Pub. L. 96–465, set out as a note under section 3901 of Title 22, Foreign Relations and Intercourse.
# C_2008128EN.01000201.xml

| 24.5.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 128/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.5.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 128/2

---

Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 8 April 2008 — Commission of the European Communities v Kingdom of Sweden

(Case C-167/05) (1)

1

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Second paragraph of Article 90 EC - Internal taxes imposed on products from other Member States - Taxation liable to protect other products indirectly - Prohibition on discrimination between imported products and competing domestic products - Excise duties - Different tax treatment of beer and wine - Burden of proof)

(2008/C 128/02)

Language of the case: Swedish

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: L. Ström van Lier, K. Gross, K. Simonsson and R. Lyal, Agents)

Applicant:

Defendant: Kingdom of Sweden (represented by: K. Wistrand, Agent)

Defendant:

Intervener in support of the defendant: Republic of Latvia (represented by: E. Balode-Buraka and E. Broks, Agents)

Intervener in support of the defendant:

Re:

Failure of Member State to fulfil its obligations — Infringement of the second paragraph of Article 90 EC — Internal taxation of alcohol and alcoholic drinks affecting wine more heavily than beer

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

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

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders the Commission of the European Communities to pay the costs; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders the Commission of the European Communities to pay the costs;

| 3. | Orders the Republic of Latvia to bear its own costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders the Republic of Latvia to bear its own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 171, 9.7.2005.

1

---
§ 147.13 Guideline K—Security violations. ( a ) *The concern.* Noncompliance with security regulations raises doubt about an individual's trustworthiness, willingness, and ability to safeguard classified information.
( b ) *Conditions that could raise a security concern and may be disqualifying include.* ( 1 ) Unauthorized disclosure of classified information;
( 2 ) Violations that are deliberate or multiple or due to negligence.
( c ) *Conditions that could mitigate security concerns include actions that:* ( 1 ) Were inadvertent;
( 2 ) Were isolated or infrequent;
( 3 ) Were due to improper or inadequate training;
( 4 ) Demonstrate a positive attitude towards the discharge of security responsibilities.