alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Syracuse Amusement Company, Inc., Appellant, v. Glen A. Murray, Respondent, et al., Defendant.

Order insofar as appealed from unanimously affirmed, with $25 costs and disbursements. (Appeal from part of order of Onondaga Special Term denying plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment against defendant Murray.) Present — Bastow, J. P., Goldman, Halpern, McClusky and Henry, JJ.
**Exhibit 32.2**

 

**Certification PursuantTo 18 U.S.C. 1350,As Adopted Pursuant toSection 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**

 

Inconnection with the Annual Report of Cyanotech Corporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-K/Afor the period ended March 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities andExchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, William R. Maris,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 therequirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o (d)); and

 

2)                 The information contained in the Reportfairly presents, in all material aspects, the financial condition and resultsof operations of the Company.

 
| Date:    September 30, 2008 |     | /s/ William R. Maris      |
|--------------------------------------------|----------|---------------------------|
|                                       |     | William R. Maris          |
|                                       | * * | *Chief Financial Officer* |

 

----
#### § 42.40 Refunds.

An applicant may withdraw an application and receive a full refund of tuition fees provided that written notification to the Academy's Student Services Branch is mailed no later than 14 days before the course begins.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Homeland Security

###### U.S. Customs and Border Protection

          - 19 CFR Chapter I

# AGENCY:

Office of the Secretary, U.S. Department of Homeland Security; U.S. Customs and Border Protection, U.S. Department of Homeland Security.

# ACTION:

Notification of continuation of temporary travel restrictions; correction.

# SUMMARY:

                        The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is making corrections to a notice that appeared in the                         **Federal Register**                         on December 22, 2020. The document contained incorrect dates.                    

# DATES:

                        The corrections apply to the notification published in the                         **Federal Register**                         December 22, 2020.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Stephanie Watson, Office of Field Operations Coronavirus Coordination Cell, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) at 202-325-0840.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

### Correction

                    In the                     **Federal Register**                     of December 22, 2020, in FR Doc. 2020-28381—                
    - On page 83432, in the first column, correct the words “January 21, 2020.” to read, “January 21, 2021.”; and
    - On page 83433, in the second column, correct the words “January 21, 2020.” to read, “January 21, 2021.”

Christina E. McDonald,

Associate General Counsel for Regulatory Affairs.

[FR Doc. 2020-28875 Filed 1-15-21; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 9111-12-P
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>             			                <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                            	      12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                           3,229
<SECURITIES>                                   236,711
<RECEIVABLES>                               18,303,340
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                74,416
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              18,617,696
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,060,750
<BONDS>                                     17,328,606
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       184,960
<OTHER-SE>                                      43,380
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                18,847,123
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             2,164,745
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                2,167,955
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (3,210)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (3,210)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (1.34)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
<PAGE>

                                                                   Exhibit 3.124


                          CERTIFICATE OF INCORPORATION
                                       OF
                        THE ELECTRONICS SOURCE BOOK, INC.

           The undersigned, in order to form a corporation for the purpose
hereinafter stated under and pursuant to the provisions of the Delaware General
Corporation Law hereby certifies that:

           FIRST: The name of the Corporation is The Electronics Source Book,
Inc.

           SECOND: The registered office and registered agent of the Corporation
is The Corporation Trust Company, 1209 Orange Street, Wilmington, New Castle
County, Delaware, 19801.

           THIRD: The purpose of the Corporation is to engage in any lawful act
or activity for which corporations may be organized under the General
Corporation Law of Delaware.

           FOURTH: The total number of shares of stock that the Corporation is
authorized to issue is 1,000 shares of Common Stock, par value $0.01 each.

           FIFTH: The name and address of the incorporator is Beverly C. Chell,
745 Fifth Avenue, Now York, New York 10151.

           SIXTH: The Board of Directors of the Corporation, acting by majority
vote, may alter, amend Or repeal the By-Laws of the Corporation.

           SEVENTH: Except as otherwise provided by the Delaware General
Corporation Law as the same exists or may hereafter be amended, no director of
the Corporation shall be personally liable to the Corporation or its
stockholders for monctary damages for breach of fiduciary duty as a director.
Any repeal or modification of this Article SEVENTH by the stockholders of the
Corporation shall not adversely affect any right or protection of a director of
the Corporation existing at the time of such repeal or modification.

           IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has signed this Cerificate of
Incorporation on April 28, 1994.

                                                   Beverly C. Chell
§ 21.445 What are the requirements for a grants officer's or agreements officer's statement of appointment? A statement of a grants officer's or agreements officer's appointment: ( a ) Must be in writing.
( b ) Must clearly state the limits of the individual's authority, other than limits contained in applicable laws or regulations. Information on those limits of a grants officer's or agreements officer's authority must be readily available to the public and agency personnel.
( c ) May, if the individual is a contracting officer, be incorporated into his or her statement of appointment as a contracting officer (*i.e.,* there does not need to be a separate written statement of appointment for assistance instruments).
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 01-50070 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus LEOPOLDO GARCIA-PARRA, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. EP-00-CR-1162-ALL-H

-------------------- August 23, 2001 Before KING, Chief Judge, and POLITZ and PARKER, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Leopoldo Garcia-Parra appeals the 57-month term of imprisonment imposed following his guilty plea conviction of being found in the United States after removal in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. Garcia-Parra argues that his sentence should not have exceeded the two-year maximum term of imprisonment prescribed in 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a). Garcia-Parra acknowledges that his argument is foreclosed by the Supreme Court’s decision in Almendarez-Torres v. United States , 523 U.S. 224 (1998), butNo. 01-50070 -2- seeks to preserve the issue for Supreme Court review in light of the decision in Apprendi v. New Jersey , 530 U.S. 466 (2000). Apprendi did not overrule Almendarez-Torres

. See Apprendi , 530 U.S. at 489-90; United States v. Dabeit , 231 F.3d 979, 984 (5th Cir. 2000), cert. denied , 121 S. Ct. 1214 (2001). GarciaParra’s argument is foreclosed. The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED. The Government has moved for a summary affirmance in lieu of filing an appellee’s brief. In its motion, the Government asks that the judgment of the district court be affirmed and that an appellee’s brief not be required. The motion is GRANTED. AFFIRMED; MOTION GRANTED.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

IN RE:

APPOINTMENT TO THE PENNSYLVANIA LAWYERS FUND FOR CLIENT SECURITY BOARD OF TRUSTEES :

:

:

:

:

: N O

. 86

CLIENT SECURITY APPOINTMENT DOCKET

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 19 th day of March

, 202 4

, Douglas E

. R e ss , Esquire, Philadelphia

, is hereby appointed as a member of the Pennsylvania Lawyers Fund for Client Security

Board of Trustees for a term of three years

, commencing April 1, 202 4

.
§ 196.140 Dissemination of policy. ( a ) *Notification of policy.* ( 1 ) Each recipient shall implement specific and continuing steps to notify applicants for admission and employment, students and parents of elementary and secondary school students, employees, sources of referral of applicants for admission and employment, and all unions or professional organizations holding collective bargaining or professional agreements with the recipient, that it does not discriminate on the basis of sex in the educational programs or activities that it operates, and that it is required by Title IX and these Title IX regulations not to discriminate in such a manner. Such notification shall contain such information, and be made in such manner, as the designated agency official finds necessary to apprise such persons of the protections against discrimination assured them by Title IX and these Title IX regulations, but shall state at least that the requirement not to discriminate in education programs or activities extends to employment therein, and to admission thereto unless §§ 196.300 through 196.310 do not apply to the recipient, and that inquiries concerning the application of Title IX and these Title IX regulations to such recipient may be referred to the employee designated pursuant to § 196.135, or to the designated agency official.
( 2 ) Each recipient shall make the initial notification required by paragraph (a)(1) of this section within 90 days of September 29, 2000 or of the date these Title IX regulations first apply to such recipient, whichever comes later, which notification shall include publication in: ( i ) Newspapers and magazines operated by such recipient or by student, alumnae, or alumni groups for or in connection with such recipient; and
( ii ) Memoranda or other written communications distributed to every student and employee of such recipient.
( b ) *Publications.* ( 1 ) Each recipient shall prominently include a statement of the policy described in paragraph (a) of this section in each announcement, bulletin, catalog, or application form that it makes available to any person of a type, described in paragraph (a) of this section, or which is otherwise used in connection with the recruitment of students or employees.
( 2 ) A recipient shall not use or distribute a publication of the type described in paragraph (b)(1) of this section that suggests, by text or illustration, that such recipient treats applicants, students, or employees differently on the basis of sex except as such treatment is permitted by these Title IX regulations.
( c ) *Distribution.* Each recipient shall distribute without discrimination on the basis of sex each publication described in paragraph (b)(1) of this section, and shall apprise each of its admission and employment recruitment representatives of the policy of nondiscrimination described in paragraph (a) of this section, and shall require such representatives to adhere to such policy.
EXHIBIT 15.1

Board of Directors
Eckerd Corporation:



RE: Registration Statement on Form S-3 (No. 33-50223)

With respect to the subject registration statement, we acknowledge our awareness
of the use therein of our report dated September 15, 1998, related to our review
of interim financial information,  which report was included in the Form 10-Q of
Eckerd  Corporation and subsidiaries (a wholly-owned  subsidiary of J. C. Penney
Company, Inc.) for the thirteen and twenty-six weeks ended August 1, 1998.

Pursuant to Rule 436(c)  under the  Securities  Act of 1933,  such report is not
considered  a part of a  registration  statement  prepared  or  certified  by an
accountant or a report prepared or certified by an accountant within the meaning
of Sections 7 and 11 of the Act.


/s/ KPMG PEAT MARWICK LLP


Tampa, Florida
September 15, 1998
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM DRAVO
CORPORATION'S SEPTEMBER 30, 1995 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS 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>                          DEC-31-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1995
<CASH>                                             176
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    24697
<ALLOWANCES>                                       108
<INVENTORY>                                      13279
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 40189
<PP&E>                                          220616
<DEPRECIATION>                                  107236
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  210140
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            33643
<BONDS>                                              0
<COMMON>                                         15051
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                            20000
<PREFERRED>                                         25
<OTHER-SE>                                       65796
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    210140
<SALES>                                         107376
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                107379
<CGS>                                            79731
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    79731
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                3534
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   8799
<INCOME-TAX>                                       616
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               8183
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                      8183
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .42
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .42
        

</TABLE>
#### Dorothy Kantrowitz, Appellant, v. Fred Kantrowitz, Respondent.

Order, entered on November 29, 1963, dismissing petition for support, unanimously reversed on the law and on the facts, and a new trial ordered. If, as contended by petitioner, jurisdiction of the Mexican court was acquired as a result of a fraudulently induced power of attorney and appearance by her, the decree of divorce obtained by respondent is not entitled to protection or recognition under principles of comity and may be attacked collaterally in the courts of this State. (Cf. *Prime*v. *Hinton,*244 App. Div. 181, 183, 184 and cases cited; see, also, *Querze*v. *Querze,*290 N. Y. 13; *Averbuck*v. *Averbuck,*270 App. Div. 116; *White*v. *White,*26 Misc 2d 631.) The testimony here is that the parties were living together as husband and wife when the wife was induced to sign a power of attorney and to consent to an appearance in the divorce proceeding to be instituted in Mexico. The court was bound to scrutinize most closely all circumstances to ascertain whether or not any deception, fraud or coercion was practiced upon the petitioner. The relation between a husband and wife is regarded as one of special confidence and trust. Since the parties were still living together as husband and wife at the time the petitioner was induced by respondent to execute the power of attorney for her appearance in the proceeding in Mexico, the respondent was under the duty to exercise the utmost good faith in his representations to the petitioner. This instrument was to be used to his advantage for the purpose of severing the marital ties, so the burden was upon him to show that the petitioner executed the same freely and deliberately with a full understanding of her rights. (See 15 N. Y. Jur., Domestic Relations, § 210, p. 433; 41 C. J. S., Husband and Wife, § 120, p. 594; *Scheinberg*v. *Scheinberg,*249 N. Y. 277; *Matter of Smith,*243 App. Div. 348, 352, 353; *Matter of Nowakowski,*1 A D 2d 250, affd. 2 N Y 2d 618.) The record here shows the existence of issues of fact with respect to whether or not the respondent fraudulently misrepresented his then existing intentions as to his future support of the petitioner and as to his marital plans, and *655whether petitioner relied upon same when she executed the power of attorney. The trial court, apparently without passing upon these questions, dismissed the proceeding, holding that the Mexican decree was “ valid for the purposes of this action.” The court was not required to remit the petitioner to the remedy of a plenary action for a determination of the issue as to the validity of the Mexican decree. The Family Court had full jurisdiction in the premises. (See *Loomis*v. *Loomis,*288 N. Y. 222, 224; *Matter of Carter*v. *Carter,*19 A D 2d 513; cf. *White*v. *White, supra.)*Finally, if a determination upon the merits with respect to the issue of fraud was intended by the trial court, the determination is contrary to the weight of the evidence. Concur — Breitel, J. P., Valente, McNally, Stevens and Eager, JJ.
§ 37.695 What are the requirements for Federally owned property? If you provide Federally owned property to any participant for the performance of research under a TIA, you must require that participant to account for, use, and dispose of the property in accordance with: ( a ) 32 CFR 34.22, if the participant is a for-profit firm.
( b ) The requirements that apply to the participant's other Federal awards, if it is an entity other than a for-profit firm. If the other Federal awards of a participant that is a GOCO or FFRDC administered by a nonprofit organization are procurement contracts, it is appropriate for you to specify the same property standards that apply to those Federal procurement contracts.
[68 FR 47160, Aug. 7, 2003, as amended at 85 FR 51246, Aug. 19, 2020]
### §595. Repealed. Pub. L. 115–387, §2(a)(4), Dec. 21, 2018, 132 Stat. 5163

Section, Pub. L. 107–296, title XIX, §1905, formerly title XVIII, §1805, as added Pub. L. 109–347, title V, §501(a), Oct. 13, 2006, 120 Stat. 1934; renumbered title XIX, §1905, Pub. L. 110–53, title I, §104(a)(1), (2), Aug. 3, 2007, 121 Stat. 294, related to relationship of Director's authority under this subchapter to other Department entities and Federal agencies.
JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE (Fourth Chamber)

8 February 2007

Case T-318/04

**Vladimir Boucek**

**v**

**Commission of the European Communities**

(Officials – Open competition – Non‐admission to the written tests – Late submission of application)

**Application:**for annulment of the decision of the selection board in open competition EPSO/A/2/03 refusing the applicant admittance to
the written test of the competition on the ground that he had not submitted his complete application within the time-limit
prescribed.

**Held:**The action is dismissed. The parties are ordered to bear their own costs.

**Summary**

1.      *Officials – Competitions – Organisation – Conditions for admission and arrangements*

*(Staff Regulations, Annex III, Arts 2 and 5)*

2.      *Officials – Competitions – Notice of competition*

*(Staff Regulations, Annex III, Arts 1(1)(h) and 2)*

1.      The failure to notify candidates in a competition, by email, of the results of their preselection tests and of a request to
complete their application does not constitute an irregularity which infringes the principle of sound administration where
the persons concerned have been adequately informed both regarding the fact that the results and the request would be communicated
to them through their personal file on the website of the European Personnel Selection Office (EPSO), which they were required
to consult regularly, and regarding the period within which that communication would be made.

In that context, a period of three weeks granted to candidates to enable them to take note of the information in question
on the EPSO website and to complete and send their application cannot be regarded as inadequate.

(see paras 42, 46)

2.      Article 1(1)(h) of Annex III to the Staff Regulations, which states that the notice of competition must specify the closing
date for applications, does not require that notice to lay down time-limits for the submission of applications and of supporting
documents completing applications in the case of competitions in which those documents are to be sent and the conditions for
admission checked only after the preselection phase. Those documents are solely intended to complete the application submitted
at the time when it is registered.

(see paras 59-61)

See: T‐207/02 *Falcone* v *Commission* [2004] ECR-SC I‐A‐305 and II‐1393, para. 41