alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
FINANCING STATEMENT                                     Identifying File No.____

ALL INFORMATION MUST BE TYPEWRITTEN OR PRINTED IN INK. 
                                                      SIGNATURES MUST BE IN INK.

If transaction or transactions wholly or partially subject to 
recordation tax indicate amount of taxable debt here. $__________ .

This  financing  statement  dated  6/10/97 is presented to a filing  officer for
filing pursuant to Uniform Commercial Code.

1.   DEBTOR

     Name              URM Corporation
         ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 
     Address    11460 Cronridge Drive, Suite 120, Owings Mills, Maryland  21117
              -----------------------------------------------------------------

2.   SECURED PARTY

     Name              The Chase Manhattan Bank
         ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 
     Address           200 Jericho Quadrangle, Jericho, NY   11753
             ------------------------------------------------------------------
             Person and Address to whom Statement is to be Returned if Different
             from above.

3.   Maturity date of obligation (if any)      5/31/2002
                                         --------------------------------------
4.   This financing statement covers the following types (or items) of property:
     (List)

     All present and future accounts, contract rights,  instruments,  documents,
     and chattel paper, all returned and repossessed goods relating thereto, all
     proceeds thereof,  and all books,  records,  and other property relating to
     any of the foregoing.



                         CHECK |X| THE LINES WHICH APPLY

5.   |_| (If collateral is crops)  The above described crops are growing or  are
         to be grown on: (describe estate)


     |_| (If collateral is goods which are or are to  become fixtures) The above
         described goods are affixed or to be affixed to: (describe real estate)

     |_| (Proceeds of collateral are also covered)

     |_| (Products of collateral are also covered)


/s/Kenneth L. Blum,Jr. - President
--------------------------------------
(Signature of Debtor)

    URM Corporation
--------------------------------------
Type of Print Above Name on Above Line

                                               Signature Illegible - VP   
--------------------------------------       -----------------------------------
(Signature of Debtor)                           (Signature of Secured Party)


                                                The Chase Manhattan Bank
--------------------------------------       -----------------------------------
Type or Print Above Signature on Above Line     Type or Print Above Signature on
                                                Above Line
# SUBPART 42.1 – CONTRACT AUDIT SERVICES

*(Revised September 20, 2016 through PROCLTR 2016-10)*

**Parent topic:**PART 42 – CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION

## 42.101 Contract audit responsibilities.

The Contract and Pricing Compliance Division Chief is the designee to oversee contract audit follow-up in accordance with DoDI 7640.02, Policy for Follow-Up on Contract Audit Reports (https://www.esd.whs.mil/Portals/54/Documents/DD/issuances/dodi/764002p.pdf).
Editorial Note on Part 30
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 30 appear at 79 FR 75739, Dec. 19, 2014.

§ 30.31 Types of licenses. Licenses for byproduct material are of two types: General and specific. ( a ) The Commission issues a specific license to a named person who has filed an application for the license under the provisions of this part and parts 32 through 36, and 39.
( b ) A general license is provided by regulation, grants authority to a person for certain activities involving byproduct material, and is effective without the filing of an application with the Commission or the issuance of a licensing document to a particular person. However, registration with the Commission may be required by the particular general license.
[65 FR 79187, Dec. 18, 2000]
###### Editorial Note on Part 30

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 30 appear at 79 FR 75739, Dec. 19, 2014.

#### § 30.62 Right to cause the withholding or recall of byproduct material.

The Commission may cause the withholding or recall of byproduct material from any licensee who is not equipped to observe or fails to observe such safety standards to protect health as may be established by the Commission, or who uses such materials in violation of law or regulation of the Commission, or in a manner other than as disclosed in the application therefor or approved by the Commission.

[30 FR 8185, June 26, 1965, as amended at 40 FR 8785, Mar. 3, 1975]
§ 217.54 Elements of an allocation order. Each allocation order must include: ( a ) A detailed description of the required allocation action(s);
( b ) Specific start and end calendar dates for each required allocation action;
( c ) The written signature on a manually placed order, or the digital signature or name on an electronically placed order, of the Secretary of Energy. The signature or use of the name certifies that the order is authorized under this part and that the requirements of this part are being followed;
( d ) A statement that reads in substance: “This is an allocation order certified for national defense use. [Insert the legal name of the person receiving the order] is required to comply with this order, in accordance with the provisions of the Energy Priorities and Allocations System regulation (10 CFR part 217), which is part of the Federal Priorities and Allocations System”; and
( e ) A current copy of the Energy Priorities and Allocations System regulation (10 CFR part 217).
Editorial Note on Part 35
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 35 appear at 79 FR 75739, Dec. 19, 2014.

§ 35.15 Exemptions regarding Type A specific licenses of broad scope. A licensee possessing a Type A specific license of broad scope for medical use, issued under Part 33 of this chapter, is exempt from— ( a ) The provisions of § 35.12(d) regarding the need to file an amendment to the license for medical use of byproduct material, as described in § 35.1000;
( b ) The provisions of § 35.13(b);
( c ) The provisions of § 35.13(f) regarding additions to or changes in the areas of use at the addresses identified in the application or on the license;
( d ) The provisions of § 35.14(a);
( e ) The provisions of § 35.14(b)(1) for an authorized user, an authorized nuclear pharmacist, an authorized medical physicist, or an ophthalmic physicist;
( f ) The provisions of § 35.14(b)(5).
( g ) The provisions of § 35.49(a).
[67 FR 20370, Apr. 24, 2002, as amended at 72 FR 55931, Oct. 1, 2007; 83 FR 33103, July 16, 2018]
##### 



Certification Pursuant to Section 302  of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
  1.
    
    I have reviewed this amendment no. 1 to quarterly report on Form 10-QSB/A of B.H.I.T,
Inc.;2.
    
    Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material
fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of
the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the
period covered by this report;3.
    
    Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information
included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition,
results of operations and cash flows of the small business issuer as of, and for, the
periods presented in this report;4.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and
maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e)
and 15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act
Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the small business issuer and have:
    5.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer and I are have disclosed, based on our most
recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the small business
issuers auditors and the audit committee of the small business issuers board of directors
(or persons performing the equivalent functions):




---



##### 



/s/ Paul S. DennisPaul S. DennisInterim Chief Financial Officer
Case 2:06-cv-00771-ID-SRW Document 9 Filed 09/18/2006 Page 1 of 1
Case 2:06-cv-00771-ID-SRW Document 9-2 Filed 09/18/2006 Page 1 of 3
Case 2:06-cv-00771-ID-SRW Document 9-2 Filed 09/18/2006 Page 2 of 3
Case 2:06-cv-00771-ID-SRW Document 9-2 Filed 09/18/2006 Page 3 of 3
Case 2:06-cv-00771-ID-SRW Document 9-3 Filed 09/18/2006 Page 1 of 1
Editorial Note on Part 35
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 35 appear at 79 FR 75739, Dec. 19, 2014.

§ 35.605 Installation, maintenance, adjustment, and repair. ( a ) Only a person specifically licensed by the Commission or an Agreement State shall install, maintain, adjust, or repair a remote afterloader unit, teletherapy unit, or gamma stereotactic radiosurgery unit that involves work on the source(s) shielding, the source(s) driving unit, or other electronic or mechanical component that could expose the source(s), reduce the shielding around the source(s), or compromise the radiation safety of the unit or the source(s).
( b ) Except for low dose-rate remote afterloader units, only a person specifically licensed by the Commission or an Agreement State shall install, replace, relocate, or remove a sealed source or source contained in other remote afterloader units, teletherapy units, or gamma stereotactic radiosurgery units.
( c ) For a low dose-rate remote afterloader unit, only a person specifically licensed by the Commission or an Agreement State or an authorized medical physicist shall install, replace, relocate, or remove a sealed source(s) contained in the unit.
( d ) A licensee shall retain a record of the installation, maintenance, adjustment, and repair of remote afterloader units, teletherapy units, and gamma stereotactic radiosurgery units in accordance with § 35.2605.
#### Peter A. Brandenberg, Respondent-Appellant, v Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Greater New York, Appellant-Respondent. In

In an action to recover damages for breach of a hospital insurance contract and for declaratory relief, the parties cross-appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, entered December 14, 1979, which denied defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint and plaintiff’s cross motion for summary judgment. Order modified, on the law, by adding thereto, after the provision denying defendant’s motion, the following: "except that the third cause of action of the complaint is dismissed.” As so modified, order affirmed, without costs or disbursements. The allegations set forth in the third cause of action do not demonstrate that defendant, an insurer, has engaged in a fraudulent scheme evincing moral turpitude and wanton dishonesty so as to imply a criminal indifference to its civil obligations. Also, a demand for punitive damages does not constitute a separate cause of action for pleading purposes (see *Sanfilippo*v *Metropolitan Life Ins.*
      *535
      *Co.,*74 AD2d 600). Mollen, P. J., Hopkins, Mangano and Cohalan, JJ., concur.
(September 18, 1980)

#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Richard Tagliamonte, Appellant.

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Albany County, rendered February 13, 1979 upon a verdict convicting defendant of seven counts of the crime of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the first degree and one count of the crime of criminal possession of a forged instrument in the second degree. Defendant was indicted on seven counts of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the first degree (Penal Law, §220.21, subd 1) and 21 counts of criminal possession of a forged instrument in the second degree (Penal Law, § 170.25). Twenty of the forged instrument charges were dismissed during trial, and defendant was convicted of the remaining one and the seven drug charges. He was sentenced to concurrent terms of imprisonment of 20 years to life for the drug charges and three and one-half to seven years for the forged instrument charge. This appeal ensued and defendant raises several issues which he contends require a reversal. Initially, defendant contends that the People failed to prove each and every element of the offenses charged. We disagree. The record clearly demonstrates that defendant adopted a scheme whereby he obtained the drug percodan from various drug stores in the Albany area by using false names and addresses on the prescriptions. Six pharmacists testified that they gave defendant more than two ounces of percodan when defendant presented the prescriptions, and seven such transactions were described. We also reject defendant’s contention that there was insufficient evidence to establish that the doctor’s signature on *566the prescription was forged. The record contained the doctor’s signature on his application for a medical license. It was, therefore, within the competence of the jury to find that the signature on the prescription was forged *(People v Molineux,*168 NY 264, 321, 324). We are also of the view that the trial court properly excluded evidence of the doctor’s past prescription practices as irrelevant and remote. While we agree with defendant that the court improperly charged the jury in the following language: "Unlawfully means in violation of Article 33 of the Public Health Law; however, the burden of establishing that such possession was not in violation of the provisions of Article 33 of the Public Health Law rests upon the defendant”, such does not require a reversal here. The proof of defendant’s guilt is overwhelming and, consequently, the error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt *(People v Crimmins,*36 NY2d 230). There must be an affirmance. Finally, the imposition of the sentence was within the discretion of the sentencing court and we find no abuse of that discretion *(People v Dittmar,*41 AD2d 788). Judgment affirmed. Mahoney, P. J., Sweeney, Kane, Staley, Jr., and Casey, JJ., concur.
###### Editorial Note on Part 4

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 4 appear at 77 FR 39904, July 6, 2012.

#### § 4.301 Purpose and scope.

The purpose of this subpart is to set forth NRC policies and procedures under the Age Discrimination Act of 1975 which prohibits discrimination on the basis of age in programs or activities receiving Federal financial assistance.
#### LUBNAU, Respondent, v. LAEBOVETZ et al., Appellants.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department,

November 11, 1914.)

Action by Carl Lubnáu against Julius Laebovetz and another.

No opinion. Judgment and order affirmed, with costs.
1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA 

NORTHERN DIVISION 

ERNEST REED, et al,

Plaintiffs, 

vs. 

GUIDANT CORPORATION, 

GUIDANT SALES 

CORPORATION and JOE DOE 

DEFENDANTS,

 Defendants. 

2:06CV763

NOTICE OF APPEARANCE AS COUNSEL

Fred M. Haston III and Andrew B. Johnson of the law firm of Bradley 

Arant Rose & White LLP hereby enter their appearance as counsel for 

Defendants Guidant Corporation and Guidant Sales Corporation in this 

action. Defendants reserve all defenses available to them in this action, 

including, but not limited to, those included in Fed. R. Civ. P. 12. 

Respectfully submitted this the 15th day of September 2006. 

 

Case 2:06-cv-00763-WKW-DRB Document 6 Filed 09/15/2006 Page 1 of 3
2

Respectfully submitted, 

s/ Andrew B. Johnson 

Fred M. Haston, III 

Andrew B. Johnson 

BRADLEY ARANT ROSE & WHITE LLP

One Federal Place 

1819 Fifth Avenue North 

Birmingham, AL 35203-2119 

Telephone: (205) 521-8000 

Facsimile: (205) 521-8800 

E-mail: ajohnson@bradleyarant.com

thaston@bradleyarant.com

Attorneys for Defendants Guidant 

Corporation and Guidant Sales Corporation 

Case 2:06-cv-00763-WKW-DRB Document 6 Filed 09/15/2006 Page 2 of 3
3

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on September 15th 2006, I electronically filed the 

foregoing with the Clerk of the Court using the CM/ECF system which will 

send notification of such filing to the following: 

Kathryn S. Harrington, Esq 

Hollis & Wright P.C. 

505 North 20th Street, Suite 1500 

Birmingham, Alabama 35203 

kathrynh@hollis-wright.com

Counsel for Plaintiff 

and I hereby certify that I have mailed by United States Postal Service the 

document to the following non-CM/ECF participants: 

NONE 

s/ Andrew B. Johnson 

1/1492152.1

Case 2:06-cv-00763-WKW-DRB Document 6 Filed 09/15/2006 Page 3 of 3
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

NORTHERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA )

 )

 v. ) CR. NO. 2:06-cr-206-MHT

)

ALETHIA ADRIANNE SCOTT )

MOTION TO CONTINUE SENTENCING

Comes now the United States of America, by and through its United States Attorney, Leura

G. Canary, and moves this court to continue sentencing in the above-styled case and as grounds

therefore says as follows:

1. The defendant is currently set for sentencing on January 31, 2007.

2. On information and belief, the United States avers that Defendant Scott will be a

necessary witness at the trial to be conducted on February 5, 2007, in the case of United States v.

Kevin Brown.

3. The full extent of Defendant Scott’s substantial assistance will not be known until

the trial is complete in United States v. Kevin Brown.

4. The undersigned has contacted Kevin Butler, attorney for defendant, who has

indicated that he cannot give his position on this motion prior to its filing because he must discuss

the matter with his currently incarcerated client. 

 Wherefore, the above premises considered, the United States respectfully requests the Court

to continue the sentencing in the above-styled matter to a date after the completion of the jury trial

in the case of United States v. Kevin Brown.

Case 2:06-cr-00206-MHT-CSC Document 56 Filed 12/04/2006 Page 1 of 3
2

Respectfully submitted this 4th day of December, 2006. 

 LEURA G. CANARY

UNITED STATES ATTORNEY

/s/ Christopher A. Snyder

CHRISTOPHER A. SNYDER

Assistant United States Attorney

One Court Square, Suite 201

Montgomery, Alabama 36104

Telephone: (334) 223-7280

Fax: (334) 223-7135

E-mail: christopher.a.snyder@usdoj.gov

Case 2:06-cr-00206-MHT-CSC Document 56 Filed 12/04/2006 Page 2 of 3
3

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

NORTHERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA )

 )

 v. ) CR. NO. 2:06-cr-206-MHT

)

ALETHIA ADRIANNE SCOTT )

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on December 4, 2006, I electronically filed the foregoing with the Clerk

of the Court using the CM/ECF system which will send notification of such filing to the following:

Kevin Butler.

Respectfully submitted,

 LEURA GARRETT CANARY

UNITED STATES ATTORNEY

/s/ Christopher A. Snyder

CHRISTOPHER A. SNYDER

Assistant United States Attorney

One Court Square, Suite 201

Montgomery, Alabama 36104

Telephone: (334) 223-7280

Fax: (334) 223-7135

E-mail: christopher.a.snyder@usdoj.gov

Case 2:06-cr-00206-MHT-CSC Document 56 Filed 12/04/2006 Page 3 of 3
Editorial Note on Part 2
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 2 appear at 79 FR 75739, Dec. 19, 2014.

§ 2.1006 Privilege. ( a ) Subject to the requirements in § 2.1003(a)(4), the traditional discovery privileges recognized in NRC adjudicatory proceedings and the exceptions from disclosure in § 2.390 may be asserted by potential parties, interested States, local governmental bodies, Federally-recognized Indian Tribes, and parties. In addition to Federal agencies, the deliberative process privilege may also be asserted by States, local governmental bodies, and Federally-recognized Indian Tribes.
( b ) Any document for which a claim of privilege is asserted, but is denied in whole or in part by the Pre-License Application Presiding Officer or the Presiding Officer, must be provided in electronic form by the party, interested governmental participant, or potential party that asserted the claim to— ( 1 ) The other participants; or
( 2 ) To the Pre-License Application Presiding Officer or to the Presiding Officer, for entry into a Protective Order file, if the Pre-License Application Presiding Officer or the Presiding Officer so directs under §§ 2.1010(b) or 2.1018(c).
( c ) Notwithstanding any availability of the deliberative process privilege under paragraph (a) of this section, circulated drafts not otherwise privileged shall be provided for electronic access pursuant to § 2.1003(a).
[63 FR 71738, Dec. 30, 1998; 64 FR 15920, Apr. 2, 1999, as amended at 69 FR 2265, Jan. 14, 2004]
59–008 

109TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 2d Session 109–727 

PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF THE JOINT RESOLUTION, H.J. RES. 

102, MAKING FURTHER CONTINUING APPROPRIATIONS FOR THE FISCAL 

YEAR 2007, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES 

DECEMBER 8, 2006.—Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed 

Mr. PUTNAM, from the Committee on Rules, 

submitted the following 

R E P O R T 

[To accompany H. Res. 1105] 

The Committee on Rules, having had under consideration House 

Resolution 1105, by a nonrecord vote, report the same to the House 

with the recommendation that the resolution be adopted 

SUMMARY OF PROVISIONS OF THE RESOLUTION

The resolution provides for consideration of H.J. Res. 102, making further continuing appropriations for the fiscal year 2007, and 

for other purposes, under a closed rule. The rule provides one hour 

of debate in the House equally divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee on Appropriations. 

The rule waives all points of order against consideration of the 

joint resolution. The rule provides one motion to recommit the joint 

resolution. 

EXPLANATION OF WAIVERS

The Committee is not aware of any points of order against consideration of the joint resolution. The waiver of all points of order 

against consideration of the joint resolution is prophylactic in nature. 

Æ 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMRPT
§ 36.61 Inspection and maintenance. ( a ) The licensee shall perform inspection and maintenance checks that include, as a minimum, each of the following at the frequency specified in the license or license application: ( 1 ) Operability of each aspect of the access control system required by § 36.23.
( 2 ) Functioning of the source position indicator required by § 36.31(b).
( 3 ) Operability of the radiation monitor for radioactive contamination in pool water required by § 36.59(b) using a radiation check source, if applicable.
( 4 ) Operability of the over-pool radiation monitor at underwater irradiators as required by § 36.29(b).
( 5 ) Operability of the product exit monitor required by § 36.29(a).
( 6 ) Operability of the emergency source return control required by § 36.31(c).
( 7 ) Leak-tightness of systems through which pool water circulates (visual inspection).
( 8 ) Operability of the heat and smoke detectors and extinguisher system required by § 36.27 (but without turning extinguishers on).
( 9 ) Operability of the means of pool water replenishment required by § 36.33(c).
( 10 ) Operability of the indicators of high and low pool water levels required by § 36.33(d).
( 11 ) Operability of the intrusion alarm required by § 36.23(i), if applicable.
( 12 ) Functioning and wear of the system, mechanisms, and cables used to raise and lower sources.
( 13 ) Condition of the barrier to prevent products from hitting the sources or source mechanism as required by § 36.35.
( 14 ) Amount of water added to the pool to determine if the pool is leaking.
( 15 ) Electrical wiring on required safety systems for radiation damage.
( 16 ) Pool water conductivity measurements and analysis as required by § 36.63(b).
( b ) Malfunctions and defects found during inspection and maintenance checks must be repaired without undue delay.