alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 75.53 Criminal penalties. ( a ) Section 223 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, provides for criminal sanctions for willful violation of, or conspiracy to violate, any regulation issued under sections 161b., 161i., or 161o. of the Act. For purposes of criminal sanctions under section 223, all the regulations in Part 75 are issued under one or more of sections 161b., 161i., or 161o., except as provided in paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section.
( b ) The regulations in Part 75 that are not issued under sections 161b, 161i, or 161o for the purposes of section 223 are as follows: §§ 75.1, 75.2, 75.3, 75.4, 75.5, 75.7, 75.9, 75.12, 75.13, 75.15, 75.26, 75.27, 75.28, 75.29, 75.46, 75.51, and 75.53.
( c ) Any provision in Part 75 that implements the “Protocol Additional to the Agreement between the United States of America and the International Atomic Energy Agency for the Application of Safeguards in the United States of America,” known as the “Additional Protocol,” signed by the United States on June 12, 1998, is not issued under sections 161b., 161i., or 161o, for the purposes of criminal sanctions under section 223.
[73 FR 78614, Dec. 23, 2008, as amended at 83 FR 19614, May 4, 2018]
226 So.2d 517

#### STATE of Louisiana v. Glenn BEARD.

No. 50123.

Sept. 22, 1969.

In re: State of Louisiana applying for writs of certiorari, mandamus and review and for a stay order.

The district judge is hereby ordered to permit the witness (Jim Jones) to answer a question or questions objected to by the defense, regarding admissions allegedly made by the accused which are pertinent to this matter, and to reserve to the defendant the right to renew and urge his objection on an appeal in the event of his conviction.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> BD

<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999             DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999             JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                               0                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                                2,448,487               1,976,276
<SECURITIES-RESALE>                                  0                       0
<SECURITIES-BORROWED>                                0                       0
<INSTRUMENTS-OWNED>                          9,878,680              10,095,662
<PP&E>                                               0                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              12,327,167              12,071,938
<SHORT-TERM>                                         0                       0
<PAYABLES>                                      98,092                 138,545
<REPOS-SOLD>                                         0                       0
<SECURITIES-LOANED>                                  0                       0
<INSTRUMENTS-SOLD>                                   0                       0
<LONG-TERM>                                          0                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0                       0
<PREFERRED>                                          0                       0
<COMMON>                                             0                       0
<OTHER-SE>                                  12,229,075              11,933,393
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                12,327,167              12,071,938
<TRADING-REVENUE>                              534,663               1,205,980
<INTEREST-DIVIDENDS>                           298,065                 308,014
<COMMISSIONS>                                  119,662                 176,539
<INVESTMENT-BANKING-REVENUES>                        0                       0
<FEE-REVENUE>                                        0                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0                       0
<COMPENSATION>                                       0                       0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                713,066               1,337,455
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                     713,066               1,337,455
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0                       0
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                   713,066               1,337,455
<EPS-BASIC>                                      19.14                   34.14
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    19.14                   34.14


</TABLE>
(July 16, 1969)

#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Arthur Burton Stroud, Appellant.

Motion for an order directing the trial court to furnish defendant with a copy of the transcript of the minutes of the *coram nobis*hearing pursuant to subdivision 2 of section 456 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, and certain other papers, denied. The application should be made to the trial court in the first instance. Gibson, P. J., Herlihy, Reynolds, Staley, Jr., and Cooke, JJ., concur.
```

[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 246 (Friday, December 21, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 75627]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-30778]

[[Page 75627]]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board, Nevada

AGENCY: Department of Energy.

ACTION: Notice of Open Meeting.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This notice announces a meeting of the Environmental 
Management Site-Specific Advisory Board (EM SSAB), Nevada. The Federal 
Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463, 86 Stat. 770) requires that 
public notice of this meeting be announced in the Federal Register.

DATES: Wednesday, January 16, 2013, 5:00 p.m.

ADDRESSES: National Atomic Testing Museum, 755 E. Flamingo Road, Las 
Vegas, Nevada 89119.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Barbara Ulmer, Board Administrator, 
232 Energy Way, M/S 505, North Las Vegas, Nevada 89030. Phone: (702) 
630-0522; Fax (702) 295-5300 or Email: NSSAB@nnsa.doe.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Purpose of the Board: The purpose of the Board is to make 
recommendations to DOE-EM and site management in the areas of 
environmental restoration, waste management, and related activities.

Tentative Agenda

    1. Fiscal Year 2015 Budget Prioritization Briefing--Work Plan Item 
5
    2. Discussion and recommendation development for Nye County 
Drilling Proposal--Work Plan Item 4
    3. Discussion and recommendation development for Industrial Sites--
Closing Use Restriction Sites--Work Plan Item 2
    Public Participation: The EM SSAB, Nevada, welcomes the attendance 
of the public at its advisory committee meetings and will make every 
effort to accommodate persons with physical disabilities or special 
needs. If you require special accommodations due to a disability, 
please contact Barbara Ulmer at least seven days in advance of the 
meeting at the phone number listed above. Written statements may be 
filed with the Board either before or after the meeting. Individuals 
who wish to make oral presentations pertaining to agenda items should 
contact Barbara Ulmer at the telephone number listed above. The request 
must be received five days prior to the meeting and reasonable 
provision will be made to include the presentation in the agenda. The 
Deputy Designated Federal Officer is empowered to conduct the meeting 
in a fashion that will facilitate the orderly conduct of business. 
Individuals wishing to make public comments will be provided a maximum 
of five minutes to present their comments.
    Minutes: Minutes will be available by writing to Barbara Ulmer at 
the address listed above or at the following Web site: http://nv.energy.gov/nssab/MeetingMinutes.aspx.

    Issued at Washington, DC, on December 18, 2012.
LaTanya R. Butler,
Deputy Committee Management Officer.
[FR Doc. 2012-30778 Filed 12-20-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
```
# Instructions

# Data Input

# Form 219

# Minor Constr. Form 219

# Special Equip. Summary

# Transformer Conv. Costs
2007-1969.

#### State v. Craft.

Butler App. No. CA2006-06-145, 2007-Ohio-4116. On motion for leave to file delayed appeal. Motion granted.

O’Connor, O’Donnell, and Lanzinger, JJ., dissent.
EXHIBIT 32.1

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the amended Quarterly Report of AccuPoll Holding Corp. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q/A for the fiscal quarter ended September 30, 2004 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), I, Dennis Vadura, Chief Executive 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 the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

(2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.


March 14, 2005                                       /s/ Dennis Vadura
                                                    ---------------------------
                                                         Dennis Vadura
                                                         Chief Executive Officer

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other
document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that
appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement
required by Section 906, has been provided to the Company and will be retained
by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its
staff upon request.
<PAGE>

                                   Exhibit 21

                         SUBSIDIARIES OF THE REGISTRANT




o   Meret Communications, Inc., a California corporation
    o   Sorrento Networks, Inc., a Delaware corporation
    o   Sorrento Networks Europe SA, a Belgium company
    o   Sorrento Networks GmBH, incorporated in Germany
    o   Osicom Technologies Europe Limited, incorporated in the United Kingdom
    o   Sorrento Networks Asia Pacific, PTE
o   Distributed Systems International, Inc., an Illinois corporation
o   Relialogic Technology Corporation, a California corporation
o   R-Net International, Inc., a Nevada corporation
o   PDP Acquisition Corp., a California corporation, (doing business as
    Pacific Data Products)
o   Sciteq Communications, Inc., a Nevada corporation
o   Osicom Technologies SA, incorporated in France
o   Sorrento Valley Real Estate Holdings, LLC
#### In re MONTGOMERY ST. IN CITY OF NEW YORK. In re CLARK.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department.

February 11, 1915.)

In the matter of the application of the City of New York relative to acquiring title, etc., to Montgomery Street. In the matter of Clark.

No opinion. Order affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements.
### C OURT OF 

### A PPEALS FOR THE



### F IRST 

### D ISTRICT OF 

### T EXAS AT 

### H OUSTON



### O RDER ON 

### M OTION

C ause Number: 01

- 14

- 00777

- CV

Trial Court Cause

Number: 2012

- 59660

Style: Hispanic Housing and Education Information

v Chicago Title Insurance Company

Date motion filed * : September 17, 2014

Type of motion: Motion to extend time to file notice of appeal

Party filing motion: Appellant

Document to be filed: Notice of appeal

Is appeal accelerated? Yes No

If motion to extend time:

Original due date: September 2, 2014

Number of previous extensions granted: 0

Date Requested: September 16, 2014 (the date the notice of appeal was filed)

Ordered that motion is:

Granted

If document is to be filed, document due:

Absent extraordinary circumstances, the Court will not grant additional motions to extend time

Denied

Dismissed ( e.g. , want of jurisdiction, moot)

Other:

Judge's signature: /s/ Jane Bland

 Acting individually

Date: October 2, 2014
#### PEOPLE v. DORSCH.

(No. 6805.)

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

February 5, 1915.)

Bkeach of the Peace (§ 1*) — Elements of Offense.

One who spoke to a juror- during the trial of a third person, and asked whether the jurors had come to any conclusion about the case, and that the jurors would find that it was a frame-up, was not guilty of disorderly conduct tending to a breach of the peace, in violation of Consolidation Act (Laws 1882, c. 410) § 1459.

[Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Breach of the Peace, Cent. Dig. §§ 1-8; Dec. Dig. § 1.*]

Appeal from Court of General Sessions, New York County.

Alfred G. Dorsch was convicted by a judge of the General Sessions of the Peace in and for the County of New York of disorderly conduct. From a judgment of the Court of General Sessions, affirming the conviction, he appeals.

Reversed, and defendant discharged.

The evidence was, in substance, as follows: One E. was on trial before the said Court of General Sessions upon a criminal charge. During the noon recess this defendant spoke to one of the jurors in E.’s case in the corridor of the courthouse. The juror testified that the defendant asked him whether the jurors had come to any conclusion or formed any opinion about E-.’s case, and said that they would find out that it was all a frame-up. The defendant admitted that he had spoken to the juror at the request of E.’s wife and daughter, and that he had said that the ladies were necessarily anxious about the case and would like to know what the jury thought of it, but that the juror refused to discuss it. He” said that he told the juror that, as the prosecuting attorney had had the case all the morning, it looked rather black for E., but that E. had never been convicted before, and that defendant did not think that he would be convicted when his testimony was heard. Defendant denied that he had said that the case was a frame-up, swore that he had never been in a courtroom before, had not tried to influence the juror, and did not know that he was doing wrong.

The matter was brought to the attention of the trial judge in E.’s case. He sat as a city magistrate, and convicted the defendant of disorderly conduct tending to a breach of the peace, in violation of section 1459 of the Consolidation Act (Laws 1882, c. 410), and sentenced him to a definite term of two months in the workhouse under the provisions of section 88 of the Inferior Criminal Courts Act (Laws 1910, c. 659, as amended by Laws 1913, c. 372).

Argued before INGRAHAM, P. J., and LAUGHLIN, SCOTT, DOWLING, and HOTCHKISS, JJ.

J. Manheim, of New York City, for appellant.

R. C. Taylor, of New York City, for the People.

*

For other oases see same topic & § number in Dec. *&*Am. Digs. 1907 to date, ,& Rep’r Indexes

PER CURIAM.

We do not think that the acts complained of come within the provisions of section 1459 of the Consolidation Act (Laws of 1882, c. 410), because they did not tend to a breach of the peace, and therefore the conviction of this defendant was not justified.

The judgment must be reversed, and the defendant discharged.
EX-31 Rule13a-14(d)/15d-14(d) Certifications.

 

 

I, Helaine M. Kaplan,certify that:

 

1. I have reviewedthis report on Form 10-K and all reports on Form 10-D required to be filed inrespect of the period covered by this report on Form 10-K of the COMM 2013-LC6Mortgage Trust (the "Exchange Act periodic reports");

 

2. Based on myknowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as a whole, do not containany untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material factnecessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances underwhich such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report;

 

3. Based on myknowledge, all of the distribution, servicing and other information required tobe provided under Form 10-D for the period covered by this report is includedin the Exchange Act periodic reports;

 

4. Based on myknowledge and the servicer compliance statements required in this report underItem 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as disclosed in the Exchange Actperiodic reports, the servicers have fulfilled their obligations under theservicing agreements in all material respects; and

 

5. All of the reportson assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securitiesand their related attestation reports on assessment of compliance withservicing criteria for asset-backed securities required to be included in thisreport in accordance with Item 1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange Act Rules13a-18 and 15d-18 have been included as an exhibit to this report, except asotherwise disclosed in this report. Any material instances of noncompliancedescribed in such reports have been disclosed in this report on Form 10-K.

 

In giving thecertifications above, I have reasonably relied on information provided to me bythe following unaffiliated parties:

 

Midland LoanServices, a Division of PNC Bank, National Association, as Master Servicer,Rialto Capital Advisors, LLC, as Special Servicer, Wells Fargo Bank, NationalAssociation, as Trustee and Certificate Administrator, Wells Fargo Bank,National Association, as Custodian, Park Bridge Lender Services LLC, asOperating Advisor, Midland Loan Services, a Division of PNC Bank, NationalAssociation, as Primary Servicer for the Harmon Corner Mortgage Loan, MidlandLoan Services, a Division of PNC Bank, National Association, as SpecialServicer for the Harmon Corner Mortgage Loan, Wells Fargo Bank, NationalAssociation, as Trustee and Certificate Administrator for the Harmon CornerMortgage Loan, Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, as Custodian for theHarmon Corner Mortgage Loan, and Park Bridge Lender Services LLC, as OperatingAdvisor for the Harmon Corner Mortgage Loan.

 

 

 

Dated: March 20, 2018

 

 

/s/ Helaine M. Kaplan

 

 

President

(seniorofficer in charge of securitization of the depositor)
Order issued October , 2012

In The 

### Truth of Apptats JiiftI1Distrirt of &rxas at Dallas

No. 05-11-00731-CV CONSTANCE GIBSON, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS NEXT FRIEND OF M.G., A MINOR, Appellant V. GARLAND INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT, Appellee ORDER The Motion for Rehearing filed by appellant is hereby DENIED. 

## AiViLae/41 ABETH LANG-4 ICE
Consent of Grant Thornton



 Exhibit 10.1 
 CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM 
 We hereby consent to the inclusion in this Annual Report of
BioProgress PLC on Form 20-F of our report, dated July 18, 2006, on our audit of the consolidated financial statements of BioProgress PLC for the years ended December 31, 2005, 2004 and 2003. 
  

	
	 GRANT THORNTON UK LLP
 /s/ Grant Thornton UK LLP

	
	Cambridge, England
	July 18, 2006
<PAGE>

                                                                     Exhibit 4.3

                           AGREEMENT TO AMEND WARRANT

     This Agreement is dated as of July 17, 2006, by and between Knoll Capital
Management, L.P. ("Knoll") and Alfacell Corporation (the "Company").

     The undersigned hereby agree as follows:

     1. In connection with the Securities Purchase Agreement (the "Purchase
Agreement") dated as of the date hereof by and among the Company and the
purchasers of securities (the "Purchasers") that are a party thereto (including
affiliates of Knoll), the Company and Knoll have agreed to amend the terms of a
warrant to purchase 592,500 shares of the Company's common stock held by Knoll
Capital Fund II and a warrant to purchase 592,500 shares of the Company's common
stock held by Europa International, Inc. (collectively, the "Original
Warrants").

     2. Each of the Original Warrants shall be amended to reflect the following:

          -    The exercise price per share of Company common stock will be
               reduced to $2.88 per share.

          -    The Warrant will not be exercisable until six months from the
               Closing Date (as defined in the Purchase Agreement).

          Otherwise, the terms of the Original Warrants shall remain the same.

     3. On the Closing Date, The Company will issue new warrants to each of
Knoll Capital Fund II and Europa International, Inc. to reflect the amended
terms (collectively, the "Amended Warrants"). Knoll shall return the Original
Warrants to the Company as soon as practicable and upon receipt, they will be
cancelled and destroyed. In the event Knoll does not return the Original
Warrants to the Company, they shall be deemed cancelled; and, provided further,
that whether or not the Original Warrants are returned, the books and records of
the Company shall be updated to reflect the cancellation of the Original
Warrants and the issuance of the Amended Warrants.

     4. Knoll acknowledges that the terms of the Purchase Agreement and this
Agreement will be disclosed on a Form 8-K to be filed by the Company (the
"8-K"). Knoll consents to the disclosure of such terms, including the
identification of Knoll as a Purchaser in the 8-K.

<PAGE>

     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement as of
the day and year first above written.

                                        KNOLL CAPITAL MANAGEMENT, L.P.


                                        By:
                                            ------------------------------------
                                        Name:
                                              ----------------------------------
                                        Its:
                                             -----------------------------------


AGREED AND ACCEPTED:

ALFACELL CORPORATION


By: /s/ Kuslima Shogen
    ---------------------------------
Name: Kuslima Shogen
Its: Chief Executive Officer


                                        2
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

NATIONAL VEHICLE AND FUEL EMISSIONS LABORATORY

2000 TRAVERWOOD DRIVE

ANN ARBOR, MI 48105-2498

 OFFICE OF

AIR AND RADIATION

February 10, 2014

MEMORANDUM

SUBJECT: Cost-related Meetings Regarding the Proposed Tier 3 Standards

FROM: Todd Sherwood

Assessment and Standards Division, OTAQ

TO: EPA Docket # EPA-HQ-OAR-2011-0135

This memo documents a meetings held between representatives of the organizations listed below 

and EPA to discuss cost-related issues within the context of EPA’s proposed Tier 3 standards

(see 78 FR 29816). The meeting attendees are also listed below. The discussion topics included 

technology expectations, penetration rates, directional cost estimates (i.e., EPA proposed 

estimate too high, too low, etc.). 

Organization Date Non-EPA attendees EPA attendees

California Air Resources Board 6/10/2013 Paul Hughes Tony Fernandez

Todd Sherwood

Tad Wysor

Umicore 6/24/2013 Doug Ball

Greg Garr

Tom Pauly

Tony Fernandez

Todd Sherwood

Corning 6/25/2013 Achim Heibel

Tim Johnson

Tony Fernandez

Todd Sherwood

Tenneco 7/23/2013 Annette Chantaca

Adam Kotrba

Gabriel Salanta 

Thomas Spinks

Tony Fernandez

Michael Olechiw

Todd Sherwood

Tad Wysor

BASF 8/7/2013 Pramod Ravindran Tony Fernandez

Todd Sherwood

Johnson Matthey 8/7/2013 Michael Church

Michael Russ

Tony Fernandez

Todd Sherwood

Tenneco 8/21/2013 Adam Kotrba

Thomas Spinks

Tony Fernandez

Michael Olechiw

Todd Sherwood