alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Editorial Note on Part 870
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 870 appear at 73 FR 35341, June 23, 2008.

§ 870.5210 Cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) aid. ( a ) *CPR aid without feedback* — ( 1 ) *Identification.* A CPR aid without feedback is a device that performs a simple function such as proper hand placement and/or simple prompting for rate and/or timing of compressions/breathing for the professionally trained rescuer, but offers no feedback related to the quality of the CPR being provided. These devices are intended for use by persons professionally trained in CPR to assure proper use and the delivery of optimal CPR to the victim.
( 2 ) *Classification.* Class I (general controls). The device is exempt from the premarket notification procedures in subpart E of part 807 of this chapter subject to the limitations in § 870.9.
( b ) *CPR aid with feedback* — ( 1 ) *Identification.* A CPR Aid device with feedback is a device that provides real-time feedback to the rescuer regarding the quality of CPR being delivered to the victim, and provides either audio and/or visual information to encourage the rescuer to continue the consistent application of effective manual CPR in accordance with current accepted CPR guidelines (to include, but not be limited to, parameters such as compression rate, compression depth, ventilation, recoil, instruction for one or multiple rescuers, etc.). These devices may also perform a coaching function to aid rescuers in the sequence of steps necessary to perform effective CPR on a victim.
( 2 ) *Classification.* Class II (special controls). The special controls for this device are: ( i ) Nonclinical performance testing under simulated physiological or use conditions must demonstrate the accuracy and reliability of the feedback to the user on specific compression rate, depth and/or respiration over the intended duration, and environment of use.
( ii ) Labeling must include the clinical training, if needed, for the safe use of this device and information on the patient population for which the device has been demonstrated to be effective (including patient size and/or age limitations, *e.g.,* adult, pediatric and/or infant).
( iii ) For devices that incorporate electrical components, appropriate analysis and testing must demonstrate that the device is electrically safe and electromagnetically compatible in its intended use environment.
( iv ) For devices containing software, software verification, validation, and hazard analysis must be performed.
( v ) Components of the device that come into human contact must be demonstrated to be biocompatible.
( vi ) Human factors testing and analysis must validate that the device design and labeling are sufficient for effective use by the intended user.
( 3 ) *Premarket notification.* The CPR Aid with feedback device is exempt from the premarket notification procedures in subpart E of part 807 of this chapter if it does not contain software (*e.g.,* is mechanical or electro-mechanical) and is in compliance with the special controls under paragraph (b)(2) of this section, subject to the limitations of exemptions in § 870.9.
[81 FR 33134, May 25, 2016]
#### WALDEN *v.*SELLERS.

No. 8915.

April 16, 1932.

*777
      *T. B. Iiigdon,*for plaintiffs in error.

*Edgar Watkins Jr.,*and *John Wesley Weekes,*contra.

Gilbert, J.

Under the petition and the evidence it is obvious that the court erred in granting an interlocutory injunction. The only evidence produced by the petitioner to substantiate the allegations of the petition with regard to arrest was the testimony-that Walden, the police officer, had told Sellers on the telephone that he was “going to arrest him,” or that Sellers was “liable for arrest” for stopping the payment of the check, and telling counsel for petitioner the same. There was ■ no overt act, and no act of any kind by the defendant, tending to carry out the purpose of arresting petitioner. On the contrary both the police officer and the recorder testified, on the hearing, that they had no intention of arresting the petitioner on the charge mentioned, or any other. The petitioner does not seek to enjoin any proceeding in the recorder’s court, nor is there any proceeding against petitioner pending anywhere, in so far as the petition discloses. Absolutely all that can be said, when the facts are reduced to their essential *778parts, is that the police officer told the petitioner and his counsel that he would arrest Sellers, or that he was “liable for arrest” for giving the check in lieu of the bond and then stopping payment on the same. Merely because of a suggestion that non-payment would render him liable for arrest, he seeks the aid of the extraordinary power of injunction to restrain the officers of the municipality who have not arrested him, and who disclaim any intention to arrest him, and who are in no way interfering with his person or his property.

The constitutional points made are without merit. The court erred in granting an interlocutory injunction.

*Judgment reversed.*

*All the Justices concur.*
|Exhibit 99.1
|------------



|CERTIFICATIONS
|--------------



|In accordance with
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the  undersigned Chief Executive Officer
and Chief Financial Officer of Registrant  each hereby certify to their knowledge that
this annual report of Registrant on  Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31,
2002 fully complies with the  requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
and Exchange Act of  1934 and that the information contained in this annual report fairly
presents,  in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
Registrant.
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|In accordance with
the requirement of the Exchange Act, the Registrant  caused this report to be signed on
its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly  authorized.
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|Date: March 28, 2003 | /s/ Daniel Glassman
      Daniel Glassman 
      Chairman of the Board, President and 
      Chief Executive Officer 
      (Principal Executive Officer)
|-------------------- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|Date: March 28, 2003 | /s/ R. Brent Lenczycki, CPA
      R. Brent Lenczycki, CPA 
      Vice President and 
      Chief Financial Officer 
      (Principal Financial and 
      Accounting Officer)
|-------------------- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|A signed original
of this written statement required by Section 906  has been provided to Bradley
Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and will be retained by  Bradley Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange  Commission or its staff upon request.
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| |  | 
| |  | 



---
FAWLEY I BRYANT' ARCHITECTURE• INTERIORS• PlANNING 

July 8, 2012 

Ms. Aloha Ley 

Office of Aviation Analysis 

1200 New Jersey Ave., SE, W86-310 

Washington, DC 20590 

Re: Small Community Air Service Development Program 

Docket DOT-OST-2012-0069 

Sarasota Bradenton International Airport (SRQ) 

Dear Ms. Ley: 

''t·' 

'~ : ·~ i .. ; 

,::.:,iilt t Ll ?l ,;. I 

I am writing as President of Fawley! Bryant, an Architectural/Interior Design/Planning Firm with offices in 

Sarasota and Bradenton Florida to express our strong support for the above referenced grant application 

to the Small Community Air Service Development Program. The recent decision by Southwest Airlines to 

pull AirTran service from SRQ is a major blow to the air service and economic competitiveness of the 

entire region served by Sarasota Bradenton International Airport. AirTran accounted for over 360,000 

passengers or nearly 30% of all passenger traffic at SRQ in 2011. 

Sarasota Bradenton also suffers from a lack of access to a westbound airline gateway. Our firm has 

another office in Durango, Colorado and currently the only way to get this office is for us to fly out of 

Tampa (TPA) which is about an hour farther through heavy traffic than SRQ. This inflicts economic 

damage pn the local economy plus costs .our firm's business travelers valuable time. · 

A 1997 Economic Impact Study completed as part of the SRQ Master Plan Update revealed that 57% of 

ail enplanements at SRQ were out of area visitors spending an average of $665.00 per visit. Using the 

CY 2011 AirTran passenger traffic this equates to 102,600 visitors to the SRQ area. When combined 

with the 100,000 passengers lost due to no westqound service this equates to a loss of over 

$105,000,000 of direct visitor expenditures annually. When the multipiier effect is factored in it equates to 

a loss of nearly $285,000,000 of economic impact and 2,600 jobs to the area. 

The community is partnering with the airport to match the grant funds dollar for dollar on this critical 

matter. We ask the Department consider the serious negative effe.cts the recent approval provided to 

Southwest Airlines to acquire AirTran Airways has had on our community and approve the application for 

assistance. Thank you for your consideration; 

Cc: The Honorable Ray H, LaHood, Secretary of Transportation 

United States Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. 

Washington, DC 20590 

,j t j I ; •j : ~· \ . ; t \ ( 1 \. ~ ' 1 /
JUDGMENT

Court of Appeals 

 

First District of Texas 

NO. 01-14-00724-CV

RONNY PUGA AND RICKEY PUGA, Appellants

V.

BARBARA SALESI, Appellee

Appeal from the 133rd District Court of Harris County. (Tr. Ct. No. 2011-28575).

This case is an appeal from the final judgment signed by the trial court on July 29, 

2014. After submitting the case on the appellate record and the arguments properly 

raised by the parties, the Court holds that the trial court’s judgment contains no reversible 

error. Accordingly, the Court affirms the trial court’s judgment.

The Court orders that the appellants, Ronny Puga and Rickey Puga, jointly and 

severally, pay all appellate costs.

The Court orders that this decision be certified below for observance.

Judgment rendered June 23, 2015.

Panel consists of Justices Jennings, Bland, and Brown. Opinion delivered by Justice 

Brown.
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
SECTION 1350, CHAPTER 63 OF TITLE 18, UNITED STATES CODE,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

Pursuant
to Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned, as Chief Executive Officer of
The Timberland Company (the "Company"), does hereby certify that to the undersigned's knowledge:



| |  |  | /s/JEFFREY B. SWARTZJeffrey B. Swartz
Chief Executive Officer
| |  |  | -------------------------------------------------------------

Date:
November 10, 2003

The
foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of
Title 18, United States Code) and is not being filed as part of the Form 10-Q or as a separate disclosure document.

A
signed original of this written statement, required by Section 906, has been provided to The Timberland Company and will be retained by The Timberland Company and furnished to the Securities
and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

---

QuickLinks
#### Samuel Goldstein *v.*Zoning Commission of the City of Waterbury

King, C. J., Alcorn, House, Thim and By an, Js.

Argued. December 5

decided December 6, 1968

*Perry Graicerstein,*for the appellant (plaintiff).

*John F. Phelan,*assistant corporation counsel, with whom, on the brief, was *Vincent P. Matasavage,*corporation counsel, for the appellee (defendant).

Per Curiam.

The judgment is affirmed on the authority of *I. R. Stich Associates, Inc.*v. *Town Council,*155 Conn. 1, 3, 229 A.2d 545, *Kyser*v. *Zoning Board of Appeals,*155 Conn. 236, 241, 230 A.2d 595, and *Hughes*v. *Town Planning & Zoning Commission,*156 Conn. 505, 507, 242 A.2d 705.

There is no error.
EXHIBIT 10.2


 


DISCRETIONARY CREDIT NOTE


 


	
  $943,666

  	
   

  	
  Minneapolis,
  Minnesota

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
  January
  17, 2003

  



 


FOR VALUE RECEIVED,
MEDICALCV, INC., a Minnesota corporation (the “Borrower”) promises to
pay to the order of PKM PROPERTIES, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company
(the “Lender”) at its office in Minneapolis, Minnesota or at such other
place as may be designated from time to time by the holder hereof, in lawful
money of the United States of America, the principal sum of Nine Hundred
Forty-Three Thousand Six Hundred Sixty-Six Dollars ($943,666) or so much
thereof as has been advanced by the Lender to or for the benefit of the
Borrower pursuant to that certain Discretionary Credit Agreement, dated as of
the date hereof, as amended from time to time, between the Borrower and the
Lender (the “Agreement”) and remains unpaid, together with interest on
the unpaid principal balance hereof from the date hereof until this Note is
fully paid, at an annual rate of interest, calculated on the basis of actual
number of days elapsed in a 360 day year, that shall at all times be equal to
the Floating Interest Rate, as provided in the Agreement, each change in the
interest rate herein to become effective on the day the corresponding change in
the Floating Interest Rate becomes effective.


 


Interest accruing on this
Note shall be due and payable on the last day of each month commencing January
31, 2003, and at maturity or earlier prepayment in full.  The principal of this Note and all accrued
interest shall be due and payable on or before April 17, 2003.  Payments hereunder shall be applied first to
the payment of accrued interest and then to the reduction of principal.  The Borrower may prepay at any time and from
time to time, all or any portion of the balance from time to time remaining on
this Note, without penalty or premium.


 


This Note is secured by the
Security Agreement referred to in the Agreement and the Subordinated Mortgage,
Security Agreement and Fixture Financing Statement, dated January 17, 2003
given by the Borrower in favor of the Lender, and is issued pursuant to and is
subject to the Agreement.


 


The Borrower agrees to pay
all costs of collection, including attorneys’ fees, in the event this Note is
not paid when due.  This Note is being
delivered in, and shall be governed by, the laws of the State of
Minnesota.  Presentment or other demand
for payment, notice of dishonor and protest are expressly waived.


 


MEDICALCV, INC.


 


 


	
  By:

  	
  /s/ Blair P. Mowery

  
	
   

  	
  Blair P. Mowery,

  Its Chief Executive Officer
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 13-11234

Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

DAX EVAN PICKETT,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 4:12-CR-181-1

Before CLEMENT, PRADO, and ELROD, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

The attorney appointed to represent Dax Evan Pickett has moved for 

leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 

386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores, 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). 

Pickett has not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the 

relevant portions of the record reflected therein. We concur with counsel’s 

assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. 

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. 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 5TH 

CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

August 29, 2014

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 

 Case: 13-11234 Document: 00512751121 Page: 1 Date Filed: 08/29/2014
No. 13-11234

Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is 

excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. 

See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.

2

 Case: 13-11234 Document: 00512751121 Page: 2 Date Filed: 08/29/2014
EXHIBIT 10.6  


24/7
Real Media, Inc.

2002 Equity Compensation Plan

Dated April 22, 2002 


        The
purpose of this 24/7 Real Media, Inc. 2002 Equity Compensation Plan (the "Plan") is to enable 24/7 Real Media, Inc. (the "Company") to offer and issue to certain
employees, former employees, advisors and consultants of the Company and its affiliates common stock of the Company in payment of amounts owed by the Company to such third parties. 


	1.
	The
aggregate number of shares of common stock that may be issued pursuant to the Plan shall not exceed 3,000,000 shares.



	2.
	The
Company may from time to time issue to employees, former employees, advisors and consultants to the Company or its affiliates shares of common stock of the Company in payment or
exchange for or in settlement or compromise of amounts due by the Company to such persons for goods sold and delivered or to be delivered or services rendered or to be rendered.



	3.
	Shares
of common stock issued pursuant to the Plan shall be issued at a price per share of not less than eighty-five percent (85%) of the fair market value per share on the
date of issuance and on such other terms and conditions as determined by the Company.



	4.
	The
Chief Executive Officer of the Company shall be authorized to issue shares pursuant to and in accordance with the terms of the Plan, provided that all issuances shall be
co-authorized by at least one of the President, any Executive Vice President, the Chief Financial Officer or the General Counsel.



	5.
	This
Plan may be amended at any time by the Company.
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 Annual Report on Form 10-K/A for the period ended May 31, 2020 of SavMobi Technology Inc., a Nevada
corporation (the "Company"), as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Transition Report"), I, Poh Kee Liew, 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
Annual Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934,
as amended; and



2.The information contained in this Annual Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
results of operation of the Company.





|Date: November 6, 2020 | By: | /s/ Poh Kee Liew        | 
|---------------------- | --- | ----------------------- | 
|                       |     | Poh Kee Liew            | 
|                       |     | Chief Executive Officer |
EXHIBIT 32.b



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 Quarterly Report of American Affordable Housing II Limited Partnership (the "Partnership") on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Marc N. Teal, Principal Financial Officer of the general partner of the general partner of the Partnership's general partner, C&M Management Inc., certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350, as adopted pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge, after due inquiry:



|(1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a)-15 or 15(d)-15 of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934; and                         
|--- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|    |                                                                                                                                                         
|(2) | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Partnership.



|                |     |                            
|--------------- | --- | ---------------------------
|Date:           |     |                            
|August 22, 2005 | By: | /s/ Marc N. Teal           
|                |     |                            
|                |     | Marc N. Teal               
|                |     | Principal Financial 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 Fund and will be retained by the Fund and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
## F IFTH 

## D ISTRICT 

## C OURT OF 

## A PPEAL 

## S TATE OF 

## F LORIDA

_____________________________ Case No. 5D2 02 2- 2725 LT Case No. 2018

- CA

- 021888

_____________________________ S EAN F. B OGLE , E SQUIRE , as Personal Representative of the Estate of Cindy Lynn Farrington, Appella nt,

v. M AQUE W ILLIAMS , Appellee

.

_____________________________ On appeal from the Circuit Court for Brevard County. Curtis Jacobus, Judge. Kansas R. Gooden, of Boyd & Jenerette, P.A., Miami, and Kevin D. Franz , of Boyd & Jenerette, P.A., Boca Raton, for Appellant. Brian J. Lee, of Morgan & Morgan, Jacksonville, for Appellee. M ay 7, 2024
P ER C URIAM
. A FFIRMED . E ISNAUGLE , B OATWRIGHT , and M AC I VER , JJ., concur.2 _____________________________ Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331 .

_____________________________