alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Editorial Note on Part 868
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 868 appear at 73 FR 35341, June 23, 2008.

§ 868.5300 Carbon dioxide absorbent. ( a ) *Identification.* A carbon dioxide absorbent is a device intended for medical purposes that consists of an absorbent material (e.g., soda lime) that is intended to remove carbon dioxide from the gases in the breathing circuit.
( b ) *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 § 868.9.
[47 FR 31142, July 16, 1982, as amended at 61 FR 1120, Jan. 16, 1996; 66 FR 38794, July 25, 2001]
QuickLinks
 -- Click here to rapidly navigate through this document

 
 

EXHIBIT 10.9.2    
  


SECOND AMENDMENT TO SEVERANCE AGREEMENT  


        Reference is hereby made to the Severance Agreement that was entered into between the undersigned and Gart Sports Company, a Delaware corporation, its
subsidiaries, its successor, or a new parent company of Gart (collectively, the "Company"), prior to August 15, 2002 and to that Amendment to Severance Agreement dated August 15, 2002
(the "First Amendment," together with the Severance Agreement collectively called the "Agreement"). This Second Amendment to Severance Agreement (the "Second Amendment") is dated as of
September 3, 2002 and constitutes an amendment to such Agreement. 


        In
consideration of the mutual premises set forth in the Agreement, you and the Company hereby agree to amend the Agreement to include the following: 


        1.    Clause 2(c)(vi) is
hereby amended by deleting the subclause number "(vi)" and inserting in lieu thereof the subclause number "(v)". 


        2.    The
definition of "Change in Control" is hereby amended by deleting the reference to clauses "(A) through (E)" in the first and second sentences of the last paragraph of
section 2(d)(ii) and inserting in lieu thereof "(A) through (F)". 



        3.    The
location of the Company's principal executive offices in Section 10(a) of the Agreement is hereby amended by deleting the reference to "1001 Lincoln Avenue,
Denver CO 80203" and inserting in lieu thereof "1050 West Hampden Avenue, Englewood, CO 80110". 


        Other
than as set forth herein, all other terms and provisions of the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. All references to the Agreement herein or in any other documents
shall be deemed to include a reference to this Second Amendment. Capitalized terms used herein and not otherwise defined shall have the meanings set forth in the Agreement. 



        IN
WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties to this Second Amendment to Severance Agreement have set forth their signatures. 



	ACCEPTED AND AGREEED:	 	GART SPORTS COMPANY
	

Executive:	
 	

 	
 	

 	
 	

 
	

    
	
 	

By:	
 	

    

	Print Name:	 	    
	 	 	 	Name:	 	J. Douglas Morton
	Title:	 	    
	 	 	 	Title:	 	Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer
	

    	
 	

 	
 	

 	
 	

 	
 	

 
	

Address:	
 	

    
    
	
 	

 	
 	

 	
 	

 











QuickLinks



EXHIBIT 10.9.2
# C_2014448EN.01002901.xml

| 15.12.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 448/29 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.12.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 448/29

---

Action brought on 27 September 2014 — Topps Europe v Commission

(Case T-699/14)

(2014/C 448/38)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Topps Europe Ltd (Milton Keynes, United Kingdom) (represented by: R. Vidal and A. Penny, Solicitors and B. Kennelly, Barrister)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Commission

Defendant:

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul Commission Decision in of 15 July 2014 in Case AT.39899 — Licensing of intellectual property rights for football collectibles, which rejected the applicant's complaint that a number of national football governing bodies and players' associations together with Panini S.p.A., Union des Associations Européennes de Football, Fédération Internationale de Football Association, Fédération Française de Football, Associazione Italiana Calciatori, Real Federación Española de Fútbol, and Deutscher Fußball-Bund had breached Articles 101 and 102 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union; and |
| --- | --- |

—

annul Commission Decision in of 15 July 2014 in Case AT.39899 — Licensing of intellectual property rights for football collectibles, which rejected the applicant's complaint that a number of national football governing bodies and players' associations together with Panini S.p.A., Union des Associations Européennes de Football, Fédération Internationale de Football Association, Fédération Française de Football, Associazione Italiana Calciatori, Real Federación Española de Fútbol, and Deutscher Fußball-Bund had breached Articles 101 and 102 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union; and

| — | order the defendant to pay the applicant's cost of these proceedings. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the defendant to pay the applicant's cost of these proceedings.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on two pleas in law.

| 1. | First plea in law, alleging that the defendant has seriously infringed the applicant's procedural rights, and as such, the defendant has committed an error of law. |
| --- | --- |

1.

First plea in law, alleging that the defendant has seriously infringed the applicant's procedural rights, and as such, the defendant has committed an error of law.

| 2. | Second plea in law, alleging that the defendant's Decision is based on incorrect facts and is subject to a manifest error of appraisal, and as such, the defendant has committed an error of law and/or assessment of the facts. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Second plea in law, alleging that the defendant's Decision is based on incorrect facts and is subject to a manifest error of appraisal, and as such, the defendant has committed an error of law and/or assessment of the facts.

---
- All
            - Title
            - Author
            - Subject
            - Date
            - Full-Text

            -                              Explore                            ******                - Educational Resources
              - Archival Collections
              -                                      Themes                                    ******                  - Economic Data
                - Federal Reserve
                - View all 
              - Timelines 
            -                              Browse                            ******                - Titles
              - Authors
              - Subjects
              - Dates 
            -                              About                            ******                - About FRASER
              - FAQ
              - Contact Us
              -                                      FRASER API                                    ******                  - REST API
                - OAI-PMH 
            - Inside FRASER Blog

            - **

Home                 > Browse by Title > Monetary Policy and the Management of the Public Debt

              																	United States. Congress. Joint Committee on the Economic Report. Subcommittee on General Credit Control and Debt Management					 and 	Eighty-Second Congress, 1951-1953. 						*Monetary Policy and the Management of the Public Debt : Hearings Before the Subcommittee on General Credit Control and Debt Management of the Joint Committee on the Economic Report, Congress of the United States, Eighty-Second Congress, Second Session, Pursuant to Section 5 (A) of Public Law 304, 79th Congress, March 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, and 31, 1952*,												Washington: 								Government Printing Office, 										March 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, and 31, 1952,									https://fraser.stlouisfed.org/title/244,			accessed on September 21, 2024.						    

        - **FRASER**
        - About
        - FAQ
        - Legal and Privacy
        - FRASER API

          -                              @FedFRASER 
          - ** Contact Us
          -  **  What's New  
          -  **  Inside FRASER
Editorial Note on Part 862
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 862 appear at 73 FR 35341, June 23, 2008.

§ 862.1455 Lecithin/sphingomyelin ratio in amniotic fluid test system. ( a ) *Identification.* A lecithin/sphingomyelin ratio in amniotic fluid test system is a device intended to measure the lecithin/sphingomyelin ratio in amniotic fluid. Lecithin and sphingomyelin are phospholipids (fats or fat-like substances containing phosphorus). Measurements of the lecithin/sphingomyelin ratio in amniotic fluid are used in evaluating fetal maturity.
( b ) *Classification.* Class II.
Exhibit 32



CERTIFICATION



The undersigned certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, that:



(1) The accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2006, 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 accompanying Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



Date:  November 6, 2006



/s/  Marti MorfittMarti Morfitt, President & Chief Executive Officer






Date:  November 6, 2006



/s/  Samuel E. ReinkensmeyerSamuel E. Reinkensmeyer
Vice President of Finance, Chief
Financial Officer and Secretary




---
Editorial Note on Part 866
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 866 appear at 73 FR 35341, June 23, 2008.

§ 866.5130 *Alpha*-1-antitrypsin immunological test system. ( a ) *Identification.* An *alpha*-1-antitrypsin immunological test system is a device that consists of the reagents used to measure by immunochemical techniques the *alpha*-1-antitrypsin (a plasma protein) in serum, other body fluids, and tissues. The measurements aid in the diagnosis of several conditions including juvenile and adult cirrhosis of the liver. In addition, *alpha*-1-antitrypsin deficiency has been associated with pulmonary emphysema.
( b ) *Classification.* Class II (performance standards).
ARMED SERVICES BOARD OF CONTRACT APPEALS 

Appeal of--

The Boeing Company 

Under Contract No. N00383-07-D-001J 

APPEARANCES FOR THE APPELLANT: 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

APPEARANCES FOR THE GOVERNMENT: 

ASBCA No. 59611 

Scott M. McCaleb, Esq. 

John R. Prairie, Esq. 

Jon W. Burd, Esq. 

Kara M. Sacilotto, Esq. 

Craig M. Smith, Esq. 

Wiley Rein LLP 

Washington, DC 

Ronald J. Borro, Esq. 

Navy Chief Trial Attorney 

Anthony K. Hicks, Esq. 

Trial Attorney 

ORDER OF DISMISSAL 

The dispute has been settled. The appeal is dismissed with prejudice. 

Dated: 4 January 2016 

Administrative Judge 

Acting Chairman 

Armed Services Board 

of Contract Appeals 

I certify that the foregoing is a true copy of the Order of Dismissal of the Armed 

Services Board of Contract Appeals in ASBCA No. 59611, Appeal of The Boeing 

Company, rendered in conformance with the Board's Charter. 

Dated: 

JEFFREY D. GARDIN 

Recorder, Armed Services 

Board of Contract Appeals
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLAR

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          OCT-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-30-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUL-29-2000
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                          95,616
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      421
<ALLOWANCES>                                        40
<INVENTORY>                                      3,089
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               103,149
<PP&E>                                          44,265
<DEPRECIATION>                                  19,867
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 127,880
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           12,717
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           249
<OTHER-SE>                                     113,146
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   127,880
<SALES>                                            836
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                   836
<CGS>                                            1,215
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    1,215
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 6,229<F1>
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  17
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (7,191)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (7,191)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (7,191)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.29)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0

<FN>
<F1>OTHER EXPENSES ARE FOR R&D INCURRED IN DEVELOPING PRODUCT FOR MARKET.
</FN>



</TABLE>
# C_2015354EN.01003201.xml

| 26.10.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 354/32 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.10.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 354/32

---

Judgment of the General Court of 10 September 2015 — EE v OHIM (Representation of white dots on a blue background)

(Case T-94/14) (1)

1

((Community trade mark - Application for a Community figurative mark representing white dots on a blue background - Absolute ground for refusal - No distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

(2015/C 354/35)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: EE Ltd (Hatfield, United Kingdom) (represented by: P. Brownlow, Solicitor)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: S. Bonne, acting as Agent)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 20 November 2013 (Case R 495/2013-1) relating to an application for registration as a Community trade mark of a figurative sign representing white dots on a blue background.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

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

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders EE Ltd to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders EE Ltd to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 135, 5.5.2014.

1

---
1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

PAUL E. JOZWIAK , ) ) P laintiff , ) )
v. ) Civil Action No. 2 3

- 00883 (UNA) ) ) DAVID C. BURY , ) ) Defendant

. )

MEMORANDUM OPINION

P laintiff , appearing pro se , has filed a prolix c omplaint and an application to proceed in forma pauperis . The C ourt will grant the application and dismiss this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) (requiring dismissal of a case upon a determination that the complaint is frivolous

or fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted ).
Plaintiff , a Wisconsin resident who previously resided in Arizona, has sued U.S. District Judge David C. Bury. The c omplaint , to the extent intelligible, arises from D efendant’s rulings in
Plaintiff’s case filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona

. See Compl. , ECF No. 1 at 10 ( “ Bury Is Charged With Illegally Presiding Over And Dismissing The Plaintiff’s ERISA
Case Due To His Violations Of State and/or Federal Codes Of Jud icial Conduct, Civil And Constitutional Rights, COVID Orders, ERISA

- Law With That Of Written Law! ”). Plaintiff seeks
monetary damages and injunctive relief

. See i d . at 47

- 49.

A n “ in forma pauperis complaint is properly dismissed as frivolous . . . if it is clear from the face of the pleading that the named defendant is absolutely immune from suit on the claims
asserted

. ” Crisafi v. Holland , 655 F.2d 1305, 1308 (D.C. Cir. 1981)

. It is established that judges2 enjoy absolute immunity from su its for damages based, as here, on their rulings in a judicial proceeding. See Caldwell v. Kagan , 777 F. Supp. 2d 177, 179 (D.D.C. 2011) (finding “claims against the district and court of appeals judges . . . pat ently frivolous because federal judges are absolutely immune from lawsuits predicated, as here, for their official acts”) (citing Forrester v.
White , 484 U.S. 219, 225 (1988); Stump v. Sparkman , 435 U.S. 349, 355

– 57 (1978); Sindram v.
Suda , 986 F.2d 1459, 1460 (D.C. Cir. 1993)); see also Fleming v. United States , 847 F. Supp. 170, 172 (D.D.C. 1994), cert. denied , 513 U.S. 1150 (1995) (a complaint against judges who have “done nothing more than their duty” is “a meritless action.”). Moreover, a federal dist rict court such as
this “ cannot review decisions of another district court , ” Lu v. Eid , No. 21

- 5175, 2021 WL 6102201, at *1 (D.C. Cir. Nov. 29, 2021) , and compel it to act

. See United States v. Choi , 818 F. Supp. 2d 79, 85 (D.D.C. 2011) (federal district courts “generally lack[ ] appellate jurisdiction over other judicial bodies, and cannot exercise appellate mandamus over other courts ”)

. Because no “ allegation of other facts ” could plausibly cur e th e foregoing defect s , th e complaint is dismissed with prejudice. Firestone v. Firestone , 76 F.3d 1205, 1209 (D.C. Cir. 1996) (per curiam). A separate order accompanies this Memorandum Opinion.

_________/s/___________ TANYA S. CHUTKAN Date: April 14 , 2023 United States District Judge
Exhibit 32.1 

CERTIFICATION PURSUANTTO 

18 U.S.C.SECTION 1350, 

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO 

SECTION 906 OFTHE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 

        Inconnection with the accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Penn TreatyAmerican Corporation (the “Company”) for the period ended March 31, 2004 asfiled with the Securities and Exchange Commission, I, William W. Hunt, President andChief Executive Officer of the Company, certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section §1350,as adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 that to the best of myknowledge:
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE BALANCE
SHEET AND THE STATEMENTS OF REVENUE AND EXPENSES AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH REPORT ON FORM 10-Q
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                       2,728,608
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               4,548,105
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                   4,412,856
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 4,548,105
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               116,663
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                23,299
<LOSS-PROVISION>                              (98,731)
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (530,427)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
Editorial Note on Part 880
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 880 appear at 73 FR 35341, June 23, 2008.

§ 880.5780 Medical support stocking. ( a ) *Medical support stocking to prevent the pooling of blood in the legs* — ( 1 ) *Identification.* A medical support stocking to prevent the pooling of blood in the legs is a device that is constructed of elastic material and designed to apply controlled pressure to the leg and that is intended for use in the prevention of pooling of blood in the leg.
( 2 ) *Classification.* Class II (special controls). The device is exempt from the premarket notification procedures in subpart E of part 807 of this chapter subject to the limitations in § 880.9.
( b ) *Medical support stocking for general medical purposes* — ( 1 ) *Identification.* A medical support stocking for general medical purposes is a device that is constructed of elastic material and designed to apply controlled pressure to the leg and that is intended for medical purposes other than the prevention of pooling of blood in the leg.
( 2 ) *Classification.* Class I. The device is exempt from the premarket notification procedures in subpart E of part 807 of this chapter, subject to the limitations in § 880.9. The device is also exempt from the current good manufacturing practice requirements of the quality system regulation in part 820 of this chapter, with the exception of § 820.180, with respect to general requirements concerning records, and § 820.198, with respect to complaint files.
[45 FR 69682, Oct. 21, 1980, as amended at 59 FR 63011, Dec. 7, 1994; 66 FR 38805, July 25, 2001; 84 FR 71815, Dec. 30, 2019]
EXHIBIT 32.2

                  CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER
                       ARMANINO FOODS OF DISTINCTION, INC.
                       PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350


     I hereby certify that, to the best of my knowledge, the Quarterly Report
on Form 10-QSB of Armanino Foods of Distinction, Inc. for the period ending
September 30, 2004:

     (1) 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 aspects, the financial condition and results of operations of
Armanino Foods of Distinction, Inc.





/s/ Edmond J. Pera
Edmond J. Pera
Chief Operating Officer
(Principal Financial Officer)
November 12, 2004


A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 has been provided to Armanino Foods of Distinction,
Inc. and will be retained by Armanino Foods of Distinction, Inc. and furnished
to the Securities and Exchange Commission upon request.