alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. J. RES. 94

JOINT RESOLUTION

To designate the week of October 3, 1993, through

Week’’.October 9, 1993, as ‘‘National Customer Service
103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. J. RES. 94

JOINT RESOLUTION

To designate the week of October 3, 1993, through October

9, 1993, as ‘‘National Customer Service Week’’.

Whereas recognition of the value and importance of the customer raises the quality of customer service;

Whereas the high cost of attracting new customers today

heightens the need for companies to keep existing customers through effective customer service;

Whereas recognition of the contributions made by customer

service to the profitability of a company increases the

professional status of customer service;

Whereas excellent customer service distinguishes successful

companies that understand the important influence a customer has on the success of a company; and

Whereas excellent customer service can contribute to the

growth and success of every company: Now, therefore, be

it

1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives

2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 That the week of October 3, 1993, through October 9,

4 1993, is designated as ‘‘National Customer Service

5 Week’’. The President is authorized and requested to issue
2

SJ 94 ES

1 a proclamation calling on the people of the United States

2 to observe the week with the appropriate ceremonies and

3 activities.

Passed the Senate September 10 (legislative day,

September 7), 1993.

Attest:

Secretary.
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 January 31,
 2010 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: | March 15, 2010 |  |  | /s/ Rodney
 A. Young     | 
|      |                |  |  | President
 and           | 
|      |                |  |  | Chief
 Executive Officer | 
|      |                |  |  |                          | 
|Date: | March 15, 2010 |  |  | /s/ William
 J. Kullback | 
|      |                |  |  | Chief
 Financial Officer | 

23

---
#### Howard W. Sessions *v.*Arthur S. Sachs et al.

Submitted March 25

decided April 23, 1968

*David B. Beiser,*assistant attorney general, in support of the motion.

*Howard W. Sessions,*pro se, in opposition.

The motion by the defendants to strike, among other things, certain assignments of error in the appeal from the Superior Court in Hartford County is denied.

The request by the plaintiff for a hearing on the defendants’ motion to strike is denied.
EXHIBIT 10.17
                                  -------------



   ADDENDUM TO LETTER OF INTENT, DATED FEBRUARY, 2003, BETWEEN THE COMPANY AND
                       JVF INTERNATIONAL SOLUTIONS, INC.

                                    ADDENDUM
                                       TO
                                LETTER OF INTENT
                            DATED SEPTEMBER 18, 2002


By and Between MedStong International  Corporation,  hereinafter "MedStrong" and
JVF  International  Solutions,  Inc.,  hereinafter  "JVF."  The  purpose of this
addendum is to grant JVF an  extension on their  performance  under the original
Letter of Intent until June 1, 2003.

All other terms and  conditions of the September 18, 2002 Letter of Intent shall
remain in full force and effect.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF,  this being the further  agreement  between the parties,  we
hereby   execute  this  Addendum  this  ________  day  of  February,   2003,  at
______________.






MEDSTRONG INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION



-----------------------------
By:      Jerry R. Farrar
         President/CEO



JVF INTERNATIONAL SOLUTIONS, INC.


-----------------------------
By:      Julio Vazquez
         President/CEO



                                       90
Exhibit
32.02








CERTIFICATION
OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER


REQUIRED
BY RULE 13a-14(b) or RULE 15d-14(b)


AND
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT


OF
2002, 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350








In
connection with the Quarterly Report of Williams Controls, Inc (the "Company")
on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30,
2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
(the "Report"), I, Dennis E. Bunday, Chief Financial Officer of the Company,
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 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.




/s/ DENNIS
      E. BUNDAYDennis
      E. BundayChief
      Financial OfficerWilliams
      Controls, Inc.August
      7, 2008
Editorial Note on Part 880
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 880 appear at 73 FR 35341, June 23, 2008.

§ 880.2750 Image processing device for estimation of external blood loss. ( a ) *Identification.* An image processing device for estimation of external blood loss is a device to be used as an aid in estimation of patient external blood loss. The device may include software and/or hardware that is used to process images capturing externally lost blood to estimate the hemoglobin mass and/or the blood volume present in the images.
( b ) *Classification.* Class II (special controls). The special controls for this device are: ( 1 ) Non-clinical performance data must demonstrate that the device performs as intended under anticipated conditions of use. Demonstration of the performance characteristics must include a comparison to a scientifically valid alternative method for measuring deposited hemoglobin mass. The following use conditions must be tested: ( i ) Lighting conditions;
( ii ) Range of expected hemoglobin concentrations;
( iii ) Range of expected blood volume absorption; and
( iv ) Presence of other non-sanguineous fluids (*e.g.,* saline irrigation fluid).
( 2 ) Human factors testing and analysis must validate that the device design and labeling are sufficient for appropriate use by intended users of the device.
( 3 ) Appropriate analysis and non-clinical testing must validate the electromagnetic compatibility (EMC) and wireless performance of the device.
( 4 ) Appropriate software verification, validation, and hazard analysis must be performed.
( 5 ) Software display must include an estimate of the cumulative error associated with estimated blood loss values.
( 6 ) Labeling must include: ( i ) Warnings, cautions, and limitations needed for safe use of the device;
( ii ) A detailed summary of the performance testing pertinent to use of the device, including a description of the bias and variance the device exhibited during testing;
( iii ) The validated surgical materials, range of hemoglobin mass, software, hardware, and accessories that the device is intended to be used with; and
( iv ) EMC and wireless technology instructions and information.
[82 FR 60307, Dec. 20, 2017]
|                                      |
|--------------------------------------|
|                                      |  |
| Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas | BNY Mellon Trust of Delaware |
| As Indenture Trustee                 | As Owner Trustee |
| Attn:  Michelle H.Y. Voon  | Attn: Robert Castle / Kristine Gullo |
| 100 Plaza One 6th Floor         | 301 Bellevue Parkway, 3rd Floor |
| Jersey City, NY 07311                | Wilmington, DE 19809 |

|                                                 |
|-------------------------------------------------|
|                                                 |  |
| The Bank of New York Mellon Trust Company, N.A. | Ally Auto Assets LLC |
| Attn:  Diane Moser                    | Ally Financial Inc. |
| 2 North LaSalle Street, Suite 1020              | 500 Woodward Ave |
| Chicago, IL  60602                    | Mail code:  MI-01-20-TRES |
|                                            | Detroit, MI 48226 |

|        |
|--------|
|        |  |
| Re:    | Ally Auto Receivables Trust 2015-2 |
|   | Annual Statement as to Compliance |

|    |
|----|
|    |  |
| a. | A review of the activities of the Servicer during the period of January 1, 2017 through   December 31, 2017, and of its performance under the Servicing Agreement has been made under his supervision, and |

|    |
|----|
|    |  |
| b. | To the best of his knowledge, based on such review, the Servicer has fulfilled all of its obligations under the Servicing Agreement throughout such period. |

|        |
|--------|
|        |  |  |
|   | Very truly yours, |
|   |   |
|   | /s/ David J. DeBrunner |   |
|   | David J. DeBrunner |
|   | Vice President, Controller and Chief Accounting Officer |
|   |   |
###### Editorial Note on Part 880

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 880 appear at 73 FR 35341, June 23, 2008.

#### § 880.6175 [Reserved]
Exhibit 32.02

CERTIFICATION OF
CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
REQUIRED BY RULE 13a-14(b) or RULE 15d-14(b)
AND SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT
OF 2002, 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Williams Controls, Inc (the
Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2011 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
the date hereof (the Report), I, Dennis E. Bunday, Chief Financial Officer of
the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to
ss. 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.

|                        | 
|----------------------- | 
|/s/ DENNIS E. BUNDAY   
|                        | 
|Dennis E. Bunday       
|Chief Financial Officer
|Williams Controls, Inc.
|May 12, 2011           

---
**EXHIBIT 32.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION OFPRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICERPURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**

**AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906 OF THESARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

Inconnection with EMRISE Corporation’s (the “Company”)Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30,2010, as filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission on the datehereof (the “Report”), the undersigned hereby certifies in his capacity asChief Executive Officer, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350, as adopted pursuantto Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that based on hisknowledge:

 

1.             the Report fully complies with therequirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

 

2.             the information contained in theReport fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition andresults of operations of the Company.

 
| Dated: November 15, 2010 | By:    | /s/ CARMINE T. OLIVA                                   |
|-------------------------------|--------|--------------------------------------------------------|
|                          |   | Carmine T. Oliva                                       |
|                          |   | Chief Executive Officer (Principal Executive  Officer) |

 

 

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

 

----
Exhibit
10.24


 


November 14, 2002


 


Mr. Edward A. Brennan


400 North Michigan Avenue


Suite 400


Chicago, IL 60611


 


Dear Ed:


 


You’ve elected to defer your retainer and meeting fees
for calendar year 2003.


 


In June 1998, you and the Company entered into an
agreement governing the fees you had deferred through that date.  That agreement is attached.


 


I’m assuming you want to continue to defer your fees
in accordance with the June 1998 letter. 
If so, please sign below and return to me.  If you want another agreement, please let me know the details and
we’ll see what we can do.


 


Thank you for your cooperation and if there are
questions, please let me know.


 


 


	
   

  	
  Very truly yours,

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  Charles D. MarLett

  
	
   

  	
  Corporate Secretary

  



 


Deferral
of 2003 fees to be in accordance with June 2, 1998 letter:


 


 


	
  AGREED:

  	
  /s/ Edward A.
  Brennan

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  Edward
  A. Brennan

  



 


P.S.                            I’m
enclosing two originals - one to be returned to me and the other for your
files.


 


Attachment
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5.4. 

### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 07-10865 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Plaintiff-Appellee

v. JOSEPH ARTHUR BOLTON Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 4:07-CR-24-1
Before STEWART, OWEN, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Joseph Arthur Bolton appeals the sentence imposed following his guilty plea conviction for making threats against the President ofthe United States in violation of18 U.S.C. § 871. He argues that the district court erred in enhancing his offense level pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 2A6.1(b)(1). We review the procedural soundness and substantive reasonableness of Bolton’s sentence under the abuse-of-discretion standard of review. G all v. United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit 

### F I L E D July 16, 2008 Charles R. Fulbruge III ClerkNo. 07-10865

2 United States, 128 S. Ct. 586, 594 (2007). T he district court’s determination that, pursuant to§ 2A6.1(b)(1), Bolton’s conduct evidenced an intent tocarry out his threats is a factual finding and must be reviewed for clear error. U nited States v. Goynes, 175 F.3d 350, 353 (5th Cir. 1999). Because Bolton solicited another person to assassinate the President and because he attempted to travel to the President’s ranch for reconnaissance purposes, the district court did not clearly err in applying the § 2A6. 1(b)(1) enhancement. See Go ynes, 175 F.3d at 355. In addition, Bolton points to nothing in the Guidelines that precludesapplication ofthe § 2A6.1 enhancement if the defendant could not have ultimately carried out his threat. Accordingly, the district court did not clearly err in applying the § 2A6.1(b)(1) enhancement. Moreover, because the district court imposed a sentence within the properly calculated guidelines range, it is presumptively reasonable. G all, 128 S. Ct. at 597; Rita v. United States, 127 S. Ct. 2456, 2462 (2007); United Statesv. Alonzo, 435 F.3d 551, 554 (5th Cir. 2006). Bolton’s sentence is AFFIRMED.
```

[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 38 (Tuesday, February 26, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 13028-13029]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-04563]

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

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION

Sunshine Act Meeting

Agency Holding the Meeting: Commodity Futures Trading Commission.

Time and Date: 10:00 a.m., Friday, March 1, 2013.

Place:  1155 21st St. NW., Washington, DC, 9th Floor Commission 
Conference Room.

Status:  Closed.

Matters to be Considered: Surveillance and Enforcement Matters. In the 
event that the times or dates of this or any future meetings change, an 
announcement of the change, along with the new time and place of the 
meeting

[[Page 13029]]

will be posted on the Commission's Web site at http://www.cftc.gov.

Contact Person for More Information:  Melissa D. Jurgens, 202-418-5516.

Natise Stowe,
Executive Assistant.
[FR Doc. 2013-04563 Filed 2-22-13; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 6351-01-P
```
Editorial Note on Part 890
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 890 appear at 73 FR 35341, June 23, 2008.

§ 890.1 Scope. ( a ) This part sets forth the classification of physical medicine devices intended for human use that are in commercial distribution.
( b ) The identification of a device in a regulation in this part is not a precise description of every device that is, or will be, subject to the regulation. A manufacturer who submits a premarket notification submission for a device under part 807 may not show merely that the device is accurately described by the section title and identification provisions of a regulation in this part, but shall state why the device is substantially equivalent to other devices, as required by § 807.87.
( c ) To avoid duplicative listings, a physical medicine device that has two or more types of uses (e.g., used both as a diagnostic device and as a therapeutic device) is listed only in one subpart.
( d ) References in this part to regulatory sections of the Code of Federal Regulations are to chapter I of title 21, unless otherwise noted.
( e ) Guidance documents referenced in this part are available on the Internet at *http://www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/DeviceRegulationandGuidance/GuidanceDocuments/default.htm ..*
[52 FR 17741, May 11, 1987, as amended at 73 FR 34860, June 19, 2008; 78 FR 18233, Mar. 26, 2013]
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

JINPING ZHAO,

 Petitioner,

 v.

ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,

 Respondent.

No. 09-73374

Agency No. A099-422-235

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted December 17, 2013** 

Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and GRABER, Circuit Judges.

Jinping Zhao, a native and citizen of China, petitions pro se for review of the

Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal from an

immigration judge’s decision denying his application for asylum, withholding of

removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture. We have jurisdiction

FILED

JAN 03 2014

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

 * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

 ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence the agency’s factual

findings, applying the standards governing adverse credibility determinations

created by the REAL ID Act. Shrestha v. Holder, 590 F.3d 1034, 1039 (9th Cir.

2010). We grant the petition for review and we remand.

The agency based its adverse credibility determination in part on a finding

that Zhao appeared in person to make a change to his household registration on

June 15, 2005, a date when he claimed to be in detention. However, this date

appears under Zhao’s son’s registration card and Zhao did not testify that this

event, whatever it was, involved a change that would require Zhao to appear in

person. See Ren v. Holder, 648 F.3d 1079, 1087 (9th Cir. 2011) (rejecting an

adverse credibility finding that was based on a mischaracterization of the

evidence). The agency also based its adverse credibility determination on a finding

that Zhao’s testimony that his son always lived with him was inconsistent with his

household registration. Substantial evidence does not support this finding because

the agency’s rejection of Zhao’s explanation as implausible is based on

speculation. See id. at 1087-88. 

2 09-73374
Accordingly, we grant the petition for review, and we remand Zhao’s claims

for reconsideration of Zhao’s credibility and such other issues as the BIA may

deem appropriate.

PETITION FOR REVIEW GRANTED; REMANDED.

3 09-73374