alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 1.6162-1 Extension of time for payment of tax on gain attributable to liquidation of personal holding companies. ( a ) *In general.* ( 1 ) If it is shown to the satisfaction of the district director that undue hardship to the taxpayer will result from the payment of such portion of the amount determined as the tax under chapter 1 of the Code by the taxpayer as is attributable to the short-term or long-term capital gain derived by the taxpayer from the receipt by him of property other than money on a complete liquidation of a corporation to which section 331(a)(1) or 342 applies, the district director may grant an extension of time for the payment of such portion of the tax. For the meaning of the term “undue hardship”, see paragraph (b) of § 1.6161-1.
( 2 ) The extension of time for payment shall be for a period not in excess of five years. The extension shall only be granted for a taxable year beginning before January 1, 1956, and shall apply only if the corporation, for its taxable year preceding the year in which occurred the complete liquidation (or the first of the series of distributions in complete liquidation), was, under the law applicable to such taxable year, a personal holding company or a foreign personal holding company.
( b ) *Requirement of bond.* As a condition to the granting of an extension of time for payment, the taxpayer will usually be required by the district director to furnish a bond as provided in section 6165 and the regulations thereunder. For other provisions with respect to bonds, see section 7101 and the regulations in part 301 of this chapter (Regulations on Procedure and Administration).
#### § 1.642(a)(3)-2 Time of receipt of dividends by beneficiary.

In general, dividends are deemed received by a beneficiary in the taxable year in which they are includible in his gross income under section 652 or 662. For example, a simple trust, reporting on the basis of a fiscal year ending October 30, receives quarterly dividends on November 3, 1954, and February 3, May 3, and August 3, 1955. These dividends are all allocable to beneficiary A, reporting on a calendar year basis, under section 652 and are deemed received by A in 1955. See section 652(c). Accordingly, A may take all these dividends into account in determining his credit for dividends received under section 34 and his dividends exclusion under section 116. However, solely for purposes of determining whether dividends deemed received by individuals from trusts or estates qualify under the time limitations of section 34(a) or section 116(a), section 642(a)(3) provides that the time of receipt of the dividends by the trust or estate is also considered the time of receipt by the beneficiary. For example, a simple trust reporting on the basis of a fiscal year ending October 30 receives quarterly dividends on December 3, 1953, and March 3, June 3, and September 3, 1954. These dividends are all allocable to beneficiary A, reporting on the calendar year basis, under section 652 and are includible in his income for 1954. However, for purposes of section 34(a) or section 116(a), these dividends are deemed received by A on the same dates that the trust received them. Accordingly, A may take into account in determining the credit under section 34 only those dividends received by the trust on September 3, 1954, since the dividend received credit is not allowed under section 34 for dividends received before August 1, 1954 (or after December 31, 1964). Section 642(a)(3) and this section do not apply to amounts received by an estate or trust as dividends after December 31, 1964. However, the rules in this section relating to time of receipt of dividends by a beneficiary are applicable to dividends received by an estate or trust prior to January 1, 1965, and accordingly, such dividends are deemed to be received by the beneficiary (even though received after December 31, 1964) on the same dates that the estate or trust received them for purposes of determining the credit under section 34 or the exclusion under section 116.

[T.D. 6777, 29 FR 17808, Dec. 16, 1964]
From: "Rick Moore" <rmoore@aal

- inc.com>

To: Rochelle Boyd/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA

Date: 07/09/2010 03:34 PM

Subjec Information Collection Request for the Secondary Aluminum

t: Production Source Category

Dear Ms. Boyd:

We have been asked to provide analytical support in the way of sample analysis and data

report preparation in response to the “Information Collection Request for the Secondary

Aluminum Production Source Category”.

On review of the May 27, 2010 information request letter and the Enclosure 1, I have a

few questions that need your clarification pertaining to the baghouse dust analysis portion

of this request:

1. Do you have an Excel report format for the baghouse dust data?

2. In Table 2.2 a) is EPA Method 6020 (ICP/MS) the only method

allowed for Hg analysis? While Hg can be analyzed by ICP/MS it is not the generally

preferred method.

b) Is the sample preparation method EPA Method 3051 (Microwave

Digestion) the only sample prep aration method allowed or would other sample

preparation methods be permitted (for example those that use a Parr bomb) or other

digestion techniques?

3. Concerning Hexavalent Cr analysis is EPA Method 218.6 the only acceptable method

for this analysis? I have concerns that the method has been developed for aqueous

matrices and that chlorides and

other metals species can cause analytical problems for this ion

chromatographic method. What is the desired Reporting Limit in the

solid material?

Your prompt assistance with these questions would be appreciated. If you need to

discuss them further I will be available either by phone or by email at the address below.

Thank you,

Rick Moore

President

American Analytical Laboratories, Inc.

840 South Main Street

Akron OH 44311

rmoore@aal

- inc.com

ph: 330

- 535

- 1300

fax: 330

- 535

- 7246
EXHIBIT
        32.2
 
 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 Fonix Corporation on Form 10-Q for
        the
        period ending March 31, 2006, as filed with the Securities and Exchange
        Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Roger D. Dudley, Chief
        Financial 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 results of operations of the Company.
 
 
 
 **/s/
                  ROGER D. DUDLEY**Roger
                  D. DudleyChief
                  Financial Officer
 Dated
        August 2, 2006
§ 1.414(b)-1 Controlled group of corporations. ( a ) *Defintion of controlled group of corporations.* For purposes of this section, the term “controlled group of corporations” has the same meaning as is assigned to the term in section 1563(a) and the regulations thereunder, except that ( 1 ) the term “controlled group of corporations” shall not include an “insurance group” described in section 1563(a)(4), and
( 2 ) section 1563(e)(3)(C) (relating to stock owned by certain employees' trusts) shall not apply. For purposes of this section, the term “members of a controlled group” means two or more corporations connected through stock ownership described in section 1563(a) (1), (2), or (3), whether or not such corporations are “component members of a controlled group” within the meaning of section 1563(b). Two or more corporations are members of a controlled group at any time such corporations meet the requirements of section 1563(a) (as modified by this paragraph). For purposes of this section, if a corporation is a member of more than one controlled group of corporations, such corporation shall be treated as a member of each controlled group.
( b ) *Single plan adopted by two or more members.* If two or more members of a controlled group of corporations adopt a single plan for a plan year, then the minimum funding standard provided in section 412, the tax imposed by section 4971, and the applicable limitations provided by section 404(a) shall be determined as if such members were a single employer. In such a case, the amount of such items and the allocable portion attributable to each member shall be determined in the manner provided in regulations under sections 412, 4971, and 404(a).
( c ) *Cross reference.* For rules relating to the application of sections 401, 408(k), 410, 411, 415, and 416 with respect to two or more trades or businesses which are under common control, see section 414(c) and the regulations thereunder.
[T.D. 8179, 53 FR 6605, Mar. 2, 1988]
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Res. 2 Agreed to Senate (ATS)]

103d CONGRESS
  1st Session
S. RES. 2

 Informing the House of Representatives that a quorum of the Senate is 
                               assembled.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            January 5, 1993

 Mr. Dole submitted the following resolution; which was considered and 
                               agreed to

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
 Informing the House of Representatives that a quorum of the Senate is 
                               assembled.

    Resolved, That the Secretary inform the House of Representatives 
that a quorum of the Senate is assembled and that the Senate is ready 
to proceed to business.

                                 <all>
```
| (logo) WELLS FARGO | **Commercial Mortgage  Servicing**D1050-084, 8th Floor  401 South Tryon St.  Charlotte, NC 28202  1-800-326-1334 |
|--------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

 

**ANNUAL STATEMENT OFCOMPLIANCE**

  

Reference is hereby made tothat certain Trust and Servicing Agreement dated as of October 1, 2015, by andamong Morgan Stanley Capital I Inc., as Depositor, Wells Fargo Bank, NationalAssociation, as Servicer and Special Servicer and U.S. Bank NationalAssociation, as Certificate Administrator and Trustee, with respect toCommercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates Series 2015-HAUL (the"Agreement"). Capitalized terms used herein not otherwise definedshall have the meanings assigned in the Agreement.

 

Pursuant to Section 10.8 ofthe Agreement, I, Daniel Marthinsen, Managing Director of Special Servicing dohereby certify that:

 

1. A review of the activitiesof the Special Servicer during the period from January 1, 2016 through December31, 2016 (the “Reporting Period”) , and of its performance per theAgreement during such period has been made under my supervision, and

 

2. To the best of myknowledge, based on such review, the Special Servicer, has fulfilled all of itsobligations under the Agreement in all material respects throughout theReporting Period.

 

 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, theundersigned has executed this Certificate as of the 28th day of February 2017. 

 

/s/ Daniel Marthinsen

Daniel Marthinsen, ManagingDirector

Wells Fargo Bank

 

 

| Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. | (logo) Together we’ll  go far |
|------------------------|-------------------------------------|
- USGS Home
- Contact						   USGS
- Search 
USGS

- mobile menu barsUSGS Publications Warehouse
    Contact
    Explore recent 
    publications by USGS Authors
    Browse all of Pubs 
    Warehouse by Publication type and year
    FAQS
    Web 
    Service Documentation
    Other 
    Resources
    Descriptions of US Geological Survey Report Series
- USGS Publications Warehouse
- Contact
- Explore recent 
    publications by USGS Authors
- Browse all of Pubs 
    Warehouse by Publication type and year
- FAQS
- Web 
    Service Documentation
- Other 
    Resources
- Descriptions of US Geological Survey Report Series

- USGS Publications 
  Warehouse
- Explore					    
  Explore recent 
    publications by USGS Authors
    Browse all of Pubs 
    Warehouse by Publication type and year
- Explore recent 
    publications by USGS Authors
- Browse all of Pubs 
    Warehouse by Publication type and year
- Documentation					    
  FAQS
    Web 
    Service Documentation
    Other 
    Resources
    Descriptions of US Geological Survey Report Series
- FAQS
- Web 
    Service Documentation
- Other 
    Resources
- Descriptions of US Geological Survey Report Series
- Contact

### Erosion and deposition produced by the flood of December 
1964 on Coffee Creek, Trinity County, California

#### Professional Paper 422-K

Tweet


#### Links

- Document: **Document**                                
  (pdf)
- Plates:
- **Plate 1**                                
    (pdf)
- **Plate 2**                                
    (pdf)
- Paper 
  version: **USGS Store**
- Download citation as:  RIS

#### Abstract

#### Additional publication details

Part or all of this report is presented in Portable 
Document Format (PDF). For best results viewing and printing PDF documents, it 
is recommended that you download the documents to your computer and open them 
with Adobe Reader. PDF documents opened from your browser may not display or 
print as intended. Download the latest version of Adobe 
Reader, free of charge. More information about viewing, downloading, and 
printing report files can be found here.

Accessibility
				    FOIA				    Privacy				    Policies and 
Notices

U.S. Department of the Interior				    | 				    
U.S. Geological 
Survey				    				   URL: http://pubs.er.usgs.gov/publication/pp422K 
                   				    				   Page Contact Information: Pubs 
Warehouse Contact Page				    				   Page Last Modified: February 02, 
2012 00:06:02
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

ALBERTO PINEDA MELGAR,

Petitioner,

v. WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General,

Respondent. No. 18

- 72653
Agency No. A200

- 116

- 746

MEMORANDUM *

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Immigration Judge

Submitted September 18, 2019 **

Before: FARRIS, TASHIMA, and NGUYEN, Circuit Judges.
Alberto Pineda Melgar, a native and citizen of Honduras, petitions for
review of an immigration judge’s (“IJ ”) de termination under 8 C.F.R. § 1208.31(a)
that he did not have a reasonable fear of persecution or torture in Honduras, and is

thus not entitled to relief from his reinstated removal order. We have jurisdiction

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36

- 3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). 

# FILED

SEP 25 2019
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLER K U.S. COURT OF APPEAL S2 18

- 72653

under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for sub stantial evidence the IJ ’s factual
findings , Andrade

- Garcia v. Lynch , 828 F.3d 829, 836 (9th Cir. 2016), and we
deny the petition for review.

Substantial evidence supports the IJ ’s determination that Pineda Melgar
failed to establish a reasonable possibility of persecution in Honduras on account
of a protected ground. See Ayala v. Holder , 640 F.3d 1095, 1097 (9th Cir. 2011)
(even if membership in a particular social group is established, an applicant must

still sh ow that “persecution was or will be on account of his membership in such
group” (emphasis in original)); Molina

- Morales v. INS , 237 F.3d 1048, 1052 (9th
Cir. 2001) (harm based on personal retribution is not persecution on account of a
protected ground).

Su bstantial evidence also supports the IJ ’s determination that Pineda Melgar

failed to demonstrate a reasonable possibility of torture by or with the consent or
acquiescence of the government i f returned to Honduras

. See Andrade

- Garcia ,
828 F.3d at 836 (“[A ] general ineffectiveness on the government’s part to
investigate an d prevent crime will not suffice to show acquiescence.”)

. Finally, we do not consider the materials referenced in Pineda Melgar’s
opening brief that are not part of the administrative reco rd. See Fisher v. INS , 793 18

- 72653

F.3d 955, 963

- 64 (9th Cir. 1996) (en banc) ( court’s review is limited to the
administrative record).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
III

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. RES. 142

To express the sense of the Senate to recognize and commend the American

Business Women’s Association.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

SEPTEMBER 7, 1993

Mr. COVERDELL submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the

Committee on Labor and Human Resources

RESOLUTION

To express the sense of the Senate to recognize and

commend the American Business Women’s Association.

Whereas the American Business Women’s Association (hereafter referred to in this Resolution as the ‘‘Association’’)

has been making tomorrow better for active and concerned women since 1949;

Whereas at that time, as today, the primary objective of the

Association is to aid in the professional, educational, cultural, and social advancement of business women;

Whereas the national organization, founded in Kansas City,

Missouri, is an influential organization with a membership exceeding 100,000 from all types of businesses and

professions in more than 1,900 chapters in the United

States and Puerto Rico;
2

•S RES 142 IS

Whereas the Atlanta Area Council, representing 37 chapters

from across the metropolitan Atlanta area, has been a

viable business organization;

Whereas the Association offers assistance to women aspiring

to successful careers by investing in their education;

Whereas since the Association’s inception, chapters have

sponsored scholarships for women seeking to further their

education;

Whereas the amount awarded annually by chapters has

grown to more than $2,000,000; and

Whereas for thousands of working women, the Association is

a better way to advance in their education and in their

business and personal lives: Now, therefore, be it

1 Resolved, That it is the sense of the Senate to recog2 nize and commend the Association as it continues to com3 municate to individuals the importance of education and

4 self-improvement of business women.

Æ
#### § 1.263A-5 Exception for qualified creative expenses incurred by certain free-lance authors, photographers, and artists. [Reserved]
#### § 1.1031(e)-1 Exchange of livestock of different sexes.

Section 1031(e) provides that livestock of different sexes are not property of like kind. Section 1031(e) and this section are applicable to taxable years to which the Internal Revenue Code of 1954 applies.

[T.D. 7141, 36 FR 18792, Sept. 22, 1971]
Exhibit 4.5-B
                              CERTIFICATE OF TRUST
                                       OF
                           GULF POWER CAPITAL TRUST VI


         THIS CERTIFICATE OF TRUST of Gulf Power Capital Trust VI (the "Trust"),
dated April 7, 2003, is being duly executed and filed by the undersigned, as
trustee of the Trust, to form a statutory trust under the Delaware Statutory
Trust Act (12 Del. C. ss. 3801, et seq.).

         1. Name. The name of the statutory trust being formed hereby is Gulf
Power Capital Trust VI.

         2. Delaware Trustee. The name and business address of the trustee of
the Trust with a principal place of business in the State of Delaware are Chase
Manhattan Bank USA, National Association, 500 Stanton Christiana Road, Newark,
Delaware 19713.

         3. Effective Date. This Certificate of Trust shall be effective as of
its filing.

         IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned, being the sole trustee of the
Trust, has executed this Certificate of Trust as of the date first above
written.


                                   CHASE MANHATTAN BANK USA,
                                   NATIONAL ASSOCIATION,
                                   as Trustee


                                    By:      /s/John J. Cashin
                                             Name:    John J. Cashin
                                             Title:   Vice President
Exhibit
      3.01(d)


**CERTIFICATE
      OF AMENDMENT**


**to**


**Certificate
      of incorporation**


**OF**


**WILLIAMS
      CONTROLS, INC.**







Williams
      Controls, Inc., a corporation duly organized and existing under and by virtue
      of
      the General Corporation Law of the State of Delaware (the “Corporation”), does
      hereby certify that:




1.  Paragraph
      A of Article FOURTH of the Certificate of Incorporation of the Corporation
      is
      hereby amended and restated in its entirety to read as follows:




A.  The
      total
      number of shares of capital stock which the corporation shall have authority
      to
      issue is 125,000,000 shares, consisting of 75,000,000 shares of common stock,
      $.01 par value (the “Common Stock”), and 50,000,000 shares of preferred stock,
      $.01 par value (the “Preferred Stock”).




2.  The
      foregoing amendment was duly adopted by a majority in voting power of the
      outstanding stock of the Corporation in accordance with the provisions of
      Section 242 of the General Corporation Law of the State of
      Delaware.




IN
      WITNESS WHEREOF, Williams Controls, Inc. has caused this Certificate to be
      executed by Dennis E. Bunday, its Chief Financial Officer and Secretary on
      this
      22 day of February, 200 5.







WILLIAMS
                CONTROLS, INC.
              
              
              By:/s/Dennis
                E.
                Bunday
              Name:Dennis E. Bunday
              Office:Chief Financial Officer &
Secretary
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

DAVID J. PEDERSEN, 

Plaintiff-Appellant, 

 v. 

TRACY SCHNEIDER, Correctional 

Manager, 

Defendant-Appellee.

No. 22-35012 

D.C. No. 3:21-cv-05121-RSM 

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Washington

Ricardo S. Martinez, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted January 18, 2023**

Before: GRABER, PAEZ, and NGUYEN, Circuit Judges.

David J. Pedersen, a Washington state prisoner, appeals pro se the district 

court’s summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging a First 

Amendment violation in connection with the rejection of outgoing mail. We have 

jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo the district court’s 

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

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

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

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

FILED

JAN 27 2023

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 22-35012 

decision on cross-motions for summary judgment. JL Beverage Co., LLC v. Jim 

Beam Brands Co., 828 F.3d 1098, 1104 (9th Cir. 2016). We affirm. 

The district court properly granted summary judgment for defendant because

Pedersen failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether the rejected 

outgoing letter was not obscene or whether the prison’s policy regulating outgoing 

mail did not further a substantial government interest. See Procunier v. Martinez, 

416 U.S. 396, 413 (1974), overruled on other grounds by Thornburgh v. Abbott, 

490 U.S. 401 (1989) (explaining that the First Amendment is not violated by 

regulation of outgoing prisoner mail which furthers a substantial government 

interest and is no greater than necessary to protect that interest); Miller v. 

California, 413 U.S. 15, 23-26 (1973) (setting forth test for determining obscene

material unprotected by the First Amendment).

AFFIRMED.