alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I

#### Editorial Note:

Part 2 is placed in the separate grouping of parts pertaining to trademarks regulations.

###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I

#### Editorial Note:

Part 6 is placed in the separate grouping of parts pertaining to trademarks regulations.

###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I

#### Editorial Note:

Part 7 is placed in the separate grouping of parts pertaining to trademarks regulations.

###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I

#### Editorial Note:

Part 1 is placed in the separate grouping of parts pertaining to patents regulations.

###### Editorial Note on Part 2

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 2 appear at 68 FR 14337, Mar. 25, 2003.

#### § 2.175 Correction of mistake by owner.

(a) Whenever a mistake has been made in a registration and a showing has been made that the mistake occurred in good faith through the fault of the owner, the Director may issue a certificate of correction. In the discretion of the Director, the Office may issue a new certificate upon payment of the required fee, provided that the correction does not involve such changes in the registration as to require republication of the mark.

(b) An application for such action must:

(1) Include the following:

(i) Specification of the mistake for which correction is sought;

(ii) Description of the manner in which it arose; and

(iii) A showing that it occurred in good faith;

(2) Be verified; and

(3) Be accompanied by the required fee.

(Sec. 7, 60 Stat. 430, as amended; 15 U.S.C. 1057)

[30 FR 13193, Oct. 16, 1965, as amended at 31 FR 5262, Apr. 1, 1966; 69 FR 51364, Aug. 19, 2004; 73 FR 67774, Nov. 17, 2008; 80 FR 33189, June 11, 2015]

###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I

#### Editorial Note:

Part 3 pertaining to both patents and trademarks is placed in the grouping pertaining to patents regulations.

###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I

#### Editorial Note:

Part 4 is placed in the separate grouping of parts pertaining to patents regulations.

###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I

#### Editorial Note:

Part 5 is placed in the separate grouping of parts pertaining to patents regulations.
```

[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 9 (Monday, January 14, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Page 2711]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-00576]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Office of the Secretary

 Applications for Certificates of Public Convenience and 
Necessity and Foreign Air Carrier Permits

    Notice of Applications for Certificates of Public Convenience and 
Necessity and Foreign Air Carrier Permits Filed Under Subpart B 
(formerly Subpart Q) during the Week Ending November 17, 2012. The 
following Applications for Certificates of Public Convenience and 
Necessity and Foreign Air Carrier Permits were filed under Subpart B 
(formerly Subpart Q) of the Department of Transportation's Procedural 
Regulations (See 14 CFR 301.201 et seq.). The due date for Answers, 
Conforming Applications, or Motions to Modify Scope are set forth below 
for each application. Following the Answer period DOT may process the 
application by expedited procedures. Such procedures may consist of the 
adoption of a show-cause order, a tentative order, or in appropriate 
cases a final order without further proceedings.
    Docket Number: DOT-OST-2009-0012.
    Date Filed: November 16, 2012.
    Due Date for Answers, Conforming Applications, or Motion to Modify 
Scope: December 7, 2012.
    Description: Application of KaiserAir, Inc. requesting an amendment 
of its certificate authority issued to it by the department to remove a 
condition restricting its ability to offer public charter service to 
the general public.

Barbara J. Hairston,
Acting Program Manager, Docket Operations, Federal Register Liaison.
[FR Doc. 2013-00576 Filed 1-11-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-9X-P
```
C OURT OF A PPEALS FOR THE
F IRST D ISTRICT OF T EXAS AT H OUSTON

O RDER

Appellate case name: Carolyn Calkins James, Individually and as next friend of her elderly mother, Mary Olive Calkins v. Honorable Olen Underwood, Honorable Patrick Sebesta and Fidelity and Deposit Company of Maryland, Richard Stephen Calkins as agent in fact for Mary Olive Calkins and Michael Easton, Individually and as assignee of Richard Stephen Calkins

Appellate case number: 01

- 13

- 00277

- CV

Trial court case number: 2012

- 51725

Trial court: 80th District Court of Harris County

On October 18 , 2013, Michele Barber Chimine, co

- counsel for appellant, filed a First Supplemental Motion to Withdraw. This motion supplements her initial Motion to Withdraw filed on October 15, 2013. After r eview of the motions, the Court finds that together they are in compliance with Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 6.5, and there fore GRANTS the motion s together as one motion to withdraw

.
It is so ORDERED.

Judge’s signature: /s/ Harvey Brown

 Acting individually  Acting for the Court

Date: October 29, 2013
LANDLORD AND TENANT.

[Hamilton Circuit Court,

November Term, 1886.]

Cox, Smith and Swing, JJ.

#### James W. Sibley v. J. P. Walton.

One not in Possession and Having no Right to Recover Possession of a Building is Not Liable eor Rent.

Receipts for rents made out by the mortgagor in the name of a mortgagee of machinery and chattels in a building, without his knowledge, do not bind him for rent, he not being in possession and having no right to recover possession of the building.

Error to the Court of Common Pleas of Hamilton county.

Cox, J.

Plaintiff in error loaned money to the Inventor’s Manufacturing Company, lessees, from the defendant of a building on West Sixth street, and as security took a bill of sale, which was in reality a mortgage of the chattels of the lessees. A part of the money borrowed was used in payment of rent, and the receipt was made out in Mr. Sibley’s name. Subsequently bills and receipts were made out in Mr. Sibley’s name, and in the present suit for rent he was made defendant. The testimony showed that the president of the leasing company was a son-in-law of Sibley’s, but that Mr. Sibley himself was never in possession of the premises occupied, and had no knowledge that bills and receipts were made out in his name.

*368C. B. Matthews, for plaintiff in error.

Ferris & Wilder, for defendant in error.

Held, that, as Sibley was not in possession, and had no right to recover possession of the premises, he could not be held responsible for the rent, and that the taking of receipts for rent in his name, by the mortgagors, without his knowledge, did not make him responsible for future rents.
#### § 52b.13 Additional conditions.

The Director may with respect to any grant award impose additional conditions consistent with the regulations of this part prior to or at the time of any award when in the Director's judgment the conditions are necessary to assure or protect advancement of the approved project, the purposes of the applicable provisions of the Act, or the conservation of grant funds.
§ 505.9 State and local permits. With respect to an eligible project, the provision of a loan under this part shall not— ( a ) Relieve the beneficiary of the loan or any obligation to obtain any required State or local permit or approval with respect to the project.
( b ) Limit the right of any unit of State or local government to approve or regulate any rate of return on private equity invested in the project.
( c ) Supersede any State or local law (including any regulation) applicable to the construction or operation of the project.
###### Editorial Note on Part 501

#### Editorial Note:

At 78 FR 4766, Jan. 23, 2013, parts 500-599 were transferred from Title 37, Chapter V, to Title 37, Chapter IV. Chapter V was removed and reserved.

#### § 501.10 Dissemination of this part and of implementing regulations.

Each Government agency shall disseminate to its employees the provisions of this part, and any appropriate implementing agency regulations and delegations. Copies of any such regulations shall be sent to the Secretary. If the Secretary identifies an inconsistency between this part and the agency regulations or delegations, the agency, upon being informed by the Secretary of the inconsistency, shall take prompt action to correct it.
###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I

#### Editorial Note:

Part 2 is placed in the separate grouping of parts pertaining to trademarks regulations.

###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I

#### Editorial Note:

Part 6 is placed in the separate grouping of parts pertaining to trademarks regulations.

###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I

#### Editorial Note:

Part 7 is placed in the separate grouping of parts pertaining to trademarks regulations.

###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I

#### Editorial Note:

Part 1 is placed in the separate grouping of parts pertaining to patents regulations.

###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I

#### Editorial Note:

Part 3 pertaining to both patents and trademarks is placed in the grouping pertaining to patents regulations.

###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I

#### Editorial Note:

Part 4 is placed in the separate grouping of parts pertaining to patents regulations.

###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I

#### Editorial Note:

Part 5 is placed in the separate grouping of parts pertaining to patents regulations.

#### § 41.69 Examiner's answer.

(a) The primary examiner may, within such time as directed by the Director, furnish a written answer to the owner's and/or requester's appellant brief or respondent brief including, as may be necessary, such explanation of the invention claimed and of the references relied upon, the grounds of rejection, and the reasons for patentability, including grounds for not adopting any proposed rejection. A copy of the answer shall be supplied to the owner and all requesters. If the primary examiner determines that the appeal does not comply with the provisions of §§ 41.61, 41.66, 41.67 and 41.68 or does not relate to an appealable action, the primary examiner shall make such determination of record.

(b) An examiner's answer may not include a new ground of rejection.

(c) An examiner's answer may not include a new determination not to make a proposed rejection of a claim.

(d) Any new ground of rejection, or any new determination not to make a proposed rejection, must be made in an Office action reopening prosecution.
#### BERKELEY FEDERAL BANK AND TRUST, FSB *v.*JEFFREY W. NAVIN ET AL.

*Kenneth R. Davis,*in support of the petition.

*Claudia M. Sklar,*in opposition.

Decided February 13, 1997

The defendants’ petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court (AC 16442) is denied.
#### § 1.482 Disclosure of medical records to recover or collect reasonable charges.

VA may disclose records described in 38 U.S.C. 7332(a) to a third party in order to recover or collect reasonable charges for care furnished to, or paid on behalf of, a patient in connection with a non-service connected disability as permitted by 38 U.S.C. 1729, or for a condition for which recovery is authorized, or with respect to which the United States is deemed to be a third-party beneficiary under the Federal Medical Care Recovery Act (Public Law 87-693, 42 U.S.C. 2651 *et seq.*).

[85 FR 64043, Oct. 9, 2020]
Exhibit 99.2

                            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 on Form 10-Q of IDS Life Insurance Company for
the quarterly period ended June 30, 2002, as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), Philip Wentzel, as Chief
Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certifies, 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/ Philip Wentzel
    --------------------------
Name:   Philip Wentzel
Title:  Chief Financial Officer
Date:   August 14, 2002
```

[House Report 107-357]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

107th Congress                                                   Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 2d Session                                                     107-357

======================================================================

 
  PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION H.R. 3394, CYBER SECURITY RESEARCH AND 
                            DEVELOPMENT ACT

                                _______
                                

  February 5, 2002.--Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be 
                                printed

                                _______
                                

 Mr. Diaz-Balart, from the Committee on Rules, submitted the following

                              R E P O R T

                       [To accompany H. Res. 343]

    The Committee on Rules, having had under consideration 
House Resolution 343, by a nonrecord vote, report the same to 
the House with the recommendation that the resolution be 
adopted.

                summary of provisions of the resolution

    The resolution provides for the consideration of H.R. 3394, 
the Cyber Security Research and Development Act, under an open 
rule. The rule provides one hour of general debate equally 
divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking minority 
member of the Committee on Science.
    The rule waives clause 4(a) of rule XIII (requiring a 
three-day layover of committee reports) against consideration 
of the bill. The rule authorizes the Chairman of the Committee 
of the Whole to accord priority in recognition to Members who 
have preprinted their amendments in the Congressional Record. 
Finally, the rule provides one motion to recommit with or 
without instructions.
    The waiver of clause 4(a) of rule XIII is needed because 
the report was not filed until Monday, February 4 and the bill 
may be considered by the House as early as Wednesday, February 
6.

                                

```
- Bureau Home
- About Us
- Portfolio
- Careers
- Industry Advisory Group
- Events
- Releases
- Build with Us
- Contact Us

HomeBureau of Overseas Buildings Operations...Releases – Overseas Buildings Operations

# 						Releases – Overseas Buildings Operations					

56 items
Clear All Filters

## View collection by:

Select a Year20242023202220212020

Select a MonthJanuaryFebruaryMarchAprilMayJuneJulyAugustSeptemberOctoberNovemberDecember

Select a LocationAfghanistanBrazilChinaColombiaDemocratic Republic of the CongoGuatemalaIndiaIndonesiaItalyKosovoMalawiMauritiusMexicoMontenegroMozambiqueNamibiaNigerNigeriaPakistanParaguayQatarSaudi ArabiaSingaporeSri LankaTaiwanThailandTurkeyUnited KingdomVietnam

Select a Release TypeDipNote: Education and CultureMedia Note

Select a Bureau/OfficeBureau of African AffairsBureau of Consular AffairsBureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and LaborBureau of East Asian and Pacific AffairsBureau of Energy ResourcesBureau of European and Eurasian AffairsBureau of Information Resource ManagementBureau of Near Eastern AffairsBureau of Overseas Buildings OperationsBureau of South and Central Asian AffairsBureau of Western Hemisphere AffairsDeputy Secretary of State for Management and ResourcesOffice of Management Strategy and SolutionsOffice of the SpokespersonThe Secretary of State

          -    Media Note  		Democracy Collection Launches Traveling Exhibition: “A More Perfect Union: American Artists and the Currents of our Time”	  May 18, 2023 
          -    Media Note  		Department of State Begins Construction on New U.S. Embassy in Lilongwe, Malawi	  May 11, 2023 
          -    Media Note  		Annual Greening Diplomacy Initiative Award and GDI-OBO Resilience Innovation Fund Winners Announced	  April 26, 2023 
          -    Media Note  		Department of State Begins Construction on New U.S. Embassy in Hanoi, Vietnam	  April 15, 2023 
          -    Media Note  		The Bureau of Overseas Buildings Operations Announces New Industry Advisory Group Appointments	  April 10, 2023 
          -    Media Note  		Department of State Dedicates New U.S. Embassy in Guatemala City, Guatemala	  March 16, 2023 
          -    Media Note  		Authentication of Washington at Princeton Portrait by Charles Willson Peale at U.S. Embassy Paris Ambassador’s Residence	  February 23, 2023 
          -    Media Note  		Overseas Buildings Operations Dedicates New U.S. Embassy in Ankara, Türkiye	  February 21, 2023 
          -    Media Note  		Office of Art in Embassies Celebrates 60 Years with Art Diplomacy for Democracy	  January 31, 2023 
          -    Media Note  		Overseas Buildings Operations’ New U.S. Consulate General Projects Receive 2022 American Architecture Awards®	  December 6, 2022 

previous page1234…6next page

Back to Top
Exhibit 13.2



CERTIFICATION BY THE PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL
OFFICER
PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



In connection with Amendment No. 1 to the annual
report of Infobird Co., Ltd (the “Company”) on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2021 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Lianfang Zhou, 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 to my knowledge:



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.





|Date: October 21, 2022 | /s/ Lianfang Zhou                                   
|---------------------- | ----------------------------------------------------
|                       | Lianfang Zhou                                       
|                       | Chief Financial Officer(Principal Financial Officer)
#### Delancey T. Smith, Respondent, *v.*William Drought, Appellant.

Appeal from a judgment in favor of plaintiff.

Venino & Sichel (Albert W. Venino, of counsel), for appellant.

William F. Clare, for respondent.

Hascall, J.

We find that no error, calling for reversal, was committed upon the trial. The question of interest on the plaintiff’s claim, after elimination therefrom of the item of $25 for sideboard, was agreed upon- as amounting to $40, so that the verdict seemed to be at the correct figure.

To all the material points raised by the appellant, upon his argument and brief, we think that the cases of Remington v. Palmer, 62 N. Y. 31, and Murdock v. Gilchrist, 52 N. Y. 242, are a complete answer.

.Judgment and order appealed‘ from affirmed, with costs and disbursements.

Fitzsimons, Oh. J., concurs.

Judgment 'and order affirmed, with costs.
Order entered July 26, 2019

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05

- 18

- 00391

- CR

FRANK PAUL CELAYA, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 291st Jud icial District Court

Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. F12

- 52876

- U



### O RDER

We REINSTATE this appeal.

We abated the appeal for the appointment of counsel. The supplemental clerk’s record

containing the trial court’s appointment was filed July 24, 2019. The Clerk is DIRECTED to
list Sharita Blacknall as counsel of record for appellant.

Appellant’s brief is DUE September 3, 2019.

/s/ ROBERT D. BURNS, III CHIEF JUSTICE
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 182 (Tuesday, September 22, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 48233]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-22792]


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

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Office of the Secretary


Membership of the Defense Contract Audit Agency Senior Executive 
Service Performance Review Boards

AGENCY: Defense Contract Audit Agency, DoD.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces the appointment of members to the 
Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA) Performance Review Boards. The 
Performance Review Boards provide fair and impartial review of Senior 
Executive Service (SES) performance appraisals and make recommendations 
to the Director, DCAA, regarding final performance ratings and 
performance awards for DCAA SES members.

DATES: Effective September 22, 2009.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sandra L. Burrell, Chief, Human 
Resources Management Division, Defense Contract Audit Agency, 8725 John 
J. Kingman Road, Suite 2133, Fort Belvoir, Virginia 22060-6219, (703) 
767-1039.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 4314(c)(4), the 
following are the names and titles of DCAA career executives appointed 
to serve as members of the DCAA Performance Review Boards. Appointees 
will serve one-year terms, effective upon publication of this notice.

Headquarters Performance Review Board

Ms. Karen Cash, Assistant Director, Operations, DCAA, Chairperson.
Mr. Kenneth Saccoccia, Assistant Director, Policy and Plans, DCAA, 
member.
Mr. Thomas Peters, Director, Field Detachment, DCAA, member.

Regional Performance Review Board

Mr. David Eck, Regional Director, Mid-Atlantic Region, DCAA, 
chairperson.
Mr. Paul Phillips, Regional Director, Eastern Region, DCAA, member.
Mr. Ronald Meldonian, Regional Director, Northeastern Region, DCAA, 
member.

    Dated: September 15, 2009.
Patricia L. Toppings,
OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
[FR Doc. E9-22792 Filed 9-21-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001-06-P