alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
41724.

#### SOUTHERN POULTRY COMPANY, INC. v. FLETCHER.

Argued January 4, 1966

Decided March 10, 1966

Rehearing denied March 23, 1966

*376*William L. Preston, Terrell W. Benton, Jr., Stewart, Sartain & Carey, Joe B. Sartain, Jr.,*for appellant.

*Davis & Davidson, Jack S. Davidson, Thomas W. Ridgway,*for appellee.

Felton, Chief Judge.

Appellant has waived all grounds of his appeal except that the statement of the attorney relative to insurance required the grant of a new trial and that no proper reprimand and instructions would remove the effect of the reference to insurance. The jury was qualified as to one insurance company. There was no cross action by the defendant. In the absence of some special circumstances showing the interest of one insurance company in the plaintiff’s recovery it will be assumed that the court and jury understood that the defendant held a policy of insurance issued by the company with reference to which the jury was qualified. The trial judge was of the opinion that the reference to insurance by the attorney for the plaintiff was incidental. We concur in that view. What was foremost in the attorney’s mind was that a lawyer who was also an insurance investigator should see to it that witnesses who knew facts which tended to disprove contentions by the other party to a case should see that they are present to testify. Whether a lawyer is an insurance investigator or not he should know he should present the best case he can to a jury. The court’s statement to the jury was sufficient to remove from the case the fact that the defendant’s lawyer was an insurance investigator. There simply was no evidence of it. Whether it hurt the defendant is extremely doubtful. The facts of this case put it in the class of cases exemplified by *Steinmetz v. Chambley,*90 Ga. App. 519 (5) (83 SE2d 318), and *Bramlett v. Hulsey,*98 Ga. App. 39, 42 (104 SE2d 614). See also *Houston v. Taylor,*50 Ga. App. 811, 814 (179 SE 207). If the attorney in this case had emphasized the fact that the defendant was insured, by insidious intention and design, we would have -a different case. The question of the grant of a mistrial is largely in the discretion of the trial judge and in this case we do not think that he abused the discretion by denying the motion for a mistrial.

*377The court did not err in overruling the motions for a mistrial.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*Frankum and Pannell, JJ., concur.*
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.

§ 41.71 Rebuttal brief. ( a ) Within one month of the examiner's answer, any appellant may once file a rebuttal brief.
( b ) ( 1 ) The rebuttal brief of the owner may be directed to the examiner's answer and/or any respondent brief.
( 2 ) The rebuttal brief of the owner shall not include any new or non-admitted amendment, or an affidavit or other evidence. See § 1.116 of this title for amendments, affidavits or other evidence filed after final action but before or on the same date of filing an appeal and § 41.63 for amendments, affidavits or other evidence filed after the date of filing the appeal.
( c ) ( 1 ) The rebuttal brief of any requester may be directed to the examiner's answer and/or the respondent brief of the owner.
( 2 ) The rebuttal brief of a requester may not be directed to the respondent brief of any other requester.
( 3 ) No new ground of rejection can be proposed by a requester.
( 4 ) The rebuttal brief of a requester shall not include any new or non-admitted affidavit or other evidence. See § 1.116(d) of this title for affidavits or other evidence filed after final action but before or on the same date of filing an appeal and § 41.63(c) for affidavits or other evidence filed after the date of filing the appeal.
( d ) The rebuttal brief must include a certification that a copy of the rebuttal brief has been served in its entirety on all other parties to the proceeding. The names and addresses of the parties served must be indicated.
( e ) If a rebuttal brief is timely filed under paragraph (a) of this section but does not comply with all the requirements of paragraphs (a) through (d) of this section, appellant will be notified of the reasons for non-compliance and provided with a non-extendable period of one month within which to file an amended rebuttal brief. If the appellant does not file an amended rebuttal brief during the one-month period, or files an amended rebuttal brief which does not overcome all the reasons for non-compliance stated in the notification, that appellant's rebuttal brief and any amended rebuttal brief by that appellant will not be considered.
1

Daniels, Nia (FAA)

From: Daniels, Nia (FAA)

Sent: Wednesday, January 07, 2015 11:01 AM

To: 'ColorPhoto@q.com'

Cc: Pappas, Rob (FAA); Pearson, Lakisha (FAA); Cooper, Thuy (FAA); Ferritto, Michelle (FAA)

Subject: Request for Additional Information - ColorPhoto

January 7, 2015 

Mr. Charles J. Lesowske 

ColorPhoto 

16176 Foothill Loop South 

Sisters, OR 97759 

Dear Mr. Lesowske: 

This letter is to inform you that the following information is missing from your petition (Docket No. FAA2014-0893). This information is necessary for the Federal Aviation Administration to process your 

petition. Please submit the additional information to your docket at www.regulations.gov and submit any 

proprietary information to the FAA Headquarters or electronically via e-mail to nia.daniels@faa.gov. 

 List the aircraft’s cruise speed. 

 Provide the flight time for the proposed UAS operation. 

 Provide description of proximity to airports. 

Please provide the additional information by January 21, 2015. 

If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at (202) 267-7626. 

Sincerely, 

Nia Daniels 

Program Analyst 

Nia Daniels, ARM‐108

Federal Aviation Administration

Office of Rulemaking, Airmen & Airspace Rules Division

800 Independence Avenue, SW

Washington, DC 20591

PH: (202) 267 ‐ 7626

Fax: (202) 267 ‐ 5075

nia.daniels@faa.gov
2
§ 59a.1 Programs to which these regulations apply. ( a ) The regulations of this subpart apply to grants of funds, materials, or both, for establishing, expanding, and improving basic medical library resources as authorized by section 474 of the Act (42 U.S.C. 286b-5).
( b ) This subpart also applies to cooperative agreements awarded for this purpose. In these circumstances, references to “grant(s)” shall include “cooperative agreements(s).”
Home2001 Treaties and Agreements...Mexico (01-125) – Agreement on Use of the 2310-2360 MHz Frequency Band

# 									Mexico (01-125) – Agreement on Use of the 2310-2360 MHz Frequency Band							

TIAS

Office of Treaty Affairs

January 25, 2001

Telecommunication:  Use of 2310-2360 MHz Band

Agreement signed at Mexico City July 24, 2000; entered into force January 25, 2001. With appendices.
Download Agreements						 [15 MB]

Tags

MexicoTreatiesTreaties and International Agreements

Back to Top
### Supporting Materials #2 Current and Projected Emissions Inventory SeeAttachment: 

# + Revised GRIC 

### EI 2007
§ 1.493 Procedures and criteria for orders authorizing disclosures for noncriminal purposes. ( a ) *Application.* An order authorizing the disclosure of patient records covered by §§ 1.460 through 1.499 of this part for purposes other than criminal investigation or prosecution may be applied for by any person having a legally recognized interest in the disclosure which is sought. The application may be filed separately or as part of a pending civil action in which it appears that the patient records are needed to provide evidence. An application must use a fictitious name, such as John Doe, to refer to any patient and may not contain or otherwise disclose any patient identifying information unless the patient is the applicant or has given a written consent (meeting the requirements of § 1.475 of this part) to disclosure or the court has ordered the record of the proceeding sealed from public scrutiny.
( b ) *Notice.* The patient and VA facility from whom disclosure is sought must be given: ( 1 ) Adequate notice in a manner which will not disclose patient identifying information to other persons; and
( 2 ) An opportunity to file a written response to the application, or to appear in person, for the limited purpose of providing evidence on whether the statutory and regulatory criteria for the issuance of the court order are met.
( c ) *Review of evidence: Conduct of hearing.* Any oral argument, review of evidence, or hearing on the application must be held in the judge's chambers or in some manner which ensures that patient identifying information is not disclosed to anyone other than a party to the proceeding, the patient, or VA, unless the patient requests an open hearing in a manner which meets the written consent requirements of § 1.475 of this part. The proceeding may include an examination by the judge of the patient records referred to in the application.
( d ) *Criteria for entry of order.* An order under this section may be entered only if the court determines that good cause exists. To make this determination the court must find that: ( 1 ) Other ways of obtaining the information are not available or would not be effective; and
( 2 ) The public interest and need for the disclosure outweigh the potential injury to the patient, the physician-patient relationship and the treatment services.
( e ) *Content of order.* An order authorizing a disclosure must: ( 1 ) Limit disclosure to those parts of the patient's record which are essential to fulfill the objective of the order;
( 2 ) Limit disclosure to those persons whose need for information is the basis for the order; and
( 3 ) Include such other measures as are necessary to limit disclosure for the protection of the patient, the physician-patient relationship and the treatment services; for example, sealing from public scrutiny the record of any proceeding for which disclosure of a patient's record has been ordered.
[60 FR 63929, Dec. 13, 1995, as amended at 85 FR 64043, Oct. 9, 2020]
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATIONS OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

UNDER

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT

THE COAST
DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM, INC.

Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q

for
the Quarter ended September 30, 2006

The undersigned, who is the Chief Financial Officer of The Coast Distribution System, Inc. (the
Company), hereby certifies that (i) the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2006, as filed by the Company with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Quarterly Report), to which
this Certification is an Exhibit, fully complies with the applicable requirements of Section 13(a) and 15(d) of the Exchange Act; and (ii) the information contained in this Quarterly Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

Dated : November 14, 2006



/s/ SANDRA A. KNELLSandra A. KnellExecutive Vice President and Chief Financial OfficerA signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
 
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS AND CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF INCOME FROM THE
SEPTEMBER 30, 1995 FORM 10-Q REPORT AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1995
<CASH>                                      10,330,000
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                2,834,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            13,238,000
<PP&E>                                      53,916,000
<DEPRECIATION>                               2,010,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              83,312,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        6,969,000
<BONDS>                                      5,520,000
<COMMON>                                             0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                    314,000
<OTHER-SE>                                  66,866,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                83,312,000
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             6,238,000
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                2,937,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             2,530,000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             488,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                283,000
<INCOME-TAX>                                   123,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            160,000
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   160,000
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .02
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .02
        

</TABLE>
#### Frederick Zimmerman, Respondent, *v.*William T. Rainey et al., Appellants.

Appeal by defendants from a judgment of the Municipal Court, second district, New York city, in favor of plaintiff, for the sum of $59 and costs.

This action was brought to recover freight on a cargo of coal shipped by defendants oh a boat belonging to the plaintiff, from South Amboy, H. J., to the borough of Brooklyn, this city, at the alleged rate of sixteen cents per ton, less advances for towing and trimming. Th'te defendants denied that such was the rate agreed upon, contending that the agreement for carriage was at the rate of $3.50 per day.

Gould *&*Wilkie, for appellants.

Hyland *&*Zabriskie, for respondent.

MacLean, J.

Hot only is there evidence to sustain the finding of fact by the court, but so far as concerns the number of witnesses and the probability of their testimony,'coupled with the inference to be' drawn from the bill of lading introduced, the preponderance of evidence is in favor of the decision of the court. Some stress is laid upon the admission of evidence, against objection by the defendants, that when a boat is chartered by the day, as distinguished from hiring for freight, it is not customary to sign a bill of lading for the cargo. The only ground of objection to this evidence was its immateriality. The bill of lading, however, was seemingly neither a special agreement nor the agreement upon which the plaintiff based his cause of action, hence the testimony did not prove or vary its purport, but applied to another fact, namely, that if the fact had been, as contended for by the de*796fondants, they would not have been able to produce the paper is question.

Freedman, P. J., concurs; Leventritt, J., concurs in result.

Judgment affirmed, with costs.
# Official Journal C 333/2013

| | ISSN 1977-091X
  doi:10.3000/1977091X.C_2013.333.eng |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 333 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 5615 November 2013 |

ISSN 1977-091X

doi:10.3000/1977091X.C_2013.333.eng

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 333

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 5615 November 2013

---

| Notice No | Contents | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | IV   Notices |
| | NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES |
| | European Commission |
| 2013/C 333/01 | Final accounts of the 8th, 9th and 10th European Development Funds — Financial year 2012 | 1 |
| 2013/C 333/02 | The Court’s Statement of Assurance on the 8th, 9th and 10th European Development Funds (EDFs) to the European Parliament and the Council — Independent Auditor’s Report | 248 |

Notice No

Contents

page

IV   Notices

NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

European Commission

2013/C 333/01

Final accounts of the 8th, 9th and 10th European Development Funds — Financial year 2012

1

2013/C 333/02

The Court’s Statement of Assurance on the 8th, 9th and 10th European Development Funds (EDFs) to the European Parliament and the Council — Independent Auditor’s Report

248

---

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    EXHIBIT 10.3

                                  AMENDMENT TO
                  HADCO CORPORATION NON-QUALIFIED STOCK OPTION
                                  PLAN OF 1995


         This Amendment (the "Amendment") to the Hadco Corporation Non-Qualified
Stock Option Plan of 1995 (the "Plan") is effective as of April 17, 2000. The
Plan shall be amended as follows:

         Sections 11 (b) and (c) shall be deleted in their entirety and replaced
with the following:

         (b) Upon any sale of all or substantially all of the assets of the
Company, or upon any merger, consolidation or tender offer in respect of which
the stockholders holding all of the Company's outstanding voting securities
immediately prior to the consummation thereof, hold less than 50% of all of the
Company's outstanding voting securities immediately after such consummation
(each of the foregoing sale, merger, consolidation or tender offer hereinafter
called an "Acquisition"), then the date upon which all then outstanding options
granted under this Plan become fully vested and exercisable shall be
automatically accelerated to occur immediately prior to the consummation of such
Acquisition. Notwithstanding any language in any option agreement between the
Company and an optionee, in no event shall any outstanding option be subject to
forfeiture solely as a result of its non-exercise after the acceleration of
vesting described above in this subsection and prior to the consummation of an
Acquisition.

         (c) In the event of a recapitalization or reorganization of the Company
pursuant to which securities of the Company or of another corporation are issued
with respect to the outstanding shares of Common Stock, an optionee upon
exercising an option shall be entitled to receive for the purchase price paid
upon such exercise securities he or she would have received if he or she had
exercised such option prior to such recapitalization or reorganization.

         Except as specifically amended hereby, each of the terms and conditions
of the Plan is hereby ratified and confirmed and shall remain in full force and
effect.
- Media Hub Home
- Remarks and Releases
- Contact Us

HomeDubai Regional Media Hub...Remarks and Releases – Dubai Regional Media Hub

# 						Remarks and Releases – Dubai Regional Media Hub					

							Press briefings from the Dubai Regional Media Hub						

		Subscribe		

44 items
Clear All Filters

## View collection by:

Select a Year20242023202220212019

Select a MonthJanuaryFebruaryMarchAprilMayJuneJulyAugustSeptemberOctoberNovemberDecember

Select a SpeakerBarbara A. LeafBonnie Denise JenkinsDaniel J. KritenbrinkHady AmrJeffrey FeltmanJennifer GavitoJohn KerryMira K. ResnickMolly PheeRamin TolouiRobert MalleyTimothy A. Lenderking

Select a LocationAfghanistanBahrainChinaEgyptIndiaIranIraqIsraelJordanKuwaitLebanonLibyaMoroccoOmanPalestinian TerritoriesQatarRussiaSaudi ArabiaSyriaTurkeyUkraineUnited Arab EmiratesUnited StatesYemen

Select a Release TypeSpecial BriefingSpecial Briefing via Telephone

Select a Bureau/OfficeAfrica Regional Media HubAsia Pacific Media HubBureau of African AffairsBureau of East Asian and Pacific AffairsBureau of Near Eastern AffairsBureau of Political-Military AffairsDubai Regional Media HubOffice of International Media Engagement

          -    Special Briefing via Telephone  		Special Briefing via Telephone with Jennifer Gavito, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Iraq and Iran	  Jennifer GavitoApril 22, 2022 
          -    Special Briefing  		Telephonic Press Briefing with Mira K. Resnick, Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Regional Security, Bureau of Political-Military Affairs	  Mira K. ResnickNovember 16, 2021 
          -    Special Briefing via Telephone  		Briefing with Ambassador Jeffrey Feltman; Special Envoy for the Horn of Africa	  Jeffrey FeltmanNovember 2, 2021 
          -    Special Briefing via Telephone  		Special Briefing with Robert Malley, U.S. Special Envoy for Iran	  Robert MalleyOctober 25, 2021 
          -    Special Briefing via Telephone  		Briefing on Yemen with Timothy Lenderking, U.S. Special Envoy for Yemen; and Sarah Charles, USAID Assistant Administrator for Humanitarian Assistance	  Timothy A. LenderkingAugust 9, 2021 
          -    Special Briefing  		Special Briefing with Jeffrey Prescott, Deputy to the U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations	  July 10, 2021 
          -    Special Briefing via Telephone  		Briefing with John Kerry, Special Presidential Envoy for Climate	  John KerryJuly 1, 2021 
          -    Special Briefing via Telephone  		Briefing with Major General Andrew Rohling, Commander of the U.S. Army’s Southern European Task Force Africa and Deputy Commanding General of U.S. Army Europe and Africa	  June 17, 2021 
          -    Special Briefing via Telephone  		Special Briefing with General Kenneth McKenzie, Commander of the U.S. Central Command	  June 7, 2021 
          -    Special Briefing via Telephone  		Special Briefing with Jeffrey Prescott, Deputy to the U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations	  June 6, 2021 

previous page12345next page

Back to Top
Exhibit 32

Statement of Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer under 18
U.S.C. 1350

I, Henry C. Pao, the chief executive officer and chief financial officer of
Supertex, Inc., a California corporation (the "Company"), certify pursuant to
Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code, that to my
knowledge:

(i)	the Quarterly Report of the Company on Form 10-Q for the period ending
September 30, 2003 (the "Report"), fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) or 15(d), whichever is applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934, and

(ii)	the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.

Date: November 7, 2003			     /s/ Henry C. Pao
					     ----------------------------
					     Henry C. Pao, Ph.D.
					     Chief Executive Officer and
					     Chief inancial Officer




The material contained in this Exhibit 32 is not deemed "filed" with the SEC
and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company under
the Securities Act of 1933 or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, whether made
before or after the date hereof and irrespective of any general incorporation
language contained in such filing.