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

Date: October 15, 2003

Assignor: SkyFrames, Inc., a Texas corporation

Assignor's Mailing Address: c/o Grey Pierson, PIERSON BEHR, ATTORNEYS,
     301 West Abram Street, Arlington, Texas 76010

Assignee: Basic Energy, Inc. n/c SkyFrames, Inc., a Utah corporation

Assignee's Mailing Address: 555 Anton Boulevard, Costa Mesa, California 92626

Consideration: One Thousand Dollars ($1,000.00) and other good and valuable
     consideration, the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged.

Property:  The  exclusive  right to use VOS  patent  pending  technology  (i.e.,
     Virtual Onboard Switching patent pending technology  previously acquired by
     Assignor  from  Myercom,  Inc., a Delaware  corporation)  SOLELY WITHIN THE
     GEOGRAPHIC  CONFINES OF NORTH AMERICA (I.E.,  CANADA, THE UNITED STATES AND
     MEXICO) ONLY.

     Assignor,  for the  consideration  stated,  hereby  assigns the Property to
Assignee.  This Assignment extends exclusively to Assignee, and the Property may
not be transferred,  assigned,  sold or otherwise encumbered by Assignee without
the express written consent of Assignor, which consent shall not be unreasonably
withheld.  Assignor  warrants  that Assignor is the lawful owner of the Property
and  that  same  is free  and  clear  from any  liens,  security  agreements  or
encumbrances.  Upon request,  Assignor  agrees to execute such other and further
instruments as may be reasonably necessary or desireable to fully effectuate the
purpose and intent of this assignement.

     When the context requires, singular nouns and pronouns include the plural.

                                        SKYFRAMES, INC., Assignor

                                        By: /s/ Grey Pierson
                                           -----------------------------
                                           GREY PIERSON
                                           Authorized Representative

     This  instrument  was  acknowledged  before me by GREY PIERSON on behalf of
SKYFRAMES, INC., a Texas corporation,  Assignor, on this the 15th day of October
2003.

---------------------------------------
             REAGAN B. REID
seal   Notary Public, State of Texas               /s/ Reagan B. Ried
           My Commission Expires                   ------------------------
              April 11, 2007                       Notary Public
---------------------------------------



ASSIGNMENT                                                             PAGE SOLO
Exhibit 32

                           COGENCO INTERNATIONAL, INC.

                   Certification pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.1350
                             Chief Executive Officer
                           And Chief Financial Officer

     To my knowledge: the quarterly report on Form 10-QSB for the period ended
December 31, 2007, containing financial statements for the period then ended,
fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Act of
1934; and the information contained in the Form 10-QSB fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Cogenco
International, Inc. for the periods presented.


February 13, 2008


/s/ David W. Brenman
---------------------------
David W. Brenman, Chief Executive
Officer and Chief Financial Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK>  0000793024
<NAME>  Kent Electronics Corporation
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-29-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-28-1996
<CASH>                                      39,417,000
<SECURITIES>                                27,002,000
<RECEIVABLES>                               72,761,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                 1,235,000
<INVENTORY>                                 56,847,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                           199,305,000
<PP&E>                                     101,830,000
<DEPRECIATION>                              21,782,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             301,169,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       50,614,000
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                    40,413,000
<OTHER-SE>                                 208,546,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               301,169,000
<SALES>                                    314,906,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                           314,906,000
<CGS>                                      239,013,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                              239,013,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               236,000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              32,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             36,591,000
<INCOME-TAX>                                14,455,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                         22,136,000
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                22,136,000
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .87
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .87
        

</TABLE>
# C_2019186EN.01000201.xml

| 3.6.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 186/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

3.6.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 186/2

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

30 May 2019

(2019/C 186/02)

1 euro =

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,1134 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 122,10 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4687 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,88178 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 10,6323 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,1228 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | 138,50 |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 9,7638 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 25,841 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 324,74 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 4,2887 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 4,7553 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 6,5590 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,6098 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,5029 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 8,7386 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,7095 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 1,5361 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 325,97 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 16,3022 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 7,6903 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,4220 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 16 032,96 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,6655 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 58,064 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 72,3334 |
| THB | Thai baht | 35,428 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 4,4327 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 21,3092 |
| INR | Indian rupee | 77,8115 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,1134

JPY

Japanese yen

122,10

DKK

Danish krone

7,4687

GBP

Pound sterling

0,88178

SEK

Swedish krona

10,6323

CHF

Swiss franc

1,1228

ISK

Iceland króna

138,50

NOK

Norwegian krone

9,7638

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

25,841

HUF

Hungarian forint

324,74

PLN

Polish zloty

4,2887

RON

Romanian leu

4,7553

TRY

Turkish lira

6,5590

AUD

Australian dollar

1,6098

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,5029

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

8,7386

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,7095

SGD

Singapore dollar

1,5361

KRW

South Korean won

1 325,97

ZAR

South African rand

16,3022

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

7,6903

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,4220

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

16 032,96

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,6655

PHP

Philippine peso

58,064

RUB

Russian rouble

72,3334

THB

Thai baht

35,428

BRL

Brazilian real

4,4327

MXN

Mexican peso

21,3092

INR

Indian rupee

77,8115

---

(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

---
ABSTRACTS OF DECISIONS.

IMPEACHMENT OF WITNESS.

[Cuyahoga Circuit Court,

January Term, 1888.]

Baldwin, Caldwell and Upson, JJ.

#### * ALDRICH v. MARCELLUS.

Contradictory Declarations to Impeach Witness.

Deposition in other suit, can not be used to contradict witness unless inquiry is first made.

Appeal — Motion for a new trial.

Darius Cadwell, for plaintiff.

E. Sowers, for defendant.

*

 The judgment in this case was affirmed by the supreme court without report, March 15 1892.

Held: That a witness, not a party to the suit may not be contradicted by statements made in a deposition given by him in another suit in which the parties in the suit were not parties, and in reference to which deposition no inquiry was made of the witness.
# The Trade and Investment Program (TIP)

The Trade and Investment Program (TIP) encourages and assistsU.S. private and public sector involvement in agricultural andagribusiness development in selected regions and countries.Program efforts focus on information collection and disseminationby the Agribusiness Information Center; trade and investmentpromotion and facilitation through the organization of business,trade, and investment opportunity missions; participation intrade shows; and the provision of technical assistance related tomarketing, grades and standards, quality control, etc.

|                                   |
|----------------------------------------|
| *Last modified: Monday, July 06, 1998* |
41418.

#### McCLURE v. PHILLIPS.

Frankum, Judge.

1. The simplest test of the sufficiency of a petition to withstand a general demurrer is whether the defendant can admit all that is alleged in the petition and escape liability. If he can, of course, the petition fails to state a cause of action; if he cannot escape liability, then the petition does state a cause of action. *Harvey v. Zell,*87 Ga. App. 280, 284 (1d) (73 SE2d 605). In the instant case count 1 of the two-count petition is, in sum and substance, a short form action on a promissory note alleging that the defendant executed the note; that the note is in default, past due and unpaid. A copy of the note is attached as an exhibit, and while it appears from the face thereof that the defendant’s liability to the plaintiff was not to mature until the happening of a certain event, the allegation that the note is in default, past due and unpaid, when considered in connection with the exhibit, is tantamount to an allegation that the event maturing the note had occurred. Certainly as against a general demurrer, the first count of the petition *209was sufficient. See *Strawn v. Kersey,*22 Ga. 586; *Carter v. Penn,*79 Ga. 747, 750 (4 SE 896).

Argued. July 6, 1965

Decided September 8, 1965.

*George M. Scheer, Jr., Shoob & McLain,*for plaintiff in error.

*Fryer, Harp & Turk, Joel J. Fryer,*contra.

2. The effect of the argument by plaintiff in error on the general demurrer is that the suit on the note is premature. This is not a ground for general demurrer, but must be raised either by a special demurrer or by a timely plea in abatement. *Norwood Realty Co. v. P & H Homes, Inc.,*98 Ga. App. 839 (107 SE2d 292). Count 1 of the petition does not show upon its face that the suit is premature, and, if the event rendering the note due had not occurred when the suit was filed, it would be a matter of defense which the defendant should raise by a timely plea. The special demurrer attacking the allegations of paragraph 4 of count 1 which alleges that the note is in default, past due and unpaid on the ground that those allegations are mere conclusions was not meritorious and was properly overruled.

3. Count 2 of the petition is a simple action on debt, alleging that the plaintiff loaned to the defendant $2,000, which the defendant promised to repay upon the closing of the sale of certain real estate known as 1015 Dawn View Lane, Atlanta, Fulton County, Ga.; that the said realty was sold to defendant, and defendant did close the sale and that plaintiff has demanded the return of the $2,000, which has not been paid. Under the authorities first cited in headnote 1, these allegations were sufficient as against the general and special demurrers filed thereto.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*Bell, P. J., and Hall, J., concur.*
EXHIBIT 35.1








ANNUAL SERVICER COMPLIANCE STATEMENT PURSUANT TO ITEM 1123 OF REGULATION AB





CARMAX BUSINESS SERVICES, LLC








The undersigned, a duly authorized officer of CarMax Business Services, LLC, as Servicer pursuant to Section 3.10 of the Sale and Servicing Agreement dated as of January 1, 2021 (the "Sale and Servicing Agreement") among CarMax Auto Owner Trust 2021-1, as Issuer (the "Issuer"), CarMax Auto Funding LLC, as Depositor, and CarMax Business Services, LLC, as Servicer (the "Servicer"), does hereby certify that:





1. CarMax Business Services, LLC is, as of the date hereof, the Servicer under the Sale and Servicing Agreement.





2. The undersigned is duly authorized to execute and deliver this Officer's Certificate.





3. A review of the activities of the Servicer during the period beginning on March 1, 2022 and ending on February 28, 2023 and of the Servicer's performance under the Sale and Servicing Agreement was made under my supervision.  To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Servicer has fulfilled all of its obligations under the Sale and Servicing Agreement in all material respects throughout such period.








Capitalized terms used in this certificate and not otherwise defined herein have the meanings assigned to them in the Sale and Servicing Agreement.





IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned, a duly authorized officer of the Servicer, has duly executed this Officer's Certificate this 26th day of May, 2023.





CARMAX BUSINESS SERVICES, LLC





/s/ Andrew J. McMonigle


Andrew J. McMonigle


Vice President and Treasurer
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 Research
Frontiers Incorporated (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the
quarter ended June 30, 2006 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Joseph
M. Harary, President, Treasurer and Principal Accounting 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), as applicable, 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/ Joseph M. Harary
    Joseph M. Harary
    President, Treasurer and Principal Accounting Officer
    August 10, 2006
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2433 Introduced in House (IH)]

110th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2433

 To prohibit the designation of any agency, bureau, or other entity of 
the Department of Homeland Security as a separate agency or bureau for 
  purposes of post employment restrictions in title 18, United States 
                                 Code.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 22, 2007

 Mr. DeFazio introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                       Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To prohibit the designation of any agency, bureau, or other entity of 
the Department of Homeland Security as a separate agency or bureau for 
  purposes of post employment restrictions in title 18, United States 
                                 Code.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. INTEGRITY IN POST-EMPLOYMENT.

    (a) Designations as Separate Agencies and Bureaus Barred.--No 
agency, bureau, or other entity of the Department of Homeland Security 
may be designated under section 207(h)(1) of title 18, United States 
Code, as a separate agency or bureau.
    (b) Effective Date.--
            (1) In general.--This section takes effect on the date of 
        the enactment of this Act.
            (2) Applicability to designations.--The following shall 
        cease to be effective on the date of the enactment of this Act:
                    (A) Any waiver of restrictions made under section 
                207(c)(2)(C) of title 18, United States Code, before 
                the enactment of this Act, with respect to any 
                position, or category of positions, in the Department 
                of Homeland Security.
                    (B) Any designation of an agency, bureau, or other 
                entity in the Department of Homeland Security, before 
                the enactment of this Act, under section 207(h)(1) of 
                title 18, United States Code, as a separate agency or 
                bureau.
                                 <all>
```
#### Stephen Sokolowski *v.*Emelia Nobile

Maltbie, C. J., Bkown, Jennings, Ells and Dickenson, Js.

Argued June 2

decided June 8, 1948

*662
      *George G. Whitehead,*for the appellant (plaintiff).

*Thomas C. Cambria,*for the appellee (defendant).

Per Curiam.

This case differs in no material respect from the preceding case, *Walling*v. *Robertine.*That case states the rule to be: “Writs of error from city courts are returnable to the Supreme Court of Errors.”

The plaintiff makes two additional claims. General Statutes, Sup. 1947, § 1418i, does not affect the jurisdiction of writs of error of the specific courts named in §§ 1667c and 1665c of the 1935 Cumulative Supplement. The term “municipal courts” is not used in the latter sections. General Statutes, § 5704, authorizing the bringing of writs of error in which errors in matters of fact and in matters of law are joined to the Superior Court, has been repealed. Cum. Sup. 1935, § 1666c.

There is no error.
###### 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.

#### § 2.163 Acknowledgment of receipt of affidavit or declaration.

###### Cross Reference

Link to an amendment published at 86 FR 64332, Nov. 17, 2021.

###### Cross Reference

Link to a delay of the above amendment published at 87 FR 62032, Oct. 13, 2022.

###### Cross Reference

Link to a delay of the above amendment published at 88 FR 62463, Sept. 12, 2023.

The Office will issue a notice as to whether an affidavit or declaration is acceptable, or the reasons for refusal.

(a) If the affidavit or declaration is filed within the time periods set forth in section 8 of the Act, deficiencies may be corrected after notification from the Office if the requirements of § 2.164 are met.

(b) A response to the refusal must be filed within six months of the date of issuance of the Office action, or before the end of the filing period set forth in section 8(a) of the Act, whichever is later. The response must be signed by the owner, someone with legal authority to bind the owner (e.g., a corporate officer or general partner of a partnership), or a practitioner qualified to practice under § 11.14 of this chapter, in accordance with the requirements of § 2.193(e)(2).

(c) If no response is filed within this time period, the registration will be cancelled, unless time remains in the grace period under section 8(a)(3) of the Act. If time remains in the grace period, the owner may file a complete, new affidavit.

[75 FR 35976, June 24, 2010, as amended at 76 FR 69133, Nov. 8, 2011]

###### 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.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<RESTATED>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                           1,280
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    6,325
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (1,608)
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 7,497
<PP&E>                                           3,758
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (2,894)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  12,090
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            9,183
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        74,281
<OTHER-SE>                                    (71,374)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    12,090
<SALES>                                          7,791
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 7,791
<CGS>                                            2,421
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    6,322
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               (1,051)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  42
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                     57
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                 57
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                        57
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .00
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .00


</TABLE>
#### § 4.62 Circulatory disturbances.

The circulatory disturbances, especially of the lower extremity following injury in the popliteal space, must not be overlooked, and require rating generally as phlebitis.