alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
41823.

#### GREENE v. SMITH.

*317Argued February 8, 1966

Decided March 2, 1966

Rehearing denied March 15, 1966.

*Huie, Etheridge •& Harland, Harry L. Cashin, Jr.,*for appellant.

*Kemp & Watson, John L. Watson, Jr.,*for appellee.

Nichols, Presiding Judge.

“It has been held many times that a demurrer, ‘being a critic, must itself be free from imperfection.’ This is particularly true of a special demurrer, which must point out clearly and specifically the alleged imperfection in the pleading attacked by it. It ‘must lay its finger, as it were, upon the very point.’ ” *Martin v. Gurley,*74 Ga. App. 642, 643 (40 SE2d 787). “ ‘ (A) special demurrer must not only point out *318the defect in the pleading attacked but also must specifically state the reason why such pleading is subject to the criticism made of it.’ *Bartow County v. Darnell,*95 Ga. App. 193, 195 (97 SE2d 610).” *Hughes v. Jackson,*109 Ga. App. 804, 807 (137 SE2d 487). The plaintiff’s special demurrers attacked paragraphs of the defendant’s answer as being “impertinent, immaterial, irrelevant and mere surplusage” but failed to point out any reason why such paragraphs were subject to such complaint. Therefore, the trial court did not err in overruling such demurrers.

The plaintiff does not complain of the judgment overruling his general demurrer to the answer, and thus, even assuming without deciding that the defendant failed to set forth an adequate defense to the plaintiff’s petition, it is the law of the case that a finding for the defendant would be authorized if the allegations of his alleged defense were supported by competent evidence. See in this connection *Cloud v. Stewart,*92 Ga. App. 247 (88 SE2d 323); *Atlantic C. L. R. Co. v. Clements,*92 Ga. App. 451, 457 (88 SE2d 809), and citations.

The plaintiff testified that he was a stockholder, officer and director of the corporation that had issued the debentures referred to in the defendant’s answer, that he owned other debentures in such corporation, that such corporation had been taken over by another corporation and under an arrangement with such corporation the interest on all outstanding debentures was being paid except those owned by the plaintiff. He also testified that the debentures were in his custody. Other evidence was adduced to show that a notation had been made on the company records that the plaintiff owned such debentures, and the defendant testified to the facts alleged in his answer. Accordingly, the judgment for the defendant was authorized by the evidence.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*Hall and Deen, JJ., concur.*
**
**Exhibit 31.1**

**CERTIFICATION**

I, CoreyHenry, certify that: 

1. I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K and all reports on Form 10-D required to be filed in respect of the period covered by this report on Form 10-K of Santander Drive Auto Receivables Trust 2020-2(the “Exchange Act periodic reports”); 

2. Based on my knowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as a whole, do notcontain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by thisreport; 

3. Based on my knowledge, all of the distribution, servicing and other information required to be provided under Form 10-D for the period covered by this report is included in the Exchange Act periodic reports; 

4. Basedon my knowledge and the servicer compliance statement required in this report under Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as disclosed in the Exchange Act periodic reports, the servicer has fulfilled its obligations under the servicing agreement inall material respects; and 

5. All of the reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria forasset-backed securities and their related attestation reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities required to be included inthis report in accordance with Item 1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange Act Rules 13a-18 and 15d-18 have been included as an exhibit to this report, except as otherwisedisclosed in this report. Any material instances of noncompliance described in such reports have been disclosed in this report on Form 10-K.

In giving the certifications above, I have reasonably relied on information provided to me by the following unaffiliated parties: Wells FargoBank, N.A. and Computershare Trust Company, N.A. 

 
By: 
/s/ Corey Henry
Name: Corey HenryTitle: President and Chief Executive Officer Santander Drive Auto Receivables LLC, as Depositor (senior officer in charge of securitization of the depositor)Date: March 31, 2023**
Exhibit
31.2



CERTIFICATION
OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO

RULE
13a-14(a) OR 15d-14(a) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934,

AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



I,
Bei Zhen, certify that:



| | 1. | I
    have reviewed this Amendment No. 1 to the Annual Report on Form 10-K of MicroCloud Hologram Inc. (the “registrant”);
| | -- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 2. | Based
    on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary
    to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to
    the period covered by this report.
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Date:
March 24, 2023



|By: | /s/
    Bei Zhen                  | 
|--- | --------------------------------- | 
|    | Bei
    Zhen                      | 
|    | Chief
    Financial Officer       | 
|    | (Principal
    Financial Officer) |
Exhibit 10.10

 

COMMUNITY HEALTHCARE TRUST

INCORPORATED

COMPENSATION REDUCTION ELECTION FORM

 

I.                                        Elective Reduction Percentages

 

As specified below, I hereby elect, pursuant to Paragraph 4 of the Alignment of Interest Program (the “Program”) of the 2014 Incentive Plan (the “Plan”) of Community Healthcare Trust (the “Company”), to reduce that percentage of each compensation type indicated below which would otherwise be paid to me in cash during 20     (with respect to compensation earned with respect to services to be performed by me subsequent to the date of this election) and subject the amount of such reduced compensation to a Restriction Period (3, 5 or 8 years) as outlined below:

 

	
Compensation Type
    	
 
    	
Deferral Percentage
    	
 
    	
Restriction Period
    	
 
    
	
Annual Base Salary 
    	
 
    	
 
    	
%
    	
 
    	
 
    
	
Annual Bonus
    	
 
    	
 
    	
%
    	
 
    	
 
    
	
Other Compensation
    	
 
    	
 
    	
%
    	
 
    	
 
    


 

I understand that this election is irrevocable for 20      .  Capitalized terms, not defined herein, shall have the meaning given such terms in the Program or the Plan.

 

II.                                   Form and Timing of Receipt of Shares

 

I understand that compensation reduced by this election will be applied to the acquisition of Acquisition Shares.  I will receive an Award based upon the Acquisition Shares multiplied by the Restriction Multiple, determined by the Restriction Period.  Shares, both Acquisition Shares and Awards, shall be credited to my account as soon as administratively feasible.  I will, at the time shares are credited to my account, have all rights of a stockholder subject to the restrictions pursuant to the Program and the Plan.  Such rights include the right to vote the shares and receive all dividends and other distributions paid or made with respect thereto.

 

I shall receive the shares, both Acquisition Shares and the Award, unrestricted pursuant to the terms of this election, the Program, the Plan, my employment agreement or as otherwise agreed to in writing by both parties.

 

Executed effective as of the date specified below.

 

	
 
    	
Executive:
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
Title:
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
Date   signed:
    	
 
    
					


 

Receipt of form by the Company

 

	
 
    	
Received   by:
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
Title:
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
Date   signed:
N OTE : This disposition is nonprecedential.


# United States **Court of Appeals**  **for the Federal Circuit**

______________________
IN RE: CELGARD, LLC
, Appellant

______________________

2016

- 1218

______________________
Appeal from the United States Patent and Trademark Office, Patent Trial and Appeal Board in No. IPR2014

- 00692.

______________________

JUDGMENT

______________________

C YRUS A LCORN M ORTON , Robins Kaplan LLP, Minn eapolis, MN, argued for appellant. Also represented by A NDREW D OUGLAS H EDDEN
, W ILLIAM M ANSKE ; B RYAN J. V OGEL , New York, NY.

F RANCES L YNCH , Office of the Solicitor, United States Patent and Trademark Office, Alexandria, VA, argued for intervenor Michelle K. Lee. Also represented by N ATHAN K. K ELLEY
, T HOMAS W. K RAUSE
, W ILLIAM L A M ARCA
, S COTT W EIDENFELLER

.

______________________

T HIS C AUSE having been heard and considered, it is

O RDERED and A DJUDGED :P ER C URIAM (P ROST
, Chief Judge, L OURIE and M OORE
, Circuit Judges ).

AFFIRMED

. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.

E NTERED BY O RDER OF THE C OURT

December 13, 2016 /s/ Peter R. Marksteiner Date Peter R. Marksteiner Clerk of Court
I 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2393 

To amend the American Bald Eagle Recovery and National Emblem 

Commemorative Coin Act. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 17, 2007 

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska (for himself and Mr. SALI) introduced the following bill; 

which was referred to the Committee on Financial Services 

A BILL 

To amend the American Bald Eagle Recovery and National 

Emblem Commemorative Coin Act. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘American Bald Eagle 

5 Commemorative Coin Program Amendments of 2007’’. 

6 SEC. 2. DISTRIBUTIONS. 

7 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subsection (b) of section 7 of the 

8 American Bald Eagle Recovery and National Emblem 

9 Commemorative Coin Act is amended to read as follows: 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with BILLS
2 

•HR 2393 IH

1 ‘‘(b) DISTRIBUTION.—Subject to section 5134(f) of 

2 title 31, United States Code, all surcharges received by 

3 the Secretary from the sale of coins issued under this Act 

4 shall be promptly paid by the Secretary as follows: 

‘‘(1) 1 5 ⁄3 to the American Eagle Foundation of 

6 Tennessee in the United States to further its works. 

‘‘(2) 1 7 ⁄3 to the American Bald Eagle Founda8 tion of Haines, Alaska, to further its works. 

‘‘(3) 1 9 ⁄3 to the Peregrine Fund of Boise, Idaho, 

10 to further its works.’’. 

11 (b) TECHNICAL AND CONFORMING AMENDMENT.— 

12 Subsection (c) of section 7 is amended by striking ‘‘United 

13 States and the American Eagle Fund’’ and inserting 

14 ‘‘United States, the American Eagle Fund, the American 

15 Bald Eagle Foundation of Haines, Alaska, and the Per16 egrine Fund of Boise, Idaho’’. 

Æ 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with BILLS
TREATIES AND OTHER INTERNATIONAL ACTS SERIES 06-621 

________________________________________________________________________ 

INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT 

Article 98 

 Agreement Between the 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

and LESOTHO 

Signed at Maseru June 21, 2006 

 
 NOTE BY THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE 

 Pursuant to Public Law 89—497, approved July 8, 1966 

(80 Stat. 271; 1 U.S.C. 113)—

“. . .the Treaties and Other International Acts Series issued 

under the authority of the Secretary of State shall be competent 

 evidence . . . of the treaties, international agreements other than 

treaties, and proclamations by the President of such treaties and 

international agreements other than treaties, as the case may be, 

therein contained, in all the courts of law and equity and of maritime 

jurisdiction, and in all the tribunals and public offices of the 

United States, and of the several States, without any further proof 

or authentication thereof.” 
LESOTHO 

International Criminal Court: Article 98 

 Agreement signed at Maseru June 21, 2006; 

 Entered into force June 21, 2006.
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### APPEAL 

### O F 

### F LORIDA 

### S ECOND 

### D ISTRICT JAMES COCHRAN, JR., Appellant, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee. No. 2D20-343 September 29, 2021 Appeal from the Circuit Court for Lee County; Bruce E. Kyle, Judge. Thomas J. Butler of Thomas Butler, P.A., Miami Beach, for Appellant. Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Blain A. Goff, Assistant Attorney General, Tampa, for Appellee. PER CURIAM. Affirmed. CASANUEVA, VILLANTI, and ATKINSON, JJ., Concur.2

Opinion subject to revision prior to official publication.
## Appendix J

CARBON/CARBON DIOXIDE Papers that Were Accepted for ECOTOX

Acceptable for ECOTOX and OPP

1. Bezemer, T. M., Jones, T. H., and Knight, K. J. (1998). Long-Term Effects of Elevated CO2 and Temperature on Populations of the Peach Potato Aphid myzus Persicae and Its Parasitoid Aphidius matricariae. Oecologia (Berl.) 116: 128-135.

EcoReference No.: 102817 Chemical of Concern: CBNDO; Habitat : T; Effect Codes : POP,BCM,BEH; Rejection Code : LITE EVAL CODED(CBNDO).

2. Fivelstad, S., Haavik, H., Loevik, G., and Olsen, A. B. (1998). Sublethal Effects and Safe Levels of Carbon Dioxide in Seawater for Atlantic Salmon Postsmolts (Salmo salar L.): Ion Regulation and Growth. Aquaculture 160: 305-316.

EcoReference No.: 49214 Chemical of Concern: CBNDO; Habitat : A; Effect Codes : BCM,GRO; Rejection Code : LITE EVAL CODED(CBNDO).

3. Fivelstad, S., Olsen, A. B., Kloften, H., Ski, H. , and Stefansson, S. (1999). Effects of Carbon Dioxide on Atlantic Salmon (Salmo salar L.) Smolts at Constant pH in Bicarbonate Rich Freshwater . Aquaculture 178: 171-187.

EcoReference No.: 56141 Chemical of Concern: CBNDO; Habitat : A; Effect Codes : GRO,MOR,CEL,BCM,PHY; Rejection
Code : LITE EVAL CODED(CBNDO).

4. Molnar, J. M. and Cumming, W. A. (1968). Effect of Carbon Dioxide on Propagation of Softwood, Conifer and Herbaceous Cuttings. Can.J.Plant Sci. 48: 595-599.

EcoReference No.: 30567 Chemical of Concern: CBNDO; Habitat : T; Rejection Code : LITE EVAL CODED(CBNDO).

5. Zaller, J. G. and Arnone III, J. A. (1997). Activity of Surface-Casting Earthworms in a Calcareous Grassland Under Elevated Atmospheric CO2. Oecologia 111: 249-254.

EcoReference No.: 102818 Chemical of Concern: CBNDO; Habitat : T; Effect Codes : POP; Rejection Code : LITE EVAL CODED(CBNDO).

Acceptable for ECOTOX but not OPP

1. Akbar, S. and Rogers, L. J. (1986). Effect of Toxaphene on Carbon Dioxide Assimilation and Translocation in
Avena secale. Phytochemistry 25: 1009-1013.

EcoReference No.: 46852; Habitat : T; Rejection Code : NO COC(CBNDO).

2. Asada, K. and Kasai, Z. (1960). Inhibition of Ca rbon Dioxide Fixation of Green Plants by Glyoxal-Bisulfite. Mem Res Inst Food Sci, Kyoto Univ, No 23,66-70

.

EcoReference No.: 25462; Habitat : T; Rejection Code : NO COC(CBNDO).
###### 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.

#### § 41.101 Notice of proceeding.

(a) Notice of a contested case will be sent to every party to the proceeding. The entry of the notice initiates the proceeding.

(b) When the Board is unable to provide actual notice of a contested case on a party through the correspondence address of record for the party, the Board may authorize other modes of notice, including:

(1) Sending notice to another address associated with the party, or

(2) Publishing the notice in the *Official Gazette of the United States Patent and Trademark Office.*
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2169 Introduced in House (IH)]

110th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2169

 To amend the Federal Water Pollution Control Act to clarify that fill 
                 material cannot be comprised of waste.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 3, 2007

 Mr. Pallone (for himself, Mr. Shays, Mr. Blumenauer, Mrs. Capps, Mr. 
   Frank of Massachusetts, Mr. Moran of Virginia, Mr. Chandler, Ms. 
McCollum of Minnesota, Mr. Farr, Mr. Langevin, Mr. Sires, Mr. Grijalva, 
 Mr. Payne, Mr. Hinchey, Mr. Gutierrez, Ms. Zoe Lofgren of California, 
     Ms. Schwartz, Mr. Delahunt, Mr. Berman, Mr. George Miller of 
California, Mr. Honda, Mr. Smith of Washington, Mr. Conyers, Mr. Miller 
 of North Carolina, Mr. Hare, Ms. Schakowsky, Ms. Woolsey, Mr. Schiff, 
 Mr. Kucinich, Mr. Serrano, Mr. McHugh, Mr. McGovern, Mr. Meehan, Mr. 
    Stark, Mr. Cooper, Mr. Gilchrest, Mr. McNerney, Mr. Inslee, Mr. 
  DeFazio, Mr. Kennedy, Mr. McNulty, Mr. Van Hollen, Mr. Waxman, Mr. 
    Rothman, Mr. Tierney, Mr. McDermott, Mr. Yarmuth, Mr. Rush, Mr. 
  Cummings, Mr. Platts, Mr. Clay, Mr. Hodes, Mr. Rangel, Mr. Lewis of 
Georgia, Mr. Fattah, Mr. Allen, Mr. Hastings of Florida, Mrs. Tauscher, 
     Mr. Kildee, Ms. Lee, Ms. DeLauro, Mr. Shuler, and Mr. Spratt) 
 introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on 
                   Transportation and Infrastructure

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend the Federal Water Pollution Control Act to clarify that fill 
                 material cannot be comprised of waste.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Clean Water Protection Act''.

SEC. 2. DEFINITION OF FILL MATERIAL.

    Section 502 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 
1362) is amended by adding at the end the following:
            ``(25) Fill material.--The term `fill material' means any 
        pollutant which replaces portions of the waters of the United 
        States with dry land or which changes the bottom elevation of a 
        water body for any purpose. The term does not include any 
        pollutant discharged into the water primarily to dispose of 
        waste.''.
                                 <all>
```
41970.

#### PRYOR v. THE STATE.

Deen, Judge.

The automobile which the accused was accused of stealing disappeared from a downtown Atlanta parking lot between 1:25 p.m. and 1:30 p.m., and was found at 2:20 p.m. some 5 to 7 miles away with the defendant sitting inside with the keys in his pocket. The defendant testified, without offering any other corroborative testimony, that he did not steal the car but agreed to watch it for some unidentified man; that he had left the school he was attending at noon, had arrived by bus in downtown Atlanta at 12:45, and had agreed to watch the automobile at about 2:15. He made contradictory statements as to whether he had walked or taken a bus from downtown Atlanta to the area in which he was found. Indubitably, the defendant’s testimony, as to his whereabouts, even if believed by the jury, did not exclude the possibility of his presence at the place where the automobile was stolen at the time it disappeared, and thus failed to measure up to the requirements for establishing the defense of alibi. *Code*§ 38-122; *Weaver v. State,*199 Ga. 267 (2) (34 SE2d 163); *Jones v. State,*68 Ga. App. 210 (4) (22 SE2d 671); *Little v. State,*94 Ga. App. 557, 560 (95 SE2d 474). It was not error in the absence of request to fail to instruct the jury on the defense of alibi.

2. In the absence of request it is not error to fail to instruct the jury on the law of admissions and confessions contained in *Code*§ 38-420. *Cantrell v. State,*141 Ga. 98 (2) (80 SE 649).

3. “On the trial of one charged with larceny, where it is shown by the evidence that recently after the commission of the offense the stolen goods were found in the possession of the defendant, that fact, while it would not require them to do so, would authorize the jury to infer that the accused was guilty unless he explained his possession to their satisfaction.” *Hansford v. State,*83 Ga. App. 502 (64 SE2d 459) and cita*661tions. The defendant’s uncorroborated testimony that he had a conversation with a stranger who turned over the keys of the car to him asking that he “watch” the car, at which time the defendant claimed to have told the person that he would watch it for a while, and that if he left he would take the keys to his home with him where the stranger could find them, might understandably have been found implausible by the jury trying the case. The automobile was recovered within an hour from the time of the theft, and the defendant’s possession, not satisfactorily explained, is a sufficient circumstance from which the jury might infer guilt.

Submitted May 3, 1966

Decided May 13, 1966.

*Robert J. Golden,*for appellant.

*Lewis R. Slaton, Solicitor General, J. Walter LeCraw, George K. McPherson, Jr., Amber W. Anderson,*for appellee.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*Nichols, P. J., and Hall, J., concur.*