alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 223.71 How do sections 23A and 23B apply to transactions in which a member bank purchases from one affiliate an asset relating to another affiliate? ( a ) *In general.* In some situations in which a member bank purchases an asset from an affiliate, the asset purchase qualifies for an exemption under this regulation, but the member bank's resulting ownership of the purchased asset also represents a covered transaction (which may or may not qualify for an exemption under this part). In these situations, the transaction engaged in by the member bank would qualify as two different types of covered transaction. Although an asset purchase exemption may suffice to exempt the member bank's asset purchase from the first affiliate, the asset purchase exemption does not exempt the member bank's resulting covered transaction with the second affiliate. The exemptions subject to this interpretation include §§ 223.31(e), 223.41(a) through (d), and 223.42(e), (f), (i), (j), (k), and (m).
( b ) *Examples* — ( 1 ) *The (d)(6) exemption.* A member bank purchases from Affiliate A securities issued by Affiliate B in a purchase that qualifies for the (d)(6) exemption in section 23A. The member bank's asset purchase from Affiliate A would be an exempt covered transaction under § 223.42(e); but the member bank also would have acquired an investment in securities issued by Affiliate B, which would be a covered transaction between the member bank and Affiliate B under § 223.3(h)(2) that does not qualify for the (d)(6) exemption. The (d)(6) exemption, by its terms, only exempts asset purchases by a member bank from an affiliate; hence, the (d)(6) exemption cannot exempt a member bank's investment in securities issued by an affiliate (even if the securities would qualify for the (d)(6) exemption).
( 2 ) T*he sister-bank exemption.* A member bank purchases from Sister-Bank Affiliate A a loan to Affiliate B in a purchase that qualifies for the sister-bank exemption in section 23A. The member bank's asset purchase from Sister-Bank Affiliate A would be an exempt covered transaction under § 223.41(b); but the member bank also would have acquired an extension of credit to Affiliate B, which would be a covered transaction between the member bank and Affiliate B under § 223.3(h)(1) that does not qualify for the sister-bank exemption. The sister-bank exemption, by its terms, only exempts transactions by a member bank with a sister-bank affiliate; hence, the sister-bank exemption cannot exempt a member bank's extension of credit to an affiliate that is not a sister bank (even if the extension of credit was purchased from a sister bank).
§ 221.116 Bank loans to replenish working capital used to purchase mutual fund shares. ( a ) In a situation considered by the Board of Governors, a business concern (X) proposed to purchase mutual fund shares, from time to time, with proceeds from its accounts receivable, then pledge the shares with a bank in order to secure working capital. The bank was prepared to lend amounts equal to 70 percent of the current value of the shares as they were purchased by X. If the loans were subject to this part, only 50 percent of the current market value of the shares could be lent.
( b ) The immediate purpose of the loans would be to replenish X's working capital. However, as time went on, X would be acquiring mutual fund shares at a cost that would exceed the net earnings it would normally have accumulated, and would become indebted to the lending bank in an amount approximately 70 percent of the prices of said shares.
( c ) The Board held that the loans were for the purpose of purchasing the shares, and therefore subject to the limitations prescribed by this part. As pointed out in § 221.114 with respect to a similar program for putting a high proportion of cash income into stock, the borrowing against the margin stock to meet needs for which the cash would otherwise have been required, a contrary conclusion could largely defeat the basic purpose of the margin regulations.
( d ) Also considered was an alternative proposal under which X would deposit proceeds from accounts receivable in a time account for 1 year, before using those funds to purchase mutual fund shares. The Board held that this procedure would not change the situation in any significant way. Once the arrangement was established, the proceeds would be flowing into the time account at the same time that similar amounts were released to purchase the shares, and over any extended period of time the result would be the same. Accordingly, the Board concluded that bank loans made under the alternative proposal would similarly be subject to this part.
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2859 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

        H.R.2859

                       One Hundred Eighth Congress

                                 of the

                        United States of America

                          AT THE FIRST SESSION

          Begun and held at the City of Washington on Tuesday,
           the seventh day of January, two thousand and three

                                 An Act

 
Making emergency supplemental appropriations for the fiscal year ending 
                           September 30, 2003.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled, That the following sums 
are appropriated, out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise 
appropriated, for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2003, namely:

                    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

                  EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS AND RESPONSE

                            Disaster Relief

    For an additional amount for ``Disaster Relief'' for necessary 
expenses in carrying out the functions of the Robert T. Stafford 
Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq.), 
$983,600,000, to remain available until expended: Provided, That this 
amount is designated by the Congress as an emergency requirement 
pursuant to section 502 of H. Con. Res. 95 (108th Congress), the 
concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal year 2004.
    This Act may be cited as the ``Emergency Supplemental 
Appropriations for Disaster Relief Act, 2003''.

                               Speaker of the House of Representatives.

                            Vice President of the United States and    
                                               President of the Senate.
```
#### J. EDMUND MICHAEL v. UNITED STATES

[59 C. Cls. 972; 269 U. S. 594]

On appeal. *Dismissed,*by the Supreme Court October 21, 1925, on motion of appellant.
# C_2023084EN.01000101.xml

| 7.3.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 84/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.3.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 84/1

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

6 March 2023

(2023/C 84/01)

1 euro =

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,0646 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 144,64 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4423 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,88630 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 11,1590 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 0,9947 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | 149,70 |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 11,1109 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 23,545 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 377,00 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 4,7090 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 4,9205 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 20,1236 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,5807 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,4493 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 8,3570 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,7188 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 1,4324 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 381,49 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 19,3688 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 7,3802 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 16 326,06 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,7673 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 58,510 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | |
| THB | Thai baht | 36,761 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 5,5356 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 19,1419 |
| INR | Indian rupee | 87,1445 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,0646

JPY

Japanese yen

144,64

DKK

Danish krone

7,4423

GBP

Pound sterling

0,88630

SEK

Swedish krona

11,1590

CHF

Swiss franc

0,9947

ISK

Iceland króna

149,70

NOK

Norwegian krone

11,1109

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

23,545

HUF

Hungarian forint

377,00

PLN

Polish zloty

4,7090

RON

Romanian leu

4,9205

TRY

Turkish lira

20,1236

AUD

Australian dollar

1,5807

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,4493

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

8,3570

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,7188

SGD

Singapore dollar

1,4324

KRW

South Korean won

1 381,49

ZAR

South African rand

19,3688

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

7,3802

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

16 326,06

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,7673

PHP

Philippine peso

58,510

RUB

Russian rouble

THB

Thai baht

36,761

BRL

Brazilian real

5,5356

MXN

Mexican peso

19,1419

INR

Indian rupee

87,1445

---

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

---
#### Mary Flanagan, Respondent, *v.*The Metropolitan Street Railway Co., Appellant.

Appeal from a judgment of the General Term of the City Court of the city of New York, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict.

Henry A. Robinson (Charles F. Brown, of counsel), for appellant.

Paul M. Herzog (Henry L. Scheuerman and Henry Siegrist, of counsel), for respondent.

*707
      *Per Curiam.*

Defendant had the greater number of witnesses, but plaintiff had the probabilities.

Present: Truax, P. J., Scott and Dugro, JJ.

Judgment affirmed, with costs.
§ 192.150 Information required in an application for conversion. ( a ) *Required information.* A savings association's application for conversion must include all of the following information. ( 1 ) The savings association's plan of conversion.
( 2 ) Pricing materials meeting the requirements of § 192.200(b).
( 3 ) Proxy soliciting materials under § 192.270, including: ( i ) A preliminary proxy statement with signed financial statements;
( ii ) A form of proxy meeting the requirements of § 192.255; and
( iii ) Any additional proxy soliciting materials, including press releases, personal solicitation instructions, radio or television scripts that the savings association plans to use or furnish to its members, and a legal opinion indicating that any marketing materials comply with all applicable securities laws.
( 4 ) An offering circular described in § 192.300.
( 5 ) The documents and information required by Form AC. The savings association may obtain Form AC from the appropriate Federal banking agency.
( 6 ) Where indicated, written consents, signed and dated, of any accountant, attorney, investment banker, appraiser, or other professional who prepared, reviewed, passed upon, or certified any statement, report, or valuation for use. *See* Form AC, instructions.
( 7 ) The savings association's business plan, submitted as a separately bound, confidential exhibit. *See* § 192.160.
( 8 ) Any additional information that the appropriate Federal banking agency requests.
( b ) *Rejection of filing.* The appropriate Federal banking agency will not accept for filing, and may return, any application for conversion that is executed improperly, materially deficient, substantially incomplete, or that provides for unreasonable conversion expenses.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<CIK>                         0000899714
<NAME>                        UNILAB CORPORATION
<MULTIPLIER>                                 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS        

<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                      DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                           DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                      11,652
<SECURITIES>                                     0
<RECEIVABLES>                               46,402
<ALLOWANCES>                                (9,819)
<INVENTORY>                                  2,811
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            52,341
<PP&E>                                      41,493
<DEPRECIATION>                             (28,333)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             118,700
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       23,791
<BONDS>                                    124,285
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                            0
<PREFERRED>                                      4
<COMMON>                                       406
<OTHER-SE>                                 (32,693)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               118,700
<SALES>                                    214,001
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                           214,001
<CGS>                                            0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                              155,942
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            27,792
<LOSS-PROVISION>                            15,663
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                          14,068
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                536
<INCOME-TAX>                                     0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            536
<DISCONTINUED>                                   0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                  0
<CHANGES>                                        0
<NET-INCOME>                                   536
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                 0.01
<EPS-DILUTED>                                 0.01
        


</TABLE>
# C_2013270EN.01000701.xml

| 19.9.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 270/7 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.9.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 270/7

---

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

of 25 March 2013

in Case E-10/12

Yngvi Harðarson v Askar Capital hf.

(Directive 91/533/EEC — Obligation to inform employees — Amendments to a written contract of employment — Effect of non-notification of amendments)

2013/C 270/05

In Case E-10/12 Yngvi Harðarson v Askar Capital hf. — REQUEST to the Court under Article 34 of the Agreement between the EFTA States on the Establishment of a Surveillance Authority and a Court of Justice by Héraðsdómur Reykjavíkur (Reykjavík District Court), on the interpretation of Council Directive 91/533/EEC of 14 October 1991 on an employer’s obligation to inform employees of the conditions applicable to the contract or employment relationship, the Court, composed of Carl Baudenbacher, President, Per Christiansen (Judge-Rapporteur) and Páll Hreinsson, Judges, gave judgment on 25 March 2013, the operative part of which is as follows:

Council Directive 91/533/EEC of 14 October 1991 on an employer’s obligation to inform employees of the conditions applicable to the contract or employment relationship must be interpreted as not requiring that compensation to an employee is to be assessed on the basis of a written contract of employment if no written document has been handed over to the employee concerning amendments, temporary or permanent, that may have been made to the essential aspects of the contract of employment or employment relationship between the parties within the time limits laid down in Article 5 of the Directive. This applies also in the context of bankruptcy proceedings or a comparable division of a limited liability company.

---
# C_2014274EN.01000402.xml

| 21.8.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 274/4 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

21.8.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 274/4

---

Request for an Advisory Opinion from the EFTA Court by Eidsivating lagmannsrett dated 31 March 2014 in the case of Enes Deveci and Others v Scandinavian Airlines System Denmark-Norway-Sweden

(Case E-10/14)

(2014/C 274/05)

A request has been made to the EFTA Court by a letter dated 31 March 2014 from Eidsivating lagmannsrett (Eidsivating Court of Appeal, Norway), which was received at the Court Registry on 8 April 2014, for an Advisory Opinion in the case of Enes Deveci and Others v Scandinavian Airlines System Denmark-Norway-Sweden, on the following questions:

| 1. | Is it consistent with Article 3(1), cf. Article 3(3), of Council Directive 2001/23/EC that the transferee undertaking assigns the individual employees covered by the transfer a place in a pay table set out in a collective agreement that applies in the transferee undertaking, with effect from a date after the collective agreement that applied in the transferor undertaking has expired, even if this results in a pay reduction for the individual employees? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Is it consistent with Article 3(1), cf. Article 3(3), of Council Directive 2001/23/EC that the transferee undertaking assigns the individual employees covered by the transfer a place in a pay table set out in a collective agreement that applies in the transferee undertaking, with effect from a date after the collective agreement that applied in the transferor undertaking has expired, even if this results in a pay reduction for the individual employees?

| 2. | Does the answer to Question 1 depend on whether the collective agreement that applied to the employees of the transferor was still in force when the transferee’s collective agreement was made applicable to the employees covered by the transfer of the undertaking? |
| --- | --- |

2.

Does the answer to Question 1 depend on whether the collective agreement that applied to the employees of the transferor was still in force when the transferee’s collective agreement was made applicable to the employees covered by the transfer of the undertaking?

| 3. | Does the answer to Question 1 depend on whether the reduction in pay is significant or not? |
| --- | --- |

3.

Does the answer to Question 1 depend on whether the reduction in pay is significant or not?

---
<PAGE>

                                                                      Exhibit 32

                            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 Radva Corporation (the "Company") on
Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2002 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), each of the
undersigned, in the capacities and on the dates indicated below, hereby
certifies pursuant to 19 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to his 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:             July 31, 2003                  /s/ Luther I. Dickens
                                                 ------------------------------
                                                 Luther I. Dickens
                                                 Chief Executive Officer

Date:             July 31, 2003                  /s/ William F. Fry
                                                 ------------------------------
                                                 William F. Fry
                                                 Vice President-
                                                 Chief Financial Officer
**Exhibit 31.2**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO RULE 15d-14**

**OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934, AS AMENDED**

**AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

I, Michael Mazzoni, certify that: 

 

1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of OPTi Inc.; 

 

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

 

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this annual report, fairlypresent all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this annual report; 

 

4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controlsand procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) and we have: 

 

a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under oursupervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this annual report is prepared;

 

b) evaluated the effectiveness of theregistrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this annual report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this annual report based on suchevaluation; and 

 

c) disclosed in this annualreport any change in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that hasmaterially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and 

 

5. The registrant’s certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, tothe registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions): 

 

a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which arereasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and 

 

b) any, fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting. 

 

June 29, 2006
427 A.2d 253

#### Exxon Corp. v. Compostella et al, Appellants.

Argued March 17, 1980.

George J. O’Neill, for appellants;

John M. Phelan, for appellee.

*636Before HESTER, WICKERSHAM and LIPEZ, JJ.

Order affirmed.