alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 208.31 State member banks as transfer agents. ( a ) The rules adopted by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) pursuant to section 17A of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78q-l) prescribing procedures for registration of transfer agents for which the SEC is the appropriate regulatory agency (17 CFR 240.17Ac2-1) apply to member bank transfer agents. References to the “Commission” are deemed to refer to the Board.
( b ) The rules adopted by the SEC pursuant to section 17A prescribing operational and reporting requirements for transfer agents (17 CFR 240.17Ac2-2 and 240.17Ad-1 through 240.17Ad-16) apply to member bank transfer agents.
#### § 1805.808 Criminal provisions.

The criminal provisions of 18 U.S.C. 657 regarding embezzlement or misappropriation of funds are applicable to all Recipients and Insiders.
#### Gilmore *v.*State of Indiana.

[No. 22,019.

Filed February 14, 1912.]

1. Criminal *Law.—Appeal.—Presenting Ground for*Review.— *Motion to*Quash.—Where a motion to quash an indictment fails to state one or more of the grounds specified in §2065 Burns 1908, Acts 1905 p. 584, no question as to the correctness of overruling such motion can be presented on appeal, p. 148.

2. Criminal *Law.—Appeal.—Presenting Ground for Review.—Motion for Neto*Trial.—Brief.—Where appellant fails to set out in his brief the motion for a new trial, or the substance thereof, or the grounds assigned therefor relied on for reversal, no question is presented as to the correctness of overruling such motion. p. 149.

From Pike Circuit Court; *John L. Brets,*Judge.

Prosecution by the State of Indiana against Albert Gilmore. From a judgment of conviction, the defendant appeals.

*Affirmed.*

*J. W. Wilson*and *J. W. Brumfield,*for appellant.

*Thomas M. Honan,*Attorney-General,- *Thomas H. Branaman, Edwin Corr,*and *James E. McCullough,*for the State.

Monks, J.

Appellant, a druggist, was tried and convicted of the offense of selling one quart of whisky, in violation of law. The only errors assigned call in question the action of the court in overruling (1) “the motion to quash each count of the indictment, and (2) the motion for a new trial. ’ ’

1. When a motion to quash an indictment is overruled by a court in this State, it is settled that unless said motion states one or more of the grounds for quashing an indietment specified in §2065 Burns 1908, Acts 1905 p. 584, no question as to the correctness of such ruling of the court can be presented on appeal. *Scott*v. *State*(1911), *149176 Ind. 382, 96 N. E. 125; *Hawks*v. *State*(1911), 176 Ind. 602, 96 N. E. 593.

The record in this case does not show that any ground was assigned in the motion to quash the indictment, and for this reason no question as to the correctness of the action of the court in overruling said motion is presented by the record.

2. The Attorney-General insists that no question is presented as to the action of the court in overruling appellant’s motion for a new trial, for the reason that “appellant has not set out said motion or the substance thereof in his brief as required by clause five of rule 2” of this court.

It has uniformly been held that if appellant does not set out in his brief the motion for a new trial or the substance thereof, or grounds assigned therefor, relied on for reversal, no question as to the correctness of the court’s action in overruling said motion is presented. *Scott*v. *State, supra,*and eases cited. See, also, *Hawks*v. *State, supra.*

Judgment affirmed.

Note.—Reported in 97 N. E. 422. See, also, under (1) 22 Cyc. 417; (2) 12 Cyc. 877.
# C_2011176EN.01000901.xml

| 16.6.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 176/9 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.6.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 176/9

---

Request for an Advisory Opinion from the EFTA Court by Statens helsepersonellnemnd dated 25 January 2011 in the case of an appeal from A

(Case E-1/11)

2011/C 176/06

A request has been made to the EFTA Court by a letter of 25 January 2011 from Statens helsepersonellnemnd (The Norwegian Appeal Board for Health Personnel), which was received at the Court Registry on 31 January 2011, for an Advisory Opinion in the case of an appeal from A, on the following question:

Does Directive 2005/36/EC or other EEA law allow the authorities of Member States to apply national rules providing for a right to deny an authorisation as a medical doctor or only to grant a limited authorisation as a medical doctor to applicants with insufficient professional qualifications, to a migrant applicant from another Member State who formally fulfils requirements under Directive 2005/36/EC for a right to mutual recognition of professional qualifications (authorisation as a medical doctor without limitations), when the professional experience of the applicant in Norway has unveiled insufficient professional qualifications?

---
#### § 270.1 Authority.

This part is issued by the Federal Open Market Committee (the “Committee”) pursuant to authority conferred upon it by sections 12A and 14 of the Federal Reserve Act (12 U.S.C. 263, 355).
EXHIBIT 31.1

                                 CERTIFICATIONS

I, Ephren W. Taylor II, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this Form 10-QSB/A of CITY CAPITAL CORPORATION;

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;

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

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

a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure
controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, 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 report is being prepared;

b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and
procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness
of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered
by this report based on such evaluation; and

c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal control over
financial reporting that occurred during the small business issuer's most recent
fiscal quarter (the registrant's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual
report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially
affect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting; and

5. The registrant's other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on
our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the
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 are reasonably
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's internal control over
financial reporting.





DATE: February 11, 2008                      /S/ EPHREN W. TAYLOR II
                                             -----------------------------------
                                             EPHREN W. TAYLOR II, CHAIRMAN
                                             CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER






<PAGE>
EX-10.2



 Exhibit 10.2 

2014 and 2015 Executive Officer Compensation Arrangements 

The compensation for the executive officers of Cerus Corporation regarding annual base salaries and target bonus percentages were as follows:

  

																	
	 Name
	  	2014
Annual Base
Salary (1)	 	  	2014
Targeted Bonus
(as a % of 2013
Annual Base
Salary)	 	 	2015
Annual Base
Salary (1)	 	  	2015
Targeted Bonus
(as a % of 2014
Annual Base
Salary)	 
	 William M. Greenman

President and Chief Executive Officer 
	  	$	525,000	  	  	 	60	% 	 	$	560,000	  	  	 	60	% 
	 Laurence M. Corash, M.D.

Senior Vice President, Chief Scientific Officer 
	  	$	407,863	  	  	 	40	% 	 	$	410,000	  	  	 	40	% 
	 Carol Moore

Senior Vice President, Regulatory Affairs, Quality and Clinical 
	  	$	326,398	  	  	 	40	% 	 	$	336,190	  	  	 	40	% 
	 Chrystal N. Menard

Chief Legal Officer and General Counsel
	  	$	301,000	  	  	 	40	% 	 	$	330,000	  	  	 	40	% 
	 Kevin D. Green

Vice President, Finance and Chief Financial
Officer
	  	$	313,160	  	  	 	40	% 	 	$	340,000	  	  	 	40	% 
	 Caspar Hogeboom

President, Cerus Europe and EEMEA
	  	€	237,059	  	  	 	40	% 	 	€	244,171	  	  	 	40	% 

  

	(1)	Annual base salary was effective March 1.
# C_2016338EN.01001001.xml

| 15.9.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 338/10 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.9.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 338/10

---

Dangerous substances — List of authorisation decisions taken by the EEA EFTA States in accordance with Article 64(8) of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 (REACH) in the first half of 2015

(2016/C 338/12)

Subcommittee I on the free movement of goods

Subcommittee I on the free movement of goods

To be noted by the EEA Joint Committee

To be noted by the EEA Joint Committee

With reference to EEA Joint Committee Decision No 25/2008 of 14 March 2008, the EEA Joint Committee is invited to note the following lists concerning authorisation decisions adopted on the basis of Article 64(8) of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 (REACH) for the period 1 January-30 June 2015, at their meeting on 30 October 2015.

---

ANNEX

List of authorisation decisions

The following authorisation decisions in accordance with Article 64(8) of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 (REACH) have been taken in the EEA EFTA States during the period 1 January-30 June 2015:

| Substance name | Commission decision under Article 64(8) of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 | Country | Date of decision |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate (DEHP) | C(2014) 5551 final | Liechtenstein | 2 January 2015 |
| Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate (DEHP) | C(2014) 5551 final | Iceland | 13 January 2015 |
| Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate (DEHP) and dibutyl phthalate (DBP) | C(2015) 1619 final | Norway | 27 March 2015 |
| Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate (DEHP) and Dibutyl phthalate (DBP) | C(2015) 1619 final | Liechtenstein | 16 April 2015 |
| Dibutyl phthalate (DBP) | C(2014) 9645 final | Liechtenstein | 16 January 2015 |
| Dibutyl phthalate (DBP) | C(2014) 9645 final | Iceland | 13 January 2015 |
| Dibutyl phthalate (DBP) | C(2014) 9645 final | Norway | 14 January 2015 |
| Diarsenic trioxide | C(2015) 3524 final | Norway | 22 June 2015 |
| Diarsenic trioxide | C(2015) 3524 final | Liechtenstein | 26 June 2015 |

Substance name

Commission decision under Article 64(8) of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006

Country

Date of decision

Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate (DEHP)

C(2014) 5551 final

Liechtenstein

2 January 2015

Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate (DEHP)

C(2014) 5551 final

Iceland

13 January 2015

Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate (DEHP) and dibutyl phthalate (DBP)

C(2015) 1619 final

Norway

27 March 2015

Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate (DEHP) and Dibutyl phthalate (DBP)

C(2015) 1619 final

Liechtenstein

16 April 2015

Dibutyl phthalate (DBP)

C(2014) 9645 final

Liechtenstein

16 January 2015

Dibutyl phthalate (DBP)

C(2014) 9645 final

Iceland

13 January 2015

Dibutyl phthalate (DBP)

C(2014) 9645 final

Norway

14 January 2015

Diarsenic trioxide

C(2015) 3524 final

Norway

22 June 2015

Diarsenic trioxide

C(2015) 3524 final

Liechtenstein

26 June 2015

---
## MARYLANDDEPARTMENT

## .OFTHE ENVIRONMENT 1800 WashingtonBoulevard.BaltimoreMD 21230 

# MDE 410-537-3000 • 1-800-633-6101

Martin O'Malley Robert M. Summers, Ph.D Governor Secretary Anthony G. Brown LieutenantGovernor

Mr. Shawn M. Garvin Regional Administrator 

### (3RAOO) U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region III 1650 Arch Street Philadelphia PA 19103-2029 Dear Mr. Garvin: The purpose ofthis letter is to submit the enclosed State Implementation Plan (SIP) Revision 

### # 11-04 concerning adoption ofthe Environmental Protection Agency's Control Technique Guidelinesfor drum and pail coating. This SIP Revision includes amendmentsto Regulation .13 under COMAR 26.11.19 Volatile Organic Compounds from Specific Processes. The Notice of Proposed Action forthis SIP Revision was published in the Maryland Register on January 14, 2011. A public hearing was held on February 15, 2011. The action was adopted on April 14, 2011. The Notice of Final Action was published on May 6, 2011 and the amendments became effective on May 16, 2011. All administrative procedures were properly followed throughout the adoption process. I certifythat the electronic copy ofthis SIP submittal (enclosed) is an exact duplicate ofthe official hard copy. Ifyou have any questions concerning this SIP submittal, please feel freeto call me at (410) 537­ 4187 or Mr. George (Tad) S. Aburn, Jr., Director ofthe Air and Radiation ManagementAdministration, at (410) 537-3255. Sincerely,

Robert M. Summers, Ph.D Secretary RMS:dhr Enclosures

Recycled Paper www.mde.state.md.us TTY Users 1-800-735-2258 Via Maryland Relay Service
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1

                        CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements
pertaining to the 1989, 1991 and 1993 stock option plans and the 1995
performance equity plan (Form S-8 No. 33-00142), (Form S-8 No. 33-00144),
Employee Stock Purchase Plan (Form S-8 No. 333-30197), 1995 Nonqualified Stock
Option Plan for Non-Employee Directors and certain nonqualified stock options
(Form S-8 No. 333-31439), 1999 Stock Option Plan (Form S-8 No. 333-37462),
Senior PIK Preferred Stock (Form S-4 No. 333-42017), and Registration of shares
underlying certain warrants (Form S-3 No. 333-50853) of our reports dated March
14, 2001, with respect to the consolidated financial statements of Source Media,
Inc., and SourceSuite LLC (formed on March 3, 2000) and our report dated March
3, 2000, with respect to the financial statements of SourceSuite LLC (formed on
November 17, 1999) included in the Annual Report (Form 10-K) of Source Media,
Inc. for the year ended December 31, 2000.

                                                  ERNST & YOUNG LLP

Dallas, Texas
April 5, 2001
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>5
<LEGEND>
FINANCIAL DATA SCHEDULE FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED MARCH 31, 1999
</LEGEND>

<S>                            <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                  12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>              MAR-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                 APR-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                   MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                           2,214,705
<SECURITIES>                    13,541,556
<RECEIVABLES>                   18,135,675
<ALLOWANCES>                             0
<INVENTORY>                              0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                35,596,109
<PP&E>                           3,201,752
<DEPRECIATION>                   1,140,140
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                  48,880,039
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>           18,409,740
<BONDS>                          5,204,262
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                    0
<PREFERRED>                              0
<COMMON>                           258,013
<OTHER-SE>                      17,904,817
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>    48,880,039
<SALES>                                  0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                32,951,480
<CGS>                                    0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                   39,332,731
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                         0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                         0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>             (1,340,421)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                (6,381,251)
<INCOME-TAX>                     (789,315)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>            (5,911,847)
<DISCONTINUED>                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                          0
<CHANGES>                                0
<NET-INCOME>                   (5,911,847)
<EPS-BASIC>                       (1.23)
<EPS-DILUTED>                       (1.23)









</TABLE>
---

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 Annual Report of Elephant & Castle Group Inc. (the "Company")
  on Form 10-K for the period ended December 25, 2005 as filed with the Securities
  and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Roger Sexton,
  Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section
  1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
  that to the best of my knowledge and belief:

| | (1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section
        13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and                                       
| | --- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| |     |                                                                                                                                                                     
| | (2) | The information contained in the Report fairly presents,
        in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
        of the Company.

/s/
        Roger SextonRoger SextonChief Financial OfficerDated: March 31, 2006




---
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.2


                        CERTIFICATION OF CEO 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 on Form 10-Q of Sterling Chemicals
Holdings, Inc. (the "Company") for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2002 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), Richard K. Crump, as Co-Chief Executive Officer of the Company,
hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

         (1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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



/s/ RICHARD K. CRUMP
--------------------------
Richard K. Crump
Co-Chief Executive Officer
Date: August 12, 2002


This certification accompanies the Report pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of
Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
#### § 221.121 Extension of credit in certain stock option and stock purchase plans.

Questions have been raised as to whether certain stock option and stock purchase plans involve extensions of credit subject to this part when the participant is free to cancel his participation at any time prior to full payment, but in the event of cancellation the participant remains liable for damages. It thus appears that the participant has the opportunity to gain and bears the risk of loss from the time the transaction is executed and payment is deferred. In some cases brought to the Board's attention damages are related to the market price of the stock, but in others, there may be no such relationship. In either of these circumstances, it is the Board's view that such plans involve extensions of credit. Accordingly, where the security being purchased is a margin security and the credit is secured, directly or indirectly, by any margin security, the creditor must register and the credit must conform with either the regular margin requirements of § 221.3(a) or the special “plan-lender” provisions set forth in § 221.4, whichever is applicable. This assumes, of course, that the amount of credit extended is such that the creditor is subject to the registration requirements of § 221.3(b).
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2938 Introduced in House (IH)]

108th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2938

   To amend title VII of the Tariff Act of 1930 to provide that the 
provisions relating to countervailing duties apply to nonmarket economy 
                               countries.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             July 25, 2003

   Mr. English (for himself and Mr. Davis of Alabama) introduced the 
 following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To amend title VII of the Tariff Act of 1930 to provide that the 
provisions relating to countervailing duties apply to nonmarket economy 
                               countries.

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

SECTION 1. APPLICATION OF COUNTERVAILING DUTIES TO NONMARKET ECONOMY 
              COUNTRIES.

    Section 701(a)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1671(a)(1)) 
is amended by inserting ``(including a nonmarket economy country)'' 
after ``country'' each place it appears.

SEC. 2. EFFECTIVE DATE.

    The amendments made by section 1 apply to subsidies provided on or 
after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```