alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 330.7 Accounts held by an agent, nominee, guardian, custodian or conservator. ( a ) *Agency or nominee accounts.* Funds owned by a principal or principals and deposited into one or more deposit accounts in the name of an agent, custodian or nominee, shall be insured to the same extent as if deposited in the name of the principal(s). When such funds are deposited by an insured depository institution acting as a trustee of an irrevocable trust, the insurance coverage shall be governed by the provisions of § 330.13.
( b ) *Guardian, custodian or conservator accounts.* Funds held by a guardian, custodian, or conservator for the benefit of his or her ward, or for the benefit of a minor under the Uniform Gifts to Minors Act, and deposited into one or more accounts in the name of the guardian, custodian or conservator shall, for purposes of this part, be deemed to be agency or nominee accounts and shall be insured in accordance with paragraph (a) of this section.
( c ) *Accounts held by fiduciaries on behalf of two or more persons.* Funds held by an agent, nominee, guardian, custodian, conservator or loan servicer, on behalf of two or more persons jointly, shall be treated as a joint ownership account and shall be insured in accordance with the provisions of § 330.9.
( d ) *Mortgage servicing accounts.* Accounts maintained by a mortgage servicer, in a custodial or other fiduciary capacity, which are comprised of payments of principal and interest, shall be insured for the cumulative balance paid into the account by mortgagors, or in order to satisfy mortgagors' principal or interest obligations to the lender, up to the limit of the SMDIA per mortgagor. Accounts maintained by a mortgage servicer, in a custodial or other fiduciary capacity, which are comprised of payments by mortgagors of taxes and insurance premiums shall be added together and insured in accordance with paragraph (a) of this section for the ownership interest of each mortgagor in such accounts.
( e ) *Custodian accounts for American Indians.* Paragraph (a) of this section shall not apply to any interest an individual American Indian may have in funds deposited by the Bureau of Indian Affairs of the United States Department of the Interior (the “BIA”) on behalf of that person pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 162(a), or by any other disbursing agent of the United States on behalf of that person pursuant to similar authority, in an insured depository institution. The interest of each American Indian in all such accounts maintained at the same insured depository institution shall be added together and insured, up to the SMDIA, separately from any other accounts maintained by that person in the same insured depository institution.
[63 FR 25756, May 11, 1998, as amended at 71 FR 14631, Mar. 23, 2006; 73 FR 61660, Oct. 17, 2008; 74 FR 47716, Sept. 17, 2009; ; 87 FR 4470, Jan. 28, 2022]
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>


<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                          38,600
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  451,200
<ALLOWANCES>                                    24,900
<INVENTORY>                                    281,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               820,400
<PP&E>                                         580,600
<DEPRECIATION>                                 199,500
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,626,300
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          563,000
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             1
<OTHER-SE>                                 (1,461,300)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,626,300
<SALES>                                      2,167,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             2,167,000
<CGS>                                          725,700
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  725,700
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 7,100
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             240,100
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                126,700
<INCOME-TAX>                                    25,500
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            101,200
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                (6,600)
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    94,600
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        


</TABLE>
SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE TERM,

DECEMBER, 1900.

#### Max Levy, Respondent, *v.*Morris Temerson, Appellant.

Appeal from a judgment of the Municipal Court of the city of New York, borough of Manhattan, rendered in favor of the plaintiff.

Louis Levy, for appellant.

Isidor Cohn, for respondent.

*755Beekman, P. J.

In this case the plaintiff sues upon a check for seventy dollars, made hy the defendant, to the order of Gran & Lehmann, which the latter indorsed over to the plaintiff. It is undisputed that the check in question was made and delivered, to the payees for an indebtedness owing by the defendant to them. There is evidence tending to show that the payees were indebted to the plaintiff in an equivalent amount, and that the check was indorsed and delivered by them to him in payment of such indebtedness. There are no defenses whatsoever to the payment of the check which existed prior to the delivery of the same to the plaintiff. Upon receiving the check the plaintiff presented the same to the hank upon which it was drawn for payment, but payment was refused on the ground that the defendant’s account was not good for such an amount. The defendant claims that subsequently thereto he paid to Gran & Lehmann the amount of the check. He did not, however, receive the check when such alleged payment was made, through some oversight on his part, as he claims. There was a sharp conflict of evidence on the trial with respect to some of the facts which were litigated thereon, but inasmuch as the trial justice decided in favor of the plaintiff, he must be deemed to have found the facts in a manner most favorable to him. There was no evidence whatever in the case tending to show that the plaintiff ever authorized Gran & Lehmann to receive payment of the check on his account or that he was ever apprised of the fact that any such payment, if made at all, had been made to Gran & Lehmann. Under the circumstances, the plaintiff, still continuing to hold the check, was in no wise affected by any such alleged payment. As there was sufficient evidence in the case to support it, the judgment in favor of the plaintiff must be affirmed.

Giegerigh and O’Gorman, JJ., concur.

Judgment affirmed, with costs.
EXHIBIT 21
Page 1 of 1

THOMAS GROUP, INC.  SUBSIDIARIES OF THE COMPANY

|SUBSIDIARY                            |  | JURISDICTION OF INCORPORATION
|------------------------------------- |  | -----------------------------
|                                      |  |                              
|Thomas Group GmbH                     |  | Germany                      
|Thomas Group (Switzerland) GmbH       |  | Switzerland                  
|Thomas Group of Louisiana, Inc.       |  | Delaware                     
|Thomas Group Asia Pte. Ltd.           |  | Singapore                    
|Thomas Group of Sweden                |  | Sweden                       
|Thomas Group Hong Kong                |  | Hong Kong                    
|Innovative Leadership Company Limited |  | Hong Kong                    

---

QuickLinks
#### § 263.97 Proceedings under this subpart.

Except as otherwise provided in this subpart, any hearing held under this subpart shall be held before an administrative law judge of the OFIA pursuant to procedures set forth in subparts A and B of this part. The Board shall appoint a person to represent the Board in the hearing. Any person having prior involvement in the matter which is the basis for the suspension or debarment proceeding shall be disqualified from representing the Board in the hearing. The hearing shall be closed to the public unless the Board, sua sponte or on the request of a party, otherwise directs. The administrative law judge shall refer a recommended decision to the Board, which shall issue the final decision and order. In its final decision and order, the Board may censure, debar or suspend an individual, or take such other disciplinary action as the Board deems appropriate.
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2895 Introduced in House (IH)]

108th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2895

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to extend bonus depreciation 
                              for 2 years.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             July 24, 2003

 Mr. Wilson of South Carolina introduced the following bill; which was 
              referred to the Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to extend bonus depreciation 
                              for 2 years.

    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 ``Bonus Depreciation Extension Act of 
2003''.

SEC. 2. 2-YEAR EXTENSION OF BONUS DEPRECIATION.

    (a) 50-Percent Bonus Depreciation.--Section 168(k)(4) of the 
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (as amended by the Jobs and Growth Tax 
Relief Reconciliation Act of 2003) is amended by striking ``January 1, 
2005'' each place it appears and inserting ``January 1, 2007''.
    (b) 30-Percent Bonus Depreciation.--Section 168(k)(2) of such Code 
(as so amended) is amended by striking ``January 1, 2005'' each place 
it appears and inserting ``January 1, 2007''.
    (c) Conforming Amendment.--The subsection heading for section 
168(k) of such Code (as so amended) is amended by striking ``January 1, 
2005'' and inserting ``January 1, 2007''.
                                 <all>
```
Exhibit 31.1
                          CERTIFICATION

I, Greg Amato, certify that:

     1.   I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of
Epolin, Inc.;

     2.   Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any
untrue  statements 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 small business issuer's other certifying officers
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 small business issuer 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 small business issuer, 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 small business
issuer'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 small
business issuer's internal control over financial reporting  that
occurred  during the small business issuer's most  recent  fiscal
quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonable likely  to
materially  affect, the small business issuer's internal  control
over financial reporting; and

     5.   The small business issuer's other certifying officer(s)
and  I  have  disclosed, based on our most recent  evaluation  of
internal  control over financial reporting, to the small business
issuer'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 reasonable  likely  to  adversely
affect  the  small business issuer'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
small   business   issuer's  internal  control   over   financial
reporting.



Dated: July 12, 2007                By:  /s/ Greg  Amato
                                    Greg Amato,
                                    Chief Executive Officer
                                    (Principal Executive Officer)
§ 308.29 Summary disposition. ( a ) *In general.* The ALJ will recommend that the Board of Directors issue a final order granting a motion for summary disposition if the undisputed pleaded facts, admissions, affidavits, stipulations, documentary evidence, matters as to which official notice may be taken, and any other evidentiary materials properly submitted in connection with a motion for summary disposition show: ( 1 ) There is no genuine issue as to any material fact; and
( 2 ) The moving party is entitled to a decision in its favor as a matter of law.
( b ) *Filing of motions and responses.* ( 1 ) Any party who believes there is no genuine issue of material fact to be determined and that the party is entitled to a decision as a matter of law may move at any time for summary disposition in its favor of all or any part of the proceeding. Any party, within 20 days after service of such a motion, or within such time period as allowed by the ALJ, may file a response to such motion.
( 2 ) A motion for summary disposition must be accompanied by a statement of the material facts as to which the moving party contends there is no genuine issue. Such motion must be supported by documentary evidence, which may take the form of admissions in pleadings, stipulations, depositions, investigatory depositions, transcripts, affidavits, and any other evidentiary materials that the moving party contends supports the moving party's position. The motion must also be accompanied by a brief containing the points and authorities in support of the contention of the moving party. Any party opposing a motion for summary disposition must file a statement setting forth those material facts as to which the opposing party contends a genuine dispute exists. Such opposition must be supported by evidence of the same type as that submitted with the motion for summary disposition and a brief containing the points and authorities in support of the contention that summary disposition would be inappropriate.
( c ) *Hearing on motion.* At the written request of any party or on the ALJ's own motion, the ALJ may hear oral argument on the motion for summary disposition.
( d ) *Decision on motion.* Following receipt of a motion for summary disposition and all responses thereto, the ALJ will determine whether the moving party is entitled to summary disposition. If the ALJ determines that summary disposition is warranted, the ALJ will submit a recommended decision to that effect to the Board of Directors. If the ALJ finds that no party is entitled to summary disposition, the ALJ will make a ruling denying the motion.
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 197 (Wednesday, October 14, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 52810]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-24613]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM


Notice of Proposals To Engage in Permissible Nonbanking 
Activities or To Acquire Companies That are Engaged in Permissible 
Nonbanking Activities

    The companies listed in this notice have given notice under section 
4 of the Bank Holding Company Act (12 U.S.C. 1843) (BHC Act) and 
Regulation Y (12 CFR Part 225) to engage de novo, or to acquire or 
control voting securities or assets of a company, including the 
companies listed below, that engages either directly or through a 
subsidiary or other company, in a nonbanking activity that is listed in 
Sec. [thinsp]225.28 of Regulation Y (12 CFR 225.28) or that the Board 
has determined by Order to be closely related to banking and 
permissible for bank holding companies. Unless otherwise noted, these 
activities will be conducted throughout the United States.
    Each notice is available for inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank 
indicated. The notice also will be available for inspection at the 
offices of the Board of Governors. Interested persons may express their 
views in writing on the question whether the proposal complies with the 
standards of section 4 of the BHC Act. Additional information on all 
bank holding companies may be obtained from the National Information 
Center website at www.ffiec.gov/nic/.
    Unless otherwise noted, comments regarding the applications must be 
received at the Reserve Bank indicated or the offices of the Board of 
Governors not later than October 27, 2009.
    A. Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis (Glenda Wilson, Community 
Affairs Officer) P.O. Box 442, St. Louis, Missouri 63166-2034:
    1. Community First Bancshares, Inc., Harrison, Arkansas, and White 
River Bancshares Company, Fayetteville, Arkansas, to engage directly in 
lending activities, pursuant to section 225.28(b)(1)of Regulation Y.

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, October 7, 
2009.
Robert deV. Frierson,
Deputy Secretary of the Board.
[FR Doc. E9-24613 Filed 10-13-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6210-01-S
108TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 292

AN ACT

To amend title 4, United States Code, to add National

Korean War Veterans Armistice Day to the list of days

on which the flag should especially be displayed.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
2

•HR 292 EH

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

2 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Korean War Veterans

3 Recognition Act of 2003’’.

4 SEC. 2. DISPLAY OF FLAG ON NATIONAL KOREAN WAR VET5 ERANS ARMISTICE DAY.

6 Section 6(d) of title 4, United States Code, is amend7 ed by inserting ‘‘National Korean War Veterans Armistice

8 Day, July 27;’’ after ‘‘July 4;’’.

Passed the House of Representatives September 17,

2003.

Attest:

Clerk.
108TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 292

AN ACT

To amend title 4, United States Code, to add National Korean War Veterans Armistice Day to

the list of days on which the flag should especially be displayed.
IB 

House Calendar No. 110

108TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 3118

[Report No. 108–317] 

To designate the Orville Wright Federal Building and the Wilbur Wright 

Federal Building in Washington, District of Columbia. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

SEPTEMBER 17, 2003

Mr. HAYES (for himself, Mr. LATOURETTE, Mr. BURR, Mr. TURNER of Ohio, 

Mr. COBLE, Mr. ISAKSON, Mr. OBERSTAR, Mr. TAYLOR of North Carolina, Mr. MCINTYRE, Mr. BALLANCE, Mr. HOBSON, Mr. HOLDEN, Mr. 

PEARCE, Mr. BEAUPREZ, and Mrs. MYRICK) introduced the following bill; 

which was referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure 

OCTOBER 15, 2003

Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed 

A BILL

To designate the Orville Wright Federal Building and the 

Wilbur Wright Federal Building in Washington, District 

of Columbia.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
2

•HR 3118 RH 

1 SECTION 1. ORVILLE WRIGHT FEDERAL BUILDING. 

2 (a) DESIGNATION.—The Federal building located at 

3 800 Independence Avenue, Southwest, in Washington, 

4 District of Columbia, shall be known and designated as 

5 the ‘‘Orville Wright Federal Building’’. 

6 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg7 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

8 States to the Federal building referred to in subsection 

9 (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Orville 

10 Wright Federal Building’’. 

11 SEC. 2. WILBUR WRIGHT FEDERAL BUILDING. 

12 (a) DESIGNATION.—The Federal building located at 

13 600 Independence Avenue, Southwest, in Washington, 

14 District of Columbia, shall be known and designated as 

15 the ‘‘Wilbur Wright Federal Building’’. 

16 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg17 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

18 States to the Federal building referred to in subsection 

19 (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Wilbur 

20 Wright Federal Building’’. 

House Calendar No. 110

108TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 3118

[Report No. 108–317] 

A BILL

To designate the Orville Wright Federal Building 

and the Wilbur Wright Federal Building in Washington, District of Columbia. 

OCTOBER 15, 2003

Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be 

printed
# C_2020218EN.01001201.xml

| 2.7.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 218/12 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

2.7.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 218/12

---

State aid – Decision to raise no objections

(2020/C 218/07)

The EFTA Surveillance Authority raises no objections to the following state aid measure:

| Date of adoption of the decision | 30 March 2020 |
| --- | --- |
| Case No | 84976 |
| Decision No | 029/20/COL |
| EFTA State | Norway |
| Legal basis | The legal basis of the scheme is the Parliamentary Decision authorising the public guarantee scheme, in accordance with conditions proposed by the Ministry. |
| Type of measure | Scheme |
| Objective | The purpose of the guarantee scheme is to alleviate the liquidity shortage faced by the airline industry and ensure that disruptions caused by the COVID-19 outbreak do not undermine the airlines’ viability. |
| Form of aid | Public guarantees |
| Budget | Estimated NOK 6 billion |
| Duration | 31 March – 30 June |
| Economic sectors | Airline industry |
| Name and address of the granting authority | GIEK, The Norwegian Export Credit Guarantee Agency |
| Pb 1763 Vika |
| N-0122 Oslo |
| NORWAY |

Date of adoption of the decision

30 March 2020

Case No

84976

Decision No

029/20/COL

EFTA State

Norway

Legal basis

The legal basis of the scheme is the Parliamentary Decision authorising the public guarantee scheme, in accordance with conditions proposed by the Ministry.

Type of measure

Scheme

Objective

The purpose of the guarantee scheme is to alleviate the liquidity shortage faced by the airline industry and ensure that disruptions caused by the COVID-19 outbreak do not undermine the airlines’ viability.

Form of aid

Public guarantees

Budget

Estimated NOK 6 billion

Duration

31 March – 30 June

Economic sectors

Airline industry

Name and address of the granting authority

GIEK, The Norwegian Export Credit Guarantee Agency

Pb 1763 Vika

N-0122 Oslo

NORWAY

The authentic text of the decision, from which all confidential information has been removed, can be found on the EFTA Surveillance Authority’s website: http://www.eftasurv.int/state-aid/state-aid-register/decisions/

---