alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 7.2003 National bank shareholder meetings; Board of directors meetings. ( a ) *Notice of shareholders' meetings.* A national bank must mail shareholders notice of the time, place, and purpose of all shareholders' meetings at least 10 days prior to the meeting by first class mail, unless the OCC determines that an emergency circumstance exists. Where a national bank is a wholly-owned subsidiary, the sole shareholder is permitted to waive notice of the shareholder's meeting. The articles of association, bylaws, or law applicable to a national bank may require a longer period of notice.
( b ) *Annual meeting for election of directors.* When the day fixed for the regular annual meeting of the shareholders falls on a legal holiday in the State in which the bank is located, the shareholders' meeting must be held, and the directors elected, on the next following banking day.
( c ) *Virtual participation at shareholder meetings* — ( 1 ) *In general.* A national bank may provide for telephonic or electronic participation at shareholder meetings.
( 2 ) *Procedures.* A national bank must follow the procedures for telephonic or electronic participation in a shareholder meeting of the corporate governance provisions it has elected to follow pursuant to § 7.2000(b), if those elected provisions include telephonic or electronic participation procedures; the Delaware General Corporation Law, Del. Code Ann. Tit. 8 (1991, as amended 1994, and as amended thereafter); or the Model Business Corporation Act, provided, however, that such procedures are not inconsistent with applicable Federal statutes and regulations and safety and soundness. The national bank must indicate the use of these procedures in its bylaws.
( d ) *Virtual participation at board of directors meetings.* A national bank may provide for telephonic or electronic participation at a meeting of its board of directors.
[85 FR 83734, Dec. 22, 2020]
## United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 99-2883

___________ Frederic G. Bennett, * * Petitioner, * * v. * Petition for Review of an * Order of the National National Transportation Safety Board; * Transportation Safety Board. Federal Aviation Administration, * * [UNPUBLISHED] Respondents. *

___________ Submitted: January 27, 2000 Filed: February 1, 2000

___________ Before McMILLIAN, HANSEN, and MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM. Frederic G. Bennett petitions for review of an order of the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) upholding the Federal Aviation Administration’s (FAA) revocation of his Airline Transport Pilot and Flight Instructor certificates. The NTSB found him in violation of 14 C.F.R. §§ 61.15 (d)(2) (motor vehicle action occurring within 3 years of previous motor vehicle action is grounds for suspension or revocationof any certificate) and 61.15(e) (requirement to provide written report of motor vehicle action to FAA within 60 days of action).-2-

The facts pertinent to our analysis are not in dispute, and the NTSB’s factual findings are adequately supported by substantial evidence in the record as a whole. See Reder v. FAA , 116 F.3d 1261, 1263 (8th Cir. 1997) (standard of review). Mr. Bennett’s challenge addresses the NTSB’s method of calculating the time between the motor vehicle actions, and the appropriateness of the sanction. We accord substantial deference to agency determinations and will affirm the decision unless it is arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not supported by law. See United States v. Grand Labs., Inc. , 174 F.3d 960, 963 (8th Cir. 1999). After a thorough
re view, we conclude the NTSB could properly determine that Mr. Bennett violated sections 61.15(d) and (e), and that revocation was warranted. See 14 C.F.R. §§ 61.15(d)(2) (authorizing revocation or suspension), 61.15(f) (1999) (failure to comply with § 61.15(e) is grounds for revocation or suspension); Balestra v. Busey , 923 F.2d 120, 122-23 (8th Cir. 1991) (NTSB is given wide range of discretion in imposing sanctions); Garvey v. Kraley , No. EA-4581, 1996 WL 785071, at **1-2 (NTSB Aug. 18, 1997) (administrative suspension of driver’s license for refusal to take breath test is motor vehicle action; where pilot sustained two motor vehicle actions withinthree years, 120-day suspension was at low end of appropriate sanction range); cf. Stixv. Bond , 569 F.2d 1029, 1031 (8th Cir. 1978) (per curiam) (holding revocation
was not excessive: penalty was imposed for violation committed while petitioner’s certificate was already suspended, was within specific statutory authorization, and did not preclude petitioner from applying for new certificate one year after date of revocation). Accordingly, we deny Mr. Bennett’s petition for review.-3-

A true copy.

Attest:
CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
In Special Term —

Spencer,- J. presiding.

#### DAVIS B. LAWLER *v.*JOHN WHETTS et al.

Notice to non-resident defendants by publication under the 71st section of the Code, must set forth a pertinent description of the property sought to be affected, that *actual*notice may be more likely to come to the defendant.

The provisions of the law are not satisfied by a general statement that it is an action “ for the recovery of money, and foreclosure of a mortgage.”

The Court are disposed, *in*limine, to require the strictest compliance with the laws of notice by publication.

This was a petition for sale of mortgaged premises.

The question arose upon a motion for judgment by default, and for sale of mortgaged premises, upon a constructive notice by publication.

*40
      *By the Court.*

The 71st section of the Code (which provides for constructive'notice of suit to non-resident defendants) requires, that the publication shall contain “ a summary statement of the object and prayer of the petition,” etc. This provision of the law is not sufficiently answered by setting forth in general terms, that the action is brought “for the recovery of money, and for the foreclosure of a mortgage.” There should be a pertinent description of the mortgaged premises — such as, that a tenant in possession may know the property is sought to be charged; whereby the party would be more apt to receive *actual*notice. So many titles have been jeopardized, and so many controversies have arisen, in consequence of imperfect publication, that the Court are disposed, *in limine,*to require a strict compliance with the law.

Notice held insufficient, and further publication ordered.
#### § 52.5 Temporary relief.

In determining whether it meets the asset threshold in paragraph (1) of the definition of “covered depository institution” in § 52.5 of this part, for purposes of a report required to be submitted for calendar year 2021, a national bank, Federal savings association, or insured Federal branch may refer to the lesser of its total consolidated assets as reported in its report of condition as of December 31, 2019, and its total consolidated assets as reported in its report of condition for the second calendar quarter of 2020.

[85 FR 77359, Dec. 2, 2020]
EXHIBIT L

Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:19997-5 Filed:02/02/22 Entered:02/02/22 18:09:18 Desc:

Exhibit L - Juan P. Lugo Sp Page 1 of 6
Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:19997-5 Filed:02/02/22 Entered:02/02/22 18:09:18 Desc:

Exhibit L - Juan P. Lugo Sp Page 2 of 6
Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:19997-5 Filed:02/02/22 Entered:02/02/22 18:09:18 Desc:

Exhibit L - Juan P. Lugo Sp Page 3 of 6
Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:19997-5 Filed:02/02/22 Entered:02/02/22 18:09:18 Desc:

Exhibit L - Juan P. Lugo Sp Page 4 of 6
Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:19997-5 Filed:02/02/22 Entered:02/02/22 18:09:18 Desc:

Exhibit L - Juan P. Lugo Sp Page 5 of 6
Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:19997-5 Filed:02/02/22 Entered:02/02/22 18:09:18 Desc:

Exhibit L - Juan P. Lugo Sp Page 6 of 6
22 JUL 2015 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

Docket Operations, M-30 

West Building ground floor, 

Room W12-140 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE. 

Washington, DC 20590 

To Whom It May Concern, 

THRUSH AIRCRAFT INC 300 Old Pretoria Road Albany, Georgia 31706 

PHONE: 229.883.1440 FAX: 229.439.9790 WEB: www.t hrushaircraft.com 

Document FAA-2004-17207, Exemption No. 9844C, Expires on 30 NOV 2015. I am requesting that this 

exemption for the Thrush Aircraft, Inc. Model S2R-T660 aircraft be extended for another period as deemed to 

be appropriate by DOT. All items previously submitted are still in valid. If there is any further information 

required, please contact me. Thank You in advance for your attention to this matte r. Petition of Thrush Aircraft, 

Inc., for an extension of this exemption. 

Respectfully Submitted, 

Ed Rusk 

Manager of Quality 

Thrush Aircraft, Inc. 

Ph# (229) 789-0326 

erusk@th rush a i rcraft.com
# C_2014066EN.01000801.xml

| 6.3.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 66/8 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.3.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 66/8

---

State aid — Decision to raise no objections

2014/C 66/07

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

| Date of adoption of the decision | : | 4 December 2013 |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Case number | : | 74663 |
| Decision number | : | 479/13/COL |
| EFTA State | : | Norway |
| Title | : | Prolongation of four regional aid schemes until 30 June 2014 |
| Legal basis | : | The Authority’s Guidelines on National Regional Aid 2007-2013 |
| Objective | : | Regional aid |
| Form of aid | : | Tax concessions, Direct grants |
| Duration | : | 1.1.2014-30.6.2014 |
| Other information | : | The four schemes are as follows:






  1. | Regionally differentiated social security contributions, initially approved by Decision No 228/06/COL |

Date of adoption of the decision

:

4 December 2013

Case number

:

74663

Decision number

:

479/13/COL

EFTA State

:

Norway

Title

:

Prolongation of four regional aid schemes until 30 June 2014

Legal basis

:

The Authority’s Guidelines on National Regional Aid 2007-2013

Objective

:

Regional aid

Form of aid

:

Tax concessions, Direct grants

Duration

:

1.1.2014-30.6.2014

Other information

:

The four schemes are as follows:

1.

Regionally differentiated social security contributions, initially approved by Decision No 228/06/COL

| 2. | The application of the depreciation rules of the Petroleum Tax Act at LNG facilities initially approved by Decision No 411/06/COL |
| --- | --- |

2.

The application of the depreciation rules of the Petroleum Tax Act at LNG facilities initially approved by Decision No 411/06/COL

| 3. | Regional transport aid scheme initially approved by Decision No 143/07/COL |
| --- | --- |

3.

Regional transport aid scheme initially approved by Decision No 143/07/COL

| 4. | Regional risk-loan scheme approved by Decision No 410/06/COL |
| --- | --- |

4.

Regional risk-loan scheme approved by Decision No 410/06/COL

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/

---
§ 43.3 Base risk retention requirement. ( a ) *Base risk retention requirement.* Except as otherwise provided in this part, the sponsor of a securitization transaction (or majority-owned affiliate of the sponsor) shall retain an economic interest in the credit risk of the securitized assets in accordance with any one of §§ 43.4 through 43.10. Credit risk in securitized assets required to be retained and held by any person for purposes of compliance with this part, whether a sponsor, an originator, an originator-seller, or a third-party purchaser, except as otherwise provided in this part, may be acquired and held by any of such person's majority-owned affiliates (other than an issuing entity).
( b ) *Multiple sponsors.* If there is more than one sponsor of a securitization transaction, it shall be the responsibility of each sponsor to ensure that at least one of the sponsors of the securitization transaction (or at least one of their majority-owned or wholly-owned affiliates, as applicable) retains an economic interest in the credit risk of the securitized assets in accordance with any one of § 43.4, § 43.5, § 43.8, § 43.9, or § 43.10.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1995
<CASH>                                         467,418
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   28,570
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               495,988
<PP&E>                                       4,661,680
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,090,367
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               4,070,163
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           40,881
<BONDS>                                        502,333
<COMMON>                                             0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                   3,526,947<F1>
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 4,070,163
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               195,940
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  142,192
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              17,881
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    35,867
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.65<F2>
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
<FN>
<F1>Refers to General Partners & Limited Partners Capital
<F2>95% Limited Partners - Interest Outstanding = 20,653.69
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
##### 



Exhibit 31.2 CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO
SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 I, Scott Poteracki, Chief Financial Officer and Secretary of MTI Technology Corporation (the
Company), certify that:  1.
    
    I have reviewed this Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended April 2, 2005, of
the Company;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) [Paragraph omitted pursuant to SEC Release Nos. 33-8238 and 34-47986]; c) 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 d) Disclosed in this report 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 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 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 controls over financial reporting. Date: July 15, 2005
    
    By:
    
    /s/ SCOTT POTERACKIScott PoterackiChief Financial Officer and Secretary
 69
Exhibit A

Party Appearance Cover Sheet

Name of Party Cobra Acquisitions LLC

Party Name Abbreviation Cobra

Attorney(s) Representing Party Name: Abid Qureshi

Email: aqureshi@akingump.com

Firm: Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

Phone Number: 212-872-8027

Zoom Screen Name: Abid Qureshi

Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:19893-1 Filed:01/25/22 Entered:01/25/22 15:59:44 Desc:

Exhibit Party Appearance Cover Sheet Page 1 of 1
Exhibit 99.2





CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO


THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





I, Nancy E. Katz, certify that:





1.  I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K/A (No.2) of Calypte Biomedical Corporation;





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 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 annual report;





3.  Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this annual 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 annual report;





Date: December 20, 2002





/s/    NANCY E.
KATZ  Nancy E. KatzChief Executive Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                          89,259
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                89,259
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  89,259
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        3,055,971
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                              600
<PREFERRED>                                        600
<COMMON>                                        54,795
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    89,295
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                   571
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 6,620
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (6,049)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 02-18-00016-CV

Cherie Allen

v.

Lender’s Commercial Finance, LLC

§

§

§

§

From the 342nd District Court

of Tarrant County (342-291007-17)

March 15, 2018

Opinion by Justice Gabriel

JUDGMENT

This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that 

the appeal should be dismissed. It is ordered that the appeal is dismissed for 

want of jurisdiction.

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS 

By /s/ Lee Gabriel

 Justice Lee Gabriel
I 

108TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 31

To nullify the recent pay increase and to eliminate automatic pay adjustments 

for Members of Congress. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 7, 2003

Mr. JEFF MILLER of Florida (for himself, Mr. PAUL, Mr. GOODE, Mr. 

LARSEN of Washington, Mr. TANCREDO, Mr. OSE, Mr. HALL, and Mr. 

FORBES) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on House Administration, and in addition to the Committee on 

Government Reform, for a period to be subsequently determined by the 

Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within 

the jurisdiction of the committee concerned 

A BILL

To nullify the recent pay increase and to eliminate automatic 

pay adjustments for Members of Congress.

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 ‘‘Rescind the Congres5 sional Pay Raise Act’’. 
2

•HR 31 IH 

1 SEC. 2. PROVISIONS RELATING TO PAY FOR MEMBERS OF 

2 CONGRESS. 

3 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 601(a) of the Legislative 

4 Reorganization Act of 1946 (2 U.S.C. 31) is amended to 

5 read as follows: 

6 ‘‘SEC. 601. (a) Until otherwise provided by law (in7 cluding under section 225 of the Federal Salary Act of 

8 1967), the annual rate of pay for—

9 ‘‘(1) each Senator, Member of the House of 

10 Representatives, and Delegate to the House of Rep11 resentatives, and the Resident Commissioner from 

12 Puerto Rico, 

13 ‘‘(2) the President pro tempore of the Senate, 

14 the majority leader and the minority leader of the 

15 Senate, and the majority leader and the minority 

16 leader of the House of Representatives, and 

17 ‘‘(3) the Speaker of the House of Representa18 tives, 

19 shall be the rate payable for such positions as of December 

20 31, 2002.’’. 

21 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—This Act shall take effect on 

22 the first day of the first pay period commencing after the 

23 next election of Representatives (within the meaning of the 

24 twenty-seventh article of amendment to the Constitution 
3

•HR 31 IH 

1 of the United States) occurring after the date of the enact2 ment of this Act.

Æ
§ 650.50 Payment of claims. ( a ) All claims of each class described in § 650.61 of this subpart shall be paid in full or provisions shall be made for such payment prior to the payment of any claim of a lesser priority. If there are insufficient funds to pay all claims in a class in full, distribution to that class will be on a pro rata basis.
( b ) Following the payment of all claims, the receiver shall distribute the remainder of the assets of the Corporation, if any, to the owners of stock and other equities in accordance with the priorities for impairment set forth in section 8.4(e)(3) of the Act and the bylaws of the Corporation.