alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 226.21 Treatment of credit balances. When a credit balance in excess of $1 is created in connection with a transaction (through transmittal of funds to a creditor in excess of the total balance due on an account, through rebates of unearned finance charges or insurance premiums, or through amounts otherwise owed to or held for the benefit of a consumer), the creditor shall: ( a ) Credit the amount of the credit balance to the consumer's account;
( b ) Refund any part of the remaining credit balance, upon the written request of the consumer; and
( c ) Make a good faith effort to refund to the consumer by cash, check, or money order, or credit to a deposit account of the consumer, any part of the credit balance remaining in the account for more than 6 months, except that no further action is required if the consumer's current location is not known to the creditor and cannot be traced through the consumer's last known address or telephone number.
§ 7.1028 Establishment and operation of a deposit production office by a national bank. ( a ) *In general.* A national bank or its operating subsidiary may engage in deposit production activities at a site other than the main office or a branch of the bank. A national bank or its operating subsidiary may solicit deposits, provide information about deposit products, and assist persons in completing application forms and related documents to open a deposit account at a deposit production office (DPO). A DPO is not a branch within the meaning of 12 U.S.C. 36(j) and 12 CFR 5.30(d)(1) so long as it does not receive deposits, pay withdrawals, or make loans. All deposit and withdrawal transactions of a bank customer using a DPO must be performed by the customer, either in person at the main office or a branch office of the bank, or by mail, electronic transfer, or a similar method of transfer.
( b ) *Services of other persons.* A national bank may use the services of, and compensate, persons not employed by the bank in its deposit production activities.
[85 FR 83732, Dec. 22, 2020]
EXHIBIT 32.1

QUIPP, INC.

CERTIFICATION BY THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

Required by Rule 13a-14(b) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and 18 U.S.C Section 1350

I, Michael S. Kady, Chief Executive Officer of Quipp, Inc., a Florida corporation (the Company), hereby certify that, based on my knowledge:

(1)

The Companys quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2007 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; 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/ MICHAEL S. KADY    
| | Michael S. Kady        
| | Chief Executive Officer

Date:

May 14, 2007
#### § 1204.1502 Definitions.

*Administrator* means the Administrator of the U.S. National Aeronautics and Space Administration or an official or employee of the Agency acting for the Administrator under a delegation of authority.

*Agency* means the U.S. National Aeronautics and Space Administration.

*Order* means Executive Order 12372, issued July 14, 1982, and amended April 8, 1983, and titled “Intergovernmental Review of Federal Programs.”

*State* means any of the 50 states, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, Guam, American Samoa, the U.S. Virgin Islands, or the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands.
<PAGE>   1
                                                                   Exhibit 4.h.2



                           NEW ROCKWELL COLLINS, INC.

                 RESOLUTIONS ADOPTED BY THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS
                                ON JUNE 13, 2001

*  APPROVAL OF ASSUMPTION OF CERTAIN STOCK
   OPTIONS PREVIOUSLY GRANTED BY ROCKWELL

        RESOLVED, that the assignment to and assumption by this Corporation,
   effective as of the Time of Distribution (as defined in the Distribution
   Agreement (the "Distribution Agreement") to be entered into by and among
   Rockwell, this Corporation and Rockwell Scientific Company LLC, a Delaware
   limited liability company ("Rockwell Science Center"), pursuant to authority
   previously granted by the Board of Directors by Unanimous Written Consent
   dated June 1, 2001), of outstanding options granted under Rockwell's 1988
   Long-Term Incentives Plan, 1995 Long-Term Incentives Plan, 2000 Long-Term
   Incentives Plan and Directors Stock Plan (the "Rockwell Plans") with respect
   to shares of Company Common Stock (as converted and adjusted pursuant to the
   terms of the Rockwell Plans and the Employee Matters Agreement (the "Employee
   Matters Agreement") to be entered into by and among Rockwell, this
   Corporation and Rockwell Science Center pursuant to authority previously
   granted by the Board of Directors by Unanimous Written Consent dated June 1,
   2001) to Rockwell Collins Optionees (as defined in the Employee Matters
   Agreement) and Rockwell Split Optionees (as defined in the Employee Matters
   Agreement) (collectively, the "Company Options"), together with any and all
   agreements, undertakings or other liabilities pursuant thereto, be, and it
   hereby is, approved; and in connection with such assignment and assumption
   (A) this Corporation shall be deemed to be "the Corporation" for all purposes
   under each of the Company Options and all outstanding stock option agreements
   relating thereto and (B) all references to the Rockwell Plans in the Company
   Options and all outstanding stock option agreements related thereto shall be
   to this Corporation's 2001 Stock Option Plan (the "2001 Plan"); and further

        RESOLVED, that the Company Options granted under the Rockwell Plans,
   assigned to and assumed by this Corporation pursuant to the immediately
   preceding resolution, be, and they hereby are, deemed to have been issued
   under the 2001 Plan; and that this Corporation's Compensation and Management
   Development Committee be, and it hereby is, authorized and directed to take
   such actions as it deems appropriate to effectuate the foregoing; and further
§ 121.637 Takeoffs from unlisted and alternate airports: Domestic and flag operations. ( a ) No pilot may takeoff an airplane from an airport that is not listed in the operations specifications unless— ( 1 ) The airport and related facilities are adequate for the operation of the airplane;
( 2 ) He can comply with the applicable airplane operating limitations;
( 3 ) The airplane has been dispatched according to dispatching rules applicable to operation from an approved airport; and
( 4 ) The weather conditions at that airport are equal to or better than the following: ( i ) *Airports in the United States.* The weather minimums for takeoff prescribed in part 97 of this chapter; or where minimums are not prescribed for the airport, 800-2, 900-11 ⁄ 2, or 1,000-1.
( ii ) *Airports outside the United States.* The weather minimums for takeoff prescribed or approved by the government of the country in which the airport is located; or where minimums are not prescribed or approved for the airport, 800-2, 900-11 ⁄ 2, or 1,000-1.
( b ) No pilot may take off from an alternate airport unless the weather conditions are at least equal to the minimums prescribed in the certificate holder's operations specifications for alternate airports.
[Doc. No. 6258, 29 FR 19222, Dec. 31, 1964, as amended by Amdt. 121-33, 32 FR 13912, Oct. 6, 1967; Amdt. 121-253, 61 FR 2615, Jan. 26, 1996]
```

[House Report 106-1031]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

106th Congress                                                   Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 2d Session                                                    106-1031

======================================================================

 
PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.J. RES. 134, MAKING FURTHER CONTINUING 
                  APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2001

                                _______
                                

  December 15 (legislative day, December 14), 2000.--Referred to the 
                House Calendar and ordered to be printed

                                _______
                                

    Mr. Linder, from the Committee on Rules, submitted the following

                              R E P O R T

                       [To accompany H. Res. 675]

    The Committee on Rules, having had under consideration 
House Resolution 675, by a nonrecord vote, report the same to 
the House with the recommendation that the resolution be 
adopted.

                  summary of provisions of resolution

    The resolution provides for consideration in the House of 
H.J. Res. 134, making further continuing appropriations for 
fiscal year 2001, under a closed rule. The rule waives all 
points of order against consideration of the joint resolution. 
The rule also provides one hour of debate equally divided and 
controlled by the chairman and ranking minority member of the 
Committee on Appropriations. Finally, the rule provides one 
motion to recommit.

                                  

```
§ 625.5 Allowable fees and expenses. ( a ) Awards will be based on rates customarily charged by persons engaged in the business of acting as attorneys, agents, and expert witnesses, even if the services were made available without charge or at a reduced rate to the applicant.
( b ) No award for the fee of an attorney or agent under these rules may exceed $75 per hour. No award to compensate an expert witness may exceed the highest rate at which the FCA pays expert witnesses. However, an award also may include the reasonable expenses of the attorney, agent, or expert witness as a separate item, if the attorney, agent, or expert witness ordinarily charges clients separately for such expenses.
( c ) In determining the reasonableness of the fee sought for an attorney, agent, or expert witness, the presiding officer shall consider the following: ( 1 ) If the attorney, agent, or expert witness is in private practice, his or her customary fees for similar services, or, if an employee of the applicant, the fully allocated costs of the services;
( 2 ) The prevailing rate for similar services in the community in which the attorney, agent, or expert witness ordinarily performs services;
( 3 ) The time actually spent in the representation of the applicant;
( 4 ) The time reasonably spent in light of the difficulty or complexity of the issues in the adversary adjudication; and
( 5 ) Such other factors as may bear on the value of the services provided.
( d ) The reasonable cost of any study, analysis, audit, engineering report, test, project, or similar matter prepared on behalf of a party may be awarded, to the extent that the charge for the service does not exceed the prevailing rate for similar services, and the study or other matter was necessary for the preparation of the applicant's case.
§ 390.297 Negotiable Order of Withdrawal Accounts. ( a ) *Negotiable Order of Withdrawal (NOW)* accounts are savings accounts authorized by 12 U.S.C. 1832 on which the State savings association reserves the right to require at least seven days' notice prior to withdrawal or transfer of any funds in the account.
( b ) For purposes of 12 U.S.C. 1832: ( 1 ) An organization shall be deemed “operated primarily for religious, philanthropic, charitable, educational, or other similar purposes and * * * not * * * for profit” if it is described in sections 501(c)(3) through (13), 501(c)(19), or 528 of the Internal Revenue Code; and
( 2 ) The funds of a sole proprietorship or unincorporated business owned by a husband and wife shall be deemed beneficially owned by “one or more individuals.”
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR BULLETIN 1028
GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PLATE 70
178°25'

178°10" 178°15' 178°20'

EXPLANATION

Te

Gunners Cove formation
Tuffaceous conglomerate and sandstone, crystal-
vitric basaltic tuff, thin basalt flows, and basaltic
dikes

Oligocene or Miocene
TERTIARY

Rat formation
Flows and flow breccias of porphyritic andesite, and

TERTIARY
OR
OLDER

‘minor amounts of conglomerate composed of
ae Dike swarm en, andesitic debris
“x Wd
ae Krysi Point pit ~
rt Sees ey
Contact
Dashed where inferred
YS
D

Fault
Dashed where inferred; direction of displacement
shown where known. U, upthrown side; D, down-

thrown side
40
ps
Strike and dip of beds

a

a
Ayugadak Point ‘~ Ca

Meee

51°45"
Base from U.S. Coast and Geodetic Geology by R Q Lewis, W.H. Nelson,
Survey manuscripts,1948-51

and H A Powers, 1951
GEOLOGY AND SUBMARINE TOPOGRAPHY OF RAT ISLAND

SCALE 1:63 360
° 1 2 3 MILES

= =

CONTOUR INTERVAL 100 FEET
DATUM IS MEAN SEA LEVEL
SUBMARINE CONTOURS IN FEET
DATUM IS MEAN SEA LEVEL

529705 © -59 (In pocket)
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### A PPEAL 

### O F 

### T HE 

### S TATE 

### O F 

### F LORIDA
F OURTH D ISTRICT

SHEENA MURPHY , Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA , Appellee

.

No. 4D 21

- 319

[ May 20, 2021 ]

Appeal from the C ounty Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County ; Kathleen M. McHugh , Judge; L.T. Case No s

. 19

- 000042AC10A and 19000795MM10A

.

Gordon Weekes, Public Defender, and Sarah W. Sandler, Assistant Public Defender, Fort Lauderdale, for appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Rachael Kaiman, Assistant At torney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.

P ER C URIAM

.
Affirmed.

D AMOORGIAN , K UNTZ and A RTAU , JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Stephen J. Markman

, Chief Justice

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano

Richard H. Bernstein

Kurtis T. Wilder

Elizabeth T. Clement

, Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

December 4, 2018

d1126 

# Order

Clerk December 4, 2018

157491 & (12)

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff

- Appellee,

v SC: 157491

COA: 339882

Oakland CC: 2008

- 223666

- FC

BRYAN VALENTIN,

Defendant

- Appellant.

____________________________________/

On order of the Court, the motion for miscellaneous relief is GRANTED to the

extent that the attached documents are considered as offers of proof. The application for

leave to appeal the February 7, 2018 order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is

DENIED, because the defendant has failed to meet the burden of establishing entitlement

to relief under MCR 6.508(D).
Exhibit
32.1





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
Innodata Isogen, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K/A for the year ended December
31, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
(the “Report”), I, Jack Abuhoff, Chairman of the Board, Chief Executive Officer
and President of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted
pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my
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.





/s/ Jack AbuhoffJack
      AbuhoffChairman
      of the Board,Chief
      Executive Officer and PresidentNovember
      30, 2010
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 199 (Friday, October 16, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 53309]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-24784]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Office of the Secretary


Aviation Proceedings, Agreements Filed the Week Ending September 
26, 2009

    The following Agreements were filed with the Department of 
Transportation under Sections 412 and 414 of the Federal Aviation Act, 
as amended (49 U.S.C. 1383 and 1384), and procedures governing 
proceedings to enforce these provisions. Answers may be filed within 21 
days after the filing of the application.
    Docket Number: DOT-OST-2009-0227.
    Date Filed: September 21, 2009.
    Parties: Members of the International Air Transport Association.
    Subject: Mail Vote 610--Resolution 010j--TC3 Special Passenger 
Amending Resolution between China (excluding Hong Kong SAR and Macao 
SAR) and Japan (Memo 1318). Intended Effective Date: October 1, 2009.

Renee V. Wright,
Program Manager, Docket Operations, Federal Register Liaison.
[FR Doc. E9-24784 Filed 10-15-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-9X-P
#### § 1203.405 Proprietary information.

Proprietary information made available to NASA is subject to examination for classification purposes under the criteria set forth in this subpart D. Where the information is in the form of a proposal and accepted by NASA for support, it should be categorized in accordance with the criteria of § 1203.400. If NASA does not support the proposal but believes that security classification would be appropriate under the criteria of § 1203.400 if it were under Government jurisdiction, the contractor should be advised of the reasons why safeguarding would be appropriate, unless security considerations preclude release of the explanation to the contractor. NASA should identify the Government department, agency or activity whose national security interests might be involved and the contractor should be instructed to protect the proposal as though classified pending further advisory classification opinion by the Government activity whose interests are involved. If such a Government activity cannot be identified, the contractor should be advised that the proposal is not under NASA jurisdiction for classification purposes, and that the information should be sent, under proper safeguards, to the Director, Information Security Oversight Office for a determination.

[44 FR 34913, June 18, 1979, as amended at 78 FR 5118, Jan. 24, 2013]
Exhibit 3.4

                                STATE OF DELAWARE
                            CERTIFICATE OF AMENDMENT
                         OF CERTIFICATE OF INCORPORATION
                         In accordance with Section 242.

Sunburst  Pharmaceuticals,  Inc., a corporation organized and existing under and
by virtue of the General Corporation Law of the State of Delaware.

DOES HEREBY CERTIFY:

FIRST: That at a meeting of the Board of Directors of Sunburst  Pharmaceuticals,
Inc.  resolutions  were duly adopted  setting forth  proposed  amendments of the
Certificate  of  Incorporation,  declaring  said  amendments to be advisable and
calling for  submission to the  stockholders  of said  corporation  of a written
consent  approving such  amendments.  The resolution  setting forth the proposed
amendments is as follows:

RESOLVED,  that the Certificate of  Incorporation of this corporation be amended
by changing  the Article  thereof  numbered  "FIRST" so that,  as amended,  said
Article shall be and read as follows:

          FIRST: The name of the corporation is Gamma Pharmaceuticals, Inc.

SECOND:  That  thereafter,  pursuant to resolution of its Board of Directors,  a
written consent of majority  shareholders was obtained from stockholders of said
corporation owning 90% of the outstanding stock of the corporation in accordance
with  Section 228 of the  Delaware  General  Corporation  Law,  resulting in the
necessary  number of shares as required  by statute  being voted in favor of the
amendment.

THIRD: That said amendment was duly adopted in accordance with the provisions of
Section 242 of the General Corporation Law of the State of Delaware.

FOURTH:  That the capital of said  corporation  shall not be reduced under or by
reason of said amendment.

IN WITNESS  WHEREOF,  the Board of Directors has caused this  certificate  to be
signed by Joseph Cunningham,  an authorized officer and director,  this 10th day
of July, AD 2006.


SIGNED: /s/ Joseph Cunningham
       ------------------------------------------
       Joseph Cunningham, Chief Financial Officer
       and Director
<PAGE>   1
                                                                   Exhibit 23.1





                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS


We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration
Statement on Form S-8 (No. 333-47397) of our report dated January 25, 1999,
except Note 16 which is as of February 10, 1999, appearing on page 47 of the
Annual Report to Stockholders which is incorporated in this Annual Report on
Form 10-K. We also consent to the incorporation by reference of our report on
the Financial Statement Schedules, which appears in this Form 10-K.





PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
Chicago, Illinois
March 30, 1999
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                            3620
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      159
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                  3792
<PP&E>                                           26425
<DEPRECIATION>                                   10182
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   20150
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                             1253
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                       18897
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     20150
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                  1181
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                      694
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   263
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    224
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                224
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       224
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.99
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.99
        

</TABLE>
#### BYRUM V. THE STATE.

(Decided November 27, 1913.)

Appeal from Jefferson Criminal Court.

Heard before Hon. S. E. Greene.

No counsel marked for appellant. R. C. Brickell, Attorney General, and W. L. Martin, Assistant Attorney General, for the State.

Per curiam.

Appeal dismissed.