alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Small Business Administration

The Mid Atlantic States Regulatory Fairness Board will hold a public hearing on May 17, 2000 at the Polytechnic University of Puerto Rico located at 377 Ponce de Leon Avenue, University Theatre Hato Rey, Puerto Rico 00919 at 9 a.m. The space is being donated by the University and the event is being co-hosted by Banco Popular. The purpose of the meeting is to receive comments and testimony from small businesses and representatives of trade associations concerning regulatory enforcement or compliance actions taken by federal agencies. Transcripts of these proceedings will be posted on the Internet. These transcripts are subject only to limited review by the National Ombudsman. Contact: Gary P. Peele (312) 353-0880. 

Bettie Baca, 

Counselor to the Administrator/Public Liaison. 

[FR Doc. 00-10199 Filed 4-21-00; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8025-01-P
# Official Journal C 79/1 Ap

| | ISSN 1725-2423 |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 79 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 491 April 2006 |

ISSN 1725-2423

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 79

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 491 April 2006

---

| Notice No | Contents | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | I   Information |
| | Council |
| 2006/C 079/1 | Modernising education and training: a vital contribution to prosperity and social cohesion in Europe — 2006 Joint Interim Report of the Council and of the Commission on progress under the ‘Education & Training 2010’ work programme | 1 |
| | Commission |
| 2006/C 079/2 | Euro exchange rates | 20 |
| 2006/C 079/3 | Prior notification of a concentration (Case COMP/M.3998 — Axalto/Gemplus) (1) | 21 |
| 2006/C 079/4 | Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case COMP/M.4136 — Deutsche Post/Williams Lea) (1) | 22 |
| 2006/C 079/5 | Authorisation for State aid pursuant to Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty — Cases where the Commission raises no objections (1) | 23 |
| 2006/C 079/6 | Authorisation for State aid pursuant to Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty — Cases where the Commission raises no objections (1) | 28 |
| | European Central Bank |
| 2006/C 079/7 | Opinion of the European Central Bank of 24 March 2006 concerning the proposal for a European Parliament and Council regulation establishing the statistical classification of economic activities NACE Rev. 2 and amending Council Regulation (EEC) No 3037/90 and certain EC regulations on specific statistical domains (CON/2006/18) | 31 |

Notice No

Contents

page

I   Information

Council

2006/C 079/1

Modernising education and training: a vital contribution to prosperity and social cohesion in Europe — 2006 Joint Interim Report of the Council and of the Commission on progress under the ‘Education & Training 2010’ work programme

1

Commission

2006/C 079/2

Euro exchange rates

20

2006/C 079/3

Prior notification of a concentration (Case COMP/M.3998 — Axalto/Gemplus) (1)

21

2006/C 079/4

Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case COMP/M.4136 — Deutsche Post/Williams Lea) (1)

22

2006/C 079/5

Authorisation for State aid pursuant to Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty — Cases where the Commission raises no objections (1)

23

2006/C 079/6

Authorisation for State aid pursuant to Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty — Cases where the Commission raises no objections (1)

28

European Central Bank

2006/C 079/7

Opinion of the European Central Bank of 24 March 2006 concerning the proposal for a European Parliament and Council regulation establishing the statistical classification of economic activities NACE Rev. 2 and amending Council Regulation (EEC) No 3037/90 and certain EC regulations on specific statistical domains (CON/2006/18)

31

---

| | |
| --- | --- |
| 2006/C 079/8 | >Notice | s3 |

2006/C 079/8

>Notice

Notice

s3

---

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | (1)   Text with EEA relevance |

---

(1)   Text with EEA relevance

1

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN
* Pursuant to Local Rule 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent

except under the limited circumstances set forth in Local Rule

47.5.4.

 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

_________________

No. 96-40193

Summary Calendar

__________________

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff-Appellee,

v.

LEWIS WILLARD SMITH,

 Defendant-Appellant.

_________________________________________________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Texas

(1:95-CR-93)

_________________________________________________________________

January 16, 1997

Before KING, JOLLY, and PARKER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Lewis Willard Smith appeals his conviction for possessing

with the intent to distribute marijuana. He contends that the

district court erred in denying his motion to suppress the

evidence seized after his traffic stop. 

Our review of the record and the arguments and authorities

convinces us that the district court’s refusal to suppress the
No. 96-40193

- 2 -

marijuana found in the search was not error. See United States

v. Kelley, 981 F.2d 1464, 1467-72 (5th Cir. 1993).

AFFIRMED.
Exhibit
32.1



CERTIFICATION
OF CEO PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



In
connection with the Quarterly Report of Virtual Crypto Technologies, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period
ended March 31, 2018 (the “Report”), as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Yair
Fudim, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section
906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my knowledge, that:



1.
The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) 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/
    Yair Fudim          | 
|--------------------------- | 
|Yair
    Fudim              | 
|Chief
    Executive Officer | 
|                            | 
|Dated:
    May 21, 2018     | 



A
signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the
Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
<PAGE>   1

                                                                    EXHIBIT 21.1

                              List of Subsidiaries

Amplitude Software Ltd.

Apollo Acquisition Corp.

Compass Acquisition Corp.

Compass Holding Corp.

CP AG (Switzerland)

CP A/S (Denmark)

CP B.V.

CP Data Center UK

CP Germany

CP Ireland

CP Latin America

CP SA (France)

CP SpA (Italy)

Critical Path GmbH

Critical Path UK Ltd.

Critical Path US

DotOne Acquisition Corp.

FaxNet Acquisition Corp.

FaxNet SA

FaxNet Services Corp.

Initialize Acquisition Corp.

UI Telecom Inc.

Unicom Int'l LLC

Wellfleet Acquisition Corp.

Xeti Acquisition Corp.

3034996 Nova Scotia Company, a Nova Scotia Company

3034997 Nova Scotia Company, a Nova Scotia Company
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 Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Chell Group  Corporation
(the  "Company") for the period ending May 31, 2003 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange  Commission  on the date hereof (the  "Report"),  I, David  Bolink,
Chief  Accounting  Officer of the Company,  certify,  pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  (S)
1350, as adopted pursuant to (S) 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,  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.

                                       By:       /s/ David Bolink
                                       -----------------------------------------
                                                  DAVID BOLINK
                                            CHIEF ACCOUNTING OFFICER

November 30, 2004

A signed  original of this written  statement  required by Section 906, or other
document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that
appears in typed form within the  electronic  version of this written  statement
required by Section 906, has been provided to Chell Group  Corporation  and will
be retained by Chell Group  Corporation  and  furnished  to the  Securities  and
Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
#### § 792.22 What will NCUA charge for other services?

Complying with requests for special services is entirely at the discretion of NCUA. NCUA will recover the full costs of providing such services to the extent it elects to provide them.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-6318
JIMMY L. SHUE, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus WILLIAM MCCOLLUM; CORRECTIONAL OFFICER HERRING, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Durham. Wallace W. Dixon, Magistrate Judge. (1:04-CV-01012-WWD) Submitted: September 28, 2006 Decided: October 5, 2006 Before NIEMEYER, TRAXLER, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Jimmy L. Shue, Appellant Pro Se. Yvonne Bulluck Ricci, NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Ra leigh, North Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).* The parties consented to the jurisdiction of the magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c)(2000). - 2 - PER CURIAM: Jimmy L. Shue appeals the magistrate judge’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. *We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Shue v. Herring , No. 1:04-CV-01012-WWD (M.D.N.C. Jan. 12, 2006). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
#### § 7.2009 Quorum of a national bank board of directors; proxies not permissible.

A national bank must provide in its articles of association or bylaws that for the transaction of business, a quorum of the board of directors is at least a majority of the entire board then in office. A national bank director may not vote by proxy.

[61 FR 4862, Feb. 9, 1996, as amended at 85 FR 83735, Dec. 22, 2020]
#### S. E. HADDON v. THE UNITED STATES

[No. M-220.

Decided November 14, 1932]

*Mr. John W. Price*for the plaintiff. *Mr. Rees B. Gillespie*was on the brief.

*Mr. M. 0. Masterson,*with whom was *Mr. Assistant Attorney General Oharles B. Rugg,*for the defendant.

*273Williams, *Judge,*

delivered the opinion of the court:

The plaintiff, a lieutenant, senior grade, of the United States Navy, brings this suit to recover rental and subsistence allowances, on account of a dependent mother, provided in section 4, of the act of June 10, 1922, 42 Stat. 625:

> “ Sec. 4. That the term ‘ dependent ’ as used in the succeeding sections of this act shall include at all times and in all places a lawful wife and unmarried children under twenty-one years of age. It shall also include the mother of the officer provided she is in fact dependent on him for her chief support.”

Under the uniform rule announced by this court in almost innumerable decisions as to what constitutes the dependency of a mother under this statute, the plaintiff in this case is entitled to recover.

The findings disclose that he was not only the chief support of his mother during the period of the claim, but that he was in fact her only support.

The plaintiff is entitled to recover rental and subsistence allowances on account of a dependent mother, payable to an officer of his rank, for the period from July 1. 1925, to Au*274gust 23,1929. The entry of judgment, however, will be withheld awaiting the coming in of a report from the General Accounting Office of the amount due for the said period.

It is so ordered.

Wi-ialey, *Judge;*Littletok, *Judge;*GkeeN, *Judge;*and Booth, *Chief*Justice, concur.
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3734 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

        H.R.3734

                       One Hundred Eighth Congress

                                 of the

                        United States of America

                          AT THE SECOND SESSION

          Begun and held at the City of Washington on Tuesday,
           the twentieth day of January, two thousand and four

                                 An Act

 
   To designate the Federal building located at Fifth and Richardson 
 Avenues in Roswell, New Mexico, as the ``Joe Skeen Federal Building''.

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

SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

    The Federal building located at Fifth and Richardson Avenues in 
Roswell, New Mexico, shall be known and designated as the ``Joe Skeen 
Federal Building''.

SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

    Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper, or other 
record of the United States to the Federal building referred to in 
section 1 shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Joe Skeen Federal 
Building''.

                               Speaker of the House of Representatives.

                            Vice President of the United States and    
                                               President of the Senate.
```
#### § 125.357 Communication and navigation facilities.

No person may release an airplane over any route or route segment unless communication and navigation facilities equal to those required by § 125.51 are in satisfactory operating condition.
§ 125.9 Definitions. ( a ) For the purposes of this part, *maximum payload capacity* means: ( 1 ) For an airplane for which a maximum zero fuel weight is prescribed in FAA technical specifications, the maximum zero fuel weight, less empty weight, less all justifiable airplane equipment, and less the operating load (consisting of minimum flightcrew, foods and beverages and supplies and equipment related to foods and beverages, but not including disposable fuel or oil):
( 2 ) For all other airplanes, the maximum certificated takeoff weight of an airplane, less the empty weight, less all justifiable airplane equipment, and less the operating load (consisting of minimum fuel load, oil, and flightcrew). The allowance for the weight of the crew, oil, and fuel is as follows: ( i ) Crew—200 pounds for each crewmember required under this chapter
( ii ) Oil—350 pounds.
( iii ) Fuel—the minimum weight of fuel required under this chapter for a flight between domestic points 174 nautical miles apart under VFR weather conditions that does not involve extended overwater operations.
( b ) For the purposes of this part, *empty weight* means the weight of the airframe, engines, propellers, and fixed equipment. Empty weight excludes the weight of the crew and payload, but includes the weight of all fixed ballast, unusable fuel supply, undrainable oil, total quantity of engine coolant, and total quantity of hydraulic fluid.
( c ) For the purposes of this part, *maximum zero fuel weight* means the maximum permissible weight of an airplane with no disposable fuel or oil. The zero fuel weight figure may be found in either the airplane type certificate data sheet or the approved Airplane Flight Manual, or both.
( d ) For the purposes of this section, *justifiable airplane equipment* means any equipment necessary for the operation of the airplane. It does not include equipment or ballast specifically installed, permanently or otherwise, for the purpose of altering the empty weight of an airplane to meet the maximum payload capacity.
Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:24631-1 Filed:06/22/23 Entered:06/22/23 12:01:41 Desc:

Exhibit 1 - Notice provided by Kroll Page 1 of 1
#### L. C. ROWE et ux *v.*DRUYVESTEYN CONSTRUCTION COMPANY et al

5-6019

484 S.W. 2d 513

Opinion delivered September 18, 1972

*Frank W. Booth,*for appellants.

*Jones, Gilbreath & Jones,*for appellees.

George Rose Smith, Justice.

Danny Rowe, aged 16, was killed on July 16, 1969, in the course of his employment, when the walls of a ditch in which he was working col*64lapsed. The appellants, Danny’s parents, filed this claim for death benefits under the workmen’s compensation. The Commission directed the employer and its insurance carrier to pay the funeral expense allowed by the statute. Ark. Stat. Ann. § 81-1315 (a) (Supp. 1971). The Commission, however, denied the claim for death benefits, because it was stipulated that Danny’s parents were not wholly or partially dependent upon him for support. This appeal is from a circuit court judgment affirming the Commission’s decision. The appellants also filed an action at law for wrongful death, which is being disposed of today in a companion case. *Rowe*v. *Druyvesteyn Const. Co.,*253 Ark. 67, 484 S.W. 2d 512 (1972).

The Commission was right. The workmen’s compensation law provides for the payment of death benefits only to those persons who were wholly or partly dependent upon the decedent. Ark. Stat. Ann. § 81-1315 (c) and (i) (Repl. 1960). Parents not dependent upon their son are not entitled to death benefits under the statute. *Sherwin-Williams Co.*v. *Yeager,*219 Ark. 20, 239 S.W. 2d 1019 (1951).

The appellants insist that Danny was illegally employed and that they are therefore entitled to double the maximum death benefits provided by the statute. The Commission found that Danny was not illegally employed at the time of his death. We need not review that issue of fact, for the Commission’s decision was correct even if Danny’s employment had been contrary to law. The compensation law provides that when death is sustained by a minor employed in violation of federal or state statutes pertaining to minimum ages for employment, the death benefits provided by the act shall be doubled. Section 81-1310 (e) (Supp. 1971). No death benefits are payable, however, to parents not dependant upon the decedent, as we have said. We find nothing in the statute to indicate a legislative intent to abrogate that rule with respect to a minor employed in violation of the law. We are not authorized to amend the compensation statute by inserting a provision that the legislature did not see fit to include.

Affirmed.
No. 98-20275 -1-

* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 98-20275 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus SABAZ ALI KHAN, Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. H-97-141-1

- - - - - - - - - - February 9, 1999 Before HIGGINBOTHAM, JONES, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *
Sabaz Ali Khan appeals his sentence following a jury conviction for conspiracy to possess wi th intent to distribute heroin, possession with intent to distribute heroin, and bribery of

a public official. Sabaz argues that the record lacks evidentiary support f or the district court’s finding that he was responsible for 3,659.1 grams of heroin.
The trial testimony shows, in April, 1995, Sabaz attempted to sell Agent Kevin Blair a kilogram of heroin, that, in February,No. 98-20275 -2- 1996, Khan sold Blair heroin obtained from Pakistani sources, and that, in August, 1997, Khan and another co-conspirator were going

to bribe a gov ernment official with proceeds from the sale of a kilogram of heroin. Accordingly, the district court did not clearly err i n finding that Khan’s relevant conduct included 3,659.1 grams of heroin. S ee United States v. Kelley , 140 F.3 d 596, 609 (5th Cir.), cert. denied , 119 S.Ct. 247 (1998).

AFFIRMED.
§ 135.337 Qualifications: Check pilots. ( a ) For the purposes of this part: ( 1 ) A check pilot (aircraft) is a person who is qualified to conduct flight checks in an aircraft for a particular type aircraft.
( 2 ) A check-pilot (FSTD) is a person who is qualified to conduct flight checks only in an FSTD for a particular type aircraft.
( 3 ) Check pilots are those persons who perform the functions described in §§ 135.321(a) and 135.323(a)(4) and (c).
( b ) No certificate holder may use a person, nor may any person serve as a check pilot in a training program established under this subpart unless, with respect to the aircraft type involved, that person— ( 1 ) Holds the pilot certificates and ratings required to serve as a pilot in command in operations under this part;
( 2 ) Has satisfactorily completed the appropriate training phases for the aircraft, including recurrent training, that are required to serve as a pilot in command in operations under this part;
( 3 ) Has satisfactorily completed the proficiency or competency checks that are required to serve as a pilot in command in operations under this part;
( 4 ) Has satisfactorily completed the applicable training requirements of § 135.339;
( 5 ) Has been approved by the Administrator for the check pilot duties involved.
( c ) Completion of the requirements in paragraphs (b)(2), (3), and (4) of this section, as applicable, shall be entered in the individual's training record maintained by the certificate holder.
( d ) A check pilot (FSTD) must accomplish the following— ( 1 ) Fly at least two flight segments as a required crewmember for the type, class, or category aircraft involved within the 12-month period preceding the performance of any check-pilot duty in an FSTD; or
( 2 ) Satisfactorily complete an approved line-observation program within the period prescribed by that program and that must precede the performance of any check pilot duty in an FSTD.
( e ) The flight segments or line-observation program required in paragraph (d) of this section are considered to be completed in the month required if completed in the calendar month before or the calendar month after the month in which they are due.
( f ) A person who serves as a required flightcrew member while performing check pilot duties must also meet the requirements of this chapter for the duty position in which they are serving.
[Docket No. FAA-2019-0360; Amdt. No. 135-145, 89 FR 51431, June 18, 2024]