alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>

                                 EXHIBIT (10)(b)

                         OPINION AND CONSENT OF ACTUARY

<PAGE>


                [Transamerica Life Insurance Company Letterhead]

April 1, 2003

Transamerica Life Insurance Company
4333 Edgewood Road NE
Cedar Rapids, Iowa  52499-0001

Re:      Separate Account VA D
         Registration on Form N-4   SEC File No. 333-94489

Dear Sir/Madam:

With regard to the above registration statement, I have examined such documents
and made such inquiries as I have deemed necessary and appropriate, and on the
basis of such examination, have the following opinions:

Fees and charges deducted under the Transamerica Access Variable Annuity
policies are those deemed necessary to appropriately reflect:

(1)      the expenses incurred in the acquisition and distribution of the
         policies,

(2)      the expenses associated with the development and servicing of the
         policies,

(3)      the assumption of certain risks arising from the operation and
         management of the policies and/or riders to the policy and that
         provides for a reasonable margin of profit.

Fees and charges assessed against the policy values in the variable account
include:

(i)      Service Charge and Administrative Charge

(ii)     Mortality and Expense Risk Fee (M&E)

(iii)    Taxes (including premium and other taxes if applicable)

(iv)     Any applicable rider fees or charges

The magnitude of each of the individual charges listed above in (i) through (iv)
is established in the pricing of the Transamerica Access Variable Annuity, to
achieve a reasonable Return on Investment (ROI), which is within the range of
industry practice with respect to comparable variable annuity products.

<PAGE>


Transamerica Life Insurance Company
April 1, 2003
Page 2


Except by coincidence, it is not expected that actual charges assessed in a
given year would exactly offset actual expenses incurred. Acquisition expenses
(as well as major product and/or systems development expenses) are incurred "up
front" and recovered, with a reasonable profit margin, through future years'
charges. In addition, the company cannot increase certain charges under the
policies in the pricing process.

Therefore, in my opinion, the fees and charges deducted under the policies, in
the aggregate, are reasonable in relation to the services rendered, the expenses
expected to be incurred, and the risks assumed by the company.

I hereby consent to the use of this opinion, which is included as an Exhibit to
the registration statement.

  /s/ Tim Bennett
-------------------------------------
Tim Bennett, ASA, MAAA
Assistant Actuary
Transamerica Life Insurance Company
§ 1214.704 Violations. ( a ) All personnel on board the NASA mission are subject to the authority of the NASA Commander and shall conform to his/her orders and direction as authorized by this subpart.
( b ) This subpart is a regulation within the meaning of 18 U.S.C. 799, and whoever willfully violates, attempts to violate, or conspires to violate any provision of this subpart or any order or direction issued under this subpart shall be subject to fines and imprisonment, as specified by law.
Docket No. FAA-2013-1070
§ 205.7 Cancellation, withdrawal, modification, expiration, or replacement of insurance coverage. ( a ) Each policy of aircraft accident liability insurance and plan for self insurance shall specify that it shall remain in force, and may not be replaced, canceled, withdrawn, or in any way modified to reduce the minimum standards set forth in this part, or to change the extent of coverage, by the insurer or the carrier, nor expire by its own terms, in regard to coverage for the carrier in its common carrier operations in air transportation, until 10 days after written notice by the insurer (in the event of replacement, by the retiring insurer), or by the insurer's representative, or by the carrier, describing the change, to the Department at the addresses specified in § 205.4(c), which 10-day notice period shall start to run from the date such notice is actually received at the Department. For purposes of this part, a policy will not be considered to have expired if the same insurer renews its coverage without reduction in the extent of coverage or amounts of coverage, and without a break in coverage, whether or not a new policy is issued, and notice to the Department is not required in that event. If the coverage being changed is by type or class of aircraft or by specific aircraft, endorsements adding or deleting specific aircraft or types or classes of aircraft, for which prior notice would be required by this paragraph, shall be filed in accordance with § 205.4(b), and prior notice of the change need not be given under this paragraph.
( b ) The requirements of this section shall not apply if the policy contains a lesser time period for cancellation in a war risk exclusion. If the war risk exclusion is activated by the insurer, the insurer or its representative shall immediately notify the Department.
[Doc. No. 47939, 57 FR 40100, 40101, Sept. 2, 1992, as amended at 70 FR 25768, May 16, 2005]
EXHIBIT 10.8.1




                                 AMENDMENT NO. 6

                                       TO

                         DEFERRED COMPENSATION AGREEMENT


     Amendment No. 6, effective the 4th day of April,  2001,  between  LECHTERS,
INC.   (hereinafter   referred  to  as  the   "Corporation")  and  DONALD  JONAS
(hereinafter  referred to as  "Employee")  to Deferred  Compensation  Agreement,
dated  December 9, 1987,  as amended  June 15, 1989,  August 15, 1989,  June 15,
1995,  April 8, 1996 and  February  14,  2001  (hereinafter  referred  to as the
"Agreement").

     WHEREAS,  the parties  desire to further  amend said  Agreement as follows:

     1.Employee  hereby releases the Corporation from its obligation to make the
payments to Employee under Paragraph 3 thereof as amended.

     2. The  Corporation  agrees to  continue to provide  the  Employee  for his
lifetime in accordance  with paragraphs 2 and 3 of Amendment dated June 15, 1995
participation  in (a) the Group Life Insurance Plan of the  Corporation  and (b)
the Group Medical and Dental Plan of the Corporation.

     3. The Employee  agrees for his lifetime in accordance with paragraph 4 (a)
and (b) of the Agreement not to compete with the  Corporation and to provide the
advisory services specified therein.

     4. Except as hereby  amended,  the  Agreement is in all respects  approved,
ratified  and  confirmed.

     IN WITNESS  WHEREOF,  the parties  have caused this  Amendment  No. 6 to be
executed as of the date first written above.

Dated:  April 4th, 2001

                               LECHTERS, INC.

                               BY:  /s/ David K. Cully
                                    ------------------
                                    Name: David K. Cully
                                    Title: President and Chief Executive Officer

                                    /s/ Donald Jonas
                                    ----------------
                                    Name: Donald Jonas
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 15**  **- 7666** 

ELVIS WAYNE JONES , Plaintiff

- Appellant ,
v. THE TEXAS BEAUMONT U.S. DISTRICT COURT S; THE TEXAS COUNTY(S): [CSCD]

- MONITORING , Defendants

- Appellees
.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia , at Norfolk
. Raymond A. Jackson , District Judge. ( 2:15

- cv - 00388

- RAJ

- RJK )

Submitted : February 25, 2016 Decided: March 1, 2016

Before SHEDD and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion
. Elvis Wayne Jones, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Elvis Wayne Jones appeals the district court ’ s order dismissing for improper venue his complaint seeking a temporary restraining order or permanent injunction
. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Jones v. The Texas Beaumont U.S. District Courts , No. 2:15

- cv - 00388

- RAJ

- RJK (E.D. Va. Sept. 15, 2015)
. We deny Jones’ motion s for a temporary or permanent restraining order , injunctive relief, and damages and reimbursement. We also deny his motion to grant veteran’s
emerge ncies. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before th is court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
###### Editorial Note on Part 21

#### Editorial Notes:

1. For miscellaneous amendments to cross references in this 21 see Amdt. 21-10, 31 FR 9211, July 6, 1966.

2. Nomenclature changes to part 21 appear at 74 FR 53384, Oct. 16, 2009.

#### § 21.41 Type certificate.

Each type certificate is considered to include the type design, the operating limitations, the certificate data sheet, the applicable regulations of this subchapter with which the FAA records compliance, and any other conditions or limitations prescribed for the product in this subchapter.
§ 25.1703 Function and installation: EWIS. ( a ) Each EWIS component installed in any area of the aircraft must: ( 1 ) Be of a kind and design appropriate to its intended function.
( 2 ) Be installed according to limitations specified for the EWIS components.
( 3 ) Perform the function for which it was intended without degrading the airworthiness of the airplane.
( 4 ) Be designed and installed in a way that will minimize mechanical strain.
( b ) Selection of wires must take into account known characteristics of the wire in relation to each installation and application to minimize the risk of wire damage, including any arc tracking phenomena.
( c ) The design and installation of the main power cables (including generator cables) in the fuselage must allow for a reasonable degree of deformation and stretching without failure.
( d ) EWIS components located in areas of known moisture accumulation must be protected to minimize any hazardous effects due to moisture.
**Exhibit
      32.2**





Certification
      Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C.
§1350)





I,
      Michael A. Reisner, Director, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial
      Officer (Principal Financial and Accounting Officer) of ICON Capital Corp.,
      the General Partner of the Registrant in connection with the Annual Report
      of
      ICON Income Fund Eight A L.P. (the "Partnership") on Form 10-K/A for the year
      ended December 31, 2006, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
      on
      the date hereof (the "Annual Report") certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the
      Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge:





1.
            The
                Annual Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a)
                or
                15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. §78m);
                and





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








*Dated:
      December 11, 2007*





*/s/Michael A. Reisner*


Michael
      A. Reisner


Director,
      Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the General
      Partner


(Principal
      Financial and Accounting Officer)


ICON
      Capital Corp.


General
      Partner of ICON Income Fund Eight A L.P.
BILL OF COSTS

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, SEVENTH DISTRICT, AT AMARILLO

No. 07-16-00438-CV

In the Interest of K.B. and K.R.B., Children

(No. 2014-513,337 IN 72ND DISTRICT COURT OF LUBBOCK COUNTY)

Type of Fee Charges Paid By

Motion fee

Motion fee

Reporter's record

Filing

Indigent

Supreme Court chapter 51 fee

Statewide efiling fee $10.00

$10.00

$560.00

$100.00

$25.00

$50.00

$30.00 EXEMPT

INDIGENT

UNKNOWN

INDIGENT

INDIGENT

INDIGENT

INDIGENT Martha Garcia

Jim Shaw

Lubbock County

Balance of costs owing to the Seventh Court of Appeals, Amarillo, Texas: $0.00

Court costs in this cause shall be paid as per

the Judgment issued by this Court.

I, VIVIAN LONG, CLERK OF THE SEVENTH COURT OF APPEALS OF THE

STATE OF TEXAS, do hereby certify that the above and foregoing is a true and correct

copy of the cost bill of THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF

TEXAS, showing the charges and payments, in the above numbered and styled cause,

as the same appears of record in this office.

IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, witness my hand

and the Seal of the COURT OF APPEALS for

the Seventh District of Texas on August 3,

2017

.



# Vivian Long

VIVIAN LONG, CLERK
*Pursuant to 5TH CIR. 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 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

For the Fifth Circuit

No. 97-50761

Summary Calendar

DR. NORLENE KUNKEL,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

VERSUS

ALAMO COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT; DR. BYRON R. SKINNER

Defendants-Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court

For the Western District of Texas

(SA-96-CV-20)

March 20, 1998

Before DUHÉ, DeMOSS, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM*:

Plaintiff Norlene Kunkel (Kunkel), a white female, served as Dean of Liberal

Studies at Palo Alto College, a part of the Alamo Community College District (ACCD),
from January 1989 until August 31, 1993. The ACCD Board of Trustees chose not to

renew Kunkel’s contract for the 1993-1994 school year. On July 30, 1993, Kunkel filed

suit against ACCD and Byron Skinner, former president of Palo Alto College. She

alleged ACCD’s decision to not renew her contract was based on her race and gender

and in retaliation for her exercise of protected First Amendment rights. In addition,

Kunkel asserted ACCD breached its contract with her by failing to follow certain

procedures in connection with her annual evaluation. Kunkel also asserted Byron

Skinner, a black male, tortiously interfered with her contract by persuading his

successor, James Dye, a white male, to recommend to the Board of Trustees that

Kunkel’s contract not be renewed. Finally, Kunkel contended ACCD further retaliated

against her after her contract expired by providing false and damaging information to

her prospective employers. Based on these allegations, Kunkel sued ACCD under (1)

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964; (2) 42 U.S.C. §§ 1981 and 1983; (3) Article 1,

§8 of the Texas Constitution; (4) the Texas Commission on Human Rights Act

(TCHRA); and (5) Texas common law breach of contract. Kunkel also sued Skinner for

(1) violation of her civil rights under §§ 1983 and 1985; (2) tortious interference with

contracts and (3) conspiracy to commit tortious interference. The district court,

accepting the magistrate’s memorandum and recommendation, granted summary

judgment in favor of the defendants on all of Kunkel’s claims. 

As Kunkel did not raise or argue any issues in her initial brief with respect to her

claims against Skinner, she has abandoned these claims. Webb v. Investacorp, Inc.,

89 F.3d 252, n.2 (5th Cir. 1996); Cinel v. Connick, 15 F.3d 1338, 1345 (5th Cir. 1994)

(any issue inadequately briefed or raised only in the reply brief is considered
abandoned). After carefully reviewing the briefs, record excerpts, and the relevant

portions of the record itself, we affirm the district court’s grant of summary judgment with

respect to Kunkel’s remaining claims against the ACCD for essentially the same

reasons stated in the magistrate’s Memorandum and Recommendation and adopted by

the district court on August 11, 1997.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 97-6550 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus WAYNE EDWARDS, Defendant - Appellant.

No. 97-6578 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus MELVIN CURTIS COX, Defendant - Appellant. Appeals from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Spartanburg. Joseph F. Anderson, Jr., District Judge. (CR-88-181, CA-96-3105-7-17, CA-96-2934-7-17) Submitted: August 14, 1997 Decided: August 25, 19972 Before NIEMEYER, Circuit Judge, and BUTZNER and PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Wayne Edwards, Melvin Curtis Cox, Appellants Pro Se. Alfred William Walker Bethea, Assistant United States Attorney, Florence, South Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM: Appellants seek to appeal the district court's orders denying their motions filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West 1994 & Supp.1997). We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinions and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. United States v. Edwards , Nos. CR-88-181; CA96-3105-7-17 (D.S.C. Mar. 26, 1997); United States v. Cox , Nos. CR88-181; CA-96-2934-7-17 (D.S.C. Mar. 26, 1997). We dispense withoral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED
Editorial Note on Part 221
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 221 appear at 84 FR 15929, Apr. 16, 2019.

§ 221.151 Method of revoking power of attorney. ( a ) A power of attorney may be revoked only by filing with the Department in the manner specified in this section a Notice of Revocation of Power of Attorney in a form acceptable to the Office of International Aviation.
( b ) *Sixty days' notice required.* Such Notice of Revocation of Power of Attorney shall be filed on not less than sixty days' notice to the Department. A Notice of Revocation of Power of Attorney will be deemed to be filed only upon its actual receipt by the Department, and the period of notice shall commence to run only from such actual receipt.
( c ) *Number of copies.* Each Notice of Revocation of Power of Attorney shall be prepared in triplicate. The original thereof shall be filed with the Department and, at the same time that the original is transmitted to the Department, the duplicate thereof shall be sent to the agent in whose favor the power of attorney was issued (except, if the alternate agent has taken over the tariffs, the duplicate of the Notice of Revocation of Power of Attorney shall be sent to the alternate agent). The third copy of the notice shall be retained by the carrier.
( d ) *Amendment of tariffs when power of attorney is revoked.* When a power of attorney is revoked, a corresponding amendment of the tariff or tariffs affected shall be made by the issuing agent of such tariffs, on not less than statutory notice, to become effective not later than the effective date stated in the Notice of Revocation of Power of Attorney. In the event of failure to so amend the tariff or tariffs, the provisions therein shall remain applicable until lawfully canceled.
# Official Journal C 93I/2022

| | ISSN 1977-091X |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 093I |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 6528 February 2022 |

ISSN 1977-091X

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 093I

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 6528 February 2022

---

| Contents | page |
| --- | --- |
| | IV   Notices |
| | NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES |
| | European Commission |
| 2022/C 93 I/01 | Notice to importers – Imports into the Union of goods originating in the non-government controlled areas of the Donetsk and Lugansk oblasts of Ukraine | 1 |

Contents

page

IV   Notices

NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

European Commission

2022/C 93 I/01

Notice to importers – Imports into the Union of goods originating in the non-government controlled areas of the Donetsk and Lugansk oblasts of Ukraine

1

---

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

EN
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

PERRY JOSEPH,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

No. 4D19-2665

[July 16, 2020]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, 

Broward County; Michael Lynch, Judge; L.T. Case No. 04001123CF10D.

Harold D. Thompson of DeNovo Law, P.A., Orlando, for appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Jeanine 

Germanowicz, Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

GROSS, GERBER, and CONNER, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
```

[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 34 (Friday, February 20, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Page 9262]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-03608]

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

ELECTION ASSISTANCE COMMISSION

Sunshine Act Meetings

AGENCY: U.S. Election Assistance Commission.

ACTION: Notice of public meeting (amended meeting date).

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

SUMMARY: EAC is amending the original Sunshine Notice that published on 
February 6, 2015. Due to an inclement weather forecast, EAC postponed 
the public meeting that was originally scheduled for Wednesday, 
February 18, 2015. The public meeting has been rescheduled for Tuesday, 
February 24, 2015, 10:00 a.m.-1:00 p.m.; U.S. Election Assistance 
Commission; 1335 East West Highway, EAC Office; Silver Spring, MD, 
20910. The EAC public meeting agenda items remain the same.

DATES: Tuesday, February 24, 2015, 10:00 a.m.-1:00 p.m. EST.

ADDRESSES: U.S. Election Assistance Commission, 1335 East West Highway 
(EAC Office), Silver Spring, MD 20910, (Metro Stop: Silver Spring on 
the Red Line).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bryan Whitener, Telephone: (301) 563-
3961.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

AGENDA ITEMS TO BE DISCUSSED: 
 Selection of Chair and Vice-Chair
 Accreditation Decision for Pro V&V
 Briefing and Discussion of Voluntary Voting Systems Guidelines 
(VVSG 1.1)
 Briefing and Discussion of Program Manuals
 Discussion and Consideration of Roles and Responsibilities 
Document
    Commissioners will meet to select a chair and vice-chair and to 
discuss the following items: Accreditation Decision for Pro V&V; 
Briefing and Discussion of Voluntary Voting Systems Guidelines (VVSG 
1.1); Briefing and Discussion of Program Manuals; and Discussion and 
Consideration of Roles and Responsibilities Document. As stated in the 
original notice, members of the public who wish to speak at the meeting 
on proposed changes to the Voluntary Voting Systems Guidelines VVSG 1.1 
were requested to send a request to participate to the EAC no later 
than 5:00 p.m. EDT on Thursday, February 12, 2015.

STATUS:  This meeting will be open to the public.

    Dated: February 18, 2015.
 Bryan Whitener,
Director of Communications & Clearinghouse.
[FR Doc. 2015-03608 Filed 2-18-15; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE P
```