alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 25.619 Special factors. The factor of safety prescribed in § 25.303 must be multiplied by the highest pertinent special factor of safety prescribed in §§ 25.621 through 25.625 for each part of the structure whose strength is— ( a ) Uncertain;
( b ) Likely to deteriorate in service before normal replacement; or
( c ) Subject to appreciable variability because of uncertainties in manufacturing processes or inspection methods.
[Doc. No. 5066, 29 FR 18291, Dec. 24, 1964, as amended by Amdt. 25-23, 35 FR 5674, Apr. 8, 1970]
§ 29.151 Flight controls. ( a ) Longitudinal, lateral, directional, and collective controls may not exhibit excessive breakout force, friction, or preload.
( b ) Control system forces and free play may not inhibit a smooth, direct rotorcraft response to control system input.
[Amdt. 29-24, 49 FR 44436, Nov. 6, 1984]
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 Quartely Report of Ecosphere Technologies, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-QSB for the period ending March 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I Dennis McGuire, Chief Executive Officer 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 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/ DENNISMCGUIRE      
| | Dennis McGuire,        
| | Chief Executive Officer
| |                        

Date:  May 18, 2007



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.
1 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO 

In re: 

THE FINANCIAL OVERSIGHT AND 

MANAGEMENT BOARD FOR PUERTO RICO, 

as representative of 

THE COMMONWEALTH OF PUERTO RICO et 

al., 

Debtors. 

PROMESA Title III. 

Case No. 17 BK 3283-LTS 

(Jointly Administered) 

NOTICE OF APPEARANCE AND REQUEST FOR NOTICE 

TO THE HONORABLE BANKRUPTCY COURT: 

COMES NOW the undersigned counsel for and on behalf of creditor HPM 

FOUNDATION, INC. for all purposes in connection with this case. Pursuant to Bankruptcy 

Rules 2002, 3017, and 9010(b) the undersigned hereby requests service of all notices, 

applications, motions, orders, pleadings, reports, plans and disclosure statements filed or served 

in this case, and requests that the name and address of the undersigned be added to all mailing 

matrices in this case. Service may be made and directed as follows: 

 Thomas T. Pennington (B.P.R. #9605) 

Reno & Cavanaugh, PLLC 

424 Church Street, Suite 2910 

Nashville, Tennessee 37129 

Telephone: (615) 866-2322 

Facsimile: (615) 866-2323 

Email: tpennington@renocavanaugh.com 

This notice of appearance and request for notices is submitted for the limited purpose of 

receiving copies of notices, pleadings, judgments, and orders in this case. By submitting this 

notice of appearance and request for notices, HPM FOUNDATION, INC. is not consenting to or 

submitting to the jurisdiction of the Bankruptcy Court for any purpose and expressly reserve the 

Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:3252 Filed:06/05/18 Entered:06/05/18 11:23:06 Desc: Main

Document Page 1 of 3
2 

right to contest the jurisdiction of the Bankruptcy Court and/or to demand a jury trial in any 

matter or proceeding to which HPM FOUNDATION, INC. may be a party. 

Respectfully submitted, 

 /s/ María Celeste Rodríguez Miranda 

María Celeste Rodríguez Miranda 

D.P.R. Bar No. 213113 

Bufete Rodríguez Miranda, C.S.P. 

P.O. Box 365072 

San Juan, PR 00936-5072 

(787) 408-0808 (tel) 

mcrm100@msn.com 

/s/Thomas T. Pennington 

Thomas T. Pennington* (B.P.R. #9605) 

Reno & Cavanaugh 

424 Church Street, Suite 2910 

Nashville, Tennessee 37129 

(615) 866-2322 (office) 

(615) 866-2323 (fax) 

tpennington@renocavanaugh.com 

*Admitted pro hac vice 

Attorneys for HPM Foundation, Inc. 

Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:3252 Filed:06/05/18 Entered:06/05/18 11:23:06 Desc: Main

Document Page 2 of 3
3 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

 I hereby certify that on June 5, 2018, a copy of the foregoing was filed electronically. 

Notice of this filing will be sent by operation of the Court’s electronic filing system to all parties 

indicated on the electronic filing receipt. Parties may access this filing through the Court’s 

electronic filing system. 

/s/Thomas T. Pennington 

Thomas T. Pennington (B.P.R. #9605) 

Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:3252 Filed:06/05/18 Entered:06/05/18 11:23:06 Desc: Main

Document Page 3 of 3
#### Lowell BYRD *v.*Christine BYRD

5-5828

478 S.W. 2d 45

Opinion delivered March 27, 1972

*FredA.Newth, Jr.,*for appellant.

*Hall, Tucker ir Lovell,*for appellee.

George Rose Smith, Justice.

In 1966 the appellant, Lowell Byrd, obtained a divorce from the appellee and was directed to pay alimony in the amount of $150 a month. *Byrd*v. *Byrd,*241 Ark. 374, 407 S.W. 2d 731 (1966). In 1971 Byrd filed the present petition, asking that he be relieved from any further obligation to pay alimony, on the ground that Mrs. Byrd was assertedly living with another man as husband and wife. This appeal is from the chancellor’s refusal to modify the prior award.

Byrd relies for relief upon our cases holding that upon a divorced wife’s remarriage her former husband is entitled to apply to the court for an order terminating the alimony payments. The reason for the rule was stated in *Wear*v. *Boydstone,*230 Ark. 580, 324 S.W. 2d 337 (1959): “We have no quarrel with the statement that alimony payments should cease upon the divorced wife’s remarriage, for we see no logic in requiring a first husband to contribute at regular intervals to an ex-wife whose care and maintenance has been assumed by a second husband.”

*203It is apparent that the reason for the rule which we have adopted in cases of remarriage does not apply in this instance, for there is no indication that Mrs. Byrd’s supposed paramour has assumed any responsibility for her care and maintenance. Nor is it shown by the weight of the proof in the case at bar that Mrs. Byrd has assumed the other man’s name and held herself out publicly as his wife. In that extreme situation at least two courts have approved a termination of the former husband’s obligation to pay alimony. *Grant*v. *Grant,*52 Cal. App. 2d 359, 126 P. 2d 130 (1942); *Coggins*v. *Coggins,*289 Ky. 570, 159 S.W. 2d 4 (1942). In New York the same result has been reached by statute. *Waddey*v. *Waddey,*290 N.Y. 251, 49 N. E. 2d 8 (1943).

In the court below the evidence was in sharp conflict. Even if we should accept Byrd’s contention that he and his supporting witnesses established instances of immorality on the part of Mrs. Byrd, we are not prepared to say that a former husband is entitled to sit in judgment of his divorced wife’s conduct, any more than she is entitled to take such a position with respect to his conduct. Upon the former appeal we increased the chancellor’s award of alimony because Mrs. Byrd was shown to be a hopeless cripple who was incapable of supporting herself. There is no showing that her condition has changed. To the contrary, Mrs. Byrd’s sister testified that she had given money to Mrs. Byrd for years: “I gave it to her because she had to have it. She had no money to live [on] and nothing to eat and nothing [with which] to buy any clothes.” Upon the proof as a whole we cannot say that the chancellor’s decision to deny Byrd’s application for relief is against the preponderance of the evidence.

Affirmed.

Byrd, J., not participating.
### SPA 14 

# • RCRA REVISION CHECKLIST 119 Toxicity Characteristic Revision; TCLP Correction 57 FR 55114-55117 November 24, 1992 as amended on February 2, 1993 at 58 FR 6854 (RCRA Cluster III, HSWA provisions) Note: The November 24, 1992 rule amends the version of the TCLP thatwas added to Appendix II to Part 261 by the March"29, 1990 final rule (55 FR 11798;" Revision Checklist 74), concurrent

### withthe removal ofthe old version of the TCLP from Appendix I to Part 268.

FEDERAL REQUIREMENTS FEDERAL RCRACITATION ANALOGOUS STATE CITATION STATEANALOG IS: EaulV



## - ALENT LESS STRIN



## - GENT MORE STAIN



### . GENT BROADE RIN SCOPE PART261 -IDENTIFICATION AND LISTING OF HAZARDOUS WASTE WAC 173-303 APPENDIX II TO PART 261 

# I.

1

o 

# • CL119.14 - Revised: 2/11/93 November24, 1992 - Page 1 of 2 Printed: 5/23/96 

## t METHOD 1311 TOXICITY CHARACTERISTIC LEACHING PROCEDURE (TCLP) change "data isP to "data 

### are": delete sentence regarding bias determined from matrix spike determination and parenthetical reference phrase following it Appendix II, 8.2 110(3)(f) X change Pmay not be not less" to "may not be less" Appendix II, 8.2.2 110(3)(f) X remove SUbparagraph Appendix II, 8.2.5 110(3)(f) X redesignate former Appendix"II, 8.4 110(3)(f) X 8.4 as 8.5; add new Appendix II, 8.4.1 110(3)(f) X 8.4 and subparagraphs Appendix II, 8.4.2 110(3)(f) X addressing use of internal calibration Appendix II, 8.4.3 110(3)(f) X quantitation methods Appendix II, 8.4.4 110(3)(f) XSPA 14 

### RCRA REVISION CHECKLIST 119: Toxicity Characteristic Revision; .TCLP Correction (cont'd)

FEDERAL REQUIREMENTS FEDERAL RCRACITATION. ANALOGOUS STATE CITATION STATEANALOG IS: EaulV



### . ALENT LESS STRIN



### . Gel! MORE STRIN



### . GENT BROADE RIN SCOPE 

### former 8.4 becomes 8.5 Appendix II, 8.5 110(3)(f) X 

### 2

1 

### There is a typographical error in the November 24, 1992 Federal Register; "84.4.4" should 

### be "8.4.4." The February 2, 1993 rule made this correction. 2 

### There is atypographical error in the Federal Register; in the table at 8.5, second column heading, there should be a space between ''TCLP".and "extraction." 

# c

CL119.14· Revised: 2/11/93 

### November 24, 1992 - Page 2 of 2 Printed: 5/23196
EXHIBIT 32.2





SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATION

CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER



I, David O. Cole, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the periodic report, to which this Statement is attached, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and the information contained in the periodic report to which this Statement is attached, fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the registrant.



A signed original of this written statement has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the SEC upon request.







Date:  April 9, 2007

By:/s/ David O. Cole

David O. Cole

Chief Financial Officer
rev. Dec. 2009

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO

You must accompany your complaint with this Category Sheet, and the Civil Cover Sheet (JS-44).

1. Title (caption) of the Case (provide only the names of the first party on each side):

2. Indicate the category to which this case belongs:

3. Indicate the title and number of related cases (if any).

4. Has a prior action between the same parties and based on the same claim ever been filed before this Court?

5. Is this case required to be heard and determined by a district court of three judges pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2284?

6. Does this case question the constitutionality of a state statute? (See, Fed.R.Civ. P. 24)

CATEGORY SHEET

 Ordinary Civil Case

 Social Security

 Banking

 Injunction

 Yes

 No

 Yes

 No

 Yes

 No

Date Submitted:

Email Address:

USDC-PR Bar Number:

Attorney Name (Last, First, MI):

Plaintiff:

Defendant:

Print Form

In re: Financial Oversight & Management Board for Puerto Rico (Commonwealth), No. 17 BK 3283-LTS; In re: 

Financial Oversight & Management Board for Puerto Rico (PRHTA), No. 17 BK 3567-LTS

6/3/17

Reset Form

hburgos@cabprlaw.com

204809

Burgos Pérez, Heriberto J. 

Assured Guaranty Corp.

Commonwealth of Puerto Rico

Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:254-4 Filed:06/03/17 Entered:06/03/17 18:25:07 Desc:

Category Sheet Page 1 of 1
#### § 25.1192 Engine accessory section diaphragm.

For reciprocating engines, the engine power section and all portions of the exhaust system must be isolated from the engine accessory compartment by a diaphragm that complies with the firewall requirements of § 25.1191.

[Amdt. 25-23, 35 FR 5678, Apr. 8, 1970]
**EXHIBIT 23**

 

**Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm**

 

The Partners 

Host Marriott, L.P.: 

 

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statement (No. 333-61722)on Form S-3 of Host Marriott, L.P. of our report dated February 23, 2005, with respect to the consolidated balance sheets of Host Marriott, L.P. and subsidiaries as of December 31, 2004 and 2003, and the related consolidated statements ofoperations, partners’ capital and comprehensive income (loss) and cash flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 2004 and the related financial statement schedule, which report appears in the annual report on Form10-K of Host Marriott, L.P. 

 

KPMG LLP

 

McLean, Virginia 

March 2, 2005
II 

116TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 4179 

To update the blood donation public awareness campaign of the Department 

of Health and Human Services to include public awareness on plasma 

donation. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JULY 2, 2020 

Ms. KLOBUCHAR (for herself and Mr. WICKER) introduced the following bill; 

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions 

A BILL 

To update the blood donation public awareness campaign 

of the Department of Health and Human Services to 

include public awareness on plasma donation. 

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 ‘‘Plasma Donation 

5 Awareness Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. IMPORTANCE OF THE BLOOD AND PLASMA SUPPLY. 

7 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 3226 of the CARES Act 

8 (Public Law 116–136) is amended— 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 4179 IS

1 (1) in the section heading, by inserting ‘‘AND

2 PLASMA’’ after ‘‘BLOOD’’; and 

3 (2) by inserting ‘‘and plasma’’ after ‘‘blood’’ 

4 each time such term appears. 

5 (b) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—The item relating 

6 to section 3226 in the table of contents in section 2 of 

7 the CARES Act (Public Law 116–136) is amended to read 

8 as follows: 

‘‘Sec. 3226. Importance of the blood and plasma supply.’’. 

Æ 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
§ 29.1141 Powerplant controls: general. ( a ) Powerplant controls must be located and arranged under § 29.777 and marked under § 29.1555.
( b ) Each control must be located so that it cannot be inadvertently operated by persons entering, leaving, or moving normally in the cockpit.
( c ) Each flexible powerplant control must be approved.
( d ) Each control must be able to maintain any set position without— ( 1 ) Constant attention; or
( 2 ) Tendency to creep due to control loads or vibration.
( e ) Each control must be able to withstand operating loads without excessive deflection.
( f ) Controls of powerplant valves required for safety must have— ( 1 ) For manual valves, positive stops or in the case of fuel valves suitable index provisions, in the open and closed position; and
( 2 ) For power-assisted valves, a means to indicate to the flight crew when the valve— ( i ) Is in the fully open or fully closed position; or
( ii ) Is moving between the fully open and fully closed position.
(Secs. 313(a), 601, and 603, 72 Stat. 752, 775, 49 U.S.C. 1354(a), 1421, and 1423; sec. 6(c), 49 U.S.C. 1655(c))
[Doc. No. 5084, 29 FR 16150, Dec. 3, 1964, as amended by Amdt. 29-13, 42 FR 15046, Mar. 17, 1977; Amdt. 29-26, 53 FR 34219, Sept. 2, 1988]
EXHIBIT 32.1





SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATION

CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER



I, Robert M. Budd, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the periodic report, to which this Statement is attached, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and the information contained in the periodic report to which this Statement is attached, fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the registrant.



A signed original of this written statement has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the SEC upon request.







Date:  July 13, 2007

By:/s/ Robert M. Budd

Robert M. Budd

Chief Executive Officer
----

            COMMISSION DECISION         

of 19 January 2005         

relating to a proceeding under Article 81 of the EC Treaty and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement against Akzo Nobel NV, Akzo Nobel Nederland BV, Akzo Nobel Chemicals BV, Akzo Nobel Functional Chemicals BV, Akzo Nobel Base Chemicals AB, Eka Chemicals AB, and Akzo Nobel AB, jointly and severally, Clariant AG and Clariant GmbH jointly and severally, Elf Aquitaine SA and Arkema SA, jointly and severally, and Hoechst AG

(Case No C.37.773 — MCAA)

(notified under document number C(2004) 4876)

(Only the English, French and German texts are authentic)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2006/897/EC)

On 19 January 2005, the Commission adopted a decision relating to a proceeding under Article 81 of the EC Treaty and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement. In accordance with the provisions of Article 30 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1/2003(1), the Commission herewith publishes the names of the parties and the main content of the decision, including any penalties imposed, while having regard to the legitimate interest of undertakings in the protection of their business interests. A non-confidential version of the full text of the decision can be found in the authentic languages of the case and in the Commission's working languages at DG COMP's website at the following address: http://europa.eu.int/comm/competition.

I.   SUMMARY OF THE INFRINGEMENT

Introduction

The market for mcaa

Description of the cartel

II:   FINES

Basic amount

Gravity

Differential treatment

Sufficient deterrence

Duration

Aggravating circumstances

Recidivism

Attenuating circumstances

Effective cooperation outside of the 1996 Leniency Notice

Application of the 1996 Leniency Notice

1.   Non-imposition of a fine or a very substantial reduction of its amount (‘Section B’: reduction from of 75 % to 100 %)

2.   Substantial reduction in a fine (‘Section C’: reduction from 50 % to 75 %)

3.   Significant reduction of a fine (‘Section D’: reduction from 10 % to 50 %)

Decision

----

(1)OJ L 1, 4.1.2003, p. 1. Regulation as amended by Regulation (EC) No 411/2004 (OJ L 68, 6.3.2004, p. 1).

(2)  According to point 28 of the 2002 Leniency Notice, from 14 February 2002, the 2002 Notice replaces the 1996 Notice for all cases in which no undertaking has contacted the Commission in order to take advantage of the favourable treatment set out in that notice. As in this case several undertakings applied for leniency with the Commission before 14 February 2002, the 1996 Leniency Notice applies.

----
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 quarterly report
of Ecosphere Technologies, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the quarter
ending March 31, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
the date hereof, I, Dennis McGuire, Chief Executive Officer 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 my knowledge:





1.
            The
      quarterly 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 quarterly report fairly presents, in all
      material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
      the Company.





/s/
      Dennis McGuireDennis
      McGuire
              Chief
      Executive Officer
              (Principal
      Executive Officer)


Dated:
May 17, 2010




















In connection with the quarterly report
of Ecosphere Technologies, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the quarter
ending March 31, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
the date hereof, I, Adrian Goldfarb, Chief Financial Officer 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 my knowledge:





1.
            The
      quarterly 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 quarterly report fairly presents, in all
      material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
      the Company.





/s/
      Adrian GoldfarbAdrian
      Goldfarb
              Chief
      Financial Officer
              (Principal
      Financial Officer)


Dated:
May 17, 2010
Docket Number FAA - 2012 - 1075
Exhibit 8.1

Significant Subsidiaries

The following table sets forth our significant subsidiaries as
of December 31, 2014:



|                |  |                              |  |                 |        |    
|--------------- |  | ---------------------------- |  | --------------- | ------ | ---
|Name of Company |  | Jurisdiction ofEstablishment |  | PercentageOwned |       
|CIBSA:          |  | Mexico                       |  |                 | 100.0% |    
|Coca-Cola FEMSA |  | Mexico                       |  |                 | 47.9%  | (1)
|Emprex:         |  | Mexico                       |  |                 | 100.0% |    
|FEMSA Comercio  |  | Mexico                       |  |                 | 100.0% |    
|CB Equity(2)    |  | United Kingdom               |  |                 | 100.0% |    



|(1) | Percentage of capital stock. FEMSA, through CIBSA, owns 63.0% of the shares of Coca-Cola FEMSA with full voting rights.
|--- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|(2) | Ownership in CB Equity held through various FEMSA subsidiaries. CB Equity holds our Heineken N.V and Heineken Holding N.V. shares.
|--- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------