alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 63.15 Duration of certificates. ( a ) Except as provided in § 63.23 and paragraph (b) of this section, a certificate or rating issued under this part is effective until it is surrendered, suspended, or revoked.
( b ) A flight engineer certificate (with any amendment thereto) issued under § 63.42 expires at the end of the 24th month after the month in which the certificate was issued or renewed. However, the holder may exercise the privileges of that certificate only while the foreign flight engineer license on which that certificate is based is effective.
( c ) Any certificate issued under this part ceases to be effective if it is surrendered, suspended, or revoked. The holder of any certificate issued under this part that is suspended or revoked shall, upon the Administrator's request, return it to the Administrator.
( d ) Except for temporary certificate issued under § 63.13, the holder of a paper certificate issued under this part may not exercise the privileges of that certificate after March 31, 2013.
(Sec. 6, 80 Stat. 937, 49 U.S.C. 1655; secs. 313, 601, 602, Federal Aviation Act of 1958, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1354, 1421, and 1422); sec. 6(c), Department of Transportation Act (49 U.S.C. 1655(c)); Title V, Independent Offices Appropriations Act of 1952 (31 U.S.C. 483(a)); sec. 28, International Air Transportation Competition Act of 1979 (49 U.S.C. 1159(b)))
[Doc. No. 8846, 33 FR 18613, Dec. 17, 1968, as amended by Amdt. 63-22, 47 FR 35693, Aug. 16, 1982; Amdt. 63-36, 73 FR 10668, Feb. 28, 2008]
#### § 417.21 Financial responsibility requirements.

A launch operator must comply with financial responsibility requirements as required by part 440 of this chapter and as specified in a license or license order.
#### INDUST COMM v POMEROY

Ohio Appeals, 6th Dist, Lucas County

No 2172.

Decided Feb 25, 1929

E C Turner, Attorney General, Columbus, and George W Ritter, Toledo, for Commission.

James H Boyd, Toledo, for Pomeroy.

*235WILLIAMS, J.

We think this instruction followed by the finding of the jury for the plaintiff makes it clear that the jury found that the plaintiff was entitled to participate in the fund. Under Sec. 1465-90 the trial court on appeal in the instant case could properly submit to the jury but one question, —“Was the claimant entitled to participate in the fund?” The finding contained in the verdict as to the allowance of compensation ,and doctor’s bill must be disregarded as surplusage. A certificate of the court in lieu of final judgment was filed in the cause. This certificate recites the return of the verdict and a copy thereof and the overruling of the defendant’s motion for a new trial.' It also recites that the costs, including attorney fees, are taxed against the defendant. The allowance made for attorneys fees as shown by said certificate was a lump sum of .$63.75 and certain percentages. We think as' to attornéy fees, the only power the court has is to fix the percentages in accordance with the statutory provisions, and the amount to be paid ,as attorney fees shall be determined by the commission when it fixes the award in accordance with percentages fixed by the trial court. The discretion as to what those percentages shall be is vested in the court of common pleas, subject to the limitations provided in the statutes as to the amount.

We think the final order as embodied in the so called certificate should be reversed and the cause remanded with directions to certify the finding or verdict of the jury to the Industrial Commission in accordance with this opinion, including in such certificate the findings and order of the court as to percentages for determining attorney fees and as to other costs, and excluding from such certificate the part of the verdict that should be disregarded as surplusage, and with further instructions to enter such certificate in the record of judgments.

Lloyd and Richards, JJ, concur.
<PAGE>

                                                                      EXHIBIT 32

                   CERTIFICATIONS OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
                    AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO
                 SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
(SUBSECTIONS (A) AND (B) OF SECTION 1350, CHAPTER 63 OF TITLE 18, UNITED STATES
                                     CODE)

     Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a)
and (b) of section 1350, chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code), each of
the undersigned, the Chief Executive Officer and the Chief Financial Officer of
Penton Media, Inc. (the "Company"), hereby certifies, with respect to the Annual
Report of Form 10-K of the Company for the year ended December 31, 2004 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "10-K
Report") that to his knowledge:

          (1) the 10-K 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 10-K Report fairly presents, in
     all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
     the Company as of the dates and for the periods expressed in the 10-K
     Report.

                                          /s/ DAVID B. NUSSBAUM
                                          --------------------------------------
                                          David B. Nussbaum
                                          Chief Executive Officer

                                          /s/ PRESTON L. VICE
                                          --------------------------------------
                                          Preston L. Vice
                                          Chief Financial Officer

Dated: April 15, 2005
#### § 67.105 Ear, nose, throat, and equilibrium.

Ear, nose, throat, and equilibrium standards for a first-class airman medical certificate are:

(a) The person shall demonstrate acceptable hearing by at least one of the following tests:

(1) Demonstrate an ability to hear an average conversational voice in a quiet room, using both ears, at a distance of 6 feet from the examiner, with the back turned to the examiner.

(2) Demonstrate an acceptable understanding of speech as determined by audiometric speech discrimination testing to a score of at least 70 percent obtained in one ear or in a sound field environment.

(3) Provide acceptable results of pure tone audiometric testing of unaided hearing acuity according to the following table of worst acceptable thresholds, using the calibration standards of the American National Standards Institute, 1969 (11 West 42d Street, New York, NY 10036):

| Frequency (Hz) | 500 Hz | 1000 Hz | 2000 Hz | 3000 Hz |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Better ear (Db) | 35 | 30 | 30 | 40 |
| Poorer ear (Db) | 35 | 50 | 50 | 60 |

(b) No disease or condition of the middle or internal ear, nose, oral cavity, pharynx, or larynx that—

(1) Interferes with, or is aggravated by, flying or may reasonably be expected to do so; or

(2) Interferes with, or may reasonably be expected to interfere with, clear and effective speech communication.

(c) No disease or condition manifested by, or that may reasonably be expected to be manifested by, vertigo or a disturbance of equilibrium.
11

- i CHAPTER 11

. CUSTOMER SUBGROUP ANALYSIS

TABLE OF CONTENTS

11.1 INTRODUCTION

................................ ................................ ................................ ......... 11

- 1

11.2 IMPACTS OF PURCHASE PRICE

................................ ................................ .............. 11

- 111-1 CHAPTER 11. CUSTOMER SUBGROUP ANALYSIS

11.1 INTRODUCTION

The customer subgroup analysis evaluates impac ts on identifiable groups of customer s who may be disproportionately af fected by a national energy efficiency standard. The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) conduct s th e customer subgroup analysis in preparation for the notice of proposed rulemaking

. DOE will conduct this analysis , in part, by analyzing the life

cycle cost ( LCC ) and payback periods (PBPs) for customer s who fall into an identifiable group. DOE plans to evaluate variations in energy use and energy prices and use that might affect the net present value of a standard to customer subpopulations. To the extent possible , DOE will

obtain estimates of the variability of each LCC and PBP input parameter and will consider th at variability in calculating customer impacts. DOE plans to perform sensitivity analyses to consider how differences in energy use will affect subgroups of customer s.

DOE will determine effects on customer subgroups using the LCC s preadsheet m odel,

which all ows for different data inputs. The standard LCC analysis (described in Chapter 8 of the Technical Support Document ) focuses on various types of electr ic motors and the customers or

user s of those motors . DOE use s the s preadsheet m odel to analyze the LCC for any subgroup of

customer

- type by sampling only that subgroup

. In the case of medium electric motors , some of the subgroups DOE may choose to consider are small businesses or firms that use covered motors in particular applications where energy savings are likely to be small.

11.2 IMPACTS OF PURCHASE PRICE

DOE is especially sensitive to increases in product purchase price s related to new standards

. DOE wishes to avoid negative impacts on identifiable population groups that may be

un able to afford significant increases in equipment price. Because increases in first costs of equipment can preclude the purchase o f a new model

, some customer s may retain equipment past their useful life. O lder equipment is generally less efficient to begin with, and the efficiency of such equipment may deteriorate further if it is reta ined beyond its useful life. Increases in first

cost also can preclude the purchase of ne w equipment altogether, resulting in a potentially large loss of utility to the customer

.
###### Editorial Note on Part 294

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 294 appear at 84 FR 15934, Apr. 16, 2019.

#### § 294.61 Waivers.

The Department upon application or on its own initiative may waive any of the provisions of this part if it finds such action to be in the public interest.
### TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED NO VEMBER 19, 2015

NO. 03

- 14

- 00675

- CV

Agapito Panalez, Jr., Appellant

v.

Amy Telano, Appellee

APPEAL FROM 3 45TH DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY

BEFORE JUSTICES PURYEAR, GO ODWIN, AND BOURLAND

AFFIRMED

-- OPINION BY JUSTICE PURYEAR

This is an appeal from the judgment signed by the tr i a l court on June 20, 2014. Having reviewed

the record and the parties’ a rguments, the C ourt holds that there was no reversible error in the

judgment . Therefore, the C ourt affirms the trial court’s judgment

. Because appellant is indigent

and unable to pay costs, no adjudication of costs is made.
EXHIBITS 99.1

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 24/7 Real Media, Inc. (the "Company") on
Form 10-K for the period ending December 31, 2002 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), I, David J. Moore, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss.
906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



March 31,
2003

| |  | /s/DAVID J. MOORE Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
(Principal Executive Officer)
| |  | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

---

QuickLinks
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.                  

###### Federal Reserve System

      ( print page 26834)    
This notice corrects a notice (FR Doc. 00-10965) published on page 25729 of the issue for Wednesday, May 3, 2000. 

Under the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas heading, the entry for Eggemeyer Advisory Corporation, WJR Corporation, Caste Creek Capital, LLC, and Castle Creek Capital Partners Funds I, IIa and IIb, LP, all of Rancho Santa Fe, California, is revised to read as follows: 

A Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas (W. Arthur Tribble, Vice President) 2200 North Pearl Street, Dallas, Texas 75201-2272: 

1. Eggemeyer Advisory Corporation, WJR Corporation, Castle Creek Capital, LLC, and Castle Creek Capital Partners Funds I, IIa, and IIb, LP, all of Rancho Santa Fe, California, to acquire more than 5 percent of the voting shares of Independent Bankshares, Inc., Abilene, Texas, and thereby indirectly acquire Independent Financial Corporation, Dover, Delaware, and First State Bank, N.A., Abilene, Texas. 

In connection with this application, Applicants also have applied to acquire up to 35 percent of the voting shares of State National Bancshares, Inc., Lubbock, Texas, and thereby indirectly acquire voting shares of State National Bancshares Delaware, Inc., Dover, Delaware, State National Bank of El Paso, El Paso, Texas, State National Bank of West Texas, Lubbock, Texas, and United Bank & Trust Company, Abilene, Texas. 

Comments on this application must be received by May 26, 2000. 

Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, May 3, 2000. 

Robert deV. Frierson, 

Associate Secretary of the Board. 

[FR Doc. 00-11474 Filed 5-8-00; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6210-01-P
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.                  

###### Department of Health and Human Services

###### Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Mary Helen Witten, Division of HIV/AIDS Prevention—Surveillance and Epidemiology, Office of the Director, National Center for HIV, STD, and TB Prevention, 1600 Clifton Road NE, MS D-21, Atlanta, Georgia 30333, 404-639-4592 or muw4@cdc.gov or, Dr. Kenneth A. Clark, Division of HIV/AIDS Prevention—Surveillance and Epidemiology, National Center for HIV, STD, and TB Prevention, 1600 Clifton Road NE, MS E-46, Atlanta, Georgia 30333, 404-639-2085 or KClark@cdc.gov. 

                        The Director, Management Analysis and Services Office, has been delegated the authority to sign                         **Federal Register**                         Notices pertaining to announcements of meetings and other committee management activities, for both the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry.                     

Dated: May 3, 2000. 

Carolyn J. Russell, 

Director, Management Analysis and Services Office, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 

[FR Doc. 00-11794 Filed 5-10-00; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4163-18-P
§ 102.106 Contents of petition for declaratory order. ( a ) A petition for a declaratory order must allege the following: ( 1 ) The name of the employer.
( 2 ) The general nature of the employer's business.
( 3 ) The case numbers of the unfair labor practice and representation cases.
( 4 ) The commerce data relating to the operations of such business.
( 5 ) Whether any proceeding involving the same subject matter is pending before an agency or court of a State or territory.
( b ) The petition must be filed with the Board in Washington, DC.
[82 FR 11767, Feb. 24, 2017]
#### LEIST, Exr, etc v LEE et

Ohio Appeals, 4th Dist, Pickaway Co

Decided May 3, 1929

C A Leist, for Leist.

Barton Walters, Circleville, for Mary J Lower Coleman, et.'

W B Cockrell, Columbus, for Homer A Lee.

Ingalls & Selby and C M Gibson, all of Columbus, for Arthur H Lee and George W Lagore.

Before Judges HOUCK & LEMERT (5th Dist) and MAUCK (4th Dist)

*357LEMERT, J.

The court coming to construe the will in question' finds and determines as follows:

First. That the testator did not provide for the payment of the funeral expenses of the wife of George W. Lagore and the executor is not authorized to reimburse said Lagore for expenditures incurred by him in that behalf.

Second. That the testator did not contemplate that his Widow should be buried by a surviving husband in a cemetery other than the one in which the testator was to be buried, and did not provide for a monument for the widow of George W. Lagore in such other cemetery, and the executor is without authority to erect such monument.

Third. The character of the estate devised to Homer Amos Lee and to Arthur H. Lee is not clearly fixed by the will. The testator by the first sentence above quoted in the present tense vests a remainder in fee in his two adopted sons in language sufficient to indicate a vested remainder. In the last sentence he uses contradictory language by providing “if for any cause said remainder in fee does not pass to my said adopted sons”. Thus the first expression evidences his intention to create a vested remainder while the last expression indicates a purpose to create a conditional estate. As between the twQ alternatives the laws and policy of this state favor the vesting of estates. Our conclusion is that upon the death of the testator, Homer Amos Lee and Arthur H. Lee became vested with an estate in remainder subject to divestiture upon their refusal to remain and work with the testator’s widow until they respectively .arrived at the age of twenty one. They did not so refuse and consequently were never divested of their interest in the property.

The entry in this case will follow the entry in the Court of Common Pleas so far as .that court gives a construction to the will before it. The entry in this court, however, will omit that part of the entry in the Common Pleas that undertook to make an order of distribution. The Common Pleas in the exercise of its original jurisdiction and this court in the exercise of its appellate jurisdiction has no power to make an order of distribution. That is within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Probate Court.

Decree as in Common Pleas.

Mauck and Houck, JJ, concur.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

WILLIAM J. WHITSITT,

Plaintiff

- Appellant,

v.

MEEKS, CLC Administrator; CITY OF STOCKTON; CITY OF MANTECA; SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY COURTS; PLUMMER, Stockton Police Officer; SARA LIZERO, SJC Probation Control Unit; SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY PROBATION DEPARTMENT; CHRISTIAN LIFE CHURCH; KINNEY, Security for CLC;

NAT HANIEL HANEY, Pastor CLC; CHRISTIAN LIFE COLLEGE; LONG, SJC Sheriff Deputy,

Defendants

- Appellees. No. 21

- 16636

D.C. No. 2:21

- cv

- 00016

- TLN

- CKD

MEMORANDUM *

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of California Troy L. Nunley, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted July 16, 2024 * *

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36

- 3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). 

# FILED

JUL 23 2024

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS2 21

- 16636

Before: SCHROEDER, VANDYKE, and KOH, Circuit Judges.

The motion to recall the mandate (Docket Entry No. 21 ) is granted. The

February 2, 2023 order of dismissal for failure to prosecute is vacated and the

appeal is reinstated.

William J. Whitsitt appeals pro se from the district court ’ s judgment

dismissing his action alleging various federal claims. We have jurisdiction under

28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo the district court ’ s dismissal for failure to

state a claim under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B). Watison v. Carter , 668 F.3d 1108,

1112 (9th Cir. 2012). We affirm.

The district court properly dismissed Whitsitt’ s action because Whitsitt

failed to allege facts sufficient to state any plausible claim. See Ashcroft v. Iqbal

,

556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) (to avoid dismissal, “a complaint must contain sufficient

factual matter, accepted as true, to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its

face” (citation and internal quotation marks omitted)).

We do not consider matters raised for the first time on appeal. See Padgett

v. Wright , 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009)

.

The motion for judicial notice (Docket Entry No. 18 ) is treated as a motion

to file a supplemental opening brief and is granted. The Clerk will file Docket

Entry No. 19 as a supplemental opening brief.

AFFIRMED.
```

[House Document 113-120]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

113th Congress, 2d Session - - - - - - - - - - - - House Document 113-120

 
  DESIGNATION OF THE CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR OF THE INTERNATIONAL TRADE 
                               COMMISSION

                               __________

                                MESSAGE

                                  from

                   THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES

                              transmitting

 NOTIFICATION OF THE DESIGNATION OF MEREDITH M. BROADBENT AS CHAIR AND 
DEAN A. PINKERT AS VICE CHAIR OF THE UNITED STATES INTERNATIONAL TRADE 
 COMMISSION, EFFECTIVE JUNE 17, 2014, PURSUANT TO 19 U.S.C. 1330(c)(1)

    June 17, 2014.--Message and accompanying papers referred to the 
         Committee on Ways and Means and ordered to be printed
To the Congress of the United States:
    Consistent with the provisions of 19 U.S.C. 1330(c)(1), 
this is to notify the Congress that I have designated Meredith 
M. Broadbent as Chair and Dean A. Pinkert as Vice Chair of the 
United States International Trade Commission, effective June 
17, 2014.

                                                      Barack Obama.
    The White House, June 17, 2014.

                                  

```
[No. 27421-3-II.

Division Two.

October 18, 2002.]

#### The State of Washington, *Respondent,*v. Shawn Charise Gaines, *Appellant.*

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court for Pierce County, No. 00-1-01377-1, James R. Orlando, J., entered March 9, 2001. *Affirmed in part*and *remanded*by unpublished opinion per Bridgewater, J., concurred in by Morgan and Seinfeld, JJ.
#### § 121.213 [Reserved]