alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 14.10 Mandatory review for declassification. ( a ) *Scope of review.* The mandatory review procedures apply to information originally classified by the DOL when it had such authority, i.e., before December 1, 1978. Requests may come from members of the public or a government employee or agency. The procedures do not apply to information originated by other agencies and merely held in possession of the DOL. Requests for disclosure submitted under provisions of the Freedom of Information Act are to be processed in accordance with provisions of that Act.
( b ) *Where requests should be directed.* Requests for mandatory review for declassification should be directed to the Department of Labor, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Administration and Management (OASAM), Washington, DC 20210. Requests should be in writing and should reasonably describe the classified information to allow identification. Whenever a request does not reasonably describe the information sought, the requestor will be notified that unless additional information is provided or the scope of the request is narrowed, no further action will be undertaken.
( c ) *Processing.* The OASAM will assign the request for information to the appropriate DOL office for declassification consideration. A decision will be made within 60 days as to whether the requested information may be declassified and, if so, made available to the requestor. If the information may not be released in whole or in part, the requestor will be given a brief statement as to the reasons for denial, and a notice of the right to appeal the determination to the DOL Classification Review Committee, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Administration and Management, Washington, DC 20210. The requestor is to be told that such an appeal must be filed with the DOL within 60 days.
( d ) *Appeals procedure.* The DOL Classification Review Committee will review and act within 30 days on all applications and appeals for the declassification of information. The Committee is authorized to overrule on behalf of the Secretary, Agency determinations in whole or in part, when it decides that continued protection is not required. It will notify the requestor of the declassification and provide the information. If the Committee determines that continued classification is required, it will promply notify the requestor and provide the reasons for the determination.
( e ) *Burden of proof.* In evaluating requests for declassification the DOL Classification Review Committee will require the DOL office having jurisdiction over the document to prove that continued classification is warranted.
( f ) *Fees.* If the request requires a service for which fair and equitable fees may be charged pursuant to title 5 of the Independent Office Appropriation Act, 31 U.S.C. 483a (1976), the requestor will be notified and charged.
STEAM ELECTRIC

CBI REPLACEMENT PAGE

EPA-HQ-OW-2009-0819

DCN: ________________________________________

THE FOLLOWING HAS BEEN REMOVED BECAUSE IT 

CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL BUSINESS INFORMATION 

(CBI) PER 40 CFR PART 2, SUBPART B.

SE04331A015
Rev 0 (9/08) 

## Com **ments i**  **n Response to “**  **Final r**  **ule; r**  **equest for c**  **om ments**  **”**
**Docket: FAA**  **- 20**  **11 -**  **1317 Directorate Identifier**  **2011 -**  **NM -**  **193 -** **AD** Comments have been received in response to : **“ Final rule; requ**  **est for comments,”** Airworthiness Directive (AD) Docket and Directorate Identifier entered above. (Project engineer: Please review any comments to determine if additional action is warranted. Once you have made your determination, please fill in the com menter(s) name(s) and check the appropriate response below. Include additional information following the appropriate response, if necessary. Then **include your name and**  **the date**  in the spaces provided, and return it to the AD directorate focal. The FAA has reviewed comment(s) related to the above FAA Docket that we re ceived from: United/Continental **(Please check on**  **e**

**)** These comments **have not** been found to contain any information to warrant reconsideration or change of this AD. These comments **have** been found to contain information that warrants consideration of additional regulatory

action. 

### (SEE Airworthiness Directives Manual **FAA -**  **IR -**  **M -**  **8040.1 FOR ADDITIONAL ACTION.)**

______Margaret Lang sted

_____ 3/7/2012

__ Name: Date:

(This form is part of the official docket file for this AD action.)
#### § 1621.1 Purpose.

The regulations set forth in this part contain the procedures established by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission for issuing opinion letters under the Equal Pay Act.
ARTICLES OF MERGER
                                       FOR
                    POZZOLANIC NORTHWEST BULK CARRIERS, INC.,
                           (a Washington corporation)

                                       AND

                              ISG RESOURCES, INC.,
                              (a Utah corporation)

         Pursuant to the provisions of sections 23B.11.070 and 23B.11.050 of the
Washington  Business  Corporation Act (the "Act"),  ISG Resources,  Inc., a Utah
corporation (the "Corporation"),  hereby adopts and files the following Articles
of Merger as the surviving  corporation  to the merger of  Pozzolanic  Northwest
Bulk Carriers, Inc., a Washington corporation, with and into the Corporation:

          FIRST: The Plan of Merger (the "Plan") is attached  hereto and is made
               a part hereof.

          SECOND: The Plan was duly approved by the shareholders of each foreign
               constituent  corporation  in the merger  pursuant  to the laws of
               each such corporation's  state of incorporation and each domestic
               constituent  corporation  has complied with  sections  23B.11.010
               through  23B.11.040  of the Act and has  duly  approved  the Plan
               pursuant to section 23B.11.030 of the Act.

          THIRD: The  shareholders  of  each  domestic  constituent  corporation
               approved  the  Plan  by  their   unanimous   written  consent  in
               accordance with section 23B.07.040(1)(a)(i) of the Act.

         DATED as of November _____, 1998.

                                         ISG RESOURCES, INC.,
                                         a Utah corporation

                                         By:
                                             ------------------------
                                               R Steve Creamer
                                               Chief Executive Officer
                                               (An officer's title)
§ 1471.615 How does the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service notify a person of a suspension or debarment action? ( a ) The suspending or debarring official sends a written notice to the last known street address, facsimile number, or e-mail address of— ( 1 ) You or your identified counsel; or
( 2 ) Your agent for service of process, or any of your partners, officers, directors, owners, or joint venturers.
( b ) The notice is effective if sent to any of these persons.
#### STATE ex BOOTH v ROBINSON, Judge BOOTH et v CLAPP et

Ohio Supreme Court

Nos. 21266 & 21315.

Decided March 6, 1929

Syllabus by

MATTHIAS, J.

CHILDREN-Constitutional Law (140 S)

(100 A) Where in a proceeding for the adoption of a child of divorced parents the consént of the parent to whom the sole custody of such child had been awarded is duly given and the court which granted such decree approves the same as provided by Section 8025, General Code, the consent of the other parent is not required.

Such provisions of the statute are not in controvention of either the state or federal constitution.

Marshall, CJ, Kinkade, Robinson, Jones, Day and Allen, JJ, concur.
EXHIBIT  32.1  --  CERTIFICATION  OF  CHIEF  EXECUTIVE  OFFICER OF FIRST CAPITAL
INTERNATIONAL,  INC.,  PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
AND  SECTION  1350  OF  18  U.S.C.  63.


I,  Alex Genin, the Chief Executive Officer of First Capital International, Inc.
hereby  certify that First Capital International, Inc.'s periodic report on Form
10QSB  and  the  financial  statements contained therein fully complies with the
requirements  of  Section  13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(15  U.S.C.  78m or 78o(d) and that information contained in the periodic report
on  Form 10QSB and the financial statements contained therein fairly represents,
in  all material respects, the financial condition and results of the operations
of  First  Capital  International,  Inc.

Date:  August 16, 2004      /s/ Alex Genin
                            Chief Executive Officer


<PAGE>
#### HAMMAKER v DAYTON (City)

Ohio Appeals, 2nd Dist, Montgpmery Co

No. 879.

Decided July 2, 1929

Mr. Frank *W■*Howell, Dayton, for Ham-maker.

Messrs. John Harshman and Lon Volz, Dayton, for Dayton (Cit',).

HORBECK, J.

It is apparent that any person who drives an automobile after dark in the city streets must take notice of the fact that the right side of every street, unless prohibited by law, will be used for parking purposes. In the absence of some reasonable explanation other than the mere statement that the driver did not see that which he, with the exercise of the simplest demand of caution, should see, it is but logical to presume that he was recklessly careless .in failing to see the object. This defendant,, in utter disregard of his obligation as a driver, drove into the auto-mile, hurled it 25 feet, struck and injured the prosecuting, witness, drove on without stopping, and made no attempt to inform anyone of his identity until the following day.

Undoubtedly he was frightened and had a sense of deep regret for the damage he had caused. This attitude is commendable and no doubt was taken into consideration by the trial court in fixing sentence, but it in no wise amounts to a d.efense, and we cannot say that the court erred in sustaining the judgment of the trial court. On the contrary, we are of opinion that the judgment of both courts was only that which the facts and the law demanded.

The judgment of the Common Pleas Court will be affirmed, and the cause remanded to the trial court for execution of sentence..

Kunkle and Allread, JJ, concur.
**Exhibit 32.2**

 

**CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICERPURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350**

 

In connection with the accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q ofthe Company for the period ended March 31, 2005, I, Gary D. Gall,President, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certify pursuantto 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 that:

 

(1)                                  suchQuarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the period ended March 31,2005, fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

(2)           the informationcontained in such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the periodended March 31, 2005, fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of Western Sierra Bancorp.

 

 
| Date: May 6, 2005 |                                   |              |
|-------------------|----------------------------------------|-------------------|
|              |                                   | /s/  Gary D. Gall |   |   |
|              | President  and Chief Executive Officer |              |
|                   |                                        |                   |  |  |

 

----
#### § 1202.7 Who may participate in elections.

As mentioned in § 1202.3, when disputes arise between parties to a representation dispute, the National Mediation Board is authorized by the Act to determine who may participate in the selection of employees representatives.
§ 89.205 Eligibility. Only the following persons are eligible to apply for the establishment of an FAA-recognized identification area under this subpart: ( a ) A community-based organization recognized by the Administrator.
( b ) An educational institution, including primary and secondary educational institutions, trade schools, colleges, and universities.
§ 102.19 Appeal to the General Counsel from refusal to issue or reissue. ( a ) If, after the charge has been filed, the Regional Director declines to issue a complaint or, having withdrawn a complaint pursuant to § 102.18, refuses to reissue it, the Director will so advise the parties in writing, accompanied by a simple statement of the procedural or other grounds for that action. The Charging Party may obtain a review of such action by filing the “Appeal Form” with the General Counsel in Washington, DC, and filing a copy of the “Appeal Form” with the Regional Director, within 14 days from the service of the notice of such refusal to issue or reissue by the Regional Director, except where a shorter period is provided by § 102.81. The Charging Party may also file a statement setting forth the facts and reasons upon which the appeal is based. If such a statement is timely filed, the separate “Appeal Form” need not be served. A request for extension of time to file an appeal must be in writing and be received by the General Counsel, and a copy of such request filed with the Regional Director, prior to the expiration of the filing period. Copies of the acknowledgment of the filing of an appeal and of any ruling on a request for an extension of time for filing of the appeal must be served on all parties. Consideration of an appeal untimely filed is within the discretion of the General Counsel upon good cause shown.
( b ) Oral presentation in Washington, DC, of the appeal issues may be permitted by a party on written request made within 4 days after service of acknowledgement of the filing of an appeal. In the event such request is granted, the other parties must be notified and afforded, without additional request, a like opportunity at another appropriate time.
( c ) The General Counsel may sustain the Regional Director's refusal to issue or reissue a complaint, stating the grounds of the affirmance, or may direct the Regional Director to take further action; the General Counsel's decision must be served on all the parties. A motion for reconsideration of the decision must be filed within 14 days of service of the decision, except as hereinafter provided, and must state with particularity the error requiring reconsideration. A motion for reconsideration based upon newly discovered evidence which has become available only since the decision on appeal must be filed promptly on discovery of such evidence. Motions for reconsideration of a decision previously reconsidered will not be entertained, except in unusual situations where the moving party can establish that new evidence has been discovered which could not have been discovered by diligent inquiry prior to the first reconsideration.
§ 38.13 Specific air range. ( a ) For each airplane subject to this part, the SAR of an airplane must be determined by either: ( 1 ) Direct flight test measurements; or
( 2 ) Using a performance model that is: ( i ) Validated by actual SAR flight test data; and
( ii ) Approved by the FAA before any SAR calculations are submitted.
( b ) For the airplane model, establish a 1/SAR value at each of the following reference airplane masses: ( 1 ) High gross mass: 92 percent MTOM.
( 2 ) Low gross mass: (0.45 * MTOM) + (0.63 * (MTOM^0.924)).
( 3 ) Mid gross mass: simple arithmetic average of high gross mass and low gross mass.
( c ) To obtain (1/SAR)avg as required to determine the fuel efficiency metric value described in § 38.11, calculate the average of the three 1/SAR values described in paragraph (b) of this section. Do not include auxiliary power units in any 1/SAR calculation.
( d ) All determinations made under this section must be made in accordance with the procedures applicable to SAR as described in appendix A to this part.
[No. 50302-2-I.

Division One.

December 23, 2002.]

#### The State of Washington, *Respondent,*v. Barclay Webster, *Appellant.*

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court for King County, No. 01-8-04366-0, Dale B. Ramerman, J., entered April 17, 2002. *Affirmed*by unpublished per curiam opinion.
UNITED STATES NAVY–MARINE CORPS

COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

_________________________

No. 201700104

_________________________

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Appellee

v.

VICTOR M. VILLARINOROJO

Private First Class (E-2), U.S. Marine Corps

Appellant

_________________________

Appeal from the United States Navy-Marine Corps Trial Judiciary

Military Judge: Colonel Joseph P. Lisiecki III, USMCR.

Convening Authority: Commanding Officer, Headquarters and 

Support Battalion, Marine Corps Installations West-Marine Corps 

Base, Camp Pendleton, CA.

Staff Judge Advocate’s Recommendation: Lieutenant Colonel Todd 

Enge, USMC.

For Appellant: Lieutenant Captain James Kresge, USMCR.

For Appellee: Brian K. Keller, Esq.

_________________________

Decided 31 July 2017

_________________________

Before CAMPBELL, FULTON, and SAYEGH, Appellate Military Judges

_________________________

After careful consideration of the record, submitted without assignment of 

error, we affirm the findings and sentence as approved by the convening 

authority. Art. 66(c), Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. § 866(c). 

For the Court

R.H. TROIDL

Clerk of Court
EXHIBIT 32.1

                                  CERTIFICATION


     Each of the undersigned  hereby  certifies,  pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  Section
1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that
the Annual Report of Columbus McKinnon Corporation (the "Company") on Form 10-K,
as  amended,  for the  year  ended  March  31,  2006,  fully  complies  with the
requirements  of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the  Securities  Exchange Act of 1934
and that  information  contained  in the such  Annual  Report on Form  10-K,  as
amended,  fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
result of operations of the Company.

     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.


Dated:  August 4, 2006


                                                /S/ TIMOTHY T. TEVENS
                                                ---------------------
                                                Timothy T. Tevens
                                                Chief Executive Officer



                                                /S/ KAREN L. HOWARD
                                                -------------------
                                                Karen L. Howard
                                                Chief Financial Officer





                                       44
§ 60.16 Additional qualifications for a currently qualified FSTD. ( a ) A currently qualified FSTD is required to undergo an additional qualification process if a user intends to use the FSTD for meeting training, evaluation, or flight experience requirements of this chapter beyond the qualification issued for that FSTD. This process consists of the following: ( 1 ) The sponsor: ( i ) Must submit to the responsible Flight Standards office all modifications to the MQTG that are required to support the additional qualification.
( ii ) Must describe to the responsible Flight Standards office all modifications to the FSTD that are required to support the additional qualification.
( iii ) Must submit to the responsible Flight Standards office a confirmation statement as described in § 60.15(c) that a pilot, designated by the sponsor in accordance with § 60.15(d), has subjectively evaluated the FSTD in those areas not previously evaluated.
( 2 ) The FSTD must successfully pass an evaluation— ( i ) Consisting of all the elements of an initial evaluation for qualification in those circumstances where the responsible Flight Standards office has determined that all the elements of an initial evaluation for qualification is necessary; or
( ii ) Consisting of those elements of an initial evaluation for qualification designated as necessary by the responsible Flight Standards office.
( b ) In making the determinations described in paragraph (a)(2) of this section, the responsible Flight Standards office considers factors including the existing qualification of the FSTD, any modifications to the FSTD hardware or software that are involved, and any additions or modifications to the MQTG.
( c ) The FSTD is qualified for the additional uses when the responsible Flight Standards office issues an amended Statement of Qualification in accordance with § 60.15(h).
( d ) The sponsor may not modify the FSTD except as described in § 60.23.
[Docket No. FAA-2002-12461, 71 FR 63426, Oct. 30, 2006, as amended by Docket No. FAA-2022-1355, Amdt. No. 60-7, 87 FR 75711, Dec. 9, 2022]
Exhibit 10.3



 Exhibit 10.3 
 LOCK-UP AGREEMENT 
 ________ ___,____________

  

			
	 By Facsimile (____________)
	 	 By Facsimile ((804) 648-3404)

	Dehaier Medical Systems Limited	 	Anderson & Strudwick, Incorporated
	1223 Epoch Center	 	707 East Main Street
	No. 31 Zi Zhu Yuan Road	 	20th Floor
	Haidian District, Beijing 100089	 	Richmond, Virginia 23219
	People’s Republic of China	 	Attn: L. McCarthy Downs, III,
	Attn: Ping Chen	 	         Senior Vice President
	          CEO	 	

 Re: Lock-Up Agreement 
 Dear Mr. Ping and Mr. Downs: 
 The undersigned understands that
Anderson & Strudwick, Incorporated (the “Placement Agent”), proposes to enter into a Placement Agreement with Dehaier Medical Systems Limited (the “Company”), providing for the public offering (the “Offering”),
by the Placement Agent of a minimum of 1,250,000 common shares and a maximum of 1,500,000 common shares (the “Shares”). 
 In consideration of the Placement Agent’s agreement to undertake the Offering of the Shares on a “best efforts, minimum/maximum” basis, and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt of which is hereby
acknowledged, the undersigned agrees that the undersigned will not register, offer, sell, contract to sell, grant any securities convertible into or exercisable or exchangeable for the Shares or any warrants to purchase the Shares (including,
without limitation, securities of the Company which may be deemed to be beneficially owned by the undersigned in accordance with the rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission and securities which may be issued upon the exercise
of a stock option or warrant) for a period of (a) as to one-half (1/2) of the Shares now or in the future beneficially owned by the undersigned, ninety (90) days after the date of the offering and (b) as to the other one-half of such
Shares, one hundred ninety (190) days after the closing date of this offering. The obligations under this lock-up period are separate from any obligations that may relate to the Make Good Escrow Agreement to be entered between the Placement
Agent, an escrow agent, the Company and certain shareholders of the Company on the date hereof. 
 The undersigned understands
that the Company, the Placement Agent and the Representatives will proceed with the Offering in reliance upon this Lock-up Agreement. 
  

			
	Very truly yours,
		
	By:	 	 
	Name: 	 	 
	Its: