alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Editorial Note on Part 47
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 47 appear at 75 FR 41979, July 20, 2010.

§ 47.8 Voting trusts. ( a ) If a voting trust is used to qualify a domestic corporation as a U.S. citizen, the corporate applicant must submit to the Registry— ( 1 ) A true copy of the fully executed voting trust agreement, which must identify each voting interest of the applicant, and which must be binding upon each voting trustee, the applicant corporation, all foreign stockholders, and each other party to the transaction; and
( 2 ) An affidavit executed by each person designated as voting trustee in the voting trust agreement, in which each affiant represents— ( i ) That each voting trustee is a citizen of the United States within the meaning of 49 U.S.C. 40102(a)(15).
( ii ) That each voting trustee is not a past, present, or prospective director, officer, employee, attorney, or agent of any other party to the trust agreement;
( iii ) That each voting trustee is not a present or prospective beneficiary, creditor, debtor, supplier or contractor of any other party to the trust agreement;
( iv ) That each voting trustee is not aware of any reason, situation, or relationship under which any other party to the agreement might influence the exercise of the voting trustee's totally independent judgment under the voting trust agreement.
( b ) Each voting trust agreement submitted under paragraph (a)(1) of this section must provide for the succession of a voting trustee in the event of death, disability, resignation, termination of citizenship, or any other event leading to the replacement of any voting trustee. Upon succession, the replacement voting trustee shall immediately submit to the Registry the affidavit required by paragraph (a)(2) of this section.
( c ) If the voting trust terminates or is modified, and the result is less than 75 percent control of the voting interest in the corporation by citizens of the United States, a loss of citizenship of the holder of the Certificate of Aircraft Registration, AC Form 8050-3 occurs, and § 47.41(a)(3) of this part applies.
( d ) A voting trust agreement may not empower a trustee to act through a proxy.
[Amdt. 47-20, 44 FR 61939, Oct. 29, 1979, as amended by Amdt. 47-27, 70 FR 245, Jan. 3, 2005; Amdt. 47-29, 75 FR 41980, July 20, 2010]
Exhibit 32
 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  (1)
    
    The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and(2)
    
    The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.
 Date: November 13, 2009
    By:
    /s/ Lana FranksLana FranksPresident (Principal Executive Officer)Date: November 13, 2009
    By:
    /s/ Thomas OSullivanThomas OSullivanChief Financial Officer (Principal Financial Officer)
§ 10.24 Overtime payments. ( a ) *General.* The Fair Labor Standards Act and the Contract Work Hours and Safety Standards Act require overtime payment of not less than one and one-half times the regular rate of pay or basic rate of pay for all hours worked over 40 hours in a workweek to covered workers. The regular rate of pay under the Fair Labor Standards Act is generally determined by dividing the worker's total earnings in any workweek by the total number of hours actually worked by the worker in that workweek for which such compensation was paid.
( b ) *Tipped employees.* When overtime is worked by tipped employees who are entitled to overtime pay under the Fair Labor Standards Act and/or the Contract Work Hours and Safety Standards Act, the employees' regular rate of pay includes both the cash wages paid by the employer (*see* §§ 10.22(a) and 10.28(a)(1)) and the amount of any tip credit taken (*see* § 10.28(a)(2)). (*See* part 778 of this title for a detailed discussion of overtime compensation under the Fair Labor Standards Act.) Any tips received by the employee in excess of the tip credit are not included in the regular rate.
P.O. BOX 8468,400 MARKET ST., 12TH FLOOR

HARRISBURG PA 17105

PCCT# ADOROER# IE 2I ADDITIONAL INFO. TYPE OF CHARGE AMOUNT

.1

Commonwealth of PennsylvaniaCountS’ of Dauphin

Proof of Publication

30235 0001836530 04111/08 DA BASIC AD CHARGE 151 $4.57 $690.07

30235 0001836530 04111/08 DA BOLD TEXT CHARGE c $4.00

30235 0001836530 04/11/08 DA ONLINE CHARGE $2.50

.

AFFiDAVIT CHARGE $5.00

• TOTAL: $701.57

Before me, the subscriber, A Notary PUbliC in and for said County, personally came Joseph A. Dennison who being duly

sworn, doth depose and say that he is Assistant Controller of the Patriot-News Co., a general newspaper published at Harrisburg,

PA, that the advertisement, of which tearsheet is attached hereto, was published in the regular advertising columns of said

newspaj&, in the editions ofsaid newspaper, in all respects as oftiered and invoiced above; and that the Commonwealth is not

charged .therefor at a rate hiher than,is charged: any ordinary commercial advertiser for a similar amount of matter occupying

similar space and set in a lmilar manner, in said newspaper.

COMMONWEALTh OF PENNSYLVAN rSe1

SheTi8 L Kisner, Nofafy PUblic

I CHP’nCO

Member, PennSY)Vfli5 Association of Notaries
TOTAL COST

FILED ON:

PA DEPT ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECT

DIV. OF ARM

400 MARKET ST

HARRISBURG PA 17101—2301

REFERENCE: L0001725

0000875237 ENVIRONMENTALQUALITY

STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA>

COUNTY OF ERIE ) SS:

Rosanne. Cheeseman being duly sworn, deposes and

says that she is the Publisher of the Times

Publishing Company, which publishes: the 1

Erie Times—News, established October 2,2000, a I

daily newspaper of general circulation, successor,

by consolidation, of the Morning News, established I

January 1957, and I

the Erie Daily Times, established April l888,

daily newspapers of general circulation and Ipublished at Erie, Erie County, Pennsylvania, and I

that the notice of which the attached is a copy Ipublished, in the regular editions of said

newspaper of the dates referred to below. I

Affiant further deposes that she is duly I

authorized by the TIMES PUBLISHING COMPANY,publisher of The Erie Times—News to verify the

foregoing statement under oath,and affiant is notiinterested in the subject matter of the aforesaid I

notice or advertisement, and that all allegations I

in the forgoing statement as to time, place and Icharacter of publication are true.

PUBLISHED ON: 04/li

552.72 AD SPACE: 204 LINEI

04/11/08 I

+

Sworn to and sub ribe3 before me this

NOTAPA 4fM.L€4L( 2f/EM1 t

OMMONWEALTh OF PENNSYLVA1A /

Notarial Seal

Laure4ieA. Daughety, Notaiy Public CftyOfEtle,ErleCounty

My Common Expires Nov. 5.2009

Member, Pennsylvania Assolatlon of Notaries
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA SECOND DISTRICT

ROBERT W. CRENSHAW, ) DOC #970221, ) ) Appellant, ) ) v. ) Case No. 2D16-5015 ) STATE OF FLORIDA, ) ) Appellee. ) ________________________________ ) Opinion filed October 16, 2019. Appeal from the Circuit Court for Charlotte County; Donald H. Mason, Judge. Howard L. Dimmig, II, Public Defender, and Richard P. Albertine, Jr., Assistant Public Defender, Bartow, for Appellant. Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

SILBERMAN, MORRIS, and ROTHSTEIN-YOUAKIM, JJ., Concur.
Design Line Phase Quantity kVA EL0 Eff. % EL0.5 Eff. % EL1 Eff. % EL2 Eff. %

2 1 10 98.62 98.69 98.74 98.83

2 1 15 98.76 98.82 98.86 98.94

2 1 25 98.91 98.96 99 99.07

1 1 37.5 99.01 99.05 99.1 99.16

1 1 50 99.08 99.12 99.16 99.22

1 1 75 99.17 99.2 99.24 99.3

1 1 100 99.23 99.26 99.29 99.34

3 1 167 99.24 99.28 99.32 99.36

3 1 250 99.31 99.35 99.38 99.42

3 1 333 99.36 99.39 99.42 99.46

3 1 500 99.42 99.45 99.48 99.51

3 1 833 99.49 99.52 99.54 99.57

4 3 15 98.36 98.44 98.51 98.61

4 3 30 98.62 98.68 98.74 98.83

4 3 45 98.76 98.81 98.86 98.95

4 3 75 98.91 98.95 99 99.07

4 3 112.5 99.01 99.05 99.1 99.16

4 3 150 99.08 99.12 99.16 99.22

4 3 225 99.17 99.2 99.24 99.3

4 3 300 99.23 99.26 99.29 99.34

5 3 500 99.24 99.28 99.32 99.36

5 3 750 99.31 99.35 99.38 99.42

5 3 1000 99.36 99.39 99.42 99.46

5 3 1500 99.42 99.45 99.48 99.51

5 3 2000 99.46 99.49 99.52 99.54

5 3 2500 99.49 99.52 99.54 99.57
EL3 Eff. % EL4 Eff. % EL5 Eff. % EL6 Eff. % EL7 Eff. % EL0 Base Watts EL0.5 Base Watts EL1 Base Watts

98.88 98.97 99.13 99.26 99.32 69 65 63

98.99 99.07 99.22 99.33 99.39 93 89 85

99.11 99.18 99.31 99.41 99.46 136 130 125

99.19 99.26 99.38 99.46 - 185 177 169

99.25 99.31 99.42 99.5 - 230 220 210

99.32 99.38 99.48 99.55 - 312 298 285

99.37 99.42 99.51 99.58 - 387 370 353

99.39 99.43 99.49 99.59 - 637 604 571

99.45 99.49 99.54 99.63 - 862 818 773

99.49 99.52 99.57 99.66 - 1069 1014 958

99.54 99.57 99.61 99.69 - 1450 1375 1300

99.6 99.62 99.66 99.73 - 2126 2016 1906

98.67 98.77 98.95 99.04 - 123 117 112

98.88 98.97 99.12 99.19 - 206 197 188

98.99 99.07 99.2 99.27 - 280 268 255

99.11 99.18 99.3 99.36 - 410 392 375

99.19 99.26 99.37 99.42 - 556 532 508

99.25 99.31 99.41 99.46 - 690 660 630

99.32 99.38 99.47 99.51 - 935 895 854

99.37 99.42 99.5 99.55 - 1160 1110 1060

99.39 99.43 99.49 99.59 - 1908 1810 1711

99.45 99.49 99.54 99.63 - 2587 2453 2319

99.49 99.52 99.57 99.66 - 3209 3043 2877

99.54 99.57 99.61 99.69 - 4350 4125 3900

99.57 99.6 99.64 99.71 - 5398 5118 4839

99.6 99.62 99.66 99.73 - 6381 6051 5721
EL2 Base Watts EL3 Base Watts EL4 Base Watts EL5 Base Watts EL6 Base Watts EL7 Base Watts

58 56 52 43 37 34

79 76 70 59 50 46

116 111 103 86 74 68

157 151 139 117 101 #VALUE!

195 187 173 145 125 #VALUE!

264 254 234 197 169 #VALUE!

328 315 290 244 210 #VALUE!

538 505 472 428 340 #VALUE!

728 684 639 580 461 #VALUE!

903 848 793 719 571 #VALUE!

1225 1150 1075 975 775 #VALUE!

1796 1686 1576 1430 1136 #VALUE!

104 100 92 79 72 #VALUE!

175 168 155 132 121 #VALUE!

237 228 210 179 164 #VALUE!

348 334 308 263 241 #VALUE!

471 453 417 357 326 #VALUE!

585 562 518 443 405 #VALUE!

793 762 701 600 549 #VALUE!

984 946 870 744 681 #VALUE!

1612 1513 1415 1283 1020 #VALUE!

2185 2051 1918 1739 1382 #VALUE!

2711 2545 2379 2158 1715 #VALUE!

3675 3450 3225 2925 2325 #VALUE!

4560 4281 4002 3629 2885 #VALUE!

5391 5061 4731 4291 3410 #VALUE!
HOMER LEE GREEN,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO 

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND 

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D16-2493

_____________________________/

Opinion filed November 3, 2016.

An appeal from an order of the Circuit Court for Escambia County.

Edward P. Nickinson, III, Judge.

Homer Lee Green, pro se, Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

LEWIS, ROWE, and KELSEY, JJ., CONCUR.
**Exhibit
      32.1**





**CERTIFICATION**




In
      connection with the periodic report of Asiamart, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form
      10-Q for the quarter ending September 30, 2007 as filed with the Securities
      and
      Exchange Commission (the “Report”), I, Alex Yue, Chief Executive Officer
      (Principal Executive Officer) of the Company, hereby certify as of the date
      hereof, solely for purposes of Title 18, Chapter 63, Section 1350 of the United
      States Code, that to the best of my knowledge:





(1)  The
      Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as
      applicable, 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 at the dates
      and for the periods indicated.





Date:  November
                19, 2007
            /s/
                Alex YueAlex
                YueChief
                Executive Officer(Principal
                Executive Officer)
#### § 16.101 Purpose of these rules.

Section 203(a)(1) of the Equal Access to Justice Act amends section 504 of the Administrative Procedure Act to provide for the award of attorney fees and other expenses to eligible individuals and entities who are parties to certain administrative proceedings before the Department of Labor. An eligible party may receive an award when it prevails over an agency, unless the agency's position in the proceeding was substantially justified or special circumstances make an award unjust. The rules in this part describe the parties eligible for awards, the proceedings that are covered, how to apply for awards, and the standards under which awards will be granted.
§ 65.12 Offenses involving alcohol or drugs. ( a ) A conviction for the violation of any Federal or state statute relating to the growing, processing, manufacture, sale, disposition, possession, transportation, or importation of narcotic drugs, marihuana, or depressant or stimulant drugs or substances is grounds for— ( 1 ) Denial of an application for any certificate or rating issued under this part for a period of up to 1 year after the date of final conviction; or
( 2 ) Suspension or revocation of any certificate or rating issued under this part.
( b ) The commission of an act prohibited by § 91.19(a) of this chapter is grounds for— ( 1 ) Denial of an application for a certificate or rating issued under this part for a period of up to 1 year after the date of that act; or
( 2 ) Suspension or revocation of any certificate or rating issued under this part.
[Doc. No. 21956, 50 FR 15379, Apr. 17, 1985, as amended by Amdt. 65-34, 54 FR 34330, Aug. 18, 1989]
#### Dussell v. Kaufman Construction Co.

(No. 2)

*Klovsky & Kuby,*for plaintiffs.

*Swartz, Campbell & Henry,*for defendant.

April 24, 1958.

Hagan, P. J.,

Plaintiffs filed a complaint and amended complaint in trespass against Kaufman Construction Co., averring that plaintiffs are the owners of property which was damaged as a result of certain drilling, pile driving and blasting performed by defendant. In the amended complaint defendant’s liability was grounded upon negligence, absolute liability arising from an ultrahazardous activity and nuisance.

Subsequently plaintiffs, by stipulation, further amended paragraph 3 of the amended complaint to *732set forth the terms of a contract between defendant, Kaufman Construction Co., and the Delaware River Port Authority, under which plaintiffs aver that defendant is liable to plaintiffs as a third party beneficiary. To this second amendment of plaintiffs’ complaint in trespass defendant has filed preliminary objections, which are now before the court.

It is clear that the amendment to plaintiffs’ complaint setting forth a claim as a third party beneficiary under a contract between defendant and the Delaware River Port Authority introduces a cause of action in assumpsit. The question for determination is whether or not plaintiffs may join in the same complaint a cause of action in assumpsit with a cause of action in trespass. On this point the Rules of Civil Procedure are quite clear. Rule 1020(a) of the assumpsit rules provides that: “A plaintiff may state in the complaint two or more causes of action triable in the same county *which arise from contract or are*quasi-contractual.” (Italics supplied.) Pa. R. C. P. 1044 of the trespass rules provides: “The plaintiff may state in his complaint two or more causes of action *in trespass*triable in the same county, which arise from the same transaction or occurrence or series of transactions or occurrences.” (Italics supplied.)

It is clear from the above quoted rules that á cause of action in assumpsit may not be joined by a plaintiff in the same complaint with a cause of action in trespass, and that for this reason defendant’s preliminary objections must be sustained.

For the foregoing reasons we make the following

*Order*

Defendant’s preliminary objections to plaintiff’s second amended complaint are sustained; paragraph 3 of the second amended complaint is hereby stricken, and *733paragraph 3 of the original amended complaint is hereby reinstated.
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.                  

###### Securities and Exchange Commission

Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the Government in the Sunshine Act, Pub. L. 94-409, that the Securities and Exchange Commission will hold the following meeting during the week of May 8, 2000.

A closed meeting will be held on Thursday, May 11, 2000 at 11 a.m.

Commissioners, Counsel to the Commissioners, the Secretary of the Commission, and recording secretaries will attend the closed meeting. Certain staff members who have an interest in the matters may also be present.

The General Counsel of the Commission, or his designee, has certified that, in his opinion, one or more of the exemptions set forth in 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(4), (8), (9)(A) and (10), permit consideration for the scheduled matters at the closed meeting.

The subject matter of the closed meeting scheduled Thursday, May 11, 2000 will be:
    - Institution and settlement of injunctive actions; and
    - Institution and settlement of administrative proceedings of an enforcement nature.

At times, changes in Commission priorities require alterations in the scheduling of meeting items. For further information and to ascertain what, if any, matters have been added, deleted or postponed, please contact:

The Office of the Secretary at (202) 942-7070.

Dated: May 5, 2000.

Jonathan G. Katz,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 00-11668  Filed 5-5-00; 1:19 pm]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-M
United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 02-3627

___________

Century Gardens, L.P.; Marvin *

Gardens, L.P., *

*

Appellants, * Appeal from the United States

* District Court for the

v. * Eastern District of Missouri.

*

Housing Authority of St. Louis County; * [UNPUBLISHED]

United States Department of Housing *

and Urban Development, *

*

Appellees. *

___________

 Submitted: May 13, 2003

 Filed: May 16, 2003

___________

Before MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, BYE, and RILEY, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Century Gardens, L.P. (CG) and Marvin Gardens, L.P. (MG) entered into

Housing Assistance Payment (HAP) contracts with the Housing Authority of St.

Louis County (HASLC) which provided that “[t]he effective date of this Contract is

October 1, 1981,” and “[t]he term of this Contract is 15 years beginning on the

effective date.” In September 1996 Congress passed a statute whereby HAP contracts

expiring during fiscal year 1997 were to be renewed at the request of a multi-family

housing project owner for not more than one year. In December 1996 the United
1

The Honorable E. Richard Webber, United States District Judge for the

Eastern District of Missouri.

-2-

States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) implemented the

renewal statute, providing for renewal of HAP contracts expiring during the period

from October 1, 1996, through September 30, 1997. In March 1997 CG and MG

requested that their HAP contracts be renewed. HASLC refused to renew the HAP

contracts on the ground that they expired on September 30, 1996. CG and MG sought

a declaratory judgment that their HAP contracts expired on October 1, 1996, and were

subject to renewal. The district court1

 determined that CG’s and MG’s HAP contracts

expired on September 30, 1996, and thus were not subject to renewal, and entered

summary judgment for HUD and HASLC. CG and MG appeal.

Reviewing de novo, see Advantage Consulting Group, Ltd. v. ADT Sec. Sys.,

Inc., 306 F.3d 582, 585 (8th Cir. 2002), we agree with the district court that the

contracts expired on September 30 and were not renewable. Accordingly, we affirm.

See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 99.2


 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C.SS.1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906
                       OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December
31, 2002 of ServiceWare Technologies, Inc. (the "Company") as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Scott
Schwartzman, Chief Financial Officer, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
ss.1350, as adopted pursuant to ss.906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:
(1) the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) 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/ SCOTT SCHWARTZMAN
                              --------------------------------------------------

                              Scott Schwartzman, Chief Financial Officer

                              March 27, 2003
1 Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined

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

No. 96-41011 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus LILLIAN BRYANT PERRY, Defendant-Appellant.

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

(4:96-CR-13-6)

- - - - - - - - - - September 17, 1997 Before DUHÉ, DeMOSS, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: 1 Court-appointed counsel for Lillian Bryant Perry has filed a brief as required by Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Our independent review of the brief and the record discloses no nonfrivolous issue. Accordingly, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5th Cir. R. 42.2. Perry’s motion for appointment of new counsel is
DENIED.