alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 519.12 Definitions. ( a ) *Full-time students.* A *full-time student* for the purpose of this subpart is defined as one who meets the accepted definition of a full-time student of the institution of higher education which employs him/her. A full-time student retains that status during the student's Christmas, summer and other vacations, even when a student is taking one or more courses during his/her summer or other vacation. The phrase in section 14(b) of the statute “regardless of age but in compliance with applicable child labor laws”, among other things restricts the employment in an institution of higher education to full-time students who are at least 14 years of age because of the application of section 3(1) of the Act.
( b ) *Institution of higher education.* An *institution of higher education* is an institution above the secondary level, such as a college or university, a junior college, or a professional school of engineering, law, library science, social work, etc. It is one that is recognized by a national accrediting agency or association as determined by the U.S. Commissioner of Education. Generally, an institution of higher education: ( 1 ) Admits as regular students only individuals having a certificate of graduation from a high school or the recognized equivalent of such a certificate; and
( 2 ) is legally authorized within a State to provide a program of education beyond high school; and
( 3 ) provides an educational program for which it normally awards a bachelor's degree, or provides not less than a two-year program which is acceptable for full credit toward such a degree or offers a two-year program in engineering, mathematics, or the physical or biological sciences which is designed to prepare the student to work as a technician and at a semi-professional level in engineering, scientific, or other technological fields which require the understanding and application of basic engineering, scientific, or mathematical principles of knowledge.
[40 FR 6329, Feb. 11, 1975; 40 FR 22546, May 23, 1975]
#### § 403.11 OMB control number.

The collecting of information requirements in this part have been approved by the Office of Management and Budget and assigned OMB control number 1245-0003.

[59 FR 15115, Mar. 31, 1994, as amended at 63 FR 33779, June 19, 1998; 78 FR 8024, Feb. 5, 2013]
§ 550.1 “Talent fees” as used in section 7(e)(3)(c) of the Fair Labor Standards Act, as amended. The term *talent fees* in section 7(e)(3)(c) of the Act shall mean extra payments made to performers, including announcers on radio and television programs, where the payment is made: ( a ) To an employee having regular duties as a staff performer (including announcers), as an extra payment for services as a performer on a particular commercial program or a particular series of commercial programs (including commercial spot announcements) or for special services as a performer on a particular sustaining program or a particular series of sustaining programs;
( b ) In pursuance of an applicable employment agreement or understanding or an applicable collective bargaining agreement in a specific amount agreed upon in advance of the performance of the services or special services for which the extra payment is made: *Provided, however,* That where services described in paragraph (a) of this section are performed on a program falling outside of the regular workday or workweek as established and scheduled in good faith in accordance with the provisions of the applicable employment agreement, the Administrator will not regard the Act as requiring additional compensation as a result of the time worked on the program if the parties agree in advance of such program that a special payment made therefor shall include any increased statutory compensation attributable to the additional worktime thereon and if such special payment, when made, is actually sufficient in amount to include the statutory straight time and overtime compensation (computed without regard to talent fees) for the additional time worked in the workweek resulting from the performer's services on such program.
[15 FR 402, Jan. 25, 1950, as amended at 18 FR 5069, Aug. 25, 1953]
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

WESTERN DISTRICT

B.C.,

Respondent

v.

C.P. AND D.B.,

Petitioners

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 61 WAL 2023

Petition for Allowance of Appeal 

from the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 21st day of June, 2023, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is 

GRANTED. The issue, rephrased for clarity, is:

Whether the lower courts erred in placing paramount 

importance on periods of separation in determining that the 

presumption of paternity was inapplicable, despite the marital 

couple’s reconciliation which predated the third-party’s 

paternity action?
Exhibit 32.1

**TRANS MAX TECHNOLOGIES, INC.**

Certifications

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

                In connection with the QuarterlyReport of Trans Max Technologies, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2004 as filed with the Securitiesand Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned, in the capacity indicated below, hereby certifiespursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to hisknowledge:

1.             The Report fully complies with the requirements ofSection 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 operation of the Company as of and for the period covered in theReport.

By:          /s/RaymondBrouzes                                                                                             Raymond Brouzes, President and Chief Financial Officer

Date:       September 20, 2004
Jeffers Cattle Co., Inc.

P. 0. Box 715

Holbrook, Arizona 86025

Dear Mr. Jeffers:

Thank you for your interest in Arizona’s plan to address regional haze in protected national parks and

wilderness areas as required under the Clean Air Act (CAA). We are responding to your letter dated July

21, 2012, requesting an extension ofthe public comment period and additional hearings.

We agree to extend the deadline for public comment and increase the number of public hearings to

provide additional opportunity for review and comment on the regional haze plan for three power plants

in Arizona (Apache Generating Station, Cholla Power Plant and Coronado Generating Station.)

We will conduct two additional public hearings. On August 14, 2012, we will hold an additional hearing

in Holbrook, Arizona at Holbrook High School, George Gardner Performing Arts Center, 455 N. 8th

Ave. from 6-8 PM. Note that EPA has changed the location from Northland Pioneer College in order to

accommodate more people. On August 15, 2012, we will hold a hearing in Benson, Arizona, at Cochise

College (Rooms 113 and 115) from 6-8 PM. These two hearings are in addition to the public hearing

held in Phoenix on July 31, 2012.

We have extended the public comment period by two weeks, for a total of 60 days ending on September

18, 2012, but are unable to provide the 90 days that you requested. We are on an expedited schedule to

review and respond to all public comments and to prepare a final determination by the consent decree

deadline ofNovember 15, 2012. We did request an extension ofthis deadline from the other parties to

the consent decree, but were unsuccessful.

We look forward to working with you and other interested parties to address regional haze affecting

national parks and wilderness areas. If you have further questions, please contact Colleen McKaughan,

Associate Director, at 520-498-0118.

Sincerely,

Deborrdan

Director, Air Division

Printed an Recycled Paper
1 / 6
2 / 6
3 / 6
4 / 6

6 / 6
#### § 452.98 Outside agencies.

There is nothing in the Act to prevent a union from employing an independent organization as its agent to handle the printing, mailing, and counting of ballots in such elections if all the standards of the Act are met.
#### Carlson *v.*The State.

[No. 17,819.

Filed September 25, 1896.]

*Record.*— Bill *of Exceptions.*— Longhand *Manuscript of*Evidence.— The filing of the longhand manuscript of the evidence must be antecedent to its being incorporated into the bill of exceptions.

*Same.*— Bill *of Exceptions.*— Instructions.—Instructions in order to become a part of the record must be copied by the clerk.

Prom the Tippecanoe Circuit Court.

*Affirmed.*

*Davis & Bright,*for appellant.

*W. A. Ketcham,*Attorney-General, and *F. E. Matson,*for State.

Jordan, J.

— Appellant was charged by indictment with feloniously entering a certain dwelling house in the day time and attempting to commit a felony therein. Upon a trial before a jury, he was convicted, and over his motion for a new trial, was sentenced, upon the verdict, to be imprisoned in the State’s prison. The only error assigned in this court is based upon the overruling of the motion for a new trial.

The questions presented for our consideration by counsel for appellant, relate to the sufficiency of the evidence to support the verdict and to the alleged *651error of the court in giving certain instructions to the jury. We cannot consider and determine these questions upon their merits, for the reason, that neither the evidence nor the instructions of which appellant complains are properly in the record. The evidence upon the trial was taken down by an official reporter, and an attempt has been made to certify the original longhand manuscript to this court under section 1 of an act approved March 7,1873. Acts 1873, p. 194.

The certificate of the trial judge shows that the bill of exceptions was presented to him and signed on November 19, 1895. From the certificate of the clerk it appears that the official report of the evidence, and the bill of exceptions, were filed in his office on November 21, 1895. It is settled by the decisions of this court that the filing of the longhand manuscript of the evidence must be antecedent to its being incorporated into a bill of exceptions by the signature of the judge to such bill. This is the evident requirement of the statute to which we have referred. *DeHart*v. Board, *etc.,*143 Ind. 363; *Smith*v. *State, ante,*176. An attempt has also' been made to incorporate into the bill of exceptions along with the stenographer’s report of the evidence, the instructions in controversy, and to certify them to this court in like manner as the longhand evidence, without being copied by the clerk. Such procedure is not authorized.

For the reasons stated, it follows that the evidence and instructions are not in the record.

Judgment affirmed.
EGU MACT -- Additional interagency comments on preamble
12/15/2011 05:19 PM

From: "Higgins, Cortney" <Cortney_Higgins@omb.eop.gov>

To: RobertJ Wayland/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA

Cc: Bill Maxwell/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA

Hi Bob, Attached are additional interagency comments that came in this afternoon. As you’ll note, many of them were included in the initial comments and it’s not clear that they’ve been addressed.

Please let me know if you have any questions.

Regards,
Cortney

Comments to MATS Final Rule (12-15-11) under EO13563.docx
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 157 (Monday, August 15, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 50454-50455]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-20656]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE


Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request

    The Department of Commerce will submit to the Office of Management 
and Budget (OMB) for clearance the following proposal for collection of 
information under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 
U.S.C. Chapter 35).
    Agency: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).
    Title: Northeast Region Vessel Identification Requirements.
    OMB Control Number: 0648-0350.
    Form Number(s): NA.
    Type of Request: Regular submission (extension of a current 
information collection).
    Number of Respondents: 4,920.
    Average Hours per Response: 45 minutes.
    Burden Hours: 3,690.
    Needs and Uses: This request is for extension of a current 
information collection.
    Regulations at 50 CFR 648.8 and 697.8 require that owners of 
vessels over 25 ft (7.6 m) in registered length that have Federal 
permits to fish in the Northeast Region display the vessel's name and 
official number. The vessel's name and official number must be of a 
specific size at specified locations. The display of the identifying 
characters aids in fishery law enforcement.
    Affected Public: Business or other for-profit organizations.
    Frequency: Annually.
    Respondent's Obligation: Mandatory.
    OMB Desk Officer: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#feb1b7acbfa1ad8b9c93978d8d979190be91939cd09b918ed0999188"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="cf80869d8e909cbaada2a6bcbca6a0a18fa0a2ade1aaa0bfe1a8a0b9">[email protected]</span></a>.
    Copies of the above information collection proposal can be obtained 
by calling or writing Diana Hynek, Departmental Paperwork Clearance 
Officer, (202) 482-0266, Department of Commerce, Room 6616, 14th and 
Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230 (or via the Internet at 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#b8dcf0c1d6ddd3f8dcd7db96dfd7ce"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="cca884b5a2a9a78ca8a3afe2aba3ba">[email protected]</span></a>).
    Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information 
collection should be sent within 30 days of publication of this

[[Page 50455]]

notice to <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#7f30362d3e202c0a1d12160c0c1610113f10121d511a100f51181009"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="2e61677c6f717d5b4c43475d5d4741406e41434c004b415e00494158">[email protected]</span></a>.

    Dated: August 10, 2011.
Gwellnar Banks,
Management Analyst, Office of the Chief Information Officer.
[FR Doc. 2011-20656 Filed 8-12-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
Hon. %. Soanlu 

Aasiatrnt County Attorney 

Brow County 

Broarsville, Texas 

Dow Mr. sosdLnc opinioa NOBD, O-206 

Be: Authority of the sheriff to 

grant oerhin persons the 

privilege of owryilg arms0 

Your requert for am opinion on thq,questioa stated above haa beem reoeived by thin offioa. Ue with to thank you for the very able brisf pnseatad by you with your im~uiriea. It has beerr of great assistants in passing 

upoa,tha quwtiona presentode 

Artiole 463 of the Pen81 Code of Texae reads in follows: "W~oaver 

shill 08x-q 011 or about hlo prom, aaddle, or in his saddle bags any 

pistol, dirk, dagger, slingshot, sword cum, spear, or kmuokle~~ made of 

8q melal or uy bud substanoe, bmie knife, or uy other knife manufaotured or sold for the purposw of offemss or defense, shall be punished 

by fine not less thaa $100.00 nor more thaa $600.00 or Iy oonfiaeme* in 

jail for not less than om@ month nor more ti!~a OM yerr.' 

There are o er t8il a xoeptioar mnda to thin Artiole, and those @xooptioan are found in th+ succeeding Artiole desigmated No. 484 of the Penal 

Code, ahioh is LO follorar 

"The preceding artiols shall not apply to a person in roturl sex-viw as a militirmu, nor to any peace offiasr in the 'actual disohrge of 

his offioial duty, nor to the ourying of arma on onets ovum premises or 

plaoe of business, nor to persons traveling, nor to wy deputy constable, 

or special polioemu who rbosives a oompemsation of forty dollars or more 

per month for his servioes as s1+91 officer, and who is'appoieed in 6onfodty with the statutes authorizing suoh appointiemt~ aor to the Dma, 

Fish ud Oyster Coxmniro%onc)r,Ior to rnj deh$y iha 18 the-a&tuti dimoharge of hir dutieo U tirehi-nor to uy~guu11‘7iwd0@, or local deputy 

Gane,. Fish and Oyster Ccanmissionsr nhea in the actual discharge of his 

duties 5~ the coumty of his residemoe, nor shall it apply to any game 

nrdtn or deputy GWUJ, Msh and @vter &mmissioaer who aotually rooeivos 

from'th.s State fees or compensation for his sezM.oeo." 

The eases of Moore v. State, 86 Crimiaal Reports, end Bnksr V. 

S&tsrfield, 111 Saw. 437, hold in effeot that an individual ifrizsd 
HcLllu. Scanlan - Page 2 (o-206) 

to orrry L pistol upon his m premisea ud while engaged in the pi-formanoe of his duty at his pl~oe of tiusiasss, and that suoh individual is 

authorized under the 1rfft.o oury 8 proto going to and returaiag from 

his place of residence, provided that in making such trips, he does not 

go out of the regular course of travel. When not returniag home or going 

to his plaoe of busiaess, such individual has PO authority to carry 8 

pistol, and in doiag so would violate Article 483 of the Wnrl CodeInvies of the 8Iwmr mentioned authorities, it is the opinion of this 

depwtment, and you are rsspeotfully advised, that the sheriff or any other 

authority has no right or Power to authorize anyone to aarry PXITLS which at-? 

prohibited by Article 463 of the Pea.1 Cods. 

Truofing that the 8bove amowers your inquiry,wnr 8ro 

Yours vary truly 

ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS 

By /s/llrdell lRlliams 

Ardell Rlliams 

ALssistant 

APPRUJEDZ 

/s/Gerald C. &in 

ATTORNBYGENERALCFTEXAS
eaui_ex1031.htm


Exhibit 10.31


 



SECOND AMENDED AND RESTATED


$1,325,000 LOAN AGREEMENT







This Second Amended and Restated $1,325,000 Loan Agreement (“Second Amendment”) is made and entered into this _27_ day of March, 2015 by EAU Technologies, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the “Company”) and Peter Ullrich, a resident of Florida (“Holder”).







BACKGROUND







WHEREAS, Company and Holder executed and delivered that certain Amended and Restated $1,325,000 Loan Agreement, dated April 4, 2014, in the original principal amount of $1,325,000 (the “Original Note”);







WHEREAS, Company and Holder executed and delivered that certain $1,325,000 Loan Agreement, dated January 31, 2013, in the original principal amount of $1,325,000;







WHEREAS, the Company and the Holder desire to execute and deliver this Second Amendment to the Original Note.







NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the sum of Ten and No/100 Dollars ($10.00) and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the Company and the Holder do hereby agree as follows:







1.           Section 4(a) of the Original Note is hereby deleted in its entirety and the following is hereby inserted in its place:







Maturity Date.  The Company shall pay the principal amount outstanding hereunder together with accrued and unpaid interest thereon and any other amounts payable to Holder in respect of this Note on the earlier of (i) November 30, 2015, or (ii) the acceleration of the maturity of this Note by Holder pursuant to Section (6)(b)(i), (the earlier of such dates, the “Maturity Date”), unless otherwise converted into Common Stock in accordance with Section 5.







2.           Except as expressly set forth herein, the Original Note shall remain unchanged and unmodified and in full force and effect.







3.           All capitalized terms not otherwise defined in this Amendment shall have the meanings assigned to them in the Original Note.


 


4.           This Amendment may be executed in one or more counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, but all of which together shall constitute one and the same instrument, with the same effect as if the signatures thereto were in the same instrument.


 


[Remainder of page intentionally left blank.  Signatures on following page.]


 




  





1











  






 


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed and delivered this Amendment under seal on the date first above written.


 




	 	Company:	 
	 	 	 
	 	EAU TECHNOLOGIES, INC.	 
	 	 	 	 
	
  

	
By: 

	/s/ Douglas W. Kindred	 
	 	 	Douglas W. Kindred	 
	 	 	Chief Executive Officer	 
	 	 	 	 
	 	Holder:	 
	 	 	 	 
	 	Peter F. Ullrich	 
	 	 	 	 
	 	

By: 

	/s/ Peter F. Ullrich	 
	 	 	Peter F. Ullrich	 
	 	 	 	 








  












2
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-2001
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-02-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUL-01-2000
<CASH>                                             286
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  168,471
<ALLOWANCES>                                  (12,259)
<INVENTORY>                                    179,532
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               361,210
<PP&E>                                          43,217
<DEPRECIATION>                                (17,794)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 401,212
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          328,043
<BONDS>                                          6,956
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             8
<OTHER-SE>                                      59,171
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   401,212
<SALES>                                        177,020
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               177,020
<CGS>                                          162,809
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  162,809
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                21,112
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   374
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               4,252
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (11,527)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (4,607)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (6,920)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (6,920)
<EPS-BASIC>                                    $(0.82)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  $(0.82)


</TABLE>
797 A.2d 890

#### OFFICE OF DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL, Petitioner, v. Joseph James D’ALBA, Respondent.

No. 182 Disciplinary Docket No. 3.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.

April 29, 2002.

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM:

AND NOW, this 29th day of April, 2002, upon consideration of the Report and Recommendations of the Disciplinary Board dated March 8, 2002, it is hereby

ORDERED that JOSEPH JAMES D’ALBA, be and he is SUSPENDED from the Bar of this Commonwealth for a period of three (3) months, and he shall comply with all the provisions of Rule 217 Pa.R.D.E.

It is further ORDERED that respondent shall pay costs to the Disciplinary Board pursuant to Rule 208(g), Pa.R.D.E.