alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Editorial Note on Part 67
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 67 appear by USCG-2001-10714, 69 FR 24983, 24984, May 5, 2004.

§ 67.25-10 Sound signal. ( a ) The owner of a Class “B” structure shall: ( 1 ) Install a sound signal that has a rated range of at least one-half mile, except that the District Commander may— ( i ) Prescribe a greater rated range, not to exceed 2 miles, under the provisions of paragraph (b) of this section; or
( ii ) Exempt the structure from the requirements of this paragraph, under the provisions of paragraph (c) of this section;
( 2 ) Operate the sound signal when the visibility in any direction is less than 3 miles, unless the District Commander establishes a greater or lesser distance of visibility, not to exceed 5 miles, under the provisions of paragraph (b) or (c) of this section.
( b ) The owner of a Class “B” structure shall install a sound signal with a greater rated range or operate it at times of greater visibility than required in paragraph (a) of this section if: ( 1 ) The structure is erected on or adjacent to the edge of a: ( i ) Navigable channel;
( ii ) Fairway; or
( iii ) Line of demarcation; and
( 2 ) The District Commander decides a greater range or operation of the sound signal at times of greater visibility is necessary for the safety of marine commerce.
( c ) The District Commander may waive or relax the provisions of paragraph (a) of this section, if he or she finds that a structure is: ( 1 ) So close to other structures and so enveloped by the sound signals on other structures that it is not a hazard to navigation; or
( 2 ) So located in a shoal area that it is not a hazard to navigation.
[CGD 72-74R, 37 FR 13513, July 8, 1972, as amended by USCG-2001-10714, 69 FR 24983, 24984, May 5, 2004]
Editorial Note on Part 157
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 157 appear by USCG-2008-0179, 73 FR 35015, June 19, 2008.

§ 157.128 Stripping system. ( a ) Each tank vessel having a COW system under § 157.10(e), § 157.10a(a)(2), or § 157.10c(b)(2) must have a stripping system that is designed to remove crude oil from— ( 1 ) Each cargo tank at 1.25 times the rate at which all the COW machines that are designed to simultaneously wash the bottom of the tank, are operating; and
( 2 ) The bottom of each tank to allow the tank vessel to pass the inspection under § 157.140(a)(2).
( b ) Each cargo tank must be designed to allow the level of crude oil in the tank to be determined by: ( 1 ) Hand dipping at the aftermost portion of the tank and three other locations; or
( 2 ) Any other means accepted by the Commandant.
( c ) Each stripping system must have at least one of the following devices for stripping oil from each cargo tank: ( 1 ) A positive displacement pump.
( 2 ) A self-priming centrifugal pump.
( 3 ) An eductor
( 4 ) Any other device accepted by the Commandant.
( d ) There must be a means in the stripping system piping between the device under paragraph (c) of this section and each cargo tank to isolate each tank from the device.
( e ) If the stripping system has a positive displacement pump or a self-priming centrifugal pump, the stripping system must have the following: ( 1 ) In the stripping system piping: ( i ) A pressure gauge at the inlet connection to the pump; and
( ii ) A pressure gauge at the discharge connection to the pump.
( 2 ) At least one of the following monitoring devices to indicate operation of the pump. ( i ) Flow indicator.
( ii ) Stroke counter.
( iii ) Revolution counter.
( f ) If the stripping system has an eductor, the stripping system must have: ( 1 ) A pressure gauge at each driving fluid intake and at each discharge; and
( 2 ) A pressure/vacuum gauge at each suction intake.
( g ) The equipment required under paragraphs (e) and (f) of this section must have indicating devices in the cargo control room or another location that is accepted by the Commandant.
[CGD 77-058b, 45 FR 43709, June 30, 1980, as amended by CGD 82-28, 50 FR 11627, Mar. 22, 1985]
EXHIBIT 8
                                                                      ---------


                      CONSENT OF PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS LLP

We hereby  consent to (i) the  inclusion  in the Annual  Report of Western  Oil
Sands Inc.  on Form 40-F for the year ended  December  31,  2006,  of our audit
report  dated  February  22,  2007,  relating  to  the  Consolidated  Financial
Statements for each of the years in the two year period ended December 31, 2006
and  management's  assessment  of the  effectiveness  of internal  control over
financial  reporting and the  effectiveness  of internal control over financial
reporting of Western Oil Sands Inc. as of December 31, 2006.

/s/  PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
-------------------------------

Calgary, Alberta
February 22, 2007
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

DANIEL LUGO,

Case No. 9:22-cv-81539-DMM

Plaintiff,

v.

KEY ENDEAVORS, LLC,

Defendant.

__________________________________/

PROPOSED ORDER ON DEFENDANT’S UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR EXTENSION 

OF TIME TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT

THIS MATTER is before the Court on Defendant’s Unopposed Motion for Extension of 

Time to Respond to Complaint. The Court, having reviewed the file and being fully advised in the 

premises, finds that there is good cause to grant the relief requested in the Motion. 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Motion is GRANTED, and Defendant shall respond 

to Plaintiff’s Complaint on or before November 23, 2022. 

DONE AND ORDERED this ___ day of ___________ 2022, in Chambers of the United 

States District Court for the Southern District of Florida.

THE HONORABLE DONALD M. MIDDLEBROOKS

United States District Judge

cc: Counsel of Record

Case 9:22-cv-81539-DMM Document 6-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/25/2022 Page 1 of 1
EXHIBIT 32
                   ADVANCED COMMUNICATIONS TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
    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  Advanced   Communications
Technologies,  Inc.  (the  Company) on Form 10-KSB for the period ended June 30,
2005 as filed with the SEC on the date hereof (the Report),  I, Wayne I. Danson,
President,  Chief Executive  Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the Company,
certify,  pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

      1.    The Report fully complies with the  requirements of section 13(a) or
            15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

      2.    The  information  contained in the Report  fairly  presents,  in all
            material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
            of the Company.

      A signed  original of this written  statement  required by Section 906 has
been provided to Advanced Communications Technologies, Inc. and will be retained
by Advanced  Communications  Technologies,  Inc. and furnished to the Securities
and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

Date: October 3, 2005


/s/ Wayne I. Danson
-------------------
Wayne I. Danson
President, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer
**EXHIBIT 31.2**
**CERTIFICATIONS**
I, Bradley D. Tilden, certify that:
1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q/A of Alaska Airlines, Inc.for the period ended September 30, 2004;
2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untruestatement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make thestatements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made,not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;
3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this quarterly report, fairly present in all material respectsthe financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of,and for, the periods presented in this report;
4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in ExchangeAct Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and we have:
a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosurecontrols and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure thatmaterial information relating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this report is being prepared;
b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness ofthe disclosure controls and procedures, as of September 30, 2004, based on suchevaluation; and
c) disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarterthat has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and
5. The registrant’s other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on ourmost recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to theregistrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors(or persons performing the equivalent functions):
a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adverselyaffect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financialinformation; and
b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employeeswho have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting.        December 23, 2004 By    /s/ Bradley D. Tilden   Bradley D. Tilden   Chief Financial Officer
I

106TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 5245

To amend the Railroad Retirement Act of 1974 to eliminate a limitation

on benefits.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

SEPTEMBER 21, 2000

Mr. ANDREWS introduced the following bill; which was referred to the

Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure

A BILL

To amend the Railroad Retirement Act of 1974 to eliminate

a limitation on benefits.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 That section 3(f)(3) of the Railroad Retirement Act of

4 1974 (45 U.S.C. 231b(f)(3)) is amended by striking ‘‘(ii)

5 after an annuity has been certified for payment’’ and all

6 that follows through ‘‘and (iii)’’ and inserting ‘‘and (ii)’’.

7 The amendment made by this Act shall apply with respect

8 to months beginning on or after January 1, 1978.

Æ
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0000004507
<NAME> ORANGE-CO, INC.
<MULTIPLIER> 1000
<CURRENCY> US Dollars
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             OCT-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                             985
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   10,265
<ALLOWANCES>                                      (474)
<INVENTORY>                                     47,797
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                61,740
<PP&E>                                         162,883
<DEPRECIATION>                                  40,311
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 202,854
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           26,421
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        76,142
<OTHER-SE>                                      33,375
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   202,854
<SALES>                                         28,424
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                28,424
<CGS>                                          (23,713)
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  (23,713)
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                (1,711)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                (540)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  2,460
<INCOME-TAX>                                      (922)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              1,538
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,538
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .15
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .15
        

</TABLE>
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5331 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

        H.R.5331

                       One Hundred Sixth Congress

                                 of the

                        United States of America

                          AT THE SECOND SESSION

           Begun and held at the City of Washington on Monday,
             the twenty-fourth day of January, two thousand

                                 An Act

 
   To authorize the Frederick Douglass Gardens, Inc., to establish a 
memorial and gardens on Department of the Interior lands in the District 
  of Columbia or its environs in honor and commemoration of Frederick 
                                Douglass.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. MEMORIAL AND GARDENS TO HONOR AND COMMEMORATE FREDERICK 
              DOUGLASS.

    (a) Memorial and Gardens Authorized.--The Frederick Douglass 
Gardens, Inc., is authorized to establish a memorial and gardens on 
lands under the administrative jurisdiction of the Secretary of the 
Interior in the District of Columbia or its environs in honor and 
commemoration of Frederick Douglass.
    (b) Compliance With Standards for Commemorative Works.--The 
establishment of the Frederick Douglass memorial and gardens shall be 
in accordance with the Commemorative Works Act (40 U.S.C. 1001 et 
seq.).

SEC. 2. PAYMENT OF EXPENSES.

    The Frederick Douglass Gardens, Inc., shall be solely responsible 
for acceptance of contributions for, and payment of the expenses of, 
the establishment of the memorial and gardens. No Federal funds may be 
used to pay any expense of the establishment of the memorial and 
gardens.

SEC. 3. DEPOSIT OF EXCESS FUNDS.

    If, upon payment of all expenses of the establishment of the 
memorial and gardens (including the maintenance and preservation amount 
required under section 8(b) of the Commemorative Works Act (40 U.S.C. 
1008(b)), or upon expiration of the authority for the memorial and 
gardens under section 10(b) of such Act (40 U.S.C. 1010(b)), there 
remains a balance of funds received for the establishment of the 
memorial and gardens, Frederick Douglass Gardens, Inc., shall transmit 
the amount of the balance to the Secretary of the Treasury for deposit 
in the account provided for in section 8(b)(1) of such Act (40 U.S.C. 
1008(b)(1)).

                               Speaker of the House of Representatives.

                            Vice President of the United States and    
                                               President of the Senate.
```
#### RANSOM P. ALGER, Respondent, *v.*WILLARD JOHNSON, Appellant.

*Statute of frauds—when must he pleaded.*

It is only when a complaint sets forth a contract, and the answer admits that allegation, that the defendant must plead the statute of frauds. (Moak’s Van S. PI., 505, 555 ; *Duffy*v. *O'Donovan,*46 N. Y., 226.)

Appeal from a judgment in favor of the plaintiff, entered on the report of a referee.

The action -was brought for work done and materials furnished by the plaintiff to the defendant. The answer contained a general denial of all the material allegations of the complaint. The defendant claimed that the contract for the work and materials was with one Baker, and that therefore the promise of the defendant to pay therefor was within the statute of frauds, but the court was of opinion that the evidence showed that the employment was by the defendant and not by Baker, and affirmed the judgment.

*413
      *Stephens & Pardee,*for the appellant.

*H. C. Howe,*for the respondent

Opinion by

Gilbert, J.

Judgment affirmed.
§ 3040.221 Additional supporting justification for negotiated service agreements. ( a ) Each request shall also include the items specified in paragraphs (b) through (j) of this section.
( b ) A copy of the negotiated service agreement.
( c ) The planned effective date(s) of the planned rates.
( d ) The identity of a responsible Postal Service official who will be available to provide prompt responses to requests for clarification from the Commission.
( e ) A statement identifying all parties to the agreement and a description clearly explaining the operative components of the agreement.
( f ) Details regarding the expected improvements in the net financial position or operations of the Postal Service (39 U.S.C. 3622(c)(10)(A)(i) and (ii)). The projection of the change in net financial position as a result of the agreement shall be based on accepted analytical principles. The projection of the change in net financial position as a result of the agreement shall include for each year of the agreement: ( 1 ) The estimated mailer-specific costs, volumes, and revenues of the Postal Service absent the implementation of the negotiated service agreement;
( 2 ) The estimated mailer-specific costs, volumes, and revenues of the Postal Service which result from implementation of the negotiated service agreement;
( 3 ) An analysis of the effects of the negotiated service agreement on the contribution to institutional costs from mailers not party to the agreement;
( 4 ) If mailer-specific costs are not available, the source and derivation of the costs that are used shall be provided, together with a discussion of the currency and reliability of those costs and their suitability as a proxy for the mailer-specific costs; and
( 5 ) If the Postal Service believes the Commission's accepted analytical principles are not the most accurate and reliable methodology available: ( i ) An explanation of the basis for that belief; and
( ii ) A projection of the change in net financial position resulting from the agreement made using the Postal Service's alternative methodology.
( g ) An identification of each component of the agreement expected to enhance the performance of mail preparation, processing, transportation, or other functions in each year of the agreement, and a discussion of the nature and expected impact of each such enhancement.
( h ) Details regarding any and all actions (performed or to be performed) to assure that the agreement will not result in unreasonable harm to the marketplace (39 U.S.C. 3622(c)(10)(B)).
( i ) A discussion in regard to how functionally similar negotiated service agreements will be made available on public and reasonable terms to similarly situated mailers.
( j ) Such other information as the Postal Service believes will assist the Commission in issuing a timely determination of whether the requested changes are consistent with applicable statutory policies.
§ 334.720 Gulf of Mexico, south from Choctawhatchee Bay; Missile test area. ( a ) *The danger zone.* The danger zone shall encompass all navigable waters of the United States as defined at 33 CFR part 329, including the waters of the Gulf of Mexico south from Choctawhatchee Bay within an area described as follows: Beginning at a point five nautical miles southeasterly from USC&GS Station Tuck 3, at latitude 30°23′10.074′′ N, longitude 086°48′25.433′′ W, three nautical miles offshore of Santa Rosa Island; thence easterly three nautical miles offshore and parallel to shore, to a point south of Apalachicola Bay, Florida at latitude 29°32′00′′ N, longitude 085°00′00′′ W; thence southeasterly to latitude 29°17′30′′ N, longitude 084°40′00′′ W; thence southwesterly to latitude 28°40′00′′ N, longitude 084°49′00′′ W; thence southeasterly to latitude 28°10′00′′ N, longitude 084°30′00′′ W; thence 270° true to longitude 086°48′00′′ W; thence due north along longitude 086°48′00′′ W to the intersection of the line with a circle of five nautical miles radius centered on USC&GS Station Tuck 3, at latitude 30°23′10.074′′ N, longitude 086°48′25.433′′ W, thence northeasterly along the arc of the circle to the point of beginning.
( b ) *The regulations.* ( 1 ) The area will be used intermittently during daylight hours for a week or 10 days at a time. Firing will take place once or twice a day for periods ordinarily of not more than one hour. Advance notice of such firings will be published in local newspapers.
( 2 ) During periods of firing, passage through the area will not be denied to cargo-carrying or passenger-carrying vessels or tows proceeding on established routes. In case any such vessel is within the danger zone, the officer in charge of firing operations will cause the cessation or postponement of fire until the vessel has cleared the portion of the danger area involved. The entire area involved will be under constant observation of both surface patrol vessels and air patrol planes prior to and during periods of firing and notice will be given to vessels and tows of intention to fire by buzzing low over the vessel, upon which signal vessels and tows shall proceed on their established course promptly and clear the area as soon as possible.
( 3 ) All persons and vessels, except those identified in paragraph (b)(2) of this section, will be warned to leave the immediate danger area during firing periods by surface patrol craft. Upon being so warned, such persons and vessels shall clear the area immediately. Such periods normally will not exceed two hours.
( c ) *Enforcement.* ( 1 ) The regulations in this section shall be enforced by the Commander, 96 Air Base Wing, Eglin AFB, Florida and such agencies as he/she may designate.
( 2 ) Enforcement of the regulations in this section will be accomplished in accordance with the active security level as defined by the Department of Defense Force Protection Condition (FPCON) System.
[76 FR 75455, Dec. 2, 2011]