alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Britton v. Mutual Benefit Life Insurance Company.

*Life insurance —fraudulent representations—Waiver—Notice.*

A life insurance company does not waive the consequences of fraudulent representations on the part of the assured by taking premiums on the policy subsequent to an examination of the assured, made two years after the policy was issued pursuant to an application for another insurance .by him. Statements by an applicant for insurance, to the examining physician, in the presence of the company’s agent, do not constitute notice to the company.

Exceptions by plaintiff ordered to be heard in the first instance at general term. The action was by Oscar F. Britton against The Mutual Benefit Life Insurance Company, upon a policy of $3,000 issued by defendant on the life of George J. M. Andrews. The defense was that the policy was void by reason of certain false and fraudulent representations on the part of the assured as to the state of his health. The complaint was dismissed.

*J. T. M. Davie,*for plaintiff.

*John T. Pingree,*for defendant.

Gilbert, J.

The evidence leaves no room for doubt that the assured perpetrated a gross fraud in obtaining the policy sued on, and that he was aided in his fraudulent purpose by the physician who examined him for the company. The circuit judge, therefore, was clearly right in dismissing the complaint, unless the company waived the consequences of such fraud by taking premiums after an examination of the assured had been made, two years after the policy in suit was issued, pursuant to an application for another insurance by him. We have discovered nothing in the evidence given, or in that which was offered and rejected, warranting the *443inference that the defendant was notified that any of the representations which the assured made on the occasion when the policy sued on was obtained, were untrue. On the contrary, the result of the last examination, under the auspices of the physicians, seems to have been quite as favorable to the assured as the first. The examination in proper is not before us, because the court excluded it. We must presume that it contained nothing favorable to the plaintiff, for it was offered only for the purpose of showing the state of health of the assured at the time it was made.

In this point of view it was wholly immaterial. The receipt of premiums from an assured who has got sick after the policy was issued can be no defense. What was said at the time of the examination to the examining physician, in presence of agents of the defendant, constitutes no notice to the latter.

There must be judgment for the defendant, with costs.

*Judgment for defendant.*
§ 286.45 What uses of Tribal Family Assistance Grant funds are improper? ( a ) A Tribe may not use Tribal Family Assistance Grant funds to provide assistance to: ( 1 ) Families or individuals that do not otherwise meet the eligibility criteria contained in the Tribal Family Assistance Plan (TFAP); or
( 2 ) For more than the number of months as specified in a Tribe's TFAP (unless covered by a hardship exemption); or
( 3 ) Individuals who are not citizens of the United States or qualified aliens or who do not otherwise meet the definition of “eligible families” at § 286.5.
( b ) Tribal Family Assistance Grant funds may not be used to contribute to or to subsidize non-TANF programs.
( c ) A Tribe may not use Tribal Family Assistance Grant funds for services or activities prohibited by 45 CFR part 75, subpart E.
( d ) All provisions in 45 CFR part 75 are applicable to the Tribal TANF program.
( e ) Tribal TANF funds may not be used for the construction or purchase of facilities or buildings.
( f ) Tribes must use program income generated by the Tribal Family Assistance grant for the purposes of the TANF program and for allowable TANF services, activities and assistance.
[65 FR 8530, Feb. 18, 2000, as amended at 81 FR 3020, Jan. 20, 2016]
§ 2556.760 May a sponsor or subrecipient approve the participation of a VISTA in a demonstration or other political meeting? ( a ) No VISTA sponsor or subrecipient may approve a VISTA to be involved in planning, initiating, participating in, or otherwise aiding or assisting in any demonstration or other political meeting.
( b ) If a VISTA sponsor or subrecipient, subsequent to the receipt of any AmeriCorps financial assistance, including the assignment of VISTAs, approves the participation of a VISTA in a demonstration or other political meeting, that VISTA sponsor or subrecipient is subject to procedures related to the suspension or termination of such assistance, as provided in subpart B of this part, §§ 2556.135 through 2556.140.
§ 2554.43 What are the procedures for appealing the ALJ decision? ( a ) Any defendant who submits a timely answer and is found liable for a civil penalty or assessment in an initial decision may appeal the decision.
( b ) The defendant may file a notice of appeal with the authority head within 30 days following issuance of the initial decision, serving a copy of the notice of appeal on all parties and the ALJ. The authority head may extend this deadline for up to an additional 30 days if an extension request is filed within the initial 30-day period and shows good cause.
( c ) The defendant's appeal will not be considered until all timely motions for reconsideration have been resolved.
( d ) If a timely motion for reconsideration is denied, a notice of appeal may be filed within 30 days following such denial or issuance of a revised initial decision, whichever applies.
( e ) A notice of appeal must be supported by a written brief specifying why the initial decision should be reversed or modified.
( f ) The Corporation's representative may file a brief in opposition to the notice of appeal within 30 days of receiving the defendant's notice of appeal and supporting brief.
( g ) If a defendant timely files a notice of appeal, and the time for filing motions for reconsideration has expired, the ALJ will forward the record of the proceeding to the authority head.
### The CementIndustry Can Meet These Standards
A lot, ifnot most, ofwhat you'll hearfrom industry are their complaints that these new rules establish emission standards that are not achievable with current technology.
But that's not true. Every piece ofpollution control equipment they need to comply with these rules is being used with great effectiveness on a cement plant in the US right now. Forexample, wet scrubbers to reduce Hydrochloric Acid and SulfurDioxide have been used successfully for years now in Midlothian. Why were scrubbers necessary so early here inTexas?
It wasn't because industry thought it was a good idea. It was because EPA told Holcim in 1989that without them on its new cementplant, the Midlothian area would likely violate the Clean AirAct for too much Sulfur Dioxide pollution. There were already too many cementkilns operating without scrubbers and another one would put the area overthe line. Regardless ofhow they gothere, they've worked to reduce both Hydrochloric Acid and SOx significantly from the 3 dry kilns that use them. Unfortunately, there are seven other wet kilns, builtfrom 1960 to 1975 that do not have them, even now. One ofthe most valuable pieces ofairpollution control equipmentthese rules could require is installation ofwet scrubbers

- a standard piece ofoperating equipmentin every otherheavy industry but still a novelty in the cement industry.
TXI''s Kiln #5 and both Holcin1 kilns in Midlothian have advanced baghouses for the capture ofParticulate Matter, an insidious and dangerous pollutant. But the same seven older\Vet kilns that lack scrubbers, also lack this pollution control device. They still rely on the same kind ofequip1nent they \Vere using in the 1970's \vhen PM control \Vas first being discussedElectro-Static-Precipitators. They're much less efficient and protective than n1icro filtered baghouses. Because ofthe amount ofdust and soot generated by 1 0 kilns in a sn1all area, advanced baghouses should be required on all 

### DF\\1 kilns,
TXI's Kiln #5 also has had a Regenerative Thermal Oxidizer up and running since 2000, \Vhich controls the en1issions ofTotal I-Iydrocarbons. It acts as an afterburner for the

# 'lolatiles in the TXI exhaust. Reducing THC \vill help reduce our red ozone days.
In Oregon, the cornpleted testing and installation ofa Carbon i\bsorption unit for**~1crcury** pollution at an Ash Grove cc1nent p!ant has dc1nonstrated 

### it can be up to 900r cffcctive in reinoving**~1ercury** frorn the exhaust strcarn. I

### am submitting an article aboutthis unit into the record. Because we have the largest concentration ofcementmanufacturing facilities in the US, we should also have the best cementmaking technology in the US. That technology is available and ready to be adapted to the entire US cementindustry. The EPA's cost analysis proves the public health benefits far outweigh the costto industry for upgrading their equipment. I want to thank you for proposing these excellent rules, urge you to withstand the industry's opposition and adoptthem in final form.
Rebecca A. Bornhorst 1405 Indian Creek Drive DeSoto, TX 75115 becky.bomhorst@gmail.com
###### Editorial Note on Part 46

#### Editorial Note:

The Department of Health and Human Services issued a notice of waiver regarding the requirements set forth in part 46, relating to protection of human subjects, as they pertain to demonstration projects, approved under section 1115 of the Social Security Act, which test the use of cost—sharing, such as deductibles, copayment and coinsurance, in the Medicaid program. For further information see 47 FR 9208, Mar. 4, 1982.

#### § 46.403 IRB duties.

In addition to other responsibilities assigned to IRBs under this part, each IRB shall review research covered by this subpart and approve only research which satisfies the conditions of all applicable sections of this subpart.
§ 287.45 How can NEW Program funds be used? ( a ) NEW grants are for making work activities available to such population as the Tribe specifies.
( b ) NEW funds may be used for work activities as defined by the Tribal grantee.
( c ) Work activities may include supportive services necessary for assisting NEW Program participants in preparing for, obtaining, and/or retaining employment.
---

---

Exhibit 32.1

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

In
connection with the Quarterly Report of Defense Industries International, Inc. (the
Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2008 as filed with the
SEC on the date hereof (the Report), I, Joseph Postbinder, Chief Executive
Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to
§ 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 result of operations of the Company.

|/s/ Joseph Postbinder
Joseph PostbinderChief Executive OfficerMay 15, 2008 |  | 
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |  | 



---

---
## SPREADING W I NGS 51000

Motor


## ESC**Fold ~blt**  

### Propell.,- (1 55211 552RJ
A ght P.1tCIMtHYS



## Ga1n**V~lue** 

## sec.ungs framt Arm WtiCI\t**Und~o~dlnc Moc~H'.**  

### UC. Proptlltr) 

### Center frtme Wtfl:l'lt**(Witt~** 

### Landlf\1 Gtu 

### Mounc l nc Bnt, Servos) 

### Sutor Slu KV Wti.&JI.tCWitl'l Cool 

# n.c ran) Wortllnc Curnnt


### Or1vt PWM F rtqutncy

l•keottWe l ctlt lou i Wtl&ht Powu BtUtl')' Mu Po!Ntr Consumpt\.on 

### Hovtr Power Conwn'\ptlon Hovn Tlmt for 

### Al fllcht 

### Conuo l tt hr WooKonc-M FIJ.Oit (OI'IHOIItr

# ~**"''~**



# ' ""'



# ' " '"'•**81~ Roiii~.PIC!'IIZI:l'** **. 'f-** **~** Antudt**Roii1~.Ptct\1~.Vtn<M 12~**  819<**Roiii9CJ'It_Pc<n1~. Y-** **~** Att tudt Roll181)11j, Pc<h 180'111. Vtf'l-ul**12~**
III 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. RES. 131 

Authorizing the Sergeant at Arms and Doorkeeper of the Senate to conduct 

a blood donation drive on March 30, 2023. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MARCH 28, 2023 

Mr. PADILLA submitted the following resolution; which was considered and 

agreed to 

RESOLUTION 

Authorizing the Sergeant at Arms and Doorkeeper of the 

Senate to conduct a blood donation drive on March 30, 

2023. 

1 Resolved, 

2 SECTION 1. SENATE BLOOD DONATION DRIVE ON MARCH 

3 30, 2023. 

4 (a) AUTHORIZATION.—In addition to blood donation 

5 drives conducted under Senate Resolution 78 (118th Con6 gress), agreed to February 16, 2023, the Sergeant at 

7 Arms and Doorkeeper of the Senate, in conjunction with 

8 the American Red Cross, is authorized to conduct a blood 

9 donation drive from 9 a.m. to 3 p.m. on March 30, 2023, 

10 in room 902 of the Philip A. Hart Senate Office Building. 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•SRES 131 ATS 

1 (b) IMPLEMENTATION.—Physical preparations for 

2 the conduct of, and the implementation of, the blood dona3 tion drive authorized under subsection (a) shall be carried 

4 out in accordance with such conditions as the Sergeant 

5 at Arms and Doorkeeper of the Senate, in consultation 

6 with the Committee on Rules and Administration of the 

7 Senate, may prescribe. 

Æ 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>      5

<S>                            <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                       6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>             DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                  JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                          2,297,358
<SECURITIES>                            0
<RECEIVABLES>                     662,169
<ALLOWANCES>                            0
<INVENTORY>                             0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                2,297,358
<PP&E>                        111,518,064
<DEPRECIATION>                 14,699,749
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                109,628,850
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>           2,267,040
<BONDS>                        94,898,364
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                   0
<PREFERRED>                             0
<COMMON>                        2,666,966
<OTHER-SE>                      9,796,480
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>  109,628,850
<SALES>                        10,398,680
<TOTAL-REVENUES>               10,545,272
<CGS>                           5,098,793
<TOTAL-COSTS>                  10,232,110
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                        0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                        0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                359,919
<INCOME-PRETAX>                   313,162
<INCOME-TAX>                      147,096
<INCOME-CONTINUING>               166,066
<DISCONTINUED>                          0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                         0
<CHANGES>                               0
<NET-INCOME>                      166,066
<EPS-BASIC>                          0.07
<EPS-DILUTED>                        0.07


</TABLE>
Public Hearing for Proposed Greenhouse Gas Emissions Standards and Fuel Economy Standards for

Model Year 2017

- 2025 Light

- duty Vehicles

Hard Copies of Testimony and Other Material s Provided by Testifiers

San Francisco Public Hearing

January 24 , 2012

Docket Attachment 1: Hard copies of testimony provided by testifiers to EPA/NHTSA panel

Name Affiliation Page

Tom Cackette California Air Resources Board 1

Erica Morehouse Environmental Defense Fund 5

Larry Greene National Association of Clean Air Agencies 11

Forrest McConnell NADA 15

Alan Lloyd International Council on Clean Transportation 19

Don Anair Union of Concerned Scientists 21

Gary Latshaw Citizen 25

Lacy Plache Edmunds.com 27

John Cabaniss Global Automakers 30

Simon Mui Natural Resources Defense Council 33

John A. “Skip” Laitner American Council for an Energy

- Efficient Economy 37

Chris Busch BlueGreen Alliance 44

Barbara Nocera Mazda North America 47

Frankie Ridolfi Small Business Majority/ Climate Earth 50

Celia Canfield Small Business Majority 52

Theodore Hadzi

- Antich Pacific Legal Foundation 55

Norman Brown Delta Construction Company 56

Dave Dempsey San Francisco State University 57

David Pepper American Lung Association 59

John Boesel CALSTART 62

Colleen Quinn Coulomb Technology 65

Susan Stephenson California Interfaith Power & Light 70

Peyton Fleming Ceres 71

Susan Frank California Clean Cars Campaign 72

Will Barrett American Lung Association in California 81

Lance Tunick On behalf of Aston Martin, Lotus, and McLaren 85

Docket Attachment 2: Submitted by E100 Ethanol Group

– Slide of Oral Testimony Regarding the light

duty GHG and CAFE Vehicle Standards for model years 2017

- 2025

Docket Attachment 3: Submitted by SAFE

– U.S. Oil Intensity and Oil Spending
#### § 164.106 Relationship to other parts.

In complying with the requirements of this part, covered entities and, where provided, business associates, are required to comply with the applicable provisions of parts 160 and 162 of this subchapter.

[78 FR 5693, Jan. 25, 2013]
Transport Transports

Canada Canada

 TP 7245E

AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVE

The following airworthiness directive (AD) may be applicable to an aircraft which our records indicate is registered in your name. ADs are issued pursuant to Canadian 

Aviation Regulation (CAR) 521 Division X. Pursuant to CAR 605.84 and the further details of CAR Standard 625, Appendix H, the continuing airworthiness of a Canadian 

registered aircraft is contingent upon compliance with all applicable ADs. Failure to comply with the requirements of an AD may invalidate the flight authorization of the aircraft. 

Alternative means of compliance shall be applied for in accordance with CAR 605.84 and the above-referenced Standard.

This AD has been issued by the Continuing Airworthiness Division (AARDG), National Aircraft Certification Branch, Transport Canada, Ottawa, telephone 613 952-4357.

Pursuant to CAR 202.51 the registered owner of a Canadian aircraft shall, within seven days, notify the Minister 

in writing of any change of his or her name or address. 

To request a change of address, contact the Civil Aviation Communications Centre (AARC) 

at Place de Ville, Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0N8, or 1-800-305-2059, 

or www.tc.gc.ca/civilaviation/communications/centre/ address.asp

24-0022 (01-2005)

1/1

No.

CF-2012-19

Issue Date

12 June 2012

Number: CF-2012-19

Subject: Control Box Assembly Manufacturing Defect

Effective: 25 June 2012

Applicability: Bell Helicopter Textron Canada Inc. helicopter models 206A and 206B, serial 

numbers 4 and subsequent; model 206L, serial numbers 45004 through 45153 and 

46601 through 46617; equipped with control box assembly part number

206-375-017-101 or 206-375-017-103 as part of the engine auto-relight kit.

Compliance: Within 4 months from the effective date of this AD, unless already accomplished.

Background: It has been determined that control box assemblies, part number (P/N) 206-375-017-101

and 206-375-017-103, have a manufacturing defect. The malfunction of the control box 

assembly will disable the auto-relight system and the pilot will, in the event of an engine 

flame out, be required to re-start the engine manually. This situation could result in an 

unsafe condition during flight and consequently, may lead to a loss of control of the 

helicopter.

Corrective 

Actions:

Replace the applicable control box assembly in accordance with the Accomplishment 

Instruction in the applicable Alert Service Bulletin (ASB) dated 2 May 2011 or later 

revisions approved by the Chief, Continuing Airworthiness, Transport Canada.

Model Control Box Assembly Part Number ASB

206A and 206B Replace 206-375-017-101

with 206-375-017-105

206-11-127

206L Replace 206-375-017-103

with 206-375-017-107

206L-11-167

Authorization: For the Minister of Transport, Infrastructure and Communities

ORIGINAL SIGNED BY

Derek Ferguson

Chief, Continuing Airworthiness

Contact: Bogdan Gajewski, Continuing Airworthiness, Ottawa, telephone 613-952-4357, facsimile 

613-996-9178 or e-mail ADs@tc.gc.ca or any Transport Canada Centre.
Exhibit 8.1
 Subsidiaries
of Sterlite Industries (India) Limited
 Subsidiary
    
    Country of Incorporation1.
    
    Bharat Aluminium Company Limited
    
    India2.
    
    Copper Mines of Tasmania Pty. Ltd.
    
    Australia3.
    
    Fujairah Gold FZE
    
    UAE4.
    
    Hindustan Zinc Limited
    
    India5.
    
    Monte Cello BV
    
    The Netherlands6.
    
    Sterlite Energy Limited
    
    India7.
    
    Sterlite Opportunities and Ventures Limited
    
    India8.
    
    Sterlite Infra Limited
    
    India9.
    
    Sterlite (USA), Inc.
    
    USA10.
    
    Thalanga Copper Mines Pty. Ltd.
    
    Australia11.
    
    Talwandi Sabo Power Limited
    
    India
```

[Federal Register: July 8, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 130)]
[Rules and Regulations]               
[Page 39149]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr08jy10-8]                         

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2009-0878; Airspace Docket No. 09-ASW-7]
RIN 2120-AA66

 
Establishment of Low Altitude Area Navigation Route (T-284); 
Houston, TX

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule; withdrawal.

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

SUMMARY: A final rule, published in the Federal Register April 1, 2010, 
establishing low altitude area navigation (RNAV) route T-284 for the 
Houston, TX, terminal area, is being withdrawn. As a result of Houston 
Area Air Traffic System (HAATS) Project, Phase 3C, program actions, the 
route is pending redesign and will be resubmitted for rulemaking at a 
future date.

DATES: Effective date 0901 UTC, July 8, 2010. The Director of the 
Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference action under 
1 CFR part 51, subject to the annual revision of FAA Order 7400.9 and 
publication of conforming amendments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Colby Abbott, Airspace and Rules 
Group, Office of System Operations Airspace and AIM, Federal Aviation 
Administration, 800 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591; 
telephone: (202) 267-8783.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

History

    On April 1, 2010, the FAA published in the Federal Register a final 
rule to establish RNAV route T-284 for the Houston, TX, terminal area 
(75 FR 16336), Docket No. FAA-2009-0878. Subsequent to publication, the 
Manager, Houston Air Route Traffic Control Center requested the 
recently published route be withdrawn pending redesign. The FAA intends 
to resubmit a redesigned route as a new rulemaking proposal at a future 
date.

Withdrawal of Final Rule

    Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me, the FAA 
withdraws the final rule published in the Federal Register April 1, 
2010 (75 FR 16336) [FR Doc. 2010-7245].

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O. 10854, 
24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on June 29, 2010.
Paul Gallant,
Acting Manager, Airspace and Rules Group.
[FR Doc. 2010-16492 Filed 7-7-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
```
§ 150.439 Effect of submission of proposed hearing exhibits. ( a ) Any proposed hearing exhibit submitted by a party in accordance with § 150.437 is deemed part of the record unless the opposing party raises an objection to that exhibit and the ALJ rules to exclude it from the record. An objection must be raised either in writing prior to the prehearing conference provided for in § 150.441 or at the prehearing conference. The ALJ may require a party to submit the original hearing exhibit on his or her own motion or in response to a challenge to the authenticity of a proposed hearing exhibit.
( b ) A party may introduce a proposed hearing exhibit following the times for submission specified in § 150.437 only if the party establishes to the satisfaction of the ALJ that it could not have produced the exhibit earlier and that the opposing party will not be prejudiced.