alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 15.1101 General. ( a ) Except as noted in paragraphs (a)(1) and (2) of this section, the regulations in this subpart apply to seagoing vessels as defined in § 10.107 of this subchapter. ( 1 ) The following vessels are exempt from application of the STCW Convention: ( i ) Fishing vessels as defined in 46 U.S.C. 2101(11)(a).
( ii ) Fishing vessels used as fish-tender vessels as defined in 46 U.S.C. 2101(11)(c).
( iii ) Barges as defined in 46 U.S.C. 102, including non-self-propelled MODUs.
( iv ) Vessels operating exclusively on the Great Lakes or on the inland waters of the U.S., in the Straits of Juan de Fuca, or on the Inside Passage between Puget Sound and Cape Spencer.
( v ) Pilot vessels engaged on pilotage duty.
( 2 ) The following small vessels engaged exclusively on domestic, near coastal voyages are not subject to any obligation for the purposes of the STCW Convention: ( i ) Small passenger vessels subject to subchapter T or K of 46 CFR chapter I.
( ii ) Vessels of less than 200 GRT (other than passenger vessels subject to subchapter H of 46 CFR chapter I).
( iii ) Uninspected passenger vessels as defined in 46 U.S.C. 2101(42)(B).
( b ) Masters, mates, and engineers serving on vessels identified in paragraphs (a)(2)(i) and (a)(2)(ii) of this section may be issued, without additional proof of qualification, an appropriate STCW endorsement when the Coast Guard determines that such a document is necessary to enable the vessel to engage on a single international voyage of a non-routine nature. The STCW endorsement will be expressly limited to service on the vessel or the class of vessels and will not establish qualification for any other purpose.
[USCG-2004-17914, 78 FR 78010, Dec. 24, 2013, as amended by USCG-2018-0874, 84 FR 30883, June 28, 2019]
EX-31.1

CERTIFICATION

I, Harry Masuda, certify that:

1.      I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Human
BioSystems;

2.      Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue
statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make
the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements
were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this quarterly
report;

3.      Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this quarterly report, fairly present in all material
respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the
registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this quarterly report;

4.      The registrant's other certifying officers and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures [as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a - 15(e) and 15d - 15(e)] for the registrant and we have:

a.      designed such disclosure controls and procedures or caused such
disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to
ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its
consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those
entities, particularly during the period in which this quarterly report is
being prepared;


b.      evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and
procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness
of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered
by this quarterly report based on such evaluation; and

c.      disclosed in this quarterly report any change in the registrant's
internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the
registrant's most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant's forth fiscal
quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or
is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant's internal control
over financial reporting;

5.      The registrant's other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based
on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting,
to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of the registrant's
board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent function):

a.      All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design
or operation of internal control over financial reporting which reasonably
likely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process,
summarize and report financial information; and

b.      Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal controls
over financial reporting.

Date: August 15, 2005


/s/ Harry Masuda
------------------
Harry Masuda
Chief Executive Officer and
Acting Chief Financial Officer
# C_2011331EN.01001002.xml

| 12.11.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 331/10 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.11.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 331/10

---

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesgerichtshof (Germany) lodged on 26 August 2011 — Ekkerhard Schauß v Transportes Aéreos Portugueses SA

(Case C-437/11)

2011/C 331/16

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Referring court

Bundesgerichtshof

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Ekkerhard Schauß

Applicant:

Defendant: Transportes Aéreos Portugueses SA

Defendant:

Question referred

Question referred

Does a passenger have a right to compensation under Article 7 of Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 (1) in the case where departure was delayed for a period of time less than the limits specified in Article 6(1) of that regulation, but arrival at the final destination was at least three hours later than the scheduled arrival time?

1

---

(1)  Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 February 2004 establishing common rules on compensation and assistance to passengers in the event of denied boarding and of cancellation or long delay of flights, and repealing Regulation (EEC) No 295/91 (OJ 2004 L 46, p. 1).

1

---
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

MAURICE CRISP,

Plaintiff,

v.

PATRICIA CARUSO, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

Case No. 2:14-cv-14132

HONORABLE STEPHEN J. MURPHY, III

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND

RECOMMENDATION (document no. 18) AND DISMISSING THE CASE

Maurice Crisp is a prisoner currently in the custody of the Michigan Department of

Corrections. He alleged in his lawsuit that while he was incarcerated at the St. Louis,

Michigan Correctional Facility, he ingested contaminated water and as a result, developed

numerous health complications. The Court referred the matter to a magistrate judge who

permitted Crisp to cure the defects of his original complaint. Referral Order, ECF No. 10;

Order 8–9, ECF No. 13. After Crisp amended his complaint, the magistrate judge entered

a Report and Recommendation suggesting the Court dismiss the case as time-barred. See

Report 6, ECF No. 18. 

De novo review of the magistrate judge's findings is only required if the parties "serve

and file specific written objections to the proposed findings and recommendations." Fed.

R. Civ. P. 72(b)(2). Pursuant to Civil Rule 72(b)(2), the parties were permitted to file

objections to the Report within 14 days of service. No objections were filed, and therefore

de novo review of the Report is not required. Having reviewed the Report's analysis, in light

of the record, the Court finds that its conclusions are factually based and legally sound.

Accordingly, it will adopt the Report's findings and dismiss the complaint with prejudice.

2:14-cv-14132-SJM-MKM Doc # 19 Filed 11/08/16 Pg 1 of 2 Pg ID 121
ORDER

WHEREFORE, it is hereby ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation

(document no. 18) is ADOPTED.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the case is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.

SO ORDERED.

s/Stephen J. Murphy, III 

STEPHEN J. MURPHY, III

United States District Judge

Dated: November 8, 2016

I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was served upon the parties and/or

counsel of record on November 8, 2016, by electronic and/or ordinary mail.

s/David P. Parker 

Acting Case Manager

2

2:14-cv-14132-SJM-MKM Doc # 19 Filed 11/08/16 Pg 2 of 2 Pg ID 122
EXHIBIT 32.2

Certification of Chief Financial Officer

Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as created by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned officer of
Varsity Group Inc. (the Company) hereby certifies, to such officers knowledge, that the Companys Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the three months ended March 31, 2006 (the Report) fully
complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended and that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
condition and results of operations of the Company.



|                    |  |                              
|------------------- |  | -----------------------------
|Dated: May 15, 2006 |  | /s/ Jack M Benson            
|                    |  | Jack M Benson                
|                    |  | Chief Financial Officer      
|                    |  | (Principal Financial Officer)
**Exhibit 21.1**

**SUBSIDIARIES OFREGISTRANT**

| **Name of Subidiary******                  |  **** | **State of****Incorporation****** |  **** | **Percent****Ownership****** |
|--------------------------------------------|------------|-----------------------------------|------------|------------------------------|
|                                            |       |                                   |       |                              |
| SOCO Wattenberg Corporation                |       | Delaware                     |       | 100%                         |
| Patina Well Services, Inc.                 |       | Colorado                     |       | 100%                         |
| Patina BNR Corp.                           |       | Delaware                     |       | 100%                         |
| Patina Oklahoma Corp.                      |       | Delaware                     |       | 100%                         |
| Le Norman LOCO, Inc.                       |       | Oklahoma                          |       | 100%                         |
| North Texas Gathering Company              |       | Delaware                     |       | 100%                         |
| Elysium Energy, LLC                        |       | New York                          |       |   50%              |
| E&B Natural Resources Management Corp. |       | California                        |       |   50%              |
| Le Norman Partners, LLC                    |       | Oklahoma                          |       |   30%              |
§ 130.450 Machinery alarms. ( a ) Each alarm required by § 130.460 of this subpart must be of the self-monitoring type that will both show visibly and sound audibly upon an opening or break in the sensing circuit.
( b ) The visible alarm must show until it is manually acknowledged and the condition is corrected.
( c ) The audible alarm must sound until it is manually silenced.
( d ) No silenced alarm may prevent any other audible alarm from sounding.
( e ) Each OSV must be provided with means for testing each visible and audible alarm.
( f ) Each OSV must provide battery power for the alarm required by § 130.460(a)(8) of this subpart.
# C_2011252EN.01005702.xml

| 27.8.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 252/57 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.8.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 252/57

---

Action brought on 3 July 2011 — ZZ v Parliament

(Case F-65/11)

2011/C 252/127

Language of the case: German

Parties

Parties

Applicant: ZZ. (represented by O. Mader, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Parliament

Defendant:

Subject-matter and description of the dispute

Subject-matter and description of the dispute

Annulment of the decision of the European Parliament whereby the applicant was awarded only 2 promotion points in respect of the promotions year 2004, in which he was seconded to the European Court of Auditors.

Forms of order sought

Forms of order sought

The applicant claims that the Civil Service Tribunal should:

| — | Annul the defendant’s decision of 19 July 2010 not to award the applicant a third promotion point for 2004, and annul the defendant’s decision of 28 April 2011, dismissing the applicant’s complaint against the decision of 19 July 2010; |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the defendant’s decision of 19 July 2010 not to award the applicant a third promotion point for 2004, and annul the defendant’s decision of 28 April 2011, dismissing the applicant’s complaint against the decision of 19 July 2010;

| — | Order the defendant to pay the applicant compensation for non-material damage suffered by him, of an amount to be assessed in the discretion of the Tribunal; |
| --- | --- |

—

Order the defendant to pay the applicant compensation for non-material damage suffered by him, of an amount to be assessed in the discretion of the Tribunal;

| — | Order the defendant to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

Order the defendant to pay the costs.

---
Editorial Note on Part 160
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 160 appear by USCG-2012-0832, 77 FR 59785, 59786, Oct. 1, 2012.

§ 160.053-3 Materials, construction and workmanship. ( a ) *General.* Except as otherwise specifically provided by this subpart and subparts 164.019 and 164.023 of this chapter, the materials, construction, and workmanship of unicellular plastic foam work vests specified by this subpart shall conform to the requirements of Military Specification MIL-L-17653A.
( b ) *Color of envelope.* Indian Orange, Cable No. 70072, Standard Color Card of America, will be acceptable in lieu of the Scarlet-Munsell 7.5 red 6 ⁄ 10 color specified for envelopes or covers by paragraph 3.1.1.1 of Specification MIL-L-17653A.
( c ) *Color of webbing and thread.* The color of the webbing and thread need not match the color of the envelope as specified by paragraphs 3.1.3 and 3.2.8 of Specification MIL-L-17653A.
( d ) *Materials; acceptance and quality.* All components used in the construction of work vests must meet the applicable requirements of subpart 164.019 of this chapter.
[CGFR 59-22, 24 FR 4961, June 18, 1959, as amended by CGD 84-068, 58 FR 29493, May 20, 1993]
Exhibit 3.2
                                                                     -----------

                            CERTIFICATE OF AMENDMENT
                                       OF
                          CERTIFICATE OF INCORPORATION
                                       OF
                                 BIOFIELD CORP.


BIOFIELD CORP., a corporation organized and existing under and by virtue of the
General Corporation Law of the State of Delaware, DOES HEREBY CERTIFY:

FIRST: That by a Written Consent of the Board of Directors of the Corporation,
resolutions were duly adopted setting forth a proposed amendment of the Fifth
Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation of said Corporation, declaring
said amendment to be advisable and providing that the written consent of the
stockholders to such amendment should be obtained. The resolution setting forth
the proposed amendment is as follows:

         RESOLVED, that the Fifth Amended and Restated Certificate of
Incorporation of this Corporation be amended by amending the Article thereof
numbered "FOURTH" by substituting a new Article FOURTH as set forth below:

                  FOURTH: The aggregate number of shares which the Corporation
         shall have the authority to issue is seventy-two million three hundred
         thousand (72,300,000) shares, par value of $.001 per share, consisting
         of sixty million (60,000,000) shares of Common Stock, par value $.001
         per share; and twelve million three hundred thousand (12,300,000)
         shares of Preferred Stock, par value $.001 per share, such Preferred
         Stock to be issued in such series and with such designations, powers,
         preferences and rights and with such qualifications, limitations and
         restrictions as may be established by the Board of Directors pursuant
         to Article FIFTH.

SECOND: That thereafter, pursuant to resolution of its Board of Directors, the
written consent of the stockholders of the Corporation was obtained in
accordance with Section 228 of the General Corporation Law of the State of
Delaware, by which consent the necessary number of shares as required by statute
consented to the amendment, and written notice of action taken by such
stockholders' consent has been given as provided in Section 228 of the General
Corporation Law.

THIRD: That said amendment was duly adopted in accordance with the provisions of
Section 242 of the General Corporation Law of the State of Delaware.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, said Corporation has caused this certificate to be signed by
David M. Long, Jr., an authorized officer, this 20th day of May, 2005.


By: /s/ DAVID M. LONG, JR.
    -------------------------------------------
    David M. Long, Jr., Chief Executive Officer
# C_2008195EN.01000401.xml

| 1.8.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 195/4 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

1.8.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 195/4

---

Opinion of the Advisory Committee on Mergers given at its meeting of 20 February 2008 relating a draft decision relating to Case COMP/M.4747 — IBM/Telelogic

Rapporteur: Spain

(2008/C 195/03)

| 1. | The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that the notified operation constitutes a concentration within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the EC Merger Regulation. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that the notified operation constitutes a concentration within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the EC Merger Regulation.

| 2. | The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that the notified operation has a Community dimension within the meaning of Articles 1 and 4(5) of the EC Merger Regulation. |
| --- | --- |

2.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that the notified operation has a Community dimension within the meaning of Articles 1 and 4(5) of the EC Merger Regulation.

| 3. | The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission's definition of the relevant product markets. |
| --- | --- |

3.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission's definition of the relevant product markets.

| 4. | The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission's definition of the relevant geographic market. |
| --- | --- |

4.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission's definition of the relevant geographic market.

| 5. | The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission's assessment that the notified operation would not significantly impede effective competition on the market for software Modelling tools. |
| --- | --- |

5.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission's assessment that the notified operation would not significantly impede effective competition on the market for software Modelling tools.

| 6. | The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission's assessment that the notified operation would not significantly impede effective competition on the market for software Requirements Management tools. |
| --- | --- |

6.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission's assessment that the notified operation would not significantly impede effective competition on the market for software Requirements Management tools.

| 7. | The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that the notified concentration should be declared compatible with the Common Market and with the functioning of the EEA Agreement in accordance with Articles 2(2), 8(1) and 10(2) of the Merger Regulation and Article 57 of the EEA Agreement. |
| --- | --- |

7.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that the notified concentration should be declared compatible with the Common Market and with the functioning of the EEA Agreement in accordance with Articles 2(2), 8(1) and 10(2) of the Merger Regulation and Article 57 of the EEA Agreement.

---
Editorial Note on Part 154
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 154 appear part 154 appear by CGD-95-072, 60 FR 50466, Sept. 29, 1995, CGD-96-041, 61 FR 50732, Sept. 27, 1996, USCG-2009-0702, 74 FR 49235, Sept. 25, 2009, and USCG-2012-0832, 77 FR 59785, Oct. 1, 2012.

§ 154.1170 Hand hose line: General. Each dry chemical hand hose line must: ( a ) Not be longer than 33m (108 ft.);
( b ) Be stored on a hose reel or in a hose cabinet and be one that is operable whether or not it is unwound from a hose reel or removed from a hose cabinet;
( c ) Be non-kinkable;
( d ) Have a nozzle with a valve to start and stop the flow of chemical;
( e ) Have a capacity of at least 3.5 kg/sec (7.7 lb./sec); and
( f ) Be one that can be operated by one person.
I 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2077 

To amend the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act to require 

notifications under that Act for mass layoffs that occur at more than 

one site of an employer and to increase penalties for violation of the 

Act. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 23, 2009 

Mr. GUTIERREZ (for himself, Mrs. NAPOLITANO, Mr. LIPINSKI, Mr. 

GRIJALVA, and Mr. ROTHMAN of New Jersey) introduced the following 

bill; which was referred to the Committee on Education and Labor 

A BILL 

To amend the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act to require notifications under that Act for mass 

layoffs that occur at more than one site of an employer 

and to increase penalties for violation of the Act. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Alert Laid off Employ5 ees in Reasonable Time Act’’. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with BILLS
2 

•HR 2077 IH

1 SEC. 2. MASS LAYOFFS OF A SINGLE EMPLOYER AT MUL2 TIPLE SITES. 

3 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 2(a)(3) of the Worker Ad4 justment and Retraining Notification Act (29 U.S.C. 

5 2101(a)(3)) is amended— 

6 (1) in subparagraph (B)(ii) by inserting ‘‘or’’ 

7 after the semicolon; and 

8 (2) by adding at the end the following: 

9 ‘‘(C) results in an employment loss for a 

10 single employer at more than 1 site of employ11 ment during any 30-day period for— 

12 ‘‘(i)(I) at least 33 percent of the em13 ployees of the employer (excluding any 

14 part-time employees); and 

15 ‘‘(II) at least 50 employees (excluding 

16 any part-time employees); or 

17 ‘‘(ii) at least 500 employees (excluding 

18 any part-time employees);’’. 

19 (b) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—Section 3(a)(2) of 

20 such Act (29 U.S.C. 2102(a)(2)) is amended by striking 

21 ‘‘to the State’’ and inserting ‘‘in the case of a plant closing 

22 or mass layoff described in section 2(a)(3)(B), to the 

23 State’’. 

24 SEC. 3. INCREASED PENALTIES. 

25 Section 5(a)(1)(A) of the Worker Adjustment and 

26 Retraining Notification Act (29 U.S.C. 2104(a)(1)(A)) is 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with BILLS
3 

•HR 2077 IH

1 amended by striking ‘‘back pay’’ and inserting ‘‘two times 

2 the amount of back pay’’. 

Æ 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with BILLS