alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 10.2
 Confidential Treatment Requested
         Amendment société par actions simplifiée, Seller Buyer
  Agreement
     
 *****
    
    Confidential portions of the material have been omitted and filed separately with the
Securities and Exchange Commission. USA  Airbus A330 Purchase Agreement 
Amendment 4
    
    CONFIDENTIAL AND PRIVILEGED




---



##### 



Confidential Treatment Requested
 1.
    
    **********2.
    
    PREDELIVERY PAYMENTSIf the Seller exercises an *****.3.
    
    EFFECT OF AMENDMENT3.1
    
    Upon execution, this Amendment will constitute a valid amendment to the Agreement and the
Agreement will be deemed to be amended to the extent herein provided and, except as
specifically amended hereby, will continue in full force and effect in accordance with its
original terms. This Amendment supersedes any previous understandings, commitments or
representations whatsoever, whether oral or written, related to the subject matter of this
Amendment.3.2
    
    Both parties agree that this Amendment will constitute an integral, nonseverable part of the
Agreement, that the provisions of the Agreement are hereby incorporated herein by reference,
and that this Amendment will be governed by the provisions of the Agreement, except that if
the Agreement and this Amendment have specific provisions that are inconsistent, the specific
provisions contained in this Amendment will govern.4.
    
    CONFIDENTIALITYThis Amendment is subject to the confidentiality provisions set forth in Clause 22.7 of the
Agreement.5.
    
    COUNTERPARTSThis Amendment may be signed in any number of separate counterparts. Each counterpart, when
signed and delivered (including counterparts delivered by facsimile transmission), will be
an original, and the counterparts will together constitute one and the same instrument.
 
 *****
    
    Confidential portions of the material have been omitted and filed separately with the
Securities and Exchange Commission. USA  Airbus A330 Purchase Agreement 
Amendment 4
    
    CONFIDENTIAL AND PRIVILEGED
  2/3




---



##### 



Confidential Treatment Requested
  US AIRWAYS, INC.
    
    
    
    AIRBUS S.A.S.By:
    
    /s/ Thomas T. Weir
    
    
    
    By:
    
    /s/ Christophe MoureyIts: Vice President and Treasurer
    
    
    
    
    
    Its: Senior Vice President Contracts
 
 *****
    
    Confidential portions of the material have been omitted and filed separately with the
Securities and Exchange Commission. USA  Airbus A330 Purchase Agreement 
Amendment 4
    
    CONFIDENTIAL AND PRIVILEGED
  3/3
#### Same *v.*John McCarthy, *Appellant*.

Order affirmed, with costs and disbursements.
EXHIBIT 31.1

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND PRESIDENT PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 

OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 

I, Roy T.K. Thung, certify that: 

I have reviewed this report on Form 10-Q of Independence Holding Company; 

Based on my knowledge, this 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;

Based on my knowledge, the financial statements and other financial information included in this 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;

The registrant's other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15e and 15d-15e) for the registrant and have:
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 report is being prepared;

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 report, based on such evaluation; and

disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal controls over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant's fourth 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; and

The registrant's other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal controls over financial reporting, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent function):
all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

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

Date: May 14, 2004 

/s/   Roy T. K. Thung

 President and Chief Executive Officer
#### §§ 404.3-404.99 [Reserved]
1 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN 

SOUTHERN DIVISION 

RICKEY BILLS, 

 Plaintiff, Case No. 15-cv-11414 

 Hon. Matthew F. Leitman 

v. 

PAUL KLEE, et al., 

 Defendants. 

__________________________________________________________________/ 

ORDER OVERRULING PLAINTIFF’S OBJECTION (ECF No. 111) TO 

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION (ECF No. 107) 

Plaintiff Rickey Bills is a state inmate in the custody of the Michigan 

Department of Corrections. In this prisoner civil-rights action, Bills alleges that the 

Defendants interfered with his right to access the courts and retaliated against him 

for filing lawsuits. (See Sec. Am. Compl., ECF No. 67.) 

On June 14, 2021, Bills filed a motion in which it appeared that he asked for 

certain records be provided to him. (See Mot., ECF No. 103.) The motion was 

difficult to follow. The assigned Magistrate Judge did his best to review the motion, 

and on July 12, 2021, he denied it. (See Order, ECF No. 107.) The Magistrate Judge 

explained that to the extent that Bills appeared to be requesting a transcript of a prior 

status conference, “the records Bills seeks do not appear to exist.” (Id., 

PageID.1128.) The Magistrate Judge further noted that to the extent that Bills was 

Case 2:15-cv-11414-MFL-DRG ECF No. 113, PageID.1255 Filed 08/03/21 Page 1 of 3
2 

seeking documents from the Defendants, he could have (and should have) requested 

those documents during discovery. (See id., PageID.1128-1129.) 

Bills has now filed an objection to the Magistrate Judge’s denial of his motion. 

(See Obj., ECF No. 111.) The substance of the objection is one sentence: 

At no time in this Plaintiff Rickey Bills “motion” that he 

requested for an appointment of an attorney/counsel? In 

(ECF No. 103) Plaintiff Bills did requested for “records” 

...... Which the Magistrate denied. 

(Id., PageID.1156.) 

 The objection does not explain, even in the broadest sense, why Bills believes 

that the Magistrate Judge erred. Nor does the objection provide any basis to disturb 

the Magistrate Judge’s resolution of Bills’ motion. Finally, the objection does not 

specifically identify the documents Bills wants, does not provide any reason to 

believe that those documents exist, and does not explain why Bills is legally entitled 

to those documents (if they do exist). 

 For all of these reasons, Bills’ objection (ECF No. 111) to the Magistrate 

Judge’s order denying his motion is OVERRULED. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

 s/Matthew F. Leitman 

 MATTHEW F. LEITMAN 

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 

Dated: August 3, 2021 

Case 2:15-cv-11414-MFL-DRG ECF No. 113, PageID.1256 Filed 08/03/21 Page 2 of 3
3 

 I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was served upon the 

parties and/or counsel of record on August 3, 2021, by electronic means and/or 

ordinary mail. 

 s/Holly A. Monda 

 Case Manager 

 (810) 341-9764 

Case 2:15-cv-11414-MFL-DRG ECF No. 113, PageID.1257 Filed 08/03/21 Page 3 of 3
§ 69.15 Authorized measurement organizations. ( a ) Except as noted under paragraphs (c) and (d) of this section, measurement or remeasurement of all vessels under the Convention Measurement System and Standard and Dual Regulatory Measurement Systems must be performed by an authorized measurement organization meeting the requirements of § 69.27. A current listing of authorized measurement organizations may be obtained from the Commanding Officer, Marine Safety Center (MSC-4), U.S. Coast Guard, 2703 Martin Luther King Jr. Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20593 or by writing to Commanding Officer (MSC), Attn: Marine Safety Center, U.S. Coast Guard Stop 7430, 2703 Martin Luther King Jr. Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20593-7430.
( b ) Measurement or remeasurement of all vessels under subpart E of this part must be performed by the Coast Guard.
( c ) Measurement or remeasurement of all U.S. Coast Guard vessels and all U.S. Navy vessels of war must be performed by the Coast Guard.
( d ) At the option of the Commandant, the Coast Guard may measure any vessel under this part.
( e ) The appropriate tonnage certificate, as provided for under this part, is issued by the authorized measurement organization as evidence of the vessel's measurement under this part.
[CGD 87-015b, 54 FR 37657, Sept. 12, 1989, as amended by CGD 92-058, 57 FR 59938, Dec. 17, 1992; CGD 92-053, 59 FR 50508, Oct. 4, 1994; CGD 95-014, 60 FR 31606, June 15, 1995; CGD 97-057, 62 FR 51045, Sept. 30, 1997; USCG-2007-29018, 72 FR 53965, Sept. 21, 2007; USCG-2009-0702, 74 FR 49230, Sept. 25, 2009; USCG-2013-0671, 78 FR 60149, Sept. 30, 2013; USCG-2011-0522, 81 FR 18719, Mar. 31, 2016; USCG-2016-0498, 82 FR 35091, July 28, 2017]
§ 390.11 Sale or other disposition of agreement vessels. ( a ) *Eligible agreement vessels.* The sale or other disposition (including mortgages) of eligible agreement vessels shall not require prior approval of the Maritime Administrator, but shall require written notification within 10 days after the sale or other disposition. Such notification shall include a description of the transaction, the identity of the transferee, the proceeds to be realized, the date of the transaction and whether the proceeds will be deposited into the fund.
( b ) *Qualified agreement vessels* — ( 1 ) *In general.* If a qualified agreement vessel whose basis has been reduced through the application of qualified withdrawals is sold or disposed of (including mortgaged) within one year, interest on the amount of gain attributable to the basis reduction shall attach if the Maritime Administrator determines that the disposition was contrary to the policies of the Act, the joint regulations or these regulations. See § 390.13 (relating to failure to fulfill a substantial obligation under the agreement).
( 2 ) *Period of one year defined.* The one-year period shall mean 365 days from the date of final delivery from the shipyard in the case of construction or reconstruction and 365 days from the date of first loading of the vessel in the case of an acquisition.
( 3 ) *Prior approval.* The party shall obtain the written approval of the Maritime Administrator prior to the sale or other disposition (including mortgage) of a qualified agreement vessel.
( 4 ) *Deposit requirement.* The Maritime Administrator will not normally require the deposit of the net proceeds from the sale of a qualified agreement vessel but shall require the deposit of the net proceeds from the mortgage of a qualified agreement vessel for which qualified withdrawals from the fund have been made.
( c ) *Sale or other disposition of agreement vessels to related persons* — ( 1 ) *In general.* Section 3.2(c)(4) of the joint regulations (§ 391.2(c)(4) of this chapter) requires that the net proceeds from the sale or other disposition of an agreement vessel shall be the fair market value of the vessel when the party and the purchaser are owned or controlled directly or indirectly by the same interests within the meaning of section 482 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, and the regulations thereunder. In such case, the party shall furnish data to establish that the amount realized or to be realized is the fair market value.
( 2 ) *Data to be submitted.* Sufficient data must be submitted to support a determination by the Maritime Administrator of the fair market value including the original cost of the vessel, dates of original delivery, acquisition and reconstruction, as applicable, cost of improvements, sales price, costs of sale and any other information which would assist in making such determination.
[41 FR 4265, Jan. 29, 1976, as amended at 73 FR 56740, Sept. 30, 2008]
Release dates | Full version (300 KB PDF)Actions by the Board | Actions 
  under delegated authority
  Applications and reports:Boston
 |
New York
 |
Philadelphia
 |
Cleveland
 |
Richmond
 |
Atlanta
Chicago
 |
St. Louis
 |
Minneapolis
 |
Kansas City
 |
Dallas
 |
San Francisco

# District: 10
Federal Reserve Bank of: Kansas City

## Filings received during the week ending December 6, 2008

|Filer | Filing Type | Filing Proposal | End of Comment Period
|----- | ----------- | --------------- | ---------------------
|NONE 

## Availability of CRA Public Evaluations

|Institution / Location       | RSSDID | Exam Date  | CRAPublic Date | CRARating | Exam Method
|---------------------------- | ------ | ---------- | -------------- | --------- | -----------
|PEOPLES BK, LAWRENCE, KANSAS | 177957 | 08/18/2008 | 11/25/2008     | S         | Int Sm Bank

## CRA Examinations scheduled for     Quarter of

|Institution | Location
|----------- | --------
|NONE       

* Subject to the provisions of the Community Reinvestment Act

Release dates | Full version (300 KB PDF)Actions by the Board | Actions 
  under delegated authority
  Applications and reports:Boston
 |
New York
 |
Philadelphia
 |
Cleveland
 |
Richmond
 |
Atlanta
Chicago
 |
St. Louis
 |
Minneapolis
 |
Kansas City
 |
Dallas
 |
San Francisco

---

Home Banking information and regulation  Accessibility Contact 
  us
Exhibit 32.2 

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 Independence Holding Company (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Teresa A. Herbert, Vice President 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 to my knowledge: 

(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.
#### § 78.35-1 When required.

On all vessels navigating in other than protected waters, where the distance between deckhouses is more than 46 meters (150 feet) a fixed means of facilitating communication between both ends of the vessel, such as a raised fore and aft bridge or side tunnels, must be provided. Previously approved arrangements may be retained so long as they are maintained in good condition to the satisfaction of the Officer in Charge, Marine Inspection.

[CGD 95-027, 61 FR 26004, May 23, 1996]
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN 

SOUTHERN DIVISION 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

 Plaintiff, Criminal No. 15-cr-20457 

Hon. Matthew F. Leitman 

v. 

D-1 DWAYNE DUPREE, 

D-3 SHAWN PEARSON. 

 Defendants. 

___________________________________________________________________/

ORDER GRANTING MOTION PERMITTING FIREARMS 

IN THE COURTHOUSE AS EXHIBITS

Upon motion of the government, and for the reasons stated therein, firearms

may be brought into the building by Task Force Officer Robert Harris, of the 

Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) or by a fellow agent or police officer assisting 

in the above case. 

Upon being presented with this order, the court security officers shall permit

these firearms into the courthouse. The firearms shall be handled consistent with 95-

AO-079. A court security officer shall escort the agent and the firearms to the

Marshals Service office where the firearms will be inspected and secured by 

Supervisory Deputy United States Marshals. Once the firearms to the deemed 

safe, the court security officer and the agent will transport the firearms to the 

Case 2:15-cr-20457-MFL-APP ECF No. 121, PageID.492 Filed 02/07/17 Page 1 of 2
courtroom. The case agent is responsible for the security of the firearms - for the 

duration of the trial – shall coordinate with the Marshals Service for transportation of 

the firearms to and from the appropriate courtroom. The firearms may be stored 

overnight in the Marshals Service vault, and after the trial is completed they shall be 

removed from the courthouse. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

 /s/Matthew F. Leitman 

 MATTHEW F. LEITMAN 

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 

Dated: February 7, 2017 

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

and/or counsel of record on February 7, 2017, by electronic means and/or ordinary 

mail. 

 s/Holly A. Monda 

 Case Manager 

 (313) 234-5113 

Case 2:15-cr-20457-MFL-APP ECF No. 121, PageID.493 Filed 02/07/17 Page 2 of 2
RAYMOND E. JONES

, Appellant,

v.

DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS

, Appellee

. IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D 14

- 766

_____________________________/

Opinion filed July 21, 2014.

An appeal from the Circuit Court for Leon County

. Kevin J. Carroll , Judge

. Raymond E. Jones, pro se

, Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Daniel A. Johnson, Assistant Attorney G eneral, Tallahassee , for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

WOLF

, ROBERTS

, and ROWE

, J J

. , CONCUR.
§ 502.24 Practice before the Commission defined. ( a ) Practice before the Commission shall be deemed to comprehend all matters connected with the presentation of any matter to the Commission, including the preparation and filing of necessary documents, and correspondence with and communications to the Commission, on one's own behalf or representing another. (See § 502.32).
( b ) The term “Commission” as used in this subpart includes any bureau, division, office, branch, section, or unit of the Federal Maritime Commission and any officer or employee of such bureau, division, office, branch, section, or unit. [Rule 24.]
[49 FR 44369, Nov. 6, 1984, as amended at 64 FR 7807, Feb. 17, 1999]
Release dates | Full version (300 KB PDF)  Board Actions | Actions   under delegated authority  Applications and reports received:Boston | New York | Philadelphia   | Cleveland | Richmond   | AtlantaChicago | St. Louis | Minneapolis   | Kansas City | Dallas   | San Francisco

#   Board Actions 

## Actions taken during the week ending July 5, 2008

----

Bank Holding CompaniesJPMorgan Chase & Co., New York, New York  -- request for an exemption from section 23A of the Federal Reserve Act and Regulation W to allow JPMorgan Chase Bank, National Association, Columbus, Ohio, to purchase certain derivatives businesses of The Bear Stearns Companies, Inc., New York, from JPMorgan Chase & Co.					-Granted, June 30, 2008 					

EnforcementBank of York, York, Alabama  -- cease and desist order dated August 14, 2006, terminated June 19, 2008.					-Announced, June 30, 2008 					First BanCorp, Santurce, Puerto Rico  -- cease and desist order dated March 16, 2006, terminated June 24, 2008.					-Announced, June 30, 2008 					

Monetary and Financial PolicyTerm Auction Facility  -- TAF auctions in the amount of $75 billion each on July 14 and July 28, 2008.					-Announced, July 1, 2008 					

Release dates | Full version (300 KB PDF)  Board Actions | Actions   under delegated authority  Applications and reports received:Boston | New York | Philadelphia   | Cleveland | Richmond   | AtlantaChicago | St. Louis | Minneapolis   | Kansas City | Dallas   | San Francisco
Home | Banking information and regulationAccessibility | Contact   usLast update: July 10, 2008
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Transportation

###### Federal Aviation Administration

# AGENCY:

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

# ACTION:

Notice of RTCA Special Committee 203, Minimum Performance Standards for Unmanned Aircraft Systems and Unmanned Aircraft. 

# SUMMARY:

The FAA is issuing this notice to advise the public of a meeting of RTCA Special Committee 203, Minimum Performance Standards for Unmanned Aircraft Systems and Unmanned Aircraft.

# DATES:

The meeting will be held June 19-21, 2007 from 9-5 p.m. 

# ADDRESSES:

                        The meeting will be held at RTCA, Inc., 1828 L Street, NW., Suite 805 Washington, DC 20036.                         *Point of Contact:*                         Rudy Ruana;                         *Telephone:*                         202-833-9339; e-mail:                         *rruana@rtca.org*

# Note:

Dress is Business Casual.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        (1) RTCA Secretariat, 1828 L Street, NW., Suite 805, Washington, DC, 20036; telephone (202) 833-9339; fax (202) 833-9434; Web site:                         *http://www.rtca.org.*

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Pursuant to section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463, 5 U.S.C., Appendix 2), notice is hereby given for a Special Committee 203 meeting. The agenda will include: 

*June 19:*

*June 20*.                

                    Attendance is open to the interested public but limited to space availability. With the approval of the chairmen, members of the public may present oral statements at the meeting. Persons wishing to present statements or obtain information should contact the person listed in the                     **FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT**                     SECTION. Members of the public may present a written statement to the committee at any time.                

Dated: Issued in Washington, DC, on May 21, 2007.

Francisco Estrada C. 

RTCA Advisory Committee.

[FR Doc. 07-2646 Filed 5-25-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-M