alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 310.54 General requirements for eligibility. ( a ) *Citizenship.* All candidates shall be citizens of the United States except: ( 1 ) Nominees from foreign nations;
( 2 ) nominees from the Northern Mariana Islands;
( 3 ) designees from the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands; and
( 4 ) nominees from American Samoa, who may be American nationals. No person who is not a citizen shall be entitled to any office or position in the U.S. merchant marine by reason of his or her graduation from the Academy, until such person shall have become a citizen.
( b ) *Age.* On July 1 of the year of admission to the Academy, a candidate shall be not less than seventeen (17) years of age and shall not have passed his or her twenty-fifth (25) birthday.
( c ) *Character.* A candidate shall be of good moral character. The Administrator may reject the nomination of any candidate whose character is incompatible with the Academy's standards. No person who has been dismissed or compelled to resign from the U.S. Military Academy, the U.S. Naval Academy, the U.S. Air Force Academy, the U.S. Coast Guard Academy, the Academy or a State maritime academy for improper conduct shall be eligible for appointment as a midshipman at the Academy. No person whose last discharge from any armed force was under conditions other than honorable or who has had a merchant mariner document removed or suspended for cause shall be eligible for appointment as a midshipman.
( d ) *Investigation.* To be eligible for appointment, all candidates who are United States citizens shall be completely loyal to the United States and shall meet the requirements established by the Department of the Navy for designation as Midshipman, USNR (including the Merchant Marine Reserve, USNR). Candidates for appointment shall execute documents approved by the Administrator for the purpose of a security and suitability investigation. Appointment as a Midshipman, USNR (including the Merchant Marine Reserve, USNR) shall be a condition of admission for an individual who is a citizen. A candidate who is conditionally appointed to the Academy pending completion of a Navy security and suitability investigation shall be subject to immediate separation should the candidate, as a result of the investigation, fail to meet the requirements established for appointment as Midshipman, USNR.
( e ) *Waivers.* There shall be no waivers of general eligibility requirements.
(Sec. 204(b), Merchant Marine Act, 1936, as amended (46 U.S.C. 1114(b)); Pub. L. 97-31 (August 6, 1981); 49 CFR 1.66)
[47 FR 21812, May 20, 1982, as amended at 49 FR 45858, Nov. 21, 1984]
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>      5


<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                     12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                 DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                                    JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                      DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                            211,642
<SECURITIES>                                      0
<RECEIVABLES>                                     148,043
<ALLOWANCES>                                      5,000
<INVENTORY>                                       401,974
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                  800,835
<PP&E>                                            18,684
<DEPRECIATION>                                    14,766
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                    942,976
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                             180,373
<BONDS>                                           230,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                             403
<PREFERRED>                                       0
<COMMON>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                        0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                      942,976
<SALES>                                           1,438,167
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                  1,438,167
<CGS>                                             820,137
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                     820,137
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                  833,987
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                  0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                4,239
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   216,129
<INCOME-TAX>                                      0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               0
<DISCONTINUED>                                    0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                   0
<CHANGES>                                         0
<NET-INCOME>                                      216,129
<EPS-BASIC>                                       (0.13)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     (0.13)



</TABLE>
SUPREME COURT.

#### James Snodgrass agt. Kasimer Krenkle.

*New*York, *Special*Term,

June, 1875.

*Vndm'taMng on*aWjowrwment, *by*defendant, *when it inures to the benefit of the assignee of the plaintiff.*

Where an undertaking is given by defendants on the adjournment of a' cause conditioned to pay the judgment, if execution is returned unsatisfied, the assignee of the plaintiff who owns the debt in that action can sustain an action upon that undertaking, where the condition upon which it was given has been forfeited.

This suit was brought to recover $4,942.65 on a bond given by defendant in a suit pending in the court of common pleas of this city and county on an adjournment on the trial. The defendant demurred that the complaint did not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. The case was argued by *Mr. Hildreth*for the defendant and by *D. McMahon*for the plaintiff. Judge Donohue delivered the following opinion, overruling the demurrer and rendering judgment for plaintiff.

Donohue, *J.*

The complaint alleges that a suit was pending in which the assignor of the plaintiff was plaintiff and certain other parties defendants; that the defendants in that suit, having moved for an adjournment, it was granted on the giving of the undertaking in suit; that that undertaking was to pay the judgment in execution, was returned unsatisfied, and the complaint alleges that the execution has been so returned. The complaint further alleges that the plaintiff in *123the suit was really, by assignment, the plaintiff here. The complaint alleges that the debt belongs to the plaintiff, and the amount is due to him. It is to be presumed that the assignment to him was in writing. To this the defendant demurs, on the ground that as the undertaking was to pay the plaintiff in the original suit, without adding his assigns, no suit will lie in the name of the present plaintiff. This, in practice, it seems to me, the Code intended to abolish and leave the action to be brought in the name of the real plaintiff. If the defendant is right and the original plaintiff had died before judgment, no action would lie in the name of his executors. It seems to me the complaint substantially complies with the Code, and that the grounds of demurrer stated are insufficient. I will, in the settlement of the order, hear the defendant as to the right to amend, if he has merits.
#### In re Disqualification of Panioto. Wyler *v.*Wyler.

[Cite as *In re Disqualification of Panioto*(1998), 84 Ohio St.3d 1226.]

(No. 97-AP-177

Decided January 23, 1998.)

Moyer, C.J.

This affidavit of disqualification was filed by James J. Condit, counsel for plaintiff Karen L. Wyler in a domestic relations case before Judge Ronald A. Panioto. Pending before Judge Panioto is defendant Jeffrey L. Wyler’s motion to modify custody.

Affiant contends that Judge Panioto should be disqualified because of comments made during a series of hearings last year and because he has engaged in frequent *ex parte*communications with health care professionals of the parties’ children. As to affiant’s first contention, I have reviewed the transcript of these hearings submitted by Judge Panioto and cannot conclude that the comments referenced by affiant demonstrate a bias or prejudice on the part of the judge. Judge Panioto’s comments were made following the testimony of the therapist for the parties’ minor son and in view of the failure of affiant’s client to appear or testify at the hearings. While Judge Panioto indicated that he had sufficient evidence to support a decision to modify the existing custody arrangement, he did not do so. Instead, he granted the affiant’s request to appoint a different therapist for the parties’ children. Such an action is in direct contradiction to affiant’s claim that Judge Panioto is biased and prejudiced against his client.

With respect to the claim that Judge Panioto has engaged in *ex parte*communications with the children’s health care professionals, Judge Panioto notes that the parties agreed in 1994 that he should have regular and direct contact with the children’s therapists and that these contacts have continued with the knowledge of the parties and without objection. Given affiant’s apparent consent to this procedure, I cannot conclude that the communications demonstrate a bias or prejudice that mandates Judge Panioto’s disqualification.

For these reasons, the affidavit of disqualification is found not well taken and is denied.
EXHIBIT 32

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


         In  connection  with the Annual  Report of Eat at Joe's,  Ltd., on Form
10-KSB for the year ending  December 31, 2005 as filed with the  Securities  and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "REPORT"),  the undersigned,  Joseph
Fiore, Chief Executive Officer and Principal  Accounting Officer of the Company,
certify,  pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  ss.1350,  as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge and belief:

         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.

Date: March 30, 2006


/s/ Joseph Fiore
----------------------------------------------------
Joseph Fiore
CEO, CFO, Chairman, Secretary, Director
(Principal Executive & Accounting Officer)


A signed  original of this written  statement  required by Section 906, or other
document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that
appears in typed form within the  electronic  version of this written  statement
has been  provided  to the  Company  and will be  retained  by the  Company  and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.





                                       26
#### § 503.13 Incorporation by reference.

For purposes of this subpart, matter which is reasonably available to the class of persons affected hereby shall be deemed published in the Federal Register when incorporated by reference therein with the approval of the Director of the Office of the Federal Register.

[49 FR 44401, Nov. 6, 1984; 49 FR 47394, Dec. 4, 1984]
§ 90.05-20 Applicability to offshore supply vessels. ( a ) Existing offshore supply vessels as defined by § 90.10-40(b), if they are of 100 GRT (100 GT ITC if GRT is not assigned) as defined in § 125.160 of this chapter or more, are subject to inspection under this subchapter. New offshore supply vessels as defined by § 90.10-40(c), are subject to inspection under subchapter L of this chapter.
( b ) Each offshore supply vessel permitted grandfathering under paragraph (a) of this section must have completed construction and have a Certificate of Inspection by— ( 1 ) March 16, 1998, if the vessel is of less than 500 GRT (6,000 GT ITC if GRT is not assigned) as defined in § 125.160 of this chapter; or
( 2 ) August 18, 2016, if the vessel is of at least 6,000 GT ITC (500 GRT if GT ITC is not assigned) as defined in § 125.160 of this chapter.
[CGD 82-004 and CGD 86-074, 62 FR 49321, Sept. 19, 1997, as amended by USCG-2012-0208, 79 FR 48925, Aug. 18, 2014]
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          FEB-01-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             MAY-05-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               AUG-03-1997
<CASH>                                             281
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      974
<ALLOWANCES>                                       216
<INVENTORY>                                     15,716
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                17,220
<PP&E>                                          14,322
<DEPRECIATION>                                   7,681
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  42,149
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           20,606
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            19
<OTHER-SE>                                      11,065
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    42,149
<SALES>                                         27,768
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                27,768
<CGS>                                           14,005
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   14,005
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                16,380
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   103
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 370
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (2,995)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (2,995)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (2,995)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.16)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
New Jersey Department of Labor, Workmen’s Compensation Bureau.

#### JENNIE J. HEFFERN, PETITIONER, v. WOBURN DEGREAS-ING COMPANY, RESPONDENT.

Por the petitioner, *John L. Ridley.*

Por the respondent, *Richard*TP. *Balcer.*

At that time it was stipulated and agreed between the parties that the facts in the case were as follows: That Martin J. Heffern was employed by the respondent, the Woburn Degreasing Company, on January 25th, 1928, and that he had been employed by said respondent for several j’ears past; that his wages were $51 per week; that on the day in question he left the place of his employment around noon and went to his home for lunch; that on said journey he had no errand to perform for the respondent. He drove his own car, a Dodge touring car, which had been parked at the plant. Upon returning and as he was about to turn into the driveway of the plant, in fact, his car -was partially in said driveway, the sidewalk extending to the driveway and curb and there is a center sidewalk of approximately six to eight feet wide, when, in that position, his car was hit on the left rear door by a Public Service bus. The petitioner’s car was thrown against the laboratory building which is located on the corner, six to eight feet from the curb. The accident resulted in the death of the said Martin J. Heffern on Janu*689ary 30th, 1928. Said Martin J. Heffern left the dependents upon him alleged in the petition.

It was further stipulated and agreed that the only question at issue is whether the accident arose out of and in the course of his employment and it was further stipulated that frequently during his noon hour when he went home to lunch he went on errands for his employer, but on this particular day he had no errand to perform.

On the stipulation as to facts given above it was agreed to submit the case on briefs and briefs were submitted both on behalf of the petitioner and the respondent.

After carefully reviewing the facts as stipulated in this case and after reading the briefs submitted in the matter, I have come to the conclusion that under the terms of the Workmen’s Compensation law of this state as set forth in the leading case of *Bryant*v. *Fissel,*84 *N. J. L.*72, the deceased did not meet with an injury by accident arising out of and in the course of his employment. I find that the deceased took himself out of the course of his employment when he went home for lunch in his own car and he had not placed himself in the position to resume work at the time of the accident and therefore he was not in the course of his employment at the time of the accident.

I further find that the accident, as well as not arising in the course of the employment, did not arise out of the employment as the employment did not require the petitioner to use his personal car to return to the place of employment after going to his own home for lunch, and therefore I find that the accident did not arise out of the employment.

Accordingly, I hereby order that the ease be dismissed without cost to either party.

Charles E. Corbin-, *Deputy Commissioner.*
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: 8
Federal Reserve Bank of: St. Louis

## Filings received during the week ending February 16, 2008

|Filer             | Filing Type    | Filing Proposal                                                                                                                                                      | End of Comment Period                              
|----------------- | -------------- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ---------------------------------------------------
|ARVEST BANK       | * Branch       | Arvest Bank, Fayetteville, Arkansas, to establish a branch facility to be located at 11207 South State Highway 51 inside the Wal-Mart Supercenter, Coweta, Oklahoma. | Newspaper:02/27/2008Federal Register:Not applicable
|Newspaper:        | 02/27/2008    
|Federal Register: | Not applicable

## Availability of CRA Public Evaluations

|Institution / Location               | RSSDID | Exam Date  | CRAPublic Date | CRARating | Exam Method
|------------------------------------ | ------ | ---------- | -------------- | --------- | -----------
|MIDWEST BANKCENTRE, LEMAY, MISSOURI  | 657459 | 10/15/2007 | 01/23/2008     | S         | Large Bank 
|MISSOURI BK THE, WARRENTON, MISSOURI | 309150 | 10/15/2007 | 12/28/2007     | S         | Small Bank 
|REELFOOT BK, UNION CITY, TENNESSEE   | 149253 | 09/17/2007 | 01/01/2008     | S         | Small 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
§ 3.10-1 Procedures for designating oceanographic research vessels. ( a ) Upon written request by the owner, master, or agent of a vessel, a determination will be made by the Officer in Charge, Marine Inspection, of the zone in which the vessel is located, whether the vessel may be designated as an oceanographic research vessel.
( b ) The request should contain sufficient information to allow the Officer in Charge, Marine Inspection, to make this determination. At a minimum, the following items must be submitted: ( 1 ) A detailed description of the vessel, including its identification number, owner and charterer.
( 2 ) A specific operating plan stating precisely the intended use of the vessel.
( 3 ) Any additional information as may be requested by the Officer in Charge, Marine Inspection.
( c ) If designation is granted, it shall be indicated as follows: ( 1 ) For inspected vessels—indicated on the certificate of inspection, valid for its duration.
( 2 ) For uninspected vessels—indicated by a letter of designation, which shall be maintained on board the vessel and remain in effect for two years from date of issuance.
( d ) All designations shall remain valid for the period specified on the applicable document, provided all operating conditions remain unchanged from the date of designation.
( e ) In the event of a change in operating conditions, the owner, master, or agent of the vessel shall advise the Officer in Charge, Marine Inspection who issued the designation. After reviewing the pertinent information concerning the operational changes, the Officer in Charge, Marine Inspection, shall determine if the vessel is still eligible to retain its designation as an oceanographic research vessel.
[CGD 77-081, 46 FR 56202, Nov. 16, 1981, as amended by CGD 95-028, 62 FR 51195, Sept. 30, 1997]
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 114 (Thursday, June 14, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Page 32835]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 07-2935]


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

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service


Lassen National Forest, CA, Creeks Forest Health Recovery Project

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Cancellation of Notice of Intent.

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

SUMMARY: This notice cancels the Notice of Intent to prepare a 
Supplement to the Environmental Impact Statement for the Creeks Forest 
Health Recovery Project on the Lassen National Forest, published in the 
Federal Register on December 7, 2006, (Volume 71, Number 235, page 
70946).

ADDRESSES: Almanor District Ranger, Lassen National Forest, P.O. Box 
767, Chester, CA 96020.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rick Atwell, Interdisciplinary Team 
Leader, may be contacted by phone at (530) 258-2141.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A Notice of Intent to prepare a Supplement 
to the Environmental Impact Statement for the Creeks Forest Health 
Recovery Project is cancelled due to additional information related to 
the California spotted owl analysis, conducted in concert with Pacific 
Southwest Research Station, for the Creeks project area.

    Dated: June 8, 2007.
Elizabeth Norton,
Acting Forest Supervisor.
[FR Doc. 07-2935 Filed 6-13-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M