alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 299.419 Emergency communication. ( a ) *PA (public address) system.* Each passenger car shall be equipped with a PA system that provides a means for a trainset crewmember to communicate by voice to passengers of his or her trainset in an emergency situation. The PA system shall also provide a means for a trainset crewmember to communicate by voice in an emergency situation to persons in the immediate vicinity of his or her trainset (*e.g.,* persons on the station platform). The PA system may be part of the same system as the intercom system.
( b ) *Intercom system.* Each passenger car shall be equipped with an intercom system that provides a means for passengers and crewmembers to communicate by voice with each other in an emergency situation. Except as further specified, at least one intercom that is accessible to passengers without using a tool or other implement shall be located in each end (half) of each car.
( c ) *Marking and instructions.* The following requirements apply to all units of a trainset: ( 1 ) The location of each intercom intended for passenger use shall be conspicuously marked with HPPL material in accordance with § 299.423; and
( 2 ) Legible and understandable operating instructions shall be made of HPPL material in accordance with § 299.423 and posted at or near each such intercom.
( d ) *Back-up power.* PA and intercom systems shall have a back-up power system capable of— ( 1 ) Powering each system to allow intermittent emergency communication for a minimum period of 90 minutes. Intermittent communication shall be considered equivalent to continuous communication during the last 15 minutes of the 90-minute minimum period; and
( 2 ) Operating in all equipment orientations within 90 degrees of vertical.
( e ) *Additional requirements.* The PA and intercom systems shall be designed to operate without failure and remain attached under the conditions typically found in passenger rail equipment including expected mechanical vibrations, and shock in accordance with § 299.405(a)(1), as well as comply with electromagnetic interference criteria in § 299.435(e).
```

[Journal of the House of Representatives, 1995]
[Wednesday, October 18, 1995 (130), Para 130.29 Hour of Meeting]
[Page 1552]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]

para.130.29  hour of meeting

  On motion of Mr. ARMEY, by unanimous consent,
  Ordered, That when the House adjourns today, it adjourn to meet at 9 
o'clock a.m. on Thursday, October 19, 1995.
```
#### § 271.213 Safety performance evaluation process.

An RRP plan shall describe a railroad's processes for identifying and analyzing its safety culture pursuant to § 271.105(a), monitoring safety performance pursuant to § 271.105(b), and conducting safety assessments pursuant to § 271.105(c).
#### § 213.313 Application of requirements to curved track.

Unless otherwise provided in this part, requirements specified for curved track apply only to track having a curvature greater than 0.25 degree.

[78 FR 16104, Mar. 13, 2013]
<PAGE>


                                                                    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 Max & Erma's, Inc. (the "Company") on
Form 10-Q for the period ending August 3, 2003, as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, William C. Niegsch,
Jr., the Executive 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:

(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.



/s/ William C. Niegsch, Jr.
---------------------------
William C. Niegsch, Jr., Executive Vice
President and Chief Financial Officer



September 5, 2003


                                       20
EXHIBIT C


                            ARTICLES OF ORGANIZATION
                                       FOR
                             TINTIC UTAH METALS LLC

         The undersigned natural person who is over the age of eighteen (18)
years, acting as organizer of a limited liability company, organized and created
under the provisions of the Colorado Limited Liability Company Act, hereby
adopts the following Articles of Organization for said limited liability
company.

         ARTICLE 1. NAME: The name of the limited liability company is Tintic
Utah Metals LLC. Any reference in these Articles of Organization to "the
Company" is to such limited liability company.

         ARTICLE 2. PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS: The Company's principal place
of business is at 15988 Silver Pass Road, Eureka, Utah 84628.

         ARTICLE 3. REGISTERED AGENT: The name and business address of the
Company's registered agent in Colorado for service of process is CT Corporation
System, 1675 Broadway, Denver, CO 80202.

         ARTICLE 4. MANAGEMENT: The management of the Company is vested in its
Members. The names and addresses of the Company's initial members are:

Akiko Resources (Utah) Inc.
1800 Glenarm Place, Suite 210
Denver, Colorado 80202

Chief Consolidated Mining Company
866 Second Avenue
New York, New York 10017

KZ Utah, Inc.
32 Loockerman Square
Dover, Delaware 19901

         IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have signed these Articles of Organization this
29th day of July, 1996, and I acknowledge the same to be my true act and deed.


         /s/ James M. King
         --------------------------------
         James M. King, Organizer
         1801 California St., Suite 3600
         Denver, Colorado 80202



<PAGE>



STATE OF COLORADO        )
                         )SS.
CITY AND COUNTY OF DENVER)

         The foregoing Articles of Organization were signed and sworn to by
James M. King, as Organizer, who affirmed, under penalty of perjury, that the
facts stated herein are true, on this 29th day of July, 1996.

         Witness by hand and official Seal.

                                                  /s/ Sandra L. Wainer
                                                  ---------------------------
                                                  Notary Public

  **NOTARY PUBLIC SEAL**

                                                  Address: 1801 California #3600
                                                           Denver, CO 80202

  My commission expires: Dec. 5, 1998
                        -------------
Unassociated Document


    EXHIBIT
      10.3

    


    Terms
      of
      December 2006 Amendment to Employment Agreement

    between
      Bay National Bank and Hugh W. Mohler

    


    


    On
      December 12, 2005, the Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors of
      Bay
      National Bank increased, effective January 1, 2006, Hugh Mohler’s annual base
      compensation from $200,000 to $250,000.

    


    Also,
      the
      Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors of the Bank approved a
      discretionary bonus to Mr. Mohler of $75,000 in December 2005 (the agreement
      is
      silent with respect to the payment of bonuses to Mr. Mohler). This bonus was
      paid in January 2006.
§ 25.140 Dissemination of policy. ( a ) *Notification of policy.* ( 1 ) Each recipient shall implement specific and continuing steps to notify applicants for admission and employment, students and parents of elementary and secondary school students, employees, sources of referral of applicants for admission and employment, and all unions or professional organizations holding collective bargaining or professional agreements with the recipient, that it does not discriminate on the basis of sex in the educational programs or activities that it operates, and that it is required by Title IX and these Title IX regulations not to discriminate in such a manner. Such notification shall contain such information, and be made in such manner, as the designated agency official finds necessary to apprise such persons of the protections against discrimination assured them by Title IX and these Title IX regulations, but shall state at least that the requirement not to discriminate in education programs or activities extends to employment therein, and to admission thereto unless §§ 25.300 through 25.310 do not apply to the recipient, and that inquiries concerning the application of Title IX and these Title IX regulations to such recipient may be referred to the employee designated pursuant to § 25.135, or to the designated agency official.
( 2 ) Each recipient shall make the initial notification required by paragraph (a)(1) of this section within 90 days of September 29, 2000 or of the date these Title IX regulations first apply to such recipient, whichever comes later, which notification shall include publication in: ( i ) Newspapers and magazines operated by such recipient or by student, alumnae, or alumni groups for or in connection with such recipient; and
( ii ) Memoranda or other written communications distributed to every student and employee of such recipient.
( b ) *Publications.* ( 1 ) Each recipient shall prominently include a statement of the policy described in paragraph (a) of this section in each announcement, bulletin, catalog, or application form that it makes available to any person of a type, described in paragraph (a) of this section, or which is otherwise used in connection with the recruitment of students or employees.
( 2 ) A recipient shall not use or distribute a publication of the type described in paragraph (b)(1) of this section that suggests, by text or illustration, that such recipient treats applicants, students, or employees differently on the basis of sex except as such treatment is permitted by these Title IX regulations.
( c ) *Distribution.* Each recipient shall distribute without discrimination on the basis of sex each publication described in paragraph (b)(1) of this section, and shall apprise each of its admission and employment recruitment representatives of the policy of nondiscrimination described in paragraph (a) of this section, and shall require such representatives to adhere to such policy.
```

[Journal of the House of Representatives, 1995]
[Monday, November 6, 1995 (140), Para 140.9 Subsequent Action on a Reported Bill Sequentially Referred]
[Page 1873]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]

para.140.9  subsequent action on a reported bill sequentially referred

  Under clause 5 of rule X the following action was taken by the 
Speaker:

                      [Submitted November 3, 1995]

       H.R. 994. The Committee on Commerce discharged. Referred to 
     the Committee on the Judiciary extended for a period ending 
     not later than November 7, 1995.
```
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

 

In connection with the quarterly report ofPaulson Capital Corporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the periodending September 30, 2005 as filed with the Securities and ExchangeCommission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Chester L.F. Paulson,President, certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuantto Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of myknowledge:

 

(1)                                  The Report fullycomplies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

(2)                                  The informationcontained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financialcondition and results of operations of the Company.

 
| /s/ Chester L.F. Paulson |   |
|--------------------------|--------|
| Chester L.F. Paulson     |
| President                |
| November 11, 2005   |

 

----
Page | of 2

REC- LA0bID- 05

LEGAL PROCESSING DIVISION »
PUBLICATION & REGULATIONS MAY — & 2008

As of: May 06, 2009
BRANCH Received: May 05, 2009

Status: Posted
PUBLIC SUBMISSION frostes: may 06, 2009
Comments Due: May 28, 2009)
Submission Type: Web

Docket: IRS-2009-0008
Request for Information for Paul Wellstone and Pete Domenici Mental Health Parity and Addiction
Equity Act of 2008

Comment On: IRS-2009-0008-0001
Request for Information Regarding the Paul Wellstone and Pete Domenici Mental Health Parity
and Addiction Equity Act of 2008

Document: IRS-2009-0008-0003
Comment on FR Doc # E9-09629

Submitter Information

Name: Judy C Briggs
Address:
2150 Country Club Rd.
Suite 210
Winston Salem, NC, 27104
Email: jbriggs@cbhallc.com
Phone: 336-499-4000
Fax: 336-499-4006
Submitter's Representative: CEO
Organization: Carolina Behavioral Health Alliance

General Comment

If a health plan carves out behavioral health benefits administration to a
managed behavioral health organization, can it have parallel deductibles for
medical and behavioral health as long as the behavioral health deductible is
equal or less than the medical? If only one deductible is applied, it will
increase the administrative cost tremendously because all claims transactions
will have to be shared in real time and could cause some smaller managed
behavioral health companies to go out of business.

Can the out of network allowable that a plan pays be based on the network
allowable? An example: the plans pays 70% of out of network allowable on the
medical and the behavioral health benefits. The behavioral health benefits pays
70% of what they pay their network providers and the enrollee is responsible for
the remainder of billed charges. Out of network facilities are reimbursed at 70%
of the average in network facility rate.

If a medical plan covers skilled nursing care does that mean the residential

https://fdms.erulemaking.net/fdms-web-agency/component/submitterInfoCoverPage?Call=P... 5/6/2009


Page 2 of 2

care has to be covered on the behavioral health side?

https://fdms.erulemaking.net/fdms-web-agency/component/submitterInfoCoverPage?Call=P... 5/6/2009
From: Ddobnicker [mailto:ddobnicker@iafs.net] 

Sent: Monday, July 20, 2015 4:50 PM

To: EBSA, E-ORI - EBSA

Subject: Regulatory Identification Number 1210-AB32

Following are comments regarding the DOL Proposed Fiduciary Rule:

DOL proposes to narrow the types of information that can be provided to clients or potential 

clients in an educational capacity. Chief amongst the changes is that educational materials 

would no longer be allowed to contain information regarding specific investment products, 

investment managers, or the value of particular securities or other property. This very likely 

makes it more difficult for advisors to effectively educate the investors as to the options available 

in their retirement plan. As advisors, we are perfectly capable of discussing investment options 

in neutral terms without recommending specific securities.

We believe in full disclosure of fees to all parties (plan sponsor, participants and 

beneficiaries.) Prohibiting or limiting investment options with 12b-1 fees or other shared forms 

of compensation is counterproductive and may eliminate investment choices that are beneficial 

to investors.

The fiduciary rule should be applicable to corporate retirement plans but not to Individual 

Retirement Accounts (IRAs.) There is no difference in educating an individual client that has 

assets in an IRA vs. a non-IRA account.

The goal for the fiduciary rule is to protect retirement plan participants and make retirement plan 

investing more practical for them without handcuffing their investment advisors.

Sincerely,

Dale A. Dobnicker, Vice-President

InterActive Financial Services Co.

2500 Shawnee Road, Suite A

Lima, OH 45806

ddobnicker@iafs.net

www.iafs.net 

 

419.991.3333 Phone

800.347.0612 Toll Free

888.733.9204 Fax

"The highest compliment I can receive is the referral of friends, family and business associates. 

Thank you for your trust."

Investment Advisor Representative, RDA FINANCIAL NETWORK, Inc., A Registered Investment Advisor. Registered Representative 

with and securities offered through Cambridge Investment Research, Inc., A Broker/Dealer, Member FINRA/SIPC. InterActive 

Financial, RDA Financial Network and Cambridge are not affiliated.

Trade orders cannot be accepted via e-mail. This email service may not be monitored daily or after normal business hours. Important 

letters, e-mail or faxed messages should be confirmed by calling 800.347.0612
§ 272.11 Penalties. ( a ) *Civil penalties.* A person who violates any requirement of this part, or causes the violation of any such requirement, is subject to a civil penalty of at least $1,086 and not more than $35,516 per violation, except that: Penalties may be assessed against individuals only for willful violations, and, where a grossly negligent violation or a pattern of repeated violations has created an imminent hazard of death or injury to persons, or has caused death or injury, a penalty not to exceed $142,063 per violation may be assessed. Each day that a violation continues is a separate offense. *See* appendix A to part 209 of this chapter for a statement of agency civil penalty policy.
( b ) *Criminal penalties.* A person who knowingly and willfully falsifies a record or report required by this part may be subject to criminal penalties under 49 U.S.C. 21311.
[79 FR 16233, Mar. 25, 2014, as amended at 81 FR 43113, July 1, 2016; 82 FR 16135, Apr. 3, 2017; 83 FR 60750, Nov. 27, 2018; 84 FR 37076, July 31, 2019; 86 FR 1760, Jan. 11, 2021; 86 FR 23256, May 3, 2021; 87 FR 15870, Mar. 21, 2022; 88 FR 1129, Jan. 6, 2023; 88 FR 89564, Dec. 28, 2023]
* Pursuant to 5 T H C IR

. R. 47.5, the court has determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except

under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 02-50233

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

RIGOBERTO RIVERA-CASTRO, a/k/a Rigoberto Castro-Garcia,

Defendant-Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. 3:01-CR-1380-ALL

October 8, 2002

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, SMITH, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Appellant Rivera-Castro appeals his sentence imposed following

his guilty plea conviction for illegal reentry into the United

States in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. Rivera argues that the

district court erred in sentencing him based on § 1326(b)(2), which

provides that an illegal alien who was removed from this country

subsequent to a conviction for an aggr avated felony shall be

sentence d to not more than twenty years, because his prior1 523 U.S. 224 (1998).

2 526 U.S. 227 (1999).

3 530 U.S. 466 (2000).

4 See, e.g.

, United States v. Rayo-Valdez

, – F.3d –, 2002 WL

1832140 (5th Cir. Aug. 12, 2002) (“We must follow [ AlmendarezTorres ]

, which has not been overruled by the only court with t h e

power to do so, the Supreme Court.”); United States v. RodriguezMontel ongo , 263 F.3d 429, 434 (5th Cir. 2001) (“Although

[Appellant] is correct that Apprend i cast doubt on the continued

v alidity of A lmendarez-Torres

, it did not overrule that

decision.... It is for this court to apply the law as it exists and

for the Supreme Court to overrule its precedent if it so

chooses.”).

2 conviction was neither charged in his indictment nor presented to

the jury to b e proven beyond a reasonable doubt. Although he

concedes that Almendarez-Torres v. United States 1 held that a prior

aggravated felony is a sentencing factor, not an element of the

crime, he urges that Jones v. United States 2 and Apprendi v. New

Jersey 3 overruled Almendarez-Torres

. However, we have noted on

numerous occasions that the Supreme Court has not overrul e d

Almendarez-Torres , and that therefore we are still bound to apply

it. 4

Appellant’s sentence is therefore AFFIRMED.
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the Court has determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except

under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

____________________

No. 98-10489

Summary Calendar

____________________

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

JOSE ANGEL CASTORENA,

Defendant-Appellant.

_________________________________________________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court,

for the Southern District of Texas

(4:92-CR-155-Y)

_________________________________________________________________

September 21, 1998

Before KING, BARKSDALE, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Federal prisoner #23875-077 Jose Angel Castorena appeals the

denial of his motion for reduction of sentence under 18 U.S.C. §

3582(c)(2). We review such denials for abuse of discretion.

United States v. Gonzalez-Balderas, 105 F.3d 981, 982 (5th Cir.

1997). 

Castorena maintains that the district court should have

reduced his sentence in the light of a 1994 amendment to U.S.S.G.
§ 2D1.1(c) (“Amendment 505"), under which his base offense level

would have been 38, rather than 40; and that the court should have

considered explicitly the factors listed in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a).

Retroactive application of Amendment 505 left the district court

still bound to impose life imprisonment, however, given the

enhancements to Castorena’s offense level. See Gonzalez-Balderas,

105 F.3d at 982-84. Accordingly, the district court did not abuse

its discretion in summarily denying Castorena’s motion for

reduction of sentence without explicitly considering the § 3553(a)

factors. See id.

AFFIRMED