alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 25.215 Membership practices of certain organizations. ( a ) *Social fraternities and sororities.* These Title IX regulations do not apply to the membership practices of social fraternities and sororities that are exempt from taxation under section 501(a) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, 26 U.S.C. 501(a), the active membership of which consists primarily of students in attendance at institutions of higher education.
( b ) *YMCA, YWCA, Girl Scouts, Boy Scouts, and Camp Fire Girls.* These Title IX regulations do not apply to the membership practices of the Young Men's Christian Association (YMCA), the Young Women's Christian Association (YWCA), the Girl Scouts, the Boy Scouts, and Camp Fire Girls.
( c ) *Voluntary youth service organizations.* These Title IX regulations do not apply to the membership practices of a voluntary youth service organization that is exempt from taxation under section 501(a) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, 26 U.S.C. 501(a), and the membership of which has been traditionally limited to members of one sex and principally to persons of less than nineteen years of age.
**Exhibit 32.2**

 

**Certification of Chief Financial Officer**

Certification Pursuant To 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,

Created by Section 906

of The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

 

The undersigned officer of FileNet Corporation (the “Company”), hereby certifies, to such officer’s knowledge, that:

 

 (i)        the accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the fiscal period ended June 30, 2005 (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

 

 (ii)        the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

 

| Dated:  August 9, 2005 |  
 
*/s/ Sam M. Auriemma***

Sam M. Auriemma

Executive Vice President

Chief Financial Officer

(Principal Financial Officer)

 

 

 

 

 

 

  |
|------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
#### William Keating, Appellant, v. The Tribune Association, Respondent.

Order affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements to respondent, to abide event.
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 99.1

                      Statement of Chief Executive Officer
                                       of
                      Berger Holdings, Ltd. (the "Company")



I, Theodore A. Schwartz, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

..    the Company's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended September
     30, 2002 (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of Section
     13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

..    the information contained in the Report presents, in all material respects,
     the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



Dated: November 14, 2002
                                                By: /s/ Theodore A. Schwartz
                                                ----------------------------
                                                Theodore A. Schwartz
                                                Chief Executive Officer
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, *v.*John Miller, Appellant.

*People*v. Miller, 143 App. Div. 251, affirmed.

(Submitted June 1, 1911;

decided June 16, 1911.)

Appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered' March 17, 1911, which reversed an order of the Court of General Sessions of the Peace in the county of New York granting a motion in arrest of judgment after a verdict convicting the defendant of the crime of unlawful entry as a second offense.

*Lorlys Elton Rogers*for appellant.

*Charles S. Whitman, District Attorney (Robert S. Johnstone*of counsel), for respondent.

Order affirmed, on opinion of Scott, J., below

Concur: Cullen, Ch. J., Gray, Haight, Werner, Willard Bartlett, Chase and Collin, JJ.
1210-AB32-2-1386.html[7/26/2015 3:39:49 PM]

PUBLIC SUBMISSION

As of: July 16, 2015

Received: July 09, 2015

Status: Pending_Post

Tracking No. 1jz-8jw1-5bn8

Comments Due: July 21, 2015

Submission Type: Web

Docket: EBSA-2010-0050

Definition of the Term ‘‘Fiduciary’’; Conflict of Interest Rule—Retirement Investment Advice; Notice of

 proposed rulemaking and withdrawal of previous proposed rule.

Comment On: EBSA-2010-0050-0205

Definition of Fiduciary; Conflict of Interest Rule-Retirement Investment Advice and Related Proposed

 Prohibited Transaction Exemptions; Hearing and Comment Period Extension

Document: EBSA-2010-0050-DRAFT-1882

Comment on FR Doc # 2015-14921

Submitter Information

Name: Jerome Schmidtz

General Comment

I do have some retirement funds set up and I do not need anybody from the federal government telling me how to

 manage or use my retirement funds. This is a good example of the federal government meddling in something

 that they have no business in.
SUPREME COURT.

#### Sweet agt. Chapman.

*Costs—allowed for rean'gwment.*

Where the plaintiff had a verdict at the circuit, the defendant appealed, the general term affirmed the judgment, the defendant moved the general term for leave to go to the court of appeals, the defendant paid the costs of the appeal, including forty dollars for argument. Thereafter the general term ordered a reargument, and upon such reargument granted a new trial, with costs to abide the event. On the new trial plaintiff again had a verdict and taxed the costs, including forty dollars for reargument:

*Held,*that this item of forty dollars for reargument was properly allowed. The reargument was ordered upon defendant’s application, and as the reargument resulted in a new trial being ordered in which plaintiff recovered, he is entitled to compensation for such reargument.

*Onondaga Special*Term, *May,*1877.

Motion by defendant for a readjustment of costs as to an item of forty dollars allowed for reargument. The plaintiff had a verdict at the circuit, the defendant appealed, the general term affirmed the judgment, the defendant moved the general term for leave to go to the court of appeals. The defendant paid the costs of the appeal, including forty dollars for argunent. Thereafter the general term ordered a reargument, and upon such reargument granted a new trial, with costs to abide the event. A new trial was had and the plaintiff again received a verdict, and taxed the costs, including forty dollars, for reargument.

R. *H.*Tyler, for motion.

*Randall & Randall,*opposed.

*254Hardin, *J.*

A trial is defined to be “ the judicial examination of the issue.” An argument takes place prior to a judicial decision of the issues in a case. There had been an argument and decision. Costs were allowable, and properly taxed and paid. They were paid “for argument of the appeal,” the judgment was affirmed, the costs paid, and, of course, the plaintiff satisfied.

But upon defendant’s application a reargument was ordered. He it was who imposed the labor of a reargument that took place, and the court thereupon reversed the judgment and ordered a new trial, with costs to abide the event. The court expressly ordered the costs to abide. That, of course^ covered statutory costs to the successful party.

By subdivision 1 of section 306 of the Code, the costs of an appeal are in the discretion of the court when a new trial is ordered. The discretion was, therefore, properly exercised by the general term when it reversed the judgment and ordered a new trial. The plaintiff would have no compensation for the reargument if this item was not allowed (3 *Den.,*259, *and note*; 1 *How.,*236; 2 *Hill, 357).*

The motion must be denied, but as the question is novel, without costs of the motion to either party.
H. Res. 176

In the House of Representatives, U.S.,

June 21, 2001.

Resolved, That on the Committee on Resources, Mr.

Hayworth of Arizona shall rank after Mr. Tancredo of Colorado.

Attest:

Clerk.
Order entered January 18, 2019

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05 - 18 - 01097 - CR JOHN HENRY ALLEN, Appellant

V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the 203rd J udicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. F18 - 52271 - P



### O RDER Before the Court is court reporter Lisabeth Kellett’s January 17, 2019 second request for an extension of time to file the reporter’s record. We GRANT the request and ex tend the time to file the reporter’s record until February 6, 2019

. If Ms. Kellett fails to file the record by February 6, 2019, the Court may utilize its available remedies, including ordering that she not sit until the complete reporter’s record is filed

. We DIRECT the Clerk to send a copy of this order, by electronic transmission, to Lisabeth Kellett and to counsel for the parties

. /s/ CORY L. CARLYLE JUSTICE
WASHOE COUNTY 

HEALTH DISTRICT 

ENHANCING QUALITY OF LIFE 

July 1, 2016 

Meredith Kurpius 

Manager, Air Quality Analysis Office 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX 

7 5 Hawthorne Street, AIR-7 

San Francisco, CA 94105 

Subject: 2016 Annual Network Plan 

Dear Ms. Kurpius: 

Enclosed is the "Washoe County Health District, Air Quality Management Division 2016 

Ambient Air Monitoring Network Plan". This plan was prepared in accordance with 40 CFR 

58.10 and was available for public inspection from June 1 to June 30, 2016 at the Washoe 

County Health District, Air Quality Management Division (AQMD) website (OurCleanAir.com). 

A hardcopy of the plan was also available at the AQMD office. No public comments were 

received during the public inspection period. 

Feel free to contact Mr. Craig Petersen or me at (775) 784-7200 if you have any questions or 

comments. 

Sincerely, 

J)~~ 

Daniel Inouye 

Monitoring and Planning Branch Chief 

Attachments 

cc: Anna Mebust, EPA Region IX 

Craig Petersen, AQMD 

AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT 

l 001 East Ninth Street I P.O. Box 11130 I Reno, Nevada 89520 

AQM Office: 775-784-7200 I Fax: 775-784-7225 I washoecounty.us/health 

Serving Reno, Sparks and all of Washoe County, Nevada. Washoe County is an Equal Opportunity Employer. Public Health f'r•~' " ' · froma ,,- I f(ll~c.
Exhibit 32.2 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 In connection with the Quarterly Report of AmeriServ Financial, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2013, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Jeffrey A. Stopko, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial 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: 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.  August 9, 2013

          

          /s/ Jeffrey A. StopkoJeffrey A. StopkoExecutive Vice President andChief Financial Officer
###### Editorial Note on Part 393

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 393 appear at 66 FR 49874, Oct. 1, 2001.

#### § 393.61 Truck and truck tractor window construction.

Each truck and truck tractor (except trucks engaged in armored car service) shall have at least one window on each side of the driver's compartment. Each window must have a minimum area of 1,290 cm2 (200 in2) formed by a rectangle 33 cm by 45 cm (13 inches by 173⁄4 inches). The maximum radius of the corner arcs shall not exceed 152 mm (6 inches). The long axis of the rectangle shall not make an angle of more than 45 degrees with the surface on which the unladen vehicle stands. If the cab is designed with a folding door or doors or with clear openings where doors or windows are customarily located, no windows shall be required in those locations.

[70 FR 48052, Aug. 15, 2005]
# Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

March 5, 2019

No. 04

- 19

- 00101

- CV

IN THE INTEREST OF Z.A.F AND Z.R.F., CHILDREN

,

From the 131st Judicial District Court, Bexar Coun ty, Texas

Trial Court No. 2018PA00277 Honorable Charles E. Montemayor, Judge Presiding



### O R D E R

The trial court clerk has filed a notice of late record, requesting additional time to file the clerk’s record. We grant the request and order the trial court clerk, Mary Angie Garcia, to file the clerk’s record by March 8, 2019.

_________________________________ Luz Elena D. Cha pa, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said

court on this 5th day of March, 2019

.

___________________________________ KEITH E. HO TTLE

, Clerk of Court
### Regulatory Evaluation

Docket No. FAA

- 

### 2012

- 0482 Directorate Identifier: 

### 2012

-NE

- 14

- AD If you make changes to the values in the table below, you must ensure the totals update accordingly. If they do not, click (or Tab) into an d then out of the changed cell

. **Estimated Costs:**  Action (e.g., Inspection, replacement) Do not include on

condition costs here Costs per **Product** (e.g., aircraft, engine,

propeller, appliance) Work

- h ours (include access, testing, and close

- up) Labor

co st ( @ $8 5 /h our) Part s Cost Total Costs ( labor + parts) Number of

**U.S. Registered**  **Products** Total Cost

for U

. S

. Fleet 

### Inspect 12.5 $1,062.5 0 $0 $1,062.50 

### 200 $212,500.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0 .00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 

### The known number of products in compliance: Total Costs of compliance for U.S. fleet: $212,500 

### Costs covered under warranty ( if known ) $
**On**
**- Condition Costs:**  Action (e.g., Inspection, replacement) Work

- h ours

(include access, testing, and close

up) Labor cost

( @ $8 5 /hour) Parts Cost Cost per Product


### Replace disk 48.0 $4,080.00 $225,000 $229,080.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 

### Special considerations for **Economic Analysis** ( Use this field to explain anything in the Estimated Costs table that was assumed or might not be obvious. This field can also be used to explain warranty costs) 

### : 

### RR estimates that 10% of the disks will need to be replaced after being rejected during the SQUID inspection

. In addition, 76 disks will be removed at a lower life than listed in the current Airworthiness

### Limitations Section of the engine manual. Using the above disk replacement cost, the total cost

from retiring disks at a life lower than that shown in the AL S is estimated to be $764,000. Cost estimated by

ASE based on cost of a Trent 800 Stage 5

- 6 HPC disk. Not covered under warranty. The total costs of compliance for the US fleet is $212,500 plus $764,000 = $ 976,500. **Executive Order 12866:** Could the AD be considered a “significant regulatory action”? YES * NO
* Explanation: **DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures:** Is the AD significant? YES * NO
* Explanation: **Regulatory Flexibility Act:** Will the AD have a signif icant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities? E xplain for either a Yes or No answer. YES NO Explanation: **Intrastate Aviation in Alaska:** This AD could affect intrastate aviation in Alaska. Is it appropriate to include specific requirements for aircraft operated in Alaska where aviation might be the only mode of transportation? YES * NO


### * Explanation 

### :
```

[Journal of the House of Representatives, 1995]
[Friday, June 30, 1995 (90), Para 90.23 Senate Enrolled Bill Signed]
[Page 1092]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]

para.90.23  senate enrolled bill signed

  The SPEAKER announced his signature to an enrolled bill of the Senate 
of the following title:

       S. 962. An Act to extend authorities under the Middle East 
     Peace Facilitation Act of 1994 until August 15, 1995.
```
Exhibit 12

                  THE CIT GROUP HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

               COMPUTATION OF RATIOS OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

                                                                       Years Ended December 31,
                                                               -----------------------------------------
                                                                  1995            1994            1993
                                                               ---------       ---------       ---------
                                                                       Dollar Amounts in Millions
<S>                                                            <C>             <C>             <C>      
Net income .................................................   $   225.3       $   201.1       $   182.3
Provision for income taxes .................................       139.8           123.9           128.5
                                                               ---------       ---------       ---------

Earnings before provision for income taxes .................       365.1           325.0           310.8
                                                               ---------       ---------       ---------
Fixed Charges:
  Interest and debt expenses on indebtedness ...............       831.5           614.0           508.0
  Interest factor--one third of rentals on real and personal
    properties .............................................         7.9             7.9             8.0
                                                               ---------       ---------       ---------

  Total fixed charges ......................................       839.4           621.9           516.0
                                                               ---------       ---------       ---------

    Total earnings before provisions for income taxes and
      fixed charges ........................................   $ 1,204.5       $   946.9       $   826.8
                                                               =========       =========       =========

Ratios of Earnings to Fixed Charges ........................        1.44            1.52            1.60

</TABLE>
* 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.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 98-50704

Summary Calendar

 

JOSEPH ANTHONY HUMISTON,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

CHIEF OF POLICE, AUSTIN POLICE DEPARTMENT;

UNKNOWN AUSTIN POLICE DEPARTMENT OFFICERS,

Defendants-Appellees.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. A-96-CV-473

- - - - - - - - - -

April 30, 1999

Before REAVLEY, BENAVIDES and PARKER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Joseph Anthony Humiston, Texas prisoner # 436035, appeals

the district court’s summary judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. 

§ 1983 complaint. Humiston alleged that the chief of police of

Austin and unknown Austin police officers illegally seized his

vehicle and sold it at an auction in violation of his Fourth

Amendment rights. Humiston argues on appeal that the district

court erred, that the Department of Public Safety and Texas

representatives were involved in a conspiracy of stealing cars, 
No. 98-50704

-2-

and that the district court never ruled on Humiston’s motion to

amend his complaint to include the proper parties. 

We review the district court’s grant of summary judgment de

novo. Guillory v. Domtar Industries, Inc., 95 F.3d 1320, 1326

(5th Cir. 1996). The summary judgment evidence revealed 1) that

the Department of Public Safety, and not the Austin police

department, was the agency which seized Humiston’s vehicle and 

2) that the defendants did not participate in or know about the

seizure. The district court’s summary judgment dismissing

Humiston’s claims against the Austin police officers was not

error. 

Humiston requested in his objections to the magistrate

judge’s report and recommendation to amend his complaint to add

Elizabeth Watson, former Austin Chief of Police, and C. Scott, a

D.P.S. officer as additional parties. No ruling was made on that

request, but no reason is given for naming them as parties and no

allegation of their liability is made.

AFFIRMED.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
SEPTEMBER 30, 1997 CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND IS QUALIFIED
IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                           2,264
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    1,415
<ALLOWANCES>                                       150
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 3,802
<PP&E>                                           2,968
<DEPRECIATION>                                   2,228
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   6,676
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            3,369
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        36,263
<OTHER-SE>                                    (33,157)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     6,676
<SALES>                                            729
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 1,697
<CGS>                                            1,791
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    5,874
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  12
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (5,808)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (5,808)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (5,808)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.35)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.35)
        

</TABLE>