alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**Exhibit
        3**
 
 **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 Utah Medical Products, Inc. (the
        “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2006, as filed with the
        Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Kevin
        L. Cornwell, Chief Executive 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 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.
 
 
 
 /s/ Kevin L.
        Cornwell
 Kevin
        L.
        Cornwell
 Chief
        Executive Officer
 August
        8,
        2006
 
 
 *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.*
----

**EXHIBIT      32.4**

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

|   | (1) | the                Report fully complies with the requirements of § 13(a) or 15(d) of the                Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended;                and |
|--------|-----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | (2) | the                information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material                respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the                Company. |
|--------|-----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Date:                March 14, 2006 | By:    | /s/                Charles N. Eldred       |
|-------------------------------------|--------|--------------------------------------------|
|                                |   | Charles                N. Eldred           |
|                                |   | Senior                Vice President,      |
|                                |   | and                Chief Financial Officer |
From: Diane Bielen [mailto:Diane.Bielen@kretzlumber.com] 

Sent: Wednesday, February 02, 2011 3:12 PM 

To: EBSA, E-ORI - EBSA 

Subject: Definition of Fiduciary Proposed Rule

Hello, 

We are deeply distressed by the news that ESOP appraisers are to become fiduciaries under the 

proposed rule. The separation that is provided by their current role is necessary. If they become 

fiduciaries, an unscrupulous appraiser might lean toward an optimistic appraisal. I much prefer it 

when my appraiser judges the company and its performance in accordance with clear, unclouded 

principles. Further, for the respectable appraiser, he or she may think twice about valuation as a 

career, or he or she will be forced to increase their rates beyond what my small ESOP can afford 

to be induced to take on this added responsibility/liability. 

This is a bad rule, and I hope that you will think twice about it. It is good to have separation, since 

the Trustees are ultimately responsible for the valuation. 

Sincerely, 

Diane E. Bielen

Vice President

Kretz Lumber Co., Inc.

-an Employee Owned CompanyW11143 County Road G

PO Box 160

Antigo, WI 54409

715-623-5410, 800-352-1438

715-627-4399 FAX

 

 

We're on Facebook! Check us out at facebook.com/kretzlumber
---------------------------------------------------------------------

Page 1 of 1 

AUG 2 6 2010 

LEGAL PROCESSING DIVISION 


PUBLICATION &. REGULATIONS 
 , BRANCH As of: August 26, 2010 

Received: August 10, 2010 

Status: Posted 

Posted: August 26, 2010 

Tracking No. 80b2da46 

PUBLIC 

SUBMISSION Comments Due: August 16, 2010 

Submission Type: Web 

Docket: IRS-2010-0010 

Group Health Plans and Health Insurance Coverage Rules Relating to Status as a Grandfathered 

Health Plan Under the Patient Protection and Afforable Care Act 

Comment On: IRS-2010-0010-0001 

Group Health Plans and Health Insurance Coverage: Interim Final Rules for Relating to Status as 

a Grandfathered Health Plan under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act 

Document: IRS-201O-001O-0435 

Comment on FR Doc # 2010-14488 

Submitter Information 

----------------------------------------------------------------..---­ General Comment 

August 10, 2010 

Office of Consumer Information and Insurance Oversight 


Department of Health and Human Services 


Attention: OCIIO-9991-IFC 

P.O. Box 8016 


Baltimore, MD 21244-1850 


Re Interim Final Rule for Group Health Plans and Health Insurance Coverage Relating to Status as 

a Grandfathered Health Plan Under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act 

As a consumer I wish to take this opportunity to formally comment on 

the interim final rule regarding health plans and "grandfather" status (Document 10 IRS-2010­

0010-0001). 

I believe the consumer protections included as part of the new health care law are vitally 

important and should be extended to as many people as possible. Accordingly, every effort 

should be made to increase the number of individuals covered by the Patient Protection and 

Affordable Care Act (PPACA) via the above regulations. The triggers or conditions that would 

extend these protections to consumers under currently existing "grandfathered" plans should not 

be weakened or reduced in any way. I specifically support the position and detailed comments 

offered by the American Chiropractic Association with respect to the implementation of these 

regulations. 

Vicki Ungurean 

https :llfdms.erulemaking.netlfdms-web-agencyl componentisubmitterInfoCoverPage?Call=... 8/26/2010
#### United Dressed Beef Company, Respondent, *v.*James Burrell et al., Copartners under the Firm Name of Burrell Brothers, Defendants. James Burrell, Appellant.

*United Dressed Beef Co.*v. Burrell, 140 App. Div. 131, affirmed.

(Argued May 20, 1912;

decided June 4, 1912.)

Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the second judicial department, entered October Y, 1910, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict in an action to recover for goods alleged to have been sold and delivered, and also to recover on a promissory note.

*John C. Judge*for appellant.

*Philip B. Adams*for respondent.

Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion.

Concur: Cullen, Ch. J., Gray, Willard Bartlett, Hiscock, Chase and Collin, JJ. Absent: Vann, J.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM "THE
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>                          SEP-30-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                           2,980
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                               0
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                 6,400
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                     29,322
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                           4,713
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                             4,832
<LOANS>                                         71,640
<ALLOWANCE>                                        170
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 118,855
<DEPOSITS>                                      81,961
<SHORT-TERM>                                         0
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                              1,441
<LONG-TERM>                                      2,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        21,524
<OTHER-SE>                                      11,929
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 118,855
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                  2,660
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                1,281
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                     0
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                 3,941
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                               1,543
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,549
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                            2,392
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                       30
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                  1,708
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    858
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                         858
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       516
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.25
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.25
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    4.31
<LOANS-NON>                                          0
<LOANS-PAST>                                         0
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                   158
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                        0
<RECOVERIES>                                         2
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                  170
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                                 0
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                            170
        


</TABLE>
#### BETHLEHEM STEEL COMPANY, A CORPORATON, PLAINTIFF, v. UPPERCU CORPORATION, A CORPORATION, AND INGLIS M. UPPERCU, DEFENDANTS.

Decided July 14, 1933.

For the motion, Pitney, *Hardin <& Skinner.*

Opposed, *Ackerson <& Van Buskirk.*

Lawrence, S. C. C.

This suit is based on part of a series of promissory notes executed by defendant corporation to plaintiff and endorsed by defendant Uppereu. The sum sought to be recovered admittedly remains, due and unpaid. It appears that on or about June 27th, 1929, Mr. Uppereu was the controlling owner not only of defendant corporation, but of another called Universal Shock Eliminator, Incorporated. The latter got into financial difficulties and, at his instance, a meeting of its creditors was called, among them the plaintiff company, at which it was proposed by him that the property of the corporation in question should be sold, the proceeds as to claims not exceeding $1,000 prorated and distributed to such creditors, and the remainder of the claims assigned to the defendant corporation and secured by its notes, endorsed by Mr. Uppereu. An agreement to this effect was duly signed and carried out, with the result that a series of notes, payable at recurring periods, for installments of the unpaid indebtedness, were made by the Uppereu Corporation and endorsed by him. These notes appear to *549have been issued by the corporation after formal ratification of the composition agreement and later in part paid. The claims, including that of plaintiff, were duly assigned to the corporation, in pursuance of the agreement. The notes not paid, so far as plaintiff is concerned, are here in suit.

The answer of defendant corporation sets up that the notes were without consideration and *ultra vires.*Motion is now made to strike this answer as sham. The supporting affidavits do not materially differ, either on the part of the plaintiff or defendant, as to the history of the transaction, but serve to clearly disclose the intimate relation of the defendants and Universal Shock Eliminator, Incorporated, and the mutual interest involved. That the answer should be striken seems apparent. The principles of law applicable are indicated in *Jesselsohn*v. *Boorstein,*111 *N. J. Eq.*310; 162 *Atl. Rep.*254, and in *Merchants Refrigerating Co.*v. *Fenchel Realty Co.,*9 *N. J. Mis. R.*971; 156 *Atl. Rep.*275, and cases cited. The conclusion is that the motion should be granted. A rule may be submitted áccordingly.
#### § 673.3 Policy.

The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) has adopted the principles and methods of Safety Management Systems (SMS) as the basis for enhancing the safety of public transportation in the United States. FTA will follow the principles and methods of SMS in its development of rules, regulations, policies, guidance, best practices, and technical assistance administered under the authority of 49 U.S.C. 5329. This part sets standards for the Public Transportation Agency Safety Plan, which will be responsive to FTA's Public Transportation Safety Program, and reflect the specific safety objectives, standards, and priorities of each transit agency. Each Public Transportation Agency Safety Plan will incorporate SMS principles and methods tailored to the size, complexity, and scope of the public transportation system and the environment in which it operates.
```

[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 167 (Wednesday, August 30, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Page 60008]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-18724]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice: 12160]

Overseas Security Advisory Council (OSAC) Meeting Notice

ACTION: Closed meeting.

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

    The Department of State announces the meeting of the U.S. State 
Department's Overseas Security Advisory Council on September 20, 2023. 
Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 
U.S.C. appendix), 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(4), and 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(7)(E), it 
has been determined that the meeting will be closed to the public. The 
meeting will focus on an examination of corporate security policies and 
procedures, will involve extensive discussion of trade secrets and 
proprietary commercial information that is privileged and confidential, 
and will discuss law enforcement investigative techniques and 
procedures. The agenda will include updated committee reports, global 
threat overviews, and other matters relating to private sector security 
policies and protective programs and the protection of U.S. business 
information overseas.
    For more information, contact Ellen Tannor, Overseas Security 
Advisory Council, U.S. Department of State, Washington, DC 20522-2008, 
phone: 571-345-2223 email: [email protected].

    Authority: 5 U.S.C. 1009 and 22 U.S.C. 2651a.

Ellen Tannor,
Executive Director, Overseas Security Advisory Council, Department of 
State.
[FR Doc. 2023-18724 Filed 8-29-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-43-P
```
#### WILLIAM H. WEART, PLAINTIFF, v. FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF DUNELLEN, A NATIONAL BANKING CORPORATION, DEFENDANT.

Decided July 14, 1933.

Por the motion, *Blanchard <& Carey.*

Opposed, *Joseph J. Mutrdck.*

Lawrence, S. C. C.

This suit was instituted by plaintiff to recover of defendant bank approximately $10,000, covering alleged official fees as a notary public in protesting promissory notes, inland bills of exchange and other negotiable paper for the institution from July 1st, 1923, to January 23d, 1932, during which period plaintiff was in its employ as bookkeéper and cashier, under an annual salary. The suit is made to rest on the holding in the case of *Geddis*v. *West Side Na*
      *547
      *tional Bank, 7 N. J. Mis. R.*245; 145*Atl. Rep. 731,*later affirmed by the Court of Errors and Appeals, 106 *N. J. L.*238; 148 *Atl. Rep.*917. On the argument of the present motion *Kip*v. *Peoples Bank and Trust Co.,*110 *N. J. L.*178; 164 *Atl. Rep.*253, was also relied on. The motion is to strike the amended answer and counter-claim of defendant as partly frivolous or sham. There are fifteen separate defenses pleaded and it is not found necessary to refer to them in detail, as the trial judge will limit the issues at the trial to those matters not within the scope of the matters disposed of in either the Geddis or Kip cases in the appellate court. It will suffice to say that the pleader evidently seeks to raise questions not considered in either of the cases to which reference is made, such as the bank’s contract with plaintiff to serve for a fixed compensation and an acceptance thereof in full satisfaction, together with a waiver and gift of his fees as a notary or the remitting thereof, under such contract. The statute of limitations is also pleaded, which it is conceded cannot be stricken, as it is clearly applicable to all fees sought to be recovered beyond the six-year period before the commencement of the suit. The counter-claim covers the expense incurred by the bank in purchasing notarial records and other supplies necessary to be used and actually used by plaintiff in the performance of his official duties as a notary, for which ho himself did not pay. The theory appears to be that if plaintiff is entitled to his fees, then the defendant was under no obligation to provide him with his records and supplies, clerical assistance, notarial seal and the expense of his commission. This raises a novel question in such litigation and ought not to be disposed of on a mere motion to strike. The motion to strike the answer here under consideration will be denied without prejudice to its renewal at the trial as to those matters that are found to be within the scope of the decision in *Kip*v. *Peoples Bank and Trust Co., supra.*The denial of the motion is not to carry costs.
# Fourth Court of Appeals

**San Antonio, Texas**

JUDG MENT

No. 04

- 21

- 00116

- CV

BISON DRILLING AND FIELD SERVICES LLC and Bison Trucking LLC, Appellants

v.

MCDAY ENERGY CORP. , Donald W. Orr, and McDay Oil & Gas, Inc., Appellees

From the 293rd Judicial District Court

, Zavala County, Texas

Trial Court No. 18

- 05

- 14176

- ZCV

Honorable Maribel Flores , Judge Presiding

BEFORE CHIEF JUSTICE MARTINEZ

, JUSTICE ALVAREZ , AND JUSTICE

VALENZUELA

In accordance with this court’s opinion of this date, appellan ts’ motion to dismiss the appeal is GRANTED and this appeal is DISMISSED AS MOOT. Costs of appeal are assessed against appellants.

SIGNED July 7, 2021.

_________________________________ Lori I. Valenzuela , Justice
Here's how you know
 **Official websites use .mil** .mil
 **Secure .mil websites use HTTPS** lock () https://


Skip to main content (Press Enter).
 Toggle navigation
            
            U.S. Central Command
                CENTCOM
        Search
                    Search CENTCOM:
                        Search
                Search CENTCOM:
                    Search
    Home

    ABOUT US
    
        COMMAND PRIORITIES

    LEADERSHIP

    COMPONENT COMMANDS

    HISTORY

    POSTURE STATEMENT

    CENTCOM AOR
    
        CENTCOM COALITION

    OPERATIONS AND EXERCISES
    
        USMTM

    CIVILIAN CASUALTY REPORT

    CONTACT
    
        OPERATIONAL CONTRACT SUPPORT

    COMMUNITY RELATIONS

    THEATRE MEDICAL CLEARANCE

    INNOVATION VENDOR PORTAL

    MILITARY MEMBER INNOVATION PORTAL

    MEDIA
    
        SOCIAL MEDIA

    NEWS ARTICLES

    PRESS RELEASES

    STATEMENTS

    IMAGERY

    VIDEOS

    TRANSCRIPTS

    VISITORS AND PERSONNEL
    
        FAMILY CENTER

    FAMILY READINESS

    CENTCOM WEBMAIL

    SOCIAL MEDIA SECURITY

    ACCOUNTABILITY

    EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS

    USCENTCOM UNCLASSIFIED REGULATIONS

    FOIA LIBRARY

    INNOVATION OASIS

    WELCOME GUIDE  Search
 Search
 All Images All ImagesCommunity RelationsOtherPreviousCommanders
 Upload Date Upload DatePhoto DateTitle
  Share
  
 Small () Medium () Full Size (1.83 MB)
 
 Soldiers Army Central Command Centcom Resolute Support
 Photo Gallery
 About UsCommand PrioritiesLeadershipComponent
   CommandsHistoryPosture Statement
   Area of
   ResponsibilityCENTCOM Coalition
   Operations And
   ExercisesOperation Inherent
   ResolveResolute Support
   MediaSocial MediaNews ArticlesPress ReleasesVideo And Imagery
   Visitors And
   PersonnelFamily ReadinessCENTCOM WebmailSocial MediaSecurityAccountabilityEmergency
   Preparedness
   ContactCommunity Relations
                    Stay Connected
                
                Privacy & Security  Inspector General  FOIA  Privacy Act
            

Hosted by Defense Media Activity - WEB.mil
WARNING: THE EDGAR SYSTEM ENCOUNTERED ERROR(S) WHILE PROCESSING THIS SCHEDULE.

<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-28-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-28-1997
<CASH>                                       5,670,000
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                7,961,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                 89,726,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                           111,976,000
<PP&E>                                     308,991,000
<DEPRECIATION>                           (179,672,000)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             243,461,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       82,836,000
<BONDS>                                      7,142,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        71,000
<OTHER-SE>                                    (90,000)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               243,461,000
<SALES>                                  1,102,947,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                         1,102,947,000
<CGS>                                      830,878,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                              254,282,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                         (4,982,000)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             12,805,000
<INCOME-TAX>                                 4,851,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                N/A
<DISCONTINUED>                                     N/A
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                    N/A
<CHANGES>                                          N/A
<NET-INCOME>                                 7,954,000
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.12
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      N/A
        

</TABLE>