alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Document Headings

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

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### National Labor Relations Board

# AGENCY:

National Labor Relations Board.

# ACTION:

Notice; appointment to serve as members of performance review boards.

# SUMMARY:

The National Labor Relations Board is issuing this notice that the individuals whose names and position titles appear below have been appointed to serve as members of performance review boards in the National Labor Relations Board for the rating year beginning October 1, 2022 and ending September 30, 2023.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Roxanne L. Rothschild, Executive Secretary, National Labor Relations Board, 1015 Half Street SE, Washington, DC 20570, (202) 273-1940 (this is not a toll-free number), 1-866-315-6572 (TTY/TDD).

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

## Name and Title

Andrew Krafts—Executive Assistant to the Chairman (Chief of Staff), Office of the Chairman

Grant Kraus—Deputy Chief Counsel, Office of the Chairman

Terence G. Schoone-Jongen—Director, Office of Representation Appeals

Peter Sung Ohr—Deputy General Counsel, Office of the General Counsel

Joan A. Sullivan—Associate General Counsel, Division of Operations Management

Nancy Kessler Platt (Alternate)—Associate General Counsel, Division of Legal Counsel

*Authority:*5 U.S.C. 4314(c)(4).                

By Direction of the Board.

Dated: November 3, 2023.

Roxanne L. Rothschild,

Executive Secretary.

[FR Doc. 2023-24675 Filed 11-7-23; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7545-01-P
List of Subsidiaries

Industries International Incorporated, incorporated in Nevada, the United States
of America

Broad Faith Limited, incorporated in the British Virgin Islands, 100% owned by
Industries International Incorporated

Shenzhen Kexuntong Industrial Limited, incorporated in Shenzhen China, 95% owned
by Broad Faith Limited

Sunbest Industries Limited, incorporated in Shanghai, China, 100% owned by
Industries International Incorporated

Shenzhen Wonderland Communication Science & Technology Company, Limited,
incorporated in Shenzhen, China, 68.73% owned by Shenzhen Kexuntong Industrial
Limited and 4.24% owned by Sunbest Industries Limited

Li Sun Power International Limited, incorporated in British Virgin Islands, 100%
owned by Industries International Incorporated

Wuhan Lixing Power Sources Company Limited, incorporated in Wuhan, China, 72.84%
owned by Li Sun Power International Limited

Shenzhen Chuang Lixing Power Sources Company Limited, incorporated in Shenzhen
China, 90% owned by Li Sun Power International Limited

Wuhan Lixing (Torch) Power Sources Company, Limited, (Joint Venture with HSBC)
incorporated in Wuhan China, 70.7% owned by Wuhan Lixing Power Sources Company
Limited
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

: CIVIL ACTION NOS.

:

WALKER : 02-3868

SIMON : 02-3887

GOTO : 02-3922

JOHNSON, et al. : 02-3932

HOSOKAWA : 02-3959

KILCY : 02-3964

BYRON : 02-4108

ROCHA, et al. : 02-4121

CAVITT : 02-4139

HIBMA-CANARIO, et al. : 02-4152

BAILEY, et al. : 02-4188

BOSSI, et al. : 02-4234

STEINHAUER, et al. : 02-4257

SKEELS, et al. : 02-4274

WALKER, et al. : 02-4279

FRIEDEN, et al. : 02-4310

DIMANLANTA : 02-4313

:

:

VS. :

:

BAYER CORPORATION, et al. :

O R D E R

AND NOW, this day of July, 2002, the Court having been previously

advised that the above action cannot proceed to trial and disposition because of the following

reason:

[ ] - Order staying these proceedings pending disposition of a related

action.

[ ] - Order staying these proceedings pending determination of

arbitration proceedings.

[ ] - Interlocutory appeal filed.

Case 2:02-cv-04257-RBS Document 2 Filed 07/11/2002 Page 1 of 2
[ X ] - Other: Case is placed into suspense pending receipt of the Case

Transfer Order from the Judicial Panel on Multi District Litigation

transferring case to District of Minnesota..

It is

ORDERED that the Clerk of Court mark this action closed for statistical purposes and

place the matter in the Civil Suspense File, and it is

FURTHER ORDERED that the Court shall retain jurisdiction; and that the case be

restored to the trial docket when the action is in a status so that it may proceed to final

disposition; this order shall not prejudice the rights of the parties to this litigation.

BY THE COURT:

________________________________________

R. Barclay Surrick

Case 2:02-cv-04257-RBS Document 2 Filed 07/11/2002 Page 2 of 2
Exhibit 32.1



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 Shoe Pavilion, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 27, 2003 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
(the Report), I, Dmitry Beinus, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of the Company certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge:



|(1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
|--- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



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



|/s/Dmitry Beinus                    
|------------------------------------
|Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
|November 12, 2003                   



This certification accompanies the
Report pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, and shall not, except to the extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company for the purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as
amended.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA 

 

 : 

BISHNU C. BORAH, M.D., P.C., : Civil Action No. 

and BISHNUE BORAH, M.D., : 

 : 2:04-cv-03617-BMS 

 Plaintiffs, : 

 : 

v. : 

 : 

MONUMENTAL LIFE INSURANCE CO., : 

et al, : 

 :

NOTICE OF MOTION TO DISMISS 

To: Steven J. Fram, Esquire 

 Archer & Greiner, P.C. 

 One Centennial Square 

 Haddonfield, NJ 08033 

 Attorney for the Plaintiffs 

Please TAKE NOTICE that the Sea Nine Associates, through its undersigned counsel, 

respectfully moves the Court, pursuant to Rule 12(b)(5) and Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules 

of Civil Procedure, for an Order Dismissing Plaintiffs’ Complaint. 

In support of this Motion, Sea Nine Associates relies upon the Memorandum of Law 

submitted with this Motion. 

As more fully set forth in the Memorandum of Law, dismissal of Plaintiffs’ Complaint 

without prejudice is warranted for the failure to serve within the time and in the manner provided 

in Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(5) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 4. Additionally, the Plaintiffs have attempted to 

serve a complaint against a sole proprietorship where the sole proprietor died before the 

institution of the action. 
 In the alternative, if the Court does not dismiss this case based on failure to serve 

Sea Nine, Sea Nine moves to dismiss this case based on Fed R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) for the 

failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. First, all of the claims are 

barred by the applicable statute of limitations. Second, the claims under the New Jersey 

Consumer Fraud Act and the New Jersey Racketeering Act must be dismissed because 

New Jersey law has no application in this matter. The specific grounds are set forth with 

greater specification in the Memorandum of Law. 

 WHEREFORE, for the reasons, Sea Nine Associates respectfully requests that 

Plaintiffs’ Complaint be dismissed. 

 

 The Law Offices of Robert M. Bovarnick 

 

 By: /s/ Robert M. Bovarnick 

 Robert M. Bovarnick, Esquire 

 Two Penn Center, Suite 1310 

 1500 John F. Kennedy Blvd. 

 Philadelphia, PA 19102 

 (215) 568-4480 

Dated: January 14, 2005 Attorney for Sean Nine Associates
Case 2:04-cv-27245-HB Document 36 Filed 11/10/2009 Page 1 of 2
Case 2:04-cv-27245-HB Document 36 Filed 11/10/2009 Page 2 of 2
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



I, Peter Bolton, certify that:

1.

I have reviewed this annual report on Form 20-F of Rolling Thunder Exploration Ltd.;

2.

Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3.

Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4.

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

a)

designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

b)

evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

c)

disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter (the registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal control over financial reporting; and

5.

The registrants other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the audit committee of the registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

a)

all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

b)

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

Date:  November 30, 2006

|                                |  |                  
|------------------------------- |  | -----------------
|By:                             |  | /s/  Peter Bolton
|                                |  |                  
|Peter Bolton,
President and CEO
NOTES TO THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS 86

Note 6. Property, Plant, and Equipment, Net 

Property, Plant, and Equipment as of September 30, 2019, and 2018 

Cost 

Accumulated 

Depreciation/ 

Amortization Net Cost 

Accumulated 

Depreciation/ 

Amortization Net 

(In billions of dollars) 2019 2018 

Buildings, structures, and facilities .................. 775.8 469.7 306.1 728.4 431.1 297.3 

Furniture, fixtures, and equipment .................. 1,387.5 809.5 578.0 1,363.9 782.7 581.2 

Construction in progress ................................ 171.6 N/A 171.6 159.5 N/A 159.5 

Internal Use Software .................................... 51.5 32.1 19.4 49.4 30.8 18.6 

Land............................................................. 21.7 N/A 21.7 21.5 N/A 21.5 

Other property, plant, and 

equipment............ ....................................... 31.7 21.6 10.1 38.0 25.6 12.4 

Total property, plant, and equipment ......... 2,439.8 1,332.9 1,106.9 2,360.7 1,270.2 1,090.5

Note: "N/A" indicates not applicable. 

DOD comprises approximately 69.4 percent of the government’s reported PP&E, as of September 30, 2019. DOD 

continues to implement SFFAS No. 50, Establishing Opening Balances for General Property, Plant, and Equipment which 

permits alternative methods in establishing opening balances for general PP&E and has elected to exclude land and land 

rights. The total acreage excluded was 20,926,485 as of September 30, 2019 and September 30, 2018. 

The following entities comprise over 90 percent of the government’s reported PP&E net of $1,106.9 billion as of 

September 30, 2019. Please refer to the entities’ financial statements for details. 

 DOD 

 DOE 

 GSA 

 DOC 

 DOI 

 USPS 

 DHS 

 VA 

 TVA 

 State 

Certain PP&E are multi-use heritage assets, see Note 24—Stewardship Land and Heritage Assets for additional 

information on multi-use heritage assets.
# C_2016419EN.01002601.xml

| 14.11.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 419/26 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.11.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 419/26

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Oberlandesgericht Düsseldorf (Germany) lodged on 15 July 2016 — DOCERAM GmbH v CeramTec GmbH

(Case C-395/16)

(2016/C 419/35)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Referring court

Oberlandesgericht Düsseldorf

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: DOCERAM GmbH

Applicant:

Defendant: CeramTec GmbH

Defendant:

Questions referred

Questions referred

| 1. | Does a technical function that precludes protection within the meaning of Article 8(1) of Council Regulation (EC) No 6/2002 of 12 December 2001 on Community designs (1) also exist if the design effect is of no significance for the product design, but the (technical) functionality is the sole factor that dictates the design? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Does a technical function that precludes protection within the meaning of Article 8(1) of Council Regulation (EC) No 6/2002 of 12 December 2001 on Community designs (1) also exist if the design effect is of no significance for the product design, but the (technical) functionality is the sole factor that dictates the design?

1

| 2. | If the Court answers Question 1 in the affirmative:
  From which point of view is it to be assessed whether the individual design features of a product have been chosen solely on the basis of considerations of functionality? Is an ‘objective observer’ required and, if so, how is such an observer to be defined? |
| --- | --- |

2.

If the Court answers Question 1 in the affirmative:

From which point of view is it to be assessed whether the individual design features of a product have been chosen solely on the basis of considerations of functionality? Is an ‘objective observer’ required and, if so, how is such an observer to be defined?

---

(1)  OJ 2002 L 3, p. 1.

1

---
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

STANLEY N. OZOROSKI

Petitioner

v.

EDWARD J. KLEM; THE DISTRICT

ATTORNEY OF THE COUNTY OF

MONTGOMERY; AND THE ATTORNEY

GENERAL OF THE STATE OF

PENNSYLVANIA

Respondents

Civil Action No. 03-6381

ORDER

September 28, 2005

Upon consideration of the pleadings and record herein, and after review of

the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Charles B.

Smith, it is hereby ORDERED that:

1. The Report and Recommendation is APPROVED and ADOPTED.

2. The Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §

2254, is DENIED.

3. There is no probable cause to issue a certificate of appealability.

Case 2:03-cv-06381-LP Document 18 Filed 09/28/05 Page 1 of 2
It is so ORDERED. 

BY THE COURT:

________________________

LOUIS H. POLLAK J.

Case 2:03-cv-06381-LP Document 18 Filed 09/28/05 Page 2 of 2
January 2010 to January 2011 Schedule 

For Treasury-Disbursed Recurring Benefit Payments 

Settlement Dates 

Agency Jan’10 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct 

OPM Office of Personnel Management Civil Service Retirement/Annuity 

1/4** 2/1 3/1 4/1 5/3** 6/1 7/1 8/2** 9/1 10/1 

RRB Railroad Retirement Board Railroad Retirement/Annuity 

1/4** 2/1 3/1 4/1 5/3** 6/1 7/1 8/2** 9/1 10/1 

VA Department of Veterans Affairs Compensation and Pension 

12/31* 2/1 3/1 4/1 4/30* 6/1 7/1 7/30* 9/1 10/1 

SSA Social Security Administration 3rd of Month 

12/31* 2/3 3/3 4/2* 5/3 6/3 7/2* 8/3 9/3 10/1* 

SSA Cycle -2

 2nd Wednesday 

1/13 2/10 3/10 4/14 5/12 6/9 7/14 8/11 9/8 10/13 

SSA Cycle -3 3rd Wednesday 

1/20 2/17 3/17 4/21 5/19 6/16 7/21 8/18 9/15 10/20 

SSA Cycle -4 4th Wednesday 

1/27 2/24 3/24 4/28 5/26 6/23 7/28 8/25 9/22 10/27 

SSI Supplemental Security Income 

12/31* 2/1 3/1 4/1 4/30* 6/1 7/1 7/30* 9/1 10/1 

. * = Settlement Date Adjusted to the Preceding Business Day ** = Settlement Date Adjusted to the Following Business Day 

Prepared by the U. S. Department of the Treasury/Fina
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

WALTER and BARBARA CONSTANCE :

: CIVIL ACTION NO. 02-CV-4196

Plaintiffs, :

:

v. :

:

BAYER CORPORATION;

BAYER AG;

GLAXOSMITHKLINE, PLC;

GLAXOSMITHKLINE;

SMITHKLINE BEECHAM

:

:

:

:

:

ENTRY OF APPEARANCE

:

Defendants. :

ENTRY OF APPEARANCE

To the Clerk of the Court:

Kindly enter the appearances of Hope S. Freiwald, Aline Fairweather, Erin

Brennan and Kirstin J. Miller as attorneys for defendant SmithKline Beecham Corporation d/b/a

GlaxoSmithKline.

Respectfully Submitted,

_____________________________ _____________________________

Hope S. Freiwald Aline Fairweather

_____________________________ _____________________________

Erin Brennan Kirstin J. Miller

DECHERT PRICE & RHOADS

4000 Bell Atlantic Tower

1717 Arch Street

Philadelphia, PA 19103-2793

(215) 994-4000

Case 2:02-cv-04196-JD Document 7 Filed 09/20/2002 Page 1 of 1
1 The parties all agree that this action should be dismissed

because there is no proper plaintiff to prosecute the action.

Although the Winer Family Trust and the Pennexx Defendants further

agree that this action should be dismissed without prejudice, the

Smithfield Defendants urge the Court to dismiss this action with

prejudice for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The Court has

already rejected the Smithfield Defendants’ subject matter

jurisdiction argument by Order dated February 11, 2005. (See Doc.

No. 110). Furthermore, even assuming arguendo that this Court

lacks subject matter jurisdiction over the action, “Article III

deprives federal courts of the power to dismiss a case with

prejudice where federal subject matter jurisdiction does not

exist.” Hernandez v. Conriv Realty Assocs., 182 F.3d 121, 123 (2d

Cir. 1999); accord In re Orthopedic “Bone Screw” Prods. Liab.

Litig., 132 F.3d 152, 155 (3d Cir. 1997). Accordingly, the instant

action is dismissed without prejudice for lack of prosecution.

This Order does not operate as a “final adjudication” of the action

under 15 U.S.C. § 78u-4(c)(1). See generally Blaser v. Bessemer

Trust Co., Civ. A. No. 01-11599, 2002 WL 31359015 (S.D.N.Y. Oct.

21, 2002).

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

THE WINER FAMILY TRUST : CIVIL ACTION

:

:

:

v. :

:

:

:

MICHAEL QUEEN, et al. : NO. 03-4318

O R D E R

AND NOW, this 29th day of June, 2005, upon consideration of

the Court’s Order to Show Cause (Doc. No. 136), and the parties’

responses thereto (Doc. Nos. 138-140), IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that

this action is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for lack of

prosecution.

1 The Clerk of Court shall CLOSE this case for

Case 2:03-cv-04318-JP Document 141 Filed 06/29/05 Page 1 of 2
2

statistical purposes.

BY THE COURT:

s/ John R. Padova 

John R. Padova, J.

Case 2:03-cv-04318-JP Document 141 Filed 06/29/05 Page 2 of 2
Case 2:03-cr-00745-JCJ Document 121 Filed 07/09/09 Page 1 of 2
Case 2:03-cr-00745-JCJ Document 121 Filed 07/09/09 Page 2 of 2
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 218 (Tuesday, November 14, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Page 78089]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-24997]


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

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice: 12264]


Notice of Determinations; Culturally Significant Objects Being 
Imported for Exhibition--Determinations: ``Nineteenth-Century 
Photography Now'' Exhibition

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given of the following determinations: I 
hereby determine that certain objects being imported from abroad 
pursuant to agreements with their foreign owners or custodians for 
temporary display in the exhibition ``Nineteenth-Century Photography 
Now'' at the J. Paul Getty Museum at the Getty Center, Los Angeles, 
California, and at possible additional exhibitions or venues yet to be 
determined, are of cultural significance, and, further, that their 
temporary exhibition or display within the United States as 
aforementioned is in the national interest. I have ordered that Public 
Notice of these determinations be published in the Federal Register.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Reed Liriano, Program Coordinator, 
Office of the Legal Adviser, U.S. Department of State (telephone: 202-
632-6471; email: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#6d1e080e190402035f5958542d1e190c1908430a021b"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="e4978187908d8b8ad6d0d1dda49790859081ca838b92">[email protected]</span></a>). The mailing address is U.S. 
Department of State, L/PD, 2200 C Street NW (SA-5), Suite 5H03, 
Washington, DC 20522-0505.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The foregoing determinations were made 
pursuant to the authority vested in me by the Act of October 19, 1965 
(79 Stat. 985; 22 U.S.C. 2459), Executive Order 12047 of March 27, 
1978, the Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act of 1998 (112 
Stat. 2681, et seq.; 22 U.S.C. 6501 note, et seq.), Delegation of 
Authority No. 234 of October 1, 1999, Delegation of Authority No. 236-3 
of August 28, 2000, and Delegation of Authority No. 523 of December 22, 
2021.

Nicole L. Elkon,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Professional and Cultural Exchanges, 
Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs, Department of State.
[FR Doc. 2023-24997 Filed 11-13-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-05-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>