alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 36 (Friday, February 23, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Page 8207]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-3027]


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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION


Proposed Collection; Comment Request

Upon written request, copies available from: Securities and Exchange 
Commission, Office of Filings and Information Services, Washington, DC 
20549.

Extension: Rule 15c3-1f, SEC File No. 270-440, OMB Control No. 3235-
0496.

    Notice is hereby given that, pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction 
Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Securities and Exchange 
Commission (``Commission'') has submitted to the Office of Management 
and Budget a request for approval of extension on the following rule: 
17 CFR 240.15c3-1f (Appendix F to Rule 15c3-1 (``Appendix F'')).
    Appendix F requires a broker-dealer choosing to register, upon 
Commission approval, as an OTC derivative dealer to develop and 
maintain an internal risk management system based on Value-at-Risk 
(``VAR'') models. Appendix F also requires the OTC derivatives dealer 
to notify Commission staff of the system and of certain other periodic 
information including when the VAR model deviates from the actual 
performance of the OTC derivatives dealer's portfolio. It is 
anticipated that five (5) broker-dealers will spend 1,000 hours per 
year complying with Appendix F. The total burden is estimated to be 
approximately 5,000 hours.
    Written comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed 
collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of 
the functions of the agency, including whether the information will 
have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of 
the burden of the collection of information; (c) ways to enhance the 
quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected; and (d) 
ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on 
respondents, including through the use of automated collection 
techniques or other forms of information technology. Consideration will 
be given to comments and suggestions submitted in writing within 60 
days of this publication.
    Direct your written comments to R. Corey Booth, Director/Chief 
Information Officer, Securities and Exchange Commission, c/o Shirley 
Martinson, 6432 General Green Way, Alexandria, VA 22312 or send an e-
mail to: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#025250435d4f636b6e606d7a427167612c656d74"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="0e5e5c4f51436f67626c61764e7d6b6d20696178">[email protected]</span></a>. Comments must be submitted to OMB within 
60 days of this notice.

    Dated: February 14, 2007.
Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E7-3027 Filed 2-22-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


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



 Exhibit 10.17 
 cmcdemus@clear-point.com 
 DIRECT DIAL: 215-997-7710 X. 101

 June 25, 2008 
 VIA UPS, OVERNIGHT
DELIVERY 
  

															
	Warren Business Products	  		  		  		  		  		  	
	Attn: Matt Kingfield	  		  		  		  		  		  	
	  
	  		  		  		  		  		  		  	
	  
	  		  		  		  		  		  		  	

 Dear Matt: 
 I am writing in reference to that certain Second Amended and Restated Promissory Note, dated March 31, 2008, payable by ClearPoint Resources, Inc. (the “Company”) in the original principal amount of $50,000 (the
“Note”). By way of this letter, the Company is notifying you that, effective June 20, 2008, it has, in accordance with Section 1 of the Note, exercised the Maturity Date Extension (as defined in the Note). As a result, the
new Maturity Date for the Note is March 31, 2010. The Company exercised the Maturity Date Extension in connection with its recent loan transaction with ComVest Capital, LLC, whereby the Company received a $9 million term loan and $3 million
revolver. 
 As required by Section 3 of the Note, I have enclosed a second Warrant for 7,500 shares of Company Common Stock,
exercisable from June 20, 2008 until March 31, 2011 at an exercise price of $1.55. 
 Feel free to call me with any questions.

 Very truly yours, 
 CLEARPOINT RESOURCES, INC. 
 Christopher D. McDemus 
 Senior V.P. & General Counsel 

Encl.
Before the Second Division,

August 17, 1949

No. 53499.

protest 136440-K (New York).

#### Abraham & Straus, Inc. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Rao, J.

It was stipulated that the merchandise is the same in all material respects as the gloves which were the subject of *United States*v. *Julius Kayser & Co.*(33 C. C. P. A. 179, C. A. D. 333). The claim of the plaintiff was therefore sustained.
Exhibit 99

                            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 on Form 10-Q of Merrill Lynch Preferred
Capital Trust III (the "Trust") and Merrill  Lynch  Preferred  Funding III, L.P.
(the  "Partnership")  for the  period  ended  June 28,  2002 as  filed  with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, John C.
Stomber, Regular Trustee of the Trust and Senior Vice President and Treasurer of
Merrill Lynch & Co.,  Inc.,  the General  Partner of the  Partnership,  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 Trust
    and the Partnership.




                   MERRILL LYNCH PREFERRED CAPITAL TRUST III



                   By: /s/ John C. Stomber
                   --------------------------------------------
                   Name: John C. Stomber*
                   Title: Regular Trustee




                   MERRILL LYNCH PREFERRED FUNDING III, L.P.


                   By: MERRILL LYNCH & CO., INC., as General Partner



                   By: /s/ John C. Stomber
                   --------------------------------------------
                   Name: John C. Stomber*
                   Title: Senior Vice President and Treasurer


Dated: August 9, 2002

___________________________
* John C. Stomber functions as the equivalent of the chief executive officer and
chief financial officer of each of the Trust and the Partnership for purposes of
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

: CIVIL ACTION NOS.

:

HAMMOND, et al. : 02-4409

GRESH, et al. : 02-4410

GEARINGER, SR. : 02-4411

BRASSILL : 02-4413

FYE : 02-4414

SEARFOSS : 02-4415

SMITH, et al. : 02-4416

MEYER, et al. : 02-4480

BINDER, et al. : 02-4658

BOULOUS : 02-4659

NEES, SR., et al. : 02-4730

WHELAN, et al. : 02-5164

MENTZER : 02-5165

MCELHINEY, et al. : 02-5317

DELGAUDIO, et al. : 02-5318

WAGNER, et al. : 02-5319

:

V. :

:

DAIMLERCHRYSLER CORPORATION :

et al. : :

O R D E R

AND NOW, this day of August, 2002, it is hereby

ORDERED that the above-captioned case or cases are referred to the Honorable

Charles R. Weiner for the purposes of the monitoring and the coordination of the status of

discovery, scheduling of arbitration hearings (if appropriate), settlement negotiations (if

appropriate), and scheduling trial dates (if appropriate), and it is further

ORDERED that the above-captioned case(s) shall remain on the calendar(s) of the

judge(s) to whom they were assigned at the time of filing, until further order of this court,

and, it is further 

Case 2:02-cv-04416-SD Document 5 Filed 08/13/2002 Page 1 of 2
-2-

ORDERED that counsel for defendant(s) who filed a petition for removal of the

above-captioned case(s) to this court shall serve a copy of this Order on counsel for

plaintiff(s) in the above-captioned case(s), and, it is further

ORDERED that the relevant Prothonotaries of the Courts of Common Pleas

located within the jurisdiction of the United States District Court for the Eastern District 

of Pennsylvania that the above-captioned case or cases have been removed from shall

retain the original records in these matters, pending further Order of this court.

 

JAMES T. GILES, Ch.J.

Case 2:02-cv-04416-SD Document 5 Filed 08/13/2002 Page 2 of 2
IN THE

TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

No. 10-12-00145-CV

CARL H. WATSON,

Appellant

v.

MAGNABLEND, INC., COLLIDER DATA 

CENTER, L.L.C., AND ELLIS COUNTY, TEXAS,

Appellees

From the 40th District Court

Ellis County, Texas

Trial Court No. 84227

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Carl H. Watson filed a petition seeking to use Rule 202 of the Texas Rules of Civil 

Procedure to conduct pre-suit discovery of representatives of Magnablend, Inc., 

Collider Data Center, LLC, and Ellis County, Texas. The trial court denied the petition, 

and Watson appeals.

"Presuit deposition orders are appealable only if sought from someone against 

whom suit is not anticipated." In re Jorden, 249 S.W.3d 416, 419 (Tex. 2008). That is, if 

the order allows or denies the pre-suit deposition of a person against whom suit is 
Watson v. Magnablend, Inc. Page 2

contemplated, the order is interlocutory, and there is no appellate jurisdiction. Thomas 

v. Fitzgerald, 166 S.W.3d 746, 747-48 (Tex. App.—Waco 2005, no pet.).

According to his petition, Watson contended he was investigating potential 

claims or lawsuits against “Deponents,“ i.e. representatives of Magnablend, Inc., 

Collider Data Center, LLC, and Ellis County, Texas.1 Because Watson contemplates or 

anticipates a possible suit against the appellees, the trial court’s order is interlocutory. 

On appeal, Watson contends that he only anticipates suit against Ellis County, and thus, 

because he does not contemplate a suit against Magnablend and Collider Data, the trial 

court’s order is appealable. But, just as a summary judgment as to one of multiple 

parties does not make the order granting summary judgment appealable because it is 

only an interlocutory order, see Lehmann v. Har-Con Corp., 39 S.W.3d 191, 205 (Tex. 2001), 

the denial of Rule 202 discovery when a suit or claim is contemplated against one of 

several deponents is also an interlocutory order and not appealable.2 

This appeal is dismissed.

TOM GRAY

Chief Justice

 

1 Various portions of the petition could also be construed to indicate that the anticipated suit would be 

against Ellis County only. This does not however, impact the analysis of whether the order is final for 

purposes of appeal. Appellant’s post submission brief relies primarily on cases in which the discovery 

was sought only from an entity other than the entity against which suit was anticipated. We have been 

unable to find authority in this area of the law where pre-suit discovery was sought of multiple entitles at 

least one of which is the anticipated defendant.

2 Likewise, the denial of the motion to recuse and the grant of sanctions, the basis of issue four, is an 

interlocutory order, and as such, we have no jurisdiction to review it by a direct appeal at this time.
Watson v. Magnablend, Inc. Page 3

Before Chief Justice Gray,

Justice Davis, and

Justice Scoggins

Appeal Dismissed

Opinion delivered and filed April 18, 2013

[CV06]
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 220 (Thursday, November 16, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Page 78751]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-25283]


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

FEDERAL FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS EXAMINATION COUNCIL

[Docket No. AS23-18]


Appraisal Subcommittee Notice of Meeting

AGENCY: Appraisal Subcommittee of the Federal Financial Institutions 
Examination Council.

ACTION: Notice of Special Closed Meeting.

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

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In accordance with Section 1104(b) of Title 
XI of the Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery, and Enforcement Act 
of 1989, as amended, notice is hereby given that the Appraisal 
Subcommittee (ASC) met for a Special Closed Meeting on this date.
    Location: Virtual meeting via Webex.
    Date: November 8, 2023.
    Time: 11:15 a.m. ET.
    Action and Discussion Item: Personnel Matter.
    The ASC convened a Special Closed Meeting to discuss a personnel 
matter. No action was taken by the ASC.

James R. Park,
Executive Director.
[FR Doc. 2023-25283 Filed 11-15-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6700-01-P
Exhibit 23.2

Consent of Independent Engineers

We refer to our report auditing estimates of the natural
gas, natural gas liquids and conventional oil reserves attributable to Husky Energy Inc. (the Company) as of December 31, 2010 (the Report).

We hereby consent to references to our name in the Companys Annual Report on Form 40-F to be filed with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission pursuant to the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934, as amended, and the Companys registration statement on Form F-9 (File No. 333-157389). We also confirm that we have read the Companys Annual Information Form for the year ended December 31, 2010, dated
March 8, 2011, and that we have no reason to believe that there are any misrepresentations in the information contained in it that was derived from the Report or that is within our knowledge as a result of the services we performed in
connection with such Report.

Sincerely,

McDaniel & Associates Consultants Ltd.



|                        
|------------------------
|/s/ B.J. Wurster, P.Eng.
|B.J. Wurster, P.Eng.    
|Vice President          
|Calgary, Alberta, Canada
|March 8, 2011
(Reap. Dec. 10975)

#### Mitsubishi International Corp. *v.*United States

Entry No. 1049482.

(Decided May 10, 1965)

*William, Whynman*for the plaintiff.

*John W. Douglas,*Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Nichols, Judge:

This appeal for reappraisement is before me on the following stipulation of counsel for the respective parties:

> IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED, by and between counsel for the parties hereto, subject to the approval of the Court, that the merchandise covered by the above appeal for reappraisement consists of footwear composed in chief value of India rubber; and that said footwear was appraised under Section 402a(g) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended by the Customs Simplification Act of 1956.

> That at the time of exportation of the imported footwear no domestic manufacturer offered like or similar footwear for sale and like or similar footwear was not manufactured or produced in the United States.

> That on or about the date of exportation, such or similar footwear was freely offered for sale to all purchasers in the principal markets of Japan, in the usual wholesale quantities and in the ordinary course of trade for exportation to the United States, at the invoice unit price less marine insurance premium and ocean freight, as noted on the invoice, said price including the cost of all containers and coverings of whatever nature and all other costs, charges and expenses incident to placing the merchandise in condition, packed ready for shipment to the United States.

> That on or about the date of exportation, the foreign value or such value as defined in Section 402a (c) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, of such or similar merchandise was no higher.

> IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED that the said appeal for reappraisement may be deemed to be submitted for decision upon this stipulation.

On tbe agreed facts, I find and bold that export value, as that value is defined in section 402a (d) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended by the Customs Simplification Act of 1956, 70 Stat. 943, is the proper basis for determination of the value of the merchandise- involved herein and that such value is the invoice unit price, less marine insurance premium and ocean freight, as noted on the invoice, said price *654including the cost of all containers and coverings of whatever nature and all other costs, charges, and expenses incident to placing the merchandise in condition, packed ready for shipment to the United States.

Judgment will be rendered accordingly.
----

Order of the President of the Court of 14 June 2006 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale Civile di Bergamo — Italy) — D.I.A. Srl, in liquidation v Cartiere Paolo Pigna SpA

(Case C-309/05) (1)

(2006/C 224/67)

Language of the case: Italian

The President of the Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

----

(1)OJ C 243, 1.10.2005.

----
EXHIBIT NO. 32.1
Form 10-KSB
Network Capital, Inc.
File No. 000-32155


          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 Annual Report of Network Capital, Inc. (the "Company") on
Form 10-KSB for the year ended March 31, 2005 as filed with the  Securities  and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),  I, Bruce Cairney,  Chief
Executive and 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.


Date: June 15, 2005                               By: /s/ Bruce Cairney
      -------------                                  ---------------------------
                                                                   Bruce Cairney
                                                             Chief Executive and
                                                         Chief Financial Officer


A signed  original of this  written  statement  required by Section 906 has been
provided to Network Capital,  Inc. and will be retained by Network Capital, Inc.
and  furnished  to the  Securities  and  Exchange  Commission  or its staff upon
request.
# Sheet1

&"Arial,Bold"Part 1SUPPLEMENT	&"Arial,Bold"&16&KFF0000DRAFT	&"Arial,Bold"Fiscal Year 2024 ReportingSection VII

&"Arial,Bold"Bulletin No. 2024-01	&"Arial,Bold"&KFF0000DRAFT &K000000VII ESR - &P	&"Arial,Bold"IRC Handout 11/29/23
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
THE SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS OF SOLUCORP INDUSTRIES  LTD FROM THE QUARTERLY  PERIOD ENDED JUNE 30,
1999 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                         0001051720
<NAME>                        SOLUCORP INDUSTRIES LTD.
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                   JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                         0
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  1,478,013
<ALLOWANCES>                                   112,074
<INVENTORY>                                    3,590,544
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               8,066,703
<PP&E>                                         1,247,275
<DEPRECIATION>                                 149,926
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 8,639,320
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          4,694,592
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       21,215,991
<OTHER-SE>                                     0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   8,639,320
<SALES>                                        2,416,585
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               3,667,412
<CGS>                                          2,491,897
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  4,140,728
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               1,648,831
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (473,316)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            0
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (473,316)
<EPS-BASIC>                                  (0.02)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  0



</TABLE>
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

AGRIZAP, INC. : CIVIL ACTION

:

vs. :

:

WOODSTREAM CORP., et al. : NO. 04-3925

O R D E R

AND NOW, this 14th day of February, 2005, the proposed Pre-Trial Schedule

submitted by the parties, and attached hereto, has been reviewed by the Court and is hereby

adopted by the Court as the Scheduling Order in the above-captioned case.

BY THE COURT:

 

ROBERT F. KELLY

SENIOR JUDGE 

Case 2:04-cv-03925-RK Document 17 Filed 02/14/2005 Page 1 of 1
Case 2:05-cv-04557-NS Document 26-8 Filed 01/04/07 Page 1 of 17
Case 2:05-cv-04557-NS Document 26-8 Filed 01/04/07 Page 2 of 17
Case 2:05-cv-04557-NS Document 26-8 Filed 01/04/07 Page 3 of 17
Case 2:05-cv-04557-NS Document 26-8 Filed 01/04/07 Page 4 of 17
Case 2:05-cv-04557-NS Document 26-8 Filed 01/04/07 Page 5 of 17
Case 2:05-cv-04557-NS Document 26-8 Filed 01/04/07 Page 6 of 17
Case 2:05-cv-04557-NS Document 26-8 Filed 01/04/07 Page 7 of 17
Case 2:05-cv-04557-NS Document 26-8 Filed 01/04/07 Page 8 of 17
Case 2:05-cv-04557-NS Document 26-8 Filed 01/04/07 Page 9 of 17
Case 2:05-cv-04557-NS Document 26-8 Filed 01/04/07 Page 10 of 17
Case 2:05-cv-04557-NS Document 26-8 Filed 01/04/07 Page 11 of 17
Case 2:05-cv-04557-NS Document 26-8 Filed 01/04/07 Page 12 of 17
Case 2:05-cv-04557-NS Document 26-8 Filed 01/04/07 Page 13 of 17
Case 2:05-cv-04557-NS Document 26-8 Filed 01/04/07 Page 14 of 17
Case 2:05-cv-04557-NS Document 26-8 Filed 01/04/07 Page 15 of 17
Case 2:05-cv-04557-NS Document 26-8 Filed 01/04/07 Page 16 of 17
Case 2:05-cv-04557-NS Document 26-8 Filed 01/04/07 Page 17 of 17
Notice from Beijing Champion Distance Education Technology Co., Ltd.



 Exhibit 10.15 
 NOTICE 
  

	TO:	Beijing Dongda Zhengbao Science and Technology Co., Ltd, and 

 Mr. Zhu Zhengdong 
 Ms. Yin Baohong 
 According to the letter of authorization issued respectively by Mr. Zhu Zhengdong and Ms. Yin Baohong, the shareholders of Beijing Dongda Zhengbao Science and Technology Co., Ltd, on March 25th, 2008 to our company Beijing
Champion Distance Education Technology Co., Ltd (hereafter collectively “Letter of Authorization”), our company hereby appoints Mr. Zhu Zhengdong (Chinese resident ID card number: 320102196806142439) as the representative to exercise
all the rights empowered by the Letter of Authorization as of the date this Notice executed. 
 It is hereby noticed. 
  

					
	Company Name:	  	Beijing Champion Distance Education Technology Co., Ltd
	Authorized representative:	  	Sun Hongfeng	  	
	Date:	  	March 25th, 2008	  	

  

 1