alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>

                                EXHIBIT (10)(b)
                                ---------------

                        OPINION AND CONSENT OF ACTUARY
<PAGE>

               [Transamerica Life Insurance Company Letterhead]

April 10, 2001


PFL Life Insurance Company
4333 Edgewood Road NE
Cedar Rapids, Iowa 52499-0001

Re:  Separate Account VA D
     (formerly PFL Life Variable Annuity Account D)
     Registration on Form N-4 SEC File No. 33-94489

Dear Sir/Madam:

With regard to the above registration statement, I have examined such documents
and made such inquiries as I have deemed necessary and appropriate, and on the
basis of such examination, have the following opinions:

Fees and charges deducted under the Transamerica Access Variable Annuity
(formerly Access Variable Annuity) policies are those deemed necessary to
appropriately reflect:

(1)   the expenses incurred in the acquisition and distribution of the Policies,

(2)   the expenses associated with the development and servicing of the
      policies,

(3)   the assumption of certain risks arising from the operation and
      management of the Policies and/or riders to the Policy and that provides
      for a reasonable margin of profit.

Fees and charges assessed against the policy values in the Variable Account
include:

(i)   Service Charge and Administrative Charge

(ii)  Mortality and Expense Risk Fee (M&E)

(iii) Taxes (including Premium and other Taxes if applicable)

(iv)  Any applicable rider fees or charges

The magnitude of each of the individual charges listed above in (i) through (iv)
is established in the pricing of the Transamerica Access Variable Annuity
(formerly Access Variable Annuity), to achieve a reasonable Return on Investment
(ROI), which is within the range of industry practice with respect to comparable
variable annuity products.
<PAGE>

Transamerica Life Insurance Company
April 10, 2001
Page 2

Except by coincidence, it is not expected that actual charges assessed in a
given year would exactly offset actual expenses incurred. Acquisition expenses
(as well as major product and/or systems development expenses) are incurred "up
front" and recovered, with a reasonable profit margin, through future years'
charges. In addition, the company cannot increase certain charges under the
Policies in the pricing process.

Therefore, in my opinion, the fees and charges deducted under the Policies, in
the aggregate, are reasonable in relation to the services rendered, the expenses
expected to be incurred, and the risks assumed by the company.

I hereby consent to the use of this opinion, which is included as an Exhibit to
the Registration Statement.

/s/ Calvin R. Birkey
---------------------------------------
Calvin R. Birkey, FSA, MAAA
Managing Actuary
Transamerica Life Insurance Company
(formerly PFL Life Insurance Company)
Exhibit 31.2


CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER


I, Dan Lamadrid, certify that:


1. I have reviewed this Amendment No. 1 on Form 10-K/A to the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Ascena Retail Group, Inc.; and


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.





December14,2020/s/ Dan LamadridDan LamadridChief Financial Officer
# C_2007155EN.01002201.xml

| 7.7.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 155/22 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.7.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 155/22

---

Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 16 May 2007 — Trek Bicycle v OHIM — Audi (ALLTREK)

(Case T-158/05) (1)

1

(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the Community word mark ALLTREK - Earlier national word mark TREK - Relative ground for refusal - No likelihood of confusion - No similarity of goods - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/04)

(2007/C 155/42)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Trek Bicycle Corp. (Waterloo, Wisconsin, United States) (represented by: J. Kroher and A. Hettenkofer, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: initially, B. Müller, subsequently, G. Schneider, acting as Agents)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervener before the Court: Audi AG (Ingolstadt, Germany) (represented by: L. von Zumbusch and M. Groebl, lawyers)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervener before the Court:

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 2 February 2005 (Case R 587/2004-4) relating to Opposition Proceedings between Trek Bicycle Corp. and Audi AG.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders the applicant to pay the costs incurred by the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs); |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders the applicant to pay the costs incurred by the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs);

| 3. | Orders the intervener to bear its costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders the intervener to bear its costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 171 of 9.7.2005.

1

---
Case No. 5,427.

#### GILL v. PATTEN.

[1 Cranch, C. C. 114.] 1

Circuit Court, District of Columbia.

March Term, 1803.

Pleading — Withdrawal op Plea op Covenants Performed — Special Plea.

The court will give the defendant leave to withdraw the plea of covenants performed, and to file a special plea, if it appear to be a plea to the merits, and not decidedly bad, leaving the plaintiff to his demurrer.

Covenant for rent. Plea, covenants performed.

Mr. Youngs, for defendant,

moved for leave to withdraw the plea, and file a special plea, stating a covenant on the part of Gill that he would pay the ground-rent due to W. T. Alexander, but had not done it, whereby Patten was prevented from occupying fully, for fear of having his goods seized for that rent due to Alexander.

The first plea was put in at the rules in time. THE COURT not being certain that the plea offered is bad, and not being willing to decide upon the validity of the plea, permitted to be filed.

[See Cases Nos. 5,42S-0,430.]
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

EASTERN DIVISION

MALIK J. SOUDAH, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

 Civil Action 2:11-cv-206

v. Judge GREGORY L. FROST

 Magistrate Judge E.A. Preston Deavers

RADOSLAW LEWKOWSKI, et al., 

Defendants.

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

Plaintiffs filed the Complaint in this action on March 4, 2011. To date, Plaintiffs have

not effected service of process as required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m). On August

1, 2011, the Court ordered Plaintiffs to show cause within fourteen days why the Court should

not dismiss the action and why the Court should allow an extension of time to effect service. 

(ECF No. 3.) Plaintiffs have not responded to the Court’s Show Cause Order. The undersigned

therefore RECOMMENDS that the Court dismiss this action without prejudice pursuant to Rule

4(m) for failure to timely effect service of process. 

PROCEDURE ON OBJECTIONS

If any party seeks review by the District Judge of this Report and Recommendation, that

party may, within fourteen (14) days, file and serve on all parties objections to the Report and

Recommendation, specifically designating this Report and Recommendation, and the part in

question, as well as the basis for objection. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b). 

Response to objections must be filed within fourteen (14) days after being served with a copy.

Case: 2:11-cv-00206-GLF-EPD Doc #: 4 Filed: 08/24/11 Page: 1 of 2 PAGEID #: <pageID>
Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b).

The parties are specifically advised that the failure to object to the Report and

Recommendation will result in a waiver of the right to de novo review by the District Judge and

waiver of the right to appeal the judgment of the District Court. See, e.g., Pfahler v. Nat’l Latex

Prod. Co., 517 F.3d 816, 829 (6th Cir. 2007) (holding that “failure to object to the magistrate

judge’s recommendations constituted a waiver of [the defendant’s] ability to appeal the district

court’s ruling”); United States v. Sullivan, 431 F.3d 976, 984 (6th Cir. 2005) (holding that

defendant waived appeal of district court’s denial of pretrial motion by failing to timely object to

magistrate judge’s report and recommendation). Even when timely objections are filed,

appellate review of issues not raised in those objections is waived. Robert v. Tesson, 507 F.3d

981, 994 (6th Cir. 2007) (“[A] general objection to a magistrate judge’s report, which fails to

specify the issues of contention, does not suffice to preserve an issue for appeal . . . .”) (citation

omitted)) 

Date: August 24, 2011 /s/ Elizabeth A. Preston Deavers 

 Elizabeth A. Preston Deavers

 United States Magistrate Judge 

2

Case: 2:11-cv-00206-GLF-EPD Doc #: 4 Filed: 08/24/11 Page: 2 of 2 PAGEID #: <pageID>
(Reap. Dec. 8328)

#### Luria Steel & Trading Corp. *v.*United States

Entry No. 2773-H.

(Decided August 5, 1954)

*Sharretts, Paley & Carter*for the plaintiff.

*Warren E. Burger,*Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Oliver, Chief Judge:

This appeal for reappraisement has been submitted for decision upon the following stipulation of counsel for the parties hereto:

> IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by and between counsel that the market value or the price at the time of exportation of this steel line pipe to the United States, at which such or similar merchandise was freely offered for sale to all purchasers in the principal markets of the country from which exported, in the usual wholesale quantities and in the ordinary course of trade, for exportation to the United States, plus 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, was £55-8-4 per 100 feet E. O. B. British port and that there was no higher foreign value.

> IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED that this appeal for re-appraisement be submitted upon this stipulation.

On the agreed facts I find the export value, as that value is defined in section 402 (d) of the Tariff Act of 1930, to be the proper basis for the determination of the value of the merchandise here involved, and that such value was Sterling 55-8-4 per 100 feet f. o. b. British port.

Judgment will be rendered accordingly.
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 8970 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 8970

 To direct the Secretary of Homeland Security to establish a publicly 
 available database that includes information regarding aliens without 
lawful status in the United States who have been convicted of felonies.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              July 9, 2024

 Mr. Molinaro (for himself, Mr. D'Esposito, Ms. Stefanik, Mr. Williams 
 of New York, Mr. Lawler, and Mr. Langworthy) introduced the following 
       bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To direct the Secretary of Homeland Security to establish a publicly 
 available database that includes information regarding aliens without 
lawful status in the United States who have been convicted of felonies.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Illegal Offender Registry Act''.

SEC. 2. DATABASE OF INFORMATION REGARDING ALIENS WITHOUT LAWFUL STATUS 
              WHO HAVE BEEN CONVICTED OF FELONIES.

    Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act, 
the Secretary of Homeland Security shall establish a database that is 
publicly available on the website of the Department of Homeland 
Security that includes, for each alien without lawful status in the 
United States under the immigration laws (as such term is defined in 
section 101 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101)) who 
is physically present in the United States, and has been convicted of a 
felony in the United States, the following information:
            (1) The locality in which the alien resides.
            (2) The alien's name.
            (3) The crime for which the alien was convicted.
                                 <all>
```
### MEMORANDUM OPINION
No. 04

- 11

- 00273

- CV Tracy James JEWELL , Appellant

v. Melonie Rose JEWELL , Appellee
From the 216th Judicial District Court , Bandera County, Texas Trial Court No. FL

- 11

- 007 Honorable Thomas F. Lee , Judge Presiding
PER CURIAM Sitting: Catherine Stone, Chief Justice Steven C. Hilbig, Justice Marialyn Barnard, Justice
Delivered and Filed: October 5, 2011
DISMISSED FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION
Tra cey James Jewell appealed the trial court ’ s judgment rendered on April 22, 2011. Jewell’s brief was due on August 12, 2011. Neither the brief nor a motion for extension of time was filed. On August 31, 2011, we ordered Appellant to file, not later than Sep tember 12, 2011, his appellant ’ s brief and a written response reasonably explaining his failure to timely file the brief. We advised Appellant that if he failed to file a brief and the written response by the date ordered, we would dismiss the appeal for w ant of prosecution. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 38.8(a); see04

- 11

- 00273

- CV

- 2

- also T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 42.3(c) (court may dismiss appeal because appellant has failed to comply with a court order within the time provided). Appellant has not filed a brief or the written response ordered by the court.
We therefore order this appeal dismissed for want of prosecution. We further order that appellee, Melonie Rose Jewell , recover her costs in this appeal from Tracy James Jewell

.

PER CURIAM
# C_2007296EN.01000602.xml

| 8.12.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 296/6 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.12.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 296/6

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.4824 — KRAFT/Danone Biscuits)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2007/C 296/06)

On 9 November 2007, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(2) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | from the Europa competition website (http://ec.europa.eu/comm/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

from the Europa competition website (http://ec.europa.eu/comm/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website under document number 32007M4824. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law (http://eur-lex.europa.eu). |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website under document number 32007M4824. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law (http://eur-lex.europa.eu).

---
Exhibit 32.2



TAMPA ELECTRIC COMPANY



Certification of Periodic Financial Report

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350



Each of the
undersigned officers of Tampa Electric Company (the Company) certifies, under the standards set forth in and solely for the purposes of 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that,
to his knowledge, the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarter ended Mar. 31, 2004 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and information contained in that Form 10-Q
fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



|                   |  |  |  |                                        
|------------------ |  |  |  | ---------------------------------------
|                   |  | 
|Dated: May 7, 2004 |  |  |  | /s/    R. D. FAGAN                     
|                   |  |  |  |                                        
|                   |  |  |  | Robert D. Fagan Chief Executive Officer



|                   |  |  |  |                                           
|------------------ |  |  |  | ------------------------------------------
|                   |  | 
|Dated: May 7, 2004 |  |  |  | /s/    G. L. GILLETTE                     
|                   |  |  |  |                                           
|                   |  |  |  | Gordon L. Gillette Chief Financial Officer
```

[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 105 (Thursday, May 31, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 32010]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-13246]

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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

Bureau of Industry and Security

15 CFR Part 748

Applications (Classification, Advisory, and License) and 
Documentation

CFR Correction

0
In Title 15 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Parts 300 to 799, 
revised as of April 1, 2012, on page 459, in Supplement 7 to part 748, 
in the fourth column of the table, the two entries for ``National 
Semiconductor Hong Kong Limited'' are removed.

[FR Doc. 2012-13246 Filed 5-30-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 1505-01-D
```
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS

444444444444

NO. 11-0441

444444444444

IN RE MICHAEL N. BLAIR, RELATOR

4444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444

ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS

4444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444

JUSTICE LEHRMANN, joined by CHIEF JUSTICE JEFFERSON, JUSTICE JOHNSON, and JUSTICE

WILLETT, dissenting.

In 1994, Michael Blair was convicted of and sentenced to death for a murder he did not

commit. In 2004, while still on death row for the murder conviction, Blair pled guilty to four counts

of molesting a child and began serving life sentences for those convictions. The murder conviction

was set aside in 2008, and Blair then began his quest for compensation under the Tim Cole Act. See

TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE §§ 103.001–.154.

For the reasons stated in the plurality opinion, I agree that, to the extent the Comptroller

preserved the argument, Blair is not procedurally barred from seeking judicial review in this Court

of the Comptroller’s denial of his second application for compensation under the Tim Cole Act. 

More specifically, I do not believe the Act requires claimants to submit an application to cure to the

Comptroller after a denial of compensation “if there is nothing to cure.” ___ S.W.3d at ___. Nor

do I believe the Act prohibits successive applications.
However, I also join Part IV of JUSTICE BOYD’S concurrence and would hold that Blair’s

2004 felony conviction does not foreclose Blair’s eligibility for any compensation under the Act. 

The plain language of the Act, when properly construed in context, confirms that an applicant who

is convicted of a felony (meaning the act of conviction, not the status of being convicted) after he

becomes eligible for compensation is not wholly deprived of such eligibility. See TEX. CIV. PRAC.

&REM.CODE § 103.154(a) (“[C]ompensation payments to a person under this chapter terminate if,

after the date the person becomes eligible for compensation . . . , the person is convicted of a crime

punishable as a felony. Compensation payments terminate under this subsection on the date of the

subsequent conviction.”) (emphasis added). Underthissection, the compensation payments to which

Blair was otherwise entitled for the wrongful murder conviction terminated upon, but were not

nullified by, the 2004 conviction. As the concurrence notes, while such a result may not be

“desirable under the circumstances of this case,” neither is it “absurd for the State to compensate

Blair for the ten years he spent on death row for a murder he did not commit.” ___ S.W.3d at ___.

I would conditionally grant mandamus relief and order the Comptroller to compensate Blair

for time served prior to his conviction in 2004. Accordingly, I respectfully dissent.

_________________________________

Debra H. Lehrmann

Justice

OPINION DELIVERED: August 23, 2013

2
Jump to navigation

            - About
            - Browse Collections
            - Advanced Search
            - Contact

## You are here

- Home  › 
- Browse Collections  › 
- U.S. Government Posters

# It's smokeless, smokeless-- not harmless!

                - U.S. Government Posters

## Description

                    -           Title        
                    -  It's smokeless, smokeless-- not harmless! 
                    -           Creator        
                    -  United States. American Forces Information Service 
                    -           Publisher        
                    -  American Forces Information Service, Department of Defense 
                    -           Description        
                    -  Shipping list no.: 99-0059-P. 
                    -           Subject: Time        
                    -  1990-2000 
                    -           Subject: Place        
                    -  United States 
                    -           Series Title        
                    -  Defense billboard ; 131; Defense billboard (1988) ; # 131. 
                    -           Physical Description        
                    -  156 × 44 cm 
                    -           Number of Pages        
                    -  1 
                    -           Host institution        
                    -  University of Iowa. Libraries. Government Publications 
                    -           Digitization Specifications        
                    -  Scanned with Zeutschel OS 12000 Scanner at 300 ppi, 24-bit color. Archival tiff image available. 
                    -           Rights Management        
                    -  This is a work of the U.S. Government and is not subject to copyright protection in the United States. 
                    -           Contact Information        
                    -  Please contact the Government Publications Department at the University of Iowa Libraries: lib-govpub@uiowa.edu. 
                    -           Item Type (AAT)        
                    -  Posters 
                    -           Item Type (IMT)        
                    -  jpeg 

                - Contact the Libraries
                - Library locations & hours
                - News & Events
                - Help using the Libraries
                - Assistance for people with disabilities
                - Our diversity statement
                - Thank a Librarian
                - Web site/page feedback  OR  general suggestions
                -  

                -  
                - 100 Main Library (LIB)
                - 125 West Washington St.
                - Iowa City, IA 52242-1420
                - 319-335-5299 (Service Desk)
                - ©2020  The University of Iowa
                -