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


     THIS  ASSIGNMENT,  effective  as  of  November  30,  2001,  by  Noveon
Holdings,  Inc., a Delaware  corporation  ("Assignor"),  to Noveon, Inc., a
Delaware corporation ("Assignee").

     WHEREAS,  Assignor is the holder of a promissory  note dated  November
30, 2001 between Steven J. Demetriou as maker and Noveon Holdings,  Inc. as
payee (the "Note");

     WHEREAS,  Assignor is a party to the Security Agreement dated November
30, 2001 between Steven J. Demetriou as pledgee and Noveon  Holdings,  Inc.
as pledgor (the "Security Agreement");

     WHEREAS, Assignor desires to assign and transfer all of its rights and
obligations pursuant to the Note and the Security Agreement to Assignee.

     NOW,  THEREFORE,  in consideration of the rights and obligations being
assigned hereunder, the parties hereto agree as follows:

     1.  Assignment.  Assignor hereby assigns and transfers to Assignee for
its  benefit  all of  Assignor's  rights,  duties,  obligations,  title and
interest  in and to the  Note and  Security  Agreement,  including  without
limitation  (i) all rights of Assignor to receive  moneys due and to become
due  under or  pursuant  to the  Note or  Security  Agreement  and (ii) all
obligations  and duties of  Assignor  arising  under the Note and  Security
Agreement.

     2.  Acceptance.  Assignee hereby accepts the foregoing  assignment and
agrees to perform each and every  obligation of Assignor under the Note and
Security Agreement.


      IN WITNESS  WHEREOF,  this  Assignment  has been duly  executed by the
parties hereto effective as of the date first above written.

ASSIGNOR:                                ASSIGNEE:

Noveon Holdings, Inc.                    Noveon, Inc.



/s/ Christopher R. Clegg                 /s/ Christopher R. Clegg
--------------------------------------   --------------------------------
Christopher R. Clegg                     Christopher R. Clegg
Senior Vice President, General Counsel   Senior Vice President, General Counsel
and Secretary                            and Secretary


<PAGE>




ACCEPTED and AGREED this 30th day of
November, 2001:


/s/ Steven J. Demetriou
-----------------------------
Steven J. Demetriou
II 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 3533 

To appropriate, with an offset, $36,000,000 for the Seafood Import Monitoring Program of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 

to increase audits of imported shrimp and red snapper. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

DECEMBER 14, 2023 

Mr. KENNEDY introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred 

to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To appropriate, with an offset, $36,000,000 for the Seafood 

Import Monitoring Program of the National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration to increase audits of imported shrimp and red snapper. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. INCREASED AUDITS OF IMPORTED SHRIMP 

4 AND RED SNAPPER BY SEAFOOD IMPORT 

5 MONITORING PROGRAM. 

6 (a) IN GENERAL.—There are appropriated, out of 

7 any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, 

8 $36,000,000 to the Administrator of the National Oceanic 

2 

•S 3533 IS

1 and Atmospheric Administration for fiscal year 2024 for 

2 the Seafood Import Monitoring Program to increase au3 dits of imported shrimp and red snapper. 

4 (b) OFFSET.—Of the balances of amounts appro5 priated or otherwise made available for activities of the 

6 Internal Revenue Service by paragraphs (1)(A)(ii), 

7 (1)(A)(iii), (1)(B), (2), (3), (4), and (5) of section 10301 

8 of Public Law 117–169 (commonly known as the ‘‘Infla9 tion Reduction Act of 2022’’) that are available for obliga10 tion as of the date of the enactment of this Act, 

11 $36,000,000 are hereby rescinded. 

Æ
#### Eugene JOHNSON v. STATE of Louisiana, DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY.

No. 11801.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana, First Circuit.

Feb. 13, 1978.

*663Phil E. Miley, Baton Rouge, of counsel, for plaintiff-appellant Eugene Johnson.

Foye L. Lowe, Jr., Baton Rouge, of counsel, for defendant-appellee State of Louisiana, Dept, of Public Safety.

Before BLANCHE, COVINGTON and CHIASSON, JJ.

COVINGTON, Judge.

Eugene Johnson instituted this suit on May 19, 1977, to obtain a restricted driver’s license and for injunctive relief against the State of Louisiana, through the Department of Public Safety. After hearing, the trial court denied the petitioner’s demands, and he has appealed. We affirm.

The basis for the petitioner’s suit is LSA-R.S. 32:415.1, which allows the granting of a restricted driver’s license under certain circumstances if the revocation of a licensee’s driving privileges will deprive him or his family of the necessities of life or will prevent him from earning a livelihood.

The only evidence offered to support the petitioner’s contention was his own testimony. His testimony shows that he works as a welder at Delta Southern, and that he usually worked the 3:30 to midnight shift, five days a week. From his own testimony, the petitioner does not need an automobile on his job; as a welder, his job activities do not require him to operate an automobile. The petitioner admitted to two convictions for DWI.

The trial judge, after hearing the testimony, found that:

> “(I)t will be a substantial inconvenience if the Court did not grant him a restricted driver’s license, but it would not mean that he would lose his job and after all when a person had got two convictions on DWI it appears to the Court that he does serve to be a substantial hazard to the safety of the people using the highways.”

We have reviewed the evidence, and find no abuse of the trial court’s discretion in denying the petitioner’s application for restricted driving privileges. We affirm the judgment at the petitioner’s costs.

AFFIRMED.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
COMPANY'S CONSOLIDATED CONDENSED STATEMENTS AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                    3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                          10,078
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   12,959
<ALLOWANCES>                                     1,956
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                28,488
<PP&E>                                         244,504
<DEPRECIATION>                                  11,380
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 330,570
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          153,185
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          179,211
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        (3,740)
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   330,570
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                11,082
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   10,894
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                35,699
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 537
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (36,048)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (36,048)
<DISCONTINUED>                                 (36,048)
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (42,018)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (1.80)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (1.80)


</TABLE>
QuickLinks
 -- Click here to rapidly navigate through this document



	

 	 	Exhibit 4.42




news release  


  
 

    NORANDA TO WEBCAST 2002
  FINANCIAL RESULTS CONFERENCE CALL    
  


TORONTO, ONTARIO, February 5, 2003 — Noranda Inc. announced today that it will host a live,
interactive internet webcast presentation for shareholders and investors on Tuesday, February 11, at 10:00 a.m. (EST), to review its 2002 financial results. Fourth-quarter 2002 results
for the Company will be released on Tuesday, February 11, ahead of the market opening. 


During
the meeting, senior management from the Company will review financial and operating results for 2002. The live, interactive webcast and slide presentation will be accessible via  www.noranda.com under
the "For Investors" section. 


If
you are unable to participate during the live webcast, the call will be archived on Noranda's website at www.noranda.com. To access the replay, click
on the Conference Call button on the home page. 


Noranda Inc. is a leading international mining and metals company with more than 48 mining and metallurgical operations and projects under development in 17 countries.
Noranda is one of the world's largest producers of zinc and nickel and is a significant producer of copper, primary and fabricated aluminum, lead, silver, gold, sulphuric acid and cobalt. Noranda is
also a major recycler of secondary
copper, nickel and precious metals. Noranda employs over 16,000 people. It is listed on The Toronto Stock Exchange and The New York Stock Exchange (NRD).


-30- 


Contact:  


Dale
Coffin

Manager, External Communications

Tel: 416-982-7161

dale.coffin@toronto.norfalc.com

www.noranda.com 









QuickLinks


NORANDA TO WEBCAST 2002 FINANCIAL RESULTS CONFERENCE CALL
Exhibit 32.1






CERTIFICATIONS PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


(18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350)






In connection with the Quarterly Report of Sierra Resource Group, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, James M. Stonehouse, 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:




(1)           The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 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 result of operations of the Company.






Sierra Resource Group, Inc.RegistrantDate: August 23, 2010
By:
/s/ James M. StonehouseName : James M. StonehouseTitle: James M. StonehouseChief Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer)
#### Robert ARD, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 2483.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

March 20, 1970.

Rehearing Denied April 22, 1970.

Leo W. Haley, Orlando, for appellant.

Earl Faircloth, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Charles W. Musgrove, Asst. Atty. Gen., West Palm Beach, for appellee.

WALDEN, Judge.

Defendant was convicted of second degree murder and duly sentenced. He appeals. We reverse.

The warning requirements of Miranda v. State of Arizona, 1966, 384 U.S. 436, 86 S.Ct. 1602, 16 L.Ed.2d 694, are well known. Essentially we determine here if a confession made prior to the Miranda decision which is offered in evidence at a trial held subsequent to Miranda must meet the Miranda requirements in order to be admissible. The confession in question was received in evidence over objection despite the fact that it was not in compliance with Miranda. This was error.

Although it was impossible at the time of the arrest for the police officers to know what type of warning was required on their part, the Miranda standards are applicable to all confessions which are sought to be introduced if the trial is commenced subsequent to the Miranda decision. Johnson v. State of New Jersey, 1966, 384 U.S. 719, 86 S.Ct. 1772, 16 L.Ed. 2d 882; Glover v. State, Fla.App. 1967, 203 So.2d 676. The rationale of this application of the Miranda requirements is that as of the date of the Miranda decision, the authorities were put on fair notice of the *440requirements for valid confessions and that they should see that any confession introduced subsequent to Miranda complies with it.

Notwithstanding- the fact that there is substantial evidence of the defendant’s guilt in the record, even without the inadmissible confession, such admission constitutes fundamental error and requires reversal. Blackburn v. Alabama, 1960, 361 U.S. 199, 80 S.Ct. 274, 4 L.Ed.2d 242; Reddish v. State, Fla.1964, 167 So.2d 858; Abram v. State, Fla.App.1968, 216 So.2d 498; Jones v. State, Fla.App. 1967, 200 So. 2d 574.

The other points raised by defendant have been considered and are deemed to be without merit.

The judgment appealed is reversed and remanded for a new trial.

Reversed and remanded.

McCAIN and REED, JJ„ concur.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                              5
<CIK>                                  0000907127
<NAME>                                 SIMS COMMUNICATIONS, INC.
<MULTIPLIER>                                                    1
<CURRENCY>                                                     US

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                                  12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                          JUN-30-1999
<PERIOD-START>                                              JUL-1-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                               JUN-30-1999
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                                 1
<CASH>                                                    189,772
<SECURITIES>                                                    0
<RECEIVABLES>                                             282,724
<ALLOWANCES>                                               31,811
<INVENTORY>                                               227,033
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                        1,168,055
<PP&E>                                                  4,402,696
<DEPRECIATION>                                          2,106,053
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                          6,374,862
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                   2,142,550
<BONDS>                                                         0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                           0
<PREFERRED>                                                    11
<COMMON>                                                    1,673
<OTHER-SE>                                              4,104,922
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                            6,374,862
<SALES>                                                 2,212,376
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                        2,212,376
<CGS>                                                     634,518
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                           8,365,937
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                          446,753
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                                0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                        337,153
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                        (7,571,985)
<INCOME-TAX>                                                    0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                    (7,571,985)
<DISCONTINUED>                                                  0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                                 0
<CHANGES>                                                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                           (7,571,985)
<EPS-BASIC>                                                 (0.71)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                               (0.71)



</TABLE>
#### Fritz LOEWENTHAL v. FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF GREENVILLE, Miss., Jerome S. Hafter & Walter Kirchheimer, Executors of Estate of Cecilia Rosenfeld, Decessed.

No. 45861.

Supreme Court of Mississippi.

June 1, 1970.

Rehearing Denied July 2, 1970.

Bogen & Bogen, Greenville, for appellant.

Lake, Tindall & Hunger, Greenville, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
#### SAFETY MOTOR TRANSIT CORPORATION, Appellant, v. James A. LYONS, Appellee.

No. 4109.

Circuit Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Jan. 6, 1937.

Woods, Chitwood, Coxe & Rogers, of Roanoke, Va., for appellant.

Showalter, Parsons, Kuyk & Coleman, of Roanoke, Va., for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Appeal dismissed on joint motion of attorneys.
EXHIBIT
32.2





CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT


TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In
conjunction with the quarterly report on Form 10-Q of International Fuel
Technology, Inc. (the “Company”) for the period ended September 30, 2008, as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
“Report”),





I, Stuart
D. Beath, the Chief 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, 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, 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.








Dated:  November
      12, 2008
                By:
                /s/Stuart D.
      BeathStuart
      D. BeathChief
      Financial Officer
# L_2005108EN.01006001.xml

| 29.4.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 108/60 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

29.4.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 108/60

---

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 669/2005

of 28 April 2005

fixing the maximum export refund on oats in connection with the invitation to tender issued in Regulation (EC) No 1565/2004

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1784/2003 of 29 September 2003 on the common organisation of the market in cereals (1), and in particular Article 7 thereof,

Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 1501/95 of 29 June 1995 laying down certain detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1766/92 on the granting of export refunds on cereals and the measures to be taken in the event of disturbance on the market for cereals (2), and in particular Article 4 thereof,

Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 1565/2004 of 3 September 2004 on a special intervention measure for oats in Finland and Sweden for the 2004/2005 marketing year (3),

Whereas:

| (1) | An invitation to tender for the refund for the export of oats produced in Finland and Sweden for export from Finland or Sweden to all third countries with the exception of Bulgaria, Norway, Romania and Switzerland was opened pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1565/2004. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

An invitation to tender for the refund for the export of oats produced in Finland and Sweden for export from Finland or Sweden to all third countries with the exception of Bulgaria, Norway, Romania and Switzerland was opened pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1565/2004.

| (2) | On the basis of the criteria laid down in Article 1 of Regulation (EC) No 1501/95, a maximum refund should be fixed. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

On the basis of the criteria laid down in Article 1 of Regulation (EC) No 1501/95, a maximum refund should be fixed.

| (3) | The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Cereals, |
| --- | --- |

(3)

The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Cereals,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

For tenders notified from 22 to 28 April 2005, pursuant to the invitation to tender issued in Regulation (EC) No 1565/2004, the maximum refund on exportation of oats shall be 32,95 EUR/t.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on 29 April 2005.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 28 April 2005.

For the Commission

Mariann FISCHER BOEL

Member of the Commission

---

(1)  
  OJ L 270, 21.10.2003, p. 78.

1

(2)  
  OJ L 147, 30.6.1995, p. 7. Regulation as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1431/2003 (OJ L 203, 12.8.2003, p. 16).

2

(3)  
  OJ L 285, 4.9.2004, p. 3.

3

---
#### Frank A. STUART, M. D., P. A., and Underwriters at Lloyds, Appellants, v. Ruth Johnson McCUTCHEON and Louis N. McCutcheon, her husband, Appellees.

No. 78-674.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

July 12, 1978.

*493James E. Tribble of Blackwell, Walker, Gary, Powers, Flick & Hoehl, Miami, for appellants.

George A. Williamson, Fort Lauderdale, for appellees.

PER CURIAM.

This improper interlocutory appeal is treated as a petition for common law certio-rari pursuant to Fla.R.App.P. 9.040(c). Cer-tiorari-is hereby denied.

CROSS, MOORE and BERANEK, JJ., concur.
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 206 (Friday, October 24, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 55412]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-28183]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Cancer Institute; Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice is hereby given of the following 
National Cancer Institute Special Emphasis Panel (SEP) meeting.

    Name of SEP: Community Clinical Oncology Program.
    Date: November 17-18, 1997.
    Time: 8:30 a.m. to Adjournment.
    Place: Key Bridge Marriott, 1401 Lee Highway, Arlington, VA 
22209.
    Contact Person: Ray Bramhall, Ph.D., Scientific Review 
Administrator, National Cancer Institute, NIH, Executive Plaza 
North, Room 636B, 6130 Executive Boulevard, MSC 74, Bethesda, MD 
20892-7407; Telephone: 301/496-3428.
    Purpose/Agenda: To review, discuss and evaluate grant 
applications.
    The meeting will be closed in accordance with the provisions set 
forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5, U.S.C. 
Applications and the discussions could reveal confidential trade 
secrets or commercial property such as patentable material and 
personal information concerning individuals associated with the 
applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly 
unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Numbers: 93.393, 
Cancer Cause and Prevention Research; 93.394, Cancer Detection and 
Diagnosis Research; 93.395, Cancer Treatment Research; 93.396, 
Cancer Biology Research; 93.397, Cancer Centers Support; 93.398, 
Cancer Research Manpower; 93.399, Cancer Control)

    Dated: October 17, 1997.
LaVerne Y. Stringfield,
Committee Management Officer, National Institutes of Health.
[FR Doc. 97-28183 Filed 10-23-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-M