alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### A. A. Baker, Respondent, *vs.*Henry J. Rice, Appellant.

1. *Jury*— Notes *of evidence given*to, *etc.*— It would undoubtedly be improper to permit a jury to take the attorney’s notes of evidence without the consent of the parties or their attorneys. But where such consent is given, the circumstance cannot be afterward urged as an objection to the verdict.

*dp peal from Livingston Court of Common Pleas.*

*Dixon 8f Wait,*for Appellant.

*Broadus Pollard,*for Respondent.

Adams, Judge,

delivered the opinion of the court.

This is an action of replevin for one mare, one horse and one colt.

The defendant by his answer admitted that the plaintiff was the owner of the horse and colt and denied that he was the owner of the mare, and set up property in himself in the mare; and as to the horse and colt, the defendant alleged that they were in his possession as a pledge for payment of one hundred and fifty-six dollars, which the plaintiff had agreed to pay him and had never paid. The replication was a general denial of all the allegations of the answer.

On the trial each party gave evidence tending to prove his side of the case. After the close of the evidence the court gave five instructions for the plaintiff, and fourteen out of fifteen instructions for the defendant.

The jury found a verdict for the plaintiff and the defendant has appealed to this court.

It is unnecessary to recite the numerous instructions given in this case. It is sufficient to say that they presented the case to the jury fairly and very favorably for the defendant in all of its bearings. There was but one instruction asked by the defendant that was refused, and the substance of the refused instruction was contained in other instructions given for him.

So there was no error in.giving or refusing instructions. Those given for the plaintiff were proper expositions of the law and were supported by the evidence.

There had been a mis-trial of the case and this jury came *24into court and announced that they could not agree, and the attorney for the plaintiff, in the presence of the court and jury remarked in substance, that his client was poor and not able to stand much litigation, and he would be willing to take a majority verdict. This remark was improper and ought not to have been made, but it does not appear to have had any influence on the jury. The jury also remarked that they wanted the notes of the evidence taken down by the respective attorneys, which, after some objections, were finally given to them by the consent of the attorneys for both of the parties. It would undoubtedly have been improper to let the jury take the notes of the evidence, without the consent of the parties or their attorneys; but as they gave their consent, it cannot be urged here as an objection to the verdict.

Upon the whole case, verdict and judgment seem to be for the right party.

Judgment affirmed.

The other judges concur.
Part B of the Supporting Statement

1. Respondent Universe Respondents associated with this information collection are owners or operators of existing aerospace manufacturing and rework facilities. The North American Industrial Classification Codes (NAI CS ) associated with this industry include the following:

 336411 - Aircraft Manufacturing  336412 - Aircraft Engine and Engine Parts Manufacturing  336413 - Other Aircraft Parts and Auxiliary Equipment Manufacturing  336414 - Guided Missile and Space Vehicle Manufacturing  336415 - Guided Missile and Space Vehicle Propulsion Units and Propulsion Units Parts Manufacturing  336419 - Other Guided Missile and Space Vehicle Parts and Auxiliary Equipment Manufacturing  481111 - Scheduled Passenger Air Transportation  48111 2 - Scheduled Freight Air Transportation  481211 - Nonscheduled Chartered Passenger Air Transportation  481212 - Nonscheduled Chartered Freight Air Transportation  481219 - Other Nonscheduled Air Transportation The respondent universe was estimated to consi st of a pproximately

1,000 aerospace manufacturing and rework facilities. Several databases were used to identify aerospace manufacturing and rework facilities. These databases include OECA’s E CHO and OTIS databases, the NEI database, and the TRI database . Each database was searched b y NAICS or Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) codes to identify aerospace facilities. The resulting list of facilities was examined for duplicates and known closed facilities. Input from the industry was also obtained . All of the survey

recipients , regardless of actual or potential HAP emissions, will be required to complete some portion of the electronic survey . F acilities that are major sources of HAP emissions , facilities that have taken enforceable permit limits to restrict HAP emissions tobelow major source thresholds , and facilities with the potential to emit HAP emissions below

major source thresholds will all be required to complete the applicable sections of the survey . Thus, the government burden estimates in Table 7 are based on 1,000 survey responses. 2. Response Rates Since the information will be requested pursuant to the authority of CAA section 114, EPA expects that all respondents requested to submit information will do so.
| 1.     | Such Annual Report on Form 10-K for the period ended March 31, 2011, 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 such Annual Report on Form 10-K for the period ended March 31, 2011, fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Elite Energies, Inc. |

|                           | ELITE ENERGIES, INC. |                    |
|--------------------------------|----------------------|-------------------------|
|                           |                 |                    |   |
| Date:  June 29, 2011 | By:                  | /s/ Stephen Wan         |   |
|                           |                 | Stephen Wan             |   |
|                           |                 | Chief Financial Officer |   |
|                           |                 |                    |   |
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 Annual Report of Dehaier Medical Systems Limited (the Company) on Form 10-K/A for the year ended December 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on December 10, 2010 (the Report), I,
Ping Chen, 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 Exchange Act of 1934; and

2. The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the consolidated financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



|                  |  |  |  |  |  |                        
|----------------- |  |  |  |  |  | -----------------------
|December 10, 2010 |  |  |  |  |  | /s/ Ping Chen          
|                  |  |  |  |  |  | Ping Chen              
|                  |  |  |  |  |  | Chief Executive Officer
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

Pursuant to the requirement set forth in Rule 13a-14(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, (the “Exchange Act”) and Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code (18 U.S.C. §1350), Yancey Spruill, Chief Financial Officer of SendGrid Inc. (the “Company”), hereby certifies that, to the best of my knowledge:

|  | 1. |  | The Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2017, to which this Certification is attached as Exhibit 32.1 (the “Report”), fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of the Exchange Act; 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: February 26, 2018

 

|                                                                                                                                                            |   |   |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|--------|
| /s/ YANCEY SPRUILL

 

Yancey Spruill Chief Financial Officer, Chief Operating Officer and Treasurer(Principal Accounting and Financial Officer) |   |   |

 

This certification accompanies the Report to which it relates, is not deemed filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Exchange Act (whether made before or after the date of the Report), irrespective of any general incorporation language contained in such filing.

 

----
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 231 (Tuesday, December 2, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 63696]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-31476]


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

COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS


Agenda and Notice of Public Meeting of the Virginia Advisory 
Committee

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the rules and 
regulations of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, that a meeting of 
the Virginia Advisory Committee to the Commission will convene at 12:00 
p.m. and adjourn at 4:00 p.m. on Wednesday, December 17, 1997, at the 
Library of Virginia, 800 East Broad Street, Richmond, Virginia 23221. 
The purpose of the meeting is (1) to welcome new members and returning 
members; (2) present an administrative orientation and report on the 
status of the Commission and its State Advisory Committees; and (3) 
discuss a draft report of its project, ``The Treatment of Blacks on the 
Peninsula.''
    Persons desiring additional information, or planning a presentation 
to the Committee, should contact Committee Chairperson Roger A. Galvin, 
703-838-0083, or Ki-Taek Chun, Director of the Eastern Regional Office, 
202-376-7533 (TDD 202-376-8116). Hearing-impaired persons who will 
attend the meeting and require the services of a sign language 
interpreter should contact the Regional Office at least ten (10) 
working days before the scheduled date of the meeting.
    The meeting will be conducted pursuant to the provisions of the 
rules and regulations of the Commission.

    Dated at Washington, DC, November 19, 1997.
Carol-Lee Hurley,
Chief, Regional Programs Coordination Unit.
[FR Doc. 97-31476 Filed 12-1-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6335-01-P
<PAGE>   1
                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.30


December 6, 2000

Mr. Daniel Lutz
Chief Financial Office
Comarco, Inc.
2 Cromwell
Irvine, CA 92618-1816

Ref:    Letter Amendment for the Loan Agreement dated as of September 26, 1994
        as amended


Dear Mr. Lutz:

Pursuant to our discussion, you have notified Bank of America that the company
is in the process of making a small acquisition. The acquisition will be
considered a merger. In your review of the Loan Agreement you asked whether you
would be in violation of Section 5 (ii) which states that the Company "will not
suffer or permit any merger or consolidation", as a result of the pending
transaction. In my review of the document, it was the intent of this section to
apply if Comarco was merging or consolidating with another entity and would not
be the surviving entity. Therefore, we deem the pending transaction not to
violate this covenant.

Second, you have notified me that the company recently did a stock split in
which fractional shares were paid in cash. You asked whether this violated
Section 6 "Dividends" of the Loan Agreement, which reads Borrower will not
declare or pay any dividend (other that stock dividends), or make any
distribution in cash, assets or other property to any shareholder in respect of
the Borrower's stock. Effective with this Letter the Bank waives the violations
and changes the covenant to now read:

Borrower will not declare or pay and dividend (other than stock dividends), or
make any distribution in cash, in excess of $100,000.00, assets or other
property to any shareholder in respect of the Borrower's stock.

Please execute the original of this letter and return to my attention
acknowledging your agreement and understanding of the above change.

Sincerely


/s/ Elaine Eaton
---------------
Senior Vice President

AGREED TO THIS 6TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2000

COMARCO, INC.


By: /s/ Daniel Lutz
------------------
Name: Daniel Lutz
Title: Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

WASHINGTON, D. C. 

 

TREASURY ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON RACIAL EQUITY (TACRE) – September 19, 2023

Agenda*

Page 1 of 2

Call to Order/Roll Call 9:00 – 9:05 Snider Page, DFO 

Opening Remarks 9:05 – 9:15 Michael Nutter, Chair & 

 Felicia Wong, Vice Chair

Treasury Opening Remarks and Introduction 

Of Guest Speaker 9:15 – 9:20 Janis Bowdler, Counselor for

 Racial Equity

IRS Update on Audit Disparities and the

 Impact of Recent Budget Cuts 9:20 – 10:10 IRS Commissioner Daniel Werfel

Break 10:10 – 10:20 All

Subcommittee Preliminary Briefings With

 Full Committee Comments/Discussion Michael Nutter, Chair

• Internal Staffing and Culture 10:20 – 10:45 Michael McAfee

• Financial Health & Capital Access 10:45 – 11:10 Bulbul Gupta &

 Valerie Red-Horse Mohl

• IRA Implementation 11:10 – 11:35 Amanda Renteria 

• Research and Data Equity 11:35 – 12:00 Dr. Dorothy Brown &

Dr. John Friedman 

Adjourn Full Committee Meeting for

 Subcommittee Preparatory Working Lunch 12:00 – 2:00 All

Call to Order Full Committee Meeting 2:00 – 2:05 Snider Page, DFO

Remarks and Preparation for 

Full Committee Briefs for Voting 2:05 – 2:10 Michael Nutter, Chair

Felicia Wong, Vice Chair

 

Subcommittee Presentations for Full Committee 

Voting and Receiving by Treasury Officials

• Internal Staffing and Culture 2:10 – 2:35 Michael McAfee

Anna Canfield-Roth, Assistant 

Secretary (A/S) for 

Management
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

WASHINGTON, D. C. 

 

TREASURY ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON RACIAL EQUITY (TACRE) – September 19, 2023

Agenda*

Page 2 of 2

• Financial Health & Capital Access 2:35 – 3:00 Bulbul Gupta &

 Valerie Red-Horse Mohl

Graham Steele, A/S for Financial 

Institutions 

• IRA Implementation 3:00 – 3:25 Amanda Renteria

Lily Batchelder, A/S for Tax 

Policy, and

Laurel Blatchford, Chief 

Implementation Officer, IRA

• Research and Data Equity 3:25 – 3:50 Dr. Dorothy Brown &

Dr. John Friedman

Lily Batchelder, A/S for Tax 

Policy, and Laurel Blatchford, 

Chief Implementation Officer, 

IRA

Review/Discussion on Public Comments 3:50 – 4:00 Michael Nutter, Chair &

Felicia Wong, Vice Chair 

Break 4:00 – 4:10 All

New Business/Next Meeting 

Next Meeting (December 7th)

Expectations 4:10 – 4:20 Felicia Wong, Vice Chair

Overview of Treasury’s Process for

 Adjudication of Recommendations 4:20 – 4:30 Diane Lim, Equity Hub 

 Director

Final Comments and Adjourn 4:30 – 5:00 Michael Nutter, Chair

*Times and Presenters Subject to Change
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 225 (Friday, November 21, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 62362]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-30689]


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

NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION

[97-163]


Notice of Agency Report Forms Under OMB Review

AGENCY: National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA).

ACTION: Notice of agency report forms under OMB review.

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

SUMMARY: The National Aeronautics and Space Administration, as part of 
its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, 
invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this 
opportunity to comment on proposed and/or continuing information 
collections, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. 
L. 104-13: 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)). The information is used by NASA 
attorneys and technology transfer specialists to determine if a 
licensee is achieving and maintaining practical application of the 
licensed inventions as required by its license agreement.

DATES: Written comments and recommendations on the proposal for the 
collection of information should be received on or before January 20, 
1998.

ADDRESSES: All comments should be addressed to Mr. Michael Battaglia, 
Office of Aeronautics & Space Transportation Technology, Code RW, 
National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Washington, DC 20546-
0001. All comments will become a matter of public record and will be 
summarized in NASA's request for OMB approval.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Ms. Carmela Simonson, Office of the Chief Information Officer, (202) 
358-1223.
    Reports: None.
    Title: AST--Technology Utilization.
    OMB Number: 2700-0009.
    Type of review: Reinstatement.
    Need and Uses: As required in Section 305(b) of the National 
Aeronautics and Space Act of 1958 and the NASA Supplement to the 
Federal Acquisitions Regulations, NASA R&D contracts require federally 
funded technology to the private sector.
    Affected Public: Business or other for-profit, Not-for-profit 
institutions.
    Number of Respondents: 300.
    Responses Per Respondent: 3.
    Annual Responses: 900.
    Hours Per Request: 1 hour.
    Annual Burden Hours: 900.
    Frequency of Report: Annually.
Donald J. Andreotta,
Deputy Chief Information Officer (Operations), Office of the 
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 97-30689 Filed 11-20-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7510-01-M
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 221 (Monday, November 17, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 61421]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-30088]


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

SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION


Revocation of License of Small Business Investment Company; New 
England MESBIC, Inc.

    Pursuant to the authority granted to the United States Small 
Business Administration by the Final Order of the United States 
District Court for the District of New Hampshire, dated September 10, 
1997, the United States Small Business Administration hereby revokes 
the license of New England MESBIC, Inc., a Massachusetts, to function 
as a small business investment company under the Small Business 
Investment Company License No. 01/01-5318 issued to New England MESBIC, 
Inc. on October 26, 1982 and said license is hereby declared null and 
void as of November 5, 1997.

United States Small Business Administration.

    Dated: November 5, 1997.
Don A. Christensen,
Associate Administrator for Investment.
[FR Doc. 97-30088 Filed 11-14-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8025-01-P
#### William E. SPARKS, Appellant, v. TITUSVILLE-COCOA AIRPORT DISTRICT, William G. Henry, John C. Flake, E. E. Maxwell, James M. Mitton, Thomas S. Kenney, James H. Herring, Titusville-Cocoa Airport Authority, James Cooper and Michael S. Diogo, Appellees.

No. 70-613.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Jan. 20, 1971.

Rehearing Denied Feb. 25, 1971.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
#### John T. D’ANTONI v. Edward EZZELL.

No. 62666.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Sept. 1, 1978.

In re: Edward Ezzell, applying for certiorari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit. Parish of Orleans. 360 So.2d 262.

Writ denied.
# L_2005122EN.01001801.xml

| 14.5.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 122/18 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.5.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 122/18

---

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 739/2005

of 13 May 2005

amending Regulation (EEC) No 2921/90 as regards the amount of the aid for the production of casein and caseinates from skimmed milk

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1255/1999 of 17 May 1999 on the common organisation of the market in milk and milk products (1), and in particular Article 15(b) thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | Article 2(1) of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2921/90 of 10 October 1990 on aid for the production of casein and caseinates from skimmed milk (2), sets the amount of aid for the production of casein and caseinates from skimmed milk. In view of the development in the price of skimmed milk powder on the internal market and the price of casein and caseinates on the Community and world markets, the amount of the aid should be reduced. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Article 2(1) of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2921/90 of 10 October 1990 on aid for the production of casein and caseinates from skimmed milk (2), sets the amount of aid for the production of casein and caseinates from skimmed milk. In view of the development in the price of skimmed milk powder on the internal market and the price of casein and caseinates on the Community and world markets, the amount of the aid should be reduced.

| (2) | Regulation (EEC) No 2921/90 should be amended accordingly. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

Regulation (EEC) No 2921/90 should be amended accordingly.

| (3) | The Management Committee for Milk and Milk Products has not delivered an opinion within the time limit set by its chairman, |
| --- | --- |

(3)

The Management Committee for Milk and Milk Products has not delivered an opinion within the time limit set by its chairman,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

In Article 2(1) of Regulation (EEC) No 2921/90, ‘EUR 1,30’ is hereby replaced by ‘EUR 0,75’.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on the day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.

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

Done at Brussels, 13 May 2005.

For the Commission

Mariann FISCHER BOEL

Member of the Commission

---

(1)  
  OJ L 160, 26.6.1999, p. 48. Regulation as last amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 186/2004 (OJ L 29, 3.2.2004, p. 6).

1

(2)  
  OJ L 279, 11.10.1990, p. 22. Regulation as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 281/2005 (OJ L 48, 19.2.2005, p. 5).

2

---