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

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

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Labor

###### Pension and Welfare Benefits Administration

          - [Prohibited Transaction Exemption 2000-45; Exemption Application Nos. D-10809 and D-10865] 

# AGENCY:

Pension and Welfare Benefits Administration, U.S. Department of Labor (the Department).

# ACTION:

Notice of Technical Correction. 

                    On September 7, 2000, the Department published in the                     **Federal Register**                     (65 FR 54315) a final exemption which amends and replaces PTE 99-15 (64 FR 1648, April 5, 1999), an exemption granted to Salomon Smith Barney. PTE 99-15 relates to the operation of the TRAK Personalized Investment Advisory Service product (the TRAK Program) and the Trust for Consulting Group Capital Markets Funds (the Consulting Group).                

                    On page 54316 of the grant notice, the last sentence of the third paragraph of the                     **Supplementary Information**                    , erroneously refers to an effective date of July 10, 2000 with respect to Section III(d) of the grant notice. Thus, the sentence should be revised to read as follows:                

The Final Exemption is effective as of April 1, 2000 with respect to the amendments to Sections II(i) and III(b) of the grant notice and the inclusion of new Section III(d) of the grant notice.

Also on page 54316 of the grant notice, clause (c) of Footnote 1, should be revised as follows to describe more accurately the purpose of the automated reallocation option:

(c) adopted an automated reallocation option under the TRAK Program which would afford an Independent Plan Fiduciary the option of having his or her asset allocation adjusted automatically whenever the Consulting Group changes an allocation model;

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Ms. Jan D. Broady of the Department at (202) 219-8881. (This is not a toll-free number.)

Signed at Washington, DC, this 18th day of September, 2000.

Ivan L. Strasfeld,

Director of Exemption Determinations, Pension and Welfare Benefits Administration, Department of Labor.

[FR Doc. 00-24388  Filed 9-21-00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4510-29-M
**EXHIBIT 21.1**    **Legal Entities** **Jurisdiction**     D-R Holdings (France) S.A.S.     France    D-R Holdings (Germany) GmbH     Germany    D-R Holdings (Netherlands) B.V.     Netherlands    D-R Holdings Norway AS     Norway    D-R Holdings (U.K.) Ltd.     United Kingdom    D-R International Sales LLC     Cayman Islands    D-R Steam LLC     United States of America    Dresser-Rand (Nigeria) Ltd.     Nigeria    Dresser-Rand (SEA) Pte. Ltd.     Singapore    Dresser-Rand (U.K.) Ltd.     United Kingdom    Dresser-Rand AS     Norway    Dresser-Rand Asia Pacific Sdn. Bhd.     Malaysia    Dresser-Rand B.V.     Netherlands    Dresser-Rand Canada, Inc.     Canada    Dresser-Rand CIS     Moscow    Dresser-Rand Comercio e Industria Ltda.     Brazil    Dresser-Rand Company     United States of America    Dresser-Rand Company Ltd.     United Kingdom    Dresser-Rand de Mexico S.A. de C.V.     Mexico    Dresser-Rand de Venezuela, S.A.     Venezuela    Dresser-Rand do Brasil, Ltda.     Brazil    Dresser-Rand Engineered Equipment (Shanghai) Ltd.     China    Dresser-Rand Global Services, Inc.     United States of America    Dresser-Rand GmbH     Germany    Dresser-Rand Holding (Delaware) LLC     United States of America    Dresser-Rand India Private Limited     India    Dresser-Rand International B.V.     Netherlands    Dresser-Rand Italia S.r.l     Italy    Dresser-Rand Japan Ltd.     Japan    Dresser-Rand LLC     United States of America    Dresser-Rand Machinery Repair Belgie N.V.     Belgium    Dresser-Rand Nadrowski GmbH     Germany    Dresser-Rand Overseas Sales Company Ltd.      United States of America    Dresser-Rand Power LLC     United States of America    Dresser-Rand S.A.      France    Dresser-Rand s.r.o.      Czech Republic    Dresser-Rand Sales Company S.A.      Switzerland    Dresser-Rand Services B.V.      Netherlands    Dresser-Rand Services, S. de R.L. de C.V.      Mexico    Dresser-Rand Services, S.a.r.l     Switzerland    Dresser-Rand Thailand, LLC     United States of America    PT Dresser-Rand Services Indonesia     Indonesia    Turbodyne Electric Power Corporation     United States of America
EXHIBIT 32.1





CERTIFICATE PURSUANT TO SECTION 906


OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-K of PVH Corp. (the “Company”) for the fiscal year ended February 2, 2014 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Emanuel Chirico, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:





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




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




Dated: April 3, 2014





By:/s/ Emanuel ChiricoName:Emanuel ChiricoChairman and Chief Executive Officer





A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
EXHIBIT 99.1


                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



In connection with the Quarterly Report of CYOP Systems International Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2002 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Mitch
White, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
ss.1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
hereby certify that to the best of my knowledge:


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


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

/s/ Mitch White

Mitch White
Chief Executive Officer
August 14, 2002

This certification accompanies this Report pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of
Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
|                                                                                    
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                    
|View History: Annual Download Data (XLS File)                                      
|View History: Annual                                                                
|View History: Annual                                                                
|View History:                                                                       
|                                                                                    
|Gulf Of Mexico Natural Gas Total Liquids Extracted in Mississippi (Thousand Barrels)
|                                                                                    
|                                                                                    
|Gulf Of Mexico Natural Gas Total Liquids Extracted in Mississippi (Thousand Barrels)
|                                                                                    

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|2010's                                                                                                                            |        |        | 6,008  | 5,009  | 6,741  | 8,953  | 6,198  | 12,539 | 11,971 | 13,755
|2020's                                                                                                                            | 11,750 | 13,767 | 13,399 |        |        |        |        |        |        |       
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 7/31/2024                                                                                                          
|Next Release Date: 8/30/2024
Ronald E. 

Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

May 14, 2015

No. 04-15-00269-CV

Christopher GARCIA and Patrick Mendoza,

Appellants

v.

Ronald E. BRUNO,

Appellee

From the 111th Judicial District Court, Webb County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2015CVQ000699 D2

Honorable Monica Z. Notzon, Judge Presiding

ORDER

On April 27, 2015, appellant Patrick Mendoza filed a premature notice of appeal 

acknowledging that the trial court had not entered an appealable order but stating the notice of 

appeal was necessary to protect Mendoza’s rights in the event a federal court issued a 

preliminary injunction in a separate cause. On April 28, 2014, appellant Christopher Garcia also 

filed a premature notice of appeal for the same reasons.

On May 8, 2015, appellant Patrick Mendoza filed a motion to dismiss his appeal, stating, 

“The appeal was filed prematurely, and the appeal is no longer necessary.” Because no 

appealable order has been entered, this court questions whether this court has jurisdiction to 

retain appellant Christopher Garcia’s appeal on the docket of this court. It is therefore 

ORDERED that appellant Christopher Garcia show cause in writing no later than two weeks 

from the date of this order why this court has jurisdiction to consider his appeal.

_________________________________

Sandee Bryan Marion, Chief Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 14th day of May, 2015.

___________________________________

Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court
##### 



Exhibit 10.34
 EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT
(Non CEO)
 Company Employee
 RECITALS
   NOW, THEREFORE
 IT IS HEREBY AGREED AS FOLLOWS
 ARTICLE I
EMPLOYMENT
 Term of Employment  Employment Term   Renewal Terms ;  Renewal Term 
 Position and Duties




---



##### 



ARTICLE II
COMPENSATION AND OTHER BENEFITS
 Base Salary ( Base Salary )
 Performance Bonus  Bonus Year   Performance Bonus 
 Benefit Plans  Plans 
 Expenses
 Vacation
 ARTICLE III
TERMINATION
 Right to Terminate; Automatic Termination
 Termination by Company Without Cause
 2




---



##### 



Termination by Employee for Good Reason
 Termination by Company For Cause  For Cause   For Cause 
 Termination Upon Death or Disability  disability 
 3




---



##### 



Rights Upon Termination
 Section 3.1(a) and 3.1(b) Termination Code Deferred Payment Date
 Severance Payment
 Severance Benefits
  Section 3.1(c) Termination
 Section 3.1(d) Termination
 4




---



##### 



Severance Benefits
 Termination Pursuant to a Change of Control
 Severance Payment
 Severance Benefits
   Change in Control 
 5




---



##### 



Exclusive Remedy
 Limitation of Benefits
 ARTICLE IV
GENERAL PROVISIONS
 Notices
 (a)
    
    If to the Company:TomoTherapy Incorporated1240 Deming WayMadison, WI 53717Attn: General Counsel(b)
    
    If to Employee:900 Spring Valley RoadBlack Earth, WI 53515Attn: Steven G. Brooks
 Entire Agreement
 Amendment
 Assignability
 6




---



##### 



Severability
 Arbitration
     Waiver of Breach
 7




---



##### 



Governing Law; Construction
   EMPLOYEE:
    
    COMPANY:TomoTherapy Incorporated/s/
Steven G. Books
    
    By:

/s/
Frederick A. RobertsonSteven G. Books
    
    Frederick A. Robertson, M.D.Chief Executive Officer
 8
II 

Calendar No. 375 

112TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 2244 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JULY 29, 2011 

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and 

Governmental Affairs 

APRIL 25, 2012 

Reported by Mr. LIEBERMAN, without amendment 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 67 Castle Street in Geneva, New York, as 

the ‘‘Corporal Steven Blaine Riccione Post Office’’. 

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

3 SECTION 1. CORPORAL STEVEN BLAINE RICCIONE POST 

4 OFFICE. 

5 (a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States 

6 Postal Service located at 67 Castle Street in Geneva, New 

7 York, shall be known and designated as the ‘‘Corporal Ste8 ven Blaine Riccione Post Office’’. 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 2244 RS

1 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg2 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

3 States to the facility referred to in subsection (a) shall 

4 be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Corporal Steven 

5 Blaine Riccione Post Office’’. 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS

tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
Calendar No. 375 

112TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 2244 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States PostRiccione Post Office’’. New York, as the ‘‘Corporal Steven Blaine al Service located at 67 Castle Street in Geneva, 

APRIL 25, 2012 

Reported without amendment 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 02-10-00442-CR

ALDO SERVIN JR. APPELLANT

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS STATE

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

FROM THE 432ND DISTRICT COURT OF TARRANT COUNTY

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

MEMORANDUM OPINION1

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

Appellant Aldo Servin, Jr. timely filed a motion for new trial and a notice of 

appeal from the trial court’s September 15, 2010 judgment adjudicating guilt. 

The trial court subsequently timely granted Servin’s motion for new trial. See

Tex. R. App. P. 21.8(a). The granting of a motion for new trial restores the case 

to its original position in the trial court. See Tex. R. App. P. 21.9. Therefore, the 

 

1See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4.
2

appeal has become moot, and on our own motion, we dismiss the appeal as 

moot. Tex. R. App. P. 43.2(f).

PER CURIAM

PANEL: MCCOY, MEIER, and GABRIEL, JJ.

DO NOT PUBLISH

Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b)

DELIVERED: December 23, 2010
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

Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title
18 of the United States Code), the undersigned officer of Synova Healthcare Group, Inc., (the Company) does hereby certify with respect to the Annual Report of the Company on Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 2006 (the
Report) 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: February 26, 2007 |  | /s/ Stephen E. King    
|                        |  | Stephen E. King        
|                        |  | Chief Executive Officer

The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code) and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document.
Exhibit 10.81


 





AMENDMENT 6 TO ACQUISITION AGREEMENT


 


This Amendment 6 to Acquisition Agreement
(this “Amendment”), dated March 27, 2019 is entered into by and among China United Insurance Service, Inc.,
a company with limited liability incorporated under the laws of Delaware (“CUIS”) and the selling shareholders
of Action Holdings Financial Limited (“AHFL”) as listed in Schedule I of this Amendment (the “Selling
Shareholders”).


 


CUIS and the Selling
Shareholders are collectively referred to as the “Parties” and each a “Party” under this
Amendment.


 


WHEREAS, the Parties entered into the Acquisition Agreement on August 24, 2012 (the “Agreement”),
pursuant to which CUIS acquired any and all issued and outstanding shares of AHFL and became the sole shareholder of AHFL, and
the Parties agreed that CUIS shall pay the consideration set forth in Section 2.2 of the Agreement for such acquisition.


 


WHEREAS, the Company and the selling
shareholders of AHFL entered into a fifth amendment to the Agreement, pursuant to which, on or prior to March 31, 2019, the Company
is committed to distribute the cash payment in the amount of NT$15 million.


 


WHEREAS, the Selling Shareholders and CUIS desire to
amend certain provisions of Sections 2.2(iii) of the Agreement.


 


NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the
mutual covenants and undertakings contained herein and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of
which are hereby acknowledged, and subject to and on the terms and conditions set forth herein, the Parties hereto agree as follows:


 


To amend and restate Sections 2.2(iii):


(iii) pay NT$15 million to the Selling
Shareholders in the amounts set forth on Schedule I on or prior to March 31, 2021 or at any other time or in any other manner
otherwise agreed upon by and among the Parties.


 


Capitalized terms defined in the Agreement
have, unless expressly defined in this Amendment or the context requires otherwise, the same meaning in the Agreement.


 


Except amended by
this Amendment, any other provision of the Agreement shall remain unchanged. This Amendment together with the Agreement shall
constitute the entire agreement among the Parties with respect to the subject matter of the Agreement and shall supersede all
previous communications of the Parties in respect of the subject matter of the Agreement. This Amendment is made in one or more
counterparts, all of which will be considered one and the same agreement and will become effective. When one or more counterparts
have been signed by each of the parties and delivered to the other parties, it being understood that all parties need not sign
the same counterpart.


 






     

     


    




 


IN WITNESS WHEREOF the Parties hereto have executed this Amendment
as of the day and year first above written.


 


 


China United Insurance Service, Inc.


 


By: /s/ Yi-Hsiao Mao          


Name: Yi-Hsiao Mao





Title: CEO
[Cite as State v. Suter , 2023

- Ohio

- 4590.]

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

TWELFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT OF OHIO

BUTLER COUNTY

STATE OF OHIO

,

Appellee,

- vs

-

KEVIN K. SUTER, JR.,

Appellant

. :

:

:

:

:

: CASE NO. CA2023

- 03

- 032

D E C I S I O N

12/18/2023

APPEAL FROM MIDDLETOWN MUNICIPAL COURT

Case No. CRB 2300126

Ashley Bretland, City of Middletown Prosecuting Attorney, for appellee.

Christopher P. Frederick , for appellant.

Per Curiam

.

{¶1} This cause came on to be considered upon a notice of appeal filed by

appellant, Kevin K. Suter, Jr. , the transcript of the docke t and journal entries, the tran script

of proceedings and original papers from the Middletown Municipal Court , and upon the brief

filed by appellant's counsel.

{¶2} Appellant's counsel has filed a brief with this court pursuant to Anders v.

California , 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396 (1967)

, which (1) indicates that a careful review ofButler CA2023

- 03

- 032

- 2

- the record from the proceedings below fails to disclose any errors by the trial court

prejudicial to the rights of appellant upon which an assignment of error may be predicated;

(2) lists one potential error "that might arguably support the appeal," Anders , at 744, 87

S.Ct. at 1400; (3) requests that this court review the record independently t o determine

whether the proceed ings are free from prejudicial error and without infringement of

appellant's constitutional rights; (4) requests permission to withdraw as counsel for

appellant on the basis that the appeal is wholly frivolous ; and (5) certifies that a copy of both

the brief and motion to withdraw have been served upon appellant.

{¶3} Having allowed appellant sufficient time to respond, and no response having

been received, we have accordingly examined the record and find no error prejudicial to

appellant's rights in the proceedings in the trial court. The motion of counsel for appella nt

requesting to withdraw as counsel is granted, and this appeal is dismissed for the reason

that it is wholly frivolous.

HENDRICKSON , P.J., PIPER and M. POWELL

, JJ., concur.[Cite as State v. Suter , 2023

- Ohio

- 4590.]