alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
| Skip to contentSocial Security Online | Actuarial Publications |
|---------------------------------------|------------------------|

| www.socialsecurity.gov | Home  FAQs  Contact Us  Search | **Search**  |
|------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------|------------------|

| Solvency provisions | Summary Measures and Graphs |
|---------------------|-----------------------------|

| Level of Monthly Benefits (PIA) | Description of Proposed Provision:      Eliminate dropout years for OASI and DI computation of primary insurance amount (PIA) for individuals newly eligible for benefits from 2010 to 2018.  Specifically, for OASDI benefit computation, reduce the maximum number of drop-out years from 5 for benefit eligibility in 2009, with a decrease of 1 computation year in 2010, 2012, 2014, 2016, and 2018. |
|---------------------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                                 |

*Estimates based on the intermediate assumptions        of the 2008 Trustees Report*

|  |  |
|--|--|

|        |
|--------|
|   | Privacy Policy      | Website Policies        & Other Important Information      | Site Map     Last reviewed or modified August 11, 2008 |
**Exhibit 23.1**

**Consent of Independent Registered Public AccountingFirm**

Weconsent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements (Form S-2Nos. 333-117628 and 333-124488) of Unify Corporation of our reportdated May 19, 2005, with respect to the consolidated financial statementsand the 2005 schedule of Unify Corporation as of and for the year ended April 30,2005 included in its Annual Report on Form 10K as filed on or aboutJuly 28, 2005 with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
| /s/ GRANT  THORNTON LLP |
|-------------------------|
| Reno, Nevada            |
| July 26, 2005 |

 

----
Long-range 

actuarial 

balance

Annual 

balance in 

75th year

Long-range 

actuarial 

balance

Annual 

balance in 

75th year

Long-range 

actuarial 

balance

Annual 

balance in 

75th year

-3.61 -4.35 0.19 0.22 5% 5%

Estimates based on the intermediate assumptions of the 2023 Trustees Report Office of the Chief Actuary

Social Security Administration

September 15, 2023

Summary Measures and Graphs

Category of Change: Payroll Taxes (including maximum taxable)

Current law

[percent of payroll]

Change from current law

[percent of payroll] Shortfall eliminated

Proposed Provision: E3.11. Beginning in 2031, apply 2 percent payroll tax rate on earnings over the wageindexed equivalent of $300,000 in 2017 (about $522,300 in 2031), with the threshold wage-indexed after 

2031. Do not provide benefit credit for additional earnings taxed.

6.0

8.0

10.0

12.0

14.0

16.0

18.0

20.0

2023 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 2080 2090

Percent

Year

OASDI Cost Rates and Income Rates

(as a percentage of taxable payroll)

Income rates under current law

Income rates with this provision

Cost rates under current law

Cost rates with this provision

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

2023 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 2080 2090

Percent

Year

OASDI Trust Fund Ratio

(assets as a percentage of annual expenditures)

Current law With this provision
#### STATE v. ED AYERS.

(Filed 9 October, 1946.)

Criminal Law § 17c—

The court may impose sentence upon a plea of *nolo contendere*as upon a plea of guilty, and defendant’s contention that the court could not pronounce judgment upon such plea without first determining his guilt or innocence is without merit.

Appeal by defendant from *Gwyn, J.,*at April Term, 1946, of Aveey.

Criminal prosecution on indictment charging violation of certain provisions of the prohibition law.

The defendant entered a plea of *nolo contendere,*and from the judgment pronounced appealed, assigning error.

*Attorney-General McMullan and Assistant Attorneys-General Bruton, Rhodes, and Moody for the State.*

*Charles Hutchins for defendant.*

*580Per Curiam.

The defendant contends that notwithstanding his plea of *nolo contendere,*the court could not pronounce judgment without determining his guilt or innocence. The contention is without merit. A plea of *nolo contendere*is equivalent to a plea of guilty, in so far as it gives the court power to punish; and the court may impose sentence thereon as upon a plea of guilty. *S. v. Parker,*220 N. C., 416, 17 S. E. (2d), 475; *S. v. Burnett,*174 N. C., 796, 93 S. E., 473.

Affirmed.
## SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK 

## Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

**962 CA 15-00348** 
PRESENT: SMITH, J.P., CARNI, LINDLEY, VALENTINO, AND DEJOSEPH, JJ.

SCOTT WINTERMUTE, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT,

V MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

VANDEMARK CHEMICAL, INC., DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

RUPP, BAASE, PFALZGRAF, CUNNINGHAM & COPPOLA LLC, BUFFALO (MELISSA L. VINCTON OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

BISOGNO & MEYERSON, LLP, BROOKLYN (PATRICK BISOGNO OF COUNSEL), FOR PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT.

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Niagara County (Matthew J. Murphy, III, A.J.), entered May 9, 2014. The judgment awarded plaintiff money damages upon a jury verdict.

It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously reversed on the law without costs, the posttrial motion is granted, the verdict is set aside and a new trial is granted.

Memorandum: Plaintiff commenced this action seeking damages for injuries he allegedly sustained when he slipped and fell inside a building at defendant’s chemical plant. Following a trial, the jury returned a verdict in favor of plaintiff, and Supreme Court denied defendant’s posttrial motion seeking to set aside the verdict pursuant to CPLR 4404 (a). We agree with defendant that the court abused its discretion in refusing to allow defendant to present the testimony of a witness who interviewed plaintiff concerning the facts and circumstances of his fall ( see generally Kaplan v Sparks [appeal No. 1], 221 AD2d 974, 974). That evidence was relevant to the critical issue whether plaintiff slipped on snow or ice inside of defendant’s building, or whether plaintiff tracked the snow into the building on his boots. Moreover, inasmuch as plaintiff was in possession of the written report generated as a result of the interview well before trial, plaintiff demonstrated no prejudice from the untimely disclosure of this witness ( see O’Callaghan v Walsh , 211 AD2d 531, 531-532). We thus conclude that the court erred in denying defendant’s posttrial motion to set aside the verdict and for a new trial ( see CPLR 4404 [a]).

In light of our determination, we do not address defendant’s remaining contentions. Entered: December 31, 2015 Frances E. Cafarell Clerk of the Court
Long-range 

actuarial 

balance

Annual 

balance in 

75th year

Long-range 

actuarial 

balance

Annual 

balance in 

75th year

Long-range 

actuarial 

balance

Annual 

balance in 

75th year

-3.61 -4.35 1.79 2.22 50% 51%

Estimates based on the intermediate assumptions of the 2023 Trustees Report Office of the Chief Actuary

Social Security Administration

September 15, 2023

Category of Change: Coverage of Employment or Earnings, or Inclusion of Other Sources of Revenue

Summary Measures and Graphs

Current law

[percent of payroll]

Change from current law

[percent of payroll] Shortfall eliminated

Proposed Provision: F10. Expand the tax on net investment income (NII) as defined in the Affordable Care 

Act (ACA) to cover earnings from active S corporation holders and active limited partners. Apply a 12.4-

percent tax on this expanded definition of NII, payable to the OASI and DI Trust Funds with specified 

thresholds, effective for 2024 and later. The unindexed thresholds for this provision are $400,000 for a 

single filer and $500,000 for a married couple filing jointly. The NII tax would apply to the lesser of NII and 

the excess of modified adjusted income (MAGI) above the unindexed thresholds.

6.0

8.0

10.0

12.0

14.0

16.0

18.0

20.0

2023 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 2080 2090

Percent

Year

OASDI Cost Rates and Income Rates

(as a percentage of taxable payroll)

Income rates under current law

Income rates with this provision

Cost rates under current law

Cost rates with this provision

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

2023 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 2080 2090

Percent

Year

OASDI Trust Fund Ratio

(assets as a percentage of annual expenditures)

Current law With this provision
##### 



EXHIBIT 32.2 Section 906 Certification of Chief Financial Officer

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 SBS Technologies, Inc. (the Company)
on
Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2003, as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, (the Report), I, James E. Dixon,
Jr., Chief Financial 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; and
| | --- |  | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



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

/s/ James E. Dixon, Jr.

James E. Dixon, Jr.
Chief Financial Officer
September 24, 2003
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 29 (Monday, February 13, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 8261-8262]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-3495]



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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION


Request Under Review by Office of Management and Budget

Acting Agency Clearance Officer: David T. Copenhafer, (202) 942-8800
Upon written request copies available from: Securities and Exchange 
Commission, Office of Filings and Information Services, Washington DC 
20549
Proposed Amendment Form BD File No. 270-19

    Notice is hereby given that pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act 
of 1980 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Securities and Exchange 
Commission has submitted for the Office of Management and Budget 
approval on the proposed amendments to Form BD [17 CFR 249.501] under 
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78a et seq.).
    Form BD is used to apply for registration as a broker-dealer and 
for firms other than banks and registered broker-dealers to apply for 
registration as a municipal securities dealer or a government 
securities broker-dealer. Form BD also is used to amend such 
applications when any information previously filed on Form BD becomes 
inaccurate. It is estimated that 1,200 broker-dealers annually will 
incur an average burden of 2.75 hours to file initial or successor 
applications for registration on Form BD for an annual burden of 3,300 
hours. It also is estimated that broker-dealers will file 12,000 
amendments annually, and will incur an average burden of 20 minutes to 
file amendments on Form BD for an annual burden of 3,960 hours. The 
total annual burden for Form BD and Form BD amendments is 7,260 hours.
    Direct general comments to the Clearance Officer for the Securities 
and [[Page 8262]] Exchange Commission at the address below. Direct any 
comments concerning the accuracy of the estimated average burden hours 
for compliance with the Commission rules and forms to David T. 
Copenhafer, Acting Director, Office of Information Technology, 
Securities and Exchange Commission, 450 Fifth Street, NW., Washington, 
DC 20549 and the Clearance Officer for the Securities and Exchange 
Commission, Project Number 3235-0012, Office of Management and Budget, 
New Executive Office Building, Room 3208, Washington DC 20503.

    Dated: February 3, 1995.
Margaret H. McFarland,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 95-3495 Filed 2-10-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8010-01-M
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 246 (Friday, December 22, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 66557]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-31176]



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

INTERSTATE COMMERCE COMMISSION
[Finance Docket No. 32820]


Norfolk Southern Railway Company and Atlantic and East Carolina 
Railway Company--Lease and Operation Exemption--North Carolina Railroad 
Company

AGENCY: Interstate Commerce Commission.

ACTION: Notice of Exemption.

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

SUMMARY: The Commission exempts from the prior approval requirements of 
49 U.S.C. 11343-45 the renewal of a lease to allow Norfolk Southern 
Railway Company and Atlantic and East Carolina Railway Company to 
continue to lease and operate approximately 317 miles of North Carolina 
Railroad Company's rail line, between Charlotte and Morehead City, NC, 
subject to standard employee protective conditions.

DATES: This exemption is effective on December 22, 1995. Petitions to 
reopen must be filed by January 11, 1996.

ADDRESSES: Send pleadings referring to Finance Docket No. 32820 to: (1) 
Office of the Secretary, Case Control Branch, Interstate Commerce 
Commission, 1201 Constitution Avenue, N.W., Washington, DC 20423; 
<SUP>1 (2) Robert J. Cooney, Norfolk Southern Railway, 3 Commercial 
Place, Norfolk, VA 23510; (3) Scott M. Saylor, North Carolina Railroad 
Company, 234 Fayetteville Street Mall, Raleigh, NC 27602; and (4) Betty 
Jo Christian, Steptoe & Johnson, 1330 Connecticut Avenue, N.W., 
Washington, DC 20036.

    \1\  Legislation to sunset the Commission on December 31, 1995, 
and transfer remaining functions is now under consideration in 
Congress. Until further notice, parties submitting pleadings should 
continue to use the current name and address.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Beryl Gordon, (202) 927-5610. [TDD for 
the hearing impaired: (202) 927-5721.]

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Additional information is contained in the 
Commission's decision. To purchase a copy of the full decision, write 
to, call, or pick up in person from: DC News & Data, Inc., Room 2229, 
Interstate Commerce Commission Building, 1201 Constitution Avenue, 
N.W., Washington, DC 20423. Telephone: (202) 289-4357/4359. [Assistance 
for the hearing impaired is available through TDD services (202) 927-
5721.]

    Decided: December 13, 1995.

    By the Commission, Chairman Morgan, Vice Chairman Owen, and 
Commissioner Simmons.
Vernon A. Williams,
Secretary
[FR Doc. 95-31176 Filed 12-21-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7035-01-P
```
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 32 (Thursday, February 16, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 9056]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-3930]

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

NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION

Advisory Panel for Presidential Faculty Fellows; Meeting

    In accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-
463, as amended), the National Science Foundation announces the 
following meeting.

    Name: Advisory Panel for Presidential Faculty Fellows (#139).
    Date and Time: March 7-8, 1995; 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. both days.
    Place: Room 375, National Science Foundation, 4201 Wilson 
Boulevard, Arlington, VA 22230.
    Type of Meeting: Closed.
    Contact Person: Dr. Margaret A. Cavanaugh, Program Director, 
National Science Foundation, 4201 Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, VA 
22230, Telephone: (703) 306-1842.
    Purpose of Meeting: To provbide advice and recommendations 
concerning nominations submitted to NSF for financial support.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate nominations for the Presidential 
Faculty Fellows Program.
    Reason for Closing: The nominations being reviewed include 
information of a proprietary or confidential nature, including 
technical information; and personal information concerning 
individuals associated with the proposals. These matters are exempt 
under 5 U.S.C. 552 b(c) (4) and (6) of the Government in the 
Sunshine Act.

    Dated: February 13, 1995.
M. Rebecca Winkler,
Committee Management Officer.
[FR Doc. 95-3930 Filed 2-15-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7555-01-M
```
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan

September 16, 2008 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice

136867 Michael F. Cavanag h
Elizabeth A. Weave r Marilyn Kell y Maura D. Corriga n Robert P. Young, Jr. PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Stephen J. Markman, Plaintiff-Appellee, J ustices

v SC: 136867 COA: 285309 Kent CC: 05-011461-FH GEORGE MARTIN VANDENBERG, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for le ave to appeal the June 6, 2008 order of the Court of Appeals is considered and, purs uant to MCR 7.302(G)(1), in lieu of granting leave to appeal, we RE MAND this case to the Court of Appeals for consideration as on leave granted of the substantive issues contai ned in Issues IV and V in the application previously filed in the Court of Appeals in this case. Issues IV and V are to be heard with the sentencing issues on which the Court of Appeals has already granted the defendant’s application for leave to appeal. In all other re spects, the application fo r leave to appeal is DENIED, because we are not pe rsuaded that the remaining qu estion presented should be reviewed by this Court.

l0915 I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

September 16, 2008

Clerk
#### Isaias Scherer, Respondent, v. Benajah Tyrrell and others, Appellants.

Order reversed, with ten dollars costs and printing disbursements, and motion to amend complaint denied, with ten dollars costs.

Opinion by

Learned, P. J.
Exhibit 4.1
	
	CLASS A SHARE CERTIFICATEHONG KONG SHARE REGISTER
DATE OF ISSUECERTIFICATE NUMBERRUN/TFR. NO.REGISTERNUMBER OF SHARE(S)CODE:NUMBER OF SHARE(S):GIVEN UNDER THE SECURITIES SEAL OF THE COMPANY ON THE DATE OF ISSUE STATED ABOVE.DIRECTORNO TRANSFER OF THE WHOLE OR ANY PORTION OF THE ABOVE SHARE(S) CAN BE REGISTERED UNLESS ACCOMPANIED BY THIS SHARE CERTIFICATE.HONG KONG SHARE REGISTRAR: COMPUTERSHARE HONG KONG INVESTOR SERVICES LIMITED, SHOPS 1712-1716, 17TH FLOOR, HOPEWELL CENTRE, 183 QUEENS ROAD EAST, WANCHAI, HONG KONG.THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE UNDERMENTIONED PERSON(S) IS/ARE THE REGISTERED HOLDER(S) OF FULLY PAID CLASS A ORDINARY SHARE(S) OF NOMINAL VALUE US$0.0001 PER SHARE IN THE SHARE CAPITAL OF KANZHUN LIMITED (THE COMPANY) AS DETAILED BELOW SUBJECT TO THE MEMORANDUM AND ARTICLES OF ASSOCIATION OF THE COMPANY.KANZHUN LIMITED(A company controlled through weighted voting rights and incorporated in the Cayman Islands with limited liability)
V1.1
EXHIBIT 31.2

                                  CERTIFICATION

I, Henry Houston, Chief Financial Officer, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of remote knowledge,
inc. (the "Corporation");

2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly 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 quarterly
report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the
financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as
of, and for, the periods presented in this quarterly report;

4. The Corporation's other certifying officer and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and have:

     a. designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that material
     information relating to the Corporation, including its consolidated
     subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities,
     particularly during the period in which this quarterly reports is being
     prepared;

     b. evaluated the effectiveness of the Corporation's disclosure controls and
     procedures and presented in this report our conclusion about the
     effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of
     the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

     c. disclosed in this report any change in the Corporation's internal
     control over financial reporting that occurred during the Corporation's
     most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant's fourth fiscal quarter in the
     case of an quarterly report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably
     likely to materially affect, the Corporation's internal control over
     financial reporting; and

5. The Corporation's other certifying office and I have disclosed, based on my
most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the
Corporation's auditors and the audit committee of Corporation's board of
directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

     a. all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal
     controls over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely
     affect the Corporation's ability to record, process, summarize and report
     financial data and have identified for the Corporation's auditors any
     material weaknesses in internal controls; and

     b. any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
     employees who have a significant role in the Corporation's internal
     controls over financial reporting.

Date: August 16, 2004

/s/  Henry Houston
-----------------------------
     Henry Houston
     Chief Financial Officer
#### EARL THOMAS, by His Next Friend, E. G. McCULLOUGH, v. THE GREAT ATLANTIC AND PACIFIC TEA COMPANY.

(Filed 23 April, 1930.)

Appeal by plaintiff from *Clement, J.,*at October Term, 1929, of Stanly.

Civil action by plaintiff, clerk in the defendant’s grocery store, to recover for an injury sustained on 6 April, 1928, while he was cutting a piece of cheese for a customer with a dull, long-bladed and short-handled knife, which slipped and caused him to cut his finger' — later becoming *823infected — said knife having been used by plaintiff for the same purpose for about six months.

From a judgment of nonsuit entered at the close of plaintiff’s evidence the plaintiff appeals, assigning errors.

*O. J. Sikes .a,nd G. Hobart Morton for plaintiff.*

*1. B. Burleyson for defendant.*

Per Curiam.

We perceive no valid reason for disturbing the judgment of nonsuit. The principles and authorities applicable and pertinent are discussed in *Gaither v. Clement,*183 N. C., 450, 111 S. E., 782, and *Wright v. Thompson,*171 N. C., 88, 87 S. E., 963.

Affirmed.