alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              JUN-30-1996
<PERIOD-START>                                 OCT-01-1995
<PERIOD-END>                                   DEC-31-1995
<CASH>                                           466,014
<SECURITIES>                                           0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  1,521,149
<ALLOWANCES>                                           0
<INVENTORY>                                    2,324,730
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               4,511,889
<PP&E>                                         1,040,358
<DEPRECIATION>                                   710,786
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 7,383,953
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          7,398,197
<BONDS>                                                0
<COMMON>                                          22,097
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                  0
<PREFERRED>                                            0
<OTHER-SE>                                     6,982,738
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   7,383,953
<SALES>                                        2,167,456
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               2,167,456
<CGS>                                            580,229
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  2,776,553
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                       0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              (131,093)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 (780,161)
<INCOME-TAX>                                           0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                    0
<DISCONTINUED>                                         0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                        0
<CHANGES>                                              0
<NET-INCOME>                                    (780,161)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      (0.18)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      (0.18)
        



</TABLE>
Article Ref: E-007

Measurement Matters, Vol. 11, Issue 4 October 2021 Page 1

NIST Handbook 130 Related to EPA Final Rule, Fuels 

Regulatory Streamlining

Byline: Lisa Warfield

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) published a Final Rule, Fuels Regulatory Streamlining, 

(85 FR 78412). The purpose of the rule was to update and modernize EPA’s existing gasoline, diesel, and 

other fuel regulations and remove inconsistencies. Under the EPA Fuels Regulatory Streamlining Rule, the 

majority of fuels provisions were migrated from 40 CFR Part 80 to a new 40 CFR Part 1090. Most of 

the EPA Fuels Streamlining provisions in the new Part 1090 went into effect on January 1, 2021.

In July 2021 at the 106th NCWM Annual Meeting, the Fuels and Lubricants Subcommittee apprised the 

Laws and Regulations Committee that a CFR Regulation cited within NIST Handbook 130 (2020) 

Uniform Laws and Regulation in the Areas of Legal Metrology and Fuel Quality would need to reflect 

updated CFR citations.

NIST Handbook 130 Uniform Regulation for the Method of Sale of Commodities:

 Section 2.20.2. Documentation for Dispenser Labeling Purposes - Update the CFR citation 40 

CFR 80.1503 to 40 CFR 109.1110

 Section 2.20.3. EPA Labeling Requirements - Update the CFR citation from 40 CFR 80.1501 to 

40 CFR 1090.1510

NIST Handbook 130 Uniform Fuels and Automotive Lubricants Regulation:

 Section 2.1.2. Gasoline-Ethanol Blends - Update CFR citation 40CFR 80.27(d) to 40 CFR 

1090.215(b)

 Section 3.2.5. Documentation for Dispenser Labeling Purposes - Update CFR citation 40 CFR 

80.1503 to 40 CFR 1090.1110

 Section 3.2.6. EPA Labeling Requirements – Update CFR citation 40 CFR 80.1501 to 40 CFR 

1090.1510

40 CFR Part 1090 is available at Electronic Code of Federal Regulations (eCFR) or type in 

www.ecfr.gov and search for 40 CFR Part 1090 using the drop-down menu. 

Any questions regarding this notice should be directed to Lisa Warfield, NIST Technical Advisor to the 

NCWM Laws and Regulations Committee, at lisa.warfield@nist.gov.
U.S. District Court for the Northern District Of Illinois

Attorney Appearance Form

Case Title: In re: TikTok, Inc. 

 Consumer Privacy Litigation

Case Number: 1:20-cv-04699

An appearance is hereby filed by the undersigned as attorney for:

Plaintiff E.K. 

Attorney name (type or print): Hayley E. Lowe

Firm: Israel David LLC

Street address: 17 State Street, Suite 4010

City/State/Zip: New York, New York 10004

Bar ID Number: 5289145 (New York)

(See item 3 in instructions)

Telephone Number: (212) 739-0622

Email Address: hayley.lowe@davidllc.com

Are you acting as lead counsel in this case? Yes No

Are you a member of the court’s general bar? Yes No

Are you a member of the court’s trial bar? Yes No

Are you appearing pro hac vice? Yes No

If this case reaches trial, will you act as the trial attorney? Yes No

If this is a criminal case, check your status. Retained Counsel

 Appointed Counsel

If appointed counsel, are you a

Federal Defender

CJA Panel Attorney

______________________________________________________________________

In order to appear before this Court an attorney must either be a member in good standing of this Court’s 

general bar or be granted leave to appear pro hac vice as provided for by local rules 83.12 through 83.14. 

I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Under 28 U.S.C.§1746, this 

statement under perjury has the same force and effect as a sworn statement made under oath. 

Executed on March 18, 2024

Attorney signature: S/ Hayley E. Lowe

(Use electronic signature if the appearance form is filed electronically.)

Revised 7/19/2023

Case: 1:20-cv-04699 Document #: 322 Filed: 03/19/24 Page 1 of 1 PageID #:14260
10489.

#### District Grand Lodge No. 18 *v.*Fortune *et al.*

Decided November 4, 1919.

Rehearing denied December 9, 1919.

Complaint; from city court of Floyd county—Judge Nunnally. March 15,1919.

*C. P. Goree,*for plaintiff in error.

*L. E. Covington, Wright Willingham,*contra.

Luke, J.

It does not appear that the trial judge, who, without the aid of a jury, heard the traverse to the return of the sheriff, erred in finding against the traverse, since the evidence in support of the traverse did not demand a finding that the plaintiff in error had traversed the sheriff’s return of service at the first term after it had received notice thereof, as required by section 5566 of the Civil Code (1910). It follows that the court did not err in overruling the motion for a new trial.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*Broyles, C. J., and Bloodworth, J., concur.*
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                           2,048
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 2,398
<PP&E>                                          12,774
<DEPRECIATION>                                   4,955
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             135,560,526
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,944,120
<BONDS>                                              0
<COMMON>                                       152,149
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                  13,709,527
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               135,560,526
<SALES>                                        154,172
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               337,605
<CGS>                                           70,075
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  119,894
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               4,204 
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                217,711 
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            217,711 
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   217,711
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .01
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .01
        

</TABLE>
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

 

**CERTIFICATION**

 

 

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, the undersigned officer of ING Life Insurance and Annuity Company (the “Company”) hereby certifies that, to the officer’s knowledge, the Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2008 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

 

| August 11, 2008 |   | By: /s/ | David A. Wheat                                                                                                   |
|-----------------|--------|---------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| (Date)          |   |    | David A. Wheat

Executive Vice President and

Chief Financial Officer

  |

 

 

 

 

 

----
Exhibit
  32.1





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

In
  connection with the Quarterly report of Inland Fiber Group, LLC (the “Company”)
  on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2006, as filed with the Securities
  and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, John
  M. Rudey, Chief Executive 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:

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/
        John M. Rudey John
        M. Rudey
        Chief Executive OfficerSeptember 21,2006


A signed
  original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document
  authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears
  in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required
  by Section 906, has been provided to Inland Fiber Group, LLC and will be retained
  by Inland Fiber Group, LLC and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission
  or its staff upon request.
Exhibit
      32.1




**CERTIFICATION
      OF PERIODIC REPORT**




Pursuant
      to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
      Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, each of the undersigned officers of Alpha Nutra,
      Inc. (the “Company”), certifies that:




1.  The
      Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of the Company for the quarter ended March
      31,
      2005 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
      15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d));
      and




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







September
      20, 2006








By:
            /s/Mark
                L. Baum
              Mark
                L. Baum
              President
                and Chief Executive Officer





This
      certification is made solely for the purpose of 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, subject
      to the knowledge standard contained therein, and not for any other
      purpose.
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    Exhibit 5.1


September 14, 1998



Board of Directors of
WorldCom, Inc.
515 East Amite Street
Jackson, MS  39201

Ladies and Gentlemen:

I have acted as counsel to MCI WORLDCOM, Inc., a Georgia corporation (the
"Company") in connection with a Post-Effective Amendment No. 1 on Form S-8 to
Registration Statement No. 333-36901 on Form S-4 (collectively, the
"Registration Statement") to be filed by the Company with the Securities and
Exchange Commission (the "Commission") under the Securities Act of 1933, as
amended (the "Act"), with respect to 102.5 million shares (the "Shares") of
Common Stock, par value $.01, of the Company ("Common Stock") which are to be
issued upon exercise of options granted under the MCI WorldCom Stock Option
Plan, the MCI WorldCom 1988 Directors' Stock Option Plan and the MCI WorldCom
1979 Stock Option Plan, as amended (the "Plans").

In connection herewith, I or members of my staff have examined and relied
without investigation as to matters of fact upon the Registration Statement, the
Second Amended and Restated Articles of Incorporation and the Bylaws of the
Company, certificates of public officials, certificates and statements of
officers of the Company, and such other corporate records, documents,
certificates and instruments as I have deemed necessary or appropriate to enable
me to render the opinions expressed herein. I have assumed the genuineness of
all signatures on all documents examined by me, the authenticity of all
documents submitted to me as originals, and the conformity to authentic
originals of all documents submitted to me as certified or photostatic copies. I
have also assumed the due authorization, execution and delivery of all
documents.

Based upon the foregoing, and in reliance thereon and subject to the
qualifications and limitations stated herein, I am of the opinion that when the
Registration Statement, including any amendments thereto, shall have become
effective under the Act, and the Shares have been issued in accordance with the
terms of the Plans, then the Shares will be legally issued, fully paid and
nonassessable.

I hereby consent to the filing of this opinion as Exhibit 5.1 to the aforesaid
Registration Statement on Form S-8. I also consent to your filing copies of this
opinion as an exhibit to the Registration Statement with agencies of such states
as you deem necessary in the course of complying with the laws of such states
regarding the offering and sale of the Shares. In giving this consent, I do not
admit that I am in the category of persons whose consent is required under
Section 7 of the Act or the rules and regulations of the Commission.

                                        Very truly yours,

                                        /s/ William E. Anderson

                                        William E. Anderson
#### DAVIS et al. v. ST. LOUIS-SOUTHWESTERN RY. CO.

Civ. A. 3116.

United States District Court W. D. Louisiana, Shreveport Division.

Sept. 17, 1951.

Irion & Switzer, Reuben W. Egan, Jackson, Mayer & Kennedy and Charles L. Mayer, all of Shreveport, La., for plaintiff.

Wilkinson, Lewis & Wilkinson and John M. Madison, all of Shreveport, La., for defendant.

DAWKINS, Chief Judge.

This case is a splendid illustration of the futility, if persisted in, of the attempt in the Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C. A., by the Supreme Court to limit the pleadings and to simplify litigation. Several of the numerous motions were ruled upon from the bench, but the one now to be considered is a plea of nonjoinder of an alleged indispensable party, to wit, the compensation insurer of plaintiff’s employer, because of Sections 1101-2-3 of Title 23 of LSA-Louisiana Revised Statutes of 1950.

Those enactments were mainly for the protection of the employer or its insurer who make payments of compensation for injuries or death due to the fault of others.

Plaintiff certainly could not make the insurer in question a plaintiff, for it is fundamental that no one can be compelled to join in a lawsuit in that capacity if he does not wish to do so; yet, if he refuses, the complainant may, if his presence is indispensable, make him a party defendant. If this had been done in this case, the compensation insurer would necessarily have had to be arraigned on the same side with the plaintiff. In that event, if a citizen of the same state as the present defendant, this court wou.d have had no jurisdiction.

The questions here, primarily, are twofold, first, the one of liability, and secondly, the amount of the recovery. Mainly because of the large number of damage suits which are being filed in this court, under Act No. 55 of 1930 of the Legislature, as amended, now LSA-RS 22:655, permitting the complainant to sue the insurer of the alleged tort-feasor without making the insured a party, the work of this court does not allow time for extended researches or to write long opinions on the manifold issues which are raised. If the business of the court is to be expedited, it simply has to cut through them and, by the use of common sense, make such dispositions as *752will, while effectively disposing of the issues, not prejudice or deny any fundamental right.

With this end in view, the complainant will be required to furnish the Clerk a true copy of his complaint for certification and service by the Marshal upon the compensation insurer, American Automobile' Insurance Company. When this has been done; if the latter fails or does not desire to assert any claim defendant will be relieved if it pays to plaintiff any. sum which may be recovered.

Proper decree should be presented.
National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) Fiscal Year 2022 Agency Report

1. Please provide a summary of your agency’s activities undertaken to carry out the provisions of 

OMB Circular A-119, “Federal Participation in the Development and Use of Voluntary Consensus 

Standards and in Conformity Assessment Activities” and the National Technology Transfer and 

Advance Act (NTTAA). The summary should contain a link to the agency’s standards-specific 

website(s) where information about your agency’s standards and conformity assessment related 

activities are available.

When NARA used standards during rulemaking in FY 2022, we complied with Executive Order 12866, 

“Regulatory Planning and Review;” Executive Order 13563, “Improving Regulation and Regulatory

Review;” Executive Order 13610, “Identifying and Reducing Regulatory Burdens;” Executive Order 

13609, “Promoting International Regulatory Cooperation;” Executive Order 13771, "Reducing Regulation 

and Controlling Regulatory Costs"; and OMB Circular A-4, “Regulatory Analysis.”

NARA promulgated no rules in FY 2022 using Government unique standards (GUS).

NARA uses both voluntary consensus standards (VCS) and GUS in our procurement activities. NARA's 

Office of the Chief Acquisition Officer relies on program office personnel (technical experts) to identify, 

manage, and review the standards used in procurements of products and services within their own 

program areas. NARA’s standards-related activities are available here:

https://www.archives.gov/preservation/technical

https://www.archives.gov/records-mgmt/storage-standards-toolkit

https://www.archives.gov/records-mgmt/prmd/standards-development.html

https://www.archives.gov/files/federal-register/write/handbook/ibr.pdf

2. Please list the government-unique standards (GUS) your agency began using in lieu of voluntary 

consensus standards during FY 2022. Please note that GUS which are still in effect from previous years 

should continue to be listed, thus the total number in your agency's report will include all GUS 

currently in use (previous years and new as of this FY):

Current total GUS: 0
Exhibit 21

Maui
Land & Pineapple Company, Inc.Subsidiaries
As of December 31, 2009

Name

State of
Incorporation

Percentage
of OwnershipMaui Pineapple Company, Ltd.

Hawaii


100Kapalua Land Company, Ltd.

Hawaii


100Kapalua Realty Company, Ltd.

Hawaii


100Kapalua Advertising Company, Ltd.

Hawaii


100Kapalua Water Company, Ltd.

Hawaii


100Kapalua Waste Treatment Company, Ltd.

Hawaii


100Honolua Plantation Land Company, Ltd.

Hawaii


100Kapalua Bay Holdings, LLC

Delaware


51Kapalua Bay, LLC

Delaware


100


---



QuickLinks
Amendment No. 1 to the Agreement between the Company and Richard L. Rosenfield



 Exhibit 10.2 
  
 CALIFORNIA PIZZA KITCHEN, INC. 
  
 AMENDMENT NO. 1 
  
 TO 
  
 NON-QUALIFIED STOCK OPTION AGREEMENT 
  
 This AMENDMENT NO. 1 (this “Amendment”) dated November 23, 2005 to that certain Non-Qualified Stock Option Agreement (the
“Agreement”) between California Pizza Kitchen, Inc. (the “Company”) and Richard L. Rosenfield (“Optionee”) dated August 2, 2000 (the “Effective Date”) is effective as of the
Effective Date. 
  
 RECITALS 
  
 WHEREAS, a difference of views has arisen with regard to the
“Expiration Date,” as that term is defined in the Agreement; and 
  
 WHEREAS, the parties wish to resolve the difference of views in an amicable fashion. 
  
 AMENDMENT 
  
 NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing premises and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which the
parties hereto acknowledge, the Company and Optionee hereby agree as follows: 
  
 1. Amendment. 
  

	 	(a)	Section 1.8(e) of the Agreement is hereby amended and restated in its entirety to read as follows: 

  
 “(e) December 15, 2005.” 
  

	 	(b)	A new Section 7(c) is added and shall read as follows: 

  
 “(c) Without limiting the foregoing, Holder also agrees that Holder will not effect any Transfer of 25,000 Option Shares for a period of 18 months
after the exercise of the Option relating to such Option Shares. For purposes hereof, “Transfer” shall be defined as any sale or transfer of the Option Shares that results in a change of “beneficial ownership” as such term is
defined in Rule 13d-3 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Holder agrees that each certificate or instrument representing such transfer restricted Option Shares shall be stamped or otherwise imprinted with the following legend (in addition to any
legend required under applicable securities laws): 
  
 THESE
SECURITIES ARE SUBJECT TO RESTRICTIONS ON TRANSFERABILITY AND RESALE AND MAY NOT BE TRANSFERRED OR RESOLD FOR A PERIOD OF 








 
EIGHTEEN MONTHS FROM THE DATE HEREOF; PROVIDED, HOWEVER, THAT NOTWITHSTANDING THE FOREGOING THESE SECURITIES MAY BE TRANSFERRED IF THE TRANSFER DOES NOT
RESULT IN A CHANGE IN THE “BENEFICIAL OWNERSHIP” OF THESE SECURITIES AS THAT TERM IS DEFINED IN RULE 13D-3 UNDER THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934” 
  
 2. Express Changes Only. Except as modified by this Amendment, the Agreement shall remain unchanged and shall
remain in full force and effect. 
  
 3. Governing
Law. This Amendment shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California without giving effect to principles of conflicts of laws thereof. 
  
 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Amendment No. 1 to be duly executed as of the date first written
above. 
  

			
	 CALIFORNIA PIZZA KITCHEN, INC.

	     a Delaware corporation

		
	 By:
	 	 /s/ Susan M. Collyns

	 	 	 Susan M. Collyns

	 	 	 Chief Financial Officer

		
	 	 	 /s/ Richard L. Rosenfield

	 	 	 RICHARD L. ROSENFIELD