alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**Form of Rule 13a-14(a) Certification (CEO)**Exhibit 31.1**CERTIFICATIONS**I, Richard J. Boyle, Jr., certify that:1. I have reviewed this Annual Report on Form 10-K of LoopNet, Inc.; 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisreport; 4. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have: (a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controlsand procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material informationrelating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us byothers within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is beingprepared;  (b) [Paragraph omitted pursuant to SEC Release 33-8238.];  (c) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controlsand procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and  (d) disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (theregistrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal controlover financial reporting; and5. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and theaudit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunction): (a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affectthe registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information;and  (b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees whohave a significant role in the registrant’s internal controls over financial reporting.     Date:  March 19, 2007 /s/ Richard J. Boyle, Jr.         Richard J. Boyle, Jr.    President, Chief Executive Officer, and Chairman of the    Board of Directors, LoopNet, Inc.
Order filed June 23, 2015

In The 

## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________ NO. 14

- 15

- 00151

- CV

____________ 5500 GRIGGS , Appellant

V. FAMCOR OIL, INC., Appellee

On Appeal from the 270th District Court

Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 2009

- 21808



### O R D E R
Appellant’ s brief was due June 5, 2015

. No brief or motion for extension of
time has been filed.
Unless appellant files a brief with this court on or before July 23, 2015 , the court will dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(b).

PER CURIAM
#### EDGAR RICE BURROUGHS, INC. et al. v. CHARLTON PUBLICATIONS, INC. et al.

No. 64 Civ. 3743.

United States District Court S. D. New York.

Feb. 10, 1965.

Cowan, Liebowitz & Latman, New York City, for plaintiffs; Alan Latman, Marvin S. Cowan, New York City, O’Melveny & Myers, Robert M. Hodes, Los Angeles, Cal., of counsel.

Eastman & Da Silva, New York City, for defendants; Lee V. Eastman, New York City, of counsel.

SUGARMAN, District Judge.

Sears, Roebuck & Co. v. Stiffel Co., 376 U.S. 225, 84 S.Ct. 784, 11 L.Ed.2d 661 and Compco Corp. v. DayBrite Lighting, Inc., 376 U.S. 234, 84 S.Ct. 779, 11 L.Ed.2d 669, upon which movants rely on this motion to dismiss the fourth count of the complaint, recognize that a state may, in appropriate circumstances require that precautionary steps be taken to prevent customers from being misled or confused as to the source of the goods.

The fourth count *inter alia*charges that defendants’ publications were “calculated to and did represent, suggest and imply falsely and fraudulently (a) that the character and characterization of “TARZAN” and the stories in which said character appeared were, or included, the literary efforts of Edgar Rice Burroughs or (b) plaintiffs’ association, sponsorship or connection with defendants’ said publications * * * ” thereby “deceiving, misleading and confusing the public”.

A motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim should not be granted unless it appears to a certainty that the plaintiff would be entitled to no relief under any state of facts which could be proved in support of his claim. If, within the framework of the complaint, evidence may be introduced which will sustain a grant of relief to the plaintiff, the complaint is sufficient.

The motion is denied.

It is so ordered. No further order is necessary.
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

                                                                      EXHIBIT 12

                            PSEG ENERGY HOLDINGS INC.
               COMPUTATION OF RATIOS OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES


                                                                         For the Three Months
                                                                           Ended March 31,
                                                                        ---------------------
                                                                          2002         2001
                                                                        -------      --------
                                                                        (Thousands of Dollars)
<S>                                                                     <C>          <C>
Earnings as Defined in Regulation S-K (A):
Pre-tax Income from Continuing Operations......................         $4,430       $62,225
(Income)/Loss from Equity Investees Net of Distributions.......         (4,965)      (15,839)
Fixed Charges..................................................         60,895        44,657
Amortization of Capitalized Interest...........................            219            76
Capitalized Interest...........................................         (2,797)       (4,739)
                                                                        -------      --------
Earnings.......................................................         57,782        86,379
                                                                        =======      ========

Fixed Charges as Defined in Regulation S-K (B):
Total Interest Expensed and Capitalized........................         60,289        42,734
Interest in Rental Expense.....................................            606         1,923
                                                                        -------      --------
Total Fixed Charges............................................         60,895        44,657
                                                                        =======      ========

Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges.............................           0.95          1.93
                                                                        =======      ========

<FN>
(A)  The term  "earnings"  shall be defined  as pretax  income  from  continuing
     operations  before  adjustment  for minority  interests or income loss from
     equity  investees.  Add fixed charges adjusted to exclude (a) the amount of
     any interest capitalized during the period, (b) amortization of capitalized
     interest and (c) distributed  income of equity  investees.  From the total,
     subtract interest capitalized.

(B)  Fixed Charges represent (a) interest, whether expensed or capitalized,  (b)
     amortization of debt discount,  premium and expense, and (c) an estimate of
     interest implicit in rentals.

</FN>
</TABLE>
# VOCC Archives - Federal Maritime Commission

- Industry Advisory: Requirements to Maintain Status as a VOCC Common carriers publishing automated tariffs as vessel-operating common carriers (VOCCs) must operate at least one vessel in common carriage in the foreign commerce of the United States to maintain their status.&#160; Organizations offering common carriage that do not operate at least one vessel are considered non-vessel-operating common carriers (NVOCCs).&#160; Licensing, registration, and financial responsibility requirements [&#8230;]The post Industry Advisory: Requirements to Maintain Status as a VOCC appeared first on Federal Maritime Commission.
- FMC Seeks Public Comments on New Maersk & Hapag-Lloyd Cooperative Agreement The Federal Maritime Commission has opened a 12-day comment period allowing interested members of the public to respond to Maersk and Hapag Lloyd’s newly filed vessel sharing agreement, the Gemini Cooperation Agreement. Instructions for submitting comments are included in a&#160;Notice of Agreements Filed&#160;published in the Federal Register yesterday.&#160; The deadline for submitting comments is Tuesday, [&#8230;]The post FMC Seeks Public Comments on New Maersk &amp; Hapag-Lloyd Cooperative Agreement appeared first on Federal Maritime Commission.
- Industry Advisory – Requirement to File Timely and Accurate Service Contracts The Federal Maritime Commission reminds vessel-operating common carriers (VOCCs) they must file all service contracts and amendments to service contracts in the Commission’s&#160;SERVCON&#160; system&#160;no later than thirty (30) days after the effective date. Failure to file service contracts in accordance with&#160;46 CFR Part §530&#160;could result in fines or other penalties. Filers must ensure that the [&#8230;]The post Industry Advisory – Requirement to File Timely and Accurate Service Contracts appeared first on Federal Maritime Commission.
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3440 Introduced in House (IH)]

111th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 3440

  To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow dealers in real 
              estate to use the installment sales method.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             July 31, 2009

  Mr. Pascrell (for himself, Mr. Roskam, Mr. Adler of New Jersey, Mr. 
    Lance, and Mr. Cantor) introduced the following bill; which was 
              referred to the Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow dealers in real 
              estate to use the installment sales method.

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

SECTION 1. DEALERS IN REAL ESTATE ALLOWED TO USE INSTALLMENT SALES 
              METHOD.

    (a) In General.--Paragraph (1) of section 453(l) of the Internal 
Revenue Code of 1986 is amended to read as follows:
            ``(1) In general.--The term `dealer disposition' means any 
        disposition of personal property by a person who regularly 
        sells or otherwise disposes of personal property of the same 
        type on the installment plan.''.
    (b) Conforming Amendments.--
            (1) Paragraph (2) of section 453(l) of such Code is 
        amended--
                    (A) by striking subparagraph (B),
                    (B) by redesignating subparagraph (C) as 
                subparagraph (B), and
                    (C) by striking ``or (B)'' in subparagraph (B), as 
                redesignated by this paragraph.
            (2) Subsection (l) of section 453 of such Code is amended 
        by striking paragraph (3).
    (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section shall 
apply to dispositions of property after the date of the enactment of 
this Act.
                                 <all>
```
Exhibit 10.1


     

    Exhibit
      10.1

     

    

     

    
      
        
        

      

      
        1

        
          

        

      

      
        
        

      

    

     

     

     

     

    

     

     

    
      
         

      

      
        2

        
          

        

      

      
         

      

    

     

    

     

     

    
      
         

      

      
        3
EXHIBIT 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906

OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Annual Report of CurrencyShares® Japanese Yen Trust (the Trust) on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended October 31, 2010, as amended, as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Nick Bonos, Chief Executive Officer of Rydex Specialized Products LLC, the Sponsor of the Trust, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

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

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



|                             
|-----------------------------
|Date: March 10, 2011         
|                             
|/s/ NICK BONOS               
|Nick Bonos*                  
|Chief Executive Officer      
|(principal executive officer)



|* | The Registrant is a trust and Nick Bonos is signing in his capacity as the principal executive officer of Rydex Specialized Products LLC, the Sponsor of the Registrant.
|- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 208 (Monday, October 30, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 50150-50151]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-23557]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Health Resources and Services Administration


National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program: Revised Amount of 
the Average Cost of a Health Insurance Policy

AGENCY: Health Resources and Services Administration, Department of 
Health and Human Services (HHS).

ACTION: Notice.

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

    The Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) is 
publishing an updated monetary amount of the average cost of a health 
insurance policy as it relates to the National Vaccine Injury 
Compensation Program (VICP).
    Section 100.2 of the VICP's implementing regulation (42 CFR part 
100) states that the revised amount of an average cost of a health 
insurance policy, as determined by the Secretary, is effective upon its 
delivery by the Secretary to the United States Court of Federal Claims 
(the Court), and will be published periodically in a notice in the 
Federal Register. This figure is calculated using the most recent 
Medical Expenditure Panel Survey-Insurance Component (MEPS-IC) data 
available as the baseline for the average monthly cost of a health 
insurance policy. This baseline is adjusted by the annual percentage 
increase/decrease obtained from the most recent annual Kaiser Family 
Foundation and Health Research and Educational Trust (KFF/HRET) 
Employer Health Benefits survey or other authoritative source that may 
be more accurate or appropriate.
    In 2017, MEPS-IC, available at www.meps.ahrq.gov, published the 
annual 2016 average total single premium per enrolled employee at 
private-sector establishments that provide health insurance. The figure 
published was $6,101. This figure is divided by 12-months to determine 
the cost per month of $508.42. The $508.42 is increased or decreased by 
the percentage change reported by the most recent KFF/HRET Employer 
Health Benefits Survey, available at www.kff.org. The percentage 
increase

[[Page 50151]]

from 2016 to 2017 was 4.0 percent. By adding this percentage increase, 
the calculated average monthly cost of a health insurance policy for a 
12-month period is $528.76.
    Therefore, the Secretary announces that the revised average cost of 
a health insurance policy under the VICP is $528.76 per month. In 
accordance with Sec.  100.2, the revised amount was effective upon its 
delivery by the Secretary to the Court. Such notice was delivered to 
the Court on October 24, 2017.

    Dated: October 24, 2017.
George Sigounas,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2017-23557 Filed 10-27-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4165-15-P
#### Allan G. HALSETH, Claimant-Appellant, v. Eric K. SHINSEKI, Secretary of Veterans Affairs, Respondent-Appellee.

No. 2009-7048.

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.

May 25, 2011.

Before RADER, Chief Judge, LOURIE and O’MALLEY, Circuit Judges.

ON MOTION

ORDER

RADER, Chief Judge.

The Secretary of Veterans Affairs moves to vacate the judgment of the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims and to remand for further proceedings.

The appellant filed a notice of appeal with the Court of Veterans Claims more than 120 days after the Board of Veterans’ Appeals mailed its decision in his case. That court dismissed the appeal as untimely, concluding that the 120-day appeal pe*895riod established by 38 U.S.C. § 7266(a) for seeking review of Board of Veterans’ Appeals decisions is jurisdictional and not subject to equitable tolling. The appellant sought this court’s review.

This court stayed the briefing schedule in this appeal pending the United States Supreme Court’s review of our decision in *Henderson v. Shinseki,*589 F.3d 1201 (Fed. Cir.2009) (en banc) (affirming Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims determination that period to appeal to that court is not subject to equitable tolling). In *Henderson ex rel. Henderson v. Shinseki,*— U.S.-, 131 S.Ct. 1197, 179 L.Ed.2d 159 (2011), the Supreme Court reversed this court’s decision and concluded that the 120-day deadline for filing an appeal with the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims does not have jurisdictional consequences. Because the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims erred in concluding that the appeal deadline established by § 7266(a) is jurisdictional, we vacate the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims’ judgment and remand for further proceedings.

Accordingly,

It Is Ordered That:

(1) The motion is granted. The judgment is vacated and the case is remanded for further proceedings.

(2) All sides shall bear their own costs.
Subsidiary Guarantee of the Guarantor, dated February 3, 2005



 Exhibit 10.16 
  
 GUARANTEE 
  
 For value received, each Subsidiary Guarantor (which term includes any successor Person under the Indenture) hereby fully and unconditionally, jointly and
severally, guarantees on a senior basis (the “Subsidiary Guarantee”) (i) the due and punctual payment of the principal of and interest on the Notes, whether at maturity, by acceleration or otherwise, the due and punctual payment of
interest on the overdue principal and interest, if any, on the Notes, to the extent lawful, and the due and punctual performance of all other obligations of the Company to the Holders or the Trustee all in accordance with the terms set forth in
Article Eleven of the Indenture (as defined below) and (ii) in case of any extension of time of payment or renewal of any Notes or any such other obligations, that the same shall be promptly paid in full when due or performed in accordance with the
terms of the extension or renewal, whether at stated maturity, by acceleration or otherwise. This Guarantee shall become effective in accordance with Article Eleven of the Indenture and its terms shall be evidenced therein. The validity and
enforceability of any Guarantee shall not be affected by the fact that it is not affixed to any particular Note. 
  
 Capitalized terms used but not defined herein shall have the meanings ascribed to them in the Indenture, dated as of February 3, 2005 among Gregg
Appliances, Inc., an Indiana corporation, as issuer, HHG Distributing, LLC, an Indiana limited liability company, as Guarantor, and Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, as trustee (the “Trustee”), as amended or supplemented (the
“Indenture”). 
  
 THIS SUBSIDIARY GUARANTEE SHALL
BE GOVERNED BY, AND CONSTRUED IN ACCORDANCE WITH, THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK. THE UNDERSIGNED SUBSIDIARY GUARANTOR HEREBY AGREES TO SUBMIT TO THE JURISDICTION OF THE COURTS OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK IN ANY ACTION OR PROCEEDING ARISING OUT OF
OR RELATING TO THIS SUBSIDIARY GUARANTEE. 
  
 This Subsidiary
Guarantee is subject to release upon the terms set forth in the Indenture. 
  
 IN WITNESS THEREOF, the Subsidiary Guarantor has caused this Subsidiary Guarantee to be signed manually or by facsimile by its duly authorized officer. 
  

					
	HHG DISTRIBUTING, LLC
		
	By:	 	 /s/ Jerry W. Throgmartin

	 	 	 Name:
	 	 Jerry W. Throgmartin

	 	 	 Title:
	 	 President and Secretary