alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
03/22/2010 15:23 FAX 2024835142 FAA + DMS 21001/002 

^'EPfS^SFORK 

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 

"•j •' . "i n 

IN THE MATTER OF: § FAA Docket No. CP09SW0006 

§ 

AMERICAN EAGLE AIRLINES, INC. § FAA C<.ise2008SW210288 

§ 

§ U. S. Administrative Law Judge 

§ Richard C. Goodwin 

NOTICE OF DEPOSITION OF RONALD STILLWFXL 

Pursuant to 14 C.F.R. §I3.220(j), please take notice that the undersigned counsel will take 

the deposition upon oral cxiuninaiion of Ronald Stillwell, Aviation Safety Inspector, beginning at 

9ain on March 11, 2010, at American Airlines, Inc., 4333 Amon Carter Boulevard, Fon Worth, 

Texas 76155, before a certified court reporter authorized to administer oaths, for all purposes 

permitted by federal rules and statutes. 

Respectfully submitted, 

4-^4ie 

Francis C. Heil 

American Airlines, Inc. 

Legal Department 

P.O. Box 619616 MD 5675 

DFW Airport, TX 75261-9616 

Attorney for American Kagic Airlines, Inc. 

Diited: February 26, 2010 
03/22/2010 15;23 FAX 2024935142 FAA * DMS 21002/002 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I hereby certify thai on February 26, 2010, a copy of the foregoing Notice of Deposition has been 

served by Federal Express Priority Overnight delivery on the following: 

Ronald Slillwell, Aviation Safely Inspector 

AMR Certificates Management Office 

14800 Trinity Boulevard, Suite 100 

Fort Worth, Texas 76155 

T; 817-684-6800 

F: 817-684-6920 

Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 (U.S. Mail only) 

Federal Aviation Administration 

Office of the Chief Counsel 

Wilbur Wright Building. Suite 2W1000 

600 Independence Avenue, SW., 

Washington, DC 20591 

Rcna M. Price, Aiiomey 

Federal Aviation Administration 

Southwest Region 

Office of the Regional Counsel, ASW-7 

2601 Meacham Blvd. 

Fort Worth, Texas 76137 

rena.m.price@faa.gov 

T: 817-222-5068 

F: 817-222-5945 

Lisa A. Paparelli, Paralegal
§ 98.13 Import permit. ( a ) Ruminant and swine embryos and all test samples required by this subpart may be imported into the United States from regions where foot-and-mouth disease exists only if accompanied by import permits issued by the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS).
( b ) An application for the import permits must be submitted to the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, Veterinary Services, Strategy and Policy, 4700 River Road Unit 38, Riverdale, Maryland 20737-1231. Application forms also may be obtained at this same address. The application for a permit to import embryos will also serve as the application for a permit to import test samples for those embryos; separate applications are not required. The application must include the following information: ( 1 ) The name and address of the exporter;
( 2 ) The name and address of the importer;
( 3 ) The name and address of the place where the donor dam will be bred and where the embryo(s) will be collected;
( 4 ) The species, breed, and number of embryos to be imported;
( 5 ) The purpose of the importation;
( 6 ) The port of embarkation;
( 7 ) The mode of transportation;
( 8 ) The route of travel;
( 9 ) The port of entry in the United States;
( 10 ) The proposed date of arrival in the United States; and
( 11 ) The name and address of the person to whom the embryos will be delivered in the United States.
( c ) Applications for a permit to import sheep and goat embryos and oocytes must include the flock identification number of the receiving flock and the premises or location identification number assigned in the APHIS National Scrapie Database; or, in the case of embryos or oocytes moving to a storage facility, the premises or location identification number must be included.
(Approved by the Office of Management and Budget under control number 0579-0040) [56 FR 55809, Oct. 30, 1991, as amended at 59 FR 67616, Dec. 30, 1994; 61 FR 15183, Apr. 5, 1996; 62 FR 56025, Oct. 28, 1997; 83 FR 15494, Apr. 11, 2018; 86 FR 45629, Aug. 16, 2021; 86 FR 68864, Dec. 3, 2021]
### §264. Part of Idaho in fourth zone

In the division of territory, and in the definition of the limits of each zone, as provided in sections 261 to 264 of this title, so much of the State of Idaho as lies south of the Salmon River, traversing the State from east to west near forty-five degrees thirty minutes latitude, shall be embraced in the fourth zone: Provided, That common carriers within such portion of the State of Idaho may conduct their operations on Pacific time.

(Mar. 19, 1918, ch. 24, §3, as added Mar. 3, 1923, ch. 216, 42 Stat. 1434; amended June 24, 1948, ch. 631, §1, 62 Stat. 646; Pub. L. 110–69, title III, §3013(c)(4), Aug. 9, 2007, 121 Stat. 599.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Prior Provisions

The original section 3 of act Mar. 19, 1918, providing for daylight-savings, was repealed by act Aug. 20, 1919, ch. 51, 41 Stat. 280.

#### Amendments

2007—Pub. L. 110–69 substituted "fourth zone" for "third zone".

1948—Act June 24, 1948, inserted proviso relating to common carriers.

#### **Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries**

#### Effective Date of 1948 Amendment

Act June 24, 1948, ch. 631, §2, 62 Stat. 646, provided that: "This Act [amending this section] shall take effect at 2 o'clock antemeridian of the second Monday following the date of its enactment."
#### James Kelly, as Administrator, etc., of Catharine Kelly, Deceased, Respondent, v. John Mulcahy, Appellant.

Judgment'and order affirmed,-with costs. No opinion.
#### § 25.3 Delegation.

All of the Secretary's responsibilities, powers, and functions under the SAFETY Act, except the authority to declare that an act is an Act of Terrorism for purposes of section 865(2) of the SAFETY Act, may be exercised by the Under Secretary for Science and Technology of the Department of Homeland Security or the Under Secretary's designees.
#### § 590.140 Application for grant of inspection.

The proprietor or operator of each official plant and official import inspection establishment must make application to the Administrator for inspection service unless exempted by § 590.100. The application must be made in writing on forms furnished by the inspection service. In cases of change of name or ownership or change of location, a new application must be made.

[85 FR 68675, Oct. 29, 2020]
### §5303. Antitrust savings clause

Nothing in this Act, or any amendment made by this Act, shall be construed to modify, impair, or supersede the operation of any of the antitrust laws, unless otherwise specified. For purposes of this section, the term "antitrust laws" has the same meaning as in subsection (a) of section 12 of title 15, except that such term includes section 45 of title 15, to the extent that such section 45 applies to unfair methods of competition.

(Pub. L. 111–203, §6, July 21, 2010, 124 Stat. 1390.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

This Act, referred to in text, is Pub. L. 111–203, July 21, 2010, 124 Stat. 1376, known as the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, which enacted this chapter and chapters 108 (§8201 et seq.) and 109 (§8301 et seq.) of Title 15, Commerce and Trade, and enacted, amended, and repealed numerous other sections and notes in the Code. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 5301 of this title and Tables.

#### **Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries**

#### Effective Date

Section effective 1 day after July 21, 2010, except as otherwise provided, see section 4 of Pub. L. 111–203, set out as a note under section 5301 of this title.
Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation 

84-3 

February 14, 1984 

REFERENCE: 

 [*1] 4043(a). Reportable Events. Requirement of Notice

4043(b)(7) Reportable Events. Substantial Owner Distributions

29 CFR 2615 Reporting & Notification Requirements for Reportable Events 

OPINION: 

 This is in response to your request for an advisory opinion as to whether annuity payments to a substantial owner

by an ongoing plan which will total $10,000.00 or more within successive 24-month periods during the substantial

owner's lifetime must be reported to the PBGC anew for each such 24-month period. 

In your letter you state that in settlement of the substantial owner's request for a lump sum distribution from the *

* * Pension Benefit Plan (the "Plan"), the substantial owner's retirement benefit will be provided as follows: 1)

assignment of life insurance policies on the substantial owner's life (which have been held by the plan) with a cash value

of $28,000.00; 2) a monthly annuity of $1,151.60; 3) a $10,000.00 payment on * * *, * * * and * * *. You state further

that after the distribution of the life insurance policy and the first $10,000 payment unfunded vested benefits of the Plan

would be approximately $100,000. The settlement has been reported to PBGC as a reportable event under Section [*2]

4043(b)(7) of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 ("ERISA"); 29 U.S.C. § 1343(b)(7). 

Section 4043(b)(7) as interpreted in 29 C.F.R. § 2615.18(a) requires that distributions to a participant who is a

substantial owner be reported to PBGC if (1) the distributions have a value of $10,000 or more within a 24-month period;

(2) the distributions are not made due to the participant's death; and * * * (3) immediately after the distributions, the plan

has * * * nonforfeitable benefits which are not funded. Under § 4043(a) of ERISA such a reportable event must be

reported to the PBGC within 30 days after the plan administrator knows or has reason to know that the reportable event

has occurred. Under 29 C.F.R. § 2615.18(b) the 30 day notice requirement is waived unless: (1) the substantial owner

receives a distribution, or distributions, of $10,000 or more within a 12-month period; and (2) the amount distributed

exceeds the amount of the maximum guaranteeable benefit for a substantial owner for the year in which the distribution

or last distribution in a series was made. The conditions for waiver are not met in this case. 

As indicated above, PBGC has been notified that there [*3] will be annuity payments to the substantial owner during

his lifetime which will be in excess of $10,000 for successive 24-month periods. In our view 29 C.F.R. § 2615.18(a)

was not intended to require the filing of repetitive reportable event notices with respect to subsequent 24-month periods

in which such payments are made. 

I hope this information is of assistance to you. 

Henry Rose 

General Counsel
### SUBCHAPTER VI—PREVENTION OF UNFAIR METHODS OF COMPETITION
January 15, 2014

Mr. Joseph R. Haley Medical Express

3204 Point White Dr. NE Bainbridge Island, WA 98110

Dear Mr. Haley :

This is in response to your letter, dated August 20 , 2013 sent to the public docket ( No. FAA

2013

- 0762 ) petitioning the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) on behalf of Medical Express (MedEx) for an exemption from part 125 of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR). The proposed exemption, if granted, would allow MedEx to be exempt from the part 125 certification process and the opportunity to demonstrate by performance and compliance the legitimacy to hold a certificate.

On November 12, 2013, MedEx submitted the following addi tional information to the FAA,

whi ch we added to the docket:

• Preapplication Statement of Intent

• Reformatted exemption request

• Resume for Mr. Joseph Haley

• Offshore Air Certificate

Unfortunately, t he additional information provided does not comply with the requirements of § 11.81 (copy enclosed). Section 11.81 requires that a petition for exemption must include the following information:

• The specific section or sections of 14 CFR from which you seek relief, the extent of

the relie f you seek, and the reason you seek relief.

• The reasons granting the request would be in the public interest; that is, how it would benefit the public as a whole.

• The reasons the exemption wouldn’t adversely affect safety or how the exemption would provi de a level of safety at least equal to that provided by the rule from which you seek an exemption.

• Any more information, views, or arguments available to support your request.2

• The specific reasons you need to exercise the privileges of your exemption outside

the United States.

MedEx requested relief from a certification process which is used to determine an applicant’s ability to hold and maintain an operating certificate. M edEx requested to be exempted from this process based on the years of experience amassed by the individuals mentioned in the petition for exemption. Claims alone are insufficient evidence for the FAA to issue an exemption

. Merely relying on past experien ce is not a sufficient reason to provide relief.

MedEx has failed to provide a sufficient explanation of why granting an exe mption would not affect safety or how an exemption would provide a n equivalent level of safety to the existing regulation

. MedEx did not s pecify which section (s) in part 125 from which you seek relief ( 14 CFR § 11.81(e)). MedEx has also failed to provide sufficient evidence that the proposed operation would be in the public interest (14 CFR § 11.81(d)).

Based on the reasons above

, and s ince the relief you seek through exemption from the part 125 certification process is not a valid request, we will take no further action on your petition.

Accordingly, Docket No. FAA

- 2013

- 0762 is being closed.

Sincerely,

/s/

Brenda D. Courtney Manager, Aircraft and Airport Rules Division

Enclosure
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 47 (Thursday, March 10, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Page 13197]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-5507]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Eye Institute; Notice of Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of the following 
meeting.
    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the 
provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 
U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussion could 
disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as 
patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals 
associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would 
constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Eye Institute Special Emphasis 
Panel, NEI Clinical Applications II.
    Date: April 11, 2011.
    Time: 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: Hyatt Regency Bethesda, One Bethesda Metro Center, 7400 
Wisconsin Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20814.
    Contact Person: Anne E. Schaffner, PhD, Chief, Scientific Review 
Branch, Division of Extramural Research, National Eye Institute, 
National Institutes of Health, 5635 Fishers Lane, Suite 1300, MSC 
9300, 301-451-2020, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#1c7d796f5c72797532727574327b736a"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="10717563507e75793e7e79783e777f66">[email protected]</span></a>.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.867, 
Vision Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

    Dated: March 4, 2011.
Jennifer S. Spaeth,
Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 2011-5507 Filed 3-9-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
#### In the Matter of the Arbitration between Rochester City School District, Appellant, and Rochester Association of Paraprofessionals, Respondent.

[823 NYS2d 718]

Appeal from an order and judgment (one paper) of the Supreme Court, Monroe County (Thomas A. Stander, J.), entered November 22, 2005 in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 75. The order and judgment denied the petition, granted the cross application of respondent and confirmed the arbitration award.

It is hereby ordered that the order and judgment so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed without costs.

Memorandum: Petitioner appeals from an order and judgment that denied its petition seeking to vacate the arbitration award directing petitioner to reinstate the grievant to his position as a paraprofessional and instead granted the cross application of respondent to confirm the award. “Petitioner failed to meet its heavy burden of establishing that the award is ‘violative of a strong public policy, is totally irrational or clearly exceeds a specifically enumerated limitation on. the arbitrator’s power’ ” *(Matter of Mohawk Val. Community Coll. [Mohawk Val. Community Coll. Professional Assn.],*28 AD3d 1140, 1141 *1352[2006], quoting *Matter of Town of Callicoon [Civil Serv. Empls. Assn., Town of Callicoon Unit],*70 NY2d 907, 909 [1987]; *see Matter of New York City Tr. Auth. v Transport Workers’ Union of Am., Local 100, AFL-CIO,*6 NY3d 332, 336 [2005]). Present—Scudder, J.P, Kehoe, Martoche and Green, JJ.
§ 352.11 Post-mortem inspection. ( a ) Post-mortem inspection of reindeer, elk, deer, antelope, bison and water buffalo shall be conducted in accordance with the provisions contained in 9 CFR part 310 or as determined by the Administrator.
( b ) The post-mortem examination of field ante-mortem-inspected exotic animals must occur in the shortest length of time practicable and on the day that field ante-mortem inspection is performed to minimize the changes in the carcass which can affect the post-mortem examination, disposition and wholesomeness of the carcass and its parts.
( c ) The post-mortem veterinarian shall inspect and make the disposition of all incoming “U.S. Suspect” tagged exotic animals.
[54 FR 1333, Jan. 13, 1989]
Exhibit 99.1



June 30, 2003

Securities and Exchange Commission
450 Fifth Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20549

Ladies and gentlemen:

The certification set forth below is being submitted to the Securities and
Exchange Commission solely for the purpose of complying with Section 1350 of
Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code. This certification is not to
be deemed filed pursuant to the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and does not
constitute a part of the Annual Report on Form 20-F (the "Report") accompanying
this letter.

Marc Beuls, the Chief Executive Officer, John Ratcliffe, the Chief Financial
Controller and Judy Tan, Chief of Finance - Global Operations, each certifies
that, to the best of his or her 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 results of operations
          of Millicom international Cellular S.A.


                                           /s/ Marc Beuls
                                           ------------------------------
                                           Name: Marc Beuls
                                           Chief Executive Officer

                                           /s/ John Ratcliffe
                                           ------------------------------
                                           Name: John Ratcliffe
                                           Chief Financial Controller

                                           /s/ Judy Tan
                                           ------------------------------
                                           Name: Judy Tan
                                           Chief of Finance - Global Operations

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 Millicom and will be retained by
Millicom and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff
upon request.
```

                                                                  Exhibit 31.1
                                  CERTIFICATION

I, Steven B. Rash certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10QSB of Power3 Medical
   Products, Inc.;
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 the this quarterly 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 registrant's other certifying officers and I are responsible for
   establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures for the
   registrant and have:
        a. Designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that
           material information relating to the registrant, including the
           consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within
           those entities, particularly during the period in which this
           quarterly report is being prepared;
        b. Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure
           controls and procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the
           filing of this quarterly report; and
        c. Presented in this quarterly report our conclusions about the
           effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on
           our evaluation noted preceding;
5. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on
   our most recent evaluation, to the registrant's auditors:

        a. All significant deficiencies in the design or operation of
           internal controls which could adversely affect the registrant's
           ability to record, process, summarize, and report financial data
           and have identified for the registrant'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 registrant's
           internal controls; and
6. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have indicated in this
   quarterly report whether there were significant changes in internal
   controls or in other factors that could significantly affect internal
   controls subsequent to the date of our most recent evaluation, including
   any corrective actions with regard to significant deficiencies and material
   weaknesses.

Date: August 17, 2004

                                        /s/ Steven B. Rash
                                        By: Steven B. Rash
                                        Title: Chief Executive Officer
```