alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
September 12, 2014

Docket Management Facility

U.S Department of Transportation

1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE

West Building Ground Floor

Room W12-140

Washington, DC 20590

Re: Exemption No 8794C, Regulatory Docket No. FAA-2006-26039

Ladies and Gentlemen:

In accordance with Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations parts 11.63 and 11.81, US

Airways, Inc (US Airways) petitions the Administrator to amend Exemption No 8794C

to extend the expiration date of the exemption from October 31, 2014, to October 31, 

2016, or other such future date as may be found acceptable. Exemption No 8794C, as 

amended, grants relief from 14 CFR part 121.434 (c)(1)(ii) so as to allow US Airways to 

substitute a qualified and authorized check airman or aircrew program designee for an 

FAA inspector to observe a qualifying pilot in command (PIC) who is completing initial 

or upgrade training specified in §121.424 during at least one flight leg that includes a 

takeoff and a landing.

This exemption has been used by US Airways for almost eight years, and by several other 

airlines, with no negative impact. US Airways continues to be in compliance with the 

conditions of the exemption to 14 CFR part 121.434 (c)(1)(ii), and believes that 

extending Exemption No. 8794C, as stated, would have no adverse effect on safety. 

Therefore, we respectfully request an extension of Exemption No. 8794C for two years, 

or other appropriate regulatory relief.

US Airways suggests that good cause exists for waiving publication of notice of this 

petition in the Federal Register. The grant of exemption petitioned for here would not set 

a precedent, and the exemption would in all ways, other than the effective date, be 

identical to the exemption now in place. Delay in acting on the petition would be 

detrimental to the petitioner and to the public, as well.

4000 East Sky Harbor Blvd, FC-FSS, Phoenix, AZ 85034 (480) 693-4660 Fax (480) 693-4936
SUMMARY

US Airways, Inc. petitions for an amendment to Exemption No 8794C to extend the 

expiration date of same, which permits US Airways to substitute a qualified and 

authorized check airman or aircrew program designee for an FAA inspector to observe a 

qualifying pilot in command (PIC) who is completing initial or upgrade training specified 

in §121.424 during at least one flight leg that includes a takeoff and a landing.

Please let me know if there is any further information you need for your review of this 

petition. Thank you for your consideration.

Sincerely,

Captain Lyle Hogg

Vice President, Flight Operations

US Airways, Inc.

4000 East Sky Harbor Boulevard

FC-FSS

Phoenix, AZ 85034
### §1003. Authorization for free travel on Golden Gate Bridge; issuance, presentation, and acceptance; other authorization devices

(a) The use of the Golden Gate Bridge free of toll, provided for in section 1002 of this title, shall be granted upon the presentation and surrender at the toll lanes of an authorization certifying that the traffic in question is entitled to such right. Such authorization shall be issued and signed by any military or naval officer designated for such purpose in accordance with regulations which shall be prescribed by the Secretary of the Army and the Secretary of the Navy, respectively. The names and signatures of officers so designated shall be furnished to the Golden Gate Bridge and Highway District, and thereafter authorizations signed by them shall be accepted by such bridge and highway district as prima facie evidence of the facts stated therein.

(b) Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection (a), such right to use the Golden Gate Bridge free of toll may be established by any other device or means which may be acceptable to the Golden Gate Bridge and Highway District; and the Secretary of the Army and the Golden Gate Bridge and Highway District, and the Secretary of the Navy and the Golden Gate Bridge and Highway District, may enter into any appropriate agreements to secure the effective, convenient, and just exercise of such right.

(Mar. 14, 1944, ch. 92, §2, 58 Stat. 116.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

The Department of War was designated the Department of the Army and the title of the Secretary of War was changed to Secretary of the Army by section 205(a) of act July 26, 1947, ch. 343, title II, 61 Stat. 501. Section 205(a) of act July 26, 1947, was repealed by section 53 of act Aug. 10, 1956, ch. 1041, 70A Stat. 641. Section 1 of act Aug. 10, 1956, enacted "Title 10, Armed Forces" which in sections 3011 to 3013 continued the military Department of the Army under the administrative supervision of a Secretary of the Army.

#### **Executive Documents**

#### Secretary of the Air Force

For transfer of certain functions relating to finance and fiscal matters, insofar as they pertain to Secretary of the Air Force, from Secretary of the Army to Secretary of the Air Force, see Secretary of Defense Transfer Order Nos. 25, Oct. 14, 1948, and 40 [App. B(61)], July 22, 1949.
<PAGE>

                                                                      Exhibit 32

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

I, Richard A. Karp, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly
Report of Catapult Communications Corporation on Form 10-Q for the fiscal
quarter ended June 30, 2003 fully complies with the requirements of Section
13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information
contained in such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q fairly presents in all material
respects the financial condition and results of operations of Catapult
Communications Corporation.

                                     By: /s/ RICHARD A. KARP
                                        --------------------------------------
                                     Name:  Richard A. Karp
                                     Title: Chief Executive Officer

I, Chris Stephenson, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly
Report of Catapult Communications Corporation on Form 10-Q for the fiscal
quarter ended June 30, 2003 fully complies with the requirements of Section
13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information
contained in such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q fairly presents in all material
respects the financial condition and results of operations of Catapult
Communications Corporation.

                                     By: /s/ CHRISTOPHER A. STEPHENSON
                                        ---------------------------------------
                                     Name:  Christopher A. Stephenson
                                     Title: Chief Financial Officer
IV

106TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. RES. 54

Providing amounts for the expenses of the Committee on House

Administration in the One Hundred Sixth Congress.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

FEBRUARY 11, 1999

Mr. THOMAS submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the

Committee on House Administration

RESOLUTION

Providing amounts for the expenses of the Committee on

House Administration in the One Hundred Sixth Congress.

1 Resolved,

2 SECTION 1. AMOUNTS FOR COMMITTEE EXPENSES.

3 For the expenses of the Committee on House Admin4 istration (hereafter in this resolution referred to as the

5 ‘‘Committee’’), including the expenses of all staff salaries,

6 there shall be paid, out of the applicable accounts of the

7 House of Representatives for committee salaries and ex8 penses, not more than $6,307,220 for the One Hundred

9 Sixth Congress.
2

•HRES 54 IH

1 SEC. 2. SESSION LIMITATIONS.

2 Of the amount specified in section 1—

3 (1) not more than $3,055,255 shall be available

4 for expenses incurred during the period beginning at

5 noon on January 3, 1999, and ending immediately

6 before noon on January 3, 2000; and

7 (2) not more than $3,251,965 shall be available

8 for expenses incurred during the period beginning at

9 noon on January 3, 2000, and ending immediately

10 before noon on January 3, 2001.

11 SEC. 3. VOUCHERS.

12 Payments under this resolution shall be made on

13 vouchers authorized by the Committee, signed by the

14 Chairman of the Committee, and approved in the manner

15 directed by the Committee on House Administration.

16 SEC. 4. REGULATIONS.

17 Amounts made available under this resolution shall

18 be expended in accordance with regulations prescribed by

19 the Committee on House Administration.

Æ
##### 



EXHIBIT 32.2
 Written Statement of Chief Financial Officer Pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
  (a)
    
    the Form 10-Q Report of the Company for the
quarterly period ended June 30, 2007 filed on the
date hereof with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (the Report) fully complies with the
requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and(b)
    
    information contained in the Report fairly
presents, in all material respects, the financial
condition and results of operations of the Company.
 /s/ John A. Stone
S. 1211

One Hundred Sixth Congress

of the

United States of America

AT THE SECOND SESSION

Begun and held at the City of Washington on Monday,

the twenty-fourth day of January, two thousand

An Act

To amend the Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Act to authorize additional

measures to carry out the control of salinity upstream of Imperial Dam in a

cost-effective manner.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of

the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. AMENDMENT OF THE COLORADO RIVER BASIN SALINITY

CONTROL ACT.

Section 208(c) of the Colorado River Basin Salinity Control

Act (43 U.S.C. 1598(c)) is amended—

(1) in the first sentence—

(A) by striking ‘‘$75,000,000 for subsection 202(a)’’ and

inserting ‘‘$175,000,000 for section 202(a)’’; and

(B) by striking ‘‘paragraph 202(a)(6)’’ and inserting

‘‘paragraph (6) of section 202(a)’’; and

(2) in the second sentence, by striking ‘‘paragraph 202(a)(6)’’

and inserting ‘‘section 202(a)(6)’’.

SEC. 2. REPORT.

The Secretary of the Interior shall prepare a report on the

status of implementation of the comprehensive program for minimizing salt contributions to the Colorado River from lands administered by the Bureau of Land Management directed by section

203(b)(3) of the Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Act (43

U.S.C. 1593). The report shall provide specific information on individual projects and funding allocation. The report shall be transmitted to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources of
S. 1211—2

the Senate and the Committee on Resources of the House of Representatives no later than June 30, 2000.

Speaker of the House of Representatives.

Vice President of the United States and

President of the Senate.
# C_2010234EN.01003802.xml

| 28.8.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 234/38 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.8.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 234/38

---

Order of the President of the General Court of 9 July 2010 — Alcoa Trasformazioni v Commission

(Case T-177/10 R)

(Interim measures - State aid - Preferential electricity tariffs - Decision declaring the aid incompatible with the common market and ordering its recovery - Application for suspension of operation of a measure - No urgency)

2010/C 234/69

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Alcoa Trasformazioni Srl (Portoscuso, Italy) (represented by: M. Siragusa, T. Müller-Ibold and F. Salerno, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: V. Di Bucci and E. Gippini Fournier, Agents)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Application for suspension of operation of Commission decision C(2009) 8112 final of 19 November 2009 on the State aid C 38/A/2004 (ex NN 58/2004) and C 36/B/2006 (ex NN 38/2006) implemented by the Italian Republic in favour of Alcoa Trasformazioni.

Operative part of the order

Operative part of the order

| 1. | The application for interim measures is dismissed. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The application for interim measures is dismissed.

| 2. | The costs are reserved. |
| --- | --- |

2.

The costs are reserved.

---
CJ 

CJ 

CJ 

CJ 

-

-

- -

2023 RMA Crops' Indemnities 

No Indemnity ($0.00)

$0.01 - $1,000,000.00

$1,000,000.01 - $10,000,000.00 

$10,000,000.01 - $25,000,000.00 

$25,000,000.01 - $50,000,000.00 

$50,000,000.01 - $82,886,990.00 

MapCreationDate:Augus t 29,2023

Layer Credits:USDA&USCensus Bureau

Source:USDARiskManagement Agency -Summary of Business

DataCurrent Date:Augus t 28,2023

This map depicts weekly crop insurance indemnity data by county as of the data current date denoted on the map MapProjection:USAContiguous Albers EqualAreaConic

RMA Risk Management Services Division

Theinformationdisplayedinthis mapis intendedtoserveas anaidindisplayingdataprovidedor s toredby theRiskManagement Agency.It does not modify,replaceor supersedeany USDApublishedpolicy provisions or procedures.

Maps createdby USDARiskManagement Agency arefor spatialandvisualcontext for depictingthebasicinformationfor “where”.Maps arenot consideredasurvey.GeneralReferenceOnly. 

-PublicInformationand is published biweekly.
Exhibit 32
                    CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                     18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                      AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
          SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


     In connection with the Quarterly Report of Accesstel, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ending March 31, 2004, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Quarterly
Report"), I, Kevin Marion, President 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 Quarterly 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 Quarterly Report fairly presents, in
all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the
Company.


     Dated: 6/21/04                           /s/ Kevin Marion
           --------                           ----------------------------
                                              Kevin Marion
                                              President
# C_2010288EN.01007302.xml

| 23.10.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 288/73 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.10.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 288/73

---

Action brought on 6 August 2010 — Mata Blanco v Commission

(Case F-65/10)

()

(2010/C 288/138)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: José Manuel Mata Blanco (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: L. Levi and A. Blot, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Annulment of the EPSO decision not to include the applicant on the reserve list for internal competition ‘COM/INT/OLAF.09/AD10 — Administrators specialised in anti-fraud’ and the reserve list and all the decisions taken on the basis of that list

Form of order sought

| — | annul the EPSO decision of 11 May 2010 confirming, after re-examination, its decision of 9 March 2010 not to include the applicant on the reserve list for internal competition ‘COM/INT/OLAF/09/AD10 — Administrators specialised in anti-fraud’; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the EPSO decision of 11 May 2010 confirming, after re-examination, its decision of 9 March 2010 not to include the applicant on the reserve list for internal competition ‘COM/INT/OLAF/09/AD10 — Administrators specialised in anti-fraud’;

| — | annul the reserve list for internal competition ‘COM/INT/OLAF/09/AD10 — Administrators specialised in anti-fraud’ in so far as it does not include the applicant’s name and all other decision taken on the basis of that list; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the reserve list for internal competition ‘COM/INT/OLAF/09/AD10 — Administrators specialised in anti-fraud’ in so far as it does not include the applicant’s name and all other decision taken on the basis of that list;

| — | order, as measures of organisation of procedure (cf. Article 55 of the Rules of Procedure of the General Court), the production by the defendant of the criteria used by the jury for the oral test, the questions put to him by the competition jury during his oral test and the copy of the jury’s assessment sheet relating to that oral test together with the criteria used in their marking. |
| --- | --- |

—

order, as measures of organisation of procedure (cf. Article 55 of the Rules of Procedure of the General Court), the production by the defendant of the criteria used by the jury for the oral test, the questions put to him by the competition jury during his oral test and the copy of the jury’s assessment sheet relating to that oral test together with the criteria used in their marking.

---
Offer Letter from the Registrant to Glenn Reinus



 Exhibit 10.34 
  

			
	February 14, 2003	  	



 Glenn Reinus 
 3006
Barton Point Circle 
 Austin, TX. 78733 
 e-mail:
glennreinus@yahoo.com 
 Dear Glenn, 
 I am pleased to
extend you an offer to join Rackspace Managed Hosting as Vice President/Sales beginning as soon as is mutually agreeable between you and Lanham Napier. We are offering you a bi-weekly compensation of $5,769.23, which is $150,000.00 annualized.
Additionally, you will have the opportunity to earn up to $100,000.00 (annualized) in bonuses based on agreed upon performance goals. You will receive 360,000 stock options priced at fair market value. (Details of the options are contained in a
separate Stock Options Agreement.) The Company also offers an excellent benefits package including medical, dental, disability, and life insurance. Your insurance coverages will go into effect on your start date. 
 The contents of this letter do not form an employment contract or alter your at-will employment status. All Company personnel are at-will employees. This means that
either the Company or the employee may terminate the employment relationship at any time, for any reason or no reason. Only the Chief Executive Officer or President may enter into any agreement to the contrary, whether verbal or written, with any
employee. If such Chief Executive Officer or President should choose to enter into an agreement to the contrary, it must be a written agreement signed by one of such officers to be valid. 
 Again, I am pleased to represent Lanham Napier in offering you the opportunity to join Rackspace Managed Hosting. 
  

	
	Sincerely,
	
	/s/ Karla V. Fulton
	Karla V. Fulton
	Director of Employee Services

 I accept the offer to join Rackspace Managed Hosting as VP/Sales and agree to the terms outlined above.

  

					
	/s/ Glenn Reinus	  	 	  	2-14-03
	Signature	  	 	  	Date

 Setting the Standard in Managed
HostingTM 
 112 East Pecan, Suite
600    San Antonio, TX 78205    PH: 210 892 4000    FX: 210 892 4329    www.rackspace.com 
  


 [9.3.9][Reinus, Glenn EMPLY AGRMNT - FEBRUARY 14 2003.pdf][Page 1 of 1]
FI L ED U.S. COURT OF APPEAL S EL EVENTH CI RCUI T Aug . 21, 2009 THOMAS K. KAH

N CL ERK [ D O N O T P U B L I S H ]

I N T H E U N I T E D S T A T E S C O U R T O F A P P E A L S

F O R T H E E L E V E N T H C I R C U I T

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ N o

. 0 8

- 1 6 2 4 8

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ D

. C

. D o c k e t N o

. 0 6

- 0 1 2 8 9

- C V

- J E O

- S

T R A C Y T H R A S H E R ,

P l a i n t i f f

- A p p e l l a n t ,

v e r s u s

A M E R I C A N I N T E R N A T I O N A L G R O U P , I N C

. , N A T I O N A L U N I O N F I R E I N S U R A N C E C O M P A N Y O F P I T T S B U R G , P

. A

. , A M E R I C A N I N T E R N A T I O N A L S P E C I A L T Y L I N E S I N S U R A N C E C O M P A N Y , I L L I N O I S N A T I O N A L I N S U R A N C E C O M P A N Y ,

D e f e n d a n t s
- A p p e l l e e s

.

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ A p p e a l f r o m t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s D i s t r i c t C o u r t f o r t h e N o r t h e r n D i s t r i c t o f A l a b a m a

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ( A u g u s t 2 1 , 2 0 0 9 )B e f

o r e C A R N E S a n d P R Y O R , C i r c u i t J u d g e s , a n d D O W D , D i s t r i c t J u d g e

. *

P E R C U R I A M :

W e a f f i r m t h e j u d g m e n t o n t h e b a s i s o f J u d g e O t t ’ s w e l l

- r e a s o n e d

m e m o r a n d u m o p i n i o n o f S e p t e m b e r 2 9 , 2 0 0 8

. W e a d d t o i t o n l y o u r o b s e r v a t i o n

t h a t t h e b r e a c h o f c o n t r a c t c l a i m i s a l s o c l e a r l y b a r r e d b y t h e s t a t u t e o f l i m i t a t i o n s

.
W h e t h e r t h e o t h e r t h r e e c l a i m s a r e a l s o b a r r e d b y t h e s t a t u t e o f l i m i t a t i o n s a r e m o r e
i s s u e s t h a t w e d o n o t r e a c h

.
A F F I R M

.

Honora ble David D. D owd, J r., United States District Judge f or the Nor

thern District of * Ohio, sitti ng by

desig nation.
2
**Order of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 9 June 2011 – TF1 v Commission**

**(Case C-451/10 P)**

Appeal – State aid – Article 86(2) EC – Public service broadcasting – Decision not to raise objections – Proof – Economic efficiency of the undertaking

1.                     *State aid – Planned aid – Examination by the Commission – Preliminary stage and stage involving the exchange of views and
arguments – Compatibility of aid with the common market – Difficulties of assessment – Commission’s duty to open the inter
partes procedure – Definition – Serious difficulties – Burden and extent of proof in the case of an action for annulment of
the decision not to raise objections (Art. 88(2) and (3) EC; Council Regulation No 659/1999, Art. 4(3)) (see paras 47-50,
52)*

2.                     *Appeals – Operative part of the judgment justified by ground stated ex abundanti cautela – Rejection (see paras 62-63)*

**Re:**

| | | | | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Appeal brought against the judgment of General Court (Fifth Chamber) delivered on 1 July 2010 in Joined Cases T‐568/08 and T‐573/08 | TF1 and M6 | v | Commission | , by which that court dismissed the appellant’s action for annulment of Commission Decision C(2008) 3506 final of 16 July 2008 relating to the proposed grant, by the French Republic, of capital funding of EUR 150 million to France Télévisions SA – Infringement of the rules relating to the burden of proof and the taking of evidence – Infringement of Article 106(2) TFEU – Concept of ‘service of general economic interest’ – No serious difficulties. |

**Operative part**

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 1. | | The appeal is dismissed. |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 2. | | Télévision française 1 SA (TF1) is ordered to pay the costs. |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 3. | | Canal + and the French Republic are ordered to bear their own costs. |