alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 

IN THE MATTER OF RECEIVED 

TRANS NORTH AVIATION, LTD. JUL- 8 2013 

FAA DOCKET NO. (2012-GL-03-0012HEARING DOCKET 

(Civil Penalty Action) 

FDMS NO. (FAA - 2013-0046) 

AGENCY'S REQUEST FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME WITHIN WHICH TO FILE 

ANSWERS TO THE DISCOVERY REQUEST OF TRANS NORTH AVIATION, LTD 

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), by counsel, 

hereby files its request for an extension of time within which to 

answer Complainant's Discovery Request and in support states as 

follows: 

1. The Agency's Attorney has been burdened with an extensive 

litigation schedule. 

2. Other matters including Real Estate and Environmental 

matters have also affected her ability to gather 

:'-nformation. 

3. Vacation schedules at this time of year makes it difficult 

to contact employees and others. 

Therefore, the Agency respectfully requests that the time for the 

discovery response petiod be extended to July 9, 2013. 
Respectfully submitted this 24th day of April, 2013 

eanette B Daubaras, Attorney 

Federal Aviation Administration 

Great Lakes Region, AGL-7G 

2300 East Devon Avenue 

Des Plaines, IL 60018 

Telephone: 

Facsimile: 

Email: 

(847) 294-7313 

(847) 294-7498 

jeanette. b.daubaras@faa.gov 

2 
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

The undersigned certifies that the foregoing Complaint was served via Certified Mail, Return 

Receipt Requested and Regular mail to the Hearing Docket and as follows and by regular 

mail to Mr. Schaberg, President Trans North Aviation, LTD and by regular mail to Mr. 

Barnett, III, Esq. at the following addresses : 

Original and One Copy: 

One Copy 

One Copy: 

Hearing Docket 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue, S. W. 

Washington, DC 20591 

Attn: Hearing Docket Clerk 

AGC-430, Wilber Wright Building 

Suite 2W1000 

Mr. Ronald J. Schaberg 

President 

Trans North Aviation LTD 

Eagle River Airport 

PO Box 1445 

Eagle River, WI 54521 

Charles R. Barnett, III 

1664 Moorland Lane 

Crystal Lake, IL 60014-2985 

Dated this 24 day of June!, 2013. 

3 

Yo! a Quiles 

Leg Technician 

FAA Great Lakes
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Charles A. Kohorst, Appellant.

[823 NYS2d 807]

Appeal from a judgment of the Genesee County Court (Robert C. Noonan, J.), rendered October 24, 2005. The judgment convicted defendant, upon a jury verdict, of assault in the second degree.

*1250It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him following a jury trial of assault in the second degree (Penal Law § 120.05 [3]). As part of his omnibus motion, defendant challenged his warrantless arrest in his home, contending that the police acted unlawfully by entering the home without a warrant, and County Court denied that part of his omnibus motion without conducting a *Payton*hearing. Following a substitution of defense counsel, defendant’s substituted defense counsel moved for reconsideration of that part of defendant’s omnibus motion, and the court denied the motion. Defendant now contends on appeal that his original defense counsel was ineffective because he failed to articulate sufficient facts in support of that part of the omnibus motion concerning the *Payton*issue. We reject that contention, inasmuch as the record establishes that defendant’s original defense counsel provided meaningful representation with respect to that part of the omnibus motion *(see generally People v Benevento,*91 NY2d 708, 712-713 [1998]; *People v Baldi,*54 NY2d 137, 147 [1981]). We also reject defendant’s further contention that the court erred in summarily denying the motion for reconsideration of that part of defendant’s omnibus motion concerning the *Payton*issue *(see People v*McQueen, 307 AD2d 765, 766 [2003], *lv denied*100 NY2d 622 [2003]). In any event, even assuming, arguendo, that defendant had a reasonable expectation of privacy on his porch and thus that there was a *Payton*violation, we would nevertheless conclude that the violation would not warrant suppression of what the police observed and heard following that alleged violation. When the police confronted defendant in his home following the alleged *Payton*violation, defendant committed a new and independent crime when he interfered with the police officers’ arrest of his wife and assaulted a police officer *(see People v Ellis,*4 AD3d 877, 878 [2004], *lv denied*3 NY3d 639, 673 [2004]).

Defendant’s conviction of assault is supported by legally sufficient evidence *(see People v Bernier,*279 AD2d 701, 702 [2001], *lv denied*96 NY2d 797 [2001]), and the verdict is not against the weight of the evidence *(see generally People v Bleakley,*69 NY2d 490, 495 [1987]). We have examined defendant’s remaining contention and conclude that it is lacking in merit. Present—Kehoe, J.P., Martoche, Centra, Green and Pine, JJ.
Editorial Note on Part 1003
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 1003 appear at 68 FR 9846, Feb. 28, 2003, and at 68 FR 10350, Mar. 5, 2003.

§ 1003.16 Representation. ( a ) The government may be represented in proceedings before an Immigration Judge.
( b ) The alien may be represented in proceedings before an Immigration Judge by an attorney or other representative of his or her choice in accordance with 8 CFR part 1292, at no expense to the government.
[52 FR 2936, Jan. 29, 1987. Redesignated at 57 FR 11571, Apr. 6, 1992, as amended at 62 FR 10332, Mar. 6, 1997]
#### H. R. Chislett, Defendant in Error, v. Ferdinand W. Jaros et al., Plaintiffs in Error.

Gen. No. 15,220.

Municipal *Court—when judgment not disturbed.*The Appellate Court will not reverse a judgment rendered by the Municipal Court unless it is satisfied from an examination of the record that the judgment is contrary to the law and the evidence or resulted from substantial errors in the trial court directly affecting the matters in issue between the parties.

Error to the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Frank P. Sadler, Judge, presiding.

Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the March term, 1909.

Affirmed.

Opinion filed December 2, 1910.

Walter A. Brendecke, for plaintiffs in error.

Cameron & Matson, for defendant in error.

*121Mr. Justice Smith

delivered the opinion of the court.

The defendant in error, H. E. Chislett, recovered a judgment in the Municipal Court of Chicago for professional services rendered as a surgeon on the son of the plaintiffs in error February 16, 1908. It appears that the patient was suffering from acute, diffusive, suppurative peritonitis, and in the opinion of Dr. Chislett he could be expected to live only a short time unless operated upon, and that medical treatment alone offered no assurance of recovery.

The defense attempted to be made out was that the operation was performed in an improper and careless manner and directly contributed to the death of the boy.

The contentions of the parties and the substantial facts in support of them were placed before the jury. The employment of the plaintiff below was not disputed. It was a question of fact for the jury to determine from the evidence whether the operation was improperly and carelessly performed or not. Some errors intervened in the rulings on evidence, but we are not satisfied from an examination of the record that the judgment is contrary to the law and the evidence, or resulted from substantial errors of the trial court directly affecting the matters at issue between the parties.

The judgment is affirmed.

*Affirmed.*
### §460gg–11. Civil and criminal jurisdiction of Idaho and Oregon

Nothing in this subchapter shall diminish, enlarge, or modify any right of the States of Idaho, Oregon, or any political subdivisions thereof, to exercise civil and criminal jurisdiction within the recreation area or of rights to tax persons, corporations, franchises, or property, including mineral or other interests, in or on lands or waters within the recreation area.

(Pub. L. 94–199, §14, Dec. 31, 1975, 89 Stat. 1122.)
### §460u–6. Administration

#### (a) Utilization of authorities for conservation and management of natural resources

In the administration of the Park the Secretary may utilize such statutory authorities relating to areas of the national park system and such statutory authority otherwise available to him for the conservation and management of natural resources as he deems appropriate to carry out the purposes of this subchapter.

#### (b) Preservation of Park; incompatible visitor conveniences restricted; provisions for public enjoyment and understanding; developments for public uses

In order that the Park shall be permanently preserved in its present state, no development or plan for the convenience of visitors shall be undertaken therein which would be incompatible with the preservation of the unique flora and fauna or the physiographic conditions now prevailing or with the preservation of such historic sites and structures as the Secretary may designate: Provided, That the Secretary may provide for the public enjoyment and understanding of the unique natural, historic, and scientific features within the Park by establishing such trails, observation points, and exhibits and providing such services as he may deem desirable for such public enjoyment and understanding: Provided further, That the Secretary may develop for appropriate public uses such portions of the Park as he deems especially adaptable for such uses.

(Pub. L. 89–761, §6, formerly §7, Nov. 5, 1966, 80 Stat. 1311; renumbered §6, Pub. L. 94–549, §1(9), Oct. 18, 1976, 90 Stat. 2533; amended Pub. L. 116–6, div. E, title I, §115(a)(1)(B), Feb. 15, 2019, 133 Stat. 232.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Prior Provisions

A prior section 6 of Pub. L. 89–761 was renumbered section 5 and is classified to section 460u–5 of this title.

#### Amendments

2019—Pub. L. 116–6 substituted "Park" for "lakeshore" wherever appearing.
### §441e–1. Change in name of Badlands National Monument

The area formerly known as the "Badlands National Monument", established by Presidential Proclamation of January 25, 1939 (53 Stat. 2521), shall henceforth be known as the "Badlands National Park".

(Pub. L. 95–625, title VI, §611, Nov. 10, 1978, 92 Stat. 3521.)
### §§581b to 581i. Repealed. Pub. L. 95–307, §8(a), June 30, 1978, 92 Stat. 356

Section 581b, act May 22, 1928, ch. 678, §3, 45 Stat. 701, authorized appropriations for investigations of diseases of forest trees and products.

Section 581c, act May 22, 1928, ch. 678, §4, 45 Stat. 701, authorized appropriations for investigations of forest insects.

Section 581d, act May 22, 1928, ch. 678, §5, 45 Stat. 701, authorized appropriations for experiments and investigations of life histories and habits of forest animals, birds, and wildlife.

Section 581e, act May 22, 1928, ch. 678, §6, 45 Stat. 701, authorized appropriations for investigations of the relationship of weather conditions to forest fires.

Section 581f, act May 22, 1928, ch. 678, §7, 45 Stat. 701, authorized appropriations for experiments and investigations for development of improved methods of management of forest ranges.

Section 581g, act May 22, 1928, ch. 678, §8, 45 Stat. 701, authorized appropriations for experiments, investigations, and tests of the physical and chemical properties of forest products.

Section 581h, acts May 22, 1928, ch. 678, §9, 45 Stat. 702; May 31, 1944, ch. 217, 58 Stat. 265; June 25, 1949, ch. 245, 63 Stat. 271; Aug. 8, 1953, ch. 378, 67 Stat. 489; Sept. 25, 1962, Pub. L. 87–685, 76 Stat. 579; Dec. 14, 1967, Pub. L. 90–193, 81 Stat. 579; Aug. 17, 1974, Pub. L. 93–378, §3(b), formerly §2(b), 88 Stat. 476, renumbered Oct. 22, 1976, Pub. L. 94–588, §2, 90 Stat. 2949, set forth provisions relating to comprehensive survey and analysis of the present and prospective conditions of and requirements for renewable resources.

Section 581i, act May 22, 1928, ch. 678, §10, 45 Stat. 702, authorized appropriations for economic investigations of forest lands and forest products.

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

#### Effective Date of Repeal

Repeal effective Oct. 1, 1978, see section 9 of Pub. L. 95–307, set out as an Effective Date note under section 1641 of this title.
##### 



Exhibit 10(a)(xxiii)
 Named Executive Officer Salaries
 Name
    
    
    AmountWilliam R. JohnsonChairman, President, and Chief Executive Officer
    
    
    $
    1,150,000Jeffrey P. BergerExecutive Vice President  Chairman Global Foodservice
    
    
    $
    540,750David C. MoranExecutive Vice President  President & Chief Executive
Officer of Heinz North America
    
    
    $
    620,000D.E.I. SmythSenior Vice President  Chief Administrative Officer
    
    
    $
    489,071Arthur B. WinkleblackExecutive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
    
    
    $
    595,000
 Director Compensation
  
    
    $85,000 in cash and 3,000 restricted stock units payable in Common Stock.
    
    $15,000 retainer for the chairs of the Audit and Management Development and Compensation Committees.
    
    $10,000 retainer for the chairs of the Corporate Social Responsibility and Corporate Governance Committees.
§ 260.117 Application procedures. ( a ) The FHWA notices announcing each year's programs and containing the application form may be obtained from FHWA regional and division offices, State highway agencies, metropolitan planning organizations, Governors' highway safety representatives, Urban Mass Transportation Administration regional directors, major transit authorities and from colleges and universities. Forms may also be obtained from the NHI, HHI-3, FHWA, Washington, DC 20590.
( b ) In order to become a candidate, the applicant shall complete and forward the application form according to the instructions in the FHWA notice announcing the programs. The cutoff date for submitting the application stipulated in the notices should be observed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                                            <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                12-MOS                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          APR-26-1997             APR-25-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-28-1996             APR-27-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               APR-28-1997             APR-25-1998
<CASH>                                       1,542                  16,518
<SECURITIES>                                     0                       0  
<RECEIVABLES>                               33,333                  59,403     
<ALLOWANCES>                                     0                       0
<INVENTORY>                                 22,334                  36,136
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            60,583                 129,372
<PP&E>                                      30,966                  54,161
<DEPRECIATION>                                   0                       0      
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             113,587                 231,404
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       51,212                  66,949
<BONDS>                                          0                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                            1                       1 
<PREFERRED>                                 11,474                  30,457
<COMMON>                                         0                       0
<OTHER-SE>                                 (36,736)                (51,217)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               113,587                 231,404
<SALES>                                    160,847                 234,380
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 0                       0       
<CGS>                                      108,786                 151,360
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               10,882                  28,229
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 0                       0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 0                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                          11,631                  18,819
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             (3,275)                (15,087)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     4                    (430)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                         (3,279)                (14,657)
<DISCONTINUED>                                 782                   9,377
<EXTRAORDINARY>                               (259)                 (7,464)
<CHANGES>                                        0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                (2,756)                (12,744)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                            (3,235.00)             (15,202.08)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    0                       0
        

</TABLE>
United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

_____________

No. 96-3196EM

_____________

Willie Watson, *

*

Appellant, *

*

v. * Appeal from the United States

* District Court for the Eastern

United States Postal Service; St. Louis * District of Missouri.

Gateway District Area Local of *

American Postal Workers Union, * [UNPUBLISHED]

AFL-CIO; American Postal Workers *

Union, AFL-CIO, *

*

Appellees. *

_____________

 Submitted: July 7, 1997

Filed: July 11, 1997

_____________

Before McMILLIAN, FAGG, and LOKEN, Circuit Judges.

_____________

PER CURIAM.

Willie Watson appeals the district court's grant of summary judgment to

Watson's former employer and his former unions in this employment-related lawsuit.

Watson also seeks review of a Merit Systems Protection Board decision. Based on the

record before us, we find no error that would require reversal. We thus affirm on the

basis of the district court's thorough, well-reasoned order. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.
-2-

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
Order entered March 8, 2019

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05 - 18 - 01040 - CV MICHAEL CARY SNOWDEN AND BRENDA ASCENCIO , Appellant s V. BRANDON QUACH, Appellee On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 4

Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. CC - 18 - 00955 - D



### O RDER Before the Court is appellee’s March 7, 2019 unopposed second motion for an extension of time to file a brief. We GRANT the motion and extend the time to March 14, 2019

. /s/ KEN MOLBERG JUSTICE
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Before the

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

Release No. 77498 / April 1, 2016

ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDING

File No. 3-12114

In the Matter of

American Express Financial Corporation 

(now known as Ameriprise Financial, Inc.)

Respondent.

ORDER APPOINTING FUND 

ADMINISTRATOR AND SETTING

ADMINISTRATOR BOND AMOUNT

On December 1, 2005, Respondent American Express Financial Corporation (“AEFC” or 

“Respondent”) consented to an Order Instituting Administrative and Cease-and-Desist 

Proceedings, Making Findings, and Imposing Remedial Sanctions and a Cease-and-Desist Order 

Pursuant to Sections 203(e) and 203(k) of the Investment Advisors Act of 1940 and Sections 9(b) 

and 9(f) of the Investment Company Act of 1940 (“Order”).

1

 The Order found that AEFC allowed 

market timing in certain of its mutual funds and variable annuity products from January 1, 2002

through October 2003 that was contrary to fund prospectuses and not disclosed to shareholders and 

AEFC directors. The Order required Respondent to pay disgorgement of $10,000,000 and a civil 

money penalty of $5,000,000 and established a Fair Fund in the total amount of $15,000,000 for a 

distribution to harmed investors pursuant to Section 308(a) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

 

1 Advisers Act Rel. No. 2451 (December 1, 2005).
The Division of Enforcement (“Division”) now seeks the appointment of Rust Consulting, 

Inc. (“Rust”) as the fund administrator and requests that the administrator’s bond be set at 

$15,000,000 as required by Rules 1105(a) and 1105(c) of the Commission’s Rules on Fair Fund 

and Disgorgement Plans (“Rules”). Rust is included in the Commission’s approved pool of 

administrators.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, that pursuant to Rule 1105(a) Rust is appointed 

as the fund administrator and shall obtain a bond in accordance with Rule 1105(c) in the approved 

amount of $15,000,000. 

By the Commission.

Brent J. Fields

Secretary
Exhibit 32.1
                           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 WOM, Inc. (the "Company")on Form
10-QSB for the period ending June 30, 2004 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), Frederic M. Zinn the
principal executive officer and principal financial officer, certifies pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 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 result of operations of the
Company.

Dated: August 16, 2004


           /s/ Frederic M. Zinn
               ----------------
               Frederic M. Zinn
               President
               Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer
### §583f. "Federally owned or administered forest land" defined

Whenever used in this subchapter, the term "federally owned or administered forest land" shall be construed to mean forest land in which, or in the natural resources of which, the United States has a legal or equitable interest of any character sufficient to entitle the United States to control the management or disposition of the timber or other forest products thereon, except land heretofore or hereafter reserved or withdrawn for purposes which are inconsistent with the exercise of the authority conferred by this subchapter; and shall include trust or restricted Indian land, whether tribal or allotted, except that such land shall not be included without the consent of the Indians concerned.

(Mar. 29, 1944, ch. 146, §7, 58 Stat. 134.)
Current 1 - 30 31 - 60 61 - 90 > 90 TOTAL

Lindsay ChryslerDodgeJeep&Ram of Man... 14,500.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 14,500.00

Caliber Collision 99.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 99.00

West Broad Honda 7,750.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 7,750.00

Fair Oaks Chantilly 3,477.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3,477.50

Sheehy Ford of Richmond 10,311.00 5,118.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 15,429.00

Wes Greenway 2,555.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2,555.00

Ted Brit Ford Fairfax 10,326.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 10,326.50

Bill Page Honda 5,782.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 5,782.00

Sheehy Nissan Hyundai & Ford 17,587.70 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 17,587.70

Lindsay Chevrolet of Woodbridge 12,160.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 12,160.00

Ted Britt Chantilly 1,145.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1,145.00

Lindsay Ford of Wheaton 21,065.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 21,065.00

Sheehy Infiniti Of Chantilly 3,923.08 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3,923.08

Moore Cadillac 3,318.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3,318.00

TOTAL 113999.78 5,118.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 119117.78

Presidential Detailing, LLC

02/17/16 A/R Aging Summary

As of February 9, 2016

Page 1

Case 16-10447-BFK Doc 18-1 Filed 02/19/16 Entered 02/19/16 14:13:00 Desc

 Exhibit(s) Page 1 of 1