alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
1

Ngo, Dan (FAA)

From: Daniels, Nia (FAA)

Sent: Monday, November 09, 2015 8:06 AM

To: Hightower, Gerald CTR (FAA); 9-AWA-AVS-333Exemptions (FAA); Ngo, Dan (FAA)

Subject: FW: Request for Additional Information: Shawn Maylen dba Silicon Valley UAV 

(FAA-2015-2362)

Nia Daniels, ARM‐108

Federal Aviation Administration

Office of Rulemaking, Airmen & Airspace Rules Division

800 Independence Avenue, SW

Washington, DC 20591

PH: (202) 267 ‐ 7626

Fax: (202) 267 ‐ 5075

nia.daniels@faa.gov

From: info@siliconvalleyuav.com [mailto:info@siliconvalleyuav.com] 

Sent: Saturday, November 07, 2015 6:31 PM 

To: Daniels, Nia (FAA) 

Subject: RE: Request for Additional Information: Shawn Maylen dba Silicon Valley UAV (FAA-2015-2362) 

Nia Daniels, 

Please accept my apology for delay of response. We are no longer interested in any fly overs during a 

stadium event. We would like to take this out of our 333. 

Best regards, 

Shawn Maylen 

408-355-0216 cell 

-------- Original Message -------- 

Subject: Request for Additional Information: Shawn Maylen dba Silicon 

Valley UAV (FAA-2015-2362) 

From: <Nia.Daniels@faa.gov> 

Date: Fri, October 02, 2015 7:13 am 

To: <info@siliconvalleyuav.com> 

Cc: <9-AWA-AVS-333Exemptions@faa.gov>, <Gerald.CTR.Hightower@faa.gov> 

October 2, 2015

Dear Mr. Maylen:

This letter is to inform you that the following information is missing from your petition (Docket No. 

FAA-2015-2362). This information is necessary for the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to 

process your petition.

On page four of your petition, you stated that you will conduct unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) 

operations over ‘stadium events’. 
2

 Provide a detailed operations plan of conducting UAS operations at stadium events, including 

where the stadium operations will be conducted. 

 If you wish to remove ‘stadium events’ from your petition, you can do so by responding to this 

email or on your docket. 

Please submit the additional information (non-proprietary) to your docket at www.regulations.gov and 

submit any proprietary information to the FAA Headquarters or electronically via e-mail to 

333exemptions@faa.gov. If you want us to process your request any further, we must receive the 

information described above by October 16, 2015. If we do not receive the information, we will close 

the docket without notifying you further.

If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at (202) 267-2999.

Sincerely,

 

 

Nia Daniels, ARM-108

Federal Aviation Administration

Office of Rulemaking, Airmen & Airspace Rules Division

800 Independence Avenue, SW

Washington, DC 20591

PH: (202) 267 - 7626

Fax: (202) 267 - 5075

nia.daniels@faa.gov
**Exhibit(32.1)** **Certification of Periodic Financial Report Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350**     For the purposes of 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned, Timothy J. Hearn, the chief executive officer ofImperial Oil Limited (the “company”), hereby certifies that to his knowledge:(i) the Annual Report on Form 10-K of the company for the year ended December 31, 2007, as filedwith the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), fully complies with therequirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and(ii) the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the company.Date: February 26, 2008   /s/ T.J. Hearn Timothy J. Hearn  Chairman of the Board and  Chief Executive Officer
§ 300.641 Annual report of children served—information required in the report. ( a ) For purposes of the annual report required by section 618 of the Act and § 300.640, the State and the Secretary of the Interior must count and report the number of children with disabilities receiving special education and related services on any date between October 1 and December 1 of each year.
( b ) For the purpose of this reporting provision, a child's age is the child's actual age on the date of the child count.
( c ) The SEA may not report a child under more than one disability category.
( d ) If a child with a disability has more than one disability, the SEA must report that child in accordance with the following procedure: ( 1 ) If a child has only two disabilities and those disabilities are deafness and blindness, and the child is not reported as having a developmental delay, that child must be reported under the category “deaf-blindness.”
( 2 ) A child who has more than one disability and is not reported as having deaf-blindness or as having a developmental delay must be reported under the category “multiple disabilities.”
(Approved by the Office of Management and Budget under control numbers 1820-0030, 1820-0043, 1820-0621, 1820-0521, and 1820-0517) (Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1418(a), (b))
# Official Journal C 328/2012

| | ISSN 1977-091X
  doi:10.3000/1977091X.C_2012.328.eng |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 328 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 5526 October 2012 |

ISSN 1977-091X

doi:10.3000/1977091X.C_2012.328.eng

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 328

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 5526 October 2012

---

| Notice No | Contents | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | IV   Notices |
| | NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES |
| 2012/C 328/01 | Summary of European Union decisions on marketing authorisations in respect of medicinal products from 1 September 2012 to 30 September 2012(Published pursuant to Article 13 or Article 38 of Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council
  ) | 1 |
| 2012/C 328/02 | Summary of European Union decisions on marketing authorisations in respect of medicinal products from 1 September 2012 to 30 September 2012(Decisions taken pursuant to Article 34 of Directive 2001/83/EC or Article 38 of Directive 2001/82/EC) | 8 |

Notice No

Contents

page

IV   Notices

NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

2012/C 328/01

Summary of European Union decisions on marketing authorisations in respect of medicinal products from 1 September 2012 to 30 September 2012(Published pursuant to Article 13 or Article 38 of Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council
  )

(Published pursuant to Article 13 or Article 38 of Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council

)

1

2012/C 328/02

Summary of European Union decisions on marketing authorisations in respect of medicinal products from 1 September 2012 to 30 September 2012(Decisions taken pursuant to Article 34 of Directive 2001/83/EC or Article 38 of Directive 2001/82/EC)

(Decisions taken pursuant to Article 34 of Directive 2001/83/EC or Article 38 of Directive 2001/82/EC)

8

---

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN
### §801. Transfer of license; obligations of transferee

No voluntary transfer of any license, or of the rights thereunder granted, shall be made without the written approval of the commission; and any successor or assign of the rights of such licensee, whether by voluntary transfer, judicial sale, foreclosure sale, or otherwise, shall be subject to all the conditions of the license under which such rights are held by such licensee and also subject to all the provisions and conditions of this chapter to the same extent as though such successor or assign were the original licensee under this chapter: Provided, That a mortgage or trust deed or judicial sales made thereunder or under tax sales shall not be deemed voluntary transfers within the meaning of this section.

(June 10, 1920, ch. 285, pt. I, §8, 41 Stat. 1068; renumbered pt. I, Aug. 26, 1935, ch. 687, title II, §212, 49 Stat. 847.)
§ 371.41 What are allowable costs? ( a ) In addition to those allowable cost established in 2 CFR 200.400—200.475, the following items are allowable costs under this program— ( 1 ) Expenditures for the provision of vocational rehabilitation services and for the administration, including staff development, of a program of vocational rehabilitation services.
( 2 ) Expenditures for services reflecting the cultural background of the American Indians being served, including treatment provided by native healing practitioners who are recognized as such by the tribal vocational rehabilitation program when the services are necessary to assist an individual with disabilities to achieve his or her vocational rehabilitation objective.
( b ) Expenditures may not be made under this program to cover the costs of providing vocational rehabilitation services to individuals with disabilities not residing on or near Federal or State reservations.
(Authority: Sections 12(c) and 121(a) and (b)(1) of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended; 29 U.S.C. 709(c) and 741(a) and (b)(1))
### §757c. Approval for activities on land administered by other Federal departments or agencies

Activities authorized by sections 757a to 757f of this title to be performed on lands administered by other Federal departments or agencies shall be carried out only with the prior approval of such departments or agencies.

(Pub. L. 89–304, §3, Oct. 30, 1965, 79 Stat. 1126.)
EXHIBIT 32

CERTIFICATION

Pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

(Subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code)

Pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18,
United States Code), each of the undersigned officers of Excelsior Venture Partners III, LLC (the Company), does hereby certify, to such officers knowledge, that:

The Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended April 30, 2007 (the Form 10-Q) of the Company fully complies with the requirements of Section 13 (a) or 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and the information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



|                    |  |     |  |                            
|------------------- |  | --- |  | ---------------------------
|Date: June 14, 2007 |  | By: |  | /s/ David R. Bailin        
|                    |  |     |  | David R. Bailin            
|                    |  |     |  | Co-Chief Executive Officer 
|                    |  |    
|Date: June 14, 2007 |  | By: |  | /s/ Raghav V. Nandagopal   
|                    |  |     |  | Raghav V. Nandagopal       
|                    |  |     |  | Co-Chief Executive Officer 
|                    |  |    
|Date: June 14, 2007 |  | By: |  | /s/ Steven L. Suss         
|                    |  |     |  | Steven L. Suss             
|                    |  |     |  | Principal Financial Officer

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will
be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.



29
§ 303.446 Finality of decision; appeal; impartial review. ( a ) *Finality of hearing decision.* A decision made in a hearing conducted pursuant to §§ 303.440 through 303.445 is final, except that any party involved in the hearing may appeal the decision under the provisions of paragraph (b) of this section and § 303.448.
( b ) *Appeal of decisions; impartial review.* ( 1 ) The lead agency may provide for procedures to allow any party aggrieved by the findings and decision in the hearing to appeal to the lead agency.
( 2 ) If there is an appeal, the lead agency must conduct an impartial review of the findings and decision appealed. The official conducting the review must— ( i ) Examine the entire hearing record;
( ii ) Ensure that the procedures at the hearing were consistent with the requirements of due process;
( iii ) Seek additional evidence if necessary. If a hearing is held to receive additional evidence, the rights in § 303.444 apply;
( iv ) Afford the parties an opportunity for oral or written argument, or both, at the discretion of the reviewing official;
( v ) Make an independent decision on completion of the review; and
( vi ) Give a copy of the written or, at the option of the parents, electronic findings of fact and decisions to the parties.
( c ) *Findings of fact and decision to the general public.* The lead agency, after deleting any personally identifiable information, must make the findings of fact and decisions described in paragraph (b)(2)(vi) of this section available to the general public.
( d ) *Finality of review decision.* The decision made by the reviewing official is final unless a party brings a civil action under § 303.448.
(Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1415(g), 1415(h)(4), 1415(i)(1)(A), 1415(i)(2), 1439)
###### 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.

#### § 1003.22 Interpreters.

Any person acting as an interpreter in a hearing shall swear or affirm to interpret and translate accurately, unless the interpreter is an employee of the United States Government, in which event no such oath or affirmation shall be required.

[52 FR 2936, Jan. 29, 1987. Redesignated at 57 FR 11571, Apr. 6, 1992]
# Official Journal C 187/2022

| | ISSN 1977-091X |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 187 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 656 May 2022 |

ISSN 1977-091X

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 187

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 656 May 2022

---

| Contents | page |
| --- | --- |
| | II   Information |
| | INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES |
| | European Commission |
| 2022/C 187/01 | List and description of the files of the OIV Code of Oenological Practices referred to in Article 3(2) of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2019/934 | 1 |

Contents

page

II   Information

INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

European Commission

2022/C 187/01

List and description of the files of the OIV Code of Oenological Practices referred to in Article 3(2) of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2019/934

1

---

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN
### §8201. Purpose

The purpose of this chapter is to encourage partnerships among public agencies and other interested persons to promote fish conservation—

(1) to achieve measurable habitat conservation results through strategic actions of Fish Habitat Partnerships that lead to better fish habitat conditions and increased fishing opportunities by—

(A) improving ecological conditions;

(B) restoring natural processes; or

(C) preventing the decline of intact and healthy systems;

(2) to establish a consensus set of national conservation strategies as a framework to guide future actions and investment by Fish Habitat Partnerships;

(3) to broaden the community of support for fish habitat conservation by—

(A) increasing fishing opportunities;

(B) fostering the participation of local communities, especially young people in local communities, in conservation activities; and

(C) raising public awareness of the role healthy fish habitat play in the quality of life and economic well-being of local communities;

(4) to fill gaps in the National Fish Habitat Assessment and the associated database of the National Fish Habitat Assessment—

(A) to empower strategic conservation actions supported by broadly available scientific information; and

(B) to integrate socioeconomic data in the analysis to improve the lives of humans in a manner consistent with fish habitat conservation goals; and

(5) to communicate to the public and conservation partners—

(A) the conservation outcomes produced collectively by Fish Habitat Partnerships; and

(B) new opportunities and voluntary approaches for conserving fish habitat.

(Pub. L. 116–188, title II, §201, Oct. 30, 2020, 134 Stat. 924.)

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

#### Short Title

Pub. L. 116–188, §1(a), Oct. 30, 2020, 134 Stat. 905, provided that: "This Act [enacting this chapter, sections 667h and 669l of this title, and sections 8355 and 8356 of Title 7, Agriculture, amending sections 666c–1, 3702, 3703, 3709, 3710, 4403, and 4406 of this title and section 1267 of Title 33, Navigation and Navigable Waters, enacting provisions set out as notes under section 2601 of Title 15, Commerce and Trade, and section 1267 of Title 33, and amending provisions set out as notes under sections 669 and 742b of this title and section 320101 of Title 54, National Park Service and Related Programs] may be cited as the 'America's Conservation Enhancement Act'."
### §1912. Unauthorized fees for inspection of vessels

Whoever, being an officer, employee, or agent of the United States or any agency thereof, engaged in inspection of vessels, upon any pretense, receives any fee or reward for his services, except what is allowed to him by law, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than six months, or both; and shall forfeit his office.

(June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 792; Pub. L. 103–322, title XXXIII, §330016(1)(G), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 2147.)

#### Historical and Revision Notes

Based on title 18, U.S.C., 1940 ed., §196 (Mar. 4, 1909, ch. 321, §107, 35 Stat. 1107).

The phrase "officer or employee of the United States or any agency thereof" was substituted for the phrase "inspector of steamboats" in view of 1946 Reorganization Plan No. 3, eff. July 16, 1946, 11 F.R. 7875, 60 Stat. 1097, abolishing inspectors and transferring their functions to the Coast Guard.

Minor changes were made in phraseology.

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

1994—Pub. L. 103–322 substituted "fined under this title" for "fined not more than $500".
#### Ervin Charles ST. AMAND, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Sherman BLOCK; et al., Defendants-Appellees.

No. 00-56093. D.C. No. CV-00-05963-TJH.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Feb. 11, 2002 *.

Decided Feb. 20, 2002.

*284Before B. FLETCHER, T.G. NELSON, and TALLMAN, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM**

Former California state prisoner Ervin Charles St. Amand appeals pro se the district court’s order denying him leave to file his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint in for-ma pauperis. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for abuse of discretion the district court’s dismissal of an in forma pauperis action as frivolous, and we review de novo the district court’s apparent determination that the plaintiffs complaint lacked arguable substance in law or fact. *Tripati v. First Nat’l Bank & Trust,*821 F.2d 1368, 1369 (9th Cir.1987). We affirm in part, and reverse and remand in part.

The district court denied St. Amand’s application to proceed in forma pauperis on the ground that his claims were frivolous. St. Amand’s Eighth Amendment claims, alleging that the defendants ignored his requests for medical attention for a week resulting in a perforated appendix, refused to follow his doctor’s directions to change his dressing post-surgery, and broke and failed to replace his prosthetic leg, knee brace and surgical support hose, do not appear frivolous. *See Hamilton v. Endell,*981 F.2d 1062, 1066 (9th Cir.1992). St. Amand’s Americans with Disabilities Act and Rehabilitation Act claims alleging that the defendants treated him differently because he was an amputee confined to a wheelchair and denied him the benefits of the law library, also do not appear frivolous. *See Duffy v. Riveland,*98 F.3d 447, 454-55 (9th Cir.1996). Further, St. Amand’s due process claim alleging that the defendants deprived him of his prosthetic leg, support hose and knee brace does not appear frivolous. *See Wolff v. McDonnell,*418 U.S. 539, 94 S.Ct. 2963, 41 L.Ed.2d 935 (1974). Accordingly, we reverse as to St. Amand’s deliberate indifference, disability discrimination and due process claims and remand for the district court to determine whether St. Amand’s financial condition allows him to proceed in forma pauperis with these causes of action as to all defendants.

St. Amand’s remaining causes of action lack arguable substance in law or fact, and we affirm the district court’s dismissal of those claims. *See Tripati,*821 F.2d at 1369-70.

We do not address the propriety of the district court’s June 23, 2000 order because St. Amand did not amend his notice of appeal to include this issue. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 4(a)(4)(B)(ii).

*285St. Amand’s request for judicial notice is denied.

AFFIRMED in part, REVERSED and REMANDED in part.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as may be provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

DAY HIGH

 7,427

 7,233

 6,551

 6,081

 5,753

 5,412

 4,666

 5,052

 4,066

 3,789

 4,321

 5,621

 6,334

 6,698

 6,726

 4,762

 3,187

 3,887

 4,723

 3,952

 3,016

 3,082

 3,040

 3,237

 4,225

 5,281

 5,064

 4,767

 5,286

 5,050

 253

 394

 399

 391

 428

 448

 505

 977

 630

 627

 460

 386

 406

 775

 424

 232

 227

 240

 294

 288

 268

 365

 347

 367

 288

 238

 590

 432

 349

 420

 2,726

 3,053

 2,990

 2,612

 2,559

 2,157

 2,467

 2,870

 2,436

 2,108

 1,984

 2,186

 2,569

 3,222

 2,574

 1,698

 1,428

 1,555

 1,883

 1,744

 1,469

 1,695

 1,517

 1,508

 1,661

 2,186

 2,434

 2,467

 2,497

 2,515

LOW MEAN

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

U.S. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION-CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT-CALIFORNIA

SEPTEMBER 2006 WATER QUALITY REPORT RUN DATE: October 3, 2006

ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY, UMHOS 

Comments:

0 reading indicates that the station was out of service.

COLLINSVILLE BOTTOM ON THE SACRAMENTO RIVER
§ 226.23 May charter schools use grant funds for administrative costs? ( a ) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, charter school subgrantees may use grant funds for administrative costs that are necessary and reasonable for the proper and efficient performance and administration of this Federal grant. This use of funds, as well as indirect costs and rates, must comply with EDGAR and the Office of Management and Budget Circular A-87 (Cost Principles for State, Local, and Indian Tribal Governments).
( b ) Consistent with the requirements in 34 CFR 75.564(c)(2), any charter school subgrantees that use grant funds for construction activities may not be reimbursed for indirect costs for those activities.
(Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1221e-3; 7221d(b))
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Joseph Johnson, Appellant.

[823 NYS2d 674]

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Tomei, J.), rendered April 16, 2004, convicting him of murder in the second degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant’s contentions regarding alleged prosecutorial misconduct during summation are unpreserved for appellate review *(see*CPL 470.05 [2]; *People v Nuccie,*57 NY2d 818, 819 [1982]; *People v George,*2 AD3d 457 [2003]). In any event, the challenged remarks do not require reversal *(see People v Tardbania,*72 NY2d 852, 853 [1988]).

The defendant was not deprived of the effective assistance of counsel *(see People v Benevento,*91 NY2d 708, 714 [1998]; *People v Baldi,*54 NY2d 137, 147 [1981]).

The defendant’s contentions raised in point one of his main brief relating to an alleged violation by the prosecutor of the court’s *Sandoval*ruling *(see People v Sandoval,*34 NY2d 371 [1974]), as well as those contentions raised in point one of his supplemental pro se brief relating to his right to be present and point three of his supplemental pro se brief relating to his right to confront witnesses are unpreserved for appellate review. His claim raised in point two of his supplemental pro se brief relating to the hearing testimony of police witnesses is without merit. Miller, J.R, Ritter, Rivera and Lifson, JJ., concur.