alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### §§1357 to 1359. Repealed. Sept. 26, 1949, ch. 585, §2, 63 Stat. 698

Sections, act June 26, 1948, ch. 678, §§3(a), (b), 4, 5, 62 Stat. 1053, 1054, related to the investigatory functions of the Tariff Commission and the report by the President to Congress.
#### William V. Elliott, Public Administrator of Kings County, as Administrator of the Estate of Thomas Quinn, Deceased, Appellant, v. New York Rapid Transit Corporation, Respondent.

Johnston, Adel and Lewis, JJ., concur; Close, P. J., and Carswell, J., concur as to dismissal of the appeal from the order but dissent as to affirmance of the judgment and vote to reverse and to grant a new trial on the ground that the record presents a question of fact for determination by the jury as to defendant’s negligence and plaintiff’s intestate’s freedom from contributory negligence.
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
  o
    
    The Quarterly Report of the company on Form 10-Q for the period ended
September 30 , 2009, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; ando
    
    The information contained in such report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
company.
  /s/ John J. Haley

John J. HaleyPresident and Chief Executive Officer/s/ Roger F. Millay

Roger F. MillayVice President and Chief Financial Officer
  48
TREATIES AND OTHER INTERNATIONAL ACTS SERIES 07-1228.3 

________________________________________________________________________ 

NUCLEAR SAFETY 

 Arrangement Between the 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

and ARGENTINA 

Signed at Rockville and Buenos Aires 

December 4 and 28, 2007 

with 

Addenda 
 NOTE BY THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE 

 Pursuant to Public Law 89—497, approved July 8, 1966 

(80 Stat. 271; 1 U.S.C. 113)—

“. . .the Treaties and Other International Acts Series issued 

under the authority of the Secretary of State shall be competent 

 evidence . . . of the treaties, international agreements other than 

treaties, and proclamations by the President of such treaties and 

international agreements other than treaties, as the case may be, 

therein contained, in all the courts of law and equity and of maritime 

jurisdiction, and in all the tribunals and public offices of the 

United States, and of the several States, without any further proof 

or authentication thereof.” 
ARGENTINA 

Nuclear Safety 

 Arrangement signed at Rockville and Buenos Aires 

 December 4 and 28, 2007; 

 Entered into force December 28, 2007. 

 With addenda.
(No. 6511

#### Roy Greathouse, Ray Wax, Carl G. Livengood, Myron Whisnand, Ross Reeder, and Martin Stock, Jr., Claimants, *vs.*State of Illinois, Office of the Superintendent of the Educational Service Region, Respondent.

*5
      *Opinion filed July 14, 1972.*

W. A. Bozarth, Attorney for Claimants.

William J. Scott, Attorney General; William E. Webber, Assistant Attorney General, for Respondent.

Berlin, C.J.
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

31

DAY HIGH

 1,227

 1,200

 1,159

 1,132

 1,098

 1,082

 1,073

 1,067

 1,070

 1,080

 1,079

 1,068

 1,063

 1,068

 1,062

 1,058

 1,067

 1,072

 1,088

 1,116

 1,149

 1,145

 1,152

 1,168

 1,276

 1,252

 1,202

 1,166

 1,143

 1,119

 1,113

 1,075

 1,070

 1,045

 1,039

 1,018

 980

 954

 945

 947

 934

 922

 925

 930

 928

 944

 950

 953

 957

 967

 968

 961

 952

 955

 964

 972

 982

 971

 995

 1,004

 1,011

 999

 1,169

 1,153

 1,115

 1,087

 1,065

 1,047

 1,034

 1,027

 1,016

 1,002

 1,000

 999

 1,001

 1,003

 1,004

 1,002

 1,003

 1,007

 1,023

 1,036

 1,050

 1,045

 1,038

 1,048

 1,091

 1,096

 1,070

 1,065

 1,071

 1,062

 1,052

LOW MEAN

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

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

JANUARY 2009 WATER QUALITY REPORT RUN DATE: February 3, 2009

ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY, UMHOS 

Comments:

0 reading indicates that the station was out of service.

FARRAR PARK AT DUTCH SLOUGH
#### § 11.21 General.

It is unlawful for an industry member to sell, offer for sale, or contract to sell to any trade buyer, or for any such trade buyer to purchase, offer to purchase, or contract to purchase any products (a) on consignment; or (b) under conditional sale; or (c) with the privilege of return; or (d) on any basis other than a bona fide sale; or (e) if any part of the sale involves, directly or indirectly, the acquisition by such person of other products from the trade buyer or the agreement to acquire other products from the trade buyer. Transactions involving the bona fide return of products for ordinary and usual commercial reasons arising after the product has been sold are not prohibited.
(No. 76-CV-0062

#### In Re Application of Clara M. Votteler

*Order filed October 23, 1978.*

Poch, J.

This claim arises out of a criminal offense which occurred on March 30, 1975, at 124th Street and Hals-ted Avenue. Claimant seeks compensation pursuant to the provisions of the “Crime Victims Compensation Act,” hereafter referred to as “the Act.” *(Ill. Rev. Stat., Ch. 70, Sec. 71, et seq.)*

Based on the Investigatory Report of the Attorney General this Court denied the claim on November 3, 1976. The Court found that the Claimant’s husband’s death was caused by being struck and killed by a hit and run driver and therefore the Claimant’s husband was not killed as the result of being the victim of a violent crime as defined in Sec. 2(c) of the Act. The Claimant objected to this Order and requested a hearing on the merits. The claim was assigned to a Commissioner and a hearing was held before Commis*1076sioner Leo J. Spivack on May 17, 1978, where the following facts were established by a preponderance of evidence:

The Claimant was married to Christopher Votteler and on March 30,1975, her husband was struck by a hit and run driver as he was crossing the street on his way home. As the result of his injuries Christopher Votteler subsequently died. There was no evidence adduced to show the incident was deliberately caused. No one was ever arrested or charged with his death.

In order for a Claimant to be eligible for compensation under the Act there must be proof that the injury or death was the result of one of the violent crimes defined in Sec. 2(c) of the Act. In this case there is no proof that the victim came under the scope of any of those enumerated crimes of violence. Therefore the Claimant is not entitled to compensation under the terms of the Act.

There has been no evidence presented to cause the Court to modify or vacate the Order denying the claim.

It is hereby ordered that the Order of November 3, 1976, shall stand and the claim of Clara M. Votteler be and the same is hereby denied with prejudice.
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

31

DAY ELEV

 403.92

 403.83

 403.60

 403.33

 403.11

 402.89

 402.87

 402.74

 402.59

 402.35

 402.17

 402.11

 402.01

 402.06

 402.14

 402.29

 402.29

 402.08

 401.94

 401.72

 401.43

 401.31

 401.11

 401.03

 400.88

 400.65

 400.54

 400.48

 400.44

 400.32

 400.24

 406.1

 405.4

 403.8

 402.0

 400.4

 398.9

 398.8

 397.9

 396.9

 395.2

 394.0

 393.6

 392.9

 393.3

 393.8

 394.8

 394.8

 393.4

 392.4

 391.0

 389.0

 388.2

 386.8

 386.3

 385.3

 383.8

 383.0

 382.6

 382.3

 381.5

 381.0

STORAGE

-0.3

-0.6

-1.6

-1.9

-1.5

-1.5

-0.1

-0.9

-1.0

-1.6

-1.2

-0.4

-0.7

+0.3

+0.5

+1.0

+0.0

-1.4

-1.0

-1.5

-2.0

-0.8

-1.4

-0.5

-1.0

-1.5

-0.7

-0.4

-0.3

-0.8

-0.5

CHANGE

1,668

1,465

876

835

885

890

1,558

1,213

1,335

938

1,112

1,494

1,070

1,956

2,007

2,251

1,701

1,157

1,162

928

828

1,348

1,074

1,419

1,178

927

1,333

1,573

1,626

1,273

1,474

INFLOW

 1,593

 1,521

 1,447

 1,555

 1,464

 1,487

 1,418

 1,425

 1,616

 1,526

 1,506

 1,476

 1,190

 1,547

 1,494

 1,497

 1,457

 1,651

 1,415

 1,461

 1,601

 1,535

 1,532

 1,462

 1,456

 1,485

 1,486

 1,552

 1,537

 1,449

 1,509

POWER

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

SPILL

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

OUTLET

 186

 190

 188

 178

 165

 147

 172

 176

 180

 186

 183

 174

 179

 180

 179

 177

 182

 177

 176

 173

 169

 170

 172

 179

 178

 171

 173

 169

 170

 174

 180

PUMPING

 63

 68

 44

 44

 23

 19

 37

 60

 56

 53

 44

 51

 46

 57

 58

 60

 62

 53

 51

 44

 46

 52

 52

 50

 50

 45

 45

 54

 54

 54

 54

C.F.S.

 .27

 .29

 .19

 .19

 .10

 .08

 .16

 .26

 .24

 .23

 .19

 .22

 .20

 .25

 .25

 .26

 .27

 .23

 .22

 .19

 .20

 .23

 .23

 .22

 .22

 .20

 .20

 .24

 .24

 .24

 .24

INCHES

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

PRECIP

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

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

AUGUST 2014 FOLSOM LAKE DAILY OPERATIONS RUN DATE: September 1, 2014

IN LAKE

EVAPORATION

INCHES

C.F.S. PLANT

COMPUTED*

1000 ACRE-FEET

RELEASE - C.F.S. 

 RIVER 

TOTALS -25.3 40,554 46,350 0 0 5,453 1,549 6.75 .00

ACRE-FEET -25,300 80,439 91,935 0 0 10,816 3,072

COMMENTS:

* COMPUTED INFLOW IS THE SUM OF CHANGE IN STORAGE, RELEASES, PUMPING AND EVAPORATION.

SUMMARY

RELEASE (ACRE-FEET)

POWER 91,935

SPILL

PUMPING PLANT

 0

 10,816

TOTAL 102,751

PRECIPITATION

THIS MONTH =

JULY 1, 2014 TO DATE = .00

 406.4

OUTLET 0 .00
### §157. Bankruptcy fraud

A person who, having devised or intending to devise a scheme or artifice to defraud and for the purpose of executing or concealing such a scheme or artifice or attempting to do so—

(1) files a petition under title 11, including a fraudulent involuntary petition under section 303 of such title;

(2) files a document in a proceeding under title 11; or

(3) makes a false or fraudulent representation, claim, or promise concerning or in relation to a proceeding under title 11, at any time before or after the filing of the petition, or in relation to a proceeding falsely asserted to be pending under such title,

shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both.

(Added Pub. L. 103–394, title III, §312(a)(1)(B), Oct. 22, 1994, 108 Stat. 4140; amended Pub. L. 109–8, title III, §332(c), Apr. 20, 2005, 119 Stat. 103; Pub. L. 111–327, §2(b), Dec. 22, 2010, 124 Stat. 3562.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

2010—Par. (1). Pub. L. 111–327, §2(b)(1), struck out "bankruptcy" after "involuntary".

Pars. (2), (3). Pub. L. 111–327, §2(b)(2), struck out ", including a fraudulent involuntary bankruptcy petition under section 303 of such title" after "title 11".

2005—Pars. (1) to (3). Pub. L. 109–8, which directed insertion of ", including a fraudulent involuntary bankruptcy petition under section 303 of such title" after "title 11", was executed by making the insertion after "title 11" wherever appearing, to reflect the probable intent of Congress.

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

#### Effective Date of 2005 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 109–8 effective 180 days after Apr. 20, 2005, and not applicable with respect to cases commenced under Title 11, Bankruptcy, before such effective date, except as otherwise provided, see section 1501 of Pub. L. 109–8, set out as a note under section 101 of Title 11.

#### Effective Date

Section effective Oct. 22, 1994, and not applicable with respect to cases commenced under Title 11, Bankruptcy, before Oct. 22, 1994, see section 702 of Pub. L. 103–394, set out as an Effective Date of 1994 Amendment note under section 101 of Title 11.
§ 19.16 Modified forms. If a proprietor wishes to modify a form prescribed by these regulations, the proprietor must submit an application for approval of an alternate method or procedure (see §§ 19.26 and 19.27) to the appropriate TTB officer. The proprietor may not use a modified form until TTB approves the application. The application to modify a form must be accompanied by: ( a ) A copy of each proposed form with typical entries; and
( b ) A statement explaining the need to use a modified form.
(26 U.S.C. 5207)
### **PART V—IMMUNITY OF WITNESSES**
### TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03
- 24
- 00464
- CV

CTCHGC, LLC d/b/a Central Texas Gun Works; Centex Guns; CTGW; and

Michael D. Cargill , Appellant s

v. Prosperity Bank , Appellee

FROM THE 126TH DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY, NO. D
- 1
- GN
- 23
- 006997 , THE HONORABLE JESSICA MANGRUM , JUDGE PRESIDING

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

PER CURIAM

Appellant CTCHGC , LLC d/b/a Central Texas Gun W orks filed a suggestion of bankruptcy on September 3 , 2024

. See Tex. R. App. P. 8.1. We therefore abate this appeal until a party files a motion to reinstate or a motion to sever. See id . R. 8.2, 8.3. Appellant s are ordered to inform this Court of the resolution of the bankruptcy proceeding s or some other event that would allow this appeal to be reinstated. Should they fail to provide such notice, the appeal will be subject to dismissal for want of prosecution on this Court’s or another party ’ s motion. See
id. R. 42.3(b), (c).

Before Justices Baker, Smith, and Theofanis
Abated
Filed: September 12, 2024
1 The Honorable Ortrie D. Smith, United St ates District Judge for the Western District of Missouri. 

## United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 05-3287

___________ United States of America, * * Appellee, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * Western District of Missouri. Jimmie J. Caldwell, * * [UNPUBLISHED] Appellant. *

___________ Submitted: August 17, 2006 Filed: August 22, 2006

___________ Before RILEY, COLLOTON, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM. Jimmie J. Caldwell (Caldwell) pled guilty to three counts of distributing 5 grams or more of crack cocaine, in viol ation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) and (b)(1)(B). The district court 1 imposed concurrent sentences of 188 months’ imprisonment and 8 years’ supervised release. On appeal, Caldwell’s couns el moved to withdraw, and filed a brief under A nders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), arguing: (1) the district court erred in enhancing Caldwell’s sentence under U.S.S.G. § 3C1.2 for recklessly-2- creating a substantial risk of death or seri ous bodily injury to another person; and (2) the court imposed an unreasonable sentence. We reject each argument and affirm.
The testimony at Caldwell’s sentencing hearing showed, in the course of fleeing from law enforcement officers to evade his arrest on the in stant offense, Caldwell was speeding in his car and driving erratically on a congested highway. We conclude the district court did not clearly err in appl ying the section 3C1.2 enhancement. See United States v. St. James , 415 F.3d 800, 806 (8th Cir. 2005) (finding section 3C1.2 enhancement was not clearly erroneous wh ere evidence showed defendant drove car erratically at high speeds on congested streets, thereby placing both law enforcement personnel and public in danger).
Additionally, Caldwell’s sentence was not unreasonable or an abuse of discretion. The district court took the advisory Guidelines range into account–along with other 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) sentencing f actors, and Caldwell’s arguments for a variance–in sentencing Caldwell within the Guidelines range. Nothing in the record indicates the court failed to consider a rele vant factor, gave significant weight to an improper or irrelevant factor, or made a plain error of judgment. SeeUnited States v. Booker , 543 U.S. 220, 260-61 (2005) (stating s ection 3553(a) will guide appellate courts in determining whether sentence is unreasonable); United States v. Lincoln , 413 F.3d 716, 717-18 (8th Cir.) (explaining a sentence within applicable Guidelines range is presumptively reasonable and burden is on defendant to rebut that presumption), cert. denied , 126 S. Ct. 840 (2005); United States v. Haack , 403 F.3d 997, 1003-04 (8th Cir.) (standard of revi ew; defining abuse of discretion), cert. denied , 126 S. Ct. 276 (2005).
Having reviewed the record i ndependently under Penson v. Ohio , 488 U.S. 75, 80 (1988), we find no other nonfrivolous issue. Accordingly, we affirm, and grant counsel’s motion to withdraw.

______________________________
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

31

DAY ELEV

 1,155.65

 1,155.65

 1,155.64

 1,155.64

 1,155.63

 1,155.63

 1,150.62

 1,155.61

 1,155.60

 1,155.59

 1,155.58

 1,155.57

 1,155.56

 1,155.55

 1,155.54

 1,155.53

 1,155.52

 1,155.51

 1,155.50

 1,155.49

 1,155.48

 1,155.47

 1,155.46

 1,155.45

 1,155.44

 1,155.43

 1,155.42

 1,155.41

 1,155.41

 1,155.40

 1,155.39

 4.92

 4.92

 4.92

 4.92

 4.91

 4.91

 3.17

 4.91

 4.90

 4.90

 4.89

 4.89

 4.89

 4.88

 4.88

 4.87

 4.87

 4.87

 4.86

 4.86

 4.85

 4.85

 4.85

 4.84

 4.84

 4.83

 4.83

 4.83

 4.83

 4.82

 4.82

STORAGE

-0.02

+0.00

+0.00

+0.00

+0.00

+0.00

-1.75

+1.74

+0.00

+0.00

+0.00

+0.00

+0.00

+0.00

+0.00

+0.00

+0.00

+0.00

+0.00

+0.00

+0.00

+0.00

+0.00

+0.00

+0.00

+0.00

+0.00

+0.00

+0.00

+0.00

+0.00

CHANGE

-1

9

7

9

8

10

-872

886

8

8

8

9

8

7

7

7

7

7

7

7

5

5

3

4

4

4

3

2

6

5

5

INFLOW

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

SPILL

 3

 3

 3

 3

 3

 3

 3

 3

 3

 3

 3

 3

 3

 3

 3

 3

 3

 3

 3

 3

 1

 1

 1

 1

 1

 1

 1

 1

 1

 1

 1

OUTLET

 7

 6

 6

 6

 7

 7

 5

 7

 7

 7

 7

 8

 7

 6

 6

 6

 6

 6

 6

 6

 6

 6

 4

 5

 5

 5

 4

 3

 5

 6

 6

C.F.S.

 .54

 .48

 .49

 .49

 .50

 .53

 .51

 .57

 .53

 .54

 .56

 .64

 .53

 .50

 .49

 .44

 .47

 .50

 .47

 .45

 .45

 .44

 .34

 .41

 .37

 .36

 .32

 .20

 .40

 .44

 .50

INCHES

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

PRECIP

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

U.S. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION-ORLAND PROJECT-CALIFORNIA

JULY 2021 EAST PARK RESERVOIR DAILY OPERATIONS RUN DATE: 09/02/2021

IN LAKE

EVAPORATION

INCHES

C.F.S.

COMPUTED*

1000 ACRE-FEET

RELEASE - C.F.S.

TOTALS -.03 192 71 0 184 14.46 .00

ACRE-FEET -30 381 141 0 365

COMMENTS:

* COMPUTED INFLOW IS THE SUM OF CHANGE IN STORAGE, RELEASES AND EVAPORATION.

DATA BASED ON 24 HOUR PERIOD ENDING 0800 AM.

SUMMARY RELEASE (ACRE-FEET)

SPILL 0

OUTLET

TOTAL

 141

 141

PRECIPITATION

THIS MONTH =

TO DATE =

 .00

JULY 1, 2021 .00

 4.94

OCT 1, 2020 TO DATE = 11.36
EXHIBIT 32.1
                                  ------------

                  CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER
                       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 Raser  Technology Inc. (the
"Company")  on Form 10-Q for the quarter  ended June 30, 2004,  Kraig  Higginson
hereby  certifies,  pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  Section 1350, as adopted  pursuant to
Section  906 of the  Sarbanes  - Oxley  Act of  2002,  that  to the  best of his
knowledge:

         1.   The  quarterly  report fully  complies  with the  requirements  of
              Section 13(a) 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 results of
              operations of the Company.


August 12, 2004                          /s/  Kraig Higginson
---------------                          --------------------
    (Date)                               Kraig Higginson,
                                         Chief Executive Officer and Director
                                         (principal executive officer)
U.S. Department of Transportation

Docket Management System

1200 New Jersey Ave, SE

Washington, DC 20590

10/07/2015

Re: Amendment to Exemption 11599 issued pursuant to Section 333 of the FAA Reform Act and 

Part11 of the Federal Aviation Regulations in Regulatory Docket No. FAA-2015-0506.

Dear Sir or Madam;

Rotary Image Marketing, was issued an Exemption numbered 11599 (here in after the 

Exemption) for the purpose of commercial aerial data collection, photography, and 

cinematology. Rotary Image Marketing, herby requests an amendment to the Exemption to allow 

an additional type of unmanned aircraft system (UAS) that fully complies with the conditions of 

the Exemption. Also herby request an amendment to operate under the Exemption as FlyBy

Imagery rather than Rotary Image Marketing.

Rotary Image Marketing, wishes to operate a DJI Phantom 3 Professional under the same terms 

and conditions in the Exemption. Attached hereto, is the Flight Operations Manual (FOM) for 

the additional UAS. All operations of the additional UAS will be in full compliance with the 

terms of the Exemption.

Rotary Image Marketing, wishes to operate under the name FlyBy Imagery Marketing with 

removing the name Rotary Image Marketing. FlyBy Imagery will operate under the same 

conditions as Rotary Image Marketing.

As this and amendment to an existing Exemption asking for only the addition of another type of 

UAS and also to operate under a different company name. 

Thank You,

Christopher A. Frank

CEO, Rotary Image Marketing

chrisfrank83@yahoo.com

(979) 820-3096