alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
No. 13,140.

#### Ludlow *v.*The People.

(19 P. [2d] 210)

Decided January 30, 1933.

Mr. Marion F. Jones, Mr. Ralph W. McCrillis, for plaintiff in error.

Mr. Clarence L. Ireland, Attorney General, Mr. Colin A. Smith, Assistant, for the people.

*En Banc.*

Mr. Justice Moore

delivered the opinion of the court.

*196This is a companion case of *Bushnell v. People,*decided January 30, 1933, 92 Colo. 174, 19 P. (2d) 197.

The people of the state of Colorado on the relation of the attorney general sought and obtained a decree of the district court of Larimer county against Ovid Ludlow, plaintiff in err'or, permanently enjoining him from engaging in the business of transporting property for compensation over any public highway in the state of Colorado “without first having obtained from the Public Utilities Commission of the state of Colorado a certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity to operate as a motor vehicle carrier or a permit to operate as a private carrier by motor vehicle; and without otherwise having complied with the provisions and requirements of Chapter 134, Session Laws of Colorado, 1927, or' of Chapter 120, Session Laws of Colorado, 1931. ’ ’

A stipulation was filed herein, whereby all parties agreed that the briefs in the Bushnell case be considered to be the briefs in this case and that the decision of this court therein be considered to be conclusive of the questions of law herein presented and a final decision thereof.

In accordance with this stipulation and for the reasons announced in the case of *Bushnell v. People, supra,*we conclude that the constitutional questions here presented are of no avail; that the lower court had power' to decree a permanent injunction and that its judgment so entered is without error.

Judgment affirmed.

Mr. Justice Bouck not participating.
Treggon Owens 

2236 Rutherford Road, Suite 115 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Phone: 800-706-4662 

E-Mail: treggon@aerialmob.com Web: http://aerialmob.com

Date: August 17, 2015

Administrator

Docket Management Facility 

US Department of Transportation

1200 New Jersey Avenue

SE West Building Ground Floor Room W12-140

Washington, DC 20590

Dear Administrator:

This letter is to submit new aircraft to our ‘333 Exemption’ referenced above. Aerial MOB llc 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. 

Aerial MOB llc wishes to operate the following new aircraft under our exemption: Freefly Alta, DJI Inspire, Aerial MOB 

Mini Racer, Aerial MOB Light Lifter Mark II, Aerial MOB Long Endurance, Aerial MOB Heavy Lifter Mark II

Attached hereto, and submitted as a confidential document, is the Flight Operations and Procedures Manual (FOPM) for 

the additional UAS’s. All operations of the additional UAS will be in full compliance with the terms of the Exemption. 

As this is an amendment to an existing exemption asking for only the addition of another type of unmanned aerial vehicle, 

Aerial MOB llc respectfully submits that good cause exists so that notice does not need to be published in the Federal 

Register for the requested amendment. Please contact the undersigned should you have any question concerning this 

request for an amendment to the Exemption.

Sincerely,

Treggon Owens

CEO

cc:

Robert Pappas

Jake Troutman

Dean Griffith

Thuy Cooper

FAA Exemption # 11066

FAA Docket # FAA-2014-0353
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                    9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                         352,466
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               352,466
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 592,111
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           10,240
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         3,490
<OTHER-SE>                                     578,381
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   592,111
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               367,974
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  164,984
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                202,990
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            202,990
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   202,990
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0<F1>
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0<F1>
<FN>
<F1>
Not presented since all shares of common stock are held by a sole
shareholder.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 205 (Monday, October 25, 2004)]
[Notices]
[Pages 62285-62286]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-23809]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management

[CO-800-1120-PG-241A]


Notice of Public Comment Deadline Extension; Correction

AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, Interior; Forest Service, 
Agriculture.

ACTION: Notice; correction.

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

SUMMARY: The Bureau of Land Management and Forest Service published a 
notice of public comment

[[Page 62286]]

deadline extension in the Federal Register of August 20, 2004. The 
document contained an incorrect date.

Correction

    In the Federal Register of August 20, 2004, FR Vol. 69, No. 161, on 
page 51709, in the first column, under SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION, 
correct the first sentence in the last paragraph to read:
    Written public comments will be accepted until November 30, 2004, 
and can also be mailed to Northern San Juan Basin CBM EIS, USDA FS 
Content Analysis Team, PO Box 221150, Salt Lake City, UT 84122.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ann Bond, San Juan Public Lands 
Center, 15 Burnett Court, Durango, Colorado 81301. Phone (970) 385-
1219.

    Dated: October 18, 2004.
Mark W. Stiles,
San Juan Public Lands Center Manager.
[FR Doc. 04-23809 Filed 10-22-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-JB-P
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia Clerk's Office, Atlanta, December 02, 2019. I certify that the above is a true extract from the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia. Witness my signature and the seal of said court hereto affixed the day and year last above written. , Clerk. 

# Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia
ATLANTA, December 02, 2019 The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order A20I0121. WILLIAM WEAVER v. THE STATE.
Upon consideration of the Application for Interlocutory Appeal, it is ordered that it be hereby GRANTED. The Appellant may file a Notice of Appeal within 10 days of the date of this order. The Clerk of Superior Court is directed to include a copy of this order in the record transmitted to the Court of Appeals.
LC NUMBERS: 18CR0376
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsWide-bandwidth high-resolution search for extraterrestrial intelligenceResearch accomplished in the following areas is discussed: the antenna configuration; HEMT low-noise amplifiers; the downconverter; the Fast Fourier Transform Array; the backend array; and the backend and workstation.Document ID19930006636Acquisition SourceLegacy CDMSDocument TypeContractor Report (CR)AuthorsHorowitz, Paul*(Harvard Univ. Cambridge, MA, United States)*Date AcquiredSeptember 6, 2013Publication DateJune 15, 1992Subject CategorySpace BiologyReport/Patent NumberNAS 1.26:191618NASA-CR-191618Accession Number93N15825Funding Number(s)CONTRACT_GRANT: NAGW-2872Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType19930006636.pdfSTIcloud_downloadcontent_copyvisibilityRelated RecordsThere are no records associated with this record.visibility_offNo Preview Available
 No Fear Act | Freedom of Information Act | Office of the Inspector General | Agency Financial ReportsNASA Web Privacy Policy and Important Notices | NASA Guidelines for Quality of InformationDisclaimers, Copyright, Terms of Use | Accessibility | NASA OCIO | USA.gov | NASA.govContact Us | Site MapSTI LogoNASA Official: JoAnne R. Calhoun Site Curator: STI Compliance and Distribution Services Last Modified: September 12, 2024
**Exhibit 99.1**

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM 

We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement Nos. 333-121865, 333-109817 and 333-98405 on Forms S-8 of our reports dated April 13,2017, relating to (1) the consolidated financial statements of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Limited and subsidiaries (the “Company”) (which report expresses an unqualified opinion and includes an explanatory paragraphrelating to the convenience translation of New Taiwan dollar amounts into U.S. dollar amounts) and (2) the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting, appearing in this Annual Report on Form 20-F of the Company forthe year ended December 31, 2016. 

/s/ Deloitte & Touche 

Taipei, Taiwan 

The Republic of China 

April 13, 2017
NRC NEWS

 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 

 Office of Public Affairs Telephone: 301/415-8200

 Washington, DC 20555-0001 E-mail: opa@nrc.gov 

 Web Site: www.nrc.gov

No. 03-042 April 2, 2003

NRC CONSIDERING REQUEST BY WISCONSIN 

TO BE AN “AGREEMENT STATE” 

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is considering a request from Wisconsin to assume

part of the agency’s regulatory authority over certain nuclear materials in the State. If the request is

accepted, Wisconsin will become the 33rd State to sign such an agreement with the NRC.

Under the proposed agreement, the NRC would transfer to Wisconsin the responsibility for

licensing, rulemaking, inspection and enforcement activities for: (1) radioactive materials produced as a

result of processes related to the production or utilization of special nuclear material (

SNM) ; (2) uranium and thorium source materials; and (3) SNM in quantities not sufficient to support a

nuclear chain reaction. 

If the agreement is approved, approximately 260 NRC licenses, most of them for medical and

industrial uses, would be transferred to Wisconsin’s jurisdiction. The NRC would retain jurisdiction

over about 10 nuclear materials licenses and over regulation of nuclear reactors in Wisconsin. It would

also continue to regulate Federal agencies that use certain nuclear material in the State. 

Before entering into the agreement, NRC will review the State’s radiation control program to

ensure it is adequate to protect public health and safety and is compatible with NRC’s program for

regulating the radioactive materials covered in the agreement.

An announcement of the proposed agreement, along with a summary of the NRC staff draft

assessment of the Wisconsin program, will be published for public comment once a week for four

consecutive weeks in the Federal Register. Interested persons are invited to provide comments to

Michael T. Lesar, Chief, Rules Review and Directives Branch, Division of Freedom of Information and

Publications Services, Office of Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington,

DC 20555-0001.

Copies of the proposed agreement, the Governor’s request and supporting documents, as well as

the NRC staff’s assessment are available through the NRC’s Agency-wide Documents Access and

Management System (ADAMS). Help in using ADAMS is available by contacting the NRC Public

Document Room staff at 301-415-4737 or 1-800-397-4209, or by sending an 
e-mail message to pdr@nrc.gov . These documents are also available for public inspection at the NRC

Public Document Room at 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland. 

Thirty-two other states have previously signed such agreements with NRC. They are: Alabama,

Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana,

Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Mississippi, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, New

York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Maine, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Rhode Island, South Carolina,

Tennessee, Utah, and Washington. In addition, Pennsylvania and Minnesota are in various stages of

entering into agreements with the NRC. 

###
* This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of

law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. The court generally disfavors the citation of orders and judgments; nevertheless, an order and judgment may be cited under the terms and conditions of 10th Cir. R. 36.3.

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS Filed 3/15/96 TENTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v. No. 95-8034 BRUCE GAIL HARBEL, Defendant-Appellant.

Before EBEL , KELLY , and LUCERO , Circuit Judges

ORDER AND JUDGMENT *

Defendant Bruce Harbel appeals from his conviction of using or carrying a firearm during and in relation to a drug trafficking crime, namely distribution of and possession with intent to distribute methamphetamine. See18 U.S.C. § 924(c). On appeal, Harbel alleges that the trial court erred in admitting certain evidence, and that the government presented insufficient evidence for a jury to find he used a firearm within the meaning of § 924(c). While this appeal was pending, the United States Supreme Court decided2

Bailey v. United States , 116 S. Ct. 501 (1995), which held that “using” a firearm within the meaning of the statute requires “active employment” of the weapon with respect to the crime. Id . at 509. Based on Bailey , Harbel asserts that the trial court’s jury instruction, allowing conviction upon a mere showing that the firearm “facilitated” the drug offense, was erroneous. The parties were permitted supplemental briefing on the application of Baileyto this case. Regardless of whether sufficient evidence supports a jury finding that Harbel “used” a firearm within the meaning of Bailey , the government presented sufficient evidence that Harbel “carried” a firearm within the meaning of § 924(c)(1). See United States v. Pigrum , 922 F.2d 249, 253 (5th Cir.), cert. denied , 500 U.S. 936 (1991) (section 924(c)(1) reads in the disjunctive; the government can prevail by showing that the defendant engaged in either form of the prohibited conduct). Witnesses testified that Harbel carried a shotgun on his person or at his feet in a car while engaged in the drug trafficking offense. This activity constitutes “carrying” a firearm. United States v. Cardenas , 864 F.2d 1528, 1534-36 (10th Cir.), cert. denied , 491 U.S. 909 (1989). In his supplemental response brief, Harbel appears to agree that the government presented sufficient evidence to satisfy the “carry” prong of § 924(c). At oral argument, the government conceded that the jury instruction given by the trial court was erroneous in light of Bailey . It further conceded that the erroneous instruction was not harmless because evidence was presented suggesting that Harbel may3

have been found guilty of passively using a firearm in conjunction with distributing methamphetamine. Because the government acknowledges that the jury may have relied on the erroneous instruction, we must remand for a new trial. We do not reach the remaining issues on appeal, insofar as they all involve trial errors. Accordingly, we REVERSE the jury verdict and REMAND this case to the district
court. ENTERED FOR THE COURT

Carlos F. Lucero Circuit Judge
EXHIBIT 32.1



Section 1350 Certifications



I, Alan D. Feldman, hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350 adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 that, to my knowledge:



| | (i) | The accompanying Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended January 1, 2005 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934, as amended; and
| | --- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (ii) | The information contained in such report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Midas, Inc.
| | ---- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                                     
|-------------------------------------
|/s/ Alan D. Feldman                  
|Alan D. Feldman                      
|President and Chief Executive Officer
|Date: March 17, 2005                 



I, William M. Guzik, hereby certify
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350 adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 that, to my knowledge:



| | (i) | The accompanying Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended January 1, 2005 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934, as amended; and
| | --- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (ii) | The information contained in such report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Midas, Inc.
| | ---- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                         
|-------------------------
|/s/ William M. Guzik     
|William M. Guzik         
|Senior Vice President and
|Chief Financial Officer  
|Date: March 17, 2005
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS INCLUDED IN THE REGISTRANT'S QUARTERLY REPORT ON FORM 10-Q
FOR THE THREE MONTHS ENDED MARCH 31, 1998 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                       8,493,671
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  307,374
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                      6,501
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             9,015,484
<PP&E>                                       6,907,730
<DEPRECIATION>                               4,544,191
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              12,367,216
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,073,125
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                 34,738,310
<COMMON>                                       122,514
<OTHER-SE>                                  35,236,026
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                12,367,216
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               262,306
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             3,070,938
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (2,808,632)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (2,808,632)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (2,808,632)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.29)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.29)
        

</TABLE>
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-7364

HERBERT ALONZO ROBINSON, formerly SCDC #211603, #143203, 

#27925,

 Plaintiff – Appellant,

v.

GINA JARRELL, Nurse, all in their individual capacities; 

ROSITA R. THOMAS, Nurse, all in their individual 

capacities; PAMELA C. DERRICK, Nurse, all in their 

individual capacities; MR. ROWE, Commissary Personnel, all 

in their individual capacities; JOHN AND JANE DOES, all in 

their individual capacities,

 Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of 

South Carolina, at Anderson. R. Bryan Harwell, District Judge. 

(8:13-cv-02321-RBH)

Submitted: January 15, 2015 Decided: January 21, 2015

Before WILKINSON and NIEMEYER, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior 

Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Herbert Alonzo Robinson, Appellant Pro Se. Trey M. Nicolette, 

Michael Charles Tanner, MICHAEL C. TANNER LAW OFFICE, Bamberg, 

South Carolina, for Appellees.
2

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
3

PER CURIAM:

Herbert Alonzo Robinson appeals the district court’s 

order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and 

denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint. We 

have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. 

Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district 

court. Robinson v. Jarrell, No. 8:13-cv-02321-RBH (D.S.C. 

Aug. 20, 2014). We dispense with oral argument because the 

facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the 

materials before this court and argument would not aid the 

decisional process.

AFFIRMED
§ 102.12 Fungible goods. When fungible goods of different countries of origin are commingled the country of origin of the goods: ( a ) Is the countries of origin of those commingled goods; or
( b ) If the good is fungible, has been commingled, and direct physical identification of the origin of the commingled good is not practical, the country or countries of origin may be determined on the basis of an inventory management method.
[T.D. 94-4, 59 FR 113, Jan. 3, 1994, as amended by CBP Dec. 21-10, 86 FR 35581, July 6, 2021]
#### Michael Gesas, Respondent, v. William J. Markowitz, Appellant.

No opinion. Present — Martin, P. J., Glennon, Untermyer, Dore and Cohn, JJ.