alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
ARMED SERVICES BOARD OF CONTRACT APPEALS 

Appeal of --

WorldWide Language Resources, Inc. 

Under Contract No. W52P1J-10-C-0047 

APPEARANCE FOR THE APPELLANT: 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

APPEARANCES FOR THE GOVERNMENT: 

ASBCA No. 58637 

Paul R. Moore, Esq. 

Counsel 

Raymond M. Saunders, Esq. 

Army Chief Trial Attorney 

MAJ James P. Leary, JA 

CPT Vera A. Strebel, JA 

Trial Attorneys 

ORDER OF DISMISSAL 

Appellant having advised the Board that they have reached a settlement, and 

appellant having moved that its appeal be dismissed with prejudice, and the government 

having advised that it has no objection, this appeal is hereby dismissed with prejudice. 

Dated: 1 July 2015 

ALEXANDER YO GER 

Administrative Judge / · -

Armed Services Board 

of Contract Appeals 

I certify that the foregoing is a true copy of the Order of Dismissal of the Armed 

Services Board of Contract Appeals in ASBCA No. 58637, Appeal ofWorldWide 

Language Resources, Inc., rendered in conformance with the Board's Charter. 

Dated: 

JEFFREY D. GARDIN 

Recorder, Armed Services 

Board of Contract Appeals
### **CHAPTER 463—PENALTIES**

Sec.
46301.
Civil penalties.
46302.
False information.
46303.
Carrying a weapon.
46304.
Liens on aircraft.
46305.
Actions to recover civil penalties.
46306.
Registration violations involving aircraft not providing air transportation.
46307.
Violation of national defense airspace.
46308.
Interference with air navigation.
46309.
Concession and price violations.
46310.
Reporting and recordkeeping violations.
46311.
Unlawful disclosure of information.
46312.
Transporting hazardous material.
46313.
Refusing to appear or produce records.
46314.
Entering aircraft or airport area in violation of security requirements.
46315.
Lighting violations involving transporting controlled substances by aircraft not providing air transportation.
46316.
General criminal penalty when specific penalty not provided.
46317.
Criminal penalty for pilots operating in air transportation without an airman's certificate.
46318.
Interference with cabin or flight crew.
46319.
Permanent closure of an airport without providing sufficient notice.
46320.
Interference with wildfire suppression, law enforcement, or emergency response effort by operation of unmanned aircraft.

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

**2016**—Pub. L. 114–190, title II, §2205(c), July 15, 2016, 130 Stat. 631, added item 46320.

**2003**—Pub. L. 108–176, title I, §185(b), Dec. 12, 2003, 117 Stat. 2518, added item 46319.

**2000**—Pub. L. 106–181, title V, §§509(b), 511(b), Apr. 5, 2000, 114 Stat. 141, 142, added items 46317 and 46318.
July 6, 2015

Mr. Hunter Smith

8275 South Eastern Avenue

Suite 200-722

Las Vegas, NV 89123

Dear Mr. Smith:

This letter is to inform you that we are unable to process your request for an exemption from 

Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR). It explains why we cannot process your 

request and what you should do in the next 30 days.

Why We Cannot Process Your Request

We entered your exemption request on behalf of S Real Estate, LLC into the public docket 

(No. FAA−2015−1551) on May 11, 2015, but we are unable to process your request any 

further. The information you sent does not comply with the requirements of § 11.81 (copy 

enclosed). For us to consider the request any further, you must send us all of the following:

 The specific section or sections of 14 CFR from which you seek relief, the extent of the 

relief you seek, and the reason you seek relief.

 The reasons why granting the request would be in the public interest; that is, how it would 

benefit the public as a whole.

 Any additional information, views, or arguments available to support your request.

What You Should Do

If you want us to process your request any further, you must send the information described 

earlier to reach us within 30 days. Please note that § 11.63(d) requires you to send your 

petition for exemption at least 120 days before the proposed effective date of the exemption.
2

If We Do Not Hear From You

If we do not hear from you within 30 days, we will close the docket without notifying you 

further. If you have any questions or require additional time, you may call (202) 267-9677.

Sincerely,

Brittany Newton

Program Analyst, Airmen and 

 Airspace Rules Division

Enclosure
Electronically Filed Supreme Court SCWC-12-0001017 02-JUN-2016 09:11 AM

SCWC-12-0001017 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI ' I

STATE OF HAWAI ' I, Respondent/Plaintiff-Appellant,

vs. RICK TRINQUE, Petitioner/Defendant-Appellee, and MILES MARTINEZ, Respondent/Defendant-Appellee.

CERTIORARI TO THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS (CAAP-12-0001017; CR. NO. 12-1-0105) ORDER ACCEPTING APPLICATION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI (By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, McKenna, Pollack, and Wilson, JJ.) Petitioner/Defendant-Appellee’s Application for Writ of Certiorari filed on April 21, 2016, is hereby accepted and will be scheduled for oral argument. The parties will be notified by the appellate clerk regarding scheduling. DATED: Honolulu, Hawai ' i, June 2, 2016. Jon N. Ikenaga for petitioner /s/ Mark E. Recktenwald /s/ Paula A. Nakayama /s/ Sabrina S. McKenna /s/ Richard W. Pollack /s/ Michael D. Wilson Tracy Murakami for respondent
Exhibit 31.1

CERTIFICATION

I, Ronald Leon Moore, certify that:



|1. | I have reviewed Amendment No. 1 of this quarterly report on Form 10-Q/A of Cardinal Bankshares Corporation;
|-- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|2. | Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the
statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this quarterly report;
|-- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|3. | Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this quarterly report, fairly present in all material respects the
financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this quarterly report;
|-- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: December 5, 2011



|                                             
|---------------------------------------------
|/s/ Ronald Leon Moore                        
|Ronald Leon Moore                            
|Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent

except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 00-41380

Conference Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

MARIO GREGORIO SANTANA-HUERTA,

Defendant-Appellant.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. B-00-CR-313-1

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

October 29, 2001

Before WIENER, BENAVIDES, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Mario Gregorio Santana-Huerta appeals the 57-month sentence

imposed following his plea of guilty to a charge of being found

in the United States after deportation, a violation of 8 U.S.C. 

§ 1326. He contends that the felony conviction that resulted in

his increased sentence under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2) was an element

of the offense that should have been charged in the indictment.

Santana-Huerta acknowledges that his argument is foreclosed

by the Supreme Court’s decision in Almendarez-Torres v. United

States, 523 U.S. 224 (1998), but he seeks to preserve the issue
No. 00-41380

-2-

for Supreme Court review in light of the decision in Apprendi v.

New Jersey, 120 S. Ct. 2348 (2000). 

Apprendi did not overrule Almendarez-Torres. See Apprendi,

120 S. Ct. at 2362; United States v. Dabeit, 231 F.3d 979, 984

(5th Cir. 2000), cert. denied, 121 S.Ct. 1214 (2001). SantanaHuerta’s argument is foreclosed. The judgment of the district

court is AFFIRMED.
#### The People of the State of New York ex rel. Harvey Foreman, Appellant, against Edward M. Fay, as Warden of Green Haven Prison, Respondent.

— -Appeal by the relator from an order of the Supreme Court, Dutchess County, entered June 24, 1959, dismissing, after a hearing, a writ of habeas corpus and remanding appellant to custody. Order affirmed, without costs. The relator was properly sentenced as a second felony offender on the basis of a prior conviction in Canada under a charge of breaking and entering a shop “ with intent to commit an indictable offense therein, to wit: the crime of theft”, in violation of section 461 of" the Criminal Code of Canada. Nolan, P. J,, Ughetta, Christ, Pette and Brennan, JJ., concur.
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 The Dixie Group, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 25, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Daniel K. Frierson, the Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge:  (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 results of operations of the Company.  /s/DANIEL K. FRIERSON Daniel K. Frierson, Chief Executive Officer
Date:      November 4, 2010  A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to The Dixie Group, Inc. and will be retained by The Dixie Group, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
#### § 57.7004 Drill mast.

Persons shall not be on a mast while the drill-bit is in operation unless they are provided with a safe platform from which to work and they are required to use safety belts to avoid falling.
Exhibit 32
                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
                            (18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350)


         In connection with the accompanying Quarterly Report of Radale Imports,
Inc. (the  "Company")  on Form 10-QSB for the quarter  ended  September 30, 2005
(the "Report"), I, Lee D. Dodson, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby
certify that to my knowledge:

         (1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. ss.78o(d)); and

         (2) The  information  contained in the Report fairly  presents,  in all
material  respects,  the  financial  condition  and results of operations of the
Company.

Dated:  November 21, 2005

                                             /s/ Lee D. Dodson
                                            ------------------------------------
                                            Lee D. Dodson
                                            Chairman and Chief Executive Officer


         The above  certification is furnished solely pursuant to Section 906 of
the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C.  ss.1350)  and is not being filed as
part of the Form 10-QSB or as a separate disclosure document.
§ 57.6802 Bulk delivery vehicles. No welding or cutting shall be performed on a bulk delivery vehicle until the vehicle has been washed down and all explosive material has been removed. Before welding or cutting on a hollow shaft, the shaft shall be thoroughly cleaned inside and out and vented with a minimum 1 ⁄ 2-inch diameter opening to allow for sufficient ventilation.
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

16 

CA 11-01549 

PRESENT: SCUDDER, P.J., SMITH, CENTRA, LINDLEY, AND GORSKI, JJ. 

 

ANDREWS, PUSATERI, BRANDT, SHOEMAKER & 

ROBERSON, P.C. AND ROBERT S. ROBERSON, ESQ., 

PLAINTIFFS-APPELLANTS, 

V MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

COUNTY OF NIAGARA, DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT. 

 

BRANDT, ROBERSON & BRANDT, P.C., LOCKPORT (ROBERT S. ROBERSON OF

COUNSEL), FOR PLAINTIFFS-APPELLANTS. 

WEBSTER SZANYI LLP, BUFFALO (CHARLES E. GRANEY OF COUNSEL), FOR

DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT. 

 

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Niagara County (Frank

Caruso, J.), entered November 22, 2010. The order denied plaintiffs’

motion for summary judgment. 

It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is

unanimously affirmed with costs.

Memorandum: Plaintiffs commenced this action seeking damages for

breach of contract and unjust enrichment based upon defendant’s

alleged failure to pay for legal services rendered by plaintiffs. 

Supreme Court properly denied plaintiffs’ motion seeking summary

judgment on the complaint and dismissal of the counterclaims. With

respect to the complaint, plaintiffs’ own submissions in support of

the motion raise triable issues of fact whether defendant owes

plaintiffs further compensation pursuant to the legal services

contract, and whether plaintiffs performed services in addition to

those covered by that contract (see generally Ulrich v Estate of

Zdunkiewicz, 8 AD3d 1014, 1015). Plaintiffs also failed to meet their

initial burden of establishing their entitlement to judgment

dismissing the counterclaims (see generally Birt v Ratka, 39 AD3d

1238; Home Sav. Bank v Arthurkill Assoc., 173 AD2d 776, 777-778, lv

dismissed 78 NY2d 1071). Thus, the motion was properly denied,

“regardless of the sufficiency of the opposing papers” (Alvarez v

Prospect Hosp., 68 NY2d 320, 324).

Entered: January 31, 2012 Frances E. Cafarell

Clerk of the Court
#### § 1290.107 Where are the rules concerning the effect of the Department not issuing a decision in my appeal within the statutory time frame?

If your appeal involves monetary or nonmonetary obligations under Federal oil and gas leases, the rules concerning the effect of the Department not issuing a final decision in your appeal within the 33-month period prescribed under 30 U.S.C. 1724(h) are located in 43 CFR part 4, subpart J.
#### § 56.19080 Hoisting tools, timbers, and other materials.

When tools, timbers, or other materials are being lowered or raised in a shaft by means of a bucket, skip, or cage, they shall be secured or so placed that they will not strike the sides of the shaft.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>      5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
unaudited financial statements contained in the Company's Form 10-QSB and is
qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>

<S>                                        <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                              3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                     2207467
<SECURITIES>                               0
<RECEIVABLES>                              82667
<ALLOWANCES>                               0
<INVENTORY>                                0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                           2290134
<PP&E>                                     224063
<DEPRECIATION>                             0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             2514197
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                      46836
<BONDS>                                    0
<COMMON>                                   537500
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                      0
<PREFERRED>                                0
<OTHER-SE>                                 1929861
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               2514197
<SALES>                                    0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                           53079
<CGS>                                      0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                              18110
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                           0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                           0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                         0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            34969
<INCOME-TAX>                               14500
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        20469
<DISCONTINUED>                             0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                            0
<CHANGES>                                  0
<NET-INCOME>                               20469
<EPS-BASIC>                              0
<EPS-DILUTED>                              0


</TABLE>
#### § 57.12066 Guarding trolley wires and bare powerlines.

Where metallic tools or equipment can come in contact with trolley wires or bare powerlines, the lines shall be guarded or deenergized.
### **CHAPTER 27—RESERVE OFFICER PERSONNEL PROGRAM**
### Part B—Foreign Languages Program
1

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO

Docket No. 41480/41481

STATE OF IDAHO,

Plaintiff-Respondent,

v.

MARIA ELENA MAGDALENO,

Defendant-Appellant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

2014 Unpublished Opinion No. 702

Filed: August 27, 2014

Stephen W. Kenyon, Clerk

THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED 

OPINION AND SHALL NOT 

BE CITED AS AUTHORITY

Appeal from the District Court of the Third Judicial District, State of Idaho, 

Canyon County. Hon. Thomas J. Ryan, District Judge. 

Judgment of conviction and unified sentence of six years, with a minimum period 

of confinement of three, for possession of a controlled substance, affirmed.

Sara B. Thomas, State Appellate Public Defender; Spencer J. Hahn, Deputy 

Appellate Public Defender, Boise, for appellant. 

Hon. Lawrence G. Wasden, Attorney General; Jessica M. Lorello, Deputy 

Attorney General, Boise, for respondent. 

________________________________________________

Before GUTIERREZ, Chief Judge; GRATTON, Judge;

and MELANSON, Judge

PER CURIAM

In Docket No. 41481 Maria Elena Magdaleno was found guilty of possession of a 

controlled substance.

1

 Idaho Code § 37-2732(c)(1). The district court sentenced Magdaleno to a 

unified term of six years, with a minimum period of confinement of three years. Magdaleno

appeals asserting that the district court abused its discretion by imposing an excessive sentence.

Sentencing is a matter for the trial court’s discretion. Both our standard of review and the 

factors to be considered in evaluating the reasonableness of the sentence are well established and 

 

1 Ms. Magdaleno was also convicted and sentenced for a misdemeanor charge of 

possession of drug paraphernalia (Docket No. 41480). Since she has already served that entire 

sentence, any excessive sentence claim is moot.
2

need not be repeated here. See State v. Hernandez, 121 Idaho 114, 117-18, 822 P.2d 1011, 1014-

15 (Ct. App. 1991); State v. Lopez, 106 Idaho 447, 449-51, 680 P.2d 869, 871-73 (Ct. App. 

1984); State v. Toohill, 103 Idaho 565, 568, 650 P.2d 707, 710 (Ct. App. 1982). When reviewing 

the length of a sentence, we consider the defendant’s entire sentence. State v. Oliver, 144 Idaho 

722, 726, 170 P.3d 387, 391 (2007). Applying these standards, and having reviewed the record 

in this case, we cannot say that the district court abused its discretion.

Therefore, Magdaleno’s judgment of conviction and sentence are affirmed.
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsAn Application of Retroduction to Analyzing and Testing the Backing off of Nuts and Bolts During Dynamic LoadingThe method of retroduction, adapted from the doctoral thesis of Dr. A. Croce, relies on a process of dialectic questioning that begins with the information sought, proceeds to Given items (either in the form of dimensions or limits of research). and to Known mathematical forms of analysis in design or to principles of study in research. Finally, analysis and synthesis are used to abstract the dielectic questions and to arrive at the information desired. This method is used to solve the engineering design problem of a beam and to determine why bolts and nuts vibrate apart. Both mathematical analysis and dialectic logical analysis are utilized. Results are provided of tests conducted to check the retroductive study of why and how nuts back off.Document ID19870015262Acquisition SourceLegacy CDMSDocument TypeTechnical Memorandum (TM)AuthorsKerley, James J.*(NASA Goddard Space Flight Center Greenbelt, MD, United States)*Date AcquiredSeptember 5, 2013Publication DateJune 1, 1987Subject CategoryMechanical EngineeringReport/Patent NumberNAS 1.15:4001REPT-84F0269NASA-TM-4001Accession Number87N24695Funding Number(s)PROJECT: RTOP 992-41-00Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType19870015262.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
#### § 57.7802 Oxygen hose lines.

Safety chains or other suitable locking devices shall be provided across connections to and between high pressure oxygen hose lines of 1-inch inside diameter or larger.
#### § 56.6603 Air gap.

At least a 15-foot air gap shall be provided between the blasting circuit and the electric power source.