alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          OCT-26-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               JAN-27-1996
<CASH>                                          10,333
<SECURITIES>                                     8,429
<RECEIVABLES>                                   45,358
<ALLOWANCES>                                       835
<INVENTORY>                                     19,669
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                92,863
<PP&E>                                         106,498
<DEPRECIATION>                                  68,299
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 136,488
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           27,462
<BONDS>                                          4,539
<COMMON>                                         8,236
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                      90,082
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   136,488
<SALES>                                         64,075
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                64,075
<CGS>                                           46,969
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   46,969
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                16,146
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    42
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 179
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  1,121
<INCOME-TAX>                                       437
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                684
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       684
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.09
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.09
        

</TABLE>
### §1738b. Eligibility for benefits under Facility

#### (a) Requirements

To be eligible for benefits from the Facility under this subchapter, a country shall—

(1) be a Latin American or Caribbean country;

(2) have in effect or have received approval for, or, as appropriate in exceptional circumstances, be making significant progress towards the establishment of—

(A) an International Monetary Fund (hereafter referred to in this subchapter as the "IMF") standby arrangement, extended IMF arrangement, or an arrangement under the structural adjustment facility or enhanced structural adjustment facility, or in exceptional circumstances, an IMF-monitored program or its equivalent; and

(B) as appropriate, structural or sectoral adjustment loans from the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (hereafter referred to in this subchapter as the "World Bank") or the International Development Association (hereafter referred to in this subchapter as the "IDA");

(3) have placed into effect major investment reforms in conjunction with an Inter-American Development Bank (hereafter referred to as the "IDB") loan or otherwise be implementing, or making significant progress towards an open investment regime; and

(4) if appropriate, have agreed with its commercial bank lenders on a satisfactory financing program, including, as appropriate, debt or debt service reduction.

#### (b) Eligibility determination

The President shall determine whether a country is an eligible country for purposes of subsection (a).

(July 10, 1954, ch. 469, title VI, §603, as added Pub. L. 101–624, title XV, §1512, Nov. 28, 1990, 104 Stat. 3658; amended Pub. L. 102–237, title III, §302, Dec. 13, 1991, 105 Stat. 1855.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

1991—Subsec. (a)(3). Pub. L. 102–237 inserted hyphen between "Inter" and "American".

#### **Executive Documents**

#### Delegation of Functions

For delegation of functions of President under subsec. (b) of this section, see section 1 of Ex. Ord. No. 13345, July 8, 2004, 69 F.R. 41901, set out as a note under section 1738 of this title.
#### § 553.37 Purpose.

This subpart specifies the eligibility for interment and inurnment in the twenty-five Army Post Cemeteries, the West Point Post Cemetery, NY and the U.S. Disciplinary Barracks Cemetery at Fort Leavenworth, KS.
#### August Ganz, appellant, v. Valentino Bulf, appellee.

Gen. No. 29,772.

Action for conversion of automobile. Verdict of not guilty and judgment against plaintiff for costs. Appeal from the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Edgar A. Jonas, Judge, presiding. Heard in the first division of this court for the first district at the October term, 1924.

Affirmed.

Opinion filed April 13, 1925.

Vincent P. Pace, for appellant.

No appearance for appellee.

Mr. Justice Matchett

delivered the opinion of the court.
### SUBCHAPTER II—COTTON OPTION CONTRACTS
### SUBCHAPTER II—INFORMATION ANALYSIS

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Pub. L. 115–278, §2(g)(2)(A), Nov. 16, 2018, 132 Stat. 4176, struck out "AND INFRASTRUCTURE PROTECTION" after "INFORMATION ANALYSIS" in subchapter heading.
p.1 

OAR Box 1828 

Prepped by Ollie Stewart 

Document Number: 

89) ll-K- (B) -77 

Docket Number: 

A-83-27 

Printed 11/12/200811:12:51 AM Sheet 89 of 325 
P.2 

/A P 

/:L\\ a /ry 

^ 

II-K-(B)-77 

AVERAGE EMISSION RATES FROM SELECTED RUNS FOR NEW 

BOILERS. 

Letter from E. Medine, EEA to R. Short, EPA:SASD. 

July 7, 1981. 

THIS INFORMATION CAN BE FOUND IN DOCKET A-79-02, ITEM 

II-K-(B)-77
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA 

EASTERN DISTRICT 

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, 

 Respondent 

 v. 

AARON EVANS, 

 Petitioner 

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 128 EAL 2016 

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from 

the Order of the Superior Court 

ORDER 

PER CURIAM 

AND NOW, this 19th day of July, 2016, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is 

DENIED.
Exhibit 32.2

                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL 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 Annual Report of Zond-PanAero Windsystem Partners I (the
"Partnership") on Form 10-K for the years ended December 31, 1999 and 2000 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), I, Mary H. Cilia, Chief Financial Officer of Zond Windsystems
Management LLC, as General Partner of the Partnership (see Explanatory Note),
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my knowledge and belief, that:

(1)  The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d)
     of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, except that the Report was not
     timely filed, the Report is a comprehensive Form 10-K for the years ended
     December 31, 1999 and 2000 and certain sections of the Report contain
     current information; and

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


Date: March 30, 2005
                           /s/ MARY H. CILIA
                           ------------------------------
                           Mary H. Cilia
                           Chief Financial Officer
                           Zond Windsystems Management LLC, as General
                           Partner of Zond-PanAero Windsystem Partners I


Explanatory Note: Mary H. Cilia was appointed Chief Financial Officer and
Treasurer of the General Partner of the Partnership on May 3, 2004. Accordingly,
Ms. Cilia did not participate in the preparation of the financial statements
contained in the Report and did not work with Arthur Andersen LLP in connection
with its audit of the financial statements contained in the Report.
#### § 219.122 Use of Federal funds.

Federal funds administered by a Federal department or agency may not be expended for research involving human subjects unless the requirements of this policy have been satisfied.
### §1727b. Grant programs

To carry out the policies and accomplish the objectives described in section 1691 of this title, the Administrator may negotiate and execute agreements with least developed countries to provide commodities to such countries on a grant basis either through the Commodity Credit Corporation or through private trade channels.

(July 10, 1954, ch. 469, title III, §303, as added Pub. L. 95–88, title II, §211(a)(2), Aug. 3, 1977, 91 Stat. 550; amended Pub. L. 96–53, title II, §204(c), Aug. 14, 1979, 93 Stat. 369; Pub. L. 101–624, title XV, §1512, Nov. 28, 1990, 104 Stat. 3642.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Prior Provisions

A prior section 303 of act July 10, 1954, ch. 469, title III, 68 Stat. 459, which enacted section 1692 of this title, was renumbered section 310 by Pub. L. 95–88, title II, §211(a)(1), Aug. 3, 1977, 91 Stat. 548.

#### Amendments

1990—Pub. L. 101–624 amended section generally, substituting present provisions for provisions relating to a multiyear utilization proposal regarding value and amount of commodities proposed to be distributed, integration with other forms of development assistance, and non-replacement of other programs.

1979—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 96–53 struck out "for each year such funds are to be disbursed" after "on an annual basis".

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

#### Effective Date of 1990 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 101–624 effective Jan. 1, 1991, see section 1513 of Pub. L. 101–624, set out as a note under section 1691 of this title.

#### Effective Date of 1979 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 96–53 effective Oct. 1, 1979, see section 512(a) of Pub. L. 96–53, set out as a note under section 2151 of Title 22, Foreign Relations and Intercourse.

#### Effective Date

Section effective Oct. 1, 1977, see section 215 of Pub. L. 95–88, set out as an Effective Date of 1977 Amendment note under section 1702 of this title.
§ 37.605 What is the general policy on participants' financial, property, and purchasing systems? The general policy for expenditure-based TIAs is to avoid requirements that would force participants to use different financial management, property management, and purchasing systems than they currently use for: ( a ) Expenditure-based Federal procurement contracts and assistance awards in general, if they receive them; or
( b ) Commercial business, if they have no expenditure-based Federal procurement contracts and assistance awards.
#### Loraine P. Liebmann, Respondent, v. Herman Liebmann, Appellant.

— Order, entered May 28, 1963, in a divorce action in which plaintiff-respondent wife had prevailed, resettling first ordering paragraph of the order of November 15, 1961, referring to a Special Referee to hear and report concerning the amount of permanent maintenance and support of plaintiff-respondent and maintenance, support and education of the infant child of the marriage, unanimously reversed on the law, without costs, the direction for a reference is vacated and application to resettle said order of November 15, 1961 is denied with leave to reapply for appropriate relief at Special Term, without costs. In the absence of a showing by plaintiff wife of changed circumstances, it would be proper to determine the level of support on the basis of the 1957 judgment of separation and antecedent separation agreement providing for $18,500 annually for the support of plaintiff and child (see *Zloflow*v. Zlotloiv, 1 A D 2d 821, mot. for Iv. to opp. den. 1 A D 2d 950). It is not sufficient simply to show a passage of time during which the child has grown and there has been general inflation of prices. Therefore, the 1957 judgment, in the absence of contrary direct evidence of impact in the standard of support, would still reflect the appropriate amount to be paid by defendant husband. Consequently, a reference was unnecessary (see *Zolinsky*v. *Zolinsky,*17 A D 2d 158, 159). The matter is remanded to Special Term for appropriate proceedings in the matter of fixing permanent alimony and support of child and for entry of judgment herein. Concur — Breitel, J. P., Rabin, Eager, Steuer and Bastow, JJ.
Cite as 2024 Ark. 133

SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS

IN RE ARKANSAS ACCESS TO 

JUSTICE MONTH

Opinion Delivered: September 19, 2024

PER CURIAM

As officers of the court, Arkansas attorneys bear a professional responsibility, under 

Rule 6.1 of the Arkansas Rules of Professional Conduct, to provide free legal services to 

persons of limited means or organizations that serve persons of limited means and to 

voluntarily contribute financial support to organizations that provide legal services to persons 

of limited means. This commitment to public service represents one of the noblest attributes 

of the legal profession. 

We join the Arkansas Access to Justice Commission in designating October as Access 

to Justice Month to recognize the valuable contributions made by legal aid and pro bono 

attorneys throughout the year and to encourage pro bono participation to address the legal 

needs of low-income Arkansans. 

The Court commends the many Arkansas attorneys who serve their profession, their 

communities, and their state by donating thousands of hours of pro bono services. The 

Court encourages all attorneys to abide by both the letter and the spirit of Rule 6.1 through 

pro bono service and financial support. Consistent with Rule 3.7(B) of the Arkansas Code 
2

of Judicial Conduct, the Court also encourages all judges to advocate for pro bono service 

by attorneys, to participate in events that honor attorneys who provide pro bono service, to 

write and speak in favor of pro bono service, and to recruit attorneys to provide pro bono 

service.
TYPHCCn ~fi#J•I•I ..aK The Easiest Drone to Fly 

SPECIFICATIONS 

TYPHOON 0 500 Multicopter 

FLIGHT TIME: Up to 25 Minutes 

DIMENSIONS: 9.45 in (210mm) x 16.54 in (420mm) 

DIAGONAL MOTOR TO MOTOR DISTANCE: 20 in (510mm) 

PROPELLER/MAIN ROTOR DIAMETER: 13.0 in (330mm) 

WEIGHT WITHOUT BATTERY AND PAYLOAD: 40.0 oz (1130g) 

MAXIMUM TAKEOFF WEIGHT WITH CG03: 60.0 oz (1700g) 

BATTERY: 5400mAh 3S 11.1V LiPo (included) 

CHARGER: 3S 11.1V LiPo DC Balancing Smart Charger with AC Adapter 

(included) 

TRANSMITTER: 1 0-channel 2.4GHz with 5.8GHz video downlink (included) 

MAXIMUM FLYING ALTITUDE: Default 400 Feet Above Ground Level 

(Adjustable via the Q500 GUI) 

RADIO CONTROL FREQUENCY BAND: 2.4GHz 

ST1 0+ Personal Ground Station 

NUMBER OF CHANNELS: 10 

OPERATING SYSTEM: AndroidTM 

SCREEN SIZE: 5.5" 

SCREEN RESOLUTION: 854 x 480 

RADIO CONTROL FREQUENCY BAND: 2.4GHz 

CONTROL TRANSMISSION DISTANCE/RANGE (OPTIMUM CONDITIONS): 

FCC Compliance: Up to BOOm (2624.67 ft) ICE Compliance: Up to 400m 

(1312.34 ft) 

ROBUST RADIO CONTROL MODULATION: Yuneec Protocol 

VIDEO LINK FREQUENCY BAND: 5.8GHz 

FLIGHT SYSTEMS TELEMETRY DATA ON SCREEN DISPLAY (OSD): Yes 

TACTILE AND AUDIBLE FEEDBACK: Yes 

BUILT-IN LIPO BATTERY VOLTAGE I CAPACITY: 3.6V/5200mAh 18.72Wh 

CG03 Gimbal Camera 

DIMENSION: 4.5x1.4x2.9in (115x135x74mm) 

WEIGHT: 6.9oz (195g) 

SENSOR: 1/2.3" CMOS 

EFFECTIVE PIXELS: 12 Megapixels 

CAMERA LENS: 0.6in (14mm)/F2.8 (1.4in/35mm)- No Distortion 

VIDEO FOV: 115 Degree 

ELECTRONIC SHUTTER: 1/30- 1/8000 

WORKING TEMPERATURE: -1 0°C-40°C 

POWER CONSUMPTION: 10W 

VIDEO TRANSMISSION RANGE: Up to 500m (1640ft) 

TRANSMISSION SYSTEM: 5.2Ghz- 5.8Ghz 

VIDEO UHD: 4K at 30FPS, 2.7K at 30FPS, 2.5K at 30FPS 

FULL HD: 1 080p at 24/25/30/48/50/60/120FPS 

HD: 720p at 24/25/30/48/50/60/120FPS 

MICROPHONE: Yes 

CGO Steadygrip TM 

DIMENSIONS: 8.78 in (223mm) x 2.95 in (75mm) x 7.13 in (181mm) 

WEIGHT (WITHOUT CAMERA/GIMBAL): 13.9oz (395g) 

COMPATIBLE CAMERA: CG02 Series I GoPro Hero4 Black with 

GB203 Gimbal 

YUnc.c.~ ELECTRIC AVIATION 

www.yuneec.com
Exhibit 23.1



	 CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS


We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration 
statements of Corcom, Inc. on Form S-8 (File No. 2-96731,33-22257, 33-41142,
and 33-80204) of our report dated February 29, 1996, on our audits of the
consolidated financial statements and financial statement schedules of 
Corcom, Inc. and Subsidiaries as of December 31, 1995 and 1994, and for each
of the three years in the period ended December 31, 1995, which report is
included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.


s/s Coopers & Lybrand L.L.P.
Chicago, Illinois
February 29, 1996
<PAGE>
### §627. CFATS regulations

#### (a) General authority

The Secretary may, in accordance with chapter 5 of title 5, promulgate regulations or amend existing CFATS regulations to implement the provisions under this subchapter.

#### (b) Existing CFATS regulations

#### (1) In general

Notwithstanding section 4(b) of the Protecting and Securing Chemical Facilities from Terrorist Attacks Act of 2014, each existing CFATS regulation shall remain in effect unless the Secretary amends, consolidates, or repeals the regulation.

#### (2) Repeal

Not later than 30 days after December 18, 2014, the Secretary shall repeal any existing CFATS regulation that the Secretary determines is duplicative of, or conflicts with, this subchapter.

#### (c) Authority

The Secretary shall exclusively rely upon authority provided under this subchapter in—

(1) determining compliance with this subchapter;

(2) identifying chemicals of interest; and

(3) determining security risk associated with a chemical facility.

(Pub. L. 107–296, title XXI, §2107, as added Pub. L. 113–254, §2(a), Dec. 18, 2014, 128 Stat. 2916.)

#### Termination of Section

For termination of section by section 5 of Pub. L. 113–254, see Effective and Termination Dates note below.

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

Section 4(b) of the Protecting and Securing Chemical Facilities from Terrorist Attacks Act of 2014, referred to in subsec. (b)(1), is section 4(b) of Pub. L. 113–254, Dec. 18, 2014, 128 Stat. 2919, which repealed section 550 of Pub. L. 109–295, formerly set out as a Regulations note under section 121 of this title, effective as of the date that is 30 days after Dec. 18, 2014.

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

#### Effective and Termination Dates

Section effective on the date that is 30 days after Dec. 18, 2014, and authority provided under this section to terminate on July 27, 2023, see sections 4(a) and 5 of Pub. L. 113–254, set out as notes under section 621 of this title.
#### Jose Giraldo Mafia et al., Appellants, v Creekview Homes, Ltd., et al., Respondents. (And a Third-Party Action.)

[834 NYS2d 236]

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the plaintiffs appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Dutchess County (Dolan, J), dated December 7, 2005, as granted that branch of the motion of the defendant Creekview Homes, Ltd., which was for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against it and, in effect, upon searching the record, inter alia, awarded summary judgment dismissing the complaint against the remaining defendants.

Ordered that the order is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, with one bill of costs, and that branch of the motion of the defendant Creekview Homes, Ltd., which was for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against it is denied.

The proponent of a summary judgment motion must make a prima facie showing of entitlement to judgment as a matter of law, tendering sufficient evidence to eliminate any material issues of fact from the case *(see generally Winegrad v New York Univ. Med. Ctr.,*64 NY2d 851, 853 [1985]). Here, the defendant Creekview Homes, Ltd. (hereinafter Creekview Homes), failed to make the requisite showing. Contrary to the respondents’ contentions, the affidavits of the injured plaintiff and a coworker submitted in connection with the injured plaintiffs claim for workers’ compensation benefits, which affidavits were proffered

*499by Creekview Homes in its moving papers, did not establish, prima facie, that the accident could not have occurred on property that it owned or developed. There exists a triable issue of fact as whether the accident location which was described in the affidavits as having been at a construction project “in/near Carmel,” near “1-84 in Carmel,” and “at the construction site in Carmel, NY,” was the same location alleged in the complaint. Since Creekview Homes failed to establish its entitlement to judgment as a matter of law, we need not consider the sufficiency of the opposing papers (see *Winegrad v New York Univ. Med. Ctr., supra).*Accordingly, the Supreme Court erred in granting that branch of the motion of Creekview Homes which was for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against it and, in effect, upon searching the record, inter alia, dismissing the complaint against the remaining defendants.

The respondents’ remaining contention is without merit. Schmidt, J.E, Spolzino, Florio and Skelos, JJ., concur.
DronE ye Imaging, LLC 5127 S 200 W Trafalgar, IN 46181 UAS Integration Office Federal Aviation Administration 800 Independence Avenue SW Washington, DC 20591 November 23 , 2015 Re: Re: Docket FAA

- 2015

- 1401 , Petition for Amendment to Exemption No. 11957 Dear Madam, Sir : DronE ye Imaging, LLC received FAA Exemption No. 11957 on 6/30/2015 authorizing DronEye Imaging under section 333 of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 to operate one or several unmanned aircraft system s (“UAS”) for various commercial purposes. In this present petition for an amendment to Exemption No. 11957 , DronEye Im aging seeks to add the eBee UAS for the same purposes. The eBee, weighing 1.52 pounds , is a fixed wing UAV purpose built for mapping and is constructed mainl y o f foam. It is GPS and IMU controlled with RTH capability and is highl y maneuverable should the need arise to avoid any obstacle. The eBee UAV has been approved for use for other Section 333 Exemption holders as of the date on this petition and DronE ye Imaging feels that it should be approved for our operations as well

. DronE ye Imaging, LLC will comply with all of the conditions and limitations imposed in Exemption 11957 except that condition/limitation number 1 will need to be revised to include the eBee UAS. The list of “operating documents” will also need to be revised to include senseFl y’s ( operating manual) for the e Bee UAS, which will be provided separatel y to the FAA via email at 333exemptions@faa.gov . Other than these revisions, there will be no change in the conditions and reasons relative to public safety that were the basis for the initial grant of exemption. Because the requested amendment would not set any precedent or otherwise raise any novel issue, and because DronE ye Imaging seeks to begin these operations without delay, DronE ye Imaging respectfull y requests the FAA to determine that good cause exists to dispense with publication of the summary

o f this petition in the Federal Register and grant the requested amendment expeditiously

by summary means. Thank you for your consideration of this petition. Sincerel y, Brian A. Pfaehler Co

- owner DronE ye Imaging LLC bpfaeh@gmail.com 317

- 443

- 7013