alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Record of Ex Parte Contacts

Docket No. FAA
- 2012
- 0107 Directorate Identifier: 2012
- NM - 018
- AD **With whom outside the FAA has this AD action been discussed (i.e., Design Approval Holder, manufacturer, ATA, NBAA, RAA, AOPA, ALPA, GAMA, etc)?**  (You might need to submit a separate record to the Rules Docket. The AD Manual defines “ **Ex Parte Contacts** .”) ORGANIZATION PERSON CONTACTED DATE RESPONSE Design Approval Holder Gerald Nielsen 2/1/12 Other. List below
. Designated Engineering Representative Steve Bowyer 2/2/12 No response.

Other/Additional Information: 

### Gerald is assisting with data for the AD. Steve is assisting the ACO with data for the AD as well.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

EASTERN DIVISION

BARBARA M. JEFFERS and )

JOAN K. CRAIG, )

)

Plaintiffs, )

)

v. ) CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:06cv685-CSC

)

RUSSELL COUNTY BOARD )

OF EDUCATION, et al., )

)

Defendants. )

ORDER

Now pending before the court is the plaintiffs’ motion to compel (doc. # 19) filed on

August 27, 2007, and motion for protective order (doc. # 22) filed on September 10, 2007.

Upon consideration of the motions, it is

ORDERED that oral argument on the motions be and is hereby set on September 20,

2007 at 10:00 a.m. in Courtroom 4B, United States Courthouse Complex, One Church Street.

Montgomery, Alabama.

Done this 12th day of September, 2007.

 /s/Charles S. Coody 

CHARLES S. COODY

CHIEF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 3:06-cv-00685-WKW-CSC Document 23 Filed 09/12/2007 Page 1 of 1
SUBCHAPTER H - CLAUSES AND FORMS

PART 2152 - PRECONTRACT PROVISIONS AND CONTRACT CLAUSES

PARTS 2153-2199 [RESERVED]

PART 2152 - PRECONTRACT PROVISIONS AND CONTRACT CLAUSES

2152.070 Applicable clauses.

Subpart 2152.2 - Text of Provisions and Clauses

2152.203-70 Misleading, deceptive, or unfair advertising.

2152.204-70 Taxpayer Identification Number.

2152.209-70 Certification regarding debarment, suspension, proposed debarment

and other responsibility matters during negotiations.

2152.209-71 Certification regarding debarment, suspension, proposed debarment,

and other responsibility matters.

2152.210-70 Investment income.

2152.210-71 Notice of significant events.

2152.215-70 Contractor records retention.

2152.216-70 Fixed price with limited cost redetermination - risk charge.

2152.216-71 Fixed price with limited cost redetermination - service charge.

2152.224-70 Confidentiality of records.

2152.231-70 Accounting and allowable cost.

2152.232-70 Payments.

2152.232-71 Non-commingling of FEGLI Program funds.

2152.232-72 Approval for assignment of claims.

2152.237-70 Continuity of services.

2152.243-70 Changes.

2152.244-70 Subcontracts.

2152.246-70 Quality assurance requirements.

2152.249-70 Renewal and termination.

Subpart 2152.3 - Provision and Clause Matrix

2152.370 Use of the matrix.

PARTS 2153-2199 [RESERVED]
Case 2:06-cv-00642-MEF-SRW Document 42 Filed 12/10/2007 Page 1 of 4
Case 2:06-cv-00642-MEF-SRW Document 42 Filed 12/10/2007 Page 2 of 4
Case 2:06-cv-00642-MEF-SRW Document 42 Filed 12/10/2007 Page 3 of 4
Case 2:06-cv-00642-MEF-SRW Document 42 Filed 12/10/2007 Page 4 of 4
52.244-3 [Reserved]

Parent topic: 52.244 [Reserved]
**EXHIBIT      32.2**

**CERTIFICATION      PURSUANT TO**

**18      U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**

**AS      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

| (1)  | The                Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d)                of                the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;                and |
|-----------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| (1)   | The                information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material                respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the                Company. |
|-----------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| /s/              James E. Adams             |
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| James              E. Adams                                                                             |
| Executive              Vice President, Chief Financial                                                  |
| Officer              and Assistant              Secretary                                               |
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 03-7850

LAWRENCE DAVIS,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

RICKIE HARRISON; CHARLES M. CONDON,

Respondents - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

South Carolina, at Beaufort. C. Weston Houck, Senior District

Judge. (CA-01-1940-9)

Submitted: February 19, 2004 Decided: February 26, 2004

Before NIEMEYER, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Lawrence Davis, Appellant Pro Se. Samuel Creighton Waters, OFFICE

OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF SOUTH CAROLINA, Columbia, South

Carolina, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Lawrence Davis, a state prisoner, seeks to appeal the

district court’s order dismissing as untimely his petition filed

under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000). An appeal may not be taken from the

final order in a habeas corpus proceeding unless a circuit justice

or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C.

§ 2253(c)(1) (2000). A certificate of appealability will not issue

for claims addressed by a district court absent “a substantial

showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C.

§ 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by

demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that his

constitutional claims are debatable and that any dispositive

procedural rulings by the district court are also debatable or

wrong. See Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336 (2003); Slack

v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d 676,

683 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently reviewed the record and

conclude that Davis has not made the requisite showing.

Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability, deny leave to

proceed in forma pauperis, and dismiss the appeal. We dispense

with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are

adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument

would not aid the decisional process. 

DISMISSED
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

NORTHERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, :

:

PLAINTIFF, :

:

v. : CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:06cv736-WKW

:

SEVENTY FOUR THOUSAND SEVEN :

HUNDRED ($74,700) DOLLARS IN :

UNITED STATES CURRENCY, :

:

DEFENDANT. :

MOTION TO CONTINUE PRETRIAL CONFERENCE

Comes now the United States of America (United States), by and

through Leura G. Canary, United States Attorney, Middle District of

Alabama, and John T. Harmon, Assistant United States Attorney, and

states as follows:

The United States moves the Court to continue the pretrial

conference in this cause set for May 7, 2007, to a time convenient

to the Court. As grounds the United States would show that

undersigned counsel is scheduled to be out of the country from

April 23 through May 7, 2007.

Respectfully submitted this the 8 day of January, 2007. th

Case 2:06-cv-00736-WKW-SRW Document 12 Filed 01/08/2007 Page 1 of 2
FOR THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY

 LEURA G. CANARY

/s/John T. Harmon 

John T. Harmon

Assistant United States Attorney

Office of the United States Attorney

Middle District of Alabama

One Court Square, Suite 201 (36104)

Post Office Box 197

Montgomery, Alabama 36101-0197

Telephone:(334) 223-7280

Facsimile:(334) 223-7560

E-mail: John.Harmon@usdoj.gov

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on January 8, 2007, I electronically

filed the foregoing Motion to Continue Pretrial Date with the Clerk

of the Court using the CM/ECF system which will send notification

of such filing to the following: Bruce Maddox.

/s/John T. Harmon 

John T. Harmon

Assistant United States Attorney

Case 2:06-cv-00736-WKW-SRW Document 12 Filed 01/08/2007 Page 2 of 2
<PAGE>

                                                                      EXHIBIT 32


                            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 Universal Detection Technology (the
"Registrant") on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2008, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
I, Jacques Tizabi, Principal Executive Officer and Acting Principal Financial
Officer and Principal Accounting Officer of the Registrant, certify to the best
of my knowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of
the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934; and

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



Dated: November 18, 2008                /s/ Jacques Tizabi
                                        ------------------
                                        Jacques Tizabi
                                        Principal Executive Officer and
                                        Acting Principal Financial Officer
                                        and Principal Accounting Officer
###### Editorial Note on Part 2

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 2 appear at 79 FR 75739, Dec. 19, 2014.

#### § 2.1004 Amendments and additions.

Any document that has not been provided to other parties in electronic form must be identified in an electronic notice and made available for inspection and copying by the potential party, interested governmental participant, or party responsible for the submission of the document within five days after it has been requested unless some other time is approved by the Pre-License Application Presiding Officer or the Presiding Officer designated for the high-level waste proceeding. The time allowed under this paragraph will be stayed pending Officer action on a motion to extend the time.

[63 FR 71737, Dec. 30, 1998]
252.209-7007 Prohibited Financial Interests

for Lead System Integrators.

As prescribed in 209.570-4 (b), use the following clause:

PROHIBITED FINANCIAL INTERESTS FOR LEAD SYSTEM INTEGRATORS (DEC 2022)

(a) Definitions. As used in this clause—

(1) “Lead system integrator” includes “lead system integrator with system responsibility” and “lead

system integrator without system responsibility.”

(2) “Lead system integrator with system responsibility” means a prime contractor for the

development or production of a major system, if the prime contractor is not expected at the time of

award to perform a substantial portion of the work on the system and the major subsystems.

(3) “Lead system integrator without system responsibility” means a prime contractor under a

contract for the procurement of services, the primary purpose of which is to perform acquisition

functions closely associated with inherently governmental functions (see section 7.503(d) of the

Federal Acquisition Regulation) with respect to the development or production of a major system.

(b) Limitations. The Contracting Officer has determined that the Contractor meets the definition of

lead system integrator with [ ] without [ ] system responsibility. Unless an exception is granted, the

Contractor shall not have any direct financial interest in the development or construction of any

individual system or element of any system of systems while performing lead system integrator

functions in the acquisition of a major system by the Department of Defense under this contract.

(c) Agreement. The Contractor agrees that during performance of this contract it will not acquire

any direct financial interest as described in paragraph (b) of this clause, or, if it does acquire or plan

to acquire such interest, it will immediately notify the Contracting Officer. The Contractor further

agrees to provide to the Contracting Officer all relevant information regarding the change in

financial interests so that the Contracting Officer can determine whether an exception applies or

whether the Contractor will be allowed to continue performance on this contract. If a direct financial

interest cannot be avoided, eliminated, or mitigated to the Contracting Officer’s satisfaction, the

Contracting Officer may terminate this contract for default for the Contractor’s material failure to

comply with the terms and conditions of award or may take other remedial measures as appropriate

in the Contracting Officer’s sole discretion.

(d) Notwithstanding any other clause of this contract, if the Contracting Officer determines that the

Contractor misrepresented its financial interests at the time of award or has violated the agreement

in paragraph (c) of this clause, the Government may terminate this contract for default for the

Contractor’s material failure to comply with the terms and conditions of award or may take other

remedial measures as appropriate in the Contracting Officer’s sole discretion.

(e) This clause implements the requirements of 10 U.S.C. 4292.

(End of clause)

Parent topic: 252.209 RESERVED
Case 2:06-cv-00717-ID-SRW Document 32 Filed 04/18/2007 Page 1 of 2
Case 2:06-cv-00717-ID-SRW Document 32 Filed 04/18/2007 Page 2 of 2
| (logo) WELLS FARGO | **Corporate Trust Services**

  MAC R1204-010  9062 Old Annapolis Road  Columbia, MD 21045  Tel: 410 884 2000  Fax: 410 715 2380 |
|--------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

 

Re:          Annual Statement of Compliance for RBS Commercial Funding Inc., CommercialMortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2013-C11

 

Per the Pooling and ServicingAgreement dated as of February 1, 2013 (the "Agreement"), theundersigned, a duly authorized officer of Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., asCertificate Administrator ("Wells Fargo"), hereby certifies asfollows as of and for the year ending December 31, 2016 (the "ReportingPeriod"):

 

(a) A review of Wells Fargo'sactivities during the Reporting Period and of its performance under theAgreement has been made under such officer's supervision; and

 

(b) To the best of suchofficer's knowledge, based on such review, Wells Fargo has fulfilled all of itsobligations under the Agreement in all material respects throughout theReporting Period.

 

 

February 27, 2017

 

 

/s/ Brian Smith

BRIAN SMITH

Vice President

 

| Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. | (logo) Together we’ll  go far |
|------------------------|-------------------------------------|
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

NORTHERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA )

)

v. ) CR. NO. 2:06-cr-198-WKW

)

RONALD MCQUEEN )

ORDER

Before the court is Ronald McQueen’s (“McQueen”) Motion to Continue Sentencing of

March 21, 2007 (Doc. # 41). McQueen’s counsel indicates that she is required to be present at the

sentencing hearing set for March 21, 2007, in United States of America v. Leon Carmichael.

Counsel is reminded, however, that McQueen’s sentencing is set for March 20, 2007, rather than

March 21, 2007. It is ORDERED that the motion be DENIED because of the lack of conflict

between the sentencing hearing set for McQueen and the sentencing hearing in United States of

America v. Leon Carmichael, as well as the noted objection of the United States of America to a

continuance in this matter.

DONE this 15th day of March, 2007.

 /s/ W. Keith Watkins 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 2:06-cr-00198-WKW-CSC Document 48 Filed 03/15/2007 Page 1 of 1
§ 1042.215 Membership practices of certain organizations. ( a ) *Social fraternities and sororities.* These Title IX regulations do not apply to the membership practices of social fraternities and sororities that are exempt from taxation under section 501(a) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, 26 U.S.C. 501(a), the active membership of which consists primarily of students in attendance at institutions of higher education.
( b ) *YMCA, YWCA, Girl Scouts, Boy Scouts, and Camp Fire Girls.* These Title IX regulations do not apply to the membership practices of the Young Men's Christian Association (YMCA), the Young Women's Christian Association (YWCA), the Girl Scouts, the Boy Scouts, and Camp Fire Girls.
( c ) *Voluntary youth service organizations.* These Title IX regulations do not apply to the membership practices of a voluntary youth service organization that is exempt from taxation under section 501(a) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, 26 U.S.C. 501(a), and the membership of which has been traditionally limited to members of one sex and principally to persons of less than nineteen years of age.
Regulatory Evaluation 

Docket No. FAA- Directorate Identifier: -AD 

;Jdt! the work hours. ports ~.-·ost, and number c!f' U.S. re}{,istered products to the Wblc! he/ow. Whc!n you or£' 

./iuished. dick on the '·Update Fields., bull on to (llt/Omalically.fl/1 iu the Iota is. 

Update Fields I 

Estimated Costs: 

Action Costs per Product (e.g., aircraft, engine, 

(e.g., Inspection, propeller, appliance) 

Work-hours Labor Pa11s Cost Total Costs Number of Total Cost replacement) (include cost (labor+ u.s. for U.S. Fleet Do not include oncondition costs here access, testing, (@$85/h parts) Registered 

and close-up) our) Products 

ln-..p~c.:tinn. r~pair. 

d~. 

8 0 

' I 

,, 

I 

T he known number of products in compliance: '\. Lllll b1.. I 

Total Costs of compliance for U.S. fleet: $ 0 

Costs covered under warranty (if known) $unknown 

On-Condition Costs: ~ 

Action Work-hours Labor cost Parts Cost Cost per Product 

(e.g., Inspection, (include access, (@$85/hour) 

replacement) testing, and closeup) 

Inspection 8 

Installation 8 688 
Special considerations for Economic Analysis (Use this field to explain anything in the Estimated Costs table 

that was assumed or might not be obvious. This.field can also be used to explain warranty costs): 

Executive Order 12866: 

Could the AD be considered a "significant regulatory action"?-

YES* 0 NO 181 

*Explanation: 

DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures: 

Is the AD significant? ~ 

YES* D NO 181 

*Explanation: 

Regulatory Flexibility Act: 

Will the AD have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities? Explain for 

e ither a Yes or No answer. Q , 

YES 0 NO 181 

Explanation: 

Intrastate Aviation in Alaska: 

This AD could affect intrastate aviation in Alaska. Is it appropriate to include specific requirements for 

aircraft operated in Alaska where aviation might be the only mode oftranspo1tation? G 

YES* D NO 181 

*Explanation:
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 209 Introduced in House (IH)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. RES. 209

 Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that any Social 
Security reform legislation should include a ``Community Bank Option''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 12, 2005

   Mr. Sessions (for himself and Mr. Feeney) submitted the following 
   resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
 Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that any Social 
Security reform legislation should include a ``Community Bank Option''.

Whereas the Congress is considering Social Security reform that allows workers 
        to invest a portion of their Social Security monies into personal 
        savings accounts;
Whereas such accounts should include an option that permits workers to invest 
        their monies in products, such as certificates of deposit, offered by 
        banks and similar financial institutions;
Whereas employees of Galveston County, Texas, contribute to a personal 
        retirement account that resembles a bank option (which may be referred 
        to as a ``Community Bank Option'') that has earned interest rates that 
        average 6.5 percent in annual returns, with some returns of up to 15.5 
        percent;
Whereas the employees of Galveston County bear virtually no risk with these 
        accounts and, in return, receive guaranteed rates of return;
Whereas three counties in Texas have allowed county employees to take an 
        approach similar to a Community Bank Option for more than 20 years;
Whereas the State of Florida successfully restructured retirement opportunities 
        for eligible Florida State employees by allowing personal accounts that 
        have proven successful in maximizing participants' long-term savings and 
        securing the State's pension program;
Whereas certificates of deposit and other products offered by banks are FDIC-
        insured and provide a very low risk investment option for workers;
Whereas monies deposited in an option at a local community bank, savings 
        association, or credit union will be used in that community again in the 
        form of small business loans and home mortgages; and
Whereas the Community Bank Option will help neighborhoods and communities 
        throughout the United States to grow and develop: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That it is the sense of the House of Representatives that 
a Community Bank Option should be included in any Social Security 
reform legislation.
                                 <all>
```
1953.370 The Broadcasting Board of

Governors forms.

This section contains illustrations of The Broadcasting Board of Governors forms references in this

IAAR.

Parent topic: Subpart 1953.3 - Illustrations of Forms
EXHIBIT
31.1



CERTIFICATIONS
OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER

PURSUANT
TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



I,
Jack Ross, certify that:



| | 1. | I
    have reviewed this Amendment No. 1 to the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Synergy CHC Corp. (the “Company”);                                                                                                                                                                                                      
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| |    |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       
| | 2. | Based
    on my knowledge, this 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 report.



|Date:
    May 12, 2020 | By: | /s/
    Jack Ross                
|---------------------- | --- | ---------------------------------
|                       |     | Chief
    Executive Officer      
|                       |     | (Principle
    Executive Officer)