alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
June 16, 2015

Mr

. John Swasey

President

Exec Air

160 13 th Street, NW. Naples, FL 34120

Dear Mr. Swasey :

This is in response to your December 31, 2014 letter (public docket No. FAA

- 20 15

- 0011)

submitted on behalf of Exec Air and your January 26, 2015 letter (public Docket No. FAA

2015

- 0166) petitioning the Federal Aviation Administration to amend § 135.243(a)(1) of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations ( 14 CFR)

. Because the two petitions were submitted from the same individual and for the same CFR, t he two dockets were combined into one docket, Docket No. FAA

- 2015

- 0011.

The FAA has considered your request . However, when the FAA responds to petitions for rulemaking, it must follow the requirements of 14 CFR Part 11, particularly those guidelines

for processing petitions for rulemaking found in § 11.73. As stated in that section, the FAA uses the following criteria when making a decision as to whether or not to amend current regulations based on a petition for rulemaking:

1) the immediacy of the safety or security concerns the petition raises; 2) the priority of other FAA issues; and 3) the resources we have available to address these issues.

That petition for rulemaking seeks to amend § 135.243(a)(1) to only require a c ommercial

p ilot c ertificate to operate a light or midsized piston twin aircraft weighing less than 12,500

lbs. maximum takeoff weight in a part 135 ( nine passenger seats or less ) commuter operation.

The FAA has a priority list for rulemaking that addresses many issues that are critical to the safety of the aviation community and the traveling public. The FAA must prioritize its limited rulemaking resources to deliver the most value to the aviation system as a whole. Although the issues raised in your petition may have merit, they do not addr ess an immediate safety concern.2

In addition, in your January 26, 2015 correspondence , we not e that you petitioned for an exemption if rulemaking was not possible. The FAA has determined that this request could not be processed as an exemption because it does not meet § 11.81. Guidelines for submitting a petition for exemption are available at:

http://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/rulemaking/

For th e reason s stated above , we are unable to process your requests and thereby deny your petition for rulemaking in accordance with 14 CFR § 11.73. Although the FAA has decided to deny the request s , your comments and reasons for a rule change will be considered if the agency undertakes future rulemaking in this area . Accor dingly, Docket No. FAA

- 201 5

- 001 1 is being closed.

Sincerely,

/s/ John Barbagallo Deputy Director, Flight Standards Service3

Project No.: A FS

- 13

- 202

- E

Project Officer: _______________

ARM

- 10 1 : KJone s: 3/11/2013 :Doc# 43636

ARM

- 1/100/104:Program Office AFS

- 800
#### § 1210.22 Form of tag.

Each container of milk or cream shipped or transported into the United States by such permittee shall have firmly attached thereto a tag in the following form, bearing the required information in clear and legible type:

Product
(State whether raw milk, pasteurized milk, raw cream, or pasteurized cream.)
Permit number
Federal Import Milk Act, Department of Health and Human Services.
Shipper
Address of shipper

*Provided,* That in case of unit shipments consisting of milk only or cream only under one permit number, in lieu of each container being so marked, the vehicle of transportation, if sealed, may be tagged with the above tag, which should, in addition, show the number of containers and quantity of contents of each.
MEMORANDUM OPINION

No. 04-10-00687-CR

Rosendo MURILLO,

Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 290th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2004CR5765

Honorable Sharon MacRae, Judge Presiding

PER CURIAM

Sitting: Rebecca Simmons, Justice

Steven C. Hilbig, Justice

Marialyn Barnard, Justice

Delivered and Filed: October 27, 2010

DISMISSED

The trial court’s certification in this appeal states that the case is a “plea-bargain case, and 

the defendant has NO right of appeal.” Rule 25.2(d) of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure 

provides, “[t]he appeal must be dismissed if a certification that shows the defendant has a right 

of appeal has not been made part of the record under these rules.” TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(d). 

Appellant’s counsel filed a written notice with this court that counsel reviewed the record 

and “can find no right of appeal for Appellant.” We construe this notice as an indication that 
04-10-00687-CR

- 2 -

appellant will not seek to file an amended trial court certification showing that he has the right of 

appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(d); 37.1; see also Daniels v. State, 110 S.W.3d 174, 177 (Tex. 

App.—San Antonio 2003, no pet.). In light of the record presented, we agree with Appellant’s 

counsel that Rule 25.2(d) requires this court dismiss this appeal. Accordingly, this appeal is 

dismissed.

PER CURIAM

DO NOT PUBLISH
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 34 (Monday, February 22, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Page 7568]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-3524]


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

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION


Sunshine Act Meetings

TIME AND DATE: 11 a.m., March 19, 2010.

PLACE: 1155 21st St., NW., Washington, DC, 9th Floor Commission 
Conference Room.

STATUS: Closed.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: Surveillance Matters.

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: Sauntia S. Warfield, 202-418-5084.

Sauntia S. Warfield,
Assistant Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2010-3524 Filed 2-18-10; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 6351-01-P
II 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 107

To provide for the reliquidation of certain entries of clock radios. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JANUARY 24, 2005

Mr. LEVIN introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred 

to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL

To provide for the reliquidation of certain entries of clock 

radios.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. CERTAIN ENTRIES OF SOUNDSPA CLOCK RA4 DIOS. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding section 514 of 

6 the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1514) or any other pro7 vision of law, within 180 days after the date of the enact8 ment of this Act, the Customs Service shall liquidate or 

9 reliquidate each entry described in subsection (c), con10 taining merchandise which at the time of the original liq11 uidation was classified under subheading 8527.19.50, at 
2

•S 107 IS 

1 the rate of duty that would have been applicable to such 

2 merchandise if such merchandise had been classified under 

3 subheading 8527.19.10 on the date of such entry. 

4 (b) REFUND OF AMOUNTS OWED.—Any amounts 

5 owed by the United States under subsection (a) shall be 

6 paid with interest. 

7 (c) AFFECTED ENTRIES.—The entries referred to in 

8 subsection (a) are as follows:

Entry number 

110–1199345–7

110–1199542–9

110–1199558–5

110–1201694–4

110–3759754–8

110–3759785–2

101–4082299–9

101–4088073–2

101–4089053–3

101–4120875–0

101–4133671–8

101–4138302–5

101–4145092–3

101–4148477–3

101–4153108–6

101–4159322–7

101–4158601–5

101–4163243–9

101–4164448–3

101–4168318–4

101–4172197–6

101–4172489–7

101–4193123–7

101–4264820–2

101–4271724–7

101–4277850–4

101–4287672–0

101–4301588–0

101–4306238–7

101–4306235–3

101–6011727–0

101–6012796–4

101–6015492–7

101–6021099–2

101–6026903–0

101–6024120–3

101–6028079–7
3

•S 107 IS 

101–6027052–5

101–6036728–9

101–6048069–4

101–6079830–1

101–6082949–4

101–6115954–5

101–6119379–1

101–6127048–2

101–6150035–9

101–6148556–9

101–6172630–1

101–6172406–6

101–6186497–9

101–4208407–7

101–6035939–3

Æ
================================================================================

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 CirTran  Corporation on Form 10-QSB
for the period ending June 30, 2006, as filed with the  Securities  and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),  Iehab Hawatmeh,  President of the
Company,  certifies,  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 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 Company.

August 21, 2006

                                              /s/ Iehab J. Hawatmeh
                                              ----------------------------------
                                              Iehab J. Hawatmeh
                                              President



















--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 7153 

To reauthorize the Dr. Lorna Breen Health Care Provider Protection Act, 

and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 30, 2024 

Ms. WILD (for herself, Mrs. KIGGANS of Virginia, Mr. CARTER of Georgia, 

and Mrs. DINGELL) introduced the following bill; which was referred to 

the Committee on Energy and Commerce 

A BILL 

To reauthorize the Dr. Lorna Breen Health Care Provider 

Protection Act, and for other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Dr. Lorna Breen 

5 Health Care Provider Protection Reauthorization Act’’. 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 7153 IH

1 SEC. 2. EDUCATION AND AWARENESS INITIATIVE ENCOUR2 AGING USE OF MENTAL HEALTH AND SUB3 STANCE USE DISORDER SERVICES BY 

4 HEALTH CARE PROFESSIONALS. 

5 Section 3 of the Dr. Lorna Breen Health Care Pro6 vider Protection Act (Public Law 117–105) is amended— 

7 (1) in subsection (b), by inserting ‘‘and annu8 ally thereafter,’’ after ‘‘of this Act,’’; and 

9 (2) in subsection (c), by striking ‘‘2022 through 

10 2024’’ and inserting ‘‘2025 through 2029’’. 

11 SEC. 3. PROGRAMS TO PROMOTE MENTAL HEALTH AMONG 

12 THE HEALTH PROFESSIONAL WORKFORCE. 

13 The second section 764 of the Public Health Service 

14 Act (42 U.S.C. 294t), as added by section 4 of the Dr. 

15 Lorna Breen Health Care Provider Protection Act (Public 

16 Law 117–105), is amended— 

17 (1) by redesignating such section 764 as section 

18 764A; 

19 (2) in subsection (a)(3)— 

20 (A) by striking ‘‘to eligible entities in’’ and 

21 inserting ‘‘to eligible entities that— 

22 ‘‘(A) are in’’; 

23 (B) by striking the period and inserting ‘‘; 

24 or’’; and 

25 (C) by adding at the end the following: 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 7153 IH

1 ‘‘(B) have a focus on the reduction of ad2 ministrative burden on health care workers.’’; 

3 (3) in subsection (c), by inserting ‘‘not less 

4 than’’ after ‘‘period of’’; and 

5 (4) in subsection (f), by striking ‘‘2022 through 

6 2024’’ and inserting ‘‘2025 through 2029’’. 

Æ 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
### NUMBER 13

- 20

- 00 480

- CR



## COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI

– EDINBURG

JAVIER JASSO SALAZAR JR.
, Appellant ,

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS
, Appellee

.

On a ppeal from the 2 1 4 th District Court of Nueces County, Texas.



## ORDER

Before Justices Benavides, Hinojosa, and Silva Order Per Curiam

B efore the Court is appellant's motion for pro se access to the appellate record.

On March 22, 2021, a ppellant's counsel filed an Anders brief

, and appellant has been

unable to examine the record in order to file a pro se brief.

We GRANT appellant’s motion, and it is hereby ORDERED the trial court ensure2 that appellant has the opportunity to fully examine the appellate record on or before fifteen

( 15 ) days from the date this order issues , and it is FURTHER ORDERED that the trial

court notify this Court as to the date upon which the appellate record was made available

to appellant

. See Kelly v. State , 436 S.W.3d 313 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014).

Furthermore, Appellant shall have thirty (30) days from the d ay the appellate

record is first made available to him to file h is pro se brief with this Court

. The State shall

have twenty days thereafter to file its response, if any

.

PER CURIAM

Do not publish. T EX . R. A PP . P. 47.2(b).

Delivered and filed on the 5th day of May , 202 1

.
§ 1271.420 HCT/Ps offered for import. ( a ) Except as provided in paragraphs (c) and (d) of this section, when an HCT/P is offered for import, the importer of record must notify, either before or at the time of importation, the director of the district of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) having jurisdiction over the port of entry through which the HCT/P is imported or offered for import, or such officer of the district as the director may designate to act in his or her behalf in administering and enforcing this part, and must provide sufficient information, including information submitted in the Automated Commercial Environment (ACE) system or any other electronic data interchange system authorized by the U.S. Customs and Border Protection Agency as required in part 1, subpart D of this chapter, for FDA to make an admissibility decision.
( b ) Except as provided in paragraphs (c) and (d) of this section, an HCT/P offered for import must be held intact by the importer or consignee, under conditions necessary to prevent transmission of communicable disease, until an admissibility decision is made by FDA. The HCT/P may be transported under quarantine to the consignee, while the FDA district reviews the documentation accompanying the HCT/P. When FDA makes a decision regarding the admissibility of the HCT/P, FDA will notify the importer of record.
( c ) This section does not apply to reproductive HCT/Ps regulated solely under section 361 of the Public Health Service Act and the regulations in this part, and donated by a sexually intimate partner of the recipient for reproductive use.
( d ) This section does not apply to peripheral blood stem/progenitor cells regulated solely under section 361 of the Public Health Service Act and the regulations in this part, except that paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section apply when circumstances occur under which such imported peripheral blood stem/progenitor cells may present an unreasonable risk of communicable disease transmission which indicates the need to review the information referenced in paragraph (a) of this section.
[69 FR 68687, Nov. 24, 2004, as amended at 81 FR 85873, Nov. 29, 2016]
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

JUDGMENT

No. 04-16-00662-CV

Melissa FUENTES, Individually, and as Next Friend of Victor Robert Fuentes and Isabella 

Elaine Fuentes, Minors,

Appellant

v.

TEXAS MUTUAL INSURANCE CO.,

Appellee

From the 112th Judicial District Court, Sutton County, Texas

Trial Court No. 5910

Honorable Pedro Gomez, Judge Presiding

BEFORE CHIEF JUSTICE MARION, JUSTICE MARTINEZ, AND JUSTICE RIOS

In accordance with this court’s opinion of this date, the trial court’s Order on Motions for 

Summary Judgment is AFFIRMED.

It is ORDERED that appellee recover its costs of this appeal from appellant.

SIGNED November 1, 2017.

_____________________________

Irene Rios, Justice
# EUR-Lex - 31991D0270 - EN

Avis juridique important

*|*

# 31991D0270

**91/270/EEC: Commission Decision of 14 May 1991 drawing up a list of third countries from which Member States authorize importation of embryos of domestic animals of the bovine species **

*
Official Journal L 134 , 29/05/1991 P. 0056 - 0057 Finnish special edition: Chapter 3 Volume 37 P. 0199 Swedish special edition: Chapter 3 Volume 37 P. 0199 *

COMMISSION DECISION of 14 May 1991 drawing up a list of third countries from which Member States authorize importation of embryos of domestic animals of the bovine species (91/270/EEC)

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community,

Having regard to Council Directive 89/556/EEC of 25 September 1989 (1) laying down the animal health requirements applicable to intra-Community trade in and imports of embryos of domestic animals of the bovine species, as last amended by Council Directive 90/425/EEC of 26 June 1990 (2) and in particular Article 7 thereof;

Whereas the system for establishing the list of third countries from which Member States may import embryos of domestic animals of the bovine species is laid down under Directive 89/556/EEC;

Whereas in order to establish such a list, it is appropriate to take account of the animal health situation in third countries and of similar lists existing for the import of live animals and semen;

Whereas further Community measures remain to be adopted in respect of importation of embryos; whereas the Commission is continuing its task of preparing such measures with due speed;

Whereas, while respecting the limitations arising from the adoption of the list, imports of embryos shall continue to be subject to national provisions in respect of health and veterinary inspection in so far as they are not already subject to any Community health protection measures;

Whereas the measures provided for in this Decision are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Veterinary Committee,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION: Article 1

Member States shall only import embryos of domestic animals of the bovine species from those third countries which appear on the list in the Annex to this Decision. Article 2

This Decision is addressed to the Member States. Done at Brussels, 14 May 1991. For the Commission

Ray MAC SHARRY

Member of the Commission (1) OJ No L 302, 19. 10. 1989, p. 1. (2) OJ No L 224, 18. 8. 1990, p. 29.

ANNEX

List of third countries from which Member States authorize importation of embryos of domestic animals of the bovine species

Australia Poland Austria Romania Canada Sweden Czechoslovakia Switzerland Finland United States of America Hungary Yugoslavia Israel New Zealand Norway
Schaeffer, John 

From: Lynch, David 

Sent: 

To: 

Thursday, October 01 , 2015 5:07PM 

Schaeffer, John 

Subject: RE: 68610-90-2 HPV3 RE: Status 

Hello John, 

As I discussed with you earlier I found a read across approach on the ECHA website for 68610-90-2 with Ready 

Biodegradability data on 2-Butendioic acid (E) -, di-C12 alkylester and 2 Ready Biodegradability tests that had 

been extended to 60 days on Ditetradecyl fumerate (2-Butenedioic acid (2E)-, 1,4-ditetradecyl ester) and 2-

Butenedioic acid (E)-, di-C18-22-alkyl esters . All were rated "reliable with restrictions". 

http://apps.echa.europa.eu/registered/data/dossiers/DISS-dffb4072-e3f5-47ae-e044-00144f67d031/DISSdffb4072-e3f5-47ae-e044-00144f67d031 DISS-dffb4072-e3f5-47ae-e044-00144f67d031.html 

In addition I have reviewed the redacted German translation of the biodegradation study on the surrogate 

chemical provided. Due to CBI constraints I will not reveal the identity of the surrogate chemical. 

The surrogate chemical was tested for aerobic biodegradability using the BOD IS method, similar to an OECD 

301 type Ready Biodegradability tests and suitable for poorly water soluble chemicals. While this is not, strictly 

speaking, a Ready Biodegradability test, the results give an indication of the ease of aerobic biodegradation 

under relatively stringent conditions. There were some issues with the measured chemical oxygen demand of 

the test substances and variability between test replicates, but with those acknowledgements I think the study 

is acceptable. The results indicated a mean value (n=3) of 67% biodegradation in 28 days based on chemical 

oxygen demand and 60% biodegradation based on theoretical oxygen demand. 

Given the information available to characterize the Ready Biodegradability of 68610-90-2 I recommend we 

drop the requirement for Ready Biodegradation testing on 68610-90-2 based on the ECHA read across and the 

surrogate chemical BODIS study. 

Please let me know if I need to put this in a memo, or if this e-mail is sufficient. 

Let me know if you have any questions. 

Dave 

David G Lynch 

Assessment Branch 5 

Risk Assessment Division 

Mail Code 7403M 

Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxcs 

1200 Pennsylvania Ave NW 

Washington, DC 20460 

Office: 202-564-8532 

Fax: 202-564-8892 

1
<PAGE>   1


Exhibit 11.1

                              fine.com CORPORATION

             STATEMENT REGARDING COMPUTATION OF NET INCOME PER SHARE


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                             Three Months Ended July 31,      Six Months Ended July 31,
                                             --------------------------      --------------------------
                                                1997           1996            1997            1996
                                             ----------      ----------      ----------      ----------
<S>                                          <C>             <C>             <C>             <C>      
Weighted average common shares                1,055,541       1,055,541       1,055,541       1,055,541
outstanding
Net effect of stock options exercised
  and granted, and preferred stock
  issued during the 12-month period
  prior to the Company's filing of
  its initial public offering at
  less than the offering price,
  calculated using the treasury
  stock method at the initial
  offering price of $6.50 per
  share, and treated as outstanding for          99,585          99,585          99,585          99,585
                                             ----------      ----------      ----------      ----------
  all periods presented

Shares used in computation of net
  income per share                            1,155,126       1,155,126       1,155,126       1,155,126
                                             ==========      ==========      ==========      ==========

Net income                                   $   27,868      $    2,652      $   71,292      $    6,543
                                             ==========      ==========      ==========      ==========

Net income per share                         $     0.02      $     0.00      $     0.06      $     0.01
                                             ==========      ==========      ==========      ==========
</TABLE>


                                      -15-
Exhibit
      32





Certification
      Pursuant to


18
      U.S.C.
      Section 1350,


as
      Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002




Pursuant
      to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
      Act of 2002, the undersigned officers of Medialink Worldwide Incorporated (the
      "Company"), hereby certify to such officers’ knowledge, that the Company's
      Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2006 (the "Report")
      fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable,
      of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in
      the
      Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
      results of operations of the Company.








Dated:
      August 14, 2006


/s/
              Laurence MoskowitzName:
              Laurence MoskowitzTitle:
              Chief Executive Officer




/s/
              Kenneth TorosianName:
              Kenneth TorosianTitle:
              Chief Financial Officer




The
      foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350,
      as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
      2002.