alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Order 2012

- 12

- 23

Served: D ecember 29, 2011

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

WASHINGTON, D.C.

Issued by the Department of Transportation

on the 28 th day of October, 2011

In the matter of the revocation of the certificate

authority issued to

ARROW AIR , INC.

pursuant to the provisions of 14 CFR § 204.7 Docket s DOT

- OST

- 1999

- 5140

DOT

- OST

- 2004

- 19398

ORDER REVOKING FORE I GN CERTIFICATE

By Order 2011

- 10

- 22 , issued October 28, 2011 , we revoked the Section 41102 interstate

certificate of public convenience and necessity issued to Arrow Air , Inc., by Order 2000

- 8

- 5

.

By this order, we are revoking the company’s companion foreign certificate authority. Instead of

repeating our finding s and conclusions in Order 2011

- 10

- 22 , we incorporate them here by

reference.

ACCORDINGLY,

1. We revoke the certificate s of public convenience and necessity issued to Arrow Air

, Inc., by

Order 200 0

- 8

- 5 and Order 2007

- 7

- 4 , authorizing it to engage in for eign air transportation

.

2. Unless disapproved by the President of the United States under section 41307 of Title 49 of

the United States Code, this order shall become effective on the 61 st day after its submission for

section 41307 review or upon the dat e of receipt of advice from the President or his designee

under Executive Order 12597 and implementing regulations that he or she does not intend to

disapprove the Department's order under that section, whichever occurs earlier. 1

1 This order was submit ted for section 41307 review on October 28, 2011

. The 61 st day is December 28, 2011.

Since the President or his designee did not disapprove this order before that date, it became effective on December

28, 2011.

.2

3. We will serve a copy of this order on the persons listed in Attachment A.

By:

TODD M. HOMAN

Director

Office of Aviation Analysis

An electronic version of this document is available on the World Wide Web at:

http://www.regulations.govATTACHMENT A

SERVICE LIST FOR

ARROW AIR , INC.

PETER LYNCH AGC

- 300

ASST CHIEF COUNSEL FOR

ENFORCEMENT

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION

800 INDEPENDENCE AVE SW

WASHINGTON DC 20591 ANNE SUISSA RTS

- 42

OFFICE OF AIRLINE INFORMATION

DOT/RITA/BTS E

- 34

1200 NEW JERSEY AVE SE

WASHINGTON DC 20590

WILLIAM J WEBER

CERTIFICATION SECTION MANAGER

FAA AFS

- 900

45005 AVIATION DRIVE SUITE 131

DULLES VA 20166 PIERRE MURPHY

COUNSEL FOR ARROW AIR INC

1200 NEW JERSEY AVE NW

WASHINGTON DC 20036

- 6802
**Exhibit 32**

 

|   | **CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO** |
|--------|-------------------------------|

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

**AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

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

 

I, Daniel W. Dowe, the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer (principal executive officerand principal financial officer), of American Home Food Products, Inc., (the “Company”), pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,certify that:

 

|   | (1) | In connection with the Annual Report of the Company on form 10-KSB for the twelvemonth period ended May 31, 2006, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) and Section15(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 results of operation of the Company for the period presented therein. |
|--------|-----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company andwill be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

 

By: /s/ Daniel W. Dowe                                    

|   | Daniel W. Dowe |
|--------|----------------|

|   | Chief Executive Officer and |
|--------|-----------------------------|

|   | Chief Financial Officer |
|--------|-------------------------|

 

Date: October 4, 2006

 

 

 

----
---

---

Exhibit
  14.1


**Consent
  of Independent Auditors**

We consent to the incorporation
  by reference in the Registration Statements (Form S-8 No. 333- 92491 and No.
  333-102288) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission pertaining to
  the 1995 Israel stock option Plan, 1997 Stock Option Plan and 1998 Non-Employee
  Director Share Option Plan and pertaining to the 2000 Stock Option Plan of NUR
  Macroprinters Ltd., of our report dated March 30, 2004, with respect to the
  consolidated financial statements and schedules of NUR Macroprinters Ltd. included
  in this Annual Report (Form 20-F) for the year ended December 31, 2003.

|Tel-Aviv,
      IsraelMarch 30, 2004 |                                                                       |                   
|------------------------------------ | --------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------------------
|                                     |                                                                       | Yours
      truly,
|                                     |                                                                      
|                                     | /s/
      KOST FORER & GABBAY
       A Member of Ernst & Young Global

---

---
Reported Emissions and Product Content 

Dyneon/3M 2011 

0 0 0 0 No Telomer 

Production 
Dyneon/3M 2011 

0 0 0 Production 

0 

~··11 
Reported Percent Reductions in Emissions and Product Content 

Table 3. Reported Percent Reductions in Emissions and Product Content of PFOA, Precursors, and Higher Homologues from 

u.s. 

Dyneon/3M 2011 

100% 

No Telomer 

Production 

... --111rr 
Table 4. Reported Percent Reductions in Emissions and Product Content of PFOA, Precursors, and Higher Homologues from 

Non U.S. Oru•r••ti''"~ 

Dyneon/3M 2011 

-·ir 

100% 100% 

No Telomer 

Production 

·- -~1111T 
3M Fluoropolymers Accomplishments Table 

Company Reductions 

Facilities Emissio Product Content 

f u.s. 100% 100% 

Non-U.S. 100% 100% 

Global 100% 100% I 

Please enter a% number for each of the fields in the table below. 

When necessary, please combine PFOA, precursors, and higher homologues into one PFOA-equivalent number. 

In addition, please combine U.S. and non-U.S. reductions into a global reduction, if possible
# C o u rt o f

A p p ea ls
o f t h e S t a te o f

G eo rg ia

ATLANTA,_

_ _ __ _ _ __ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ Th e Co u rt

o f Ap p ea l s h er eb y p a s s es t h e f

o ll owi n g o r der :

A2 2 A0 06 1 , A2 2 A0 1 6 3

. J a m es Bo y d v . Ruby Ches ter et a l .; a nd v i ce v ers a .
W e g ran t ed J am es Bo y d ’ s ap p l i cat i o n fo r i n terl o c u t o r y rev i ew of t h e t ri al

co u r t ’s ord er den y i n g h is m o ti o n t o en fo rce a set t l em en t ag reem en t

. Aft er carefu l

rev i ew o f t h e en ti re reco rd , w e co n cl ud e t h at th e ap p l i cat i o n fo r i n t erl o cu t o ry ap p eal

was i m pro v i d en tl y gran t ed , an d i t i s o rd ered th at t h e ap p eal i n Cas e No

. A2 2 A0 0 6 1 i s h ereb y di sm i s s ed

. Ch es t er’ s cro s s -ap p eal i n Cas e No

. A 2 2 A 0 1 6 3 i s h ereb y d i s m i s s ed as m o o t.

C o u r t o f A p p e a l s o f t h e S t a t e o

f G e o r g ia C le r k ’ s O f f i c e , A t la n t a ,

_

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ I c e r ti fy t h a t t h e a b o v e is a t r u e e x t r a c t f r o m t h e m i n u t e s o

f t h e C o u r t o

f A p p e a l s o f G e o r g i a

. W i tn e s s m y s i g n a t u r e a n d th e s e a l o

f s a i d c o u r t h e r e t o a f f i x e d t h e d a y a n d y e a r l a s t a b o v e w r i t t e n

.

, C l e r k

. June 21, 2022

06/21/2022
L ocal Rule 47.5 provides: “The publication of opinions that have no t precedential value and

merely decide particular cases on the basis of well-settled principles of law imposes needless expense

on the public and burdens on the legal profession.” Pursuant to that Rule, the Court has determined

that this opinion should not be published.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 95-50076

(Summary Calendar)

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

MICHAEL McCORD,

Defendant-Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

(DR-92-CR-78(1))

(October 10, 1995)

Before Jolly, Jones, and Stewart, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Defendant-Appellant Michael McCord contends that the district court improperly grouped

the counts of his co nvict io n in resentencing. He argues that all counts should have been grouped

together as parts of a common scheme or plan. The trial judge, however, concluded that the

conviction charges represented two discernible “harms” requiring separate groupings. We affirm.

Grouping of offenses is a question of legal interpretation of the Guidelines. Therefore, we

review the district court’s grouping of McCord’s offenses de novo

. U nited States v. Patterson

, 962

F.2d 409, 416 (5th Cir. 1992). Under the Guidelines “[a]ll counts invo lving substantially the same

harm shall be grouped together into a single Group.” U.S.S.G. § 3D1.2. This rule includes situations

“[w]hen counts involve the same victim and two or more acts or transactions connected by a common

criminal objective or constituting part of a common scheme or plan.” U.S.S.G. § 3D1.2(b).2

Counts one and four invo lve appellant’s participation in a plan to take advantage of his

position as trustee of the American Bank of Commerce (“ABC”) Employee Stock Ownership Plan

(“ESOP”). Appellant conspired to acquire and sell shares of ABC to the ESOP in violation of his

fiduciary duties. He then concealed his gains by not claiming the proceeds on his income tax return.

These activities repres ent a common scheme victimizing the Internal Revenue Service and the

employees enrolled in the plan.

Counts five, six, and eight, on the other hand, concerned the defrauding of ABC. We agree

with the district court’s decision t hat t he dual groupings reflect the dual nature of the classes of

victims and criminal objectives.

Appellant supports his argument for grouping all of the counts together by citing the lower

court’s denial of

a motion for severance prior to the trial. Although both defendants McCord and

O.B. Haley, Sr., filed such motions, the court ruled only on Haley’s motion to split the o ffenses

between McCord and himself. The order did not address the grouping of sentences and is, therefore,

irrelevant for the purposes of this appeal.

AFFIRMED.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF CYBEX COMPUTER PRODUCTS CORPORATION FOR THE 12 MONTHS
ENDED MARCH 31, 1999 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1999
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                           4,061
<SECURITIES>                                    44,931
<RECEIVABLES>                                   17,288
<ALLOWANCES>                                     1,339
<INVENTORY>                                      7,447
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                72,506
<PP&E>                                          15,096
<DEPRECIATION>                                   2,544
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  92,850
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           28,654
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            14
<OTHER-SE>                                      69,482
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    92,850
<SALES>                                         82,195
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                82,195
<CGS>                                           38,302
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   38,302
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   813
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  44
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 18,257
<INCOME-TAX>                                     5,824
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    12,432
<EPS-BASIC>                                     1.00
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .95


</TABLE>
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.3


                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS



We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in this Registration
Statement on Form S-1 of our report dated April 24, 1998, except for the first
paragraph of Note 9 which is as of August 27, 1999, relating to the financial
statements of Arcxel Technologies, Inc., which appears in Vixel Corporation's
Form S-1 registration statement (File No. 333-81347). We also consent to the
reference to us under the heading "Experts" in Vixel Corporation's Form S-1
registration statement (File No. 333-81347).



PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
Seattle, Washington
September 28, 1999
EXHIBIT 32.01



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 (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2020, as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), I, Iehab Hawatmeh, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial 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:



| | (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.



| | /s/ Iehab Hawatmeh                                                                 
| | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| | Iehab Hawatmeh                                                                     
| | Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial
        Officer
        August 19, 2020



A signed original of this written statement
required by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed
form within the electronic version of this written statement has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company
and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
[No. 38411-2-I.

Division One.

January 26, 1998.]

#### The State of Washington, *Respondent,*v. Banner Dawson, *Appellant.*

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court for What-com County, No. 95-1-00898-7, Stephen J. Mura, J., entered March 13, 1996. *Affirmed*by unpublished opinion per Becker, J., concurred in by Cox and Ellington, JJ.
#### Commonwealth v. Weidler

*Frederick Y. Dietrich,*assistant district attorney, for Commonwealth.

*W. Dorland Rouse,*for defendant.

February 15, 1951.

Per Curiam,

— An information was filed against defendant by Samuel S. Yupco, a member of the Pennsylvania State Police, charging that defendant did on April 8, 1950, unlawfully use a false and fictitious name and give a false and fictitious address on the title application for Diamond “T” truck, title no. F3853107, serial no. 70273, this in violation of the provisions of section 620, subsec. *(j)*of The Vehicle Code of May 1, 1929, P. L. 905, as amended.

Defendant waived a hearing and was released on his own bail in the sum of $207, conditioned for his appearance at the next term of court.

*572The Commonwealth produced Officer Yupco, who stated defendant used a false and fictitious name, to wit, that of Phillip Weidler, also with giving a false and fictitious address of said Phillip Weidler, on the certificate of title involved and that Charles Weidler fraudently signed the name of Phillip Weidler to the certificate of title in question, as appeared on the photostatic copy produced by the Commonwealth. However, upon cross-examination Private Yupco admitted he did not see Charles Weidler sign the name of Phillip Weidler to the certificate of title involved in this matter, as shown on the photostatic copy, nor was any witness produced who saw Charles Weidler sign Phillip Weidler’s name to the certificate.

No competent testimony was produced by the Commonwealth to show that the signature appearing on the certificate of title as shown on the photostatic copy was placed there by defendant, or that the signature appearing on the photostatic copy of the certificate was the true signature of Charles H. Weidler.

At the conclusion of the testimony defendant moved that the complaint be dismissed for the reason that the Commonwealth failed to make information within 15 days following the alleged commission of the offense.

No testimony was produced by the Commonwealth to explain why the information was not filed within 15 days of the commission of the offense which the witness for the Commonwealth testified occurred on April 8, 1950, as the record shows the information was not made until May 1,1950; and no testimony was offered by the Commonwealth to show that the complaint was made within 15 days following the discovery of the alleged offense, as provided for in the amendment to The Vehicle Code.

*Conclusions of Law*

1. The court concludes that there is no competent testimony adduced by the Commonwealth to convict *573Charles Weidler of the offense of unlawfully using a false and fictitious name and giving a false and fictitious address on an application for title to a diamond “T” truck.

2. The court concludes that the information charging the offense was not made within 15 days following the commission of the offense on April 8,1950.

And now, to wit, February 15, 1951, the charge against defendant, Charles H. Weidler, is dismissed at the cost of the County of Lycoming.
###### Editorial Note on Part 314

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 314 appear at 69 FR 13717, Mar. 24, 2004; 81 FR 69639, Oct. 6, 2016.

#### § 314.201 Procedure for hearings.

Parts 10 through 16 apply to hearings relating to new drugs under section 505 (d) and (e) of the act.
Editorial Note on Part 184
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 184 appear at 66 FR 56035, Nov. 6, 2001; 66 FR 66742, Dec. 27, 2001; 68 FR 15355, Mar. 31, 2003; 69 FR 13717, Mar. 24, 2004; 70 FR 40880, July 15, 2005; 70 FR 67651, Nov. 8, 2005; and 81 FR 49897, July 29, 2016.

§ 184.1585 Papain. ( a ) Papain (CAS Reg. No. 9001-73-4) is a proteolytic enzyme derived from *Carica papaya* L. Crude latex containing the enzyme is collected from slashed unripe papaya. The food-grade product is obtained by repeated filtration of the crude latex or an aqueous solution of latex or by precipitation from an aqueous solution of latex. The resulting enzyme preparation may be used in a liquid or dry form.
( b ) The ingredient meets the specifications of the Food Chemicals Codex, 3d Ed. (1981), pp. 107-110, which is incorporated by reference. Copies are available from the National Academy Press, 2101 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20418, or available for inspection at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this material at NARA, call 202-741-6030, or go to: *http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/ibr_locations.html .*
( c ) In accordance with § 184.1(b)(1), the ingredient is used in food with no limitation other than current good manufacturing practice. The affirmation of this ingredient as generally recognized as safe (GRAS) as a direct human food ingredient is based upon the following current good manufacturing conditions of use: ( 1 ) The ingredient is used as an enzyme as defined in § 170.3(o)(9) of this chapter; processing aid as defined in § 170.3(o)(24) of this chapter; and texturizer as defined in § 170.3(o)(32) of this chapter.
( 2 ) The ingredient is used in food at levels not to exceed current good manufacturing practice.
( d ) Prior sanctions for this ingredient different from the uses established in this section do not exist or have been waived.
[48 FR 48806, Oct. 21, 1983]
#### § 26.48 Harmonization.

During both the transitional and operational phases of this subpart, both parties intend to continue to participate in the activities of the Global Harmonization Task Force (GHTF) and utilize the results of those activities to the extent possible. Such participation involves developing and reviewing documents developed by the GHTF and jointly determining whether they are applicable to the implementation of this subpart.
<PAGE>



                                                                  EXHIBIT 32 (b)


    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 Northland Cable Properties Seven
Limited Partnership (the "Partnership") on Form 10Q for the period ended
September 30, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the
date hereof (the "Form 10-Q"), I, Gary Jones, President of Northland
Communications Corporation, the General Partner, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that;


          (1)  The Form 10-Q fully complies with the requirements of Section 13
               (a) or (15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C.
               78m or 78(d)); and


          (2)  The information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents in all
               material respects, the financial condition and results of
               operations of the Partnership.


DATE: 11-12-04


/s/  GARY S. JONES
     -------------
     Gary S. Jones
     President


A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to Northland Cable Properties Seven Limited Partnership and will be
retained by Northland Cable Properties Seven Limited Partnership and furnished
to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
§ 348.1 Scope. ( a ) An over-the-counter external analgesic drug product in a form suitable for topical administration is generally recognized as safe and effective and is not misbranded if it meets each condition in this part and each general condition established in § 330.1 of this chapter.
( b ) References in this part to regulatory sections of the Code of Federal Regulations are to chapter I of title 21 unless otherwise noted.