alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
October 15, 2015

Mr. Rex J. Sanders

Rex Sanders Aerial Photography and Videography

14335 State Route 139

Minford, OH 45653

Dear Mr. Sanders:

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

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

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

Why We Cannot Process Your Request

We received your exemption request, posted to the public docket on July 24, 2015, filed in 

Docket No. FAA−2015−3205, but we are unable to process your request any further. Your 

petition does not comply with the requirements of § 11.81 (copy enclosed). For us to consider 

the request any further, you must send us all of the following:

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

the relief you seek.

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

benefit the public as a whole.

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

For more detailed information relating to submitting petitions for exemption, please visit 

http://aes.faa.gov/petition/index.html. This website helps the petitioner to meet Federal 

Aviation Administration (FAA) requirement outlines in § 11.81 and helps answer any 

questions you may have.

What You Should Do

If you want us to process your request any further, you must submit the requested information 

within 30 days. Please note that § 11.63(d) requires you to send your petition for exemption 

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

If We Do Not Hear From You

If we do not receive the information, we will close the docket without notifying you further. 

If you have any questions you may call the 333 Information Line (202) 267-2999.

Sincerely,

/s/

Brittany Newton

Program Analyst, Airmen and

 Airspace Rules Division

Enclosures
3
4
Editorial Note on Part 862
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 862 appear at 73 FR 35341, June 23, 2008.

§ 862.2320 Beta or gamma counter for clinical use. ( a ) *Identification.* A beta or gamma counter for clinical use is a device intended to detect and count beta or gamma radiation emitted by clinical samples. Clinical samples are prepared by addition of a radioactive reagent to the sample. These measurements are useful in the diagnosis and treatment of various disorders.
( b ) *Classification.* Class I (general controls). The device is exempt from the premarket notification procedures in subpart E of part 807 of this chapter subject to the limitations in § 862.9.
[52 FR 16122, May 1, 1987, as amended at 60 FR 38900, July 28, 1995; 66 FR 38788, July 25, 2001]
T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by9th C i r . R . 36- 3.

T he pane l unani m ous l yc onc l ude s thi s c a s e i s s ui t abl e f orde c i s i on ** w ith o u t o r a l ar g u m e n t. See F ed. R . A pp . P . 34 (a )( 2). NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T FE LI X G UI LL EN GO NZALEZ , P et i t i on er , v. E R I C H . H O L D E R , J r ., A tto rn e yG e n e r a l, R e s p o n d e n t. N o. 08- 72831 A ge nc yN o. A 070- 967- 208 ME MOR AN DU M *

O n P e t i t i on f

orR e vi e w of

an O r de rof

the B o ar do f I m m ig r a tio n A p p e a ls S ubm i tt e d June 15, 2011 ** B efo re: C A N B Y , O ’ S C A N N L A IN , an dF IS H E R , C i rcu i tJu d g es. F e l i x G ui l l e n G onz a l e z , ana t i ve and c i t i z e n of G ua t e m a l a , pe t i t i ons f

or re vi ew of the B oard of Im m i grat i on A pp ea l s’ (“ B IA ”) deci si on af fi rm i ng an im m ig r a tio n ju d g e ’s d e n ia l o f h is ap p lic a tio n f

o ra s y lu m , w ith h o ld in g o f r e m o v a l, and r e l i e f

unde rthe C onve nt i on A ga i ns tT ortur e ( “ C A T ” ) . W e ha ve j ur i s di c t i on 

# FI LED JU N 29 2011 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS08- 72831 2 un der 8 U . S . C . § 1 25 2. W e r evi ew for s ub st ant i alevi dence the B IA ’ s f ac tual fi n d i n g s an dw i l l up h o l dth e B IA ’ s d eci si o n u n l ess th e ev i d en ce co m p el s a c o n tr aryc o n c lu s io n . I

N S v . E l i as - Zac ar i as , 5 0 2 U .S . 4 7 8 , 4 8 1 n .1 ( 1 9 9 2 ) . W e d e n yth e p e t i t i o n f

o rr e v i e w. S ubs t ant i a l e vi de nc e s upport s the B I A ’ s de ni a l of a s y l um and w i thhol di ng of r e m ova l be c aus e G onz a l e z f a i l e d t o e s t abl i s h tha the w a s harm e d ori s a tr i s k of b e in g h arm e do n a c c o u n t o f an yp r o te c te dg r o u n d . Se e E l i as - Zac ar i as , 50 2 U . S . at 4 8 3 - 8 4 . S ub st an t i al ev i d en ce al so sup p o rt s th e B IA ’ s d en i al o f C A T rel i ef b ecau se G onz a l e z f

a i l e d t o de m ons tr a t e tha the w oul d be t ortur e d byorw i th the a c q u ie s c e n c e o f

th e G u a te m a lan g o v e rn m e n t. Se e Zh e n gv . A s h c r o ft , 332 F . 3d 11 86 , 11 94 (9th C i r. 20 03 ). P E T I T I ON F OR RE V I E W DE NI E D.
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 46 (Wednesday, March 10, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Page 11197]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-5032]


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

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Antitrust Division


Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and 
Production Act of 1993--Pistoia Alliance, Inc.

    Notice is hereby given that, on January 27, 2010, pursuant to 
section 6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 
1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301 et seq. (``the Act'') Pistoia Alliance, Inc. has 
filed written notifications simultaneously with the Attorney General 
and the Federal Trade Commission disclosing changes in its membership. 
The notifications were filed for the purpose of extending the Act's 
provisions limiting the recovery of antitrust plaintiffs to actual 
damages' under specified circumstances. Specifically, Infosys 
Technologies Ltd., Bridgewater, NJ; CambridgeSoft, San Diego, CA; 
Merck, Boston, MA; Collaborative Drug Discovery, Burlingame, CA; Royal 
Society of Chemistry, Cambridge, UNITED KINGDOM; Thomson Reuters 
HealthCare and Science, Philadelphia, PA; and EMBL/EBI, Hinxton, 
Cambridge, UNITED KINGDOM have been added as parties to this venture.
    No other changes have been made in either the membership or planned 
activity of the group research project. Membership in this group 
research project remains open, and intends to file additional written 
notifications disclosing all changes in membership.
    On May 28, 2009, Pistola Alliance, Inc. filed its original 
notification pursuant to Section 6(a) of the Act. The Department of 
Justice published a notice in the Federal Register pursuant to section 
6(b) of the Act on July 15, 2009 (74 FR 34364).
    The last notification was filed with the Department on November 4, 
2009. A notice was published in the Federal Register pursuant to 
section 6(b) of the Act on December 9, 2009 (74 FR 65157).

Patricia A. Brink,
Deputy Director of Operations, Antitrust Division.
[FR Doc. 2010-5032 Filed 3-9-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-11-M
<TABLE> <S> <C>

        <S> <C>
<ARTICLE>   5
<LEGEND>
                  This schedule contains summary information extracted from
                  the Statements of Operations and Balance Sheets of Brown
                  Disc Products Company, Inc. and is qualified in its entirety
                  by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<CIK>          0000855373
<NAME>         BROWN DISC PRODUCTS COMPANY, INC.
<MULTIPLIER>   1
<S>                                   <C>         
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>   Jun-30-1997 
<PERIOD-START>                        Jul-01-1996 
<PERIOD-END>  Mar-31-1997 
<PERIOD-TYPE> 9-MOS 
<CASH>           26,438 
<SECURITIES>      0 
<RECEIVABLES>  210,981 
<ALLOWANCES>   41,778 
<INVENTORY>                                16,304 
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                          230,145 
<PP&E>         1,495,169 
<DEPRECIATION>                          1,353,593 
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                            381,412 
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                     615,790 
<BONDS>       330,193 
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                     136,306 
<PREFERRED>                                26,368 
<COMMON>                                1,957,901 
<OTHER-SE>                             (2,685,146)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>              381,412 
<SALES>       1,129,107 
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                        1,129,107 
<CGS>                                     731,794 
<TOTAL-COSTS> 990,907                                                                        
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                           (2,686)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                0 
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>10,988 
<INCOME-PRETAX>                          (601,896)
<INCOME-TAX>      0 
<INCOME-CONTINUING>(601,896)
<DISCONTINUED>                                  0 
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                 0 
<CHANGES>                                       0 
<NET-INCOME>  (604,504)
<EPS-PRIMARY>  (.11)
<EPS-DILUTED>  (.11)

        

</TABLE>
**Exhibit
      32.02**








**CERTIFICATION
      OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER**


**REQUIRED
      BY RULE 13a-14(b) or RULE 15d-14(b)**


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


**OF
      2002, 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350**








In
      connection with the Quarterly Report of Williams Controls, Inc (the "Company")
      on Form 10-Q for the period ended June
      30,
      2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
      (the "Report"), I, Dennis E. Bunday, Chief Financial Officer of the Company,
      certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 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/
      DENNIS E. BUNDAY


Dennis
      E.
      Bunday


Chief
      Financial Officer


Williams
      Controls, Inc.


August
      10, 2007
Docket No: FAA - 2014 - 1052 Dir ID: 2014 - NM - 140 -AD
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Federal Reserve System

The notificants listed below have applied under the Change in Bank Control Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)) and § 225.41 of the Board’s Regulation Y (12 CFR 225.41) to acquire a bank or bank holding company. The factors that are considered in acting on the notices are set forth in paragraph 7 of the Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)(7)).

The notices are available for immediate inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank indicated. The notices also will be available for inspection at the office of the Board of Governors. Interested persons may express their views in writing to the Reserve Bank indicated for that notice or to the offices of the Board of Governors. Comments must be received not later than March 23, 2010.

**A. Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas**                     (E. Ann Worthy, Vice President) 2200 North Pearl Street, Dallas, Texas 75201-2272:                

*1. Clarence D. Ballard*, Winnsboro, Texas; to acquire voting shares of Sulphur Springs Bancshares, Inc., and thereby indirectly acquire voting shares of The City National Bank of Sulphur Springs, both of Sulphur Springs, Texas.                

Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, March 3, 2010.

Jennifer J. Johnson,

Secretary of the Board.

[FR Doc. 2010-4795 Filed 3-5-10; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6210-01-S
# C_2018104EN.01002402.xml

| 19.3.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 104/24 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.3.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 104/24

---

Judgment of the General Court of 1 February 2018 — Larko v Commission

(Case T-423/14) (1)

1

((State aid - Aid implemented by Greece - Decision declaring the aid incompatible with the internal market - Concept of State aid - Advantage - Private investor test - Amount of aid to be recovered - Commission Notice on State aid in the form of guarantees))

(2018/C 104/31)

Language of the case: Greek

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Larko Geniki Metalleftiki kai Metallourgiki AE (Athens, Greece) (represented by: I. Dryllerakis, I. Soufleros, E. Triantafyllou, G. Psaroudakis, E. Rantos and N. Korogiannakis, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: A. Bouchagiar and É. Gippini Fournier, Agents)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Application pursuant to Article 263 TFEU seeking annulment of Commission Decision 2014/539/EU of 27 March 2014 on the State aid SA.34572 (20113/C) (ex 13/NN) implemented by Greece for Larco General Mining & Metallurgical Company S.A. (OJ 2014 L 254, p. 24).

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Larko Geniki Metalleftiki kai Metallourgiki AE to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Larko Geniki Metalleftiki kai Metallourgiki AE to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 292, 1.9.2014.

1

---
Editorial Note on Part 880
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 880 appear at 73 FR 35341, June 23, 2008.

§ 880.3 Effective dates of requirement for premarket approval. A device included in this part that is classified into class III (premarket approval) shall not be commercially distributed after the date shown in the regulation classifying the device unless the manufacturer has an approval under section 515 of the act (unless an exemption has been granted under section 520(g)(2) of the act). An approval under section 515 of the act consists of FDA's issuance of an order approving an application for premarket approval (PMA) for the device or declaring completed a product development protocol (PDP) for the device. ( a ) Before FDA requires that a device commercially distributed before the enactment date of the amendments, or a device that has been found substantially equivalent to such a device, has an approval under section 515 of the act FDA must promulgate a regulation under section 515(b) of the act requiring such approval, except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section. Such a regulation under section 515(b) of the act shall not be effective during the grace period ending on the 90th day after its promulgation or on the last day of the 30th full calendar month after the regulation that classifies the device into class III is effective, whichever is later. See section 501(f)(2)(B) of the act. Accordingly, unless an effective date of the requirement for premarket approval is shown in the regulation for a device classified into class III in this part, the device may be commercially distributed without FDA's issuance of an order approving a PMA or declaring completed a PDP for the device. If FDA promulgates a regulation under section 515(b) of the act requiring premarket approval for a device, section 501(f)(1)(A) of the act applies to the device.
( b ) Any new, not substantially equivalent, device introduced into commercial distribution on or after May 28, 1976, including a device formerly marketed that has been substantially altered, is classified by statute (section 513(f) of the act) into class III without any grace period and FDA must have issued an order approving a PMA or declaring completed a PDP for the device before the device is commercially distributed unless it is reclassified. If FDA knows that a device being commercially distributed may be a “new” devices defined in this section because of any new intended use or other reasons, FDA may codify the statutory classification of the device into class III for such new use. Accordingly, the regulation for such a class III device states that as of the enactment date of the amendments, May 28, 1976, the device must have an approval under section 515 of the act before commercial distribution.
[52 FR 17738, May 11, 1987]
### 1



### Assessing	the	Effect	of	Five	Gasoline	Properties	on	Exhaust	Emissions	from	Light ****

**Duty	Vehicles	certified	to	Tier -**  **2	Standards Analysis**  **of	Data	from	EPA	Phase	3 (EPAct/V2/E**  **- 89)**  

## Appendix **Q .4**  **Model	Fitting	Information	for** 

## Ethane **(Bag	2)**

This appendix summarizes model fitting for Bag-2 Ethane . Model - fitting techniques and approaches summarized in Section 8 .7 . Features of the data and modeling for this compound are listed below. Fuel -parameter matrix: REDUCED Media contamination: NO No. me asurements: 62 No. censored values: 1 Modeling approach: MIXED MODEL Estimated Dependent Variable model: NO

### 2 **Models fit for Bag -**  **2 Ethane**  Model term Notation Model Full FM1 etOH Z

e ● × Arom Z

a ● ● T50 Z

5 ● ● T90 Z

9 ● ● 1 Indicates “Full minus 1,” etc. 

### Fitting history for Bag**- 2**  **Ethane –**  **with “ F** **M 1**  **” selected as best fit model.** 

### Fit Parameters Test with respect to Full Test with respect to Previous Model 

### Model p -2 ln

L BIC 1 

### Dev. 1 

### d Pr>χ 2 

### Dev. d Pr>χ 2 Full 5 84.42 95.68 0.6829 1 0.41 F M1 4 85.96 95.62 2.2256 2 0.33 1.54 1 0.21 1 A lower value indicates a better fit. 1 The deviation is the difference in the - 2loglik statistics for the nested and reference models, respectively, per 

### Error! Reference source not found.

. 

### Coefficients and Type**- III Tests of Effect for the**  **Full and Best** **- Fit Models**  **– Ethane**  **(Bag 2**  **).** Effect Full Model Best-Fit Model ( MM 1 ) Estimate Std.Err. d.f. t-value Pr> t Estimate Std.Err. d.f. t- value Pr> t Intercept - 7.724 1 0.7325 5.00 - 10.5 0.00013 - 7.7241 0.7320 5.00 - 10.55 0.00013 Z e 0.0 7345 0.05873 57.00 1.25 0.22 Z a - 0.1260 0.05151 57.00 - 2.45 0.018 - 0.1092 0.05041 57.00 - 2.17 0.034 Z 5 0.1815 0.05727 57.00 3.17 0.0025 0.1452 0.05006 57.00 2.90 0.0053 Z 9 0.1322 0.04994 57.00 2.65 0.010 0.1270 0.05044 57.00 2.52 0.015 2 veh 

###  2.6785 2.6669 2  

###  0.1458 0.1517
Editorial Note on Part 888
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 888 appear at 73 FR 35341, June 23, 2008.

§ 888.3530 Knee joint femorotibial metal/polymer semi-constrained cemented prosthesis. ( a ) *Identification.* A knee joint femorotibial metal/polymer semi-constrained cemented prosthesis is a device intended to be implanted to replace part of a knee joint. The device limits translation and rotation in one or more planes via the geometry of its articulating surfaces. It has no linkage across-the-joint. This generic type of device includes prostheses that consist of a femoral component made of alloys, such as cobalt-chromium-molybdenum, and a tibial component made of ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene and is limited to those prostheses intended for use with bone cement (§ 888.3027).
( b ) *Classification.* Class II.
#### § 1.1-3 Change in rates applicable to taxable year.

For computation of the tax for a taxable year during which a change in the tax rates occurs, see section 21 and the regulations thereunder.

[T.D. 6500, 25 FR 11402, Nov. 26, 1960. Redesignated by T.D. 7117, 36 FR 9397, May 25, 1971]
§ 876.4400 Hemorrhoidal ligator. ( a ) *Identification.* A hemorrhoidal ligator is a device used to cut off the blood flow to hemorrhoidal tissue by means of a ligature or band placed around the hemorrhoid.
( b ) *Classification.* Class II (special controls). Except for a hemostatic metal clip intended for use in the gastrointestinal tract, the device is exempt from the premarket notification procedures in subpart E of part 807 of this chapter subject to the limitations in § 876.9.
[48 FR 53023, Nov. 23, 1983, as amended at 84 FR 71813, Dec. 30, 2019]
# C_2015065EN.01003801.xml

| 23.2.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 65/38 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.2.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 65/38

---

Action brought on 28 November 2014 — MPF Holdings v Commission

(Case T-788/14)

(2015/C 065/52)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: MPF Holdings Ltd (St Helier, Jersey) (represented by: D. Piccinin and E. Whiteford, Barristers, and E. Gibson-Bolton, Solicitor)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Commission

Defendant:

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the contested decision; and |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the contested decision; and

| — | order the Commission to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the Commission to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

By its action the applicant seeks the annulment of the Commission’s Decision C(2014) 5083 final of 23 July 2014 in case SA.35980 (2014/N-2) — United Kingdom, Electricity Market Reform — Capacity Market.

In support of the action, the applicant relies on one single plea in law alleging that the Commission unlawfully deprived MPF of its right to participate in the formal investigation procedure by failing to open a formal investigation under Article 108(2) TFEU and Article 4(4) of the Procedural Regulation, notwithstanding that the capacity market gives rise to doubts as to its compatibility with the internal market. The applicant submits that:

| — | the discriminatory availability of long contract durations cannot be justified by reference to the legitimate objective of procuring the necessary amount of generation capacity; |
| --- | --- |

—

the discriminatory availability of long contract durations cannot be justified by reference to the legitimate objective of procuring the necessary amount of generation capacity;

| — | the Commission failed adequately to investigate the likely effects of the discriminatory availability of long contract durations on the efficiency of the capacity market and on the owners of existing plants; |
| --- | --- |

—

the Commission failed adequately to investigate the likely effects of the discriminatory availability of long contract durations on the efficiency of the capacity market and on the owners of existing plants;

| — | the Commission failed adequately to investigate the United Kingdom Government’s purported justification for discriminatory contract durations, namely that independent generators that rely on project finance require long term contracts; |
| --- | --- |

—

the Commission failed adequately to investigate the United Kingdom Government’s purported justification for discriminatory contract durations, namely that independent generators that rely on project finance require long term contracts;

| — | the Commission failed to justify or adequately to investigate the likely effects of the discriminatory price-taker/price-maker distinction. |
| --- | --- |

—

the Commission failed to justify or adequately to investigate the likely effects of the discriminatory price-taker/price-maker distinction.

---