alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 49.4281-1 Small aircraft on nonestablished lines. ( a ) *In general.* Amounts paid for the transportation of persons on a small aircraft of the type sometimes referred to as air taxis shall be exempt from the tax imposed under section 4261 of the Internal Revenue Code provided the aircraft has a maximum certificated takeoff weight of 6,000 pounds or less determined as provided in paragraph (b) of this section. The exemption does not apply, however, when the aircraft is operated on an established line or when the aircraft is a jet aircraft.
( b ) *Maximum certificated takeoff weight.* The term *maximum certificated takeoff weight* means the maximum certificated takeoff weight shown in the type certificate or airworthiness certificate issued by the Federal Aviation Administration.
( c ) *Established line.* The term “operated on an established line” means operated with some degree of regularity between definite points. It does not necessarily mean that strict regularity of schedule is maintained; that the full run is always made; that a particular route is followed; or that intermediate stops are restricted. The term implies that the person rendering the service maintains and exercises control over the direction, route, time, number of passengers carried, etc. An aircraft is not considered as operated on an established line at any time during which the aircraft is being operated on a flight the sole purpose of which is sightseeing.
( d ) *Jet aircraft.* For purposes of this section, the term *jet aircraft* does not include any aircraft which is a rotorcraft (such as a helicopter) or propeller aircraft.
( e ) *Applicability date.* This section applies to amounts paid on and January 19, 2021. For rules that apply before that date, *see* 26 CFR part 49, revised as of April 1, 2020.
[T.D. 6430, 24 FR 9665, Dec. 3, 1959. Redesignated by T.D. 6618, 27 FR 11226, Nov. 14, 1962. Further redesignated and amended by T.D. 9948, 86 FR 5007, Jan. 19, 2021]
Presidential Documents

39871 

Federal Register 

Vol. 74, No. 152 

Monday, August 10, 2009 

Title 3— 

The President 

Memorandum of August 5, 2009 

Designation of Officers of the Office of Science and 

Technology Policy to Act as Director 

Memorandum for the Director of the Office of Science and Technology 

Policy 

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the 

laws of the United States of America, including the Federal Vacancies Reform 

Act of 1998, 5 U.S.C. 3345 et seq., it is hereby ordered that: 

Section 1. Order of Succession. Subject to the provisions of section 2 of 

this memorandum, the following officials of the Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP), in the order listed, shall act as and perform the 

functions and duties of the office of the Director of OSTP (Director), during 

any period in which the Director has died, resigned, or otherwise become 

unable to perform the functions and duties of the office of the Director, 

until such time as the Director is able to perform the functions and duties 

of that office: 

(a) Associate Director (National Security and International Affairs); 

(b) Associate Director (Technology); 

(c) Associate Director (Science); and 

(d) Associate Director (Environment). 

Sec. 2. Exceptions. 

(a) No individual who is serving in an office listed in section 1 in an 

acting capacity, by virtue of so serving, shall act as Director pursuant to 

this memorandum. 

(b) No individual listed in section 1 shall act as Director unless that individual is otherwise eligible to so serve under the Federal Vacancies Reform 

Act of 1998. 

(c) Notwithstanding the provisions of this memorandum, the President retains 

the discretion, to the extent permitted by law, to depart from this memorandum in designating an acting Director. 

Sec. 3. Revocation. The President’s memorandum of December 11, 2002 

(Designation of Officers of the Office of Science and Technology Policy 

to Act as Director), is hereby revoked. 


rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES6
39872 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 152 / Monday, August 10, 2009 / Presidential Documents 

Sec. 4. This memorandum is intended to improve the internal management 

of the executive branch and is not intended to, and does not, create any 

right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity 

by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, 

its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person. 

Sec. 5. You are authorized and directed to publish this memorandum in 

the Federal Register. 

THE WHITE HOUSE, 

Washington, August 5, 2009. 

[FR Doc. E9–19231 

Filed 8–7–09; 8:45 am] 

Billing code 3170–W9–P 


rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES6OB#1.EPS</GPH>
ELECTRONIC RECORD

3tt-/S"

COA # 14-14-00209-CR OFFENSE: Aggravated Robbery

STYLE: Jonathan Glen Johnson v The State of Texas COUNTY: Harris

COA DISPOSITION: Affirmed rd TRIAL COURT: 263m District Court

DATE: March 10, 2015 Publish: No TC CASE #:1377006

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

STYLE: Jonathan Glen Johnson v The State of Texas

CCA #

CCA Disposition:

DATE:

JUDGE:

SIGNED:

PUBLISH:

?kO 5/E Petition w-/r

FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW IN CCA IS: . —a*?-^

OATF: Scjk 2fi 2*>/f

. / s

JUDGE: /&

PC:

DNP:

MOTION FOR

FOR REHEARING

JUDGE:

i IN CCA IS:

ELECTRONIC RECORD
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.                  

###### Department of Defense

###### Office of the Secretary

          - [Transmittal Nos. 09-27]

# AGENCY:

Department of Defense, Defense Security Cooperation Agency.

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

The Department of Defense is publishing the unclassified text of a section 36(b)(1) arms sales notification. This is published to fulfill the requirements of section 155 of Public Law 104-164 dated 21 July 1996.

      ( print page 39941)    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Ms. B. English, DSCA/DBO/CFM, (703) 601-3740.

The following is a copy of a letter to the Speaker of the House of Representatives, Transmittals 09-27 with attached transmittal, policy justification, and Sensitivity of Technology.

Dated: July 28, 2009.

Patricia L. Toppings,

OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.

      ( print page 39942)          ( print page 39943)    

BILLING CODE 5001-06-M

[FR Doc. E9-18963 Filed 8-7-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 5001-06-C
#### Double Diamond Equity, Inc., Respondent, v Nunzio Valerie, Appellant.

[807 NYS2d 762]

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Erie County (Christopher J. Burns, J.), entered October 20, 2004. The order denied defendant’s motion to vacate a default judgment.

It is hereby ordered that the order so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed with costs.

Memorandum: Upon defendant’s default, Supreme Court granted plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment in lieu of complaint *(see*CPLR 3213), pursuant to which plaintiff sought the amount due under a promissory note and guaranty executed by defendant. Although defendant properly moved to vacate the judgment granting plaintiffs motion rather than taking an ap*1104peal from it *(see*CPLR 5015 [a] [1]; *Ross Bicycles v Citibank,*134 AD2d 181, 182 [1987]; *see also Marquise Collection v M.A.S. Textiles Corp.,*239 AD2d 470 [1997]), we nevertheless conclude that he failed to establish his entitlement to that relief. “A court may vacate a default where the moving party demonstrates both a reasonable excuse for the default and the existence of a meritorious defense” *(Matter of Macias v Motor Veh. Acc. Indem. Corp.,*10 AD3d 396, 397 [2004]). Defendant’s own submissions establish that the default was intentional and thus not excusable *(see Eretz Funding v Shalosh Assoc.,*266 AD2d 184, 185 [1999]; *P & K Marble v Pearce,*168 AD2d 439 [1990]), and defendant failed to establish the existence of a meritorious defense *(see Gittleson v Dempster,*148 AD2d 578, 579 [1989], *lv denied*74 NY2d 603 [1989]). Present—Pigott, Jr., P.J., Green, Hurlbutt, Gorski and Smith, JJ.
§ 55.6694-4 Extension of period of collection when tax return preparer pays 15 percent of a penalty for understatement of taxpayer's liability and certain other procedural matters. ( a ) *In general.* For rules relating to the extension of period of collection when a tax return preparer who prepared a return or claim for refund for excise tax under chapter 44 of subtitle D of the Internal Revenue Code pays 15 percent of a penalty for understatement of taxpayer's liability and procedural matters relating to the investigation, assessment and collection of the penalties under section 6694(a) and (b), the rules under § 1.6694-4 of this chapter will apply.
( b ) *Effective/applicability date.* This section is applicable to returns and claims for refund filed, and advice provided, after December 31, 2008.
[T.D. 9436, 73 FR 78460, Dec. 22, 2008]
§ 41.6107-1 Tax return preparer must furnish copy of return to taxpayer and must retain a copy or record. ( a ) *In general.* A person who is a signing tax return preparer of any return or claim for refund of excise tax under section 4481 shall furnish a completed copy of the return or claim for refund to the taxpayer and retain a completed copy or record in the manner stated in § 1.6107-1 of this chapter.
( b ) *Effective/applicability date.* This section is applicable for returns and claims for refund filed after December 31, 2008.
[T.D. 9436, 73 FR 78455, Dec. 22, 2008]
#### § 1010.315 Exemptions for non-bank financial institutions.

A non-bank financial institution is not required to file a report otherwise required by § 1010.311 with respect to a transaction in currency between the institution and a commercial bank.
| (logo) WELLS FARGO | **Corporate Trust Services**

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

 

 

Morgan Stanley Capital I Inc. 

1585 BROADWAY

NEW YORK, New York 10036-8200

 

Re:          Annual Statement of Compliance for Morgan Stanley Capital I Inc. CommercialMortgage Pass Through Certificates, Series 2016-BNK2

 

Per the Pooling and ServicingAgreement dated as of November 1, 2016 (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's activities during the Reporting Period and of itsperformance under the Agreement has been made under such officer's supervision;and

 

(b)     Tothe best of such officer's knowledge, based on such review, Wells Fargo hasfulfilled all of its obligations under the Agreement in all material respectsthroughout the Reporting Period.

 

 

February 27, 2017

  

 

/s/ Brian Smith

BRIAN SMITH

Vice President

 

 

| Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. | (logo) Together we’ll  go far |
|------------------------|-------------------------------------|
# L_2022008DE.01019201.xml

| 13.1.2022 | DE | Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union | L 8/192 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.1.2022

DE

Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union

L 8/192

---

Berichtigung der Durchführungsverordnung (EU) 2019/317 der Kommission vom 11. Februar 2019 zur Festlegung eines Leistungssystems und einer Gebührenregelung für den einheitlichen europäischen Luftraum und zur Aufhebung der Durchführungsverordnungen (EU) Nr. 390/2013 und (EU) Nr. 391/2013

(
  Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union L 56 vom 25. Februar 2019
  )

Seite 55, Anhang VIII Nummer 1.3:

Anstatt:

| „1.3. | Der Faktor ‚Gewicht‘ entspricht der auf zwei Dezimalstellen berechneten Quadratwurzel der durch fünfzig geteilten Zahl, die das in Tonnen ausgedrückte, auf zwei Dezimalstellen berechnete und im Flughandbuch eingetragene höchstzulässige Startgewicht des Luftfahrzeugs angibt.“ |
| --- | --- |

„1.3.

Der Faktor ‚Gewicht‘ entspricht der auf zwei Dezimalstellen berechneten Quadratwurzel der durch fünfzig geteilten Zahl, die das in Tonnen ausgedrückte, auf zwei Dezimalstellen berechnete und im Flughandbuch eingetragene höchstzulässige Startgewicht des Luftfahrzeugs angibt.“

muss es heißen:

| „1.3. | Der Faktor ‚Gewicht‘ entspricht der auf zwei Dezimalstellen berechneten Quadratwurzel der durch fünfzig geteilten Zahl, die das in Tonnen ausgedrückte, auf eine Dezimalstelle berechnete und im Flughandbuch eingetragene höchstzulässige Startgewicht des Luftfahrzeugs angibt.“ |
| --- | --- |

„1.3.

Der Faktor ‚Gewicht‘ entspricht der auf zwei Dezimalstellen berechneten Quadratwurzel der durch fünfzig geteilten Zahl, die das in Tonnen ausgedrückte, auf eine Dezimalstelle berechnete und im Flughandbuch eingetragene höchstzulässige Startgewicht des Luftfahrzeugs angibt.“

---
#### Sang Hyun Ban, Appellant, v Sunjin Shipping USA, Inc. et al., Respondents.

[805 NYS2d 620]

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals, as limited by his brief, from so much' of an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Satterfield, J.), dated February 25, 2005, as denied that branch of his motion which was for summary judgment on the issue of liability on the cause *453of action alleging violation of Labor Law § 240 (1), and granted that branch of the defendants’ cross motion which was for summary judgment dismissing the causes of action alleging violations of Labor Law § 200 and common-law negligence insofar as asserted against the defendant Sunjin Shipping USA, Inc.

Ordered that the order is modified, on the law, by deleting the provision thereof granting that branch of the cross motion which was for summary judgment dismissing the causes of action alleging violations of Labor Law § 200 and common-law negligence insofar as asserted against the defendant Sunjin Shipping USA, Inc., and substituting therefor a provision denying that branch of the cross motion; as so modified, the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements, and the causes of action alleging violations of Labor Law § 200 and common-law negligence are reinstated insofar as asserted against the defendant Sunjin Shipping USA, Inc.

The plaintiff failed to establish, prima facie, the absence of a triable issue of fact as to whether, at the time of the accident, he was engaged in the alteration or repair of a building or structure within the meaning of Labor Law § 240 (1) *(see Friscia v New Plan Realty Trust,*267 AD2d 197 [1999]; *see also Kretzschmar v New York State Urban Dev. Corp.,*13 AD3d 270 [2004]; *Acosta v Banco Popular,*308 AD2d 48 [2003]; *cf. Weininger v Hagedorn & Co.,*91 NY2d 958 [1998]). Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly denied that branch of the plaintiffs motion which was for summary judgment on the issue of liability on the cause of action alleging violation of Labor Law § 240 (1).

The court erred, however, in granting summary judgment to the defendant Sunjin Shipping USA, Inc. (hereinafter Sunjin), dismissing the plaintiff’s Labor Law § 200 and common-law negligence causes of action insofar as asserted against it. Sunjin failed to establish, prima facie, that it had no notice of the hazardous condition that allegedly caused the accident *(see Ciesielski v Buffalo Indus. Park,*299 AD2d 817, 818-819 [2002]; *Scotti v Federation Dev. Corp.,*289 AD2d 322, 323-324 [2001]).

In light of our determination, we do not reach the parties’ remaining contentions. Florio, J.P., Goldstein, Fisher and Covello, JJ., concur.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                      16,761,000
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                              232,728,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                 9,450,000
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                           276,874,000
<PP&E>                                      48,410,000
<DEPRECIATION>                              37,208,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             365,973,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                      162,976,000
<BONDS>                                    156,519,000<F1>
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       223,000
<OTHER-SE>                                  34,669,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               365,973,000
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                         1,248,443,000<F2>
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                            1,100,742,000    
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                             1,881,000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                          17,334,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             14,484,000
<INCOME-TAX>                                 2,607,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          5,834,000
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 5,834,000
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.17
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.17
<FN>
<F1>Excludes current portion of bonds, mortgages, and similar debt.
<F2>Represents gross revenue which includes costs of certain services
subcontracted to third parties and other reimbursable direct project costs, such
as materials procured by the Company on behalf of its customers.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
IA

104TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. J. RES. 191

To confer honorary citizenship of the United States on Agnes Gonxha

Bojahiu, also known as Mother Teresa.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

SEPTEMBER 10, 1996

Mr. FLANAGAN (for himself, Mr. BRYANT of Tennessee, Mr. CANADY of Florida, Mr. HEINEMAN, Mr. HOKE, and Mr. HYDE) introduced the following

joint resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

JOINT RESOLUTION

To confer honorary citizenship of the United States on Agnes

Gonxha Bojahiu, also known as Mother Teresa.

Whereas the United States has conferred honorary citizenship

on only three occasions in its more than two hundred

years, and honorary citizenship is and should remain an

extraordinary honor not lightly conferred nor frequently

granted;

Whereas Agnes Gonxha Bojahiu, better known throughout

the world as Mother Teresa, has worked tirelessly with

orphaned and abandoned children, the poor, the sick, and

the dying;

Whereas Mother Teresa founded the Missionaries of Charity

in 1950, and has taken in those who have been rejected
2

•HJ 191 IH

as ‘‘unacceptable’’ and cared for them when no one else

would, regardless of race, color, creed, or condition;

Whereas Mother Teresa has deservedly received numerous

honors, including the 1979 Nobel Peace Prize and the

1985 Presidential Medal of Freedom;

Whereas Mother Teresa has worked in areas all over the

world, including the United States, to provide comfort to

the world’s neediest; and

Whereas Mother Teresa through her Missionaries of Charity

has established within the United States numerous soup

kitchens, emergency shelters for women, shelters for

unwed mothers, shelters for men, after-school and summer camp programs for children, homes for the dying,

prison ministry, nursing homes, and hospital and shut-in

ministry: Now, therefore, be it

1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives

2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 That Agnes Gonxha Bojahiu, also known as Mother Te4 resa, is proclaimed to be an honorary citizen of the United

5 States of America.

Æ
#### § 521.107 Income from operation of ships or aircraft.

The income derived from the operation of ships or aircraft registered in Denmark by a nonresident alien who is a resident of Denmark, or by a Danish corporation, and carrying on an enterprise in Denmark, is, for taxable years beginning on or after January 1, 1948, exempt from United States income tax under the provisions of Article V of the convention.
-78 -76 -74 -72

 38

 40

★

▲

▲

▲ ▲

★

▲

▲ ▲ ▲

 500

 1000

 1500

 100

18 12 06 00

07/20

NOAA HYSPLIT MODEL

 Backward trajectory ending at 2300 UTC 20 Jul 06

 EDAS Meteorological Data

Source

★ at 38.92 N 77.01 W Meters AGL

★

■

■

■

■

★ ■

■ ■ ■

★

●●●

●

★ ●

● ● ●
#### § 48.4041-12 Sales by United States, etc.

The taxes imposed by section 4041 apply to the sale at retail of taxable liquid fuels by the United States or by any agency or instrumentality of the United States, unless by statute specifically exempted from these taxes. However, the exemptions from these taxes provided by section 4041 (f), (g), and (h) and the regulations thereunder contained in this subpart F are available to the extent therein provided.

[T.D. 8066, 51 FR 20, Jan. 2, 1986]
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 22
- 0722 STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee, v. BRYAN NEIL ARVIDSON,

Defendant and Appellant .

**ORDER** Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension of time to and including July 1 9 , 2023 , within which to prepare, file, and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

June 13 2023

06/13/2023

Case Number: DA 22-0722
www.gpo.gov

### §1073. Tax exemption; payments to minors and persons under legal disabilities

None of the funds distributed per capita under the provisions of this subchapter shall be subject to Federal or State income tax. Any per capita share payable to a person under twenty-one years of age or to a person under legal disability shall be paid in accordance with such procedures, including the establishment of trusts, as the Secretary determines will adequately protect the best interest of such persons.

(Pub. L. 92–244, §2, Mar. 9, 1972, 86 Stat. 57.)