alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
AFS-12-437-E July 9, 2012

Exemption No. 10584 Regulatory Docket No. FAA-2012-0647

Mr. Curtis Yelm Parent of Cody Yelm

518 South Fifth Street Princeton, IL 61356

Dear Mr. Yelm:

This letter is to inform you that we have granted your request for exemption. It transmits our decision, explains its basis, and lists the conditions and limitations of the exemption, including the date it ends.

The Basis for Our Decision

By letter received June 10, 2012, you petitioned the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) on behalf of Cody Yelm for an exemption fr om § 121.311(b)(2)(iii)(B) of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR). That exemp tion, if granted, would allow Cody Yelm to exceed the specified weight limit for an FAA-approved child restraint system (CAReS, manufactured by AmSafe Corporation) during use of that child restraint system (CRS) aboard a United States (U.S.) aircraft.

The FAA has determined that good cause exists for not publishing a summary of the petition in the Federal Register because the requested exemption would not set a precedent and any delay in acting on this petition would be detrimental to Cody Yelm.

The FAA has issued grants of exemption in circumstances similar in all material respects to those presented in your petition. In Grant of Exemption No. 9834 (copy enclosed), the FAA found that numerous people with physical challenges had previously completed flights using restraint systems that addressed unique physical needs regarding safety, support, and security2

in the same manner of operations as described in this petition. The FAA further found that the petition, if granted, would not set any new precedents regarding the use of restraint systems by persons with disabilities.

Having reviewed your reasons for requesting an exemption, I find that—

 they do not differ materially from those presented by the petitioner in the enclosed grant.

 the reasons stated by the FAA for granting the enclosed exemption also apply to the situation you present; and

 a grant of exemption is in the public interest.

Our Decision

Under the authority contained in 49 U.S.C. 40113 and 44701, which the FAA Administrator has delegated to me, I hereby grant Cody Yelm exemption from 14 CFR § 121.311(b)(2)(iii)(B). In addition, any air carrier or commercial operator operating under part 121 while Cody Yelm is aboard its aircraft is granted an exemption from 14 CFR § 121.311(b)(2)(iii)(B) to the extent necessary to allow Cody Yelm to exceed the specified weight limit for an FAA-approved CRS during use of that CRS aboard a U.S.

aircraft.

All operations under this exemption must be conducted with at least one of Cody Yelm’s parents or a caregiver accompanying him. Cody Yelm may only occupy a passenger seat with no passenger seated behind him. In addition, Cody Yelm’s parent or caregiver must carry a copy of this exemption and advise the air carrier about the contents of the exemption at least 48 hours before the date of each flight.

This exemption terminates on June 30, 2014, unless sooner superseded or rescinded.

Sincerely,

/S/

John M Allen Director, Flight Standards Service

Enclosure
Martin, Michael (OST) 

From: 

Sent: 

To: 

Cc: 

Subject: 

Dear Mr. Martin, 

Jason Milewski <jmilewski@prautes.com> 

Monday, June 18, 2012 3:50 PM 

Martin, Michael (OST); Devany, Dennis (OST) 

Don Pozzi 

EAS Proposals for VCT - Community Response 

i Cl P Lf: 3b 

After careful consideration and much public discussion regarding the Essential Air Service proposals for 

Victoria Regional Airport, we are recommending Sun Air for commercial air service. Although both proposals 

were well thought out, we feel that the added benefit of Sun Air having full interline agreements with the major, 

legacy carriers will offer a more fluid and better connections to the national and international air transportation 

system. It is primarily for this reason that we are choosing Sun Air over SeaPort. The ability for our passengers 

to book a single ticket and have their baggage arrive at their ultimate destination more closely matches the 

service we have now and we feel that it will be less disruptive for our existing air travelers. 

Please do not hesitate to contact me, should you have any questions or need additional information. 

Sincerely, 

Jason Milewski, C.M. 

Managing Director 

Prautes Corporation 

502 Chimney Rock Dr. 

Victoria, TX 77904 

361.655.0958 

720.368.6151 fax 

1
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 170 (Thursday, September 3, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 45622]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-21202]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION


Notice of Proposed Information Collection Request

AGENCY: Department of Education.

ACTION: Correction notice.

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

SUMMARY: On August 27, 2009, the Department of Education published a 
comment period notice in the Federal Register (Page 43686, Column 3) 
for the emergency information collection, ``I Am What I Learn.'' The 
number burden hours is hereby corrected to 2,667. The Director, 
Regulatory Information Management Services, Office of Management, 
hereby issues a correction notice as required by the Paperwork 
Reduction Act of 1995.

    Dated: August 28, 2009.
Angela C. Arrington,
Director, Information Collection Clearance Division, Regulatory 
Information Management Services, Office of Management.
[FR Doc. E9-21202 Filed 9-2-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
HomeNorway

# Norway

141 items

        -    Bilateral Relations Fact Sheet  		U.S. Relations With Norway	  February 28, 2023 
        -    		Norway	  February 28, 2023 
        -    Report  		Country Reports on Terrorism 2021: Norway	  February 27, 2023 
        -    Media Note  		Minerals Security Partnership Governments Engage with African Countries and Issue a Statement on Principles for Environmental, Social, and Governance Standards	  February 7, 2023 
        -    Media Note  		Joint Statement on Violence in Upper Nile and Jonglei States, South Sudan	  December 16, 2022 
        -    Media Note  		Special Envoy for Global Food Security Fowler’s Travel to Oslo, Norway	  December 1, 2022 
        -    TIAS  		Norway (22-1116) – Defense Assistance Agreement	  November 16, 2022 
        -    Media Note  		Joint Declaration from Energy Importers and Exporters on Reducing Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Fossil Fuels	  November 11, 2022 
        -    Remarks  		Virtual Welcome Remarks at the “One Arctic, One Health” Workshop	  Monica MedinaNovember 9, 2022Tromsø, Norway 
        -    Fact Sheet  		U.S. Announcements Under the Green Shipping Challenge at COP27	  November 7, 2022 

previous page1…45678…15next page

Back to Top
# C_2005155EN.01001202.xml

| 25.6.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 155/12 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.6.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 155/12

---

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

of 20 April 2005

in Case T-273/02 Krüger GmbH & Co. KG v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) (1)

1

(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community word mark CALPICO - Earlier national mark CALYPSO - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 - Right to be heard)

(2005/C 155/24)

Language of the case: German

In Case T-273/02: Krüger GmbH & Co. KG, established in Bergisch Gladbach (Germany), represented by S. von Petersdorff-Campen, lawyer, against Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) (Agent: G. Schneider), the other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervener before the Court of First Instance, being Calpis Co. Ltd, established in Tokyo (Japan), represented by O. Jüngst and M. Schork, lawyers — action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 25 June 2002 (Case R 484/2000-1), concerning opposition proceedings between Calpis Co. Ltd and Krüger GmbH & Co. KG — the Court of First Instance (Fourth Chamber), composed of H. Legal, President, P. Mengozzi and I. Wiszniewska-Białecka, Judges; I. Natsinas, Administrator, for the Registrar, gave a judgment on 20 April 2005, in which it:

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

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders the applicant to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders the applicant to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 274 of 9.11.2002.

1

---
§ 91.12 Vehicular and pedestrian traffic. ( a ) Drivers of all vehicles in or on the property shall drive in a careful and safe manner at all times and shall comply with the signals and directions of guards and all posted traffic signs.
( b ) The blocking of entrances, driveways, walks, loading platforms, or fire hydrants in or on the property is prohibited.
( c ) Parking in or on the property is not allowed without a permit or specific authority. Parking without authority, parking in unauthorized locations or in locations reserved for other persons or continuously in excess of 8 hours without permission, or contrary to the direction of a uniformed Bureau of the Mint guard, or of posted signs, is prohibited.
( d ) This paragraph may be supplemented from time to time with the approval of the Director of the Mint, or the delegate of the Director, by the issuance and posting of such specific traffic directives as may be required and when so issued and posted such directives shall have the same force and effect as if made a part hereof.
BEFOR E TH E DEPARTMEN

T O F TRANSPORTATIO N WASHINGTON , D.C .
Agreement s Adopte dby th e Tariff s Conferenc e Internationa

l Air Transpor t Associatio n Docket OST-2006 - 2480 5

APPLICATIO N FO RAPPROVA L O F AGREEMENT S B Y TH E INTERNATIONA

L AIRTRANSPOR

T ASSOCL\TIO N REQUES T T O WITHDRA W PENDIN G AGREEMEN T FRO M DOCKE T 2005-2150 3 TECHNICA L CORRECTIO N T O DOCKE T 2006-2480 5 Correc t Mem o PTC3 1 South 017 7 attache d

lAT A REQUES T T O WITHDRA W AGREEMEN T APPROVE D DOCKE T OST-05-2150 3 ACTIO N DAT E Septembe r 23.201 1 Thi s approval an dgran t

o f antitrus t immunit y i s subject , where applicable , t o condition s previously imposed . Thi s action i s effectiv

e after 7 day s unles s apetitio n i s file d unde r 1 4 CF R385.3 0 o r arevie w i s undertake n on th e Department' s ow n motion . I n vie

w o f th e agreement' s noncontroversial natur e an dth e availabilit y o f th e abov e procedures , th e 21-da y p«rip d in 1 4 CFa30;^4 2 i BY : i=t d X.^^ \

tor , Offic e o f InterriatioiTa

l Aviatio n 1 7 Ma y 200 6 Communication s wit

h respec t to thi s documen

t shoul d b e sen

t to : Dougla s Lavi

n Regiona l Vic e President

- Nort h Americ a International Ai r

Transpor t Associatio n 175 0 K St . N.W . #12 * Floo r Washington , D.C . 2000 6 (202 ) 293-929 2
#### STATE of Louisiana v. Cody L. DENTON et al.

No. 65058.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

July 6, 1979.

In re Cody L. Denton, et al., applying for writs of certiorari, prohibition, mandamus and stay order. Lafourche Parish. No. 85909.

Writ denied. There was no abuse of discretion in disallowing bail pending sentence.
**EXHIBIT
        32**
 **Certification
        Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**
 **(Subsections
        (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States
        Code)**
 
 Pursuant
        to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b)
        of
        section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code), each of the
        undersigned officers of Along Mobile Technologies, Inc.., a Nevada corporation
        (the "Company"), does hereby certify, to such officer's knowledge,
        that:
 
 The
        Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for the fiscal quarter ended June 30, 2006
        (the
        "Form 10-QSB") of the Company fully complies with the requirements of section
        13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and information contained
        in the Form 10-QSB fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
        condition and results of operations of the Company.
 
 A
        signed
        original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided
        to
        Along Mobile Technologies, Inc. and will be retained by International Synergy
        Holding Company, Ltd. N/K/A Along Mobile Technologies, Inc. and furnished
        to the
        Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
  Dated:
        August 11, 2006
  /s/
                Jianwei
                LiJianwei
                      Li
                    President
                      and
                    Chief
                      Executive Officer


/s/
              Zhen
              WangZhen
                  Wang
                Chief
                  Financial Officer
§ 526.701 Penalties. ( a ) Section 206 of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1705) (IEEPA) is applicable to violations of the provisions of any regulation, ruling, instruction, order, directive, or license issued by or pursuant to the direction or authorization of the Secretary of the Treasury pursuant to this part or otherwise under IEEPA. ( 1 ) A civil penalty not to exceed the amount set forth in section 206 of IEEPA may be imposed on any person who violates, attempts to violate, conspires to violate, or causes a violation of any regulation in this part, ruling, instruction, order, directive, license, or prohibition issued under IEEPA.
( 2 ) IEEPA provides for a maximum civil penalty not to exceed the greater of $356,579 or an amount that is twice the amount of the transaction that is the basis of the violation with respect to which the penalty is imposed.
( 3 ) A person who willfully commits, willfully attempts to commit, willfully conspires to commit, or aids or abets in the commission of a violation of any regulation in this part, ruling, instruction, order, directive, or license, or prohibition may, upon conviction, be fined not more than $1,000,000, or if a natural person, be imprisoned for not more than 20 years, or both.
( b ) ( 1 ) The civil penalties provided in IEEPA are subject to adjustment pursuant to the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act of 1990 (Pub. L. 101-410, as amended, 28 U.S.C. 2461 note).
( 2 ) The criminal penalties provided in IEEPA are subject to adjustment pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 3571.
( c ) Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1001, whoever, in any matter within the jurisdiction of the executive, legislative, or judicial branch of the Government of the United States, knowingly and willfully falsifies, conceals, or covers up by any trick, scheme, or device a material fact; or makes any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or representation; or makes or uses any false writing or document knowing the same to contain any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or entry shall be fined under title 18, United States Code, imprisoned, or both.
( d ) Violations of this part may also be subject to other applicable laws.
Exhibit 31.1

CERTIFICATION



I, C. Jayson Brentlinger, certify that:

1.

I have reviewed this Report on Form 10-QSB of Circuit Research Labs, Inc.;

2.

Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3.

Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4.

The registrants other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

(a)

Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

(c)

Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

(d)

Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter (the registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal control over financial reporting; and

5.

The registrants other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the audit committee of the registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):



---

(a)

All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

(b)

Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrants internal control over financial reporting.

Date:  December 29, 2006.

/s/ C. Jayson Brentlinger

C. Jayson Brentlinger

Chief Executive Officer
§ 587.302 Effective date. ( a ) The term *effective date* refers to the effective date of the applicable prohibitions and directives contained in this part, and, with respect to a person whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to § 587.201, the earlier of the date of actual or constructive notice that such person's property and interests in property are blocked.
( b ) For the purposes of this section, c*onstructive notice* is the date that a notice of the blocking of the relevant person's property and interests in property is published in the Federal Register.
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

January 16, 2020

No. 04-19-00881-CV

IN RE Hannah RYERSON

Original Mandamus Proceeding1

ORDER

Sitting: Rebeca C. Martinez, Justice

Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice

Beth Watkins, Justice

On December 20, 2019, relator filed a petition for writ of mandamus. This court believes

a serious question concerning the mandamus relief sought requires further consideration. See

TEX. R. APP. P. 52.8(b). The respondent and the real parties in interest may file a response to the 

petition in this court no later than February 3, 2020. Any such response must conform to 

Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 52.4. 

It is so ORDERED on January 16, 2020.

PER CURIAM

ATTESTED TO: _____________________________

Michael A. Cruz, 

Clerk of Court

 

1 This proceeding arises out of Cause No. 2018CI04186, styled Kirsten Hartman and Diamond Landeros v. Hannah 

Ryerson, pending in the 407th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas, the Honorable Karen H. Pozza

presiding.
#### § 598.802 Availability of information pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act.

Any record or information obtained or created in the implementation of this part is not subject to disclosure under section 552(a)(3) of the Freedom of Information Act. Information required to be made available to the public under other provisions of the Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552) will be made available in accordance with § 501.805(a) of this chapter.
§ 21.26 Eligibility; assistant grade. ( a ) *Requirements; all candidates.* Except as otherwise provided in this section every candidate for examination for appointment in the grade of assistant: ( 1 ) Shall meet the requirements for eligibility for examination for appointment in the grade of junior assistant;
( 2 ) Shall be at least 21 years of age; and
( 3 ) Shall have had at least 7 years of educational and professional training or experience subsequent to high school, except that a candidate who applies for examination for appointment in the Reserve Corps to serve as a medical or dental intern may be examined for such appointment upon the completion of 6 years of such education, training, or experience.
( b ) *Additional requirements; dietitians.* Every candidate for examination for appointment as a dietitian shall have successfully completed an approved training course for dietetic interns.
§ 401.144 Denial of requests. ( a ) *General authority.* Only the Director, Office of Public Affairs, CMS, and the Regional Directors of Public Affairs, HHS, are authorized to deny written requests to obtain, inspect or copy any CMS information or record.
( b ) *Forms of denials.* ( 1 ) Oral requests may be dealt with orally, but the requester should be advised that the oral response is not an official determination and that an official determination may be obtained only by submitting the request in writing. Appropriate available assistance will be offered.
( 2 ) Written Requests—Denials of written requests will be in writing and will contain the reasons for the denial including, as appropriate, a statement that a document requested is nonexistent or not reasonably described or is subject to one or more clearly described exemption(s). Denials will also provide the requester with appropriate information on how to exercise the right of appeal.
§ 1005.8 Exchange of witness lists, witness statements and exhibits. ( a ) At least 15 days before the hearing, the ALJ will order the parties to exchange witness lists, copies of prior written statements of proposed witnesses and copies of proposed hearing exhibits, including copies of any written statements that the party intends to offer in lieu of live testimony in accordance with § 1005.16.
( b ) ( 1 ) If at any time a party objects to the proposed admission of evidence not exchanged in accordance with paragraph (a) of this section, the ALJ will determine whether the failure to comply with paragraph (a) of this section should result in the exclusion of such evidence.
( 2 ) Unless the ALJ finds that extraordinary circumstances justified the failure to timely exchange the information listed under paragraph (a) of this section, the ALJ must exclude from the party's case-in-chief: ( i ) The testimony of any witness whose name does not appear on the witness list, and
( ii ) Any exhibit not provided to the opposing party as specified in paragraph (a) of this section.
( 3 ) If the ALJ finds that extraordinary circumstances existed, the ALJ must then determine whether the admission of such evidence would cause substantial prejudice to the objecting party. If the ALJ finds that there is no substantial prejudice, the evidence may be admitted. If the ALJ finds that there is substantial prejudice, the ALJ may exclude the evidence, or at his or her discretion, may postpone the hearing for such time as is necessary for the objecting party to prepare and respond to the evidence.
( c ) Unless another party objects within a reasonable period of time prior to the hearing, documents exchanged in accordance with paragraph (a) of this section will be deemed to be authentic for the purpose of admissibility at the hearing.