alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
###### Editorial Note on Part 1

#### Editorial Notes:

1. In Patent and Trademark Office publications and usage the part number is omitted from the numbers of §§ 1.1 to 1.352 and the numbers to the right of the decimal point correspond with the respective rule numbers.

2. For nomenclature changes to part 1, see 68 FR 14335, Mar. 25, 2003; 87 FR 68904, Nov. 17, 2022.

#### § 1.219 Early publication.

Applications that will be published under § 1.211 may be published earlier than as set forth in § 1.211(a) at the request of the applicant. Any request for early publication must be accompanied by the publication fee set forth in § 1.18(d). If the applicant does not submit a copy of the application in compliance with the USPTO patent electronic filing system requirements pursuant to § 1.215(c), the Office will publish the application as provided in § 1.215(a). No consideration will be given to requests for publication on a certain date, and such requests will be treated as a request for publication as soon as possible.

###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I

#### Editorial Note:

Part 2 is placed in the separate grouping of parts pertaining to trademarks regulations.

###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I

#### Editorial Note:

Part 6 is placed in the separate grouping of parts pertaining to trademarks regulations.

###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I

#### Editorial Note:

Part 7 is placed in the separate grouping of parts pertaining to trademarks regulations.

###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I

#### Editorial Note:

Part 1 is placed in the separate grouping of parts pertaining to patents regulations.

###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I

#### Editorial Note:

Part 3 pertaining to both patents and trademarks is placed in the grouping pertaining to patents regulations.

###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I

#### Editorial Note:

Part 4 is placed in the separate grouping of parts pertaining to patents regulations.

###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I

#### Editorial Note:

Part 5 is placed in the separate grouping of parts pertaining to patents regulations.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS. 

WASHINGTON, DC 

TRAVEL GROUP, INC., D/B/A REPUBLIC AIR TRAVEL 

AND SCOT SPENCER 

AIRLIFT GROUP, INC. 

AND RICHARD BERNARD 

Unauthorized Air Transportation, 

Unfair and Deceptive Practices and Unfair Methods of 

Competition, and Violations of Public Charter Rules 

EXPRESS ONE INTERNATIONAL, INC. 

Unfair and Deceptive Practices and Unfair Methods of 

Competition, and Violations of Public Charter Rules 

Enforcement Proceeding 

STATUS REPORT 

' '; =......... • q.: /~() 

DOT -OST -1995-272 

formerly Docket 49233 

The Office of the Assistant General Counsel for Aviation Enforcement and 

Proceedings ("Enforcement Office"), pursuant to Your Honor's March 22, 2006, Order 

staying this proceeding, files this report detailing the current status of this proceeding and 

settlement negotiations. 

The Department has not ruled on the outstanding motions filed by Respondents 

and opposed by the Enforcement Office in Ascend Aviation Group, Docket OST-2004-

17486. 
2 

There have been no further settlement discussions. 

Date: July 31, 2014 

Respectfully submitted, 

Acting Assistant General Counsel for 

Aviation Enforcement and Proceedings 

Vinh Q. Nguyen 

Senior Trial Attorney 

United States Department of Transportation 

Office of Aviation Enforcement and Proceedings 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. 

Room 96-429 

Washington, D.C. 20590 

TEL: 202-366-9342 

FAX: 202-366-7152 
3 

Docket No. DOT -OST -1995-272 

I hereby certify that on this 31st day of July, 2014, a true and correct copy of the 

foregoing Status Report was served in the following manner to the following: 

Original 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

Docket Operations, M-30 

West Building Ground Floor 

Room W12-140 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. 

Washington, D.C. 20590 

By First Class Mail 

The Honorable Ronnie A. Yoder 

Chief Administrative Law Judge 

Office of Hearings, M-20 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

Washington, D.C. 20590 

TEL: (202) 366-2142 

FAX: (202) 366-7536 

By First Class Mail 

Scot Spencer 

SBD Aircraft Services 

255 S Leland Norton Way 

Sam Bernardino, CA 92408 

Scot Spencer 

22604 Esplanada Circle 

Boca Raton, Florida 33433
-78.0 -77.5 -77.0 -76.5 -76.0 -75.5

 38.5

 39.0

 39.5

★

▲ ▲

▲

▲

★ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲

 500

 1000

 1500

 100

18 12 06 00

09/05

NOAA HYSPLIT MODEL

 Backward trajectory ending at 2300 UTC 05 Sep 07

 EDAS Meteorological Data

Source

★ at 39.03 N 77.49 W Meters AGL

★

■

■

■

■

★

■ ■ ■ ■

★

●

●

●

★

●

● ● ●
. SERVED: MAY 29, 2012 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS 

WASHINGTON, DC 

IN THE MATTER OF 

MARTINAIRE AVIATION, LLC 

DOCKET No. [TO BE ASSIGNED] 

(Civil Penalty Action) 

FDMS No. FAA-2011-1295 

ORDER OF DISMISSAL 

8') • ... ) Q 

'"": t. \..1 

On January 3, 2012, the Federal Aviation Administration (hereinafter 

"Complainant") filed a Complaint. Ori December 22, 2011, Martinaire rA viation, LLC 

(hereinafter "Respondent") had requested a hearing. On May 25, 2012, Respondent filed 

a Withdrawal of Request for Hearing, citing settlement of the matter. 

14 C.P.R.§ 13.215 states: "At any time before or during a hearing, an agency 

attorney may withdraw a complaint or party may withdraw a request for a hearing 

without the consent of the administrative law judge. If an agency attorney 

withdraws the complaint or a party withdraws the request for a hearing and the 

answer, the administrative law judge shall dismiss the proceedings under this 

subpart with prejudice." 

WHEREFORE, the within filed Withdrawal of Request for Hearing having been 

read and considered, it is ORDERED that: 
2 

1. Respondent's Withdrawal of Request for Hearing ishereby GRANTED; and 

2. This proceeding be and is hereby dismissed with prejudice. 

SO ORDERED. 

Attachments - Service List 

Richard 

~'cLJC~~ C. Goodwin 

Administrative Law Judge 
SERVICE JLIS'Jf' 

ORIGINAL & ONE COPY 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue, S.W. 

Washington, DC 20591 

Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2Wl 000 1 

ONE COPY 

Michael L. Dworkin, Respondent's Counsel 

Michael L. Dworkin and Associates 

405 California Street, Suite 210 

San Francisco, CA 94104 

TEL: 415-421-2500 

FAX: 415-421-2560 

Kate Barber, Complainant's Counsel 

Attorney, Office of the Regional Counsel 

Great Lakes Region, AGL-7B 

Federal Aviation Administration 

2300 East Devon Avenue 

Des Plaines, IL 60018 

TEL: 847-294-7862 

FAX: 847-294-7498 

The Honorable Richard C. Goodwin, Administrative Law Judge 

Office ofHearings, M-20 /' · 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Av~nue, S.E. 

Washlngtcm, DC 20590 

TEL: 202-366-2139 Attorney-Advisor 

202-366-5121 Legal Assistant 

FAX: 202-366-7536 

FDMS No. FAA-2011-1295 

(Civil Penalty Action) 

.... ~.
- Office of the Spokesperson
- Briefing Schedule
- Press Briefings
- Press Releases
- Public Schedule
- 2017-2021 Archive

HomeOffice of the Spokesperson...Public Schedule

# 						Public Schedule					

							Collection of U.S. Department of State Public Schedules. 						

		Subscribe		

944 items
Clear All Filters

## View collection by:

Select a Year2024202320222021

Select a MonthJanuaryFebruaryMarchAprilMayJuneJulyAugustSeptemberOctoberNovemberDecember

Select a Release TypePublic Schedule

Select a Bureau/OfficeDeputy Secretary of StateOffice of the SpokespersonThe Secretary of State

          -    Public Schedule  		Public Schedule – May 17, 2021	  May 16, 2021 
          -    Public Schedule  		Public Schedule – May 14, 2021	  May 14, 2021 
          -    Public Schedule  		Public Schedule – May 13, 2021	  May 13, 2021 
          -    Public Schedule  		Public Schedule – May 12, 2021	  May 11, 2021 
          -    Public Schedule  		Public Schedule – May 11, 2021	  May 10, 2021 
          -    Public Schedule  		Public Schedule – May 10, 2021	  May 9, 2021 
          -    Public Schedule  		Public Schedule – May 7, 2021	  May 6, 2021 
          -    Public Schedule  		Public Schedule – May 6, 2021	  May 5, 2021 
          -    Public Schedule  		Public Schedule – May 5, 2021	  May 4, 2021 
          -    Public Schedule  		Public Schedule – May 4, 2021	  May 3, 2021 

previous page1…8586878889…95next page

Back to Top
###### Editorial Note on Part 1

#### Editorial Notes:

1. In Patent and Trademark Office publications and usage the part number is omitted from the numbers of §§ 1.1 to 1.352 and the numbers to the right of the decimal point correspond with the respective rule numbers.

2. For nomenclature changes to part 1, see 68 FR 14335, Mar. 25, 2003; 87 FR 68904, Nov. 17, 2022.

#### § 1.314 Issuance of patent.

If applicant timely pays the issue fee, the Office will issue the patent in regular course unless the application is withdrawn from issue (§ 1.313) or the Office defers issuance of the patent. To request that the Office defer issuance of a patent, applicant must file a petition under this section including the fee set forth in § 1.17(h) and a showing of good and sufficient reasons why it is necessary to defer issuance of the patent.

[65 FR 54677, Sept. 8, 2000]

###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I

#### Editorial Note:

Part 2 is placed in the separate grouping of parts pertaining to trademarks regulations.

###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I

#### Editorial Note:

Part 6 is placed in the separate grouping of parts pertaining to trademarks regulations.

###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I

#### Editorial Note:

Part 7 is placed in the separate grouping of parts pertaining to trademarks regulations.

###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I

#### Editorial Note:

Part 1 is placed in the separate grouping of parts pertaining to patents regulations.

###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I

#### Editorial Note:

Part 3 pertaining to both patents and trademarks is placed in the grouping pertaining to patents regulations.

###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I

#### Editorial Note:

Part 4 is placed in the separate grouping of parts pertaining to patents regulations.

###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I

#### Editorial Note:

Part 5 is placed in the separate grouping of parts pertaining to patents regulations.
#### § 485.546 Condition of participation: Skilled nursing facility distinct part unit.

If the REH provides skilled nursing facility services in a distinct part unit, the services furnished by the distinct part unit must be separately licensed and certified and comply with the requirements of participation for long-term care facilities specified in part 483, subpart B, of this chapter.
IN THE

TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

No. 10-19-00347-CR

LUCAS FARMER,

Appellant

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

Appellee

From the 443rd District Court

Ellis County, Texas

Trial Court No. 43824CR

MEMORANDUM OPINION

A jury convicted Appellant Lucas Farmer of aggravated assault causing serious 

bodily injury and assessed his punishment at twenty years’ imprisonment. The trial court 

thereafter ordered Farmer’s sentence to run consecutively to a prior sentence in “Cause 

No. 33172 in the 13th Judicial District Court of Navarro County, Texas, wherein the 

defendant was on the 3rd day of, January, 2014, duly and legally sentenced to a term of 
Farmer v. State Page 2

10 years for the offense of Aggravated Robbery.” This appeal ensued. In his sole issue, 

Farmer contends that the trial court improperly ordered his sentence in this case to run 

consecutively to his prior sentence. The State concedes error, and we agree.

Article 42.08, subsection (a), of the Code of Criminal Procedure gives a trial court 

discretion to order a defendant’s sentence to begin when a preceding conviction’s 

sentence “has ceased to operate.” Byrd v. State, 499 S.W.3d 443, 447 (Tex. Crim. App. 

2016); see TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 42.08(a). However, when a defendant has 

already been released on parole on the first offense, and his parole has not been revoked 

before sentencing on the second offense, then the defendant’s first sentence is considered 

to have already ceased to operate. Byrd, 499 S.W.3d at 451. Consequently, the second 

sentence may not be stacked on top of the first sentence. Id. 

The record here shows that Farmer was on parole on his preceding aggravatedrobbery conviction when he committed the instant offense. The record establishes that 

Farmer was then on a “parole hold” at the time of sentencing in this case. See Ex parte 

Turner, No. 12-19-00357-CR, 2020 WL 500780, at *3 n.2 (Tex. App.—Tyler Jan. 31, 2020, no 

pet.) (mem. op., not designated for publication) (“A parole revocation warrant, also 

known as a ‘blue warrant’ or a ‘parole hold,’ is an arrest warrant issued by the Texas 

Board of Pardons and Paroles when a parolee is suspected of violating the conditions of 

his parole.”). There is no evidence, however, that Farmer’s parole on his preceding

conviction had been revoked at the time of sentencing in this case. The trial court 
Farmer v. State Page 3

therefore improperly ordered Farmer’s sentence in this case to run consecutively to his 

preceding sentence.

We accordingly sustain Farmer’s sole issue and modify the trial court’s judgment 

to delete the cumulation order. We affirm the judgment as modified.

REX D. DAVIS

Justice

Before Chief Justice Gray,

Justice Davis, and

Justice Neill

Affirmed as modified

Opinion delivered and filed September 30, 2020

Do not publish

[CR25]
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
The schedule contains summary information extracted from the financial
statements of the June 30, 1999 Form 10-Q Integrated Resources High Equity
Partners, Series 85 and is qualified in its entirety by reference to such
financial statements.
</LEGEND>

<S>                          <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                      6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>            DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                 JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                         8,086,807
<SECURITIES>                           0
<RECEIVABLES>                    181,833
<ALLOWANCES>                           0
<INVENTORY>                            0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                       0
<PP&E>                                 0
<DEPRECIATION>                         0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                42,287,717
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                  0
<BONDS>                                0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                  0
<PREFERRED>                            0
<COMMON>                               0
<OTHER-SE>                    39,666,106
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>  42,287,717
<SALES>                                0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>               5,092,992
<CGS>                                  0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                  1,558,818
<OTHER-EXPENSES>               2,114,840
<LOSS-PROVISION>                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                     0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                1,666,518
<INCOME-TAX>                           0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>            1,666,518
<DISCONTINUED>                         0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                        0
<CHANGES>                              0
<NET-INCOME>                   1,666,518
<EPS-BASIC>                          0
<EPS-DILUTED>                          0



</TABLE>
----

            COMMISSION DECISION         

of 11 February 2005         

on the clearance of the accounts of certain paying agencies in Belgium, Spain and Greece in respect of expenditure financed by the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF), Guarantee Section, for the 2001 financial year

(notified under document number C(2005) 295)

(Only the Dutch, French, Greek and Spanish texts are authentic)

(2005/127/EC)

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1258/1999 of 17 May 1999 on the financing of the common agricultural policy (1), and in particular Article 7(3) thereof,

After consulting the Fund Committee,

Whereas:

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

The accounts of the Belgian paying agency ‘Betaalorgaan van de Vlaamse Gemeenschap’, the Spanish FEGA and Basque Country paying agencies, and the Greek paying agencies GEDIDAGEP/ OPEKEPE concerning expenditure financed by the EAGGF Guarantee Section for the 2001 financial year are hereby cleared.

The amounts which are recoverable from, or payable to, each Member State in accordance with this Decision are set out in the Annex.

Article 2

This Decision is addressed to the Kingdom of Belgium, the Kingdom of Spain and the Hellenic Republic.

Done at Brussels, 11 February 2005.

For the Commission

Mariann FISCHER BOEL            

Member of the Commission

----

(1)OJ L 160, 26.6.1999, p. 103.

(2)OJ L 160, 18.6.2002, p. 28.

(3)OJ L 158, 8.7.1995, p. 6. Regulation as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 2025/2001 (OJ L 274, 17.10.2001, p. 3).

----

ANNEX

Clearance of accounts of the Belgian, Spanish and Greek paying agencies not cleared by Decision 2002/461/EC

2001 financial year

----
.6903 NM 1.282 NM

1.874 NM 

# N 30kt Wind - Due East 

## Proposed Auke Bay Route - Easterly Wind = Minimum Autorotation Glide Distance AS-350 at 2,000ft AGL w/ No Wind = Autorotation Glide Distance Given a 30kt Easterly Wind at 1700ft/min rate of descent from 2,000ft AGL with a 65kt glide speed =Proposed Landing Site
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA 

EASTERN DISTRICT 

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, 

 Respondent 

 v. 

WARREN S. EVANS, 

 Petitioner 

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 163 EAL 2016 

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from 

the Order of the Superior Court 

ORDER 

PER CURIAM 

AND NOW, this 4th day of August, 2016, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is 

DENIED. 

Justices Donohue and Mundy did not participate in the consideration or decision 

of this matter.
Form of Side Letter from Investor AB



 EXHIBIT 10.47 
  
 INVESTOR AB 
 c/o Investor Growth Capital Limited 
 12 East 49th Street, 27th Floor

 New York, New York 10017 
  
 November     , 2003 
  
 ISTA Pharmaceuticals, Inc. 
 Attn: Lauren P. Silvernail, CFO 
 15279 Alton Parkway 
 Suite 100 
 Irvine, CA 92618 
  

	 	Re:	 	Public Offering of Shares of Common Stock of ISTA Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (the “Company”) 

  
 Dear Lauren: 
  
 In connection with the firm-commitment underwritten public offering of shares of the Company’s common stock pursuant to a Registration Statement on
Form S-2 (Registration No. 333-109576) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Registration Statement”), we have requested that the Company include
                 shares of the Company’s common stock held by us (the “Selling Stockholder Shares”) for sale to the underwriters pursuant to the terms of
an underwriting agreement to be entered into between and among the Company, the underwriters and selling stockholders identified in the Underwriting Agreement. 
  

In connection with the offering and sale of the Selling Stockholders Shares, the Company has agreed to pay for all out-of-pocket costs and expenses
incurred by us in connection with the preparation and filing of the Registration Statement and other activities customarily associated with public offerings of the type contemplated by the Registration Statement, including, without limitation, all
fees and expenses of our legal counsel. We shall pay that portion of the underwriter’s discounts and commissions equal to the proportion of the Selling Stockholder Shares to the total shares of the Company’s common stock registered in the
offering as contemplated by the Registration Statement. 
  
 In
addition, we hereby acknowledge and confirm that the statements set forth in the Registration Statement, as amended or supplemented, including any prospectus contained therein, regarding our name, the description of how we hold the shares contained
on page      footnote      or that we own                  shares of capital stock as set forth on page     ,
are true in all material respects and that there is no omission or alleged omission to state therein a material fact required to be stated therein or necessary to make the statements therein in the light of the circumstances under which they were
made not misleading. 







 November     , 2003 
 Page Two 
  
 By countersigning
this letter in the space provided below, you agree to accept the terms set forth set forth herein. 
  
 Very truly yours, 
  
  
 AGREED AND ACCEPTED AS TO CONTENT AND FORM: 
  

	ISTA	 	Pharmaceuticals, Inc. 

  

	  

 Lauren P.
Silvernail, Chief Financial Officer
§ 436.1 Purpose and applicability. This part sets forth, for Guam, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands— ( a ) The eligibility provisions that a State plan must contain;
( b ) The mandatory and optional groups of individuals to whom Medicaid is provided under a State plan;
( c ) The eligibility requirements and procedures that a Medicaid agency must use in determining and redetermining eligibility, and requirements it may not use; and
( d ) The availability of FFP for providing Medicaid and for administering the eligibility provisions of the plan.
[43 FR 45218, Sept. 29, 1978, as amended at 44 FR 17939, Mar. 23, 1979]
§ 204.8 Appeal of refusal to correct or amend an individual's record. ( a ) An individual who disagrees with a refusal of the Copyright Office to amend his or her record may request a review of the denial. The individual should submit a written appeal to the General Counsel of the United States Copyright Office at the address specified in § 201.1(c)(1) of this chapter. Appeals, and the envelopes containing them, should be plainly marked “Privacy Act Appeal.” Failure to so mark the appeal may delay the General Counsel's response. An appeal should contain a copy of the request for amendment or correction and a copy of the record alleged to be untimely, inaccurate, incomplete, or irrelevant.
( b ) The General Counsel will issue a written decision granting or denying the appeal within 30 working days after receipt of the appeal unless, after showing good cause, the General Counsel extends the 30-day period. If the appeal is granted, the requested amendment or correction will be made promptly. If the appeal is denied, in whole or in part, the General Counsel's decision will set forth reasons for the denial. Additionally, the decision will advise the requester that he or she has the right to file with the Copyright Office a concise statement of his or her reasons for disagreeing with the refusal to amend the record and that such statement will be attached to the requester's record and included in any future disclosure of such record. If the requester is dissatisfied with the agency's final determination, the individual may bring a civil action against the Office in the appropriate United States district court.
[82 FR 9364, Feb. 6, 2017]