alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
July 1, 2015

Mr. Douglas Ensbury

Doc’s Aerial Video

Mira Loma, CA 91752

Dear Mr. Ensbury:

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

part 21; §§ 45.239(b), 61.113(a) and (b), 91.7(a), 91.9(b)(2), 91.41(a) and (b), 91.103, 91.109,

91.119, 91.121, 91.151(a), 91.203(a) and (b), 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), and 91.409(a)(2) of 

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 entered your exemption request on behalf of Doc’s Aerial Video into the public docket 

(No. FAA−2015−1361), but we are unable to process your request any further. The 

information you sent 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 reasons why granting the request would be in the public interest; that is, how it would 

benefit the public as a whole.

 The reasons why the exemption would not adversely affect safety or how the exemption 

would provide a level of safety at least equal to that provided by the rule from which you 

seek an exemption.

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

What You Should Do

If you want us to process your request any further, you must send the information described 

earlier to reach us 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 hear from you within 30 days, we will close the docket without notifying you 

further. If you have any questions or require additional time, you may call (202) 267-9677.

Sincerely,

Brenda Robeson

Program Analyst, Aircraft and 

 Airport Rules Division

Enclosure
<PAGE>   1
                                                                  EXHIBIT 11

                              REXALL SUNDOWN, INC.

                    NET INCOME PER COMMON SHARE CALCULATION
               For the years ended August 31, 1996, 1995 and 1994
             (Adjusted to give retroactive effect to April 4, 1996
                          three-for-two stock split)


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                        Fiscal Year Ended
                                                             August 31,
                                              -----------------------------------------
                                                 1994           1995           1996      
                                              -----------    -----------    -----------  

<S>                                           <C>            <C>            <C>
Net income ...............................    $ 6,195,239    $ 4,361,596    $20,292,781    
                                              ===========    ===========    ===========
Primary
-------
Weighted average shares outstanding(1)....     29,071,161     29,336,510     30,511,575    
Common stock equivalents(2)...............        197,472        160,656        214,657        
                                              -----------    -----------    -----------

Primary weighted average common shares
  outstanding.............................     29,268,633     29,497,166     30,726,232
                                              ===========    ===========    =========== 

Primary net income per common share.......    $       .21    $       .15    $       .66
                                              ===========    ===========    ===========

Fully Diluted
-------------
Weighted average shares outstanding(1)....     29,071,161     29,336,510     30,511,575
Common stock equivalents(2)...............        215,670        207,264        269,512
                                              -----------    -----------    -----------

Fully diluted weighted average common
  shares outstanding......................     29,286,831     29,543,774     30,781,087
                                              ===========    ===========    =========== 

Fully diluted net income per common
  share...................................    $       .21    $       .15    $       .66
                                              ===========    ===========    ===========
</TABLE>

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

Above reflects the calculation of pro forma net income per common share
retroactively adjusted for the two-for-one stock split effected on October 28,
1993.

(1) Represents weighted average common shares outstanding for the periods
    indicated.
(2) Common stock equivalents associated with stock options calculated pursuant
    to the treasury stock method taking into consideration the tax benefit
    available to the Company upon the assumed exercise of qualified options.
# Gazzetta ufficiale C 402I/2021

| | ISSN 1977-0944 |
| --- | --- |
| Gazzetta ufficiale
  dell’Unione europea | C 402I |
| | |
| Edizione in lingua italiana | Comunicazioni e informazioni | 64° anno5 ottobre 2021 |

ISSN 1977-0944

Gazzetta ufficiale

dell’Unione europea

C 402I

Edizione in lingua italiana

Comunicazioni e informazioni

64° anno5 ottobre 2021

---

| Sommario | pagina |
| --- | --- |
| | IV   Informazioni |
| | INFORMAZIONI PROVENIENTI DALLE ISTITUZIONI, DAGLI ORGANI E DAGLI ORGANISMI DELL'UNIONE EUROPEA |
| | Corte dei conti |
| 2021/C 402 I/01 | Parere n. 2/2021 sulla proposta della Commissione per un regolamento del Consiglio che modifica il regolamento (UE, Euratom) n. 609/2014 al fine di migliorare la prevedibilità per gli Stati membri e di chiarire le procedure di risoluzione delle controversie al momento della messa a disposizione delle risorse proprie tradizionali e delle risorse proprie basate sull’IVA e sull’RNL (COM(2021) 327 final del 25 giugno 2021, 2021/0161 (NLE)) | 1 |

Sommario

pagina

IV   Informazioni

INFORMAZIONI PROVENIENTI DALLE ISTITUZIONI, DAGLI ORGANI E DAGLI ORGANISMI DELL'UNIONE EUROPEA

Corte dei conti

2021/C 402 I/01

Parere n. 2/2021 sulla proposta della Commissione per un regolamento del Consiglio che modifica il regolamento (UE, Euratom) n. 609/2014 al fine di migliorare la prevedibilità per gli Stati membri e di chiarire le procedure di risoluzione delle controversie al momento della messa a disposizione delle risorse proprie tradizionali e delle risorse proprie basate sull’IVA e sull’RNL (COM(2021) 327 final del 25 giugno 2021, 2021/0161 (NLE))

1

---

| IT | |
| --- | --- |

IT

---

IV Informazioni

INFORMAZIONI PROVENIENTI DALLE ISTITUZIONI, DAGLI ORGANI E DAGLI ORGANISMI DELL'UNIONE EUROPEA

Corte dei conti

| 5.10.2021 | IT | Gazzetta ufficiale dell’Unione europea | CI 402/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

5.10.2021

IT

Gazzetta ufficiale dell’Unione europea

CI 402/1

---

Parere n. 2/2021

sulla proposta della Commissione per un regolamento del Consiglio che modifica il regolamento (UE, Euratom) n. 609/2014 al fine di migliorare la prevedibilità per gli Stati membri e di chiarire le procedure di risoluzione delle controversie al momento della messa a disposizione delle risorse proprie tradizionali e delle risorse proprie basate sull’IVA e sull’RNL (COM(2021) 327 final del 25 giugno 2021, 2021/0161 (NLE))

(2021/C 402 I/01)

La Corte dei conti europea informa che il parere n. 2/2021 sulla proposta della Commissione per un regolamento del Consiglio che modifica il regolamento (UE, Euratom) n. 609/2014 al fine di migliorare la prevedibilità per gli Stati membri e di chiarire le procedure di risoluzione delle controversie al momento della messa a disposizione delle risorse proprie tradizionali e delle risorse proprie basate sull’IVA e sull’RNL (COM(2021) 327 final del 25 giugno 2021, 2021/0161 (NLE)) è stato pubblicato il 5 ottobre 2021.

Il parere è disponibile, per essere consultato o scaricato, sul sito Internet della Corte dei conti europea a partire dalle 17:00 del 5 ottobre 2021:

https://www.eca.europa.eu/it/Pages/DocItem.aspx?did=59435

---
§ 19.23 Motions. ( a ) *In writing.* — ( 1 ) Except as otherwise provided in this section, an application or request for an order or ruling must be made by written motion.
( 2 ) All written motions must state with particularity the relief sought and must be accompanied by a proposed order.
( 3 ) No oral argument may be held on written motions except as otherwise directed by the ALJ. Written memoranda, briefs, affidavits, or other relevant material or documents may be filed in support of or in opposition to a motion.
( b ) *Oral motions.* A motion may be made orally on the record unless the ALJ directs that such motion be reduced to writing.
( c ) *Filing of motions.* Motions must be filed with the ALJ, except that following the filing of the recommended decision, motions must be filed with the Comptroller.
( d ) *Responses.* — ( 1 ) Except as otherwise provided in this section, within ten days after service of any written motion, or within such other period of time as may be established by the ALJ or the Comptroller, any party may file a written response to a motion. The ALJ will not rule on any oral or written motion before each party has had an opportunity to file a response.
( 2 ) The failure of a party to oppose a written motion or an oral motion made on the record is deemed a consent by that party to the entry of an order substantially in the form of the order accompanying the motion.
( e ) *Dilatory motions.* Frivolous, dilatory or repetitive motions are prohibited. The filing of such motions may form the basis for sanctions.
( f ) *Dispositive motions.* Dispositive motions are governed by §§ 19.29 and 19.30.
EXHIBIT
      32.2





CERTIFICATION
      OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 AS ADOPTED
      PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





Pursuant
      to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
      Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned hereby certifies that, to his
      knowledge, the quarterly report on Form 10-Q (the “Report”) of ANTs software
      inc., a Delaware corporation (the “Company”), for the quarter ended June 30,
      2006:





1.  Fully
      complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of
      the
      Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and




2.  The
      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
      the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.




This
      certification is being provided pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350 and is not to be
      deemed a part of this Report, nor is it to be deemed to be “filed” for any
      purpose whatsoever.









Date: 
              August 14, 2006
            /s/
                Kenneth RuotoloKenneth
              Ruotolo, Chief Financial Officer







A
      signed
      original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
      Act of 2002 has been provided to the Company, and will be retained by the
      Company, and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission upon
      request.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO 

In re: 

THE FINANCIAL OVERSIGHT 

AND MANAGEMENT BOARD FOR PUERTO RICO, 

 as representative of 

THE COMMONWEALTH OF PUERTO RICO. et. al.,

1

Debtors. 

 PROMESA 

 Title III 

 Case No. 17 BK 3283-LTS 

 (Jointly Administered) 

 Re: ECF No. 888 

NOTICE OF WITHDRAWAL OF ATTORNEY 

NOW COMES counsel Hector R. Cuprill, Esq. and Carlos Fernandez-Nadal, Esq., 

partner and off counsel, respectively of CUPRILL LAW OFFICES, PSC the undersigned 

attorney, and respectfully informs this Honorable Court of his withdrawal as an attorney 

of the Autonomous Municipality of Ponce (hereafter, “AMP”) in the instant case as the AMP 

still got representation by Estrella LLC as local counsel and another atorney from the 

Continental US. 

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED. 

 In Ponce, Puerto Rico, on January 25, 2018. 

/s/ Hector R. Curpill, Esq. /s/ Carlos Fernández-Nadal, Esq. 

USDC No. 221109 USDC No. 209208 

Torre de Oro, Suite 204 818 Hostos Ave., Suite B 

2175 Ferre Blvd. Ponce, PR 00716 

Ponce, PR 00717 Telephone: (787) 848-4612 

Telephone: (787) 843-8048 Facsimile: (787) 395-7906 

E-mail: cuprislaw@yahoo.com E-mail: cfernandez@cfnlaw.com

 

Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:2283 Filed:01/25/18 Entered:01/25/18 14:50:23 Desc: Main

Document Page 1 of 1
# C_2011278EN.01000601.xml

| 22.9.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 278/6 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.9.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 278/6

---

State aid — Decision to raise no objections

2011/C 278/07

The EFTA Surveillance Authority raises no objections to the following State aid measure:

| Date of adoption of the decision | : | 9 February 2011 |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Case number | : | 69042 |
| Decision Number | : | 39/11/COL |
| EFTA State | : | Norway |
| Name of the beneficiary | : | Finnfjord AS |
| Type of measure | : | Individual aid under the Energy Fund Scheme, subject to a detailed assessment under the EFTA Surveillance Authority’s Guidelines on State aid for environmental protection |
| Scheme | : | The Energy Fund scheme approved by the EFTA Surveillance Authority with Decision No 125/06/COL on 3 May 2006 |
| Objective | : | Environmental protection |
| Form of aid | : | Grant |
| Aid amount | : | NOK 175 million |
| Economic sectors | : | Electricity production |
| Name and address of the granting authority | : | Enova SF |
| Professor Borchsgt. 2 |
| 7030 Trondheim |
| NORWAY |

Date of adoption of the decision

:

9 February 2011

Case number

:

69042

Decision Number

:

39/11/COL

EFTA State

:

Norway

Name of the beneficiary

:

Finnfjord AS

Type of measure

:

Individual aid under the Energy Fund Scheme, subject to a detailed assessment under the EFTA Surveillance Authority’s Guidelines on State aid for environmental protection

Scheme

:

The Energy Fund scheme approved by the EFTA Surveillance Authority with Decision No 125/06/COL on 3 May 2006

Objective

:

Environmental protection

Form of aid

:

Grant

Aid amount

:

NOK 175 million

Economic sectors

:

Electricity production

Name and address of the granting authority

:

Enova SF

Professor Borchsgt. 2

7030 Trondheim

NORWAY

The authentic text of the decision, from which all confidential information has been removed, can be found on the EFTA Surveillance Authority’s website:

http://www.eftasurv.int/state-aid/state-aid-register/

---
#### §§ 622.23-622.50 [Reserved]
Exhibit 23.1

                       Consent of Independent Accountants

   We consent to the  incorporation by reference in the registration  statements
of Signal Technology Corporation on Form S-8 (File No. 33-78248 and 33-78250) of
our report dated January 27, 1997, on our audits of the  consolidated  financial
statements and financial statement schedule of Signal Technology Corporation and
Subsidiaries  as of December 31, 1996 and 1995, and for the years ended December
31, 1996, 1995, and 1994, which report is included in this Annual Report on Form
10-K.



San Jose, California                                    COOPERS & LYBRAND L.L.P.
March 28, 1997

40 SIGNAL TECHNOLOGY CORPORATION
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

SUSAN KNISELY

, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. ) Civil Action No. 2 3

- 0 1271 (UNA)

)

MERRICK GARLAND )

Honorable

, )

)

)

Defendant. )

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Plaintiff, appearing pro se , has filed a Complaint, ECF No. 1, and an application to proceed

in forma pauperis , ECF No. 2. The Court will grant the application and dismiss this action

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) (requiring immediate dismissal of a case upon a

determination that the complaint fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted ).

Plaintiff is a resident of Las Vegas, Nevada, who has sued U.S. Attorney General Merrick

Garland. The complaint’s incoherency is reason enough to dismiss the case

. See Fed. R. Civ. P.

8 (minimum pleading requirements ); Jiggetts v. District of Columbia , 319 F.R.D. 408, 413 (D.D.C.

2017), aff’d sub nom. Cooper v. District of Columbia, No. 17

- 7021, 2017 WL 5664737 (D.C. Cir.

Nov. 1, 2017) ( a complaint that is “rambling, disjointed, incoherent, or full of irrelevant and

confusing material will patently fail [Rule 8(a)’s] standard”). Nevertheless, Plaintiff seeks to

compel “the U.S. Atto rney General [to] resolve the public corruption problem obstructing justice

that is preventing” Plaintiff “from filing a civil lawsuit in this Court against the Islamic Republic

of Iran and collecting restitution[.]” Compl. at 5 (Relief). But courts cann ot compel the executive

branch to initiate an investigation or a prosecution because such decisions are “generally

committed to an agency’s absolute discretion,” Heckler v. Chaney , 470 U.S. 821, 831 (1985), and2 “[m]andamus will not lie to control the exerc ise of this discretion,” Powell v. Katzenbach , 359

F.2d 234, 234 (D.C. Cir. 1965). Therefore, this case is dismissed appropriately for failure to state

a claim. A separate order accompanies this Memorandum Opinion

.

_________/s/___________

_

_ CHRISTOPHER R. COOPER

Date: May 16 , 2023 United States District Judge
§ 349.27 Notice of transfers. ( a ) *Prior notice generally required.* Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, an FDIC-supervised insured depository institution must provide a retail forex customer with 30 days' prior notice of any assignment of any position or transfer of any account of the retail forex customer. The notice must include a statement that the retail forex customer is not required to accept the proposed assignment or transfer and may direct the FDIC-supervised insured depository institution to liquidate the positions of the retail forex customer or transfer the account to a retail forex counterparty of the retail forex customer's selection.
( b ) *Exceptions.* The requirements of paragraph (a) of this section shall not apply to transfers: ( 1 ) Requested by the retail forex customer;
( 2 ) Made by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation as receiver or conservator under the Federal Deposit Insurance Act; or
( 3 ) Otherwise authorized by applicable law.
( c ) *Obligations of transferee FDIC-supervised insured depository institution.* An FDIC-supervised insured depository institution to which retail forex accounts or positions are assigned or transferred under paragraph (a) of this section must provide to the affected retail forex customers the risk disclosure statements and forms of acknowledgment required by this part and receive the required signed acknowledgments within sixty days of such assignments or transfers. This requirement shall not apply if the FDIC-supervised insured depository institution has clear written evidence that the retail forex customer has received and acknowledged receipt of the required disclosure statements.
[76 FR 40789, July 12, 2011. Redesignated at 80 FR 74912, Nov. 30, 2015]
IIB 

108TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 3379

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

NOVEMBER 6, 2003

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Government Affairs 

AN ACT

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 3210 East 10th Street in Bloomington, Indiana, as the ‘‘Francis X. McCloskey Post Office Building’’.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
2

HR 3379 RFS 

1 SECTION 1. DESIGNATION. 

2 The facility of the United States Postal Service lo3 cated at 3210 East 10th Street in Bloomington, Indiana, 

4 shall be known and designated as the ‘‘Francis X. McClos5 key Post Office Building’’ . 

6 SEC. 2. REFERENCES. 

7 Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 

8 paper, or other record of the United States to the facility 

9 referred to in section 1 shall be deemed to be a reference 

10 to the ‘‘Francis X. McCloskey Post Office Building’’.

Passed the House of Representatives November 5, 

2003. 

Attest: JEFF TRANDAHL, 

Clerk.
Exhibit 10.3
 AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO THE
CO-DEVELOPMENT AND COMMERCIALIZATION AGREEMENT
 Amendment th Effective Date GSK HGS Party Parties.
 RECITALS
 WHEREAS, Co-Development and
Commercialization Agreement
 WHEREAS,
 WHEREAS,
 NOW, THEREFORE,
 ARTICLE 1  DEFINITIONS
 New Defined Terms
 Designated Expert Schedule A
 More Conservative Approach




---



##### 



Other Dispute
 Policy Dispute
 Unreasonably Conservative
 Amended Defined Terms
 Laws
 Other Defined Terms
 ARTICLE 2  RESOLUTION OF POLICY DISPUTES
 Amendment to Article 3
 Amendment to Section 3.1.3
 - 2 -




---



##### 



Decision Making
 Amendments to Article 5
 2.2.1 Amendment to Section 5.5.1
     Amendment to add Section 5.9
 Independent Third Party Reviews
 Reviewer Review inter
alia
 - 3 -




---



##### 



Amendments to Article 15
 Amendment to Section 15.1
 Resolution of Other Disputes and Policy Disputes
 Other Disputes
 - 4 -




---



##### 



Policy Disputes Policy Officers
 Amendment to Section 15.2 Arbitration for Other Disputes.
 New Section 15.3
 Resolution of Policy Disputes
 Notice of Referral
  - 5 -




---



##### 



Request for Opinion
 (a)
    
    a very brief description of the disputed
activity or inactivity;(b)
    
    each Partys proposed resolution of the
Policy Dispute and the reasons supporting such resolution, which
shall be exchanged among the Parties; and(c)
    
    instruction to the Designated Expert to
provide to the Parties, within two (2) business days of the Request
for Opinion, a written opinion of not more than two pages in length
selecting the proposed resolution from one Party which represents the
More Conservative Approach.
   - 6 -




---



##### 



provided further provided
 Addition of Schedule A to the Agreement Schedule A
 ARTICLE 3  MISCELLANEOUS
 Scope of this Amendment
 Governing Law
 - 7 -




---



##### 



Counterparts
 [Remainder
of Page Intentionally Left Blank]
 - 8 -




---



##### 



IN WITNESS WHEREOF,
 GLAXO GROUP LIMITEDBy:
    /s/ Paul WilliamsonName:
    Paul WilliamsonTitle:
    Corporate DirectorHUMAN GENOME SCIENCES, INC.By:
    /s/ James H. Davis, Ph.D.Name:
    James H. Davis, Ph.D.Title:
    Executive Vice President and General Counsel




---



##### 



SCHEDULE A
 List of Designated Experts
 [***]
 
 [***]
    
    INDICATES MATERIAL THAT HAS BEEN OMITTED
AND FOR WHICH CONFIDENTIAL TREATMENT HAS BEEN REQUESTED. ALL SUCH OMITTED
MATERIAL HAS BEEN FILED WITH THE SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION PURSUANT TO
RULE 24b-2 UNDER THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934, AS AMENDED.