alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Dear Mr. Russell :

This letter is to inform you that the following information is missing from your petition (Docket No. FAA−2015

− 3199 )

. This information is necessary for the Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA) to process your petition.

 Provide a copy of the Motion Picture and Television Operations Manual (MPTOM) which is required by Order 8900.1, Volume 3, Chapter 8, Section 1. If you wish for us to

proce ed without this manual and remove closed

- set filming from your proposed operation please inform of us of your intention by the requested response date listed below.

Please submit the additional information (non

- proprietary) to your docket at www.regulations.gov and submit any proprietary information to the FAA Headquarters or electronically via email to 333exemptions@faa.gov

. If you want us to process your request any further, we must receive the infor mation described above by 11/26/15 . I f we do not receive the
information

, we will close the dock et without notifying you further.

If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at (202) 267

- 4549

.

Sincerely,
/s/
Michael J. Cameron Program Analyst
MATERIALS NOT INCLUDED IN

AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVE (AD) DOCKET

FAA-2014-0378

Docket Number

2013-SW-050-AD

Directorate Identifier

Name/Description of Item(s) Not Included in DMS Docket and Maintained in the 

Supplemental AD Docket - NPRM

AgustaWestland Bollettino Tecnico No. 412-135, Revision A, dated July 29, 2013

MAY BE VIEWED AT: Federal Aviation Administration

Office of the Regional Counsel,

Southwest Region

Rules Docket

2601 Meacham Blvd., Room 663

Fort Worth, Texas 76137

DURING THE HOURS OF: 9 a.m. and 3 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

except Federal holidays.
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3278 Introduced in House (IH)]

108th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 3278

 To permit statues honoring citizens of the District of Columbia to be 
placed in Statuary Hall in the same manner as statues honoring citizens 
   of the States are placed in Statuary Hall, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            October 8, 2003

 Ms. Norton (for herself and Mr. Tom Davis of Virginia) introduced the 
     following bill; which was referred to the Committee on House 
                             Administration

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To permit statues honoring citizens of the District of Columbia to be 
placed in Statuary Hall in the same manner as statues honoring citizens 
   of the States are placed in Statuary Hall, and for other purposes.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. PLACEMENT OF STATUES OF CITIZENS OF DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA IN 
              STATUARY HALL.

    (a) In General.--Section 1814 of the Revised Statutes (2 U.S.C. 
2061) is amended by adding at the end the following new sentence: ``For 
purposes of this section, the term `State' shall include the District 
of Columbia.''.
    (b) Conforming Amendment Regarding Procedures for Replacement of 
Statues.--Section 311 of the Legislative Branch Appropriations Act, 
2001 (2 U.S.C. 2062), is amended by adding at the end the following new 
subsection:
    ``(f) For purposes of this section--
            ``(1) the term `State' shall include the District of 
        Columbia; and
            ``(2) in the case of the District of Columbia, the Council 
        of the District of Columbia shall be treated as the legislature 
        and the Mayor of the District of Columbia shall be treated as 
        the Governor.''.
                                 <all>
```
Exhibit 32

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

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Trans World Entertainment Corporation (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending November 3, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
hereof (the Report), we, Robert J. Higgins, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of the Company and John J. Sullivan, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of our knowledge:

| | (1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and                               
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
| | (2) | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
|

|/s/ Robert J. Higgins                |  | /s/ John J. Sullivan         | 
|------------------------------------ |  | ---------------------------- | 
|Chairman and Chief Executive Officer |  | Executive Vice President and | 
|                                     |  | Chief Financial Officer      | 
|                                    
|December 13, 2007                    |  | December 13, 2007            | 

---
Editorial Note on Part 702
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 702 appear at 84 FR 1606, Feb. 5, 2019.

§ 702.409 Preapproval for federally insured, state-chartered credit unions to issue Subordinated Debt. ( a ) A federally insured, state-chartered credit union is required to submit the information required under § 702.408 and, if applicable, paragraph (b) of this section to both the Appropriate Supervision Office and its state supervisory authority. The Appropriate Supervision Office will issue decisions approving a federally insured, state-chartered credit union's application only after obtaining the concurrence of the federally insured, state-chartered credit union's state supervisory authority. The NCUA will notify a federally insured, state-chartered credit union's state supervisory authority before issuing a decision to “approve for use” a federally insured, state-chartered credit union's Offering Document and any amendments thereto, under § 702.408, if applicable.
( b ) If the Appropriate Supervision Office has reason to believe that an issuance by a federally insured, state-chartered credit union under this subpart could subject that federally insured, state-chartered credit union to Federal income taxation, the Appropriate Supervision Office may require the federally insured, state-chartered credit union to provide: ( 1 ) A written legal opinion, satisfactory to the NCUA, from nationally recognized tax counsel or letter from the Internal Revenue Service indicating whether the proposed Subordinated Debt would be classified as capital stock for Federal income tax purposes and, if so, describing any material impact of Federal income taxes on the federally insured, state-chartered credit union's financial condition; or
( 2 ) Pro Forma Financial Statements (balance sheet and income statement) and cash flow projections, including any off-balance sheet items, covering at least two years. Analytical support for key assumptions and key assumption changes must be included in the application. Key assumptions include, but are not limited to, interest rate, liquidity, and credit loss scenarios.
( c ) If the Appropriate Supervision Office requires additional information from a federally insured, state-chartered credit union under paragraph (b) of this section, the federally insured, state-chartered credit union may determine, in its sole discretion, whether the information it provides is in the form described in paragraph (b)(1) or (2) of this section.
[86 FR 11074, Feb. 23, 2021, as amended at 88 FR 18011, Mar. 27, 2023]
EVIDENCE — ACCOUNTS.

[Cuyahoga Circuit Court,

June Term, 1894.]

#### Cora Hough v. Wirriam J. Henk, Admr.

When not Admissible as Evidence.

Roans of money merely, without mutual dealings, is not the proper subject of book account so as to admit the book, as evidence under a petition for the money.

Hare, J.

The only substantial error claimed in this case is, that the court below excluded what was termed an account book from consideration as evidence. The book was offered on the ground that the action was founded upon an account. The action being against the administrator to enforce the allowance of the claim, and the plaintiff in the action being disqualified as a witness because of the opposite party being an administrator, the plaintiff sought to establish the tact that her book was a book of original entries and introduce the same to substantiate the claim.

First, the claim was one for money lbaned, as shown by the petition. She seeks to show accounts upon a cause of action that on such dates the plaintiff loaned so much money and the party agreed to pay it back, but the petition sets forth no copy of the account whatever. This is one consideration.

Second, the items are for money loaned — no mutual dealings between the parties — simply items of money loaned; which we do not think a proper subject-matter of book account under the circumstances of this case.

There was another claim made in the case,-to-wit: For board which was claimed to have been furnished by the plaintiff to decedent, but that does not arise under this question. That claim was attempted to be supported by other evidence, and the copy of the book offered does not contain that item. So that in the exclusion of the account offered, it had no reference whatever to the item for board.

There is no other material error claimed in the case. Certain it is that the testimony after the exclusion of that book, failed to establish the claim of the plaintiff, or, in other words, was not so clearly established as to authorize us to reverse the judgment of the court below; so the judgment of the court of common pleas is affirmed.
Johnson, Ray (FAA) From: Sent: To: Subject: Hello Ray, Adam Tjelmeland <Adam@parkerbennecorp.com> Monday, March 09, 2015 2:36 PM Johnson, Ray (FAA) Exemption

Thank you for the call today regarding the exemption for Alaska Air Fuel, Inc. My client is pursuing an FAA Part 125 certificate for their aircraft and do notwishto continue withthe filed exemption at this time. Thankyou for yourhelp inthis matter. Best Regards, Adam Tjelmeland Parker Bennecorp, LLC.

Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTL:: smarlphone

1
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
FINANCIAL DATA SCHEDULE FOR ADELPHIA COMMUNICATIONS CORP. FOR THE SIX MONTHS
ENDED JUNE 30, 2000
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0000796486
<NAME> ADELPHIA COMMUNICATIONS CORP.
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                         139,239
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  232,389<F1>
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0<F1>
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                      16,541,416<F2>
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0<F2>
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              17,973,443
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                      9,978,775
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         1,299
<OTHER-SE>                                   3,868,769
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                17,973,443
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,376,844
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,254,477
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             405,370
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (217,792)
<INCOME-TAX>                                  (45,388)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (172,404)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (201,216)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (1.57)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (1.57)
<FN>
<F1>RECEIVABLES NET OF ALLOWANCE
<F2>PP&E NET OF DEPRECIATION
</FN>


</TABLE>
#### § 7.2010 National bank directors' responsibilities.

The business and affairs of a national bank must be managed by or under the direction of the board of directors. The board of directors should refer to OCC published guidance for additional information regarding responsibilities of directors.

[61 FR 4862, Feb. 9, 1996, as amended at 85 FR 83735, Dec. 22, 2020]
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 20-0588

STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee,

v.

RYAN PATRICK SULLIVAN,

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 November 15, 2021, within which to prepare, file, 

and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

September 8 2021

09/08/2021

Case Number: DA 20-0588
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AND STATEMENT OF EARNINGS AND IS QUALIFIED
IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                             623
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   25,239
<ALLOWANCES>                                     1,483
<INVENTORY>                                     43,706
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                75,944
<PP&E>                                          31,513
<DEPRECIATION>                                  15,863
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 112,216
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           43,167
<BONDS>                                          2,675
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            42
<OTHER-SE>                                      59,263
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   112,216
<SALES>                                        103,629
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               111,751
<CGS>                                           83,324
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   83,324
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                20,451
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 1,002
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               2,248
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  4,726
<INCOME-TAX>                                     1,779
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              2,947
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     2,947
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .86
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .86
        

</TABLE>
I 

108TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 3288

To amend title XXI of the Social Security Act to make technical corrections 

with respect to the definition of qualifying State. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

OCTOBER 14, 2003

Mr. TAUZIN (for himself and Mr. DINGELL) introduced the following bill; 

which was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce 

A BILL

To amend title XXI of the Social Security Act to make 

technical corrections with respect to the definition of 

qualifying State.

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

3 SECTION 1. TECHNICAL CORRECTIONS RELATING TO THE 

4 DEFINITION OF QUALIFYING STATE UNDER 

5 TITLE XXI OF THE SOCIAL SECURITY ACT. 

6 Effective as if included in the enactment of Public 

7 Law 108–74, section 2105(g)(2) of the Social Security 

8 Act, as added by section 1(b) of such Act, is amended—

9 (1) by striking ‘‘185’’ the first place it appears 

10 and inserting ‘‘184’’; 
2

•HR 3288 IH 

1 (2) by inserting ‘‘August 1, 1994, or’’ before 

2 ‘‘July 1, 1995’’; and 

3 (3) by inserting before the period at the end the 

4 following: ‘‘, or, in the case of a State that had a 

5 statewide waiver in effect under section 1115 with 

6 respect to title XIX that was first implemented on 

7 October 1, 1993, had an income eligibility standard 

8 under such waiver for children that was at least 185 

9 percent of the poverty line and on and after July 1, 

10 1998, has an income eligibility standard for children 

11 under section 1902(a)(10)(A) or a statewide waiver 

12 in effect under section 1115 with respect to title 

13 XIX that is at least 185 percent of the poverty 

14 line’’.

Æ
§ 332.14 Exceptions to notice and opt out requirements for processing and servicing transactions. ( a ) *Exceptions for processing transactions at consumer's request.* The requirements for initial notice in § 332.4(a)(2), for the opt out in §§ 332.7 and 332.10 and for service providers and joint marketing in § 332.13 do not apply if you disclose nonpublic personal information as necessary to effect, administer, or enforce a transaction that a consumer requests or authorizes, or in connection with: ( 1 ) Servicing or processing a financial product or service that a consumer requests or authorizes;
( 2 ) Maintaining or servicing the consumer's account with you, or with another entity as part of a private label credit card program or other extension of credit on behalf of such entity; or
( 3 ) A proposed or actual securitization, secondary market sale (including sales of servicing rights), or similar transaction related to a transaction of the consumer.
( b ) *Necessary to effect, administer, or enforce a transaction* means that the disclosure is: ( 1 ) Required, or is one of the lawful or appropriate methods, to enforce your rights or the rights of other persons engaged in carrying out the financial transaction or providing the product or service; or
( 2 ) Required, or is a usual, appropriate or acceptable method: ( i ) To carry out the transaction or the product or service business of which the transaction is a part, and record, service, or maintain the consumer's account in the ordinary course of providing the financial service or financial product;
( ii ) To administer or service benefits or claims relating to the transaction or the product or service business of which it is a part;
( iii ) To provide a confirmation, statement, or other record of the transaction, or information on the status or value of the financial service or financial product to the consumer or the consumer's agent or broker;
( iv ) To accrue or recognize incentives or bonuses associated with the transaction that are provided by you or any other party;
( v ) To underwrite insurance at the consumer's request or for reinsurance purposes, or for any of the following purposes as they relate to a consumer's insurance: account administration, reporting, investigating, or preventing fraud or material misrepresentation, processing premium payments, processing insurance claims, administering insurance benefits (including utilization review activities), participating in research projects, or as otherwise required or specifically permitted by Federal or State law; or
( vi ) In connection with: ( A ) The authorization, settlement, billing, processing, clearing, transferring, reconciling or collection of amounts charged, debited, or otherwise paid using a debit, credit, or other payment card, check, or account number, or by other payment means;
( B ) The transfer of receivables, accounts, or interests therein; or
( C ) The audit of debit, credit, or other payment information.
#### § 622.56 Request for formal hearing on assessment.

An institution or person being assessed may request a formal hearing to challenge the assessment of a civil money penalty. The request must be filed in writing, within 10 days of the issuance of the notice of assessment, with the Chairman of the Board, FCA, 1501 Farm Credit Drive, McLean, VA 22102-5090.
## IN THE COURT O F CRIMINA L A PPEA LS OF TEXAS NO. WR-83,391-01

EX P ARTE LANEY P AUL BREWER, App licant
ON AP P LICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORP US CAUSE NO. W-65081-01-E IN THE 108TH DIS TRICT COURT

F ROM P OTTE R COUNTY
Per curiam . O P I N I O N Pursuant to the provisions of Ar t i cl e 1 1
. 07 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedur e, the cler k of the trial court transmitted to this Court this application for a writ of habea s corpus. Ex parte Y oung , 418 S.W .2d 824, 826 (Tex. Crim
. Ap p . 1 9 6 7). Applicant was convicted of ag gravated robber y and sentenc ed to fifty-one year s’ imprisonment. The Seventh Court of Appea ls aff irmed his convicti o n . Brewer v. State , No. 07-14-00040- CR (Tex. App.—Amarillo Dec
. 4, 2014) (not designated f

or publication). Applicant contends that he was denied his right to pursue a pro se petition for discretionar y revie w through no fault of his own. We r emande d this application to the trial court for finding s of2

fac t and conc lusions of law. Trial counsel has provided an aff idavit. The appellate opinion was handed down Dec ember 4, 2014, and counse l states that he mailed a copy of the opini on and a le tter advisingApplicant of his pro se PDR rights on Dec ember 8, 2014, which letter he attache s. The trial court obtained mail logs from Applicant’s prison unit. Applica nt r ece ived the letter

from appe llate counse l on January 8, 2015. The trial court finds that, a lthough counsel timely mailed not ification t o Applicant of the decision and of his PDR rights, “[Applicant] did not rec eive notice within the period which he could file pro se petition for discre tionary revie w endingJ anuar

y 5, 2015.” We find, there fore , that Applicant is entitled to the opportunity to file an out-of-time petition for discretionar

y revie w of the judgme nt of the Seventh Court of Appea ls in Cause No. 07-14-00040- C R that aff

irmed his conviction in Cause No. 65,081-E from the 108th District Court of Pott er County
. See Ex parte Riley , 193 S.W .3d 900 (Tex. Crim. App. 2 0 0 6 ) (hol ding in case s wher e counsel was not ineffe ctive but there has been a brea kdown in the sy stem, due proce ss require s that
an applicant be permitted to exercise his statutory right to the appellate proce eding ). Applicant shall file his petition for discretionar y revie w with this Court within 30 d ay s o f th e d ate on which this Court’s mandate issues.

Deliver ed: Marc h 9, 2016 Do not publish