alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 135.1 Applicability. ( a ) This part prescribes rules governing— ( 1 ) The commuter or on-demand operations of each person who holds or is required to hold an Air Carrier Certificate or Operating Certificate under part 119 of this chapter.
( 2 ) Each person employed or used by a certificate holder conducting operations under this part including the maintenance, preventative maintenance and alteration of an aircraft.
( 3 ) The transportation of mail by aircraft conducted under a postal service contract awarded under 39 U.S.C. 5402c.
( 4 ) Each person who applies for provisional approval of an Advanced Qualification Program curriculum, curriculum segment, or portion of a curriculum segment under subpart Y of part 121 of this chapter of 14 CFR part 121 and each person employed or used by an air carrier or commercial operator under this part to perform training, qualification, or evaluation functions under an Advanced Qualification Program under subpart Y of part 121 of this chapter of 14 CFR part 121.
( 5 ) Nonstop Commercial Air Tour flights conducted for compensation or hire in accordance with § 119.1(e)(2) of this chapter that begin and end at the same airport and are conducted within a 25-statute-mile radius of that airport; provided further that these operations must comply only with the drug and alcohol testing requirements in §§ 120.31, 120.33, 120.35, 120.37, and 120.39 of this chapter; and with the provisions of part 136, subpart A, and § 91.147 of this chapter by September 11, 2007.
( 6 ) Each person who is on board an aircraft being operated under this part.
( 7 ) Each person who is an applicant for an Air Carrier Certificate or an Operating Certificate under 119 of this chapter, when conducting proving tests.
( 8 ) Commercial Air tours conducted by holders of operations specifications issued under this part must comply with the provisions of part 136, Subpart A of this chapter by September 11, 2007.
( 9 ) Helicopter air ambulance operations as defined in § 135.601(b)(1).
( b ) [Reserved]
( c ) An operator who does not hold a part 119 certificate and who operates under the provisions of § 91.147 of this chapter is permitted to use a person who is otherwise authorized to perform aircraft maintenance or preventive maintenance duties and who is not subject to anti-drug and alcohol misuse prevent programs to perform— ( 1 ) Aircraft maintenance or preventive maintenance on the operator's aircraft if the operator would otherwise be required to transport the aircraft more than 50 nautical miles further than the repair point closest to operator's principal place of operation to obtain these services; or
( 2 ) Emergency repairs on the operator's aircraft if the aircraft cannot be safely operated to a location where an employee subject to FAA-approved programs can perform the repairs.
[Doc. No. 16097, 43 FR 46783, Oct. 10, 1978] Editorial Note
Editorial Note: For Federal Register citations affecting § 135.1, see the List of CFR Sections Affected, which appears in the Finding Aids section of the printed volume and at *www.govinfo.gov .*
Count of Yr of Proposed ListingNAICS_I 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Grand Total321 16 11 11 3 3 4 7 3 6 2 2 2 3 4 5 5 2 1 1 1 1 1 94324 4 1 2 6 1 1 1 1 3 1 1 22325 3 57 19 16 1 1 5 29 5 2 1 7 4 1 2 4 2 3 3 4 2 1 2 3 1 1 2 1813311 12332 14 7 7 5 4 7 22 2 1 1 1 1 2 4 3 4 1 2 3 91334 9 1 14 1 7 20 1 2 2 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 2 71562 184 52 53 17 21 19 65 10 3 2 3 2 1 1 1 3 5 5 4 4 4 1 1 1 2 1 465812 3 2 1 2 1 1 3 1 2 1 1 1 19AG11 1 1 4AT 11BS 11CG 3 1 4 1 1 1 1 113CO 1 12CP 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 8CS 1 1 21 2 1 1 2 11DC 2 13FT 1 2 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 12GP 25 11 16 4 2 7 1 3 3 1 2 2 6 3 6 5 1 5 4 1 4 1 113ID 19 4 6 2 1 2 3 1 2 2 1 1 44MD 2 1 1 3 1 21 11ME 9 5 2 1 4 5 4 2 5 1 1 4 3 5 51NM 3 1 11 11 8None11 2OP 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 10OT 13 6 12 2 3 1 14 1 3 3 1 3 1 1 2 2 1 1 4 74PM 8 2 2 2 1 4 2 2 3 2 4 1 1 1 3 5 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 53PR 3 2 2 4 1 1 13PS 6 1 6 1 1 2 1 1 1 20RA 1 3 5 1 2 1 1 1 1 16RC 1 1 3 1 6RD 1 2 1 15REC 1 42 11 14 6 1 6 19 4 1 2 4 4 3 1 5 3 5 3 1 2 138RW 2 24SE 3 1 1 1 13 10TA 1 2 1 2 28TP 1 1 2 6 1 2 1 1 1 16TS 2 2 1 1 2 7 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 25TW 11 2UK 2 1 14Grand To5 440 137 182 51 40 56 235 36 19 31 25 21 20 15 14 32 45 50 35 10 17 31 15 10 17 20 24 1633
EXHIBIT A 

New Connection with MIP List Parties (or Their Affiliates) 

in Matters Unrelated to the Title III Cases 

MIP List Parties Relationship to Debtors Clients and Their Affiliates 

Redwood Master Fund 

Ltd. c/o Redwood 

Capital Mgmt 

MIP List Schedule 7(B): Plan 

Support Agreement Parties - 

ERS 

Not a client. Parent is a current client.

AES Ilumina, LLC MIP List Schedule 8(D): 

Material Creditors of PREPA 

Not a client. Parent AES Corporation designated 

Paul Hastings LLP as counsel to lender (to be 

determind). 

AES PR Limited 

Partnership 

MIP List Schedule 8(D): 

Material Creditors of PREPA 

Not a client. Parent AES Corporation designated 

Paul Hastings LLP as counsel to lender (to be 

determind). 

AES Puerto Rico MIP List Schedule 8(D): 

Material Creditors of PREPA 

Not a client. Parent AES Corporation designated 

Paul Hastings LLP as counsel to lender (to be 

determind). 

McDermott Will & 

Emery 

Counsel to MIP List Parties 

(Goldman Sachs Asset 

Management, LP and Goldman 

Sachs-related entities) 

Current client. 

Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:24623-1 Filed:06/21/23 Entered:06/21/23 11:05:42 Desc:

Exhibit A Page 1 of 1
#### E. J. D. Sutton, *Plaintiff in*Error, *v.*The State of Florida, *Defendant in Error.*

1. Where the defendant is charged with the statutory offense of wantonly and maliciously shooting at or into an occupied house, testimony as to whether persons in the house were struck by the shots fired into the house is admissible, even though it relates to a distinct crime, since such testimony is relevant to the issue being tried and it may be material.

2. In a prosecution for wantonly and maliciously shooting into an occupied house, testimony that a person who was with the accused at the time was struck by shots fired from the house and that persons in the house were drinking whiskey, is not material to the issue being tried.

*1513. In a prosecution for maliciously shooting into a house, testimony as to the circumstances but not the merits of a previous difficulty between the defendant and a party in the house may be material and relevant in showing a motive for the offense charged.

Appealed from the Circuit Court for Calhoun County.

The facts in the case are stated in the opinion of the court.

*Paul Carter,*for Plaintiff in Error;

*Park Trammell,*Attorney General and *C. O. Andreios,*for the State.

Whitfield, C. J.

This writ of error was taken to a conviction for the statutory offense of wantonly and maliciously shooting at or into an occupied house.

The trial court did not err in permitting a witness to testify that persons, were struck by shots fired into the house at the time of the offense charged, since proof of any fact with its circumstances, even though amounting to a distinct crime, if it has some relevant bearing upon the issue being tried, is admissible against an objection that it is immaterial. Wallace v. State 41 Fla. 547, 26 South. Rep. 713.

There was no error in excluding the testimony of a witness who was with the accused as his wife at the time the alleged offense was committed, that she was struck by shots fired from the house into which the accused shot, as such testimony had no material bearing on the guilt or innocence of the accused under the charge and the testimony of the witnesses. The same rule is applicable to the exclusion of evidence that the persons in the house *152into which the accused shot were drinking whiskey. Such evidence was immaterial to the issue being tried.

No error was committed in refusing to strike testimony of a witness who was in the house shot into, stating the circumstances but not the merits of a difficulty he had with the accused shortly prior to the time the house was shot into by the accused. The circumstances of the previous difficulty tended to show the motive of the accused in committing the act charged against him.

The judgment is affirmed.

Taylor, Shackleford, Cockrell and Hocker, J. J., concur.
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3711 Introduced in House (IH)]

108th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 3711

To amend the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization 
  Act of 2003 (Public Law 108-173) to eliminate the comparative cost 
                          adjustment program.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 20, 2004

Mr. Wexler (for himself, Mr. Frank of Massachusetts, Mr. Owens, and Mr. 
  Jefferson) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
 Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on 
   Ways and Means, for a period to be subsequently determined by the 
  Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall 
           within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization 
  Act of 2003 (Public Law 108-173) to eliminate the comparative cost 
                          adjustment program.

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

SECTION 1. REPEAL OF COMPARATIVE COST ADJUSTMENT PROGRAM.

    Subtitle E of title II of the Medicare Prescription Drug, 
Improvement, and Modernization Act of 2003 (Public Law 108-173) is 
repealed and the provisions of law amended by such subtitle are 
restored as if such subtitle had not been enacted.
                                 <all>
```
EXHIBIT 99.2





CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER


PURSUANT TO


SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


(18 U.S.C. 1350)





In connection with the Quarterly Report of
Wells Real Estate Fund II (the Registrant) on Form 10-Q for the three month period ended June 30, 2002, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the undersigned, Douglas P.
Williams, Chief Financial Officer of the Registrant, hereby certifies, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. 1350) that:





(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 Registrant.





/S/    DOUGLAS P. WILLIAMSDouglas P. Williams Chief Financial Officer August 12, 2002
# NOTICE OF AERIAL PHOT OGRAPHY **Appendix C** 

## Aerial Photos Are Scheduled in y **our Neighborhood** DATE: _________________________ TIME: _________________________ LOCATION:

________________________

______________________________________ 

## Wh **y T ell Me?**  Merely as a curtesy to let you kno w a drone will be airbor ne taking pictures of the abov e mentioned proper ty

. Most neighbors w

ant to know what that flying thing is and what is it doing . 

## Wh **at Are Y**

**ou Photo graphing?**  We will be photog raphing the subject proper ty wi th a conscience effor t to limit our focus on the subject boundar y lines ex cept when neighborhood or subdivision imaging may also be par t of the requested photo shoot.



## Should I be concer **ned a bout Pri**  **va cy or Safety?**  Absolutely not! Aerial Imaging Services (AIS) is committed both safety and priv acy . Our objectiv es are v er y specific while in f

light photog raphy is underway . Achieving the client objectiv e is our only interest and will alwa ys focus on the subject proper ty . We notify the sur rounding and adjoini ng property o wners in adv

ance and state the purpose and time line of the shoot. Ever y pre - flight safety precaution is taken to insure our quad copter is in flight condition and never fly at heights or in proximity to obstructions and power lines that could result in collision. Our quad copter is nev er f lown out of “Line of Sight” and strict weather criteria is alwa

ys adhered to . 

## How do I contact y

**ou with questions or concer ns?**  I c an be reached by text, e

- mail and phone . **Ronald W**

**. Duff**  

### Aerial Ima **ging Ser**  **vices (217) 652**  **- 6025**  **RonDuf f@Ameritech.net**
#### § 1217.102 Background.

In order to encourage and facilitate the use of NASA's launch services for the exploration and use of space, section 116 of Public Law 97-446 provided for the duty-free entry into the United States of certain articles imported by NASA for its space-related activities or articles imported by another person or entity for the purpose of meeting its obligations under a launch services agreement with NASA. Such articles were certified by NASA to the Commissioner of Customs for duty-free entry to be launched into space or space parts or necessary and uniquely associated support equipment for use in connection with a launch into space. This exemption from duty was provided for in Subheading 9808.00.80, Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) (19 U.S.C. 1202). Also, HTSUS, Chapter VIII, U.S. note 1, pursuant to the same law, provided that return of articles by NASA from space to the United States would not be considered an importation, and similarly not be subject to a duty.

As a result of the Uruguay Round agreements of the 1994 General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, this authority was revised and expanded in scope. It now provides that imports of articles for NASA's use and articles imported to implement NASA's international programs, including articles to be launched into space, parts thereof, ground support equipment, and uniquely associated equipment for use in connection with NASA's international programs and launch service agreements would be eligible for duty-free customs entry upon certification by NASA to the Commissioner of Customs. The revised authorities also provided, in U.S. note 1 to subchapter VIII of chapter 98 of the HTSUS, that articles brought into the customs territory of the United States by NASA from space or from a foreign country as part of a NASA's international programs would not be considered imports or subject to customs entry requirements.
MEMORANDUM OPINION

No. 04-10-00185-CV

In the INTEREST OF A.G.P. IV, F.A.P., J.P., and A.C., Minor Children,

From the 37th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2006-PA-02263

Honorable Charles E. Montemayor, Associate Judge Presiding

Opinion by: Steven C. Hilbig, Justice

Sitting: Catherine Stone, Chief Justice

Phylis J. Speedlin, Justice

Steven C. Hilbig, Justice

Delivered and Filed: October 6, 2010

MOTION TO WITHDRAW GRANTED; AFFIRMED 

D.T.C. appeals the judgment terminating her parent-child relationship with A.G.P. IV, 

F.A.P., J.P., and A.C. and the trial court’s order finding her appellate points frivolous. See TEX.

FAM. CODE ANN. § 263.405(d)(3) (West 2008). Appellant’s court-appointed appellate attorney 

filed a motion to withdraw and a brief containing a professional evaluation of the record 

demonstrating there are no arguable grounds to be advanced and concluding the appeal is 

frivolous. The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). See 

In re R.R., No. 04-03-00096-CV, 2003 WL 21157944, *4 (Tex. App.—San Antonio May 21, 

2003, order) (applying Anders procedure to appeals from orders terminating parental rights), 

disp. on merits, 2003 WL 22080522 (Tex. App.—San Antonio Sept. 10, 2003, no pet.) (mem. 
No. 04-10-00185-CV

- 2 -

op.). Appellant was provided a copy of the brief and informed of her right to review the record 

and file her own brief. See Nichols v. State, 954 S.W.2d 83, 85-86 (Tex. App.–San Antonio, July 

23, 1997, no pet.); In re R.R., 2003 WL 21157944, at *4. Appellant did not file a pro se brief.

We have reviewed the record and the attorney’s brief, and we agree with counsel that the 

appellate points do not present a substantial question for appellate review. See TEX. CIV. PRAC.

& REM. CODE ANN. § 13.003(b) (West 2002); TEX. FAM. CODE ANN. § 263.405(d)(3).

Accordingly, we hold the trial court did not abuse its discretion in finding the points of appeal to 

be frivolous. We grant the motion to withdraw and affirm the trial court’s judgment.

Steven C. Hilbig, Justice
§ 703.107 External service providers. ( a ) *General.* A Federal credit union using Derivatives may use External Service Providers to support or conduct aspects of its Derivative management program, provided: ( 1 ) The External Service Provider, including affiliates, does not: ( i ) Act as a Counterparty to any Derivative transactions that involve the Federal credit union;
( ii ) Act as a principal or agent in any Derivative transactions that involve the Federal credit union; or
( iii ) Have discretionary authority to execute any of the Federal credit union's Derivative transactions.
( 2 ) The Federal credit union has the internal capacity, experience, and skills to oversee and manage any External Service Providers it uses; and
( 3 ) The Federal credit union documents the specific uses of External Service Providers in its policies and procedures, as described in § 703.106(c) of this subpart.
( b ) *Relation to § 703.106 .* This section does not alleviate the responsibility of the Federal credit union to employ qualified staff in accordance with § 703.106 of this subpart.
# Official Journal C 124A/17 A

| | ISSN 1977-091X |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 124A |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 6317 April 2020 |

ISSN 1977-091X

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 124A

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 6317 April 2020

---

| Contents | page |
| --- | --- |
| | V   Announcements |
| | ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES |
| | Court of Auditors |
| 2020/C 124 A/01 | Vacancy Notice ECA/2020/6 — Data Protection Officer (one post – AD function group, grade AD 9 – AD 12) | 1 |

Contents

page

V   Announcements

ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES

Court of Auditors

2020/C 124 A/01

Vacancy Notice ECA/2020/6 — Data Protection Officer (one post – AD function group, grade AD 9 – AD 12)

1

---

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN
§ 622.5 Answer. ( a ) *Answer is required.* Unless a different period is specified by the Board, a party who does not wish to consent to a final order must file an answer within 20 days after being served with a notice that commences the proceeding. Any subsequent notice which contains amended allegations and by its terms requires an answer must similarly be answered within 20 days after service.
( b ) *Requirements of answer; effect of failure to deny.* An answer filed under this section shall concisely state any defenses and specifically admit or deny each allegation in the notice. A party who lacks information or knowledge sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of any particular allegation shall so state and this shall have the effect of a denial. Any allegation not denied shall be deemed to be admitted. A party who intends in good faith to deny only a part of or to qualify an allegation shall specify so much of it as is true and shall deny only the remainder.
( c ) *Admitted allegations.* If a party filing an answer under this section elects not to contest any of the allegations of fact set forth in the notice, the answer shall consist of a statement admitting all of the allegations to be true. Such answer constitutes a waiver of hearing as to the facts alleged in the notice, and together with the notice will provide a record basis on which the presiding officer shall file with the Board a recommended decision in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 557. The recommended decision shall be served on the party, who may file exceptions thereto within the time provided in § 622.13.
( d ) *Effect of failure to answer.* Failure of a party to file an answer required by this section within the time provided constitutes a waiver of the party's right to appear and contest the allegations in the notice and authorizes the presiding officer, without further notice to the party, to find the facts to be as alleged in the notice and to file with the Board a recommended decision containing such findings and appropriate conclusions. The Board or the presiding officer may, for good cause shown, permit the filing of a delayed answer after the time for filing and the answer has expired.
§ 121.97 Airports: Required data. ( a ) Each certificate holder conducting domestic or flag operations must show that each route it submits for approval has enough airports that are properly equipped and adequate for the proposed operation, considering such items as size, surface, obstructions, facilities, public protection, lighting, navigational and communications aids, and ATC.
( b ) Each certificate holder conducting domestic or flag operations must show that it has an approved system for obtaining, maintaining, and distributing to appropriate personnel current aeronautical data for each airport it uses to ensure a safe operation at that airport. The aeronautical data must include the following: ( 1 ) Airports. ( i ) Facilities.
( ii ) Public protection. After February 15, 2008, for ETOPS beyond 180 minutes or operations in the North Polar area and South Polar area, this includes facilities at each airport or in the immediate area sufficient to protect the passengers from the elements and to see to their welfare.
( iii ) Navigational and communications aids.
( iv ) Construction affecting takeoff, landing, or ground operations.
( v ) Air traffic facilities.
( 2 ) Runways, clearways and stopways. ( i ) Dimensions.
( ii ) Surface.
( iii ) Marking and lighting systems.
( iv ) Elevation and gradient.
( 3 ) Displaced thresholds. ( i ) Location.
( ii ) Dimensions.
( iii ) Takeoff or landing or both.
( 4 ) Obstacles. ( i ) Those affecting takeoff and landing performance computations in accordance with Subpart I of this part.
( ii ) Controlling obstacles.
( 5 ) Instrument flight procedures. ( i ) Departure procedure.
( ii ) Approach procedure.
( iii ) Missed approach procedure.
( 6 ) Special information. ( i ) Runway visual range measurement equipment.
( ii ) Prevailing winds under low visibility conditions.
( c ) If the responsible Flight Standards office charged with the overall inspection of the certificate holder's operations finds that revisions are necessary for the continued adequacy of the certificate holder's system for collection, dissemination, and usage of aeronautical data that has been granted approval, the certificate holder shall, after notification by the responsible Flight Standards office, make those revisions in the system. Within 30 days after the certificate holder receives such notice, the certificate holder may file a petition to reconsider the notice with the Executive Director, Flight Standards Service. This filing of a petition to reconsider stays the notice pending a decision by the Executive Director, Flight Standards Service. However, if the responsible Flight Standards office finds that there is an emergency that requires immediate action in the interest of safety in air transportation, the Executive Director, Flight Standards Service may, upon statement of the reasons, require a change effective without stay.
[Doc. No. 6258, 29 FR 19194, Dec. 31, 1964, as amended by Amdt. 121-162, 45 FR 46738, July 10, 1980; Amdt. 121-207, 54 FR 39293, Sept. 25, 1989; Amdt. 121-253, 61 FR 2610, Jan. 26, 1996; Amdt. 121-329, 72 FR 1878, Jan. 16, 2007; Docket FAA-2018-0119, Amdt. 121-380, 83 FR 9172, 9173, Mar. 5, 2018]