alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 1262.201 Contents of application. ( a ) An application for an award of fees and expenses under the Act shall identify the applicant and the proceeding for which an award is sought. The application shall show that the applicant has prevailed and identify the position of an agency or agencies in the proceeding that the applicant alleges was not substantially justified. Unless the applicant is an individual, the application shall also state the number of employees of the applicant and describe briefly the type and purpose of its organization or business.
( b ) The application shall also include a statement that the applicant's net worth does not exceed $2 million (if an individual) or $7 million (for all other applicants, including their affiliates). However, an applicant may omit this statement if the applicant: ( 1 ) Attaches a copy of a ruling by the Internal Revenue Service that it qualifies as an organization described in section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code (26 U.S.C. 501(c)(3)), or, in the case of a tax-exempt organization not required to obtain a ruling from the Internal Revenue Service on its exempt status, a statement that describes the basis for the applicant's belief that it qualifies under such section; or
( 2 ) States that it is a cooperative association as defined in section 15(a) of the Agricultural Marketing Act (12 U.S.C. 1141j(a)).
( c ) The application shall state the amount of fees and expense for which an award is sought.
( d ) The application may also include any other matters that the applicant wishes this Agency to consider in determining whether and in what amount an award should be made.
( e ) The application shall be signed by the applicant or an authorized officer or attorney of the applicant. It shall also contain or be accompanied by a written verification under oath or under penalty of perjury that the information provided in the application is true and correct.
[51 FR 15311, Apr. 23, 1986, as amended at 80 FR 42029, July 16, 2015]
221005 SCH ORD RE GARCIA COLON LIFT STAY VERSION OCTOBER 5, 2022 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO

----------------------------------------------------------x

In re: PROMESA

Title III

THE FINANCIAL OVERSIGHT AND

MANAGEMENT BOARD FOR PUERTO RICO,

as representative of No. 17 BK 3283-LTS

THE COMMONWEALTH OF PUERTO RICO, (Jointly Administered)

et al.,

Debtors.1

----------------------------------------------------------x

ORDER SCHEDULING BRIEFING OF MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM STAY

The Court has received and reviewed the Motion for Relief from Stay (the 

“Motion”) filed by Keila García Colón (the “Movant”). (Docket Entry No. 22501.) Opposition 

papers to the Motion must be filed by October 18, 2022. Movant’s reply papers must be filed by

October 25, 2022. The Court will thereafter take the Motion on submission, unless a party 

thereto requests a hearing.

SO ORDERED.

Dated: October 5, 2022

 /s/ Laura Taylor Swain 

LAURA TAYLOR SWAIN

United States District Judge

 1 The Debtors in these Title III Cases, along with each Debtor’s respective Title III case number 

and the last four (4) digits of each Debtor’s federal tax identification number, as applicable, are 

the (i) Commonwealth of Puerto Rico (Bankruptcy Case No. 17-BK-3283-LTS) (Last Four Digits 

of Federal Tax ID: 3481); (ii) Puerto Rico Sales Tax Financing Corporation (“COFINA”) 

(Bankruptcy Case No. 17-BK-3284-LTS) (Last Four Digits of Federal Tax ID: 8474); (iii) Puerto 

Rico Highways and Transportation Authority (“HTA”) (Bankruptcy Case No. 17-BK-3567-LTS) 

(Last Four Digits of Federal Tax ID: 3808); (iv) Employees Retirement System of the 

Government of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico (“ERS”) (Bankruptcy Case No. 17-BK-3566-

LTS) (Last Four Digits of Federal Tax ID: 9686); (v) Puerto Rico Electric Power Authority 

(“PREPA”) (Bankruptcy Case No. 17-BK-4780-LTS) (Last Four Digits of Federal Tax ID: 

3747); and (vi) Puerto Rico Public Buildings Authority (“PBA”) (Bankruptcy Case No. 19-BK5523-LTS) (Last Four Digits of Federal Tax ID: 3801) (Title III case numbers are listed as 

Bankruptcy Case numbers due to software limitations).

Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:22502 Filed:10/05/22 Entered:10/05/22 10:11:53 Desc: Main

Document Page 1 of 1
§ 121.705 Mechanical interruption summary report. Each certificate holder shall submit to the Administrator, before the end of the 10th day of the following month, a summary report for the previous month of: ( a ) Each interruption to a flight, unscheduled change of aircraft en route, or unscheduled stop or diversion from a route, caused by known or suspected mechanical difficulties or malfunctions that are not required to be reported under § 121.703.
( b ) The number of engines removed prematurely because of malfunction, failure or defect, listed by make and model and the aircraft type in which it was installed.
( c ) The number of propeller featherings in flight, listed by type of propeller and engine and aircraft on which it was installed. Propeller featherings for training, demonstration, or flight check purposes need not be reported.
[Doc. No. 6258, 29 FR 19226, Dec. 31, 1964, as amended by Amdt. 121-10, 30 FR 10025, Aug. 12, 1965; Amdt. 121-319, 70 FR 76979, Dec. 29, 2005]
§ 121.229 Location of fuel tanks. ( a ) Fuel tanks must be located in accordance with § 121.255.
( b ) No part of the engine nacelle skin that lies immediately behind a major air outlet from the engine compartment may be used as the wall of an integral tank.
( c ) Fuel tanks must be isolated from personnel compartments by means of fume- and fuel-proof enclosures.
§ 792.05 What is the significance of records made available and indexed? The records referred to in § 792.02 may be relied on, used, or cited as precedent by NCUA against a party, provided: ( a ) The materials have been indexed and either made available or published; or
( b ) The party has actual and timely notice of the materials' contents.
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 83 (Friday, April 28, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Pages 25014-25015]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-10556]


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

SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION


Data Collection Available for Public Comments and Recommendations

ACTION: Notice and request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, this 
notice announces the Small Business Administration's intentions to 
request approval on a new, and/or currently approved information 
collection.

DATES: Submit comments on or before June 27, 2000.

ADDRESSES: Send all comments regarding whether this information 
collection is necessary for the proper performance of the function of 
the agency, whether the burden estimate is accurate, and if there are 
ways to minimize the estimated burden and enhance the quality of the 
collection, to Bettie Baca, Counselor to the Administrator/Public 
Liaison, Office of Advisory Council, Small Business

[[Page 25015]]

Administration, 409 3rd Street, S.W. Suite 7450.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bettie Baca, Counselor to the 
Administrator/Public Liaison, 202-401-8276 or Curtis B. Rich, 
Management Analyst, 202-205-7030.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Title: ``Advisory Committee Membership--Nominee Information.''
    Form No: 898.
    Description of Respondents: Candidates for Advisory Councils.
    Annual Responses: 700.
    Annual Burden: 93.

Jacqueline White,
Chief, Administrative Information Branch.
[FR Doc. 00-10556 Filed 4-27-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8025-01-P
1

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.,

Debtors.1

PROMESA

Title III

No. 17 BK 3283-LTS

(Jointly Administered)

Motion submitting Part of Exhibit II of BDO Puerto Rico, PSC’s (now known as, Old Puerto 

Rico, PSC) Response to 570th Omnibus Objection

TO THE HONORABLE COURT: 

COMES NOW BDO Puerto Rico PSC (now known as, Old Puerto Rico, PSC) 

represented by the undersigned attorney and respectfully sets forth and prays:

1. Exhibit no. II of the appearing party’s Response to the 570th Omnibus objection contains 830 pages. 

Due to the data storage limits set by the CM/ECF system when filing an exhibit, Creditor BDO Puerto 

Rico PSC (hereinafter “OLD”) must file Exhibit II in parts. ECF no. 24317.

2. Therefore, Creditor OLD will file several notices with Exhibit II divided into parts of approximately 

70 to 95 pages each. With this motion, Creditor includes pages 640-721 and 722-830 of Exhibit II. 

1 The Debtors in these Title III Cases, along with each Debtor’s respective title III case number and the last four (4) 

digits of each Debtor’s federal tax identification number, as applicable, are the (i) Commonwealth of Puerto Rico 

(Bankruptcy Case No. 17 BK 3283-LTS) (Last Four Digits of Federal Tax ID: 3481); (ii) Puerto Rico Sales Tax 

Financing Corporation (Bankruptcy Case No. 17 BK 3284-LTS) (Last Four Digits of Federal Tax ID: 8474); (iii) 

Puerto Rico Highways and Transportation Authority (Bankruptcy Case No. 17 BK 3567-LTS) (Last Four Digits of 

Federal Tax ID: 3808); (iv) Employees Retirement System of the Government of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico 

(Bankruptcy Case No. 17 BK 3566-LTS) (Last Four Digits of Federal Tax ID: 9686); and (v) Puerto Rico Electric 

Power Authority (Bankruptcy Case No. 17 BK 4780-LTS) (Last Four Digits of Federal Tax ID: 3747). (Title III case 

numbers are listed as Bankruptcy Case numbers due to software limitations).

Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:24329 Filed:05/25/23 Entered:05/25/23 15:34:36 Desc: Main

Document Page 1 of 2
2

WHEREFORE, Creditor hereby submits the attached partial Exhibit II for its Response 

to the 570th Omnibus Objection filed today at ECF no. 24317.

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED.

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE: In accordance with Fed. R. Bankr. P. 9014(b), Fed. R. 

Bankr. P. 7004(b), and the Court’s Sixteenth Amended Notice, Case Management and 

Administrative Procedures Order (Dkt. No. 20190-1) (the “CMP Order”), I hereby certify that a 

true and exact copy of the foregoing was sent by electronic mail upon all the parties listed in the 

Master Service List and by U.S. mail upon all the Standard Parties listed in the CMP Order.

 In Guaynabo, Puerto Rico, on May 25, 2023. 

Juan R. Rivera Font, LLC

27 González Giusti 

Ave.

Suite 602

Guaynabo, PR 00968

Tel: 787-250-8040

s/Juan R. Rivera Font

Juan R. Rivera-Font, Esq.

USDC-PR 221703

 juan@riverafont.com

Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:24329 Filed:05/25/23 Entered:05/25/23 15:34:36 Desc: Main

Document Page 2 of 2
§ 121.9 Fraud and falsification. ( a ) No person may make, or cause to be made, any of the following: ( 1 ) A fraudulent or intentionally false statement in any application or any amendment thereto, or in any other record or test result required by this part.
( 2 ) A fraudulent or intentionally false statement in, or a known omission from, any record or report that is kept, made, or used to show compliance with this part, or to exercise any privileges under this chapter.
( b ) The commission by any person of any act prohibited under paragraph (a) of this section is a basis for any one or any combination of the following: ( 1 ) A civil penalty.
( 2 ) Suspension or revocation of any certificate held by that person that was issued under this chapter.
( 3 ) The denial of an application for any approval under this part.
( 4 ) The removal of any approval under this part.
[Doc. No. FAA-2008-0677, 78 FR 67836, Nov. 12, 2013]
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 21-7060

DEVONTAY D. MYLES,

Petitioner - Appellant,

v.

DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY; ROY COOPER; SARAH LIAGUNO; 

COMBINED RECORDS; TODD ISHEE; ERIK A. HOOKS; TIMOTHY D. 

MOOSE; RICKIE R. BENNETT,

Respondents - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at 

Raleigh. Richard E. Myers, II, Chief District Judge. (5:21-hc-02006-M)

Submitted: September 14, 2021 Decided: September 20, 2021

Before THACKER and RICHARDSON, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit 

Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Devontay D. Myles, Appellant Pro Se. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Devontay D. Myles seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing his

28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition without prejudice for failure to exhaust his state-court remedies. 

The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of 

appealability. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(A). A certificate of appealability will not issue 

absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. 

§ 2253(c)(2). When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this 

standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists could find the district court’s assessment 

of the constitutional claims debatable or wrong. See Buck v. Davis, 137 S. Ct. 759, 773-74 

(2017). When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must 

demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable and that the petition 

states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Gonzalez v. Thaler, 565 U.S. 

134, 140-41 (2012) (citing Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000)). 

Limiting our review of the record to the issues raised in Myles’ informal brief, we

conclude that Myles has not made the requisite showing. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b); see also 

Jackson v. Lightsey, 775 F.3d 170, 177 (4th Cir. 2014) (“The informal brief is an important 

document; under Fourth Circuit rules, our review is limited to issues preserved in that 

brief.”). Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. 

We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are 

adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the 

decisional process. 

DISMISSED
**Exhibit 32.2**

 

 **Certification of the Chief Financial Officer**

**Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350**

**(Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002)**

 

I, Timothy K. Schools, the Executive Vice President and Principal Financial Officer of The South Financial Group, Inc. (“TSFG”) certify that to the best of my knowledge, based upon a review of the quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2006 of TSFG (the “Report”): 

 

(1)  The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) 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 TSFG. 

 

*/s/ Timothy K. Schools*

Timothy K. Schools 

Executive Vice President and Principal Financial Officer 

The South Financial Group, Inc.

May 9, 2006

 

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to The South Financial Group, Inc. and will be retained by The South Financial Group, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
§ 107.33 Visual observer. If a visual observer is used during the aircraft operation, all of the following requirements must be met: ( a ) The remote pilot in command, the person manipulating the flight controls of the small unmanned aircraft system, and the visual observer must maintain effective communication with each other at all times.
( b ) The remote pilot in command must ensure that the visual observer is able to see the unmanned aircraft in the manner specified in § 107.31.
( c ) The remote pilot in command, the person manipulating the flight controls of the small unmanned aircraft system, and the visual observer must coordinate to do the following: ( 1 ) Scan the airspace where the small unmanned aircraft is operating for any potential collision hazard; and
( 2 ) Maintain awareness of the position of the small unmanned aircraft through direct visual observation.
# Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

December 29, 2016

No. 04

- 16

- 00737

- CV

IN THE INTEREST OF J.D.A.O., D.E.O., A.R.O., AND E.R.T., CHILDREN

,

From the 57th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2015

- PA

- 00648

Hon orable Martha Tanner, Judge Presiding



### O R D E R

Appellant’s first motion for extension of time to file her brief is GRANTED. Appellant’s brief is due on January 17, 2017

.

_________________________________ Karen Angelini, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said

court on this 29th day of December, 2 016

.

___________________________________ Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA

ALBERTO JULIO GUILLEN, Petitioner, vs. THE SECOND JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA, IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF WASHOE; AND THE HONORABLE SCOTT N. FREEMAN, DISTRICT JUDGE, Respondents, and THE STATE OF NEVADA, Real Party in Interest. No. 69970


# FILED
APR 1 4 2016

TRACE K. LINDEMAN CLER.W SUPREME COURT BY DEPUTY CLERK

ORDER DENYING PETITION This original petition for a writ of certiorari challenges the district court's order affirming petitioner Alberto Guillen's misdemeanor convictions for assault, battery, and making a threatening telephone call. Guillen contends that NRS 51.035 is unconstitutional insofar as it permits a conviction solely on the basis of a victim's prior inconsistent statements without other corroborating evidence.

A writ of certiorari is an extraordinary remedy, lying within the discretion of this court. Zamarripa v. First Judicial Dist. Court, 103 Nev. 638, 640, 747 P.2d 1386, 1387 (1987). The writ may be granted to review the constitutionality of a statute in appealing a decision of the justice court where an appellant was prosecuted under that statute and the district court has ruled on the constitutionality of that statute. NRS 34.020(3). Guillen, however, has not challenged the constitutionality of the offense statutes under which he was prosecuted, but rather challenges the constitutionality of the evidence admitted against him. See Glass v.

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA (0) 1947A i - 117 

### 34,Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 87 Nev. 321, 324, 486 P.2d 1180, 1182(1971)

("Certiorari, although available to test the constitutionality of a statute, is not available to decide a question of the admissibility of evidence."). As this claim does not fall within the narrow scope of NRS 34.020, we decline to exercise our discretion to issue a writ of certiorari.

Having considered Guillen's petition and concluded that extraordinary relief is not warranted, we

ORDER the petition DENIED.

Douglas J.

cc: Hon. Scott N. Freeman, District Judge Washoe County Public Defender Attorney General/Carson City Washoe County District Attorney Washoe District Court Clerk

SUPREME COURT

OF NEVADA 2 (0) 1947T
**                                                        Exhibit      32.2**

**CERTIFICATION      PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**

**AS      ADOPTED      PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION      906      OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

|   | (1). | The                Report                fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) 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. |
|--------|------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Date: October                17, 2006 | /s/Douglas                I. Payne             |
|--------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------------|
|                                       | Douglas                I.                Payne |
|                                       | Chief                Financial Officer         |
#### DANFORD V. THE STATE.

(Decided January 20, 1914.)

Appeal from Anniston City Court.

Heard before Hon. Thomas W. Coleman, Jr.

Charles S. Leyden, for appellant. R. C. Brickell, Attorney General, and W. L. Martin, Assistant Attorney General, for the State.

Walker, P. J.

No error.

Affirmed.
#### § 1203.401 Effect of open publication.

Public disclosure, regardless of source or form, of information currently classified or being considered for classification does not preclude initial or continued classification. However, such disclosure requires an immediate reevaluation to determine whether the information has been compromised to the extent that downgrading or declassification is indicated. Similar consideration must be given to related items of information in all programs, projects, or items incorporating or pertaining to the compromised items of information. In these cases, if a release were made or authorized by an official Government source, classification of clearly identified items may no longer be warranted. Questions as to the propriety of continued classification should be referred to the Chairperson, NASA Information Security Program Committee.
§ 121.429 Pilots in command: Leadership and command and mentoring training. ( a ) No certificate holder may use a pilot as pilot in command in an operation under this part unless the pilot has completed the following ground training in accordance with the certificate holder's approved training program: ( 1 ) Leadership and command training in § 121.419(c)(1) and mentoring training in § 121.419(c)(2); or
( 2 ) Leadership and command training in § 121.420(b)(1) and mentoring training in § 121.420(b)(2).
( b ) Credit for training provided by the certificate holder: ( 1 ) The Administrator may credit leadership and command training and mentoring training completed by the pilot, with that certificate holder, after April 27, 2017, and prior to April 27, 2020, toward all or part of the training required by paragraph (a) of this section.
( 2 ) In granting credit for the training required by paragraph (a) of this section, the Administrator may consider training aids, devices, methods, and procedures used by the certificate holder in voluntary leadership and command and mentoring instruction.
[Amdt. 121-382, 85 FR 10925, Feb. 25, 2020, as amended by Docket No. FAA-2019-0360; Amdt. No. 121-392, 89 FR 51428, June 18, 2024]