alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 1264.104 Review by the reviewing official. ( a ) If, based on the report of the investigating official under § 1264.103(b), the reviewing official determines that there is adequate evidence to believe that a person is liable under § 1264.102 of this part, the reviewing official shall transmit to the Attorney General a written notice of the reviewing official's intention to issue a complaint under § 1264.106.
( b ) Such notice shall include— ( 1 ) A statement of the reviewing official's reasons for issuing a complaint;
( 2 ) A statement specifying the evidence that supports the allegations of liability;
( 3 ) A description of the claims or statements upon which the allegations of liability are based;
( 4 ) An estimate of the amount of money or the value of property, services, or other benefits requested or demanded in violation of § 1264.102 of this part;
( 5 ) A statement of any exculpatory or mitigating circumstances that may relate to the claims or statements known by the reviewing official or the investigating official; and
( 6 ) A statement that there is a reasonable prospect of collecting an appropriate amount of penalties and assessments. Such a statement may be based upon information then known or an absence of any information indicating that the person may be unable to pay such an amount.
§ 135.205 VFR: Visibility requirements. ( a ) No person may operate an airplane under VFR in uncontrolled airspace when the ceiling is less than 1,000 feet unless flight visibility is at least 2 miles.
( b ) No person may operate a helicopter under VFR in Class G airspace at an altitude of 1,200 feet or less above the surface or within the lateral boundaries of the surface areas of Class B, Class C, Class D, or Class E airspace designated for an airport unless the visibility is at least— ( 1 ) During the day— 1 ⁄ 2 mile; or
( 2 ) At night—1 mile.
[Doc. No. 16097, 43 FR 46783, Oct. 10, 1978, as amended by Amdt. 135-41, 56 FR 65663, Dec. 17, 1991]
Attachment 17Case:17-03283-LTS   Doc#:24634-17   Filed:06/22/23   Entered:06/22/23 18:57:29    Desc: 

Attachment 17   Page 1 of 3

Case:17-03283-LTS   Doc#:24634-17   Filed:06/22/23   Entered:06/22/23 18:57:29    Desc: Attachment 17   Page 2 of 3

Case:17-03283-LTS   Doc#:24634-17   Filed:06/22/23   Entered:06/22/23 18:57:29    Desc: Attachment 17   Page 3 of 3
‘726 

rotual retiratumt ircm the prsotloe ti barbering. 

Xe do not believe that ft ~8 intended, &en 

l barber avtirea EUTlw es p3riod 0r hi8 aJlnuaL 11. 

oorum, thst the tlm yesalrrstlreznnt period rhaaU not 

oaweeno0 until the oxplmtion of the llaszm p6r:dI 

nor 40 ne bollwe it was lotmded, uncrar suoh criroun8tsr.oes, that t&3 ftv* yradr retirsasnt pmlod ooulii 

have begun aa of the dato af the issmnaa of the atllnual liommo. Ruther, it la cur oplalon thet t&e mtirerunt peerlad tmgt?a &ea the barber eotually rctltnr 

from ths.proatias ai barbering. 

To ho&d that hhie ilre year mtitanaat pork4 

a~niae8 oa the date of the tenninction of a ourrent 

lfoaase period would exsblo II. sraan to ~OUTO hia annual licbnu rotin from the pxotlo6 of barbert= 

ime4latelj thof'ddlft*r, an4 hats not onlytho parLad 

of rlre yasr6 but t&J additional tkxe that hi6 Llcona@ 

brra t0 r~a rOn0w 

3 

his mtirrrscnt 13 wktch to atall 

bimeolf OS the 21% mlonr of s668l0n 20; on the other 

hfml, to hold thet t!m five par retlrisent ;erlcd 

OCEZiOnC68 On th6 d&t6 Of thb b36NallC6 0f th6 liC6n36 

ro~ld prevent the jmraon irota having the full fin 

year0 mtbtm0nt ?~riob OOZtdlDhtQd by the ttstut0 

fm such tim aa ti wcruld harcr praoticsd barbprkxg ioLlcwicg the iomaccs oi hi@ aurrsnt l:asnns snd th6 dat6 

of hit rot?reru,nt Cxnrlng tko snmal liaenss g6ri0d. 

ATTORNEY GEKERAL OF T~CCAS
§ 121.438 Pilot operating limitations and pairing requirements. ( a ) If the second in command has fewer than 100 hours of flight time as second in command in operations under this part in the type airplane being flown, and the pilot in command is not an appropriately qualified check pilot, the pilot in command must make all takeoffs and landings in the following situations: ( 1 ) At special airports designated by the Administrator or at special airports designated by the certificate holder; and
( 2 ) In any of the following conditions: ( i ) The prevailing visibility value in the latest weather report for the airport is at or below 3 ⁄ 4 mile.
( ii ) The runway visual range for the runway to be used is at or below 4,000 feet.
( iii ) The runway to be used has water, snow, slush or similar conditions that may adversely affect airplane performance.
( iv ) The braking action on the runway to be used is reported to be less than “good”.
( v ) The crosswind component for the runway to be used is in excess of 15 knots.
( vi ) Windshear is reported in the vicinity of the airport.
( vii ) Any other condition in which the PIC determines it to be prudent to exercise the PIC's prerogative.
( b ) No person may conduct operations under this part unless, for that type airplane, either the pilot in command or the second in command has at least 75 hours of line operating flight time, either as pilot in command or second in command. The Administrator may, upon application by the certificate holder, authorize deviations from the requirements of this paragraph (b) by an appropriate amendment to the operations specifications in any of the following circumstances: ( 1 ) A newly certificated certificate holder does not employ any pilots who meet the minimum requirements of this paragraph.
( 2 ) An existing certificate holder adds to its fleet a type airplane not before proven for use in its operations.
( 3 ) An existing certificate holder establishes a new domicile to which it assigns pilots who will be required to become qualified on the airplanes operated from that domicile.
[Doc. No. 27210, 60 FR 20870, Apr. 27, 1995]
§ 121.379 Authority to perform and approve maintenance, preventive maintenance, and alterations. ( a ) A certificate holder may perform, or it may make arrangements with other persons to perform, maintenance, preventive maintenance, and alterations as provided in its continuous airworthiness maintenance program and its maintenance manual. In addition, a certificate holder may perform these functions for another certificate holder as provided in the continuous airworthiness maintenance program and maintenance manual of the other certificate holder.
( b ) A certificate holder may approve any aircraft, airframe, aircraft engine, propeller, or appliance for return to service after maintenance, preventive maintenance, or alterations that are performed under paragraph (a) of this section. However, in the case of a major repair or major alteration, the work must have been done in accordance with technical data approved by the Administrator.
[Doc. No. 10289, 35 FR 16793, Oct. 30, 1970]
IIB 

108TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 3733

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MARCH 22, 2004

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

AN ACT

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 410 Huston Street in Altamont, Kansas, as 

the ‘‘Myron V. George Post Office’’.

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

HR 3733 RFS 

1 SECTION 1. DESIGNATION. 

2 The facility of the United States Postal Service lo3 cated at 410 Huston Street in Altamont, Kansas, shall 

4 be known and designated as the ‘‘Myron V. George Post 

5 Office’’. 

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 ‘‘Myron V. George Post Office’’.

Passed the House of Representatives March 16, 

2004. 

Attest: JEFF TRANDAHL, 

Clerk.
| (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 registrant. |

| August 2, 2010                           |   |
|------------------------------------------|--------|
|                                     |   |
|                                     |   |
| /s/Jeffrey R. Immelt                     |   |
| Jeffrey R. ImmeltChief Executive Officer |   |
|                           |   |
| /s/Keith S. Sherin                       |   |
| Keith S. SherinChief Financial Officer   |   |
Exhibit 23.1

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM



We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement Nos. 33-95704, 33-79960, 333-41639, 333-85156, and 333-118313 of Lenox Group Inc. and subsidiaries on Form S-8 of our report dated March 13, 2008, relating to the consolidated financial statements and financial statement schedule of Lenox Group Inc. and subsidiaries, (which report expressed an unqualified opinion with an explanatory paragraph relating to the change in its method of accounting for income taxes to conform to FASB Interpretation No. 48,Accounting for Uncertainty in Income Taxes, an interpretation of FASB Statement No. 109, in 2007), and managements report on the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting as of December 29, 2007, appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of Lenox Group Inc. and subsidiaries for the year ended December 29, 2007.





Parsippany, New Jersey

March 13, 2008



---
Stack Diameter

feet inches

Area 122.88 ft2

Points per Diameter

Port Depth inches

Diameter 150.1 inches

Eff Diameter inches

NOTE: Select a measurement line that passed through the center of the duct 

in a direction through the stratification.

Distance Upstream from Flow Disturbance (A) A

Distance Downstream from Flow Disturbance (B) B

Inches

Inches

# of Ports

Long Measurement Line

Point 1 Point 1

Stratification Points

Inches Inches

Point 2

Point 3

Point 2

Point 3

Point 4

Point 5

Point 6

Point 7

Point 8

Point 9

Point 10

Point 11

Point 12

Inches

Inches

Inches

Inches

Inches

Inches

Inches

Inches

Inches

Inches

Inches

36.82

86.8 Inches

136.78 Inches

Number of Points 24

Duct Diameters A

Duct Diameters B

3.7575

2.0786

14.9

21.81

29.46

38.32

49.28

65.19 Inches

Inches

Inches

Inches

Inches

Point 6

Point 5

Point 4

Point 3

Point 2

Point 1 Inches 108.41

124.32

135.28

144.14

151.79

158.7 Inches

Inches

Inches

Inches

Inches

Point 12

Point 11

Point 10

Point 9

Point 8

Point 7 Inches

Single point allowed for MW 

determination.

Point 1 Inches

Single Point

51.75
|   | (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:      July 15, 2008 | /s/Douglas I. Payne          |
|--------------------------|------------------------------|
|                     | Douglas      I. Payne        |
|                     | Chief      Financial Officer |

----
§ 137.47 Operation without position lights. Notwithstanding part 91 of this chapter, an aircraft may be operated without position lights if prominent unlighted objects are visible for at least 1 mile and takeoffs and landings at— ( a ) Airports with a functioning control tower are made only as authorized by the control tower operator; and
( b ) Other airports are made only with the permission of the airport management and no other aircraft operations requiring position lights are in progress at that airport.
# C_2020098EN.01000201.xml

| 25.3.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 98/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.3.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 98/2

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.9655 — HG/GA/Argus)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2020/C 98/02)

On 6 December 2019, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32019M9655. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32019M9655. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law.

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

---
§ 1203.802 Membership. The Committee membership will consist of the Chairperson, the Executive Secretary, and one person nominated by each of the following NASA officials: ( a ) The Associate Administrators for: ( 1 ) Aeronautics.
( 2 ) Science Missions Directorate.
( 3 ) Human Explorations and Operations.
( 4 ) International and Interagency Relations.
( b ) The Associate Administrator.
( c ) The General Counsel.
( d ) The Chief Information Officer.
( e ) Other members may be designated upon specific request of the Chairperson.
[78 FR 5121, Jan. 24, 2013]
Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:24035-22 Filed:04/19/23 Entered:04/19/23 22:37:35 Desc:

Exhibit Page 1 of 4
Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:24035-22 Filed:04/19/23 Entered:04/19/23 22:37:35 Desc:

Exhibit Page 2 of 4
Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:24035-22 Filed:04/19/23 Entered:04/19/23 22:37:35 Desc:

Exhibit Page 3 of 4
Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:24035-22 Filed:04/19/23 Entered:04/19/23 22:37:35 Desc:

Exhibit Page 4 of 4
#### § 125.361 Flight release under IFR or over-the-top.

Except as provided in § 125.363, no person may release an airplane for operations under IFR or over-the-top unless appropriate weather reports or forecasts, or any combination thereof, indicate that the weather conditions will be at or above the authorized minimums at the estimated time of arrival at the airport or airports to which released.
§ 1206.101 General policy. ( a ) In compliance with the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), as amended 5 U.S.C. 552, a positive and continuing obligation exists for NASA, herein Agency, to make available to the fullest extent practicable upon request by members of the public, all Agency records under its jurisdiction, as described in this regulation.
( b ) Part 1206 does not entitle any person to any service or to the disclosure of any record that is not required under the FOIA.
( c ) The disclosure of exempt records, without authorization by the appropriate NASA official, is not an official release of information; accordingly, it is not a FOIA release. Such a release does not waive the authority of NASA to assert FOIA exemptions to withhold the same records in response to a FOIA request. In addition, while the authority may exist to disclose records to individuals in their official capacity, the provisions of this part apply if the same individual seeks the records in a private or personal capacity.
[79 FR 46678, Aug. 11, 2014, as amended at NASA-2019-0005, 84 FR 54774, Oct. 11, 2019]
#### § 1266.103 [Reserved]
#### State *v.*Howard.

*Habeas Corpus.*

(Decided January 20, 1914.

64 South. 533.)

*Habeas Corpus; Moot Question.*— Where the judgment of conviction had been reversed and annulled by the Appellate Court, an order on habeas corpus fixing the amount of defendant’s bail upon such judgment and conviction, becomes a moot question, and will not be passed upon.

Appeal from Montgomery City Court. ’

Heard before Hon. Gaston Gunter.

*258Aaron Howard was convicted of a felony, and applied by habeas corpus for bail. From an order granting bail the state appeals.

Appeal dismissed.

R. C. Brickell, Attorney General, and T. H. Seay, Assistant Attorney General, for the State.

Merritt & Riley, and O. S. Lewis, for appellee.

PELHAM, J.

This appeal is from an order of the court in a habeas corpus proceeding fixing the amount of the defendant’s bond upon a judgment- of conviction that has been reversed and annulled by this court in the opinion rendered on December 4, 1913, in the case of *Howard v.*State, 9 Ala. App. 74, 63 South. 753. Hence the only question presented on this appeal is a moot one, and, as no useful purpose or end could be accomplished by any judgment Ave might render, we will not investigate or pass upon the case. Let the appeal be dismissed. *—Ex parte Perryman,*156 Ala. 625, 46 South. 866; *Montgomery County v. Montgomery Traction Co.,*140 Ala. 458, 37 South. 208.

Appeal dismissed.
Order entered November 14, 2019

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-19-00106-CV

GORDON CARROLL FISHER, Appellant

V.

DANIEL K. HAGOOD, P. C. AND FITZPATRICK HAGOOD SMITH AND UHL, INC.,

Appellees

On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 1

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. CC-13-05268-A

ORDER

In their letter filed October 31, 2019, appellees stipulated that due to their settlement with 

Gene E. Phillips on September 10, 2018, “[t]he effect of the settlement credit is that, as of 

September 10, 2018, the amount of the arbitration award/judgment due and owing by Fisher is 

reduced to $602,583.24, plus interest of $49.52 per day until paid.” At submission, the Court 

asked appellant’s counsel if he agreed that amount was correct. Appellant’s counsel stated he 

would review the matter and notify the Court whether he agreed to appellees’ stipulation. As of 

the date of this order, appellant has not communicated with the Court regarding the stipulation. 

Accordingly, the Court requests that appellant notify the Court by November 22, 2019 whether 

he agrees to the stipulation.
/s/ LANA MYERS 

PRESIDING JUSTICE
§ 150.33 Evaluation of programs. ( a ) The FAA conducts an evaluation of each noise compatibility program and, based on that evaluation, either approves or disapproves the program. The evaluation includes consideration of proposed measures to determine whether they— ( 1 ) May create an undue burden on interstate or foreign commerce (including unjust discrimination);
( 2 ) Are reasonably consistent with obtaining the goal of reducing existing noncompatible land uses and preventing the introduction of additional noncompatible land uses; and
( 3 ) Include the use of new or modified flight procedures to control the operation of aircraft for purposes of noise control, or affect flight procedures in any way.
( b ) The evaluation may also include an evaluation of those proposed measures to determine whether they may adversely affect the exercise of the authority and responsibilities of the Administrator under the Federal Aviation Act of 1958, as amended.
( c ) To the extent considered necessary, the FAA may— ( 1 ) Confer with the airport operator and other persons known to have information and views material to the evaluation;
( 2 ) Explore the objectives of the program and the measures, and any alternative measures, for achieving the objectives.
( 3 ) Examine the program for developing a range of alternatives that would eliminate the reasons, if any, for disapproving the program.
( 4 ) Convene an informal meeting with the airport operator and other persons involved in developing or implementing the program for the purposes of gathering all facts relevant to the determination of approval or disapproval of the program and of discussing any needs to accommodate or modify the program as submitted.
( d ) If requested by the FAA, the airport operator shall furnish all information needed to complete FAA's review under (c).
( e ) An airport operator may, at any time before approval or disapproval of a program, withdraw or revise the program. If the airport operator withdraws or revises the program or indicates to the Regional Airports Division Manager, in writing, the intention to revise the program, the Regional Airports Division Manager terminates the evaluation and notifies the airport operator of that action. That termination cancels the 180-day review period. The FAA does not evaluate a second program for any airport until any previously submitted program has been withdrawn or a determination on it is issued. A new evaluation is commenced upon receipt of a revised program, and a new 180-day approval period is begun, unless the Regional Airports Division Manager finds that the modification made, in light of the overall revised program, can be integrated into the unmodified portions of the revised program without exceeding the original 180-day approval period or causing undue expense to the government.
[Doc. No. 18691, 49 FR 49269, Dec. 18, 1984, as amended by Amdt. 150-2, 54 FR 39295, Sept. 25, 1989]
ANEXO A 

Relación de reclamaciones objeto de la Quingentésima octogésima cuarta objeción global 

 

Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:24762-2 Filed:07/14/23 Entered:07/14/23 21:17:50 Desc:

Exhibit A Claims Subject to 584 Omni Spanish Page 1 of 2
MONTO DE LA 

RECLAMACIÓN

N.o DE 

RECLAMA

CIÓN

NÚMERO DE 

CASO/DEUDOR

FECHA DE 

PRESENTA

NOMBRE CIÓN

RECLAMACIONES A SER DESESTIMADAS RECLAMACIÓN ENMENDADAS REMANENTE

Quingentésima Octogésima Cuarta Objeción Global

Anexo A: Reclamos para Desestimar

MONTO DE LA 

RECLAMACIÓN

N.o DE 

RECLAMA

CIÓN

NÚMERO DE 

CASO/DEUDOR

FECHA DE 

PRESENTA

NOMBRE CIÓN

 1 03/28/23 17 BK 03283-LTS

El Estado Libre 

Asociado de Puerto 

Rico

MANPOWERGROUP, 180870 $875,000.00

INC.

C/O KOHNER, MANN 

& KAILAS, S.C.

4650 NORTH PORT 

WASHINGTON RD.

MILWAUKEE, WI 

53212

MANPOWERGROUP, 

INC.

C/O KOHNER, MANN 

& KAILAS, S.C.

4650 NORTH PORT 

WASHINGTON RD.

MILWAUKEE, WI 53212

04/19/23 17 BK 03283-LTS

El Estado Libre Asociado de 

Puerto Rico

180866 $875,000.00

Base para: Modificada y reemplazada por una Evidencia de Reclamo presentada con posterioridad.

 2 03/20/23 17 BK 03283-LTS

El Estado Libre 

Asociado de Puerto 

Rico

QUEST DIAGNOSTICS 180865 $350,000.00

OF PUERTO RICO, 

INC.

FAEGRE DRINKER 

BIDDLE & REATH 

LLP

BRETT D. FALLON

222 DELAWARE 

AVENUE, SUITE 1410

WILMINGTON, DE 

19801

QUEST DIAGNOSTICS 

OF PUERTO RICO, INC.

FAEGRE DRINKER 

BIDDLE & REATH LLP

BRETT D. FALLON

222 DELAWARE 

AVENUE, SUITE 1410

WILMINGTON, DE 

19801

04/10/23 17 BK 03283-LTS

El Estado Libre Asociado de 

Puerto Rico

180867 $350,000.00

Base para: Modificada y reemplazada por una Evidencia de Reclamo presentada con posterioridad.

1

Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:24762-2 Filed:07/14/23 Entered:07/14/23 21:17:50 Desc:

Exhibit A Claims Subject to 584 Omni Spanish Page 2 of 2