alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
RE: Exemption data for ATR42 

From: Steve Slotte 

To: jamoritz 

12/31/2013 07:19 AM 

Cc: Gaetano Sciortino, Paul Siegmund, Richard Beckwith, Mark Forseth 

Mr. Moritz, 

I will close the docket. Advisory circular (AC) 25-16 is still an active AC, however, please coordinate 

compliance activities related to 25.869(a)(4) for the wires that are the subject of the exemption request 

with the New York ACO. 

Best Regards, 

Stephen Slotte 

FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate 

Airplane and Flightcrew Interface Branch, ANM-111 

1601 Lind Ave SW 

Renton, WA 98057 USA 

Telephone: 425-227-2315 

Facsimile: 425-227-1320 

-----"John A. Moritz" <jamoritz@delta-engineering.com> wrote: ----- 

To: Steve Slotte/ANM/FAA@FAA 

From: "John A. Moritz" <jamoritz@delta-engineering.com> 

Date: 12/30/2013 03:55PM 

Cc: Paul Siegmund/ANM/FAA@FAA, Richard Beckwith/AEA/FAA@FAA, Gaetano 

Sciortino/ANE/FAA@FAA 

Subject: RE: Exemption data for ATR42 

Mr. Slotte, 

I can confirm by test that an internal fire cannot propagate to other locations and therefore use the ELOS 

provided in 25-16. 

You can close the docket. Please confirm we can use the ELOS provided in AC 25-16. 

A) Enclosed in a case made of metal or other material that complies with the flammability requirements of 

Amendment 25-32 that will either contain an internal fire so that it cannot propagate to other locations or 

is sufficiently airtight that internal ignition sources cannot cause a fire; or 

John A. Moritz 

ODA Lead Administrator 

Delta Engineering 

13 DRBA Way 

New Castle County Airport 

New Castle, Delaware 19720 

Office: (302) 325-9337 
Cell: (302) 521-5139 

FAX: (302) 325-9322 

From: Steve.Slotte@faa.gov [mailto:Steve.Slotte@faa.gov] 

Sent: Monday, December 30, 2013 6:37 PM 

To: jamoritz@delta-engineering.com 

Cc: Paul.Siegmund@faa.gov 

Subject: Re: Exemption data for ATR42 

Mr. Moritz, 

It appears from our conversations with you, and the data you have sent via email, you believe that you 

can either directly comply with the requirements of 25.869(a)(4) or show an equivalent level of safety to 

those requirements. If you are pursuing the direct compliance/ELOS route, then an exemption from the 

requirements of 25.869(a)(4) would not be necessary. 

Can you confirm to me that you wish to withdraw your request? Upon receipt of that confirmation I will 

close the docket. 

Best Regards, 

Stephen Slotte 

FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate 

Airplane and Flightcrew Interface Branch, ANM-111 

1601 Lind Ave SW 

Renton, WA 98057 USA 

Telephone: 425-227-2315 

Facsimile: 425-227-1320 

From: "John A. Moritz" <jamoritz@delta-engineering.com> 

ANM-111, Airplane & Flight Crew Interface 

To: Paul Siegmund/ANM/FAA@FAA, Steve Slotte/ANM/FAA@FAA,

Date: 12/17/2013 08:53 AM

Subject: Exemption data for ATR42 

Mr. Siegmund, 

Do you also we me to put a copy on the Docket website? 

John A. Moritz 

ODA Lead Administrator 

Delta Engineering 

13 DRBA Way 

New Castle County Airport 

New Castle, Delaware 19720 

Office: (302) 325-9337 

Cell: (302) 521-5139 

FAX: (302) 325-9322
###### Editorial Note on Part 221

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 221 appear at 84 FR 15929, Apr. 16, 2019.

#### § 221.102 Accessibility of tariffs to the public.

Each file of tariffs shall be kept in complete and accessible form. Employees of the carrier shall be required to give any desired information contained in such tariffs, to lend assistance to seekers of information therefrom, and to afford inquirers opportunity to examine any of such tariffs without requiring the inquirer to assign any reason for such desire.
#### In the Matter of Eduardo T., a Person Alleged to be a Juvenile Delinquent, Appellant.

[698 NYS2d 48]

—In a juvenile *303delinquency proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 3, the appeal is from an order of disposition of the Family Court, Kings County (Elkins, J.), dated February 13, 1998, which, upon a fact-finding order of the same court, dated November 24, 1997, made after a hearing, finding that the appellant had committed an act which, if committed by an adult, would have constituted the crime of criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree, adjudged him to be a juvenile delinquent and placed him in a juvenile intensive supervision program for a period of two years. The appeal brings up for review the fact-finding order and the denial of that branch of the appellant’s omnibus motion which was to suppress physical evidence.

Ordered that the order of disposition is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

The branch of the appellant’s motion which was to suppress the weapon was properly denied. Contrary to the appellant’s contention, the manner in which the police officers approached him constituted only a minimal intrusion to request information *(cf., People v De Bour,*40 NY2d 210). Once the officers came within three feet of the appellant and observed the outline of a firearm in his pocket, they could lawfully conduct a pat down search and retrieve the firearm it revealed *(cf., People v Trulio,*135 AD2d 758). Mangano, P. J., Bracken, S. Miller and Sullivan, JJ., concur.
§ 382.101 What other boarding and deplaning assistance must carriers provide? When level-entry boarding and deplaning assistance is not required to be provided under this subpart, you must, as a carrier, provide or ensure the provision of boarding and deplaning assistance by any available means to which the passenger consents. However, you must never use hand-carrying (*i.e.,* directly picking up the passenger's body in the arms of one or more carrier personnel to effect a level change the passenger needs to enter or leave the aircraft), even if the passenger consents, unless this is the only way of evacuating the individual in the event of an emergency. The situations in which level-entry boarding is not required but in which you must provide this boarding and deplaning assistance include, but are not limited to, the following: ( a ) The boarding or deplaning process occurs at a U.S. airport that is not a commercial service airport that has 10,000 or more enplanements per year;
( b ) The boarding or deplaning process occurs at a foreign airport;
( c ) You are using an aircraft subject to an exception from the lift boarding and deplaning assistance requirements under § 382.97 (a)-(c) of this subpart;
( d ) The deadlines established in § 382.99(c) have not yet passed; and
( e ) Circumstances beyond your control (*e.g.,* unusually severe weather; unexpected mechanical problems) prevent the use of a lift.
Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:4206-3 Filed:11/09/18 Entered:11/09/18 22:19:52 Desc:

Exhibit Page 1 of 1
§ 313.3 Definitions. As used in this part: ( a ) *Energy efficiency* means the ratio of the useful output of services in air transportation to the energy consumption of such services.
( b ) *Energy statement* is a statement of the probable impact of a major regulatory action on energy efficiency and energy conservation, contained in a decision, opinion, order, or rule.
( c ) *Major regulatory action* is any decision by the DOT decisionmaker or administrative law judge requiring an energy statement pursuant to § 313.4 of this part.
( d ) *NEPA* means the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969.
[Doc. No. 82, 50 FR 2425, Jan. 16, 1985, as amended at 60 FR 43529, Aug. 22, 1995, as amended by Doc. No. DOT-OST-2014-0140, 84 FR 15938, Apr. 16, 2019]
#### § 303.44 Show cause proceedings.

If the Assistant Secretary determines that an application, or review of a previously granted application, will be considered in a show cause proceeding, a tentative decision shall be issued inviting interested persons to show cause why the tentative decision should not be made final. Interested persons may respond to the order within the time specified in the order. Replies to such responses shall be permitted within the time specified in the order. Persons wishing to introduce additional facts into the record should incorporate such information in their responses or replies by affidavit. In the case of applications, show cause orders may be issued after the receipt of initial comments on the application.
B2500A (Form 2500A) ( )

In re , ) Case No. 

Debtor ) 

) Chapter

) 

)

Plaintiff ) 

) 

v. ) Adv. Proc. No. 

)

) 

Defendant ) 

SUMMONS IN AN ADVERSARY PROCEEDING

YOU ARE SUMMONED and required to file a motion or answer to the complaint which is 

attached to this summons with the clerk of the court within 30 days after the date of issuance of

this summons, except that the United States and its office s and agencies shall file a motion or answer 

to the complaint within 35 days.

If you make a motion, your time to answer is governed by Fed. R. Bankr. P. 7012. 

Date:

Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:3059-2 Filed:05/14/18 Entered:05/14/18 16:29:17 Desc:

Exhibit Summons Page 1 of 2
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I, (name), certify that service of this summons and a copy of 

the complaint was made (date) by:

Mail service: Regular, first class United States mail, postage fully pre-paid, addressed

to:

Personal Service: By leaving the process with the defendant or with an officer or agent

of defendant at:

Residence Service: By leaving the process with the following adult at:

Certified Mail Service on an Insured Depository Institution: By sending the process by

certified mail addressed to the following officer of the defendant at:

Publication: The defendant was served as follows: [Describe briefly]

State Law: The defendant was served pursuant to the laws of the State of , as 

follows: [Describe briefly]

If service was made by personal service, by residence service, or pursuant to state law, I further 

certify that I am, and at all times during the service of process was, not less than 18 years of age and 

not a party to the matter concerning which service of process was made.

Under penalty of perjury, I declare that the foregoing is true and correct.

Date Signature 

Print Name: 

Business Address:

Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:3059-2 Filed:05/14/18 Entered:05/14/18 16:29:17 Desc:

Exhibit Summons Page 2 of 2
**EXHIBIT
      32.2**





**CERTIFICATE
      OF THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER**


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


**AS
      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**


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





Solely
      for the purposes of complying with 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant
      to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, I, the undersigned Chief
      Financial Officer of Auriga Laboratories, Inc. (the “Company”), hereby certify
      that, to the best of my knowledge, the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of the
      Company for the quarter ended September 30, 2007 (the “Report”) fully complies
      with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange
      Act
      of 1934 and that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in
      all
      material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
      Company.




/s/ Frank
              R.
              GreicoFrank
                R. GreicoChief
                Financial Officer




November
        9, 2007







A
      signed
      original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided
      to
      Auriga Laboratories, Inc. and will be retained by Auriga Laboratories, Inc.
      and
      furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
      request.
Editorial Note on Part 221
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 221 appear at 84 FR 15929, Apr. 16, 2019.

§ 221.53 Proportional fares. ( a ) *Definite application.* Add-on fares shall be specifically designated as “add-on” fares on each page where they appear.
( b ) A tariff may provide that fares from (or to) particular points shall be determined by the addition of add-ons to, or the deduction of add-ons from, fares therein which apply from (or to) a base point. Provisions for the addition or deduction of such add-ons shall be shown either directly in connection with the fare applying to or from the base point or in a separate provision which shall specifically name the base point. The tariff shall clearly and definitely state the manner in which such add-ons shall be applied.
( c ) *Restrictions upon beyond points or connecting carriers.* If an add-on fare is intended for use only on traffic originating at and/or destined to particular beyond points or is to apply only in connection with particular connecting carriers, such application shall be clearly and explicitly stated directly in connection with such add-on fare.
Exhibit 31.1



CERTIFICATION



I, George P. Ahearn, certify that:



1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of GEO Specialty Chemicals, Inc.;



2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material
fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;



3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this quarterly report,
fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;



4. The registrants other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure
controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and we have:



(a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure
that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;



(b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls
and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and



(c) disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal
control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter (the registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially
affect, the registrants internal control over financial reporting; and



5. The registrants other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the audit committee of
the registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent function):



(a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrants ability to record,
process, summarize and report financial information; and



(b)
any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrants internal control over financial reporting.





|Date: August 14, 2003 |  |  |  | By: |  | /s/    GEORGE P. AHEARN
|--------------------- |  |  |  | --- |  | -----------------------
|                      |  |  |  |     |  |
#### Hawley *vs.*Green & Brooks.

In *replevin,*where the plaintiff has a verdict for nominal damages, but the value of the property is not assessedby the jury, the plaintiffis not entitled to costs of increase; the appraisal by the sheriff on taking the replevin bond will not help him.

Costs in replevin. The verdict was for the plaintiff, with nominal damages; but the jury did not assess the value of the property replevied. It had been ascertained by the sheriff, who took the replevin bond at $55, and the plaintiff had his costs taxed at the common pleas rate, which he collected. A motion was made to set aside the judgment as to costs of increase, and to refund.

*By the Court,*

Cowen, J.

The motion must be granted. The better eonstruc*344tion of the statute is, that to carry costs on the value of the property, the value must be assessed by the jury, (2 *R. S.*437, § 48, *2d ed.,)*and not by the sheriff’s appraisal. (12 *Wendell,*38.) When the cause is tried, a part of the goods may be awarded to the plaintiff and a part to the defendant. In such case, the original appraisal would be no guide. Motion granted.
AFS-10-408-E 

October 14, 2010 

 Exemption No. 6002H 

 Regulatory Docket No. FAA-2002-12804 

Mr. Matthew S. Zuccaro 

President 

Helicopter Association International 

1635 Prince Street 

Alexandria, VA 22314 

Dear Mr. Zuccaro: 

This letter is to inform you that we have granted your petition to extend Exemption No. 6002, 

as amended. It explains the basis for our decision and describes its effect. 

The Basis for Our Decision 

By letter dated September 14, 2010, you petitioned the Federal Aviation Administration 

(FAA) on behalf of Helicopter Association International (HAI) and the Association of Air 

Medical Services (AAMS) for an extension of Exemption No. 6002. That exemption from 

§ 43.3 (g) of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations allows HAI and AAMS to remove and 

reinstall Liquid Oxygen System (LOX) containers in their aircraft. Pilots may do this after 

receiving and documenting appropriate training in this task by a properly certificated airframe 

mechanic, subject to certain conditions and limitations stated therein. 

In your petition, you indicate there has been no change in the conditions and reasons relative 

to public interest and safety that were the basis for granting the original exemption. 

The FAA has determined that good cause exists for not publishing a summary of the petition 

in the Federal Register because the requested extension of the exemption would not set a 

precedent, and any delay in acting on this petition would be detrimental to HAI and AAMS. 
 2

Our Decision 

The FAA has determined the justification for the issuance of Exemption No. 6002, as 

amended, remains valid with respect to this exemption and is in the public interest. 

Therefore, under the authority provided by 49 U.S.C. 40113 and 44701, which the FAA 

Administrator has delegated to me, I grant your petition. 

The Effect of Our Decision 

Our decision extends the termination date of Exemption No. 6002, as amended, to 

January 31, 2013, unless sooner superseded or rescinded. 

All conditions and limitations of Exemption No. 6002, as amended, remain the same. This 

letter must be attached to, and is a part of, Exemption No. 6002. 

Sincerely, 

/s/ 

Raymond Towles 

Acting Director, Flight Standards Service
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO

Transmittal of Record to the Court of Appeals

DATE: October 10, 2018 

BK Case: 17-3283 LTS 

APPEAL FEE PAID: YES X _ NO 

 

CASE CAPTION: In re: Commonwealth of Puerto Rico 

 

IN FORMA PAUPERIS: YES NO X 

MOTIONS PENDING: YES NO X _ 

 

NOTICE OF APPEAL FILED BY: Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors of all Title III 

Debtors (other than COFINA) 

APPEAL FROM: Memorandum Order entered on 9/18/2018 

 

SPECIAL COMMENTS: Copies of original documents. 

 

INDEX OF DOCUMENTS INCLUDED AS THE RECORD ON APPEAL: 

DOCUMENTS: 

 VOLUMES: 

Docket Entries 3797, 3941, 3998 I 

I HEREBY CERTIFY that the enclosed documents contained herein are copies or the original pleadings as 

described above and constitute the record on appeal in the case. 

 

 

 FRANCES RIOS DE MORAN 

 Clerk of the Court 

 S/ Marian B. Ramirez-Rivera 

 Marian B. Ramirez-Rivera 

 Deputy Clerk 

Acknowledgment of Receipt: 

Received By: ________________ 

USCCA #: ________________ s/c: CM/ECF Parties, Appeals Clerk

Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:4042 Filed:10/10/18 Entered:10/10/18 14:21:33 Desc: Main

Document Page 1 of 1
Exhibit 32.1
                            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 on Form 10-Q of Capital Bank Corporation
(the "Company") for the period ended March 31, 2004 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, B. Grant Yarber,
President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, to my knowledge 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 Company.


/s/ B. Grant Yarber
-------------------------------------
B. Grant Yarber
President and Chief Executive Officer
May 7, 2004

This Certification is being furnished solely to accompany the Report pursuant to
18 U.S.C. ss.1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002 and shall not be deemed "filed" by the Company for purposes of Section
18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and shall not be
incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company under the Securities
Act of 1933, as amended, or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended,
whether made before or after the date of this Report, irrespective of any
general incorporation language contained in such filing.

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.


                                     - 45 -
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 87 (Thursday, May 4, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 25948]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-11120]


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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

[TA-W-36,108 & NAFTA 3,104]


Sherman Lumber Company, Sherman Station, ME; Notice of Negative 
Determination on Reconsideration

    On August 17, 1999, the Department issued an Affirmative 
Determination Regarding Application for Reconsideration for the workers 
and former workers of the subject firm. The notice was published in the 
Federal Register on August 31, 1999 (64 FR 47521).
    The Department initially denied TAA to workers of Sherman Lumber 
because the ``contributed importantly'' group eligibility requirement 
of Section 222(3) of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, was not met. 
The workers at the subject firm were engaged in employment related to 
the production of maple flooring.
    The petitioner asserted that sufficient customers have not been 
surveyed and requested that the Department survey bids lost by the 
subject firm.
    On reconsideration, the Department requested that the subject firm 
provide additional information about customers and lost bids. The 
Department conducted a survey of lost domestic bids by the subject 
firm. The respondents indicated that their purchase of maple flooring 
were from domestic manufacturers.

Conclusion

    After reconsideration, I affirm the original notice of negative 
determination of eligibility to apply for worker adjustment assistance 
for workers and former workers of Sherman Lumber, Sherman Station, 
Maine.

    Signed at Washington, DC, this 21st day of April, 2000.
Edward A. Tomchick,
Program Manager, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. 00-11120 Filed 5-3-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-30-M