alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### § 36.5 Limitation of part.

Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 44715, the noise levels in this part have been determined to be as low as is economically reasonable, technologically practicable, and appropriate to the type of aircraft to which they apply. No determination is made, under this part, that these noise levels are or should be acceptable or unacceptable for operation at, into, or out of, any airport.

[Doc. No. 9337, 34 FR 18364, Nov. 18, 1969, as amended by
Docket FAA-2015-3782, Amdt. 36-31, 82 FR 46129, Oct. 4, 2017]
§ 27.1021 Oil system drains. A drain (or drains) must be provided to allow safe drainage of the oil system. Each drain must— ( a ) Be accessible; and
( b ) Have manual or automatic means for positive locking in the closed position.
[Amdt. 27-20, 49 FR 6849, Feb. 23, 1984]
#### § 27.775 Windshields and windows.

Windshields and windows must be made of material that will not break into dangerous fragments.

[Amdt. 27-27, 55 FR 38966, Sept. 21, 1990]
**Exhibit 32.2**

**IDEAEDGE, INC.**

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. §1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Annual Report of IdeaEdge, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-KSB for the period ending September 30, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Jonathan Shultz, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 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.
180427 SUCESIÓN SASTRE WIRSHING LIFT STAY VERSION APRIL 27, 2018 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 OF STAY

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

“Motion”) filed by Sucesión Sastre Wirshing (the “Movant”). (Docket Entry No. 2962.) 

Opposition papers to the Motion must be filed by May 10, 2018. Movant’s reply papers must be 

filed by May 17, 2018. The Court will thereafter take the Motion on submission, unless a party 

thereto requests a hearing.

SO ORDERED.

Dated: April 27, 2018

 /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); and (v) Puerto Rico Electric Power 

Authority (“PREPA”) (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#:2971 Filed:04/27/18 Entered:04/27/18 18:08:57 Desc: Main

Document Page 1 of 1
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Interior

###### Bureau of Land Management

          - [OR-030-00-1020-XU: GPO-0198]

# AGENCY:

Vale District, Bureau of Land Management, Interior.

# ACTION: 

Meeting of John Day/Snake Resource Advisory Council: Enterprise, Oregon, May 23 & 24, 2000.

# SUMMARY:

On May 23, 2000 a field trip to view grazing and weed issues for the John Day/Snake Resource Advisory Council will begin at the Wallowa-Whitman National Forest office, 88401 Hwy 82, Enterprise, Oregon at 8:00 a.m. The meeting will continue on May 24, 2000 at the Wallowa-Whitman National Forest office, 88401 Hwy 82, Enterprise, Oregon from 8:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. The meeting is open to the public. Public comments will be received at 10:00 a.m. on May 24, 2000. The following topics will be discussed by the council on May 24: Hells Canyon Subgroup recommendation on the Hells Canyon Comprehensive Management Plan, John Day River Subgroup update, Blue Mtn. Demo discussion, and a 15 minute round table for general issues.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Juan Palma, Bureau of Land Management, Vale District Office, 100 Oregon Street, Vale, Oregon 97918, Telephone (541) 473-3144.

Juan Palma,

District Manager.

[FR Doc. 00-11043  Filed 5-2-00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310-33-M
[NOT FOR PUBLICATION–NOT TO BE CITED AS PRECEDENT]

United States Court of Appeals

For the First Circuit

No. 00-2010

EUGENE B. BOWLER,

Plaintiff, Appellant,

v.

STATE OF MAINE,

Defendant, Appellee.

APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF MAINE

[Hon. Gene Carter, U.S. District Judge]

Before

 Torruella, Chief Judge,

Campbell and Cyr, Senior Circuit Judges.

Eugene B. Bowler on brief pro se.

Andrew Ketterer, Attorney General, Paul Stern, Deputy

Attorney General, Amy M. Sneirson, Assistant Attorney General,

and William R. Stokes, Assistant Attorney General, on brief for

appellee.

May 21, 2001
-2-

Per Curiam. The judgment is affirmed substantially

for the reasons set forth in the district court's opinion.

To clarify one misunderstanding voiced by plaintiff:

although the Eleventh Amendment by its terms refers only to

suits against a State by citizens of another State, the

Supreme Court has "extended the Amendment's applicability to

suits by citizens against their own States." Board of

Trustees of Univ. of Alabama v. Garrett, 121 S. Ct. 955, 962

(2001); accord, e.g., Strahan v. Coxe, 127 F.3d 155, 166 (1st

Cir. 1997).

Affirmed. See Loc. R. 27(c).
§ 25.1511 Flap extended speed. The established flap extended speed *V* *FE* must be established so that it does not exceed the design flap speed *V* *F* chosen under §§ 25.335(e) and 25.345, for the corresponding flap positions and engine powers.
#### Leon H. Rubin, Respondent, *v.*Edmund P. Cottle et al., Individually and as Executors of Octavius O. Cottle, Deceased, et al., Appellants, and The City of Buffalo et al., Respondents.

(Submitted September 28, 1936;

decided September 29, 1936.)

*Gregory U. Harmon, Corporation Counsel (Bertha J. Strootman*of counsel), for motion.

*Edmund P. Cottle*opposed.

Motion denied upon payment of ten dollars costs to respondent within ten days; otherwise, granted and appeal dismissed, with costs and ten dollars costs of motion.
II 

116TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 4335 

To require the Secretary of Transportation to establish a policy with respect 

to family seating on air transportation, and for other purposes. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JULY 28, 2020 

Ms. KLOBUCHAR (for herself, Mr. MARKEY, Mr. SCHUMER, and Ms. KLOBUCHAR)) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred 

to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation 

A BILL 

To require the Secretary of Transportation to establish a 

policy with respect to family seating on air transportation, and for other purposes. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Fly Together Act’’. 

5 SEC. 2. POLICY ON FAMILIES FLYING WITH YOUNG CHIL6 DREN. 

7 (a) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 180 days after the 

8 date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Transpor9 tation shall establish a policy directing all air carriers proVerDate Sep 11 2014 04:02 Aug 10, 2020 Jkt 099200 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\S4335.IS S4335

kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 4335 IS

1 viding scheduled passenger interstate or intrastate air 

2 transportation to establish policies that enable a child, who 

3 is age 13 or under on the date an applicable flight is 

4 scheduled to occur, to be seated in a seat adjacent to the 

5 seat of an accompanying family member over the age of 

6 13, to the maximum extent practicable and at no addi7 tional cost, except when assignment to an adjacent seat 

8 would— 

9 (1) require an upgrade to— 

10 (A) another cabin class; 

11 (B) a seat with extra legroom; or 

12 (C) seat pitch for which additional pay13 ment is normally required; or 

14 (2) violate safety guidelines. 

15 (b) STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION.—Notwithstanding 

16 the requirement in subsection (a), nothing in this section 

17 may be construed to allow the Secretary to impose a sig18 nificant change in the overall seating or boarding policy 

19 of an air carrier providing scheduled passenger interstate 

20 or intrastate air transportation that has an open or flexi21 ble seating policy in place that generally allows adjacent 

22 family seating as described in subsection (a). 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
3 

•S 4335 IS

1 (c) DEFINITION OF AIR CARRIER.—In this section, 

2 the term ‘‘air carrier’’ has the meaning given the term 

3 in section 40102(a) of title 49, United States Code. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
§ 25.307 Proof of structure. ( a ) Compliance with the strength and deformation requirements of this subpart must be shown for each critical loading condition. Structural analysis may be used only if the structure conforms to that for which experience has shown this method to be reliable. In other cases, substantiating tests must be made to load levels that are sufficient to verify structural behavior up to loads specified in § 25.305.
( b ) - ( c ) [Reserved]
( d ) When static or dynamic tests are used to show compliance with the requirements of § 25.305(b) for flight structures, appropriate material correction factors must be applied to the test results, unless the structure, or part thereof, being tested has features such that a number of elements contribute to the total strength of the structure and the failure of one element results in the redistribution of the load through alternate load paths.
[Doc. No. 5066, 29 FR 18291, Dec. 24, 1964, as amended by Amdt. 25-23, 35 FR 5672, Apr. 8, 1970; Amdt. 25-54, 45 FR 60172, Sept. 11, 1980; Amdt. 25-72, 55 FR 29775, July 20, 1990; Amdt. 25-139, 79 FR 59429, Oct. 2, 2014]
[No. 48059-6-I.

Division One.

November 18, 2002.]

#### The State of Washington, *Respondent,*v. Ruben Contreras, *Appellant.*

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court for King County, No. 00-1-10758-3, Charles W. Mertel, J., entered January 29, 2001. *Affirmed*by unpublished per curiam opinion.
#### RIVERSIDE & DAN RIVER COTTON MILLS v. UNITED STATES

[81 C. Cls. 610; 296 U. S. 624]

Petition for writ of certiorari *denied*by the Supreme Court October 21, 1935.
§ 27.1357 Circuit protective devices. ( a ) Protective devices, such as fuses or circuit breakers, must be installed in each electrical circuit other than— ( 1 ) The main circuits of starter motors; and
( 2 ) Circuits in which no hazard is presented by their omission.
( b ) A protective device for a circuit essential to flight safety may not be used to protect any other circuit.
( c ) Each resettable circuit protective device (“trip free” device in which the tripping mechanism cannot be overridden by the operating control) must be designed so that— ( 1 ) A manual operation is required to restore service after trippling; and
( 2 ) If an overload or circuit fault exists, the device will open the circuit regardless of the position of the operating control.
( d ) If the ability to reset a circuit breaker or replace a fuse is essential to safety in flight, that circuit breaker or fuse must be located and identified so that it can be readily reset or replaced in flight.
( e ) If fuses are used, there must be one spare of each rating, or 50 percent spare fuses of each rating, whichever is greater.
(Secs. 313(a), 601, 603, 604, and 605 of the Federal Aviation Act of 1958 (49 U.S.C. 1354(a), 1421, 1423, 1424, and 1425); and sec. 6(c) of the Dept. of Transportation Act (49 U.S.C. 1655(c)))
[Doc. No. 5074, 29 FR 15695, Nov. 24, 1964; 29 FR 17885, Dec. 17, 1964, as amended by Amdt. 27-13, 42 FR 36972, July 18, 1977]
Exhibit 24.9


                               KEYSPAN CORPORATION

                                POWER OF ATTORNEY



     WHEREAS,  KeySpan  Corporation,  a New York  corporation  (the  "Company"),
intends to file with the Securities and Exchange Commission under the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, an Annual Report on Form 10-K as prescribed by
said Commission  pursuant to said Act and the rules and regulations  promulgated
thereunder.

     NOW,  THEREFORE,  in my capacity as a director of the Company,  I do hereby
appoint GERALD LUTERMAN, JOHN J. BISHAR, JR. and MICHAEL J. TAUNTON, and each of
them  severally,  as my  attorneys-in-fact  with power to execute in my name and
place, and in my capacity as a director of KeySpan Corporation, said Report, any
amendment  to said  Report  and  any  other  documents  required  in  connection
therewith, and to file the same with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have executed this power of attorney this 24th day of
February, 2005.



                                                     /s/Vikki L. Pryor
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1

                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS

    We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration
Statements on Form S-8 (File No. 333-59825, effective July 24, 1998, File No.
333-66331, effective October 29, 1998, Amendment No. 1 thereto dated February
22, 1999, File No. 333-76527, effective April 19, 1999, File No. 333-79919,
effective June 3, 1999 and File No. 333-31330, effective February 29, 2000) of
BindView Development Corporation of our report dated February 10, 2004 relating
to the financial statements and financial statement schedule, which appears in
this Form 10-K. We also consent to the reference to us under the heading
"Selected Financial Data" in such Form 10-K.


                                             /s/ PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS LLP
                                             ------------------------------
                                                 PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS LLP

Houston, Texas
March 29, 2004
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE

K WAMEY SANCHEZ

,

Defendant Below, Appellant,

v.

STATE OF DELAWARE

,
Appellee. § § § No. 137 , 20 2 4 § § Court Below: Superior Court § of the State of Delaware § § Cr. ID No s

. N 1 903002433 & § N2104016130 §

Submitted: June 12 , 20 2 4 Decided: June 18 , 20 2 4

Before SEITZ , Chief Justice; LEGROW and GRIFFITHS , Justices

.

ORDER

(1) T he appellant filed this appeal from a Superior Court order sentencing

him for a violation of probation

. T he Senior Court Clerk sent the appellant a letter

directing him to pay the filing fee or to file a motion and affidavit to proceed in

forma pauperis by April 17 , 2024 , and enclosed the in forma pauperis form . On

April 19 , 202 4 , the Chief Deputy Clerk sent another letter directing the appellant to

either file a motion and affidavit to proceed in forma pauperis or pay the filing fee

by May 3 , 202 4 , or a notice to show cause would issue. The Chief Deputy Clerk

again enclosed the applicable form.

(2) On May 9 , 202 4 , the Chief Deputy Clerk issued a notice, sent by

certified mail, directing the appellant to show cause why the Court should not2

dismiss the appeal for the appellant’s failure to diligently prosecute the appeal by

either paying the Supreme Court filing fee or moving to proceed in forma pauperis

.
In response, the appellant sent a letter apologizing for failing to pay the filing fee

and stating that he was seeking to appeal his sentence; he did not address the option

of moving to proceed without paying the fee

. On May 30, 2024, t he Senior Court

Clerk sent the appellant a letter that held the notice to show cause in abeyance and

gave the appellant another opportunity to either pay the fee or seek to proceed

without paying the fee and once again enclosed the appropriate form. Th at letter

informed the appellant that if he did not pay the fee or file the motion by June 12,

2024, the appeal would be dismissed without further notice

. Because t he appellant

has not paid the filing fee or moved to proceed in forma pauperis

, the appeal must

be dismissed. 1

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED under Supreme Court Rule 29(b),

that the appeal is DISMISSED.

BY THE COURT:

/s/ N. Christopher Griffiths Justice

1 See Owens v. State , 2018 WL 1747790 , at *1 (Del. Apr. 10, 2018) (ORDER) ( “I n his response to the notice to show cause, Owens describes the delays in his filing of a motion to proceed in forma pauperis and states that he still would like to proceed with filing a motion to proceed in forma pauperis

. Owens did not include a motion to proceed in forma pauperis with his [response to the] notice to show cause and still has not filed one. In light of Owens ’ failure to pay the filing fee or file a motion to proceed in forma pauperis , this appeal must be dismissed.”).
#### BROWN, Gd’n, v. TRIANGLE MOTOR CO. et al.

No. 28273.

March 26, 1940.

100 P. 2d *847.*

Edward J. Fleming, of Tulsa, for plaintiff in error.

Hickman & Ungerman, of Tulsa, for defendants in error.

PER CURIAM.

At the conclusion of the trial in the court of common pleas, both defendants interposed a motion for a directed verdict, and the court sustained the motion of the defendant Dave Murdock and overruled the motion of the defendant Triangle Motor Company. Whereupon the issue of liability of the latter defendant was submitted to the jury, which returned a verdict in its favor. Plaintiff prosecutes an appeal from the order and judgment of the court, and on November 10, 1938, filed brief. No brief has been filed by the defendants in error and no excuse offered for failure to file same. The authorities cited in the brief reasonably sustain the allegations of error, and as stated in Osborne v. Osborne, 163 Okla. 273, 21 P. 2d 1056, it is not the duty of this court to search the record to find some theory upon which to sustain the action of the trial court, but in such instance the cause will be reversed and remanded, with directions.

The cause is reversed and remanded, with directions to vacate the order and judgment entered in favor of defendants and to grant a new trial.

BAYLESS, C. J., WELCH, V. C. J., and RILEY, OSBORN, CORN, GIBSON, HURST, DAVISON, and DANNER, JJ., concur.
Exhibit 24.9


                               KEYSPAN CORPORATION

                                POWER OF ATTORNEY



     WHEREAS,  KeySpan  Corporation,  a New York  corporation  (the  "Company"),
intends to file with the Securities and Exchange Commission under the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, an Annual Report on Form 10-K as prescribed by
said Commission  pursuant to said Act and the rules and regulations  promulgated
thereunder.

     NOW,  THEREFORE,  in my capacity as a director of the Company,  I do hereby
appoint RONALD S. JENDRAS,  GERALD LUTERMAN,  JOHN J. BISHAR, JR. and MICHAEL J.
TAUNTON,  and each of them  severally,  as my  attorneys-in-fact  with  power to
execute  in my name and  place,  and in my  capacity  as a  director  of KeySpan
Corporation,  said Report,  any amendment to said Report and any other documents
required in connection  therewith,  and to file the same with the Securities and
Exchange Commission.

     IN WITNESS WHEREOF,  I have executed this power of attorney this 6th day of
March, 2003.




                                                     /s/Edward D. Miller
                                                     -------------------
                                                     Edward D. Miller
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



In connection with the Annual Report of Buffalo Wild Wings, Inc. (the company) on Form 10-K for the year ended December 28, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), I, Mary J. Twinem, Chief Financial Officer of the company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 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.



Date: February 27, 2009



/s/MARYJ.TWINEMMary J. Twinem, Chief Financial Officer








---
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, *v.*John Sanacory, Appellant.

(Submitted October 6, 1936;

decided October 20, 1936.)

*574
      *John Sanacory,*in person, for appellant.

*Walter A. Ferris, District Attorney (William F. Horan*of counsel), for respondent.

Judgment affirmed, no opinion.

Concur: Crane, Ch. J., Lehman, O’Brien, Hubbs, Crouch, Loughran and Finch, JJ.
Exhibit 32.1 to 2011 10-K/A (Amendment No. 1)











CERTIFICATION OF PERIODIC FINANCIAL REPORT BY CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002








In connection with the Form 10-K/A (Amendment No. 1) for the year ended December 31, 2011 of Convergys Corporation (the “Company”), as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on October 3, 2012 (the “Report”), I, Jeffrey H. fox, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:





(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 as of and for the periods covered in the Report.








/s/ Jeffrey H. FoxJeffrey H. FoxChief Executive Officer








October 3, 2012








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





The foregoing certification is being furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission as an exhibit to the Form 10-K/A (Amendment No. 1) and shall not be considered filed as part of the Form 10-K/A (Amendment No. 1).