alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### THERMAL SYNDICATE, LTD., v. THE UNITED STATES

[No. 17333

Congressional.

Decided April 8, 1935]

*447
      *Mr. George A. King*for the plaintiff. *Messrs. Clarence W. De Knight*and *Ernest G. Metcalfe*were on the brief.

*Mr. Percy M.*Cox-, with whom was *Mr. Assistant Attorney General George 0.*Sweeney, for the defendant.

*454Whaley, Judge,

delivered the opinion of the court:

This is one (Senate bill 1526) of a number of cases referred to this court under Senate Congressional Reference Resolution No. 170, 67th Congress, 2d session.

The plaintiff was a tenant of the Bush Terminal Buildings Company and had served on it a commandeer order on June 19, 1918, requiring the possession of its leasehold. Upon receipt of this order the plaintiff leased other premises and vacated the leasehold on or about September 1, 1918. The defendant did not enter into physical possession of the vacated leasehold but, on September 9, 1918, canceled the order for the possession of the premises. The Bush Terminal Buildings Company by agreement with the plaintiff canceled the plaintiff’s lease on November 1, 1918. The plaintiff was required to pay the rent to that date. The facts in this case present a clear taking by the defendant of the lease of the plaintiff for which the plaintiff is entitled to receive just compensation for the fair market value of the lease from the time the plaintiff vacated the premises to the expiration of the lease. *William, Wrigley,*Jr., *Co.*v. *United States,*75 C. Cls. 569. The value of the lease taken by the defendant is $2,052.24. The plaintiff is entitled to a judgment for this amount with interest from September 1, 1918, until paid.

Other expenses which have been proved, amounting to the sum of $2,093.29, are consequential in their nature for which recovery cannot be had.

This cause of action is for the taking of private property for public use and is within the general jurisdiction of this court. *Barnes*v. *United States,*46 C. Cls. 7.

A judgment will be entered for the plaintiff. It is so ordered.

Williams, *Judge;*Littleton, *Judge;*GReen, *Judge;*and Booth, *OMef Justice,*concur.
<PAGE>

                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.51

                   FIRST AMENDMENT TO COST SHARING AGREEMENT
                   -----------------------------------------


          THIS FIRST AMENDMENT is made as of the 1st day of April, 2001, by and
among SELECT TRANSPORT, INC., a Delaware corporation ("ST"), having an address
at 4718 Old Gettysburg Road, Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania 17055, SELECT MEDICAL
CORPORATION, a Delaware corporation ("SMC"), having an address at 4716 Old
Gettysburg Road, P.O. Box 2034, Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania 17055, and SELECT
AIR II CORPORATION, a Pennsylvania corporation ("SAII"), having an address at
4718 Old Gettysburg Road, Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania 17055.


                                  BACKGROUND
                                  ----------

     A.   ST, SMC and SAII executed and delivered that certain Cost Sharing
Agreement dated December 11, 2000 (the "Agreement"), pursuant to which the
parties agreed to share certain costs relating to the operation of a hanger and
aircraft located at Harrisburg International Airport.  All capitalized terms not
specifically defined herein shall have the meanings ascribed to them in the
Agreement.

     B.   ST, SMC and SAII now desire to amend the Agreement as hereinafter
provided.

     NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereto, intending to be legally bound hereby,
covenant and agree as follows:

     1.   Amendment to Section 2. The percentage "40%" which is set forth in the
          ----------------------
second sentence of Section 2 of the Agreement is hereby changed to "25%".

     2.   No Other Modifications. Except as expressly amended hereby, the
          ----------------------
Agreement shall remain unmodified and in full force and effect.
<PAGE>

     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this First Amendment to
be executed the day and year first above written.


                              SELECT TRANSPORT, INC., a Delaware corporation


                              By: Michael E. Salerno
                                 --------------------------
                                   Michael E. Salerno
                                   Treasurer


                              SELECT MEDICAL CORPORATION., a Delaware
                              corporation


                              By: Michael E. Tarvin
                                 --------------------------
                                   Michael E. Tarvin
                                   Senior Vice President


                              SELECT AIR II CORPORATION, a Pennsylvania
                              corporation


                              By: Michael E. Salerno
                                 --------------------------
                                   Michael E. Salerno
                                   Vice President


                                      -2-
##### 



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
  (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 we.
 By:
    /s/ Lawrence D. BainLawrence D. BainChief Executive OfficerBy:
    /s/ Michael S. BrowneMichael S. BrowneChief Financial Officer
§ 33.19 Durability. ( a ) Engine design and construction must minimize the development of an unsafe condition of the engine between overhaul periods. The design of the compressor and turbine rotor cases must provide for the containment of damage from rotor blade failure. Energy levels and trajectories of fragments resulting from rotor blade failure that lie outside the compressor and turbine rotor cases must be defined.
( b ) Each component of the propeller blade pitch control system which is a part of the engine type design must meet the requirements of §§ 35.21, 35.23, 35.42 and 35.43 of this chapter.
[Doc. No. 3025, 29 FR 7453, June 10, 1964, as amended by Amdt. 33-9, 45 FR 60181, Sept. 11, 1980; Amdt. 33-10, 49 FR 6851, Feb. 23, 1984; Amdt. 33-28, 73 FR 63346, Oct. 24, 2008]
II 

Calendar No. 551 

116TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 4653 

To protect the healthcare of hundreds of millions of people of the United 

States and prevent efforts of the Department of Justice to advocate 

courts to strike down the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

SEPTEMBER 22, 2020 

Mr. SCHUMER introduced the following bill; which was read the first time 

SEPTEMBER 23, 2020 

Read the second time and placed on the calendar 

A BILL 

To protect the healthcare of hundreds of millions of people 

of the United States and prevent efforts of the Department of Justice to advocate courts to strike down the 

Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. 

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


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 4653 PCS

1 SECTION 1. PROHIBITING DOJ EFFORTS TO ADVOCATE 

2 COURTS TO STRIKE DOWN PATIENT PROTEC3 TION AND AFFORDABLE CARE ACT. 

4 The Department of Justice may not in any case, in5 cluding in California v. Texas, No. 19–840 (U.S. cert. 

6 granted Mar. 2, 2020), advocate that a court invalidate 

7 any provision of the Patient Protection and Affordable 

8 Care Act (Public Law 111–148; 124 Stat. 119) or any 

9 amendment made by that Act. 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS

pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
Calendar No. 551 

116TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 4653 

A BILL 

To protect the healthcare of hundreds of millions of 

able Care Act. to strike down the Patient Protection and Affordof the Department of Justice to advocate courts people of the United States and prevent efforts 

SEPTEMBER 23, 2020 

Read the second time and placed on the calendar 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
Certification by Chief Executive Officer
 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 June 30, 2011 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, R. Eugene Taylor, President and 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, to my knowledge that:
 
 The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and
 
 The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
 
 
 /s/R. Eugene Taylor
 R. Eugene Taylor
 President and Chief Executive Officer
 August 15, 2011
 
 This Certification is being furnished solely to accompany the Report pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 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 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 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.
### Page 1 of 3 **Disposition Comments Docket No:**  

### FAA - 2013 - 0098 These comments are in **Directorate ID:** 

### 2011 - SW - 039 - AD response to an SNPRM Originating Office Tracking No.: **Next Step:** FRAN SNPRM 

### N o C omments/Only

Supportive Comments Received

– If this box is checked, no signatures are required. No 

### Has the reference d service information been revised since the NPRM was issued? I f ye s, lis t latest revision and attach a cop y. Note that changes beyond the scope of the previously published NPRM will require a new notice. Contact the Directorate focal point for guidance. Instructions: Summarize all comments **by issue** (not by commenter) and provide your recommended resolution of each issue. **All comments relating to the sam e issue should be discussed together.**  Do not list all of the issues from one commenter togeth er. If changes to the AD are required based on the comments received, explain why and describe in detail what change(s) you recommend. Reference FAA - IR- M - 8040.1C Chapter 9. **ISSUE 1:** Select one o

f the following : If other, explain : Commenter(s): What change to the AD action is requested? Why is the change requested or how is it justified? Do we agree? If **YES,** we agree because Make the following changes to the AD: If **PARTIALLY AGREE** , we agree with because We disagree with because

Make the following changes to the AD: If **NO** , we don’t agree because **ISSUE 2**  **:** Select one of the following :

If other, explain : Commenter(s): What change to the AD action is requested? Why is the change requested or how is it justified? Do we agree? If **YES,** we agree because Make the following changes to the AD: If **PARTIALLY AGREE** , we agree with because We disagree with because Make the following changes to the AD:

### Page 2 of 3

If **NO** , we don’t agree because **For additional issues, do uble**  **- click**  **here**

### Page 3 of 3 **S ignature Section**  Signature indicates concurrence with this action. Originating Office Tracking No.: **ASE** Printed Name **: Date** 

**Branch M anager**  **Date**
[if !vml]>[endif]>

[if !vml]>[endif]>

You have reached the FederalDepository Library Program Electronic Collection (FDLP/EC) Archive. Thisarchive assures ongoing access to publications in the FDLP/EC. Access to publicationsin the archive is available through GPO's suite of cataloging and locatorservices, including the Catalog of U.S. Government Publications (CGP). Archived copies of publications are retrieved in the event that publicationsare no longer available from the original publishing agency site. 
**Title:****Downeast LNG project, finalenvironmental impact statement.**
 
SuDoc Number:E 2.11:2131 F
Item Number:0429-V-17 (online)
CGP systemNumber:000927112
 
 
Cover  Letter
Table  of Contents
Executive  Summary
Section  1
Section  2
Section  3
Section  4
Section  5
 
Appendix  A
Appendix  B
Appendix  C
Appendix  D
Appendix  E
Appendix  F
Appendix  G
Appendix  H
Appendix  I
Appendix  J
Appendix  K
Appendix  L
Appendix  M
 
 
 
January 17, 2018
§ 36.805 Noise limits. ( a ) Compliance with the noise levels prescribed under part D of appendix H of this part, or under part D of appendix J of this part, must be shown for helicopters for which application for issuance of a type certificate in the primary, normal, transport, or restricted category is made on or after March 6, 1986.
( b ) For helicopters covered by this section, except as provided in paragraph (c) or (d)(2) of this section, it must be shown either: ( 1 ) When an application for issuance of a type certificate in the primary, normal, transport, or restricted category is made on and after March 6, 1986 and before May 5, 2014, that the noise levels of the helicopter are no greater than the Stage 2 noise limits prescribed in either section H36.305 of appendix H of this part or section J36.305 of appendix J of this part, as applicable; or
( 2 ) When an application for issuance of a type certificate in the primary, normal, transport, or restricted category is made on or after May 5, 2014, that the noise levels of the helicopter are no greater than the Stage 3 noise limits prescribed in either section H36.305 of appendix H of this part, or section J36.305 of appendix J of this part, as applicable.
( c ) For helicopters for which application for issuance of an original type certificate in the primary, normal, transport, or restricted category is made on or after March 6, 1986, and which the FAA finds to be the first civil version of a helicopter that was designed and constructed for, and accepted for operational use by, an Armed Force of the United States or the U.S. Coast Guard on or before March 6, 1986, it must be shown that the noise levels of the helicopter are no greater than the noise limits for a change in type design as specified in section H36.305(a)(1)(ii) of appendix H of this part for compliance demonstrated under appendix H of this part, or as specified in section J36.305 of appendix J of this part for compliance demonstrated under appendix J of this part. Subsequent civil versions of any such helicopter must meet the Stage 2 requirements.
( d ) Helicopters in the primary category: ( 1 ) Except as provided in paragraph (d)(2) of this section, for a helicopter for which application for a type certificate in the primary category is made, and that was not previously certificated under appendix H of this part, compliance with appendix H of this part must be shown.
( 2 ) For a helicopter that: ( i ) Has a normal or transport type certificate issued under this chapter,
( ii ) Has a standard airworthiness certificate issued under this chapter,
( iii ) Has not undergone an acoustical change from its type design,
( iv ) Has not previously been certificated under appendix H of this part, and
( v ) For which application for conversion to the primary category is made, no further showing of compliance with this part is required.
[Doc. No. 26910, 57 FR 42855, Sept. 16, 1992, as amended by Amdt. 36-30, 79 FR 12045, Mar. 4, 2014]
April 3, 2014

JUDGMENT

The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

DRAKE INTERIORS, L.L.C., Appellant

NO. 14-13-00349-CV V.

ANDREA MARIE THOMAS AND ROBERT WARREN THOMAS, Appellees

________________________________

This cause, an appeal from the judgment in favor of appellee, Andrea Marie 

Thomas, signed March 20, 2013, was heard on the transcript of the record. We 

have inspected the record and find error in the judgment. We therefore order the 

judgment of the court below REVERSED and REMAND the cause for 

proceedings in accordance with the court’s opinion.

We further order that all costs incurred by reason of this appeal be paid by 

appellee, Andrea Marie Thomas.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.
Editorial Note on Part 302
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 302 appear at 84 FR 15935, Apr. 16, 2019.

§ 302.29 Argument before the administrative law judge. ( a ) The administrative law judge shall give the parties to the proceeding adequate opportunity during the course of the hearing for the presentation of arguments in support of or in opposition to motions, and objections and exceptions to rulings of the administrative law judge.
( b ) When, in the opinion of the administrative law judge, the volume of the evidence or the importance or complexity of the issues involved warrants, he or she may, either on his or her own motion or at the request of a party, permit the presentation of oral argument, and may impose such time limits on the argument as he or she may determine appropriate. Such argument shall be transcribed and bound with the transcript of testimony and will be available to the Department decisionmaker for consideration in deciding the case.
Exhibit 31.1

                             CERTIFICATION

     I, Sam DiGiralomo, certify that:

1.    I  have  reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q  of  Allstates
WorldCargo,    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 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 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 functions):

    (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.

February 14, 2005

/s/ Sam DiGiralomo
President and Chief Executive Officer
###### Editorial Note on Part 399

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 399 appear at 84 FR 15947, Apr. 16, 2019.

#### § 399.5 Arrangement of policy statements.

The statements of general policy relating to the various duties and functions of the Department are grouped according to subject matter in the following subparts; the titles of the subparts indicate the general subject matter included therein.
Exhibit 32.1



                              CERTIFICATION OF THE
                      CHAIRMAN AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
                             PURSUANT TO SECTION 906
                        OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Annual Report of KeySpan  Corporation (the "Corporation")
for the year ended  December 31, 2004 as filed with the  Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),  I, Robert B. Catell, Chairman and
Chief  Executive  Officer of the  Corporation,  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, 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.


                                    /s/Robert B. Catell
                                    ------------------------------
                                    Name: Robert B. Catell
                                    Title: Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
                                    Date: March 1, 2005
128 STAT. 1178 PUBLIC LAW 113–115—JUNE 9, 2014 

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY—H.R. 3060: 

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 160 (2014): 

Mar. 24, considered and passed House. 

May 21, considered and passed Senate. 

Æ 

Public Law 113–115 

113th Congress 

An Act 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 232 Southwest 

Johnson Avenue in Burleson, Texas, as the ‘‘Sergeant William Moody Post Office 

Building’’. 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 

the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

SECTION 1. SERGEANT WILLIAM MOODY POST OFFICE BUILDING. 

(a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States Postal 

Service located at 232 Southwest Johnson Avenue in Burleson, 

Texas, shall be known and designated as the ‘‘Sergeant William 

Moody Post Office Building’’. 

(b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, regulation, 

document, paper, or other record of the United States to the facility 

referred to in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference 

to the ‘‘Sergeant William Moody Post Office Building’’. 

Approved June 9, 2014. 

June 9, 2014 

[H.R. 3060] 


kgrant on DSKB33CYQ1 with PUBLAW