alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### § 36.801 Noise measurement.

For primary, normal, transport, or restricted category helicopters for which certification is sought under appendix H of this part, the noise generated by the helicopter must be measured at the noise measuring points and under the test conditions prescribed in part B of appendix H of this part, or under an FAA-approved equivalent procedure. For those primary, normal, transport, and restricted category helicopters having a maximum certificated takeoff weight of not more than 7,000 pounds for which compliance with appendix J of this part is demonstrated, the noise generated by the helicopter must be measured at the noise measuring point and under the test conditions prescribed in part B of appendix J of this part, or an FAA-approved equivalent procedure.

[Doc. No. 26910, 57 FR 42854, Sept. 16, 1992, as amended by Amdt. 36-25, 69 FR 31234, June 2, 2004]
**Exhibit 32**

 

**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 accompanyingQuarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Capital Crossing Preferred Corporation (the “Company”)for the period ended September 30, 2007 as filed with the Securities andExchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), each of the undersigned,Richard Wayne, President of the Company and Nancy E. Coyle, Controller of theCompany certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of his knowledge, that:

 

(1)                                              The Report fully complies withthe requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of1934, as amended; and

 

(2)                                              The information contained inthe Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial conditionand result of operations of the Company.

 
|                    |   | **CAPITAL  CROSSING PREFERRED CORPORATION** |
|-------------------------|--------|---------------------------------------------|
|                    |   |                                        |
|                    |   |                                        |
| Date: November 14, 2007 | By:    |                                        | /s/ Richard Wayne |   |
|                    |   | Richard Wayne                               |
|                    |   | *President  (Principal Executive Officer)*  |
|                    |   | * *                                    |
|                    |   | * *                                    |
| Date: November 14, 2007 | By:    |                                        | /s/ Nancy E. Coyle |   |
|                    |   | Nancy E. Coyle                              |
|                    |   | *Controller  (Principal Financial Officer)* |

 

----
§ 25.1203 Fire detector system. ( a ) There must be approved, quick acting fire or overheat detectors in each designated fire zone, and in the combustion, turbine, and tailpipe sections of turbine engine installations, in numbers and locations ensuring prompt detection of fire in those zones.
( b ) Each fire detector system must be constructed and installed so that— ( 1 ) It will withstand the vibration, inertia, and other loads to which it may be subjected in operation;
( 2 ) There is a means to warn the crew in the event that the sensor or associated wiring within a designated fire zone is severed at one point, unless the system continues to function as a satisfactory detection system after the severing; and
( 3 ) There is a means to warn the crew in the event of a short circuit in the sensor or associated wiring within a designated fire zone, unless the system continues to function as a satisfactory detection system after the short circuit.
( c ) No fire or overheat detector may be affected by any oil, water, other fluids or fumes that might be present.
( d ) There must be means to allow the crew to check, in flight, the functioning of each fire or overheat detector electric circuit.
( e ) Components of each fire or overheat detector system in a fire zone must be fire-resistant.
( f ) No fire or overheat detector system component for any fire zone may pass through another fire zone, unless— ( 1 ) It is protected against the possibility of false warnings resulting from fires in zones through which it passes; or
( 2 ) Each zone involved is simultaneously protected by the same detector and extinguishing system.
( g ) Each fire detector system must be constructed so that when it is in the configuration for installation it will not exceed the alarm activation time approved for the detectors using the response time criteria specified in the appropriate Technical Standard Order for the detector.
( h ) EWIS for each fire or overheat detector system in a fire zone must meet the requirements of § 25.1731.
[Doc. No. 5066, 29 FR 18291, Dec. 24, 1964, as amended by Amdt. 25-23, 35 FR 5678, Apr. 8, 1970; Amdt. 25-26, 36 FR 5493, Mar. 24, 1971; Amdt. 25-123, 72 FR 63405, Nov. 8, 2007]
EXHIBIT 21







SUBSIDIARIES OF MANAGEMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL

SOLUTIONS AND TECHNOLOGY CORP.



1.  Names under which subsidiary does business:



Management of Environmental Solutions & Technology B.V. (MEST B.V.)



Jurisdiction of Incorporation: Amsterdam, The Netherlands



Corporate Office Location:

TNO Environmental Technology Valley

Laan Van Westenenk 501

7334 DT, Apeldoorn, The Netherlands

011 31 55 534 7040



2.  Names under which Subsidiary does business:



Manure and Sludge Technology B.V. or MSTec B.V.



Jurisdiction of Incorporation: Rotterdam, The Netherlands



Corporate Office Location:

TNO Environmental Technology Valley

Laan Van Westenenk 501

7334 DT, Apeldoorn, The Netherlands

011 31 55 534 7040
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 Justice Drug Enforcement Administration
 Pursuant to Section 1301.33(a) of Title 21 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), this is notice that on January 25, 2000, Mallinckrodt, Inc., Mallinckrodt & Second Streets, St. Louis, Missouri 63147, made application by renewal to the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) for registration as a bulk manufacturer of the basic classes of controlled substances listed below: Drug
ScheduleTetrahydrocannabinols (7370)
IDihydromorphine (9145)
IAmphetamine (1100)
IIMethylphenidate (1724)
IICocaine (9041)
IICodeine (9050)
IIDiprenorphine (9058)
IIEtorphine Hydrochloride (9059)
IIDihydrocodeine (9120)
IIOxycodone (9143)
IIHydromorphone (9150)
IIDiphenoxylate (9170)
IIHydrocodone (9193)
IILevorphanol (9220)
IIMeperidine (9230)
IIMethadone (9250)
IIMethadone-intermediate (9254)
IIDextropropoxyphene, bulk (non-dosage forms) (9273)
IIMorphine (9300)
IIThebaine (9333)
IIOpium extracts (9610)
IIOpium fluid extract (9620)
IIOpium tincture (9630)
IIOpium powdered (9639)
IIOpium granulated (9640)
IILevo-alphacetylmethadol (9648)
IIOxymorphone (9652)
IINoroxymorphone (9668)
IIAlfentanil (9737)
IISufentanil (9740)
IIFentanyl (9801)
II
 The firm plans to manufacture the controlled substances for distribution as bulk products to its customers. Any other such applicant and any person who is presently registered with DEA to manufacture such substances may file comments or objections to the issuance of the proposed registration. Any such comments or objections may be addressed, in quintuplicate, to the Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of Diversion Control, Drug Enforcement Administration, United States Department of Justice, Washington, D.C. 20537, Attention: DEA Federal Register Representative (CCR), and must be filed no later than July 11, 2000. Dated: April 21, 2000. John H. King, Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of Diversion Control, Drug Enforcement Administration.


[FR Doc. 00-11889  Filed 5-11-00; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-09-M
#### Charles J. Haas, Respondent, *v.*Home Indemnity Company, Appellant.

Submitted. January 18, 1937;

decided January 26, 1937.

Motion for reargument denied, with ten dollars costs and necessary printing disbursements. (See 272 N. Y. 283.)
H

"î

H

H

H

î

î

î "

"

"

H

î

"

îH

"

H

H

î î

"

"

H

î

"

H

H

î

î "

"

H î

"

H

H

H

H

H

H

î

î

î

î

î

î "

"

"

"

"

"

H

î "

H

î"

H î

"

î

H "

?

?

?

?

?

?

650

650

650

650

650

700

700

700

700

750

750

700

750

750

800

750

800

650

650

650

850

700

650

800

850

850

700

850

800

700

750

700

800

650

700

850

850

750

850 850

850

850

650

850

850

850

750

650

800

850

650

¬«16

¬«16

¬«16

AA

MARTINEZ RD

LA CHANCACA RD

CHIVO RD

S OLD HWY 16

FM-3073

ARMSTRONG RD

WIED RD

CANALES LN

POLO CREA

MER LN

CANALES LN

ARMSTRO

NG

RD

Armstrong Oil Field

Las Animas Oil

and

Gas Field

Armstrong

Ranch

Azucar Windmill

Chorrito Windmill

Nuevo Windmill

Thom psonville

Hebbronville

Alta Vista

Ranch SW

San Pablo

Ranch

Armstrong

Ranch

Albercas

Ranch

Randado

Bruni

SE

McCampbell

Ranch

10'

000

30

45'

30"

52'

15'

30

30" 900

000

98°

15'

30"

11

5

16

19

14

15 45'

970

50'

16

30

940

08

30

06

01

30 30

30

30

05

24

13

04

N

10'

08

5 000m 5 5

5

47'

000m

30

30

11

30"

03

870

30"

07'

30

09

22 27°

12'

23 5 18 19 22

5 50'

30

52'

02

5

14

30

5

30

17

30

03

98° 5

04

5

30

27° 5

01

98°

12'

000

21

05

20 5

N

FEET

24

98°

12

09

14

06

30

5

5

5

07

30"

30

FEET

30

30

000m

5

30

13

30" 16

12

27° 5

07

10

13 5

FEET

5

23

30"

30

E

E

30

07'

30

30

47'

000

20

5 14 17 18

10

5 000m

13

5

30

27°

30

5 16 FEET

21

15

TEXAS

ADJOINING 7.5' QUADRANGLES

QUADRANGLE LOCATION

ARMSTRONG RANCH QUADRANGLE

TEXAS-JIM HOGG CO.

7.5-MINUTE SERIES

ARMSTRONG RANCH, TX

2013

Interstate Route State Route

ROAD CLASSIFICATION

Ramp 4WD

US Route Local Road

WX Interstate Route /. US Route H State Route

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

U. S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY

Imagery..................................................NAIP, April 2010

Roads..............................................©2006-2012 TomTom

Names..........................................................GNIS, 2012

Hydrography....................National Hydrography Dataset, 2010

Contours............................National Elevation Dataset, 2008

Boundaries....................Census, IBWC, IBC, USGS, 1972 - 2012

North American Datum of 1983 (NAD83)

World Geodetic System of 1984 (WGS84). Projection and

1 000-meter grid: Universal Transverse Mercator, Zone 14R

Produced by the United States Geological Survey

10 000-foot ticks: Texas Coordinate System of 1983 (south zone)

This map was produced to conform with the

National Geospatial Program US Topo Product Standard, 2011.

A metadata file associated with this product is draft version 0.6.7

CONTOUR INTERVAL 10 FEET

NORTH AMERICAN VERTICAL DATUM OF 1988

SCALE 1:24 000

1 0.5 0

MILES

1

1000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000

FEET

1000 500 0 METERS 1000 2000

1 0.5 0 KILOMETERS 1 2

U.S. National Grid

100,000-m Square ID

Grid Zone Designation

NR

14R

×

Ù

MN

GN

UTM GRID AND 2013 MAGNETIC NORTH

DECLINATION AT CENTER OF SHEET

0° 5 ́

2 MILS

4° 57 ́

88 MILS
§ 417.209 Malfunction turn analysis. ( a ) *General.* A flight safety analysis must include a malfunction turn analysis that establishes the launch vehicle's turning capability in the event of a malfunction during flight. A malfunction turn analysis must account for each cause of a malfunction turn, such as thrust vector offsets or nozzle burn-through. For each cause of a malfunction turn, the analysis must establish the launch vehicle's turning capability using a set of turn curves. The analysis must account for: ( 1 ) All trajectory times during the thrusting phases of flight.
( 2 ) When a malfunction begins to cause each turn throughout the thrusting phases of flight. The analysis must account for trajectory time intervals between malfunction turn start times that are sufficient to establish flight safety limits and hazard areas that are smooth and continuous.
( 3 ) The relative probability of occurrence of each malfunction turn of which the launch vehicle is capable.
( 4 ) The time, as a single value or a probability time distribution, when each malfunction turn will terminate due to vehicle breakup.
( 5 ) What terminates each malfunction turn, such as, aerodynamic breakup or inertial breakup.
( 6 ) The launch vehicle's turning behavior from the time when a malfunction begins to cause a turn until aerodynamic breakup, inertial breakup, or ground impact. The analysis must account for trajectory time intervals during the malfunction turn that are sufficient to establish turn curves that are smooth and continuous.
( 7 ) For each malfunction turn, the launch vehicle velocity vector turn angle from the nominal launch vehicle velocity vector.
( 8 ) For each malfunction turn, the launch vehicle velocity turn magnitude from the nominal velocity magnitude that corresponds to the velocity vector turn angle.
( 9 ) For each malfunction turn, the orientation of the launch vehicle longitudinal axis measured relative to the nominal launch vehicle longitudinal axis or Earth relative velocity vector at the start of the turn.
( b ) *Set of turn curves for each malfunction turn cause.* For each cause of a malfunction turn, the analysis must establish a set of turn curves that satisfies paragraph (a) of this section and must establish the associated envelope of the set of turn curves. Each set of turn curves must describe the variation in the malfunction turn characteristics for each cause of a turn. The envelope of each set of curves must define the limits of the launch vehicle's malfunction turn behavior for each cause of a malfunction turn. For each malfunction turn envelope, the analysis must establish the launch vehicle velocity vector turn angle from the nominal launch vehicle velocity vector. For each malfunction turn envelope, the analysis must establish the vehicle velocity turn magnitude from the nominal velocity magnitude that corresponds to the velocity vector turn angle envelope.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Tony Newton, Appellant.

[698 NYS2d 156]

—Appeal by the de*406fendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Richmond County (J. Goldberg, J.), rendered May 8, 1997, convicting him of robbery in the first degree, robbery in the second degree (two counts), criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree (two counts), and criminal possession of stolen property in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant contends that the circumstantial evidence against him was insufficient to establish his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt and that the verdict was against the weight of the evidence. We disagree. Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution *(see, People v Contes,*60 NY2d 620), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence *(see,*CPL 470.15 [5]). O’Brien, J. P., Ritter, Santucci and Thompson, JJ.,.concur.
§ 303.45 Evidentiary hearings. ( a ) If the Assistant Secretary determines that an application, or review of a previous granted application, should be the subject of a full evidentiary hearing, he or she shall issue an order so stating. The term “full evidentiary hearing” includes any hybrid format set out in the instituting order. This order shall set forth the issues that are to be considered in such hearing.
( b ) After the issuance of an order for a full evidentiary hearing, the Chief Administrative Law Judge shall promptly appoint an Administrative Law Judge to conduct such hearing in accordance with section 7 of the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. 556, and the Rules of Practice in part 302 of this chapter.
( c ) The applicants and the Assistant General Counsel for Aviation Enforcement and Proceedings shall be parties in any full evidentiary hearing held under this part. The Assistant Attorney General, Antitrust, shall be a party upon notice filed with the Administrative Law Judge. Other persons may intervene as parties as provided by § 302.20 of this chapter.
( d ) Within the time specified in the order instituting the full evidentiary hearing, the Administrative Law Judge shall recommend to the Assistant Secretary that the application be approved or denied or that the previously granted exemption approval or immunity should be terminated or continued in accordance with the standards of the Act. The recommendation shall be in writing, shall be based solely on the hearing record, and shall include a statement of the Administrative Law Judge's findings and conclusions, and the reasons or basis therefore, or all material issues of fact, law or discretion presented on the record. Copies of the recommendation shall be served on each party.
( e ) Within 10 days after the date the Administrative Law Judge serves his or her recommendation, any party may file written exceptions to the recommendation for consideration by the Assistant Secretary. Within 21 days after the service date of the judge's recommendation, any party may file a brief in support of or in opposition to any exceptions. This period may be altered by order of the Assistant Secretary, who may also authorize the filing of reply briefs.
[50 FR 31142, July 31, 1985, as amended at 65 FR 6456, Feb. 9, 2000; as amended by Doc. No. DOT-OST-2014-0140, 84 FR 15937, Apr. 16, 2019]
§ 414.33 Safety element approval transfer. ( a ) Only the FAA may approve a transfer of a safety element approval.
( b ) Either the holder of a safety element approval or the prospective transferee may request a safety element approval transfer.
( c ) Both the holder and prospective transferee must agree to the transfer.
( d ) The person requesting the transfer must submit a safety element approval application according to § 414.13 or § 414.15, must meet the applicable requirements of this part, and may incorporate by reference relevant portions of the initial application.
( e ) The FAA will approve a transfer of a safety element approval only after all the approvals and determinations required under this chapter for a safety element approval have been met. In conducting reviews and issuing approvals and determinations, the FAA may incorporate by reference any findings made part of the record to support the initial safety element approval determination. The FAA may modify the terms and conditions of a safety element approval to reflect any changes necessary because of a safety element approval transfer.
( f ) The FAA will provide written notice to the person requesting the safety element approval transfer of our determination.
**Exhibit 31.1**
**CERTIFICATION**
I, Richard Wayne, certify that:
 1.  I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Capital Crossing PreferredCorporation (the “registrant”);  2.  Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a materialfact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light ofthe circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to theperiod covered by this report;  3.  Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial informationincluded 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 periodspresented in this report;  4.  The registrant’s other certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining 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 disclosurecontrols and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, ismade known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period inwhich this report is being prepared;  b)  [Not applicable]  c)  Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report our conclusions about theeffectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the periodcovered by this report based on such evaluation; and  d)  Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal controlover financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscalquarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) thathas materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and
 5.  The registrant’s other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our mostrecent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’sauditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or personsperforming the equivalent functions):
 a)  All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design oroperation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely toadversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and reportfinancial information; and  b)  Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or otheremployees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting.     Date: May 13, 2005 By: /s/ Richard Wayne      Richard Wayne  *President (Principal Executive Officer)*
NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.

United States Court of Appeals 

for the Federal Circuit ______________________

SHEILA ROBINSON, 

Plaintiff-Appellant

v.

UNITED STATES, 

Defendant-Appellee

______________________

2023-2384

______________________

Appeal from the United States Court of Federal Claims 

in No. 1:23-cv-00724-LAS, Senior Judge Loren A. Smith. 

______________________

O R D E R

The appellant having failed to file the brief required by 

Federal Circuit Rule 31(a) within the time permitted by the 

rules, 

IT IS ORDERED that the notice of appeal be, and the 

same hereby is, DISMISSED, for failure to prosecute in 

accordance with the rules.

Case: 23-2384 Document: 8 Page: 1 Filed: 12/05/2023
2 ROBINSON V. US

All pending motions are denied as moot.

FOR THE COURT

December 5, 2023

Date

ISSUED AS A MANDATE: December 5, 2023

Case: 23-2384 Document: 8 Page: 2 Filed: 12/05/2023