alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
###### Editorial Note on Part 302

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 302 appear at 84 FR 15935, Apr. 16, 2019.

#### § 302.410 Consolidation of proceedings.

The DOT decisionmaker or Chief Administrative Law Judge may, upon his or her own initiative, or upon motion of any party, consolidate for hearing or for other purposes, or may contemporaneously consider, two or more enforcement proceedings that involve substantially the same parties or issues that are the same or closely related, if he or she finds that such consolidation or contemporaneous hearing will be conducive to the dispatch of business and to the ends of justice and will not unduly delay the proceedings.
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 92 (Thursday, May 11, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 30410]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-11880]


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

FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM


Change in Bank Control Notices; Acquisitions of Shares of Banks 
or Bank Holding Companies

    The notificants listed below have applied under the Change in Bank 
Control Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)) and Sec. 225.41 of the Board's 
Regulation Y (12 CFR 225.41) to acquire a bank or bank holding company. 
The factors that are considered in acting on the notices are set forth 
in paragraph 7 of the Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)(7)).
    The notices are available for immediate inspection at the Federal 
Reserve Bank indicated. The notices also will be available for 
inspection at the offices of the Board of Governors. Interested persons 
may express their views in writing to the Reserve Bank indicated for 
that notice of to the offices of the Board of Governors. Comments must 
be received not later than May 26, 2000.
    A. Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta (Lois Berthaume, Vice President) 
104 Marietta Street, N.W., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-2713:
    1. Francis O. Bourg, Jr., Francis O. Bourg, III, Augustine Bourg 
Taylor, Josephine Bourg Junot, and Dean Paul Chauvin, Jr., 
(collectively) Houma, Louisiana; to acquire additional voting shares of 
South Louisiana Financial Corporation, Houma, Louisiana, and thereby 
indirectly acquire additional voting shares of South Louisiana Bank, 
Houma, Louisiana.

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, May 8, 2000.
Robert deV. Frierson,
Associate Secretary of the Board.
[FR Doc. 00-11880 Filed 5-10-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6210-01-P
#### § 415.135 Denial of safety approval.

The FAA notifies an applicant, in writing, if it has denied safety approval for a license application. The notice states the reasons for the FAA's determination. The applicant may respond to the reasons for the determination and request reconsideration.
#### § 5.91 Competencies and training.

Any person required to have an SMS under this part must provide training to each individual identified in § 5.23 of this part to ensure the individuals attain and maintain the competencies necessary to perform their duties relevant to the operation and performance of the SMS.

[Doc. No. FAA-2021-0419, Amdt. 5-2, 89 FR 33108, Apr. 26, 2024]
#### Carmela Romano, Respondent, *v.*Metropolitan Life Insurance Company, Appellant.

(Submitted July 8, 1936;

decided October 6, 1936.)

Motion for reargument denied, with ten dollars costs and necessary printing disbursements. (See 271 N. Y. 288.)
**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 June 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/
                Charles R. BearchellCharles
                R. BearchellChief
                Financial OfficerAugust
                9, 2007
N OTE : This order is nonprecedential

. 

# United States Court of Appeals **for the Federal Circuit**

______________________ VELESA DRAUGHN, Petitioner

v.

DEPARTMENT OF THE AR MY, Respondent

______________________

2024

- 1430

______________________ Petition for review of the Merit Systems Protection Board in No. DC

- 0752

- 17

- 0527

- I

- 1.

______________________
Before C HEN , L INN , and H UGHES , Circuit Judges

. P ER C URIAM

. O R D E R
Following this court’s February 22, 2024 show cause order, Velesa Draughn urges this court not to dismiss or transfer this matter

, while the Department of the Army urges transfer

. The Merit Systems Protection Board affirmed the Army’s removal of Ms. Drau ghn , rejecting her affirmative defenses that the removal was based on disability discrimination and retaliation for protected Equal Employment Opportunity (“EEO”) activity. Ms. Draughn seeks judicial Case: 24-1430 Document: 10 Page: 1 Filed: 04/12/2024DRAUGHN v. ARMY 2

review of the MSPB ’s decision and her affirmative defen ses. “Because [Ms. Draughn] complained of a personnel action serious enough to appeal to the MSPB”

— here, her removal

— “ and alleged that the personnel action was based on,” among other things, “discrimination , [s]he brought a mixed case. ” Perry v. Merit S ys. Prot. Bd. , 582 U.S. 420, 432 (2017) (cleaned up) ; see 5 U.S.C. § 7703(b)(2) . “Judicial review of such a case lies in district court.” Perry , 582 U.S. at 432

. U nder the circumstances

, we agree that transfer to the United States District Court for the District of Maryland (where the employment action appears to have occurred) is appropriate. See 28 U.S.C. § 1631.
Accordingly,

I T I S O RDERED T HAT :
This matter and all case filings are tra nsferred to the United States District Court for the District of Maryland pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1631.

April 1 2 , 2024 Date F OR THE C OURT Case: 24-1430 Document: 10 Page: 2 Filed: 04/12/2024
§ 91.217 Data correspondence between automatically reported pressure altitude data and the pilot's altitude reference. ( a ) No person may operate any automatic pressure altitude reporting equipment associated with a radar beacon transponder— ( 1 ) When deactivation of that equipment is directed by ATC;
( 2 ) Unless, as installed, that equipment was tested and calibrated to transmit altitude data corresponding within 125 feet (on a 95 percent probability basis) of the indicated or calibrated datum of the altimeter normally used to maintain flight altitude, with that altimeter referenced to 29.92 inches of mercury for altitudes from sea level to the maximum operating altitude of the aircraft; or
( 3 ) Unless the altimeters and digitizers in that equipment meet the standards of TSO-C10b and TSO-C88, respectively.
( b ) No person may operate any automatic pressure altitude reporting equipment associated with a radar beacon transponder or with ADS-B Out equipment unless the pressure altitude reported for ADS-B Out and Mode C/S is derived from the same source for aircraft equipped with both a transponder and ADS-B Out.
[Doc. No. 18334, 54 FR 34304, Aug. 18, 1989, as amended by Amdt. 91-314, 75 FR 30193, May 28, 2010]
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.                  

###### International Trade Commission

###### Sunshine Act Meeting 

# TIME AND DATE: 

May 9, 2000 at 11:00 a.m. 

# PLACE:

 Room 101, 500 E Street S.W., Washington, DC 20436, Telephone: (202) 205-2000. 

# STATUS: 

Open to the public. 

# MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED:

1. Agenda for future meeting: none 

2. Minutes 

3. Ratification List 

4. Inv. Nos. 701-TA-318 and 731-TA-538 and 561 (Review)(Sulfanilic Acid from China and India)—briefing and vote. (The Commission will transmit its determination to the Secretary of Commerce on May 18, 2000.) 

5. Inv. Nos. 701-TA-286 and 731-TA-365 (Review)(Industrial Phosphoric Acid from Belgium and Israel)—briefing and vote. (The Commission will transmit its determination to the Secretary of Commerce on May 22, 2000.) 

6. Outstanding action jackets: 

(1.) Document No. GC-00-020: Administrative matters. 

In accordance with Commission policy, subject matter listed above, not disposed of at the scheduled meeting, may be carried over to the agenda of the following meeting. 

By order of the Commission. 

Issued: May 1, 2000. 

Donna R. Koehnke, 

Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 00-11332 Filed 5-2-00; 3:48 pm] 

BILLING CODE 7020-02-P
§ 25.1303 Flight and navigation instruments. ( a ) The following flight and navigation instruments must be installed so that the instrument is visible from each pilot station: ( 1 ) A free air temperature indicator or an air-temperature indicator which provides indications that are convertible to free-air temperature.
( 2 ) A clock displaying hours, minutes, and seconds with a sweep-second pointer or digital presentation.
( 3 ) A direction indicator (nonstabilized magnetic compass).
( b ) The following flight and navigation instruments must be installed at each pilot station: ( 1 ) An airspeed indicator. If airspeed limitations vary with altitude, the indicator must have a maximum allowable airspeed indicator showing the variation of V*MO* with altitude.
( 2 ) An altimeter (sensitive).
( 3 ) A rate-of-climb indicator (vertical speed).
( 4 ) A gyroscopic rate-of-turn indicator combined with an integral slip-skid indicator (turn-and-bank indicator) except that only a slip-skid indicator is required on large airplanes with a third attitude instrument system useable through flight attitudes of 360° of pitch and roll and installed in accordance with § 121.305(k) of this title.
( 5 ) A bank and pitch indicator (gyroscopically stabilized).
( 6 ) A direction indicator (gyroscopically stabilized, magnetic or nonmagnetic).
( c ) The following flight and navigation instruments are required as prescribed in this paragraph: ( 1 ) A speed warning device is required for turbine engine powered airplanes and for airplanes with V*MO*/M*MO* greater than 0.8 V*DF*/M*DF* or 0.8 V*D*/M*D*. The speed warning device must give effective aural warning (differing distinctively from aural warnings used for other purposes) to the pilots, whenever the speed exceeds V*MO* plus 6 knots or M*MO* + 0.01. The upper limit of the production tolerance for the warning device may not exceed the prescribed warning speed.
( 2 ) A machmeter is required at each pilot station for airplanes with compressibility limitations not otherwise indicated to the pilot by the airspeed indicating system required under paragraph (b)(1) of this section.
[Amdt. 25-23, 35 FR 5678, Apr. 8, 1970, as amended by Amdt. 25-24, 35 FR 7108, May 6, 1970; Amdt. 25-38, 41 FR 55467, Dec. 20, 1976; Amdt. 25-90, 62 FR 13253, Mar. 19, 1997]
#### In the Matter of the Application of The City of New York, Respondent, Relative to Acquiring Title to Lands Required for the Opening and Extending of Brigham Street in the Borough of Brooklyn. 330 West 95th Street Corporation, Appellant.

Submitted January 5, 1937;

decided January 19, 1937.

*509
      *Ralph L. Baldwin*for appellant.

*Paul Windels, Corporation Counsel (Reuben Levy, Paxton Blair*and *Joseph F. Mulqueen, Jr.,*of counsel), for respondent.

Order affirmed, with costs; no opinion.

Concur: Crane, Ch. J., O’Brien, Hubbs, Loughran and Rippey, JJ. Taking no part: Lehman and Finch, JJ.
Exhibit 32.1

# Written Statement of
the Chief Executive Officer
Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350

Solely
for the purposes of complying with 18 U.S.C. §1350, I, the undersigned Chief
Executive Officer of The RiceX Company (the Company), hereby certify, based on
my knowledge, that the Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of the Company for the fiscal year
ended December 31, 2003 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, 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/ Daniel L. McPeak, Sr.
Daniel L. McPeak, Sr.
March 30, 2004

55



Exhibit 32.2

# Written Statement of
the Chief Financial Officer
Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350

Solely
for the purposes of complying with 18 U.S.C. §1350, I, the undersigned Chief
Financial Officer of The RiceX Company (the Company), hereby certify, based on
my knowledge, that the Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of the Company for the fiscal year
ended December 31, 2003 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, 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/ Todd C. Crow
Todd C. Crow
March 30, 2004

56
<PAGE>



                                                               Exhibit 23.2


                        CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement on
Form S-3 (No. 333-90784) of ServiceWare Technologies, Inc. and in the related
Prospectus, Form S-8 (No. 333-44680) pertaining to the Employee Stock Purchase
Plan and Form S-8 (No. 333-50498) pertaining to the Amended and Restated Stock
Option Plan and the 2000 Stock Incentive Plan of ServiceWare Technologies,
Inc., of our report dated January 25, 2002, with respect to the consolidated
financial statements of ServiceWare Technologies, Inc., included in the Form
10-K for the year ended December 31, 2002.


                                          /s/ Ernst & Young LLP



Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
March 31, 2003
#### Elinore I. Johnson, Respondent, *v.*Francis D. Winslow et al., Individually and as Copartners under the Firm Name of Munds, Winslow and Potter, Appellants.

(Argued June 2, 1936;

decided July 8, 1936.)

*469
      *Joseph M. Proskauer, Arthur Garfield Hays, William Abramson*and *Eugene Eisenmann*for appellants.

*G. Frank Reaves*and *Martin D. Jacobs*for respondent.

Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion. (See 272 N. Y. 512.)

Concur: O’Brien, Hubbs, Crouch, Loughran and Finch, JJ. Dissenting and voting for modification in regard to damages: Crane, Ch. J., and Lehman, J.
§ 67.403 Applications, certificates, logbooks, reports, and records: Falsification, reproduction, or alteration; incorrect statements. ( a ) No person may make or cause to be made— ( 1 ) A fraudulent or intentionally false statement on any application for a medical certificate or on a request for any Authorization for Special Issuance of a Medical Certificate (Authorization) or Statement of Demonstrated Ability (SODA) under this part;
( 2 ) A fraudulent or intentionally false entry in any logbook, record, or report that is kept, made, or used, to show compliance with any requirement for any medical certificate or for any Authorization or SODA under this part;
( 3 ) A reproduction, for fraudulent purposes, of any medical certificate under this part; or
( 4 ) An alteration of any medical certificate under this part.
( b ) The commission by any person of an act prohibited under paragraph (a) of this section is a basis for— ( 1 ) Suspending or revoking all airman, ground instructor, and medical certificates and ratings held by that person;
( 2 ) Withdrawing all Authorizations or SODA's held by that person; and
( 3 ) Denying all applications for medical certification and requests for Authorizations or SODA's.
( c ) The following may serve as a basis for suspending or revoking a medical certificate; withdrawing an Authorization or SODA; or denying an application for a medical certificate or request for an authorization or SODA: ( 1 ) An incorrect statement, upon which the FAA relied, made in support of an application for a medical certificate or request for an Authorization or SODA.
( 2 ) An incorrect entry, upon which the FAA relied, made in any logbook, record, or report that is kept, made, or used to show compliance with any requirement for a medical certificate or an Authorization or SODA.
#### § 29.691 Autorotation control mechanism.

Each main rotor blade pitch control mechanism must allow rapid entry into autorotation after power failure.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>     5


<CAPTION>

Article 5 Fin. Data Schedule for 1st Qtr 10-Q

<S>                               <C>

<PERIOD-TYPE>                     3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                 JUN-30-2000
<PERIOD-START>                    JUL-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                      SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                26,437
<SECURITIES>                               0
<RECEIVABLES>                         37,037
<ALLOWANCES>                               0
<INVENTORY>                          363,354
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                     363,354
<PP&E>                               586,967
<DEPRECIATION>                        50,273
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                     1,048,681
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                558,560
<BONDS>                              902,324
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                      0
<PREFERRED>                          100,000
<COMMON>                             204,200
<OTHER-SE>                           217,914
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>       1,048,681
<SALES>                                    0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                           0
<CGS>                                      0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                        478,651
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                       4,830
<LOSS-PROVISION>                    (478,651)
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                         0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                     (473,821)
<INCOME-TAX>                               0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        0
<DISCONTINUED>                             0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                            0
<CHANGES>                                  0
<NET-INCOME>                        (473,821)
<EPS-BASIC>                            .02
<EPS-DILUTED>                            .02



</TABLE>
#### § 293.1 Applicability.

This part applies to air carriers and foreign air carriers providing scheduled transportation of passengers and their baggage in foreign air transportation.
§ 389.20 Applicability of subpart. ( a ) This subpart applies to the filing of certain documents and records with the Department by non-government parties, and prescribes fees for their processing.
( b ) For the purpose of this subpart, record means an electronic tariff record submitted to the Department under subpart R of 14 CFR part 221, and contains a set of information that describes one (1) tariff fare, or a set of information that describes one (1) related element associated with such tariff fare.
§ 5.27 Coordination of emergency response planning. Where emergency response procedures are necessary, any person required to have an SMS under this part must develop, and the accountable executive must approve as part of the safety policy, an emergency response plan that addresses at least the following: ( a ) Delegation of emergency authority throughout the person's organization.
( b ) Assignment of employee responsibilities during the emergency.
( c ) Coordination of the emergency response plans with the emergency response plans of other organizations it must interface with during the provision of its services.
[Doc. No. FAA-2021-0419, Amdt. 5-2, 89 FR 33106, Apr. 26, 2024]
#### Luther *vs.*Deyo, impleaded with others.

Albany,

Feb, 1839.

An insolvent discharge, whether obtained upon the joint application of the insolvent and his creditors, or upon his sole application to exonerate his person from imprisonment, operates as well upon debts arising ex delicto as upon those arising ex contractu.

Motion to be discharged from custody. The defendant Deyo was arrested on a *capias ad satisfaciendum*issued on a judgment obtained in 1836, *in an action of trover.*Previous to his arrest, to wit, on the 26th August, 1837, he had obtained an *insolvent's discharge*upon the application of *himself*and *his creditors*in conformity to the provisions of the statute relative to insolvent debtors, and now upon the production of the *discharge*moved that he be released from custody.

*H. H. Martin,*for the motion.

*J. Edwards,*

for the plaintiff, opposed the motion, insisting that the discharge did not affect debts arising *ex delicto,*and *630that it operated only upon debts arising *ex contractu.*He contended that it was manifest from the several provisions of the statute on this subject that the legislature onlyscontemplated discharges in matters of *contract;*and urged that *torts*are not within the policy of insolvent or bankrupt laws. In support of his views upon this question, be referred to the argument of the counsel for the plaintiff in the case of *Smith and Brown*v. Bennet, 17 Wendell, 480, which although not passed upon by the court, inasmuch as the case was decided upon a minor point, he deemed unanswerable.

The Chief Justice took the papers for consideration, and at a subsequent day, directed a rule to be entered that the defendant be discharged from custody. No formal opinion was delivered.

Motion granted.*

*

 During this term, the same question arose upon a similar application to be discharged from custody on a ca. sa„ issued in the cause of *Stewart v. Kilt-mar,*which was an action of replevin, on the ground of an insolven^discharge, granted under the article of the statute regulating voluntary assignments by an insolvent for the purpose of exonerating his person from imprisonment, and the same disposition made of it; the Chief Justice ordering the defendant to be released from custody. A similar order was made by Mr. Justice Bronson, upon a like discharge exonerating the person of the insolvent from imprison, ment, in December 1836, in the case of *Clapper*v. *Betts,*which was an action of trespass,