alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
09/09/201 1 14:5 0 FA X 202493514 2 FA A ^ DM S @001/00 2

* - • - ^ - y .- - ;: • , . UNITE D STATE S O FAMERIC A ,. . _ FEDERA LAVIATIO N ADMINISTRATIO N ^ ^ " -^ 1 

### WASHINGTON,D.c . r ^ ^'"^'-^^^^

G CQCKE T I n the matter

ol ' ) / r-i~3 ^ ) FA

A Docket No . CP10CE000 3 - ^ SS ^ GOJE T AIRLINES , LLC ' ) T) 5^g § (VD GEA RPINS ) ) DM S No . FAA-20I0-OO2 5 , ^ ^ ^.^c: ^

• ) " ::^^^~ ^ COMPLAlNANT^ S UNOPPOSE D REQUES T FO RA N EXTENSIO N O FTIM E D Y AGREEMEN T O FTH E PARTIE S T O FIL E A RJEPL Y BRIE F Complainant , th e Federa

l Aviatio n Administration , file s thi s Unoppose dReques t fo r a n Extensio n of

Time b y Agreement

o f th e Partie s to Fil e aReply Brie f i n accordanc e wit h14 . C.F.R . § 13.233(c)(1) . Complainant' s Reply Brie f i s currentl y du e on September 9 . 2011 . Complainant

request s a

n additional 2 8 day s suchtha t th e Repl y Brie f

wouldb e du e October

7 , 2011 . Prio r

t o filin g thi s request . Complainant contacte dMr . Davi d Hayes , II LEsq. , cotinse l L

o Appellant

who state dtha

t h e doe s no t

oppos e thi s motion . Respeciliill y submitted ,

Peter Lync h Assistan t Chie f Counse l fo r Enforcement

Charle s RaJey , Atiornc y Enlbrcemen t

Division , AGC-30 0 Office o f th e Chief Counse l Federa l Aviatio n Administratio n 80 0 Independenc e Avenue , S.W . Washington , D C 2059 1 Phone : (202 ) 267-335 7 Facsimile ; (202)267-510 6 Dated ; September

6 , 201 109/09/201 1 14-5 0 FAX 202493514 2 FA A- DMS 21002/00 2

Certificat e o f

Servic e I hereb y cenif

y tha t o n thi s dat e 1 hav e delivere db y persona l delivery , th e origina l an dacop y o f

Complainant' s Unoppose dReques t for a n Extensio n o f

Tim e b y Agreemen t

o f th e Partie s t o Fil e aRepl v BncfJ n th e Maile r o/GoJe l Airlines , LLC , Docke t No . CP10CE0003 , addresse dto : Federa l Aviario n Administratio n riOO Independenc e Avenue . S.W , Washington , D.C . 2059 1 Atm : Hearin g Docke t

Clerk , AGC-43 0 Wilbu r Wrigh t Buildin g - Suit e 2W100 0 I n addition . I hereb y certif y tha t o n thi s dat e 1 hav e sen t b y th e U.S . mai l on e cop y o f ih e foregoin g documen t to ; Davi dJ . A . Hayes , II , K'sq . Vic e Presiden t

& Genera l Counse l Tran s Stat e Airline s Inc . 1149 5 Natura l Bridg e Rd. , Suit e 30 3 Bridgeton , M O 6304 4

Dated : Septembe r

6 , 201 1
EXHIBIT 10.61

    


    PROMISSORY
NOTE

    


    
      	
              $1,000,000.00

            	 
      	
              October
      23, 2009

            


    

    


    Mission West Properties,
L.P. II, a Delaware limited partnership (“Mission”)

    


    promises
to pay to             M&M Real Estate Control
& Restructuring.,
LLC                                        

    


    the
principal sum of One Million Dollars and 00 Cents ($1,000,000.00),

    


    plus
interest at the rate of 30 day LIBOR plus 2 percent per annum (compounded on the
basis of a 366-day year) beginning on the 23rd day of October,
2009.

    


    Should
interest not so be paid, it shall thereafter bear like interest as the
principal, but such unpaid interest so compounded shall not exceed an amount
equal to simple interest on the unpaid principal at the maximum rate permitted
by law. Should default be made in the payment of any installment of interest
when due, the whole sum of principal and interest shall become immediately due
and payable at the option of the holder of this note.  Should suit be
commenced or an attorney employed to enforce the payment of this note, we agree
to pay such additional sum as the court may adjudge as reasonable attorney’s
fees in said suit. Principal and interest are payable in lawful money of the
United States.

    


    Principal
and interest are payable in lawful money of the United States no later than
December 31, 2010.  Notwithstanding the above, Mission shall use its
best efforts to repay the loan as soon as possible using all available sources
of cash, including but not limited to cash generated from operations and cash
available from any other financing sources.


    


    
      
        
          
            
              
                	
                        Signed By:

                      	 
      	
                        /s/ Raymond V. Marino

                      	 	
                        10/23/09

                      	 
      
	 
      	
                        Raymond V. Marino, Pres. & COO

                      	 	
                        Date

                      	 
      
	 
      	
                        Mission West Properties, Inc.

                      	 	 
      	 
      
	 
      	
                        Its General Partner

                      	 	 
      	 
      
	 
      	 
      	 	 
      	 
      
	
                        Acknowledged:

                      	
                        /s/ Tom Meckenstock

                      	 	
                        10/23/09

                      	 
      
	 
      	
                        Tom Meckenstock, Managing Member

                      	 	
                        Date
#### § 35.19 Durability.

Each part of the propeller must be designed and constructed to minimize the development of any unsafe condition of the propeller between overhaul periods.
Proposed Petroleum Refineries Sector Risk & Technology Review and New Source Performance Standards 

Public Hearing Speaker List 

August 5, 2014- Galena Park, Texas 

Time Name Affiliation 

9:00-9:15 INTRODUCTIONS OF EPA HEARING PANEL & OPENING STATEMENT 

9:15 Gene Green Congressman 

9:20 David Friedman AFPM 

9:25 Matthew Todd API 

9:30 Alex Cuclis Houston Advance Research Center 

9:35 Dr. Beverly Wright Dillard University Deep South Center for Environmental Justice 

9:40 Luke Metzger Environment Texas 

9:45 John Sullivan Sealy Center Environmental Health & Medicine 

9:50 Adrian Shelley Air Alliance Houston 

9:55 Theresa Landrum Sierra Club- Detroit 

10:00 Juan Parras TX Environmental Justice Advocacy Svcs 

10:05 Lena Moffitt Sierra Club- DC 

10:10 Kelly Haragan Environmental Integrity Project 

10:15 llan Levin Environmental Integrity Project 

10:20 Monique Harden Advocates for Environmental Human Rights 

10:25 Velma White Residents for Air Neutralization, 

10:30 Tyrone Edwards Zion Travelers Cooperative Center 

10:35 Dorothy Felex Mossville Environmental Action Now 

10:40 Margie Richard Truth Community Outreach 

10:45 Stephanie Anthony Louisiana Democracy Project 

10:50 WillieMae Williams Louisiana Environmental Justice Community Organizaiton Coalition 

10:55 Sharon Gauthe Bayou Interfaith Community Organizaing 

11:00 Darrell Malek-Wiley Sierra Club 

11:05 Mary Williams Deep South Center for Environmental Justice 

11:10 Robert Bullard Texas Southern University 

11:15 Ericua Thomas LA Democracy Project 

11:20 Willie Fontenot Sierra Club Delta Chapter 

11:25 Leslie Fields Sierra Club 

11:30 Ryan Knapick Clean Air Council 

11:35 Stephen Pavel Full Spectrum Consulting 

11:40 Pete Olson Congressman 

11:45 Saleem Chapman Clean Air Council 

11:50 Arturo Blanco National Association of Clean Air Agencies (NACAA) 

11:55 AVAILABLE 

12:00-1:00 LUNCH BREAK 

1:05 SUMMARY OF OPENING STATEMENT & HEARING PANEL INTRODUCTIONS 

1:10 Rebecca Bruhl Baylor College of Medicine 

1:15 Andy Zeilinger Louisana Bucket Brigade 

1:20 Katie Moore Louisana Bucket Brigade 

1:25 Craig Beskid East Harris County Mfg Assoc EHCMA 

1:30 Marcelo Norsworthy Environmental Defense Fund 

1:35-1:55 AVAILABLE 

1:55 Donald Richner Houston Health & Human Svs 

2:00 Hillary Corgey Public Citizen 

2:05 Neil Carman Sierra Club - Lone Star 

2:10 YingTGao CAMS CO 

2:15-2:30 AVAILABLE 

2:30-3:00 AVAILABLE 

3:00-3:30 AVAILABLE 

3:30-4:00 AVAILABLE 

4:00-4:30 AVAILABLE 

4:30-5:00 AVAILABLE 

5:00-6:00 DINNER 

6:00-6:30 AVAILABLE 

6:30-7:00 AVAILABLE 

7:00-7:30 AVAILABLE 

7:30-8:00 AVAILABLE
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  Quarterly  Report  on  Form  10-QSB  for the
six-month  period  ended  June  30,  2003 of  inCall  Systems,  Inc.,  a  Nevada
corporation  (the  "Company"),   as  filed  with  the  Securities  and  Exchange
Commission  on the date  hereof  (the  "Quarterly  Report"),  I,  Marc  Crimeni,
Chairman  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, that:

1. The Quarterly Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

2. The information  contained in this Quarterly Report fairly  presents,  in all
material  respects,  the  financial  condition  and results of  operation of the
Company.


                                 /s/ Marc Crimeni
                                 ----------------
                                 Marc Crimeni, Chairman and
                                 Chief Executive Officer
                                 September 26, 2003





                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


         In  connection  with  the  Quarterly  Report  on  Form  10-QSB  for the
six-month  period  ended  June  30,  2003 of  inCall  Systems,  Inc.,  a  Nevada
corporation  (the  "Company"),   as  filed  with  the  Securities  and  Exchange
Commission  on the date  hereof  (the  "Quarterly  Report"),  I,  Marc  Crimeni,
Chairman  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, that:

1. The Quarterly Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

2. The information  contained in this Quarterly Report fairly  presents,  in all
material  respects,  the  financial  condition  and results of  operation of the
Company.


                                 /s/ Robert Harris
                                 ----------------
                                 Robert Harris, Treasurer
                                 September 26, 2003
#### § 1209.10 Capacity of public observers.

The public may attend open Board meetings for the sole purpose of observation. Observers may not participate in meetings unless expressly invited or otherwise interfere with the conduct and disposition of agency business. When a portion of a meeting is closed to the public, observers will leave the meeting room upon request to enable discussion of the exempt matter therein under consideration.
§ 450.123 Population exposure analysis. ( a ) *General.* A flight safety analysis must account for the distribution of people for the entire region where there is a significant probability of impact of hazardous debris.
( b ) *Constraints.* The exposure analysis must— ( 1 ) Characterize the distribution of people both geographically and temporally;
( 2 ) Account for the distribution of people among structures and vehicle types;
( 3 ) Use reliable, accurate, and timely source data; and
( 4 ) Account for vulnerability of people to hazardous debris effects.
( c ) *Application requirements.* An applicant must submit: ( 1 ) A description of the methods used to develop the exposure input data in accordance with § 450.115(c), and
( 2 ) Complete population exposure data, in tabular form.
#### Edith Rosenbloom, Respondent, *v.*Amos Baldwin, Appellant, Impleaded with Another. Esther Motyca et al., as Administrators of the Estate of Neenah Chapman, Deceased, Respondents, *v.*Amos Baldwin, Appellant.

Argued March 17, 1937;

decided April 20, 1937.

*652
      *Charles J. Yorkey*for appellant.

*Clifford H. Searl*for Edith Rosenbloom, respondent.

*Dwight L. Murphy*for Esther Motyca et al., as administrators, respondents.

In each case, judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion.

Concur: Crane, Ch. J., Lehman, O’Brien, Hubbs, Lotjghran, Finch and Rippey, JJ.
II 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 467 

To amend section 520E of the Public Health Service Act to require States 

and their designees receiving grants for development and implementation 

of statewide suicide early intervention and prevention strategies to collaborate with each Federally recognized Indian tribe, tribal organization, 

urban Indian organization, and Native Hawaiian health care system 

in the State. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

FEBRUARY 13, 2019 

Ms. WARREN (for herself, Ms. MURKOWSKI, Mr. UDALL, Mr. SULLIVAN, Mr. 

SANDERS, Mr. BLUMENTHAL, Ms. DUCKWORTH, Ms. SMITH, Mr. KING, 

Mr. TESTER, Ms. KLOBUCHAR, Ms. HIRONO, Mr. SCHATZ, Mr. HEINRICH, Mr. MERKLEY, Ms. CORTEZ MASTO, and Ms. ROSEN) introduced 

the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee 

on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions 

A BILL 

To amend section 520E of the Public Health Service Act 

to require States and their designees receiving grants 

for development and implementation of statewide suicide 

early intervention and prevention strategies to collaborate 

with each Federally recognized Indian tribe, tribal organization, urban Indian organization, and Native Hawaiian health care system in the State. 

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


pamtmann on DSKBFK8HB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 467 IS

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

2 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Native American Sui3 cide Prevention Act of 2019’’. 

4 SEC. 2. COLLABORATION WITH FEDERALLY RECOGNIZED 

5 INDIAN TRIBES, TRIBAL ORGANIZATIONS, 

6 URBAN INDIAN ORGANIZATIONS, AND NATIVE 

7 HAWAIIAN HEALTH CARE SYSTEMS IN DEVEL8 OPMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION OF STATE9 WIDE SUICIDE EARLY INTERVENTION AND 

10 PREVENTION STRATEGIES. 

11 Subsection (e) of section 520E of the Public Health 

12 Service Act (42 U.S.C. 290bb–36) is amended by adding 

13 at the end the following: 

14 ‘‘(4) COLLABORATION WITH FEDERALLY REC15 OGNIZED INDIAN TRIBES, TRIBAL ORGANIZATIONS, 

16 URBAN INDIAN ORGANIZATIONS, AND NATIVE HA17 WAIIAN HEALTH CARE SYSTEMS.—As a condition on 

18 the receipt of a grant or cooperative agreement 

19 under this section for development and implementa20 tion of a statewide early intervention and prevention 

21 strategy, a State or an eligible entity designated by 

22 a State pursuant to subsection (b)(1)(B) shall agree 

23 to collaborate with each Federally recognized Indian 

24 tribe and tribal organization (as defined in the In25 dian Self-Determination and Education Assistance 

26 Act), each urban Indian organization (as defined in 


pamtmann on DSKBFK8HB2PROD with BILLS
3 

•S 467 IS

1 the Indian Health Care Improvement Act), and each 

2 Native Hawaiian health care system (as defined in 

3 section 12 of the Native Hawaiian Health Care Im4 provement Act) in the State regarding such develop5 ment and implementation.’’. 

Æ 


pamtmann on DSKBFK8HB2PROD with BILLS
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AT DECEMBER 31, 1999 (AUDITED) AND THE CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS FOR THE TWELVE MONTHS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1999 (AUDITED)
AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0001062780
<NAME> UNITED WISCONSIN SERVICES, INC.
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<CURRENCY> US DOLLARS

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                          16,254
<SECURITIES>                                   129,874
<RECEIVABLES>                                   71,575
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0<F1>
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               237,988
<PP&E>                                           9,938
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0<F2>
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 297,154
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          160,720
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        14,052
<OTHER-SE>                                      16,980
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   297,154
<SALES>                                        693,153
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               704,524
<CGS>                                          749,320
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  749,320
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               (3,300)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0<F3>
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               5,293
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (46,789)
<INCOME-TAX>                                  (17,785)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (29,004)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (29,004)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (1.72)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (1.72)
<FN>
<F1>Included in #13 (receivables)
<F2>included in #17 (property, plant, & equipment)
<F3>included in #29 (CGS)
</FN>


</TABLE>
#### CENTRAL COMMUNITY CHAUTAUQUA SYSTEM v RENTSCHLER et

Ohio Appeals, 3rd Dist, Henry Co

No 196.

Decided April 5, 1929

James P Ragan, Napoleon, for Chautauqua.

Fred Gribbell, Deshler, for Rentschaler et.

JUSTICE, J.

Several errors are assigned. One of them alludes to the overruling of plaintiff’s motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdicts.

Section 11601, of the General Code, provides that:

> “When, upon the statements in the pleadings, one party is entitled by law to judgment in his favor, judgment shall be so rendered by the court, although a verdict has been found against such party.”

This Section is mandatory, but it authorizes a judgment non obstante verdicto, only when the pleadings require it. Challen v. Cincinnati, 40 O. S. 113. McCoy et al., Trustee, v. Jones, et al., 61 O. S. 119. No such requirement appears in the instant case. To the contrary, however, the pleadings clearly disclose an issuable fact, which the trial court was required to submit to the jury under proper instructions. The motion, therefore, was properly overruled.

Another claimed error pertains to the admission of testimony.

Counsel for plaintiff insists that the trial 'court, in admitting testimony, violated the so-called “Parol Evidence Rule.” With this contention we do not agree. Parol contemporaneous evidence, of course, is inadmis*292sible to contradict, vary, add to or substraet from, the terms of a valid written instrument. 1 Grenl. Ev. Section 275. But the testimony under consideration, as we see it, did not tend to contradict, vary, add to or subtract from, the contract of guaranty. It simply tended to show the inducing and moving cause of said written contract and, in addition thereto, tDnat said contract in law never existed.

Commentaries on Evidence, 2nd Edition:

Clearly the testimony was relevant to the issues as made by the pleadings. It, therefore, was not only competent but obviously of much moment to the defendants. Its reception by the trial court was proper.

Another claimed error refers to the charge.

Did the trial court, in so charging, place upon the plaintiff an unwarranted burden? We do not think so.

The pleadings reveal that plaintiff predicated a recovery in this cause upon an alleged present and absolute contract, while the defendants bottomed their defense upon an alleged conditional signing of said contract.

In Leisy & Company v. Zuellig, 7 O. C. C. Reports, 433, the Circuit Court of the Sixth District, held:

(Here follows quotation)

In the instant case the trial court correctly put the burden upon the plaintiff of proving the material- allegations of its petition. The defense, being based upon a different agreement than that upon which plaintiff sued, was nothing more or less than a general denial. Simmons v. Green, 35 O. S. 104.

We have carefully examined the charge and are of the opinion that, when construed as ,a whole, it is free from prejudicial error. Ohio & Indiana Torpedo Company v. Fishburn, et al., 61 O. S. 608.

Entertaining these views, it follows that the judgment of the trial court should be affirmed.

Before Judges Hughes, Justice & Crow.
#### § 413.19 Issuing a license or permit.

After the FAA completes its reviews and makes the decisions required by this chapter, the FAA issues a license or permit to the applicant.

[Doc. No. FAA-2006-24197, 72 FR 17019, Apr. 6, 2007]