alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 303.05 Applications requesting antitrust immunity. ( a ) Each application must state explicitly whether or not the applicant seeks antitrust immunity under the provisions of 49 U.S.C. 41308. If antitrust immunity is requested, the application should specify whether the applicant seeks full immunity or immunity only from the provisions of sections 4, 4a and 4c of the Clayton Act, 15 U.S.C. 15, 15a, 15c. Each application seeking antitrust immunity shall contain a statement explaining why the applicant believes immunity is in the public interest and necessary in order for the transaction to proceed.
( b ) [Reserved]
( c ) Any material misrepresentation of fact in such an application shall be grounds for rescission *nunc pro tunc* of any antitrust immunity granted as a result of the misrepresentation.
( d ) A request for renewal of any immunity granted does not operate under section 558 of Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. 558(c), to extend the period of immunity conferred.
[50 FR 31142, July 31, 1985, as amended by Amdt. 303-2, 54 FR 33499, Aug. 15, 1989; Doc. No. DOT-OST-2014-0140, 84 FR 15937, Apr. 16, 2019]
No. 76-1138.

#### Le Beau Tours Inter-America, Inc. *v.*United States.

C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.
REGULATORY EVALUATION

Directorate Identifier: 2013-NM-096-AD

Executive Order 12866:

Could the AD be considered a “significant regulatory action”?

YES ( ) explain NO (X)

DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures:

Is the AD significant?

YES ( ) explain NO (X)

Regulatory Flexibility Act:

Will the AD have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities?

YES ( ) explain NO (X)

Intrastate Aviation in Alaska:

This AD could affect intrastate aviation in Alaska. Is it appropriate to include specific 

requirements for aircraft operated in Alaska, where aviation might be the only mode of 

transportation?

YES ( ) explain NO (X)
§ 382.113 What services are carriers not required to provide to passengers with a disability on board the aircraft? As a carrier, you are not required to provide extensive special assistance to qualified individuals with a disability. For purposes of this section, extensive special assistance includes the following activities: ( a ) Assistance in actual eating;
( b ) Assistance within the restroom or assistance at the passenger's seat with elimination functions; and
( c ) Provision of medical services.
**Exhibit
      32.1**





**CERTIFICATION**





In
      connection with the periodic report of Asiamart, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form
      10-Q for the quarter ending March 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities and
      Exchange Commission (the “Report”), I, Alex Yue, Chief Executive Officer
      (Principal Executive Officer) of the Company, hereby certify as of the date
      hereof, solely for purposes of Title 18, Chapter 63, Section 1350 of the United
      States Code, that to the best of my knowledge:





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





(2)  The
      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
      the financial condition and results of operations of the Company at the dates
      and for the periods indicated.





Date:
                May 20, 2008
            /s/
                Alex YueAlex
                YueChief
                Executive Officer(Principal
                Executive Officer)
#### §§ 415.44-415.50 [Reserved]
###### Editorial Note on Part 47

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 47 appear at 75 FR 41979, July 20, 2010.

#### § 47.1 Applicability.

This part prescribes the requirements for registering aircraft under 49 U.S.C. 44101-44104. Subpart B applies to each applicant for, and holder of, a Certificate of Aircraft Registration, AC Form8050-3. Subpart C applies to each applicant for, and holder of, a Dealer's Aircraft Registration Certificate, AC Form 8050-6.

[Amdt. 47-29, 75 FR 41979, July 20, 2010]
#### HOLMES v. THE STATE.

(Decided December 16, 1916.)

Appeal from Jefferson Criminal Court.

Heard before Hon. H. P. Heflin.

*662No counsel marked for appellant. W. L. Martin, Attorney General, for the State.

(This case is reported in 195 Ala. 673, and 70 South. 720.— Reporter.)

Pelham, P. J.

It appears that defendant was convicted of murder in the first degree and sentenced to the penitentiary for his natural life, and that this court is without jurisdiction under the act creating it, to hear and determine the motion to affirm on certificate. Motion denied and cause stricken.

Thomas, J., not sitting.
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

In connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-K of The Knot, Inc. (the Company) for the year ended December 31, 2006, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
Report), I, David Liu, 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 Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and                               
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
| | (2) | the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
|





| | /s/ David Liu                       
| | ------------------------------------
| | David Liu                           
| | Chairman and Chief Executive Officer

Date: March 13, 2007

---
§ 0.737-9 Decision on exceptions. ( a ) Upon receipt of exceptions, the Under Secretary may afford both parties an opportunity to submit briefs or other appropriate statements in support of their respective positions.
( b ) The Under Secretary shall issue a decision based solely on the record of the proceedings or those portions thereof cited by the parties to limit the issues.
( c ) If the Under Secretary modifies or reverses the initial hearing decision of the Examiner, he or she shall specify such findings of fact and conclusions of law as are different from those of the Examiner.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 7
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
UNAUDITED CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF MICHIGAN EDUCATIONAL
EMPLOYEES MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY AND SUBSIDIARY AS OF MARCH 31, 1999 AND FOR
THE THREE MONTH PERIOD THEN ENDED AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE
TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1999
<DEBT-HELD-FOR-SALE>                       120,547,164
<DEBT-CARRYING-VALUE>                                0
<DEBT-MARKET-VALUE>                                  0
<EQUITIES>                                           0
<MORTGAGE>                                           0
<REAL-ESTATE>                                        0
<TOTAL-INVEST>                             122,453,660
<CASH>                                       5,031,710
<RECOVER-REINSURE>                           7,760,726
<DEFERRED-ACQUISITION>                         284,735
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             240,617,416
<POLICY-LOSSES>                             93,134,162
<UNEARNED-PREMIUMS>                         30,866,486
<POLICY-OTHER>                                       0
<POLICY-HOLDER-FUNDS>                                0
<NOTES-PAYABLE>                             39,534,497
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                  52,784,169
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               240,617,416
<PREMIUMS>                                  16,737,050
<INVESTMENT-INCOME>                          1,762,267
<INVESTMENT-GAINS>                              16,456
<OTHER-INCOME>                                 376,028
<BENEFITS>                                  12,427,429
<UNDERWRITING-AMORTIZATION>                          0
<UNDERWRITING-OTHER>                         3,336,760
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              1,939,055
<INCOME-TAX>                                   805,596
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          1,133,459
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                               (69,664)
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 1,063,795
<EPS-BASIC>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
<RESERVE-OPEN>                                       0
<PROVISION-CURRENT>                                  0
<PROVISION-PRIOR>                                    0
<PAYMENTS-CURRENT>                                   0
<PAYMENTS-PRIOR>                                     0
<RESERVE-CLOSE>                                      0
<CUMULATIVE-DEFICIENCY>                              0


</TABLE>
#### § 49.35 Eligibility for recording: ownership requirements.

If the seller of an aircraft is not shown on the records of the FAA as the owner of the aircraft, a conveyance, including a contract of conditional sale, submitted for recording under this subpart must be accompanied by bills of sale or similar documents showing consecutive transfers from the last registered owner, through each intervening owner, to the seller.
#### § 102.121 Rules to be liberally construed.

The Rules and Regulations in this part will be liberally construed to effectuate the purposes and provisions of the Act.
spiritDocument# 15-012 RC 

February 23, 2015 

-U-:5-:-Department-of Transportation-- _ 

Docket Operations, M-30 

West Building ground floor, 

Room W12-140 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE 

Washington, DC 20590 

•. · 1 ~ •• • n , n e> '?: 11 a 1 _ . _ I • n : tJ . : . -: t 

-----

2800 Executive Way 

Miramar, FL 33025 

(Office) 954-447-8097 

(Fax) 954-447-8081 

Rich. Dancaster@Spirit.com 

Subject: Request for Extension of Exemption No. 10242A from 14 CFR (FAR Section) Part: 

121.434 (c)(1)(ii) Expiring on 04/30/2015. 

Dear Sirs, 

Thank you for granting Spirit Airlines Exemption No. 10242 from 14 CFR (FAR Section) Part: 

121.434 (c)(1)(ii) initially granted on 4/12/2011. 

Spirit Airlines respectfully requests an extension for exemption No. 10242A (Docket Number 

FAA-2011-0253) which expires on 4/30/2015. Please extend this exemption for the period of 

two years (4/30/2017). 

This exemption has allowed-our company to focus on the timely_ and competent C0!}1pj_e_tion of 

the observation flight and better utilization of qualifying PICs. 

Should you have any questions or if you require additional information about this request, 

please do not hesitate to contact me. 

Regards, 

~o~-

Rich Dancaster 

System Chief Pilot 

Spirit Airlines, Inc .. 

. ·' 
Regulations.gov- Your Receipt Page I of2 

feguJah~A~V 'tour \'oia tt) hod~ Onhton~U:nz 

~c:JI Your comment was submitted successfully! 

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Other: U.S. DOT/FAA- Decision 

For related information, Open Docket Folder ® 

0 Your Receipt 

- ----~~---=--~--~~----

Your 

Comment 

Tracking . Number: 1jz-Bhd6-

94yu 

Amanda. Daku@spirit.com 

Your comment: 

Comment: 

Your comment may be viewable on Regulations.gov 

once the agency has reviewed it. This process is 

dependent on agency public submission 

policies/procedures and processing times. Use your 

tr·acking number to find out the status of your 

comment. 

Spirit Airlines, Inc. Exemption No. 10242A from 14 CFR (FAR Section) 

Part 121.424 will expire on 4/30/2015. 

Please see the formal letter of request for an extension of docket number 

FAA-2011-0253. 

--Ple-ase ler me kn·ow-if yolTt'fave-a·ny' qo~·stion·s-cWifl· can· provide further -· -·· · 

information. 

Regards, 

Amanda Daku 

Sr. Manager, Regulatory Compliance & QA, Flight Operations 

Uploaded File(s)(Optional) 

No files uploaded 

15-012 RC DOT Exemption Extension 1 0242.pdf: success 

This information will appear on Regulations.gov: 

First Name: 

Amanda 

http://www.regulations.gov/ 2/23/2015 
Regulations.gov- Your Receipt 

Last Name: 

Daku 

Mailing Address: 

2800 Executive Way 

City: 

Miramar 

Country: 

United States 

State or Province: 

Page 2 of2 

lf1his information will not appear on Regulations.gov: 

ZIP/Postal Code: ~~Address: 

Amanda.Daku@spirit.com 

Phone Number: 

---- !----95"462"84936 

Fax Number: 

n/a 

http://www.regulations.gov/ 

- -----~--- ~---- ----------!----

2/23/2015
----

| 1) | Manigood International      Industrial Limited, a company set up and validly constituted under      the laws of Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, with registered      office Room 1508-1509      Peninsula Square, 18 Sung On Street, HungHom, Kowloon (hereinafter      referred to as “Company A”); and |
|----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 2) | Best Paramount Industrial      Limited, a company set up and validly constituted under the laws of      Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, with registered office 2/F, Emax, Hong Kong      International Trade and Exhibition Centre, No. 1 Trademart Drive, Kowloon      Bay, Kowloon (hereinafter referred to as “Company    B”). |
|----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

----

----

| SIGNED      by                                                      | )                         |
|---------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------|
| for      and on behalf of Manigood International Industrial Limited | )                         |
|                                                                | in      the presence of:- | ) |
|                                                                |                      |   |
|                                                                |                      |   |
|                                                                |                      |   |
|                                                                |                      |   |
| SIGNED      by                                                      | )                         |
| for      and on behalf of Best Paramount Industrial Limited    | )                         |
|                                                                | in      the presence of:- | ) |

----
<PAGE>

Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION

I, Woody M. McGee, Chief Executive Officer and I, Donald L. Paliwoda, Chief
Financial Officer of Davel Communications, Inc., certify, pursuant to Section
906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:

1. The Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarterly period
ended March 31, 2004 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act if 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m); and

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

Date: May 14, 2004                   /s/ WOODY MCGEE
                                     -------------------------------------------
                                     Woody M. McGee, Chief Executive Officer

                                     /s/ DONALD PALIWODA
                                     -------------------------------------------
                                     Donald L. Paliwoda, Chief Financial Officer
[No. 26621-1-II.

Division Two.

November 22, 2002.]

#### The State of Washington, *Respondent,*v. Joel Ray Foran, *Appellant.*

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court for Pierce County, No. 00-1-01424-2, Terry D. Sebring, J., entered November 2, 2000. *Affirmed in part*and *remanded*by unpublished opinion per Bridgewater, J., concurred in by Morgan and Houghton, JJ.
§ 71.9 Overlapping airspace designations. ( a ) When overlapping airspace designations apply to the same airspace, the operating rules associated with the more restrictive airspace designation apply.
( b ) For the purpose of this section— ( 1 ) Class A airspace is more restrictive than Class B, Class C, Class D, Class E, or Class G airspace;
( 2 ) Class B airspace is more restrictive than Class C, Class D, Class E, or Class G airspace;
( 3 ) Class C airspace is more restrictive than Class D, Class E, or Class G airspace;
( 4 ) Class D airspace is more restrictive than Class E or Class G airspace; and
( 5 ) Class E is more restrictive than Class G airspace.
§ 91.709 Operations to Cuba. No person may operate a civil aircraft from the United States to Cuba unless— ( a ) Departure is from an international airport of entry designated in § 6.13 of the Air Commerce Regulations of the Bureau of Customs (19 CFR 6.13); and
( b ) In the case of departure from any of the 48 contiguous States or the District of Columbia, the pilot in command of the aircraft has filed— ( 1 ) A DVFR or IFR flight plan as prescribed in § 99.11 or § 99.13 of this chapter; and
( 2 ) A written statement, within 1 hour before departure, with the Office of Immigration and Naturalization Service at the airport of departure, containing— ( i ) All information in the flight plan;
( ii ) The name of each occupant of the aircraft;
( iii ) The number of occupants of the aircraft; and
( iv ) A description of the cargo, if any.
This section does not apply to the operation of aircraft by a scheduled air carrier over routes authorized in operations specifications issued by the Administrator. (Approved by the Office of Management and Budget under control number 2120-0005)
October 20, 2011



### JUDGMENT



## The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

CITY OF HOUSTON , Appellant

NO. 14

- 11

- 00183

- CV V.

OCIE PICKENS , Appellee

____________________

Today the Court heard the parties’ joint motion to dismiss the appeal from the
order signed by the court below on February 21, 2011. Having considered the motion
and found it meritorious, we order the appeal DISMISSED

. We further order that each party sh all pay its costs incurred by reason of this
appeal.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.
We further order the mandate be issued immediately.
#### BUSHMAN, ADMINISTRATOR, v. UNITED STATES

[80 C. Cls. 175; 295 U. S. 756]

Petition for writ of certiorari *denied*by the Supreme Court May 27, 1935.
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 4365 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 4365

To clarify licensure requirements for contractor medical professionals 
   to perform medical disability examinations for the Department of 
               Veterans Affairs, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             July 29, 2020

  Mr. Boozman introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
             referred to the Committee on Veterans' Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To clarify licensure requirements for contractor medical professionals 
   to perform medical disability examinations for the Department of 
               Veterans Affairs, and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. CLARIFICATION OF LICENSURE REQUIREMENTS FOR CONTRACTOR 
              MEDICAL PROFESSIONALS TO PERFORM MEDICAL DISABILITY 
              EXAMINATIONS FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS.

    Subsection (c) of section 504 of the Veterans' Benefits 
Improvements Act of 1996 (Public Law 104-275; 38 U.S.C. 5101 note) is 
amended to read as follows:
    ``(c) Licensure of Contract Health Care Professionals.--
            ``(1) In general.--Notwithstanding any law regarding the 
        licensure of health care professionals, a health care 
        professional described in paragraph (2) may conduct an 
        examination pursuant to a contract entered into under 
        subsection (a) at any location in any State, the District of 
        Columbia, or a Commonwealth, territory, or possession of the 
        United States, so long as the examination is within the scope 
        of the authorized duties under such contract.
            ``(2) Health care professional described.--A health care 
        professional described in this paragraph is a physician, 
        physician assistant, nurse practitioner, audiologist, or 
        psychologist, who--
                    ``(A) has a current unrestricted license to 
                practice the health care profession of the physician, 
                physician assistant, nurse practitioner, audiologist, 
                or psychologist, as the case may be;
                    ``(B) is not barred from practicing such health 
                care profession in any State, the District of Columbia, 
                or a Commonwealth, territory, or possession of the 
                United States; and
                    ``(C) is performing authorized duties for the 
                Department of Veterans Affairs pursuant to a contract 
                entered into under subsection (a).''.
                                 <all>
```
MPD

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 19-0632

STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee,

v.

GREGORY M. SMITH,

Defendant and Appellant.

ORDER

Upon consideration of Appellee’s motion for a 60-day extension of time, 

and good cause appearing therefor, 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellee is granted an extension of time to 

and including October 1, 2020, within which to prepare, serve, and file its response 

brief.

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

July 24 2020

07/24/2020

Case Number: DA 19-0632
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court 

Lansing, Michigan 

October 31, 2005 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

127793 & (16) Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman,

 Justices 

v SC: 127793 

 COA: 256347 

Kalamazoo CC: 98-000394-FC 

DOUGLAS ALAN WORTINGER, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the December 16, 2004 

order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because the defendant has 

failed to meet the burden of establishing entitlement to relief under MCR 6.508(D). The 

motion to remand is also considered, and it is DENIED. 

s1024 

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

October 31, 2005 

Clerk