alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
TOOL# Comments Date of install Date of testTotal Vol inSLPMTotal Vol outSLPMDillutionFactorDRE CF4 DRE NF3DRECH2F2DRECHF3DREC4F8DREC4F6DRE SF6CrossReferenceA14-Mar-07 4/13/2011 272.010 944.280 3.47 49.01 99.34 99.3999.42 99.43 10 - 14ARetest 14-Mar-07 9/15/2011 182.900 658.500 3.60 47.26 99.25 96.65 99.44 99.01 99.28 15 - 20B28-Mar-07 4/21/2011 375.018 1012.183 2.70 0.00 98.37 99.1298.90 97.76 21 - 25BRetest 28-Mar-07 9/29/2011 177.900 1002.400 5.63 94.50 98.87 98.78 98.98 98.53 98.81 26 - 31C12-Sep-07 5/26/2011 193.425 787.239 4.07 98.39 98.97 98.9999.85 98.82 32 - 36D6-Oct-04 8/2/2011 97.100 882.200 9.08 67.9637E4-Nov-02 9/15/2011 306.700 845.100 2.76 31.00 99.82 99.40 99.81 99.57 40 - 44F4-Nov-02 9/15/2011 321.300 875.100 2.72 48.20 99.78 99.49 99.75 99.54 45 - 49G17-Jul-03 8/25/2011 298.900 1171.600 3.92 0.00 99.18 99.1899.71 99.16 50 - 54H17-Jul-03 8/25/2011 298.600 1216.700 4.07 0.00 99.78 99.1399.72 99.24 55 - 59I18-Mar-03 8/18/2011 339.200 802.800 2.37 28.67 99.36 99.6299.65 99.48 99.41 60 - 65J18-Mar-03 8/18/2011 305.900 896.100 2.94 14.95 99.38 98.9799.69 98.40 99.01 66 - 71K5-Dec-06 4/26/2011 181.700 668.826 3.68 97.07 97.98 99.48 97.49 72 - 75L12-May-10 9/19/2011 242.100 741.900 3.06 76.06 99.07 99.2299.14 98.78 99.09 79 - 84M3-Jul-07 4/28/2011 182.619 1156.575 6.33 39.665MRetest 3-Jul-07 9/8/2011 178.000 1124.000 6.32 67.25 99.1099.55 99.31 6 - 9N2-Jun-10 9/16/2011 94.400 496.700 5.26 95.13 99.38 98.34 76- 78O13-Sep-04 9/7/2011 218.400 853.800 3.91 42.49 99.51 99.67 99.71 1 - 4P25-Jan-10 5/26/2011 68.865 562.280 8.94 95.58 99.5638 - 39Q15-Jan-08 9/22/2011 206.300 919.100 4.45 4.09 98.42 98.67 99.60 98.44 85 - 89Note: Cross-reference column gives corresponding line numbers in Table VI: Etch Abatement Systems Measured DREs (Jan 2012 Abatement Paper)
-cr-06241-WJZ Document 43 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/25/2000 P
#### § 101-26.509-3 Consolidation of requisitions.

To the maximum extent feasible, agencies shall consolidate their requisitions for tabulating machine cards on an agencywide basis. If agencywide consolidation is not feasible, consideration shall be given to the consolidation of requisitions at any agency level when the Government will benefit from lower prices through large-volume procurement.

[43 FR 32766, July 28, 1978]
### Regulatory Eva lu ation

Docket No. FAA- Directorate Identifier: -AD



### Add the work hours, par is cos/ , and number<?( U.S. r egi s te red produc t s to the /able b e lmv. When you are .finished. click on the · 'Update Fie lds , . but/on to**auwmatical~vfill** 

### in the totals

. Update Fields 

# .J

Estimat ed Costs: Action Costs per Product (e.g., aircraft, engine, (e.g

. , Inspection, propeller, appliance) Work-hours Labor Parts Cost Total Costs Number of Total Cost replacement) ( in clude cost (labor + 

# u.s. for U.S. Fleet 

### Do not includ e oncondition costs here access, testing, (@$85/h parts) Registered and close-up) our) Products Inspection IA W F i gure 

### 84**~** 

### $7 

### .l-.lO .i ( 

### 1471 o. "io '"" o-1 o I ofSB (J 

### .00 Inspection IAW Figure 

### 65 

## '.::; ' -s::: <; ( 

### : '5

.00 

### 42**S.?. ~~:**  

### 050. \J 2 ofSB I ( () ,**G~l** 

### 0 00 0.0 ) I} 01 , ' 0.00 (i.J .;, O

. Oil 

### ' ' {i!J l)j (I 0(1**~** 

### 0 f),) " 0

. 1)\ ; <, l) ()I) ) (U)O $ ( >.\). • 'n r).O !) 

# s 0.00 

### :£ {) .UP (I 0 ( 1 

### -:. 

# n oo \) ()•' 

### o
.ou (J.OO 

### t ) 

## no r) Or) 

### 0 .00 !) 1)1 

## o --;:;o 0 (J{l 

### '· f) ( \, ( .0(1 

## ' 0 !}(; '· t) 

### G '}, I) 01) 

### 0.00 $ ()

_ (), 

### :; 

## n no .., () 00 

## s I} (l I '> (! 0(1**~** (}J}O 

### 00
•' IJ .()!) 

# s 0.00 

### ) Oc I} ()I) ... 

### 0.0 0 () (l 

# Tt ()(l (l 1)0 0 OJ ' (; l lU)O

The known number of products in compliance: 0 Total Costs of complian ce for 

### U

. S. fleet: $10,734 ,990 Costs covered u n de r war ranty 

### (if 

### known) 0$

On-Condition Costs:

# ~ Work-hours Labor cost Parts Cost Cost per Product Action (in clude access , (@$85/hour) (e.g., Inspection, testing , and close-

replacement) uo) "· 0 1)1 

### -.; 

## n. f ;<) 

### > (1.0!1 'io ll ()tl ") O.•Hl \ 1! Ot

### Special considerations for Economic Analysis (Use this field to explain anything in the E s timated Costs table that was assumed or might not be obvious. This field can also be us ed to explain warranty cost s) : 

### Executive Order 12866: Could the AD be considered a "significant regulatory action " ?

. YES* 

## 0**NO ~**  

### *Explanation: 

### DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures: Is the AD significant? • YES* 0**NO~** 

### *Explanation: 

### Regulatory Flexibility Act: Will the 

### AD have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities? Explain for either a Yes or No answer . • YES 

### 0**NO ~**  

### Explanation: 

### 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* 0**NO~** 

### * Explanation:
Case 0:00-cr-06241-WJZ Document 56 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/07/2004 Page 1 of 2
Case 0:00-cr-06241-WJZ Document 56 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/07/2004 Page 2 of 2
##### 



Exhibit 32 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT In connection with the Quarterly Report of The Allied Defense Group, Inc
(Allied) on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2004 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, the
undersigned, John G. Meyer, Jr., as Chief Executive Officer and Charles A.
Hasper as Chief Financial Officer of Allied, 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 consolidated financial condition and
results of operations of Allied. /s/ Charles A. Hasper
    
    /s/ John G. Meyer, Jr.Charles A. Hasper
    
    John G. Meyer, Jr.Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer
    
    Chief Executive Officer and PresidentMay 10, 2004
    
    May 10, 2004
 A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to The Allied Defense Group, Inc. and will be retained by The Allied
Defense Group, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or
its staff upon request.
#### § 101-6.400 Cross-reference to the Federal Management Regulation (FMR) (41 CFR chapter 102, parts 102-1 through 102-220).

For policy concerning official use of Government passenger carriers between residence and place of employment previously contained in this part, see FMR part 5 (41 CFR part 102-5), Home-to-Work Transportation.
79–006 

111TH CONGRESS REPT. 111–119 " ! HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 1st Session Part 2 

FAA REAUTHORIZATION ACT OF 2009 

MAY 21, 2009.—Committed to the Committee of the White House on the State of 

the Union and ordered to be printed 

Mr. OBERSTAR, from the Committee on Transportation and 

Infrastructure submitted the following 

SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT 

[To accompany H.R. 915] 

This supplemental report contains revisions to the material in 

the report submitted on May 19, 2009 (H. Rept. 111–119, part 1). 

In lieu of the statement regarding compliance with House Rule XXI 

that was included in House Report 111–119, Part 1: 

COMPLIANCE WITH HOUSE RULE XXI

Pursuant to clause 9 of rule XXI of the Rules of the House of 

Representatives, the Committee is required to include a list of congressional earmarks, limited tax benefits, or limited tariff benefits 

as defined in clause 9(d), 9(e), and 9(f) of rule XXI of the Rules of 

the House of Representatives. It is not clear if the definition of 

‘‘congressional earmark’’ under clause 9(d) of rule XXI applies to 

section 810 or section 815 of H.R. 915. However, in the interest of 

full disclosure and transparency, the Committee has required 

Members of Congress to comply with all requirements of clause 

9(d), 9(e), and 9(f) of rule XXI. 

Section 810, which was requested by Representative Steven C. 

LaTourette, allows Lake County, Ohio, to purchase the Lost Nation 

Airport from the City of Willoughby, Ohio. The provision authorizes 

the Secretary to make an AIP grant to assist in this purchase. Section 815, which was requested by Representative Don Young, allows the release of certain restrictions for specific airport land, 

without monetary consideration, to the town of Anchorage, Alaska, 

for construction or reconstruction of a federally subsidized highway 

project. 


rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with HEARING
2 

No other provision in the bill includes an earmark, limited tax 

benefit, or limited tariff benefit. 

Æ 


rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with HEARING
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

Case No. 22CR20422 Middlebrooks

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiffs,

vs.

ISMAEL SOTO AROCHO,

Defendant.

____________________________/ 

OBJECTIONS TO THE PRESENTENCE INVESTIGATION REPORT

ISMAEL SOTO AROCHO files these objections to the Presentence Investigation

Report (“PSI”) and states as follows:

Safety Valve

Mr. SOTO AROCHO objects to not eliminating the 10-year mandatory minimum 

sentence and reducing his guideline score by two points as required by 18 U.S.C. § 3553(f).

Mr. SOTO AROCHO’S base offense level should be reduced by two points and he 

should be sentenced without regard for the 10-year mandatory minimum sentence because he 

qualifies for the safety valve provision. See 18 U.S.C. § 3553(f); United States v. Garcon, 54 

F.4th 1271, 1276 (11th Cir. 2022).

Mr. SOTO AROCHO adopted without issue the agreed factual proffer. 

Mr. SOTO AROCHO has met all the criteria required for the safety valve.

WHEREFORE, Mr. SOTO AROCHO respectfully requests that he be afforded the 

protections of safety vale and he be sentenced below the 10-year minimum mandatory. 

/s/ Michael A. Gottlieb

Michael A. Gottlieb, P.A.

Florida Bar No.: 981133

Case 1:22-cr-20422-DMM Document 104 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/07/2023 Page 1 of 2
I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing Objections to PSI has been 

electronically filed with the Clerk of Court using CM/ECF this of 7th day of March, 2023.

/s/Michael A. Gottlieb

Michael A. Gottlieb, Esquire

Michael A. Gottlieb, P.A.

1311 SE 2nd Avenue

Ft. Lauderdale, Florida 33316

mike@mgottlieblaw.com

Phone: (954) 462-1005

Fax: (954) 463-9869

Florida Bar No.: 981133

Case 1:22-cr-20422-DMM Document 104 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/07/2023 Page 2 of 2
| AMERICAN      CONSUMERS, INC.NET      INCOME (LOSS) PER COMMON SHARE EXHIBIT      11 |   |
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
|   |   |   |   | THIRTEEN WEEKS ENDED |   | TWENTY-SIX WEEKS  ENDED |
|--------|--------|--------|--------|----------------------|--------|-------------------------|

|                                                                                          |   | November      28,2009 |     |   | November      29,2008 |   |    | November      28,2009 |   |   | November      29,2008 |   |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|-----------------------|----------|--------|-----------------------|--------|---------|-----------------------|--------|--------|-----------------------|--------|
| Net      income (loss) for computing   Income      (loss) per common share     |   | $                     | (188,144 | )      |                  | $      | 30,115  |                  |   | $      | (204,972              | )      |   | $ | 27,456  |   |
|                                                                                          |   |                  |     |   |                  |   |    |                  |   |   |                  |   |   |   |   |   |
| Weighted      average number of common shares        outstanding during each period |   |                  | 759,886  |   |                  |   | 781,696 |                  |   |   | 764,053               |   |   |   | 781,717  |   |
|                                                                                          |   |                  |     |   |                  |   |    |                  |   |   |                  |   |   |   |   |   |
| Net      income (loss) per common share                                                       |   | $                     | (0.248   | )      |                  | $      | 0.039   |                  |   | $      | (0.268                | )      |   | $ | 0.035  |   |
cldb-ex42_9.htm



 

Exhibit 4.2

CORTLAND BANCORP

194 West Main Street

Cortland, OH 44410

November 7, 2019

Securities and Exchange Commission

100 F Street, NE

Washington, D.C. 20549

Re:  Cortland Bancorp Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2019

Ladies and Gentlemen:

Cortland Bancorp, an Ohio corporation, is today filing a Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2019 (the "Form 10-Q"), as executed on November 7, 2019. 

Pursuant to the instructions relating to the Exhibits in Item 601(b)(4)(iii) of Regulation S-K, Cortland Bancorp hereby agrees to furnish the Commission, upon request, copies of instruments and agreements defining the rights of holders of its long-term debt and of the long-term debt of its consolidated subsidiaries, which are not being filed as exhibits to the Form 10-Q.  No such instrument or agreement represents long-term debt exceeding 10% of the total assets of Cortland Bancorp and its subsidiaries on a consolidated basis.

Very truly yours,

 


	
/s/ James M. Gasior

	
James M. Gasior

	
President and CEO
601 P.2d 374

#### James S. ARAM and Ruth Aram, husband and wife, Plaintiffs, Counter-Defendants, Respondents, v. David E. HARRIS and Norma C. Harris, husband and wife, Defendants, Counter-Plaintiffs, Appellants.

No. 12578.

Supreme Court of Idaho.

Oct. 16, 1979.

Blake, Feeney & Clark, Lewiston, for appellant.

Randall, Bengtson & Cox, Lewiston, for respondents.

PER CURIAM.

Earlier litigation between the same parties culminated in an out-of-court settlement with appellants receiving $1,250.00 for a road right-of-way granted to respondents. It was agreed that appellants could also use the same roadway and park vehicles on it as had been “done in the past” and that appellants could park in one certain area “from time to time” when “necessary” — but so as to at all times create “the least reasonably possible interference” with respondents’ use. None of the quoted terms was further defined, and in due time this second round of litigation ensued. Both parties presented testimony supportive of their respective contentions as to how the agreement should be construed. Apparently not caring for the trial court’s resolution, appellants caused their attorneys to appeal the controversy to this Court. The evidence amply supports the judgment of the court below, and we affirm. Costs to respondent.
TERREL

Variable Description Value Default Comments

GTOPO30 GTOPO 30-sec data - n/a 1 degree DEM files will be used

XREFKM Reference point coordinates for grid 168 n/aYREFKM Reference point coordinates for grid 720 n/a

NX Number of X grid cells 40 n/a

NY Number of Y grid cells 30 n/a

CTGPROC

Variable Description Value Default Comments

XREFKM Reference point coordinates for grid 168 n/aYREFKM Reference point coordinates for grid 720 n/a

NX Number of X grid cells 40 n/a

NY Number of Y grid cells 30 n/a

CALMET

Variable Description Value Default Comments

NUSTA Number of upper air stations 4 14898, 14918, 94983, 4837

NX Number of X grid cells 40 n/a

NY Number of Y grid cells 30 n/a

XORIGKM Reference point coordinates for grid 168 n/a

YORIGKM Reference point coordinates for grid 720 n/a

NOOBS No Observation Mode 0 Y Include Surface, Upper Air and 

NSSTA Number of Surface Stations 74 n/a 74 surface weather stationsNPSTA Number of Precipitation Stations 68 n/a 68 precipitation stations

RMAX2 Maximum radius of influence over land aloft 50 n/a Similar to PSD with ObservatioRMAX3 Maximum radius of influence over water 500 n/a Similar to PSD with Observatio

R1 Relative weighting of the first guess field and observations in the surface layer (km) 10 n/a Similar to PSD with Observatio

R2 Relative weighting of the first guess field and observations in the layers aloft (km) 20 n/a Similar to PSD with Observatio

ISURFT Surface met. Stations to use for the surface temperature - n/a Hibbing Met station

IUPT Upper air station to use for the domain scale lapse rate - n/a International Falls Upper Air sta

ITPROG 3D temperature from observations or from prognostic data? 0 Y Inclusion of Surface and Upper 

TRADKM Radius of influence for temperature interpolation 500 Y Similar to PSD with Observatio

JWAT1 Beginning land use category for temperature interpolation over water 99 n/a CALMET may fail when using 5

JWAT2 Ending land use category for temperature interpolation over water 99 n/a CALMET may fail when using 5

SIGMAP Radius of influence (km) 100 Y Precipitation Observations are 

Input Group 0bInput Group 2Input Group 2Input Group 2Input Group 4Input Group 5Input Group 6
CALPUFF

Variable Description Value Default Comments

NX Number of X grid cells in met grid 40 n/a

NY Number of Y grid cells in met grid 30 n/a

XORIGKM Reference point coordinates for met grid 168 n/a

YORIGKM Reference point coordinates for met grid 720 n/a

IBCOMP X index of LL corner 1 n/a

JBCOMP Y index of LL corner 1 n/a

IECOMP X index of UR corner 40 n/a

JECOMP Y index of UR corner 30 n/a

MOZ Ozone data input option 1 N OZONE.DAT from MN, WI, and 

NREC Number of non-gridded receptors 1222 n/a Using only BWCA and Voyage

Input Group 11Input Group 17Input Group 4
§ 101-30.101-9 Item entry control. *Item entry control* means the functional responsibility of GSA/DOD cataloging to minimize the number of items in the supply system by: ( a ) Establishing controls that prevent unessential new items from entering the supply system;
( b ) promoting the development of standards and use of standard items; and
( c ) eliminating items having nonstandard characteristics, and isolating and recommending the use of duplicate or replacement items.
[46 FR 35645, July 10, 1981]
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA 

MIAMI DIVISION 

CASE NO.: 1:22-CV-23074-BLOOM/OTAZO-REYES 

OCTAVIO COLLADO 

For himself and all others 

similarly situated, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

450 NORTH RIVER DRIVE, LLC, 

d/b/a KIKI ON THE RIVER, 

RJ RIVER, LLC, and 

ROMAN JONES, 

Defendants. 

____________________________________/ 

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS 450 NORTH RIVER DRIVE, LLC, D/B/A KIKI 

ON THE RIVER AND ROMAN JONES’ UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR LEAVE FOR 

THEIR INSURANCE ADJUSTER TO APPEAR TELEPHONICALLY AT THE 

SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE 

THIS MATTER came before the Court upon Defendant 450 North River Drive, LLC, d/b/a 

Kiki on the River and Roman Jones’ unopposed motion for leave for their insurance adjuster to 

appear telephonically at the settlement conference. The Court having reviewed the Motion and 

being otherwise fully advised in the premises, hereby: 

ORDERS AND ADJUDGES that Defendants’ Unopposed Motion is GRANTED. 

Defendants’ insurance adjuster may appear at the March 1, 2023 Settlement Conference 

telephonically. 

DONE AND ORDERED this _____ day of February, 2023 in Miami, Florida. 

 __________________________________ 

ALICIA M. OTAZO-REYES 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 

cc: All Counsel of Record 

Case 1:22-cv-23074-BB Document 89-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/28/2023 Page 1 of 1
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE

FIRST DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON

ORDER ON MOTION FOR REHEARING EN BANC 

Case number: 01-11-00969-CV

Style: Alan McGilbery v. Doris Felix McGilbery

Date motion filed: December 21, 2012

Party filing motion: Appellant, Alan McGilbery

A majority of the Court having voted against rehearing en banc, it is ordered that the motion for

rehearing en banc is denied. 

Judge’s signature: /s/ Jane Bland

Acting for the Court

Before: Chief Justice Radack and Justices Jennings, Keyes, Higley, Bland, Sharp, Massengale, 

Brown, and Huddle. 

Date: February 8, 2013.
1

IN THE UNITED STATE DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA 

JESSE IWUJI MOTORSPORTS, LLC, 

Plaintiffs,

v. Case No.: 22-cv-62268 BLOOM / Valle

EQUITY PRIME MORTGAGE, 

Defendant.

/

MEDIATION REPORT

Pursuant to the Court’s Order and/or agreement by the Parties, a Mediation Conference 

was conducted by Giselle Leonardo, Florida Supreme Court Certified Circuit Civil Mediator.

The undersigned, Giselle Leonardo, Florida Supreme Court Certified Mediator from 

Giselle Leonardo, P.A. hereby reports to this Honorable Court that a mediation conference in this 

cause was held by videoconference at 10:00 a.m. on April 25, 2023. The results of the Mediation 

Conference are as follows:

______ A SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT was reached during this Conference.

__X___ No agreement was reached.

 The Parties have agreed to ADJOURN and RECONVENE at a later date to 

continue the mediation. The Court will be notified of the continuation date.

______ The Parties have agreed to continue negotiating with the assistance of the mediator. 

If no further Report of Mediator is filed on or before _____ , the Court shall 

presume that no agreement has been reached.

______ Other: The Plaintiff advised in writing Settlement was reached.

Case 0:22-cv-62268-BB Document 26 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/10/2023 Page 1 of 2
2

Respectfully Submitted,

By: /s/ Giselle Leonardo ;

Giselle Leonardo, Esq.

Giselle Leonardo, P.A.

One East Broward Blvd., Suite #700

Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33301

Telephone: 954-728-9026

Facsimile: 954-252-2100

Email: gleonardo@gl-legal.com

Florida Supreme Court Certified Circuit Civil 

Mediator No. 18810

Florida Bar No. 0182140

COPIES FURNISHED BY EMAIL/HAND DELIVERY/FACSIMILE/U.S. MAIL TO:

All Counsel of Record

Plaintiff’s Counsel

Defendant’s Counsel

Case 0:22-cv-62268-BB Document 26 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/10/2023 Page 2 of 2
#### § 102-118.120 Must my agency use a GTR?

No, your agency is not required to use a GTR. Your agency must adopt commercial practices and eliminate GTR use to the maximum extent possible.