alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 31.1


**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE**


**SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**





I, Stephen M. OHara, certify that:





1.
I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Angelica Corporation;





2.
Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;





3.
Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included 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 periods presented in this report;




4.
The registrants other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining 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 disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this quarterly report is being prepared;(b)
evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this quarterly report based on such evaluation; and(c)
disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal control over financial reporting; and





5.
The registrants other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the audit committee of the registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):





(a)
all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely




















affect the registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and(b)
any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrants internal control over financial reporting.











Date: December 9, 2004








/s/ Stephen M. OHaraStephen M. OHaraPresident and Chief Executive Officerof Angelica Corporation










2
#### § 302-9.604 Under what condition may we authorize transportation of a POV to a post of duty?

You may authorize transportation of a POV to a post of duty only when you determine, after consideration of the factors in § 302-9.605, that it is in the interest of the Government for the employee to have use of a POV at the post of duty.

[FTR Amdt. 98, 66 FR 58196, Nov. 20, 2001. Redesignated and amended by FTR Amdt. 2011-01, 76 FR 18342, Apr. 1, 2011 and further redesignated and amended by FTR Amdt. 2011-06, 76 FR 71890, Nov. 21, 2011]
#### § 302-3.428 If I am permanently assigned to my temporary official station, is there any limitation on the weight of household goods I may transport at Government expense to my official station?

Yes. If you are permanently assigned to your temporary official station, you are limited to 18,000 pounds net weight for household goods you may transport at Government expense to your official station. This maximum weight will be reduced by the weight of any household goods transported at Government expense to your temporary official station under your TCS authorization. Subject to the 18,000 pound limit, your agency will pay to transport any household goods in extended storage to your official station. Additionally, if you change your residence as a result of your permanent assignment to your temporary official station, your agency may pay for transporting your household goods, subject to the 18,000-pound limit, between the residence you occupied during your temporary assignment and your new residence.
§ 60-30.32 Administrative complaint and answer. ( a ) Expedited hearings shall be commenced by filing an administrative complaint in accordance with 41 CFR 60-30.5. The complaint shall state that the hearing is subject to these expedited hearing procedures.
( b ) The answer shall be filed in accordance with 41 CFR 60-30.6 (a) and (b).
( c ) Failure to request a hearing within the 20 days provided by 41 CFR 60-30.6(a) shall constitute a waiver of hearing, and all the material allegations of fact contained in the complaint shall be deemed to be admitted. If a hearing is not requested or is waived, within 25 days of the complaint's filing, the Administrative Law Judge shall adopt as findings of fact the material facts alleged in the complaint, and shall order the appropriate sanctions and/or penalties sought in the complaint. The Administrative Law Judge's findings and order shall constitute a final Administrative order, unless the Office of the Solicitor, U.S. Department of Labor, files exceptions to the findings and order within 10 days of receipt thereof. If the Office of the Solicitor, U.S. Department of Labor, files exceptions, the matter shall proceed in accordance with § 60-30.36 of this part.
( d ) If a request for a hearing is received within 20 days as provided by 41 CFR 60-30.6(a), the hearing shall be convened within 45 days of receipt of the request and shall be completed within 15 days thereafter, unless more hearing time is required.
#### Bryan MCDONALD, Defendant-Below, Appellant, v. STATE of Delaware, Plaintiff-Below, Appellee.

No. 482, 2015

Supreme Court of Delaware.

Submitted: August 24, 2016

Decided: September 7, 2016

Court Below: Superior Court of the State of Delaware, Cr. ID No. 1310018871

Affirmed.
Sample Brief Cover (MSPB Cases)

2021-1113

United States Court of Appeals

for the Federal Circuit

JOANNE S. DOE,

Petitioner

v.

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY,

Respondent

Petition for Review from the Merit Systems Protection Board 

in DC-0752-99-1234-I-5

BRIEF OF PETITIONER JOANNE S. DOE

MARY S. SMITH

SMITH & JONES

123 Main Street

Anytown, ST 12345

(555) 555-5555

maryssmith@anymail.com

Counsel for Petitioner

December 1, 2021
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.                  

###### Department of the Interior

###### Bureau of Land Management

          - [CO-170-00-1060-JJ] 

# AGENCY:

Bureau of Land Management, Interior.

# ACTION:

Notice, public hearing and intent to remove wild horses. 

# SUMMARY:

A public meeting is scheduled for July 14, 2000, at the Norwood Log Cabin located at 1120 Lucerne, Norwood, Colorado from 12 noon until 4 p.m. A formal hearing will be conducted to receive statements from the public concerning the use of helicopters and motor vehicles in wild horse management operations within the Spring Creek Basin Wild Horse Herd Management Area (HMA), Colorado for calendar years 2000 and 2001 starting promptly at 2 p.m. Prior to the hearing, general management and planned removal operations for the HMA will be discussed. Periodic removals are necessary in order to maintain the populations within the appropriate management levels (AMLs) established through the planning process as a result of monitoring and analysis of that data in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act and BLM Policies. This document serves as a Notice of Intent to remove excess wild horses from the Spring Creek Basin HMA.

# DATES:

July 14, 2000.

# LOCATION:

Norwood Log Cabin, 1120 Lucerne, Norwood, Colorado.

# TIME:

The public meeting will begin at 12 noon and end at 2 p.m. The public hearing will begin at 2 p.m. and end at 4 p.m.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Gary Thrash, San Juan Field Office, 15 Burnett Court, Durango, Colorado, 81301 (970.385.1371); or Wayne Werkmeister, San Juan Field Office, P.O. Box 210, Dolores, Colorado 81323 (970.882.6828).

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The meeting will begin at 12 noon and is open to the public. Interested persons may make oral statements on the subject of helicopter use during the formal hearing. All statements will be recorded. The meeting agenda will include an introduction and opening remarks, a public comment period on the removal plan, and a formal hearing on the use of helicopters during the removal.

Dated: June 22, 2000.

Wayne Werkmeister,

Wild Horse & Burro Specialist.

[FR Doc. 00-16282  Filed 6-29-00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310-JB-M
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 681 Introduced in House (IH)]

106th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 681

 To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to permanently extend the 
            subpart F exemption for active financing income.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           February 10, 1999

 Mr. McCrery (for himself, Mr. Shaw, Mrs. Johnson of Connecticut, Mr. 
      Kleczka, Mr. Ramstad, Mr. Sam Johnson of Texas, Mr. Neal of 
   Massachusetts, Mr. Watkins, Mr. Matsui, Ms. Dunn, Mr. Crane, Mr. 
   Hulshof, Mr. Foley, Mr. Houghton, and Mr. Weller) introduced the 
 following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to permanently extend the 
            subpart F exemption for active financing income.

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

SECTION 1. PERMANENT SUBPART F EXEMPTION FOR ACTIVE FINANCING INCOME.

    (a) Banking, Financing, or Similar Businesses.--Subsection (h) of 
section 954 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to special 
rule for income derived in the active conduct of banking, financing, or 
similar businesses) is amended by striking paragraph (9).
    (b) Insurance Businesses.--Subsection (a) of section 953 of such 
Code (defining insurance income) is amended by striking paragraph (10) 
and by redesignating paragraph (11) as paragraph (10).
    (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section shall 
apply to taxable years of a foreign corporation beginning after 
December 31, 1998, and to taxable years of United States shareholders 
with or within which such taxable years of such foreign corporation 
end.
                                 <all>
```
NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.

United States Court of Appeals 

for the Federal Circuit ______________________

MARILYN BARORO ROWE, 

Plaintiff-Appellant

v.

UNITED STATES, 

Defendant-Appellee

______________________

2024-1088

______________________

Appeal from the United States Court of Federal Claims 

in No. 1:23-cv-01064-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 

Case: 24-1088 Document: 6 Page: 1 Filed: 02/15/2024
2 ROWE V. US

ORDERED that the notice of appeal be, and the same 

hereby is, DISMISSED, for failure to prosecute in 

accordance with the rules. 

FOR THE COURT

February 15, 2024

Date

ISSUED AS A MANDATE: February 15, 2024

Case: 24-1088 Document: 6 Page: 2 Filed: 02/15/2024
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 09-40812

Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

MARCO ANTONIO NUNEZ-RODEA,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 1:09-CR-330-1

Before JOLLY, STEWART, and OWEN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

*

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Marco Antonio

Nunez-Rodea has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in

accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Nunez-Rodea has not

filed a response. Our independent review of the record and counsel’s brief

discloses no nonfrivolous issue for appeal. Moreover, Nunez-Rodea’s removal

from the United States rendered moot any issues as to his sentence. See United

States v. Rosenbaum-Alanis, 483 F.3d 381, 383 (5th Cir. 2007). Accordingly,

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

June 22, 2010

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not *

be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

Case: 09-40812 Document: 00511149740 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/22/2010
No. 09-40812

counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from

further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5TH CIR.

R. 42.2.

2

Case: 09-40812 Document: 00511149740 Page: 2 Date Filed: 06/22/2010
STEAM ELECTRIC

C B I R E P L AC E M E NT P A G E

EPA

- HQ

- OW

- 20 09

- 0819

DCN:

________________________________________

T H E FO LL OW ING H AS BEE N R E M O V E D BE CAUSE IT

C O N T AINS C O N F ID E N T IAL B USIN E SS IN FO RMA T I O N

(C B I) P E R 4 0 C F R P ART 2

, SU B P ART B

. SE 04 331A014
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>       THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION 
               EXTRACTED FROM THE ARMCO INC. CONDENSED STATEMENT OF 
               CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL POSITION AND CONDENSED STATEMENT 
               OF CONSOLIDATED OPERATIONS AND RETAINED DEFICIT AND IS 
               QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL 
               STATEMENTS. 
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                           <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                 9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>             DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                  SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                            279,900
<SECURITIES>                            0
<RECEIVABLES>                     225,200
<ALLOWANCES>                            0
<INVENTORY>                       264,600
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                  776,800
<PP&E>                          1,292,400
<DEPRECIATION>                    640,500
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                  2,034,800
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>             470,900
<BONDS>                           353,900
<COMMON>                            1,100
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                   0
<PREFERRED>                       185,900
<OTHER-SE>                       (355,800)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>    2,034,800
<SALES>                         1,392,900
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                1,392,900
<CGS>                           1,236,500
<TOTAL-COSTS>                   1,236,500
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                        0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                        0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                 26,700
<INCOME-PRETAX>                    61,100
<INCOME-TAX>                        1,800
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                59,300
<DISCONTINUED>                      1,300
<EXTRAORDINARY>                    (3,000)
<CHANGES>                               0
<NET-INCOME>                       57,600
<EPS-PRIMARY>                        0.41
<EPS-DILUTED>                        0.45
        

</TABLE>
#### § 51-10.101 Purpose.

This part effectuates section 119 of the Rehabilitation, Comprehensive Services, and Developmental Disabilities Amendments of 1978, which amended section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 to prohibit discrimination on the basis of handicap in programs or activities conducted by Executive agencies or the United States Postal Service.
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

JEFFREY SCOTT ROLAND,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

No. 4D14-985

[December 17, 2014]

Appeal of order denying rule 3.853 motion from the Circuit Court for 

the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County; Martin J. Bidwill, 

Judge; L.T. Case No. 01-006152 CF10A.

Jeffrey Scott Roland, Daytona, pro se.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and James J. 

Carney, Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

The State concedes in its response to this court’s order to show cause 

that this matter must be reversed and remanded for further 

consideration of appellant’s rule 3.853 motion for DNA testing. This 

cause is remanded for the trial court to consider the merits of that 

motion. In doing so, the trial court may also consider, if appropriate, its 

earlier ruling on appellant’s petition for release and transportation of 

evidence for DNA testing, and motion for order directing buccal 

swabbing.

Reversed and remanded.

WARNER, GERBER and LEVINE, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4364 Referred in Senate (RFS)]

103d CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4364

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                July 14 (legislative day, July 11), 1994

    Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, 
                      Science, and Transportation

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
 To direct the Secretary of Transportation to transfer administrative 
  jurisdiction over certain lands for inclusion in the Cape Hatteras 
                           National Seashore.

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

SECTION 1. TRANSFER OF OCRACOKE LIGHT STATION TO SECRETARY OF THE 
              INTERIOR.

    The Secretary of Transportation shall transfer administrative 
jurisdiction over the Federal property, consisting of approximately 2 
acres, known as the Ocracoke Light Station, to the Secretary of the 
Interior, subject to such reservations, terms, and conditions as may be 
necessary for Coast Guard purposes. All property so transferred shall 
be included in and administered as part of the Cape Hatteras National 
Seashore.

            Passed the House of Representatives July 12, 1994.

            Attest:

                                           DONNALD K. ANDERSON,

                                                                 Clerk.
```
Editorial Note on Part 1
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 1 appear at 63 FR 54077, Oct. 8, 1998.

§ 1.10000 What is the purpose of the requirements related to the International Communications Filing System? ( a ) These rules are issued under the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 151 *et seq.,* and the Submarine Cable Landing License Act, 47 U.S.C. 34-39.
( b ) This subpart describes procedures for electronic filing of International and Satellite Services applications using the International Communications Filing System.
( c ) More licensing and application descriptions and directions, including but not limited to specifying which International and Satellite service applications must be filed electronically, are in parts 1, 25, 63, and 64 of this chapter.
[69 FR 47793, Aug. 6, 2004, as amended at 88 FR 21436, Apr. 10, 2023]
1

Aerial Inspection Resources,Inc.

4380 SW Macadam Ave.

Suite 515

Portland, OR 97239

Drew.p@aerialinspectionresources.com

U.S. Department of Transportation January 27, 2016

Docket Management System

1200 New Jersey Ave. S.E. 

Washington, D.C. 20590

Re: Amendment to Aerial Inspection Resources, Inc. ExemptionNo. 11467

Regulatory Docket No. FAA-2015-0261

Dear Sir or Madam:

Aerial Inspection Resources, Inc. (AIR) is requesting an amendment to our FAA Exemption No. 

11467, Docket No. FAA-2015-0261 for the purpose of conducting commercial UAS operations. AIR 

wishes to add the Phoenix Aerial TerraHawk T-16 and the Phoenix Aerial TerraHawk T-32.

For your ease in reviewing this request, please refer to the exhibit list which begins on page 2.

If we can provide any additional information to assist your understanding or review of this 

document, please do not hesitate to contact us at 503-312-9804 or via email at 

Drew.p@aerialinspectionresources.com.

Thank you,

Drew Pairamore

Director of Regulatory Compliance

Aerial Inspection Resources,Inc.
2

Table of Contents

Exhibits

Exhibit 1: TerraHawk T-16 Specifications ............... Uploaded separately due to sizeconstraints

 Exhibit 2: TerraHawk T-32 Specifications... .........Uploaded separately due to sizeconstraints 
3
Third District Court of Appeal

State of Florida

Opinion filed January 4, 2023.

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

________________

No. 3D21-2130

Lower Tribunal No. 18-18208

________________

Nayeli Hernandez,

Appellant,

vs.

Jovan Hernandez,

Appellee.

An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Marcia Del 

Rey, Judge.

Abramowitz and Associates, and Evan L. Abramowitz, for appellant.

Davis Smith & Jean, LLC, Laura Davis Smith and Sonja A. Jean, for 

appellee.

Before LOGUE, HENDON and GORDO, JJ. 

PER CURIAM.
2

Affirmed. Apesteguy v. Keglevich, 319 So. 3d 150, 154 (Fla. 3d DCA 

2021) (“The standard of review for a child support award is abuse of 

discretion.”) (quoting Castillo v. Castillo, 59 So. 3d 221, 221 (Fla. 3d DCA 

2011)); Waton v. Waton, 887 So. 2d 419, 422 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004) (The 

“findings of the trial court come to this court clothed with a presumption of 

correctness and will not be disturbed absent a showing that there was no 

competent evidence to sustain them.” (quoting Baker v. Baker, 394 So. 2d 

465, 468 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981))); Saario v. Tiller, 333 So. 3d 315, 321 (Fla. 

5th DCA 2022) (“A trial court’s decision on whether to impute income is 

reviewed for an abuse of discretion, while its determination of the amount of 

income to impute will be affirmed if supported by competent substantial 

evidence.”) (emphasis in original); Viscito v. Viscito, 214 So. 3d 736, 737 

(Fla. 3d DCA 2017) (“The standard of review of a trial court’s determination 

of equitable distribution is abuse of discretion.” (quoting Bardowell v. 

Bardowell, 975 So. 2d 628, 629 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008))); Taylor v. Mazda 

Motor of Am., Inc., 934 So. 2d 518, 520 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005) (“The standard 

of review for the denial of a motion for continuance is abuse of discretion. 

An appellate court will not interfere with a trial judge’s discretion unless 

abuse is clearly shown.”) (internal citation omitted).