alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Docket Management Facility US Department ofTransportation 1200 New JerseyAve, SE Washington, DC 20590 RE: Petition for Deviation from FAR §121.438(b)
To Whom itMay Concern, The Flight Standards Information Management System (FSIMS, Order 8900.1) provides authorization to the administratorto approve deviations from certain requirements when the regulatory section**stipul<;~.tes** that such a deviation is permitted. In accordance with the Flight Standards Information Management System (FSIMS) 8900.1, Change 234, Volume 3, Chapter 2, AllegiantAir, LLC would like to petition for deviation from FAR §121.438(b). AllegiantAir, LLC currently operates 10 Airbus 319/320 aircraftthroughout our operation. Our current growth plan includes doublingtheAirbus fleet size in the next 6-12 months, and establishing new domiciles for these aircraft in Bellingham, WA (KBLI), Fort Lauderdale, FL (KFLL), Oakland, CA (KOAK) and Punta Gorda, FL (.KPGD). Based on these accelerated aircraft deliveries in addition to establishing new bases for the Airbus, Allegiant anticipates thatwe will need to train approximately 80 pilots, and thatthe number ofpilots needed will not have acquired the requisite 75 hours priorto the anticipated in-service dates. AllegiantAir, LLC is requesting approval for a deviation ofFAR §121.438(b) for a period of6 months in order for the additionalpilotsto acquire the hours required by this FAR. We appreciate yourtime and considering in this matter.



# • A

.. '17\W

is our deal. 

# - 8360 S. Durango Drive · Las Vegas, Nevada 89113 702.851.7300 ,. 702.851.7301 al!egiant.com
No. 11-9857.

#### Rodriguez Gonzales *v.*United States.

C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.-
No. 10-10883.

#### Barnett *v.*United States.

C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.
EE-RM-03-870 COMMENT 01

Air-Conditioning and Refrigeration Institute - U.S. Department of Energy 

ARI - DOE Introductory Meeting on 

Commercial RefrigerationlFreezers & Beverage MerchandisersN ending Machines 

Thursday, March 6, 2003, 10:00 am 

at 

Air-Conditioning & Refrigeration Institute (ARI) 

4100 N. Fairfax Drive, Suite 200, Arlington, VA 22203 

Participants: ARI: Deborah Miller, Karim Amrane, and Bill Tritsis 

AGENDA 

DOE: Bryan Berringer, Brian Card, Mike Rivest (NCI), and 

Aris Marantan (NCI) 

1. Introduction 

a. DOE Team Members 

b. ARIICRMD Members 

2. Overview & Purpose of Meeting 

3. Status of DOE's evaluation of need for standards for commercial refrigeration 

products. 

a. Background (Priority Setting Report) 

b. Rulemaking Process 

c. Description of Product Categories Being Considered 

d. Methodology for Energy Use Analysis 

4. ARI - Current efforts 

5. Summary of information that may be requested in the future from ARIICRMD 

members to facilitate the rulemaking process. 

a. Support in the form of input and comment on issues relating to 

commercial refrigeration. 

1. For example: coverage of products, energy use and energy savings 

analysis, development of test procedures, development of 

standards, etc. 

b. Data or information from member companies to assist in analysis of the 

industry. 

1. For example: shipment data, niche product information, typical 

energy usage, etc.
§ 52.109 Permanent cap on number reservations. ( a ) A Responsible Organization may have in reserve status, at any one time, either 2000 toll free numbers or 7.5 percent of that Responsible Organization's numbers in working status, whichever is greater.
( b ) A Responsible Organization shall never reserve more than 3 percent of the quantity of toll free numbers in spare status as of the previous Sunday at 12:01 a.m. Eastern Time.
( c ) The Wireline Competition Bureau shall modify the quantity of numbers a Responsible Organization may have in reserve status or the percentage of numbers in the spare pool that a Responsible Organization may reserve when exigent circumstances make such action necessary. The Wireline Competition Bureau shall establish, modify, and monitor toll free number conservation plans when exigent circumstances necessitate such action.
[62 FR 20127, Apr. 25, 1997, as amended at 67 FR 13226, Mar. 21, 2002; 83 FR 53396, Oct. 23, 2018]
**EXHIBIT 32.1**

 

**CERTIFICATIONSPURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906 OF THESARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

In connection with theAnnual Report of VendingData Corporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-KSB for theyear ended December 31, 2003, as filed with the Securities and ExchangeCommission on the date hereof (the “Report”), we, Steven J. Blad, ChiefExecutive Officer and President of the Company, and John R. Spina, ChiefFinancial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, asadopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

1.             The Report fully complies with the requirements ofSection 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

2.             The information contained in the Report fairlypresents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result ofoperations of the Company.

 

 
| By:    | /s/ STEVEN J. BLAD                                                |   | Dated: | March 30, 2004 |
|--------|-------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|--------|----------------|
|   | Steven J. Blad                                                    |   |   |
| Title: | Chief  Executive Officer and President of VendingData Corporation |
|   |                                                              |   |   |
| By:    | /s/ JOHN R. SPINA                                                 |   | Dated: | March 30, 2004 |
|   | John  R. Spina                                                    |   |   |
| Title: | Chief  Financial Officer of VendingData Corporation               |   |   |

 

This certification ismade solely for the purposes of 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, subject to theknowledge standard contained therein, and not for any other purpose.

 

----
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 Defense

###### Office of the Secretary

          - [Transmittal 06-42] 

# AGENCY:

Department of Defense, Defense Security Cooperation Agency.

# ACTION:

Notice. 

# SUMMARY:

The Department of Defense is publishing the unclassified text of a section 36(b)(1) arms sales notification. This is published to fulfill the requirements of section 155 of Public Law 104-164 dated 21 July 1996.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Ms. J. Hurd, DSCA/DBO/ADM, (703) 604-6575.

The following is a copy of a letter to the Speaker of the House of Representatives, Transmittal 06-42 with attached transmittal, policy justification, and Sensitivity of Technology.

Dated: August 1, 2006.

C.R. Choate,

Alternative OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.

      ( print page 44641)          ( print page 44642)          ( print page 44643)          ( print page 44644)          ( print page 44645)          ( print page 44646)    

BILLING CODE 5001-06-M

[FR Doc. 06-6729 Filed 8-4-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 5001-06-C
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.1

 CERTIFICATION OF CEO 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 of Zap.Com Corporation (the "Company")
on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2004 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), Avram A. Glazer, as
Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002 to the best of my knowledge, that:

      (1)   The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) 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 result of operations
            of the Company.


/s/ Avram A. Glazer
-------------------
Avram A. Glazer
President and Chief Executive Officer
August 12, 2004

This Certification accompanies this Report pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not be deemed filed by the Company for
purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.



                                       17
[Cite as Disciplinary Counsel v. Bowman , 127 Ohio St.3d 1250, 2010-Ohio-6086.]

D ISCIPLINARY C OUNSEL v . B OWMAN . [Cite as Disciplinary Counsel v. Bowman, 127 Ohio St.3d 1250, 2010-Ohio6086.] (No. 2006-0444 — Submitted November 17, 2010 — Decided November 24, 2010.)
O N A PPLICATION FOR R EINSTATEMENT

.

__________________ {¶ 1} This cause came on for further consideration upon the filing of an application for reinstatement by res pondent, Kevin Arthur Bowman, Attorney Registration No. 0068223, last known bus iness address in Dayton, Ohio. {¶ 2} The court coming now to consider its order of August 23, 2006, wherein the court, pursuant to Gov.Bar R. V(6)(B)(3), suspended respondent for a period of two years with conditions to re instatement, finds that respondent has substantially complied with that order and with the provisions of Gov.Bar R. V(10)(A). Therefore, {¶ 3} It is ordered by this court that respondent is reinstated to the practice of law in the state of Ohio. {¶ 4} It is further ordered that the Clerk of this court issue certified copies of this order as provided for in Gov.Bar R. V(8)(D)(1), that publication be made as provided for in Gov.Bar R. V( 8)(D)(2), and that respondent bear the costs of publication. {¶ 5} For earlier case, see Disciplinary Counsel v. Bowman , 110 Ohio St.3d 480, 2006-Ohio-4333, 854 N.E.2d 480.
B ROWN , C.J., and P FEIFER , L UNDBERG S TRATTON , O’C ONNOR , O’D ONNELL , L ANZINGER , and C UPP , JJ., concur.

______________________
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                             291
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   12,764
<ALLOWANCES>                                     (166)
<INVENTORY>                                     23,350
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                40,853
<PP&E>                                          70,162
<DEPRECIATION>                                   8,813
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 130,806
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           25,405
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           109
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   130,806
<SALES>                                         73,440
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                74,615
<CGS>                                           56,508
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   56,508
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                23,794
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 755
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (6,442)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     1,867
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (8,309)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (8,309)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.88)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
254P15

#### Donna Simmons v. Kathleen M. Waddell

Def’s PDR Under N.C.G.S. § 7A-31 (COA14-1214)

Denied
#### § 5.407 Exemption from station identification requirement.

Medical testing experimental licensees are exempt from complying with the station identification requirements of § 5.115.
<PAGE>

Exhibit 32.2


                        CERTIFICATION OF CFO 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 MIV Therapeutics, Inc. (the "Company")
on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended August 31, 2006 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), Patrick
McGowan, as Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certifies, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, to the best of his knowledge, that:

(1)      The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) 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 result of operations of
         the Company.



/s/ Patrick McGowan
-------------------------------
Patrick McGowan
CFO
October 14, 2006
§ 73.3516 Specification of facilities. ( a ) An application for facilities in the AM, FM, TV or Class A TV broadcast services, or low power TV service shall be limited to one frequency, or channel, and no application will be accepted for filing if it requests an alternate frequency or channel. Applications specifying split frequency AM operations using one frequency during daytime hours complemented by a different frequency during nighttime hours will not be accepted for filing.
( b ) An application for facilities in the experimental and auxiliary broadcast services may request the assignment of more than one frequency if consistent with applicable rules in Part 74. Such applications must specify the frequency or frequencies requested and may not request alternate frequencies.
( c ) An application for a construction permit for a new broadcast station, the facilities for which are specified in an outstanding construction permit or license, will not be accepted for filing.
( d ) An application for facilities in the International broadcast service may be filed without a request for specific frequency, as the FCC will assign frequencies from time to time in accordance with §§ 73.702 and 73.711.
( e ) A petition to deny an application for renewal of license of an existing broadcast station will be considered as timely filed if it is tendered for filing by the end of the first day of the last full calendar month of the expiring license term. ( 1 ) If the license renewal application is not timely filed as prescribed in § 73.3539, the deadline for filing petitions to deny thereto is the 90th day after the FCC gives public notice that it has accepted the late-filed renewal application for filing.
( 2 ) If any deadline falls on a nonbusiness day, the cutoff shall be the close of business of the first full business day thereafter.
( 3 ) The dates when the licenses of all broadcast and broadcast auxiliary services regularly expire are listed in §§ 73.733, 73.1020 and 74.15.
[44 FR 38487, July 2, 1979, as amended at 47 FR 21494, May 18, 1982; 49 FR 47843, Dec. 7, 1984; 51 FR 44071, Dec. 8, 1986; 56 FR 64873, Dec. 12, 1991; 61 FR 18291, Apr. 25, 1996; 65 FR 30006, May 10, 2000; 89 FR 7258, Feb. 1, 2024]
No. 07-15-00216-CR

James William Nobile

 Appellant

v.

The State of Texas

 Appellee

§

§

§

§

From the County Court at Law No. 1

 of Randall County

November 24, 2015

Opinion by Justice Hancock

J U D G M E N T

Pursuant to the opinion of the Court dated November 24, 2015, it is ordered,

adjudged and decreed that the judgment of the trial court be affirmed.

It is further ordered that appellant pay all costs in this behalf expended for which

let execution issue.

It is further ordered that this decision be certified below for observance.

o O o

FILE COPY
#### George H. Cornelius, et al., *Plaintiffs in Error,*vs. The State of Florida, *ex*rel. H. J. Drane, *Defendant in Error.*

144 So. 66.

Division A.

Opinion filed September 27, 1932.

*Jackson, Dupree & Gone, Zewadski & Pierce, A. G. Brooks, Don Register, B. G. Langston, A. R. Ca/rver, Prank Hursey,*and *Laurie Tomlinson,*for Plaintiffs in Errol;

*Dickenson & Lake*and *Ed. R. Bentley,*for Defendant in Error.

Per Curiam.

The judgment of the Circuit Court is affirmed on authority of the opinion and judgment in the case of John Whitehurst, County Judge, Mrs. Lily Sewell, Supervisor of Registration, and A. B. Endsley, as and constituting the County Canvassing Board of Elections, et al., vs. State of Florida, ex rel. H. J. Drane, this day filed, and authorities therein cited.

Affirmed.

Buford, C.J., and Ellis and Brown, J.J., concur.

Whitfield, P.J., and Terrell, J., concur in the opinion and judgment.

Davis, J., absent from oral argument, not participating.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

**LISA ROVINSKY AND JOSEPH ROVINSKY,** 

**Petitioners**

**v.**

**LOURDESMONT/GOOD SHEPHERD YOUTH AND FAMILY SERVICES,** 

**SISTERS OF THE GOOD SHEPHERD PROVINCE OF MID-NORTH AMERICA,**  **METZ & ASSOCIATES, LTD, AND METZ**
**CULINARY MANAGEMENT,**

**Respondents :** 

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**: No. 527 MAL 2015** 

**Petition for Allowance of Appeal from the Order of the Superior Court** 

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW **, this 8th day of December, 2015, the Petition for Al lowance of Appeal** 

**is** DENIED

**.**
§ 69.605 Reporting and distribution of pool access revenues. ( a ) Access revenues and cost data shall be reported by participants in association tariffs to the association for computation of monthly pool revenues distributions in accordance with this subpart.
( b ) Association expenses incurred during the month that are allowable access charge expenses shall be reimbursed before any other funds are disbursed.
( c ) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, payments to average schedule companies that are computed in accordance with § 69.606 shall be disbursed before any other funds are disbursed. For purposes of this part, a telephone company that was participating in average schedule settlements on December 1, 1982, shall be deemed to be an average schedule company except that any company that does not join in association tariffs for all access elements shall not be deemed to be an average schedule company.
( d ) The residue shall be disbursed to telephone companies that are not average schedule companies in accordance with §§ 69.607 through 69.610.
( e ) The association shall submit a report on or before February 1 of each calendar year describing the association's cost study review process for the preceding calendar year as well as the results of that process. For any revisions to cost study results made or recommended by the association that would change the respective carrier's calculated annual common line or traffic sensitive revenue requirement by ten percent or more, the report shall include the following information: ( 1 ) The name of the carrier;
( 2 ) A detailed description of the revisions;
( 3 ) The amount of the revisions;
( 4 ) The impact of the revisions on the carrier's calculated common line and traffic sensitive revenue requirements; and
( 5 ) The carrier's total annual common line and traffic sensitive revenue requirement.
[48 FR 10358, Mar. 11, 1983, as amended at 51 FR 17027, May 8, 1986; 52 FR 21543, June 8, 1987; 54 FR 11537, Mar. 21, 1989; 60 FR 19530, Apr. 19, 1995]
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. George Antonio SALABART-GUTIERREZ, Defendant— Appellant.

No. 03-10499.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted March 15, 2004.*

Decided March 24, 2004.

Robert A. Bork, Esq., USLV — Office of the U.S. Attorney, Las Vegas, NV, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Jason F. Carr, Esq., Anne R. Traum, Esq., FPDNV — Federal Public Defender’s Office, Las Vegas, NV, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before B. FLETCHER, LEAVY and WARDLAW, Circuit Judges.

*

 This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

George Antonio Salabart-Gutierrez appeals the judgment of conviction and his 85-month sentence for unlawful reentry by a deported alien in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. He concedes that Ninth Circuit precedent forecloses his argument that imposition of a sentence longer than 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a)’s two-year statutory maximum based on a prior conviction neither alleged in the indictment nor admitted during the plea hearing violates due process under *Apprendi v. New Jersey,*530 U.S. 466, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000). *United States v. Arellano-Rivera,*244 F.3d 1119, 1127 (9th Cir.2001), *cert. denied,*535 U.S. 976, 122 S.Ct. 1450, 152 L.Ed.2d 392 (2002); *United States v. Pacheco-Zepeda,*234 F.3d 411, 414-15 (9th Cir.2000), *cert. denied,*532 U.S. 966, 121 S.Ct. 1503, 149 L.Ed.2d 388 (2001). Salabart-Gutierrez states that he presents the issue merely to preserve it should ensuing Supreme Court precedent alter the legal landscape. The judgment is therefore AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.