alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
## Be Safe Before Takeoff Pre- Flight Safety
Flight Environment 1. Do not fly in severe weather conditions. These include wind speed exceeding 10m/s, snow, or rain. 2. Check location for no fly zones, airports, all other types of air traffic. If required, Contact air traffic control. 3. Make sure all paperwork is in order. 4. Check flight area for obstacles. Building and structures, vehicles, and power lines. Equipment 1. Check batteries on each piece of equipment. Radio, drone, monitors, and all other devices. 2. Ch eck each propeller for cracks, chips, or any abnormalities. Prepare propellers for flight. Check to see that they spin smoothly. 3. Check drone and all other equipment for ware, cracks, loose parts, wire connections and anything out of place. Check joints. 4. Fi ll out flight information and flight plan in log book. 5. Clear area of non
-essential personal. 6. Connect all equipment. Check connections. Camera  Remove brace  Insert memory card  Remove lens cap, clean lens, add filters.  Ensure camera is securely attached. 7. Extend all antennas to their proper position . Radio, GPS, Monitor, etc. 8. Place sUAS in a safe take off and landing area. 9. Turn on all equipment in their proper order and check connectivity. 10. Make sure all updates and firmware are current. 11. Sync the drone com pass. 12. Cycle thru controls on radio to check all is working with Drone and camera buttons. 13. Make sure your flight channels are clean and free of interference
. 14. Check satellite connections. 15. Adjust settings for flight. Including “return to Home” height (set to avoid all obstacles), Geo Fencing perimeter, 16. Check ground station for proper function. 17. Hover a few feet off the ground and confirm all sticks are controlling sUAS correctly. 18. Remember to start recording as needed.
No. 11-5720.

#### Smith *v.*United States.

C. A. 9th Cir. Cer-tiorari denied.
SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATION

     In connection  with the quarterly  report of Ecash,  Inc...  ("Company") on
Form  10-QSB for the quarter  ended March 31, 2006 as filed with the  Securities
and Exchange Commission ("Report"), the undersigned,  in the capacity and on the
date  indicated  below,   hereby  certifies  pursuant  to  Section  906  of  the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. Section 1350), that to his knowledge:

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.


Dated: May 15, 2006                         /s/  Gary Borglund
                                            ------------------
                                            Gary Borglund,
                                            Principal Executive Officer
                                            and Principal Financial Officer
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4967 Received in Senate (RDS)]

103d CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4967

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

            October 5 (legislative day, September 12), 1994

                                Received

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
To designate the United States courthouse located at 231 West Lafayette 
  Street in Detroit, Michigan, as the ``Theodore Levin United States 
Courthouse'' and to designate the postal facility located at 1401 West 
    Fort Street in Detroit, Michigan, as the ``George W. Young Post 
                               Office''.

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

SECTION 1. THEODORE LEVIN UNITED STATES COURTHOUSE.

    (a) Designation.--The United States courthouse located at 231 West 
Lafayette Street in Detroit, Michigan, shall be known and designated as 
the ``Theodore Levin United States Courthouse''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the United States 
courthouse referred to in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a 
reference to the ``Theodore Levin United States Courthouse''.

SEC. 2. GEORGE W. YOUNG POST OFFICE.

    (a) Designation.--The postal facility located at 1401 West Fort 
Street, in Detroit, Michigan, shall be known and designated as the 
``George W. Young Post Office''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the postal facility 
referred to in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the 
``George W. Young Post Office''.

            Passed the House of Representatives October 4, 1994.

            Attest:

                                           DONNALD K. ANDERSON,

                                                                 Clerk.
```
§ 80.653 Scope of communications. ( a ) Maritime support stations are land stations authorized to operate at permanent locations or temporary unspecified locations.
( b ) Maritime support stations are authorized to conduct the following operations: ( 1 ) Training of personnel in maritime telecommunications;
( 2 ) Transmissions necessary for the test and maintenance of maritime radio equipment at repair shops and at temporary unspecified locations;
( 3 ) Transmissions necessary to test the technical performance of the licensee's public coast station(s) radiotelephone receiver(s); and
( 4 ) Transmissions necessary for radar/racon equipment demonstration.
[51 FR 31213, Sept. 2, 1986, as amended at 62 FR 40308, July 28, 1997]
#### § 95.2395 WMTS disclosure.

Manufacturers, installers and users of WMTS equipment are cautioned that the operation of this equipment could result in harmful interference to other nearby medical devices.
#### § 95.741 RCRS antenna height limit.

If the antenna of a RCRS station operating on a channel in the 26-28 MHz frequency band (whether receiving, transmitting) is installed at a fixed location, the highest point of the antenna must not be more than 6.10 meters (20 feet) higher than the highest point of the building or tree on which it is mounted; or 18.3 meters (60 feet) above the ground. RCRS station antennas must also meet the requirements in § 95.317 regarding menaces to air navigation. *See* 47 CFR 95.317 and consult part 17 of the FCC's Rules for more information (47 CFR part 17).
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 Quarterly Report
of Xcel Brands, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2012 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Robert W. D’Loren certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section
1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to my knowledge:



(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 result of operations of the Company.



|August 14, 2012 | By: | /s/ Robert W. D’Loren                      
|--------------- | --- | -------------------------------------------
|                |     | Name: Robert W. D’Loren                    
|                |     | Title: Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
#### § 73.4260 Teaser announcements.

See Public Notice, FCC 62-592, dated June 1, 1962. 27 FR 5274, June 5, 1962.

[44 FR 36389, June 22, 1979]
§ 80.293 Check bearings by authorized ship personnel. The requirement for calibration by check bearings is met if: ( a ) The required verification by check bearings are made not more than 90 days prior to the date of the annual detailed inspection of the radiotelegraph station;
( b ) The verification consists of a comparison of simultaneous visual and radio direction finder bearings. At least one comparison bearing must be taken in each quadrant, within plus or minus 20 degrees from the following bearings relative to the ship's heading: 45 degrees; 135 degrees; 225 degrees; 315 degrees;
( c ) The verification shows the visual bearing relative to the ship's heading and the difference between the visual and radio direction finder bearing, and the date each check bearing is taken.
[51 FR 31213, Sept. 2, 1986. Redesignated at 68 FR 46973, Aug. 7, 2003]
Petition for Section 333 Exemption

Operator: Dr. Matthew Lowry

Address: 7717 Westport Bay Dr, Jacksonville, FL 32244

Email: mlowry620@gmail.com

Phone: 620-222-8616

Reason for Exemption: 

I am seeking Section 333 exemption so I can begin creating drone services for my local and surrounding 

communities. My goal over time is to create a business so I can create jobs in my local community. I 

have been approached by many young adults who are struggling to establish themselves in the economy 

today. I believe that the drone industry a provide services for businesses that will help reduce liability, 

increase efficiency, and decrease operating expenses. We would like to establish a service that is 

beneficial for our community, while providing valuable reports and data that will help businesses better 

understand operating protocols.

How we will benefit the community:

Our business model is designed to create opportunity and training for people who are looking to learn 

how to fly drones and be associated with a community that is about providing quality and professional 

services for other local small businesses. For example, if we are able to provide drone services that can 

be used to evaluate the tops of buildings for repair, we are able to reduce the risk of human workers 

who would have to climb the building to evaluate. Not only will we focus on building repairs, we will also 

provide services such as working with wedding planners so we can provide professional video that can 

be view for years. We are helping families as well. We will use our drone services to provide evaluations 

that will help reduce risk and liability for companies, in return increase revenue and reduce costs. We 

will also work to establish government contracts where we can conveniently and cost effectively save 

money on land evaluations, building repairs, and more.

How we will manage safety risks:

We will at all times follow best practices recommended by the FAA. We will require each operator to 

follow the best practices by the FAA and show competency and full ability to operate a drone. 

Additionally, before any operator is allowed to fly the drone, there will be a background check and drug 

screening to determine if each operator is competent to operate the drone. Furthermore, each operator 

will have a physical examination performed to see if they are physically fit enough for proper flight 

safety. As new regulations begin to be set forth for drone operations, we will continue stay up to date 

on all regulations and changing laws. Safety of the public and our drone operators is at most importance 

and be well respected.

Make and Model:

DJI Phantom 3 Professional
**EXHIBIT 32.1**

**CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OFTHE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

I, Robert F. Olson, Chairman of the Board, Presidentand Chief Executive Officer of Stellent, Inc., a Minnesota Corporation(the “Company”), certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-OxleyAct of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that, to my knowledge:

(1)          the Annual Report on Form 10-Kof the Company for the fiscal period ended March 31, 2006 (the “Report”)fully complies with the applicable requirements of Section 13(a) or15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

(2)          theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
|                            | /s/ ROBERT F. OLSON                     |
|----------------------------|-----------------------------------------|
|                       | Robert F. Olson                         |
| * *                   | *Chairman  of the Board, President and* |
| * *                   | *Chief  Executive Officer*              |
| Dated:  June 14, 2006 |                                    |

 

----
Appendix A

Peer Review Representatives of 

Stakeholder Organizations

	Peer Review Representatives of Stakeholder Organizations		

American Board of Eye Surgery

Robert Dotson, MD	

American Glaucoma Society

Robert N. Weinreb, MD

American Optometric Association

John F. Amos, OD, MS

American Society of Cataract & Refractive Surgery

Alan Robin, MD

Cochrane Collaboration: Eyes & Vision CRG

Richard Wormald, MA, MB, MSc

Glaucoma Patient Perspective

Ms. Edith Marks

Glaucoma Research Foundation

Lars Vistnes, MD (patient)

Ruth Williams, MD

Health Care Financing Administration

John J. Whyte, MD, MPH

The Glaucoma Foundation

Ms. Ali Hodin
§ 64.2329 Format. ( a ) A carrier shall provide subscriber list information obtained in its capacity as a provider of telephone exchange service to a requesting directory publisher in the format the publisher specifies, if the carrier's internal systems can accommodate that format.
( b ) If a carrier's internal systems do not permit the carrier to provide subscriber list information in the format the directory publisher specifies, the carrier shall: ( 1 ) Within thirty days of receiving the publisher's request, inform the directory publisher that the requested format cannot be accommodated and tell the directory publisher which formats can be accommodated; and
( 2 ) Provide the requested subscriber list information in the format the directory publisher chooses from among the available formats.
No. 11-5846.

#### Neston *v.*United States.

C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.

Justice Kagan took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.
[DO NOT PUBLISH]

In the

United States Court of Appeals

For the Eleventh Circuit

____________________

No. 24-10248

Non-Argument Calendar

____________________

MARK T. STINSON, SR., 

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

MARK YATES, 

WALL & ASSOCIATES, INC., 

Defendants-Appellees,

JOHN P. YATES

warden, BOP, et al.,

USCA11 Case: 24-10248 Document: 23-1 Date Filed: 07/18/2024 Page: 1 of 3
2 Opinion of the Court 24-10248

Defendants.

____________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Florida

D.C. Docket No. 1:23-cv-24688-RKA

____________________

Before ROSENBAUM, NEWSOM, and LUCK, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

This appeal is DISMISSED, sua sponte, for lack of jurisdiction. Mark Stinson appeals the district court’s omnibus order that 

(1) denied as moot his motion opposing the court’s sua sponte consolidation of two of his civil actions; (2) denied his motion to reopen a closed case and consolidate two other cases; and (3) dismissed 

without prejudice defendants Mark Yates and Wall & Associates, 

Inc. after Stinson dropped them from his amended complaint.

We lack jurisdiction to review the district court’s non-final 

interlocutory decisions regarding consolidation. See 28 U.S.C. 

§ 1291. At the time Stinson filed his notice of appeal, his amended 

complaint remained pending before the district court. Further, the 

district court’s order is not immediately appealable under the collateral order doctrine. See Plaintiff A v. Schair, 744 F.3d 1247, 1253 

(11th Cir. 2014) (explaining that a non-final order may be appealed 

under the collateral order doctrine if it, inter alia, is effectively unreviewable on appeal from a final judgment). A district court’s 

USCA11 Case: 24-10248 Document: 23-1 Date Filed: 07/18/2024 Page: 2 of 3
24-10248 Opinion of the Court 3

exercise of its authority to consolidate or refuse to consolidate cases 

may be reviewed on appeal from a final judgment. See In re Air 

Crash Disaster at Fla. Everglades on Dec. 29, 1972, 549 F.2d 1006, 1013 

(5th Cir. 1977). 

Finally, to the extent Stinson challenges the district court’s 

dismissal without prejudice of his claims against Yates and Wall & 

Associates, Inc., he lacks standing to do so because he voluntarily 

removed them from his amended complaint. See Versa Prods., Inc. 

v. Home Depot USA, Inc., 387 F.3d 1325, 1327 (11th Cir. 2004). 

No petition for rehearing may be filed unless it complies 

with the timing and other requirements of 11th Cir. R. 40-3 and all 

other applicable rules.

USCA11 Case: 24-10248 Document: 23-1 Date Filed: 07/18/2024 Page: 3 of 3
§ 73.318 FM blanketing interference. Areas adjacent to the transmitting antenna that receive a signal with a strength of 115 dBu (562 mV/m) or greater will be assumed to be blanketed. In determining the blanketed area, the 115 dBu contour is determined by calculating the inverse distance field using the effective radiated power of the maximum radiated lobe of the antenna without considering its vertical radiation pattern or height. For directional antennas, the effective radiated power in the pertinent bearing shall be used. ( a ) The distance to the 115 dBu contour is determined using the following equation: D (in kilometers) = 0.394√ P D (in miles) = 0.245√ P Where P is the maximum effective radiated power (ERP), measured in kilowatts, of the maximum radiated lobe.
( b ) After January 1, 1985, permittees or licensees who either ( 1 ) commence program tests, or
( 2 ) replace their antennas, or
( 3 ) request facilities modifications and are issued a new construction permit must satisfy all complaints of blanketing interference which are received by the station during a one year period. The period begins with the commencement of program tests, or commencement of programming utilizing the new antenna. Resolution of complaints shall be at no cost to the complainant. These requirements specifically do not include interference complaints resulting from malfunctioning or mistuned receivers, improperly installed antenna systems, or the use of high gain antennas or antenna booster amplifiers. Mobile receivers and non-RF devices such as tape recorders or hi-fi amplifiers (phonographs) are also excluded.
( c ) A permittee collocating with one or more existing stations and beginning program tests on or after January 1, 1985, must assume full financial responsibility for remedying new complaints of blanketing interference for a period of one year. Two or more permittees that concurrently collocate on or after January 1, 1985, shall assume shared responsibility for remedying blanketing complaints within the blanketing area unless an offending station can be readily determined and then that station shall assume full financial responsibility.
( d ) Following the one year period of full financial obligation to satisfy blanketing complaints, licensees shall provide technical information or assistance to complainants on remedies for blanketing interference.
[28 FR 13623, Dec. 14, 1963, as amended at 52 FR 25866, July 9, 1987]
Order entered March 2019

In The



## Court of Appeals

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05

- 18

- 01500

- CR

LATORIA MATTOX, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 291st Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. F15

- 00710

- U



### O RDER

Before the Court is court reporter Sasha Brooks ’s March 8, 2019 req uest for an extension

of time. We GRANT the request and ORDER the repor ter’s record filed on or before April 1 0,

2019.

/s/ LANA MYERS

JUSTICE
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 169 (Thursday, August 31, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 51884-51885]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 06-7323]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Office of the Secretary


Aviation Proceedings, Agreements Filed the Week Ending August 11, 
2006

    The following Agreements were filed with the Department of 
Transportation under the Sections 412 and 414 of the Federal Aviation 
Act, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1382 and 1384) and procedures governing 
proceedings to enforce these provisions. Answers may be filed within 21 
days after the filing of the application.
    Docket Number: OST-2006-25604.
    Date Filed: August 10, 2006.
    Parties: Members of the International Air Transport Association.
    Subject: TC31 South Pacific--Mail Vote 497, Passenger Revalidating 
Resolutions, Intended Effective Date: 1 October 2006, (Memo 0188).

    Docket Number: OST-2006-25613.
    Date Filed: August 11, 2006.
    Parties: Members of the International Air Transport Association.
    Subject: PTC12 USA-EUR 0199 dated 11 August 2006, Resolution 015h--
USA Add-ons between USA and UK, (Memo

[[Page 51885]]

0199), Intended Effective Date: 1 October 2006.

Renee V. Wright,
Program Manager, Docket Operations, Federal Register Liaison.
[FR Doc. 06-7323 Filed 8-30-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-9X-P
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4762 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4762

To amend title 39, United States Code, to require the Postal Service to 
   accept a change-of-address order from a commercial mail receiving 
             agency and to forward mail to the new address.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             July 14, 1994

 Mr. Young of Alaska introduced the following bill; which was referred 
           to the Committee on Post Office and Civil Service

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend title 39, United States Code, to require the Postal Service to 
   accept a change-of-address order from a commercial mail receiving 
             agency and to forward mail to the new address.

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

SECTION 1. CHANGE-OF-ADDRESS ORDER BY COMMERCIAL MAIL RECEIVING AGENT.

    (a) In General.--Chapter 36 of title 39, United States Code, is 
amended by adding at the end the following:
``Sec. 3686. Change-of-address order by commercial mail receiving 
              agency
    ``Upon termination of an agency relationship between an addressee 
and a commercial mail receiving agency, either the addressee or the 
commercial mail receiving agency may file a change-of-address order 
with the Postal Service. The Postal Service shall forward to such 
addressee mail which is marked for forwarding by the commercial mail 
receiving agency in the same manner as, and subject to the same terms 
and conditions as apply to, mail forwarded directly by the Postal 
Service to such addressee.''.
    (b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents at the beginning of 
chapter 36 of title 39, United States Code, is amended by inserting 
after the item relating to section 3685 the following new item:

``3686. Change-of-address order by commercial mail receiving agency.''.
                                 <all>
```