alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[4910-13·PJ

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION ;;Cl'l<RE~Cf.S

O\'fII<G SYMBOL

Federal Aviation Administration

NITIAI.!.'SlG

"

"'(jill/O

ROUTING SYMBOl

~(CD

700,701 & 702), CL-600-2DI5 (Regional Jet Series 705), and CL-600-2D24 (Regional

Jet Series 900) Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of Transportation

Airworthiness Directives; Bombardier, Inc. Model CL-600-2CIO (Regional Jet Series

14 CFR Part 39 ?,~

''1-/07

[Drc~e.t No. FAA-1009-1110j Directorate Identifier 2009-NM-116-AD; Amendment OLJTINGSYMBOL

Ib~~1 _I~

39·**;AD*~ .2..010-/8-0B ~",~,c,

RlN 2120-AA64

(DOT).

ACTION: Final rule.

mUTlNG SI'MBOl

\

o

SUl\fMARY: We are superseding an existing amvorthiness directive (AD) for the

products listed above. This AD results from mandatory continuing airworthiness

ATE

ROUTING';YMllOl

tNlTIALSiSIG

".

OlJTINO 5YMIIOl

NlTlAlS'SIG

DATE

,

* * *

, , ,

information (MC:AI) originated-by-an aviation authority of another country to identify

and correct an unsafe condition on an aviation plduct. The MeAl describes the unsafe ~,"-m-~-",-,,---

During testing, it was discovered that when the outflow valve (OFV)

manual mode connector is not connectedl the manual mode motor and

altitude limitation are not properly tested! Consequently. a disconnect of

the OFV manual mode and/or a related Jiring failure could potentially

result in a dormant loss of several CPC [~abin pressure control]

backup/safety functions, including OFV kanual control, altitude

limitation, emergency depressurization abd smoke clearance. * * *

condition as:
om",""'.,,"'" .'-

[49-1-0~d •.RJ-'~!!!,!;",\~n,"m.

- _ ""'_,' ANl._PI

'i:- ROlJ~ ',""'01,_

, r>.Nli-I) I

(DOT).

Federal Avi1ltion Adniini~~l'ation

DEPARTMENT OF TI{AN1{P(~RTAT[ON

-39~~*;AD'**)

ACTION: FiiuiJ.rqle .

.'SUMMARY: We are sup~t:seding,an existing-ajm.orth~e~s.directive{AP)'for-(he

-~,rbducts.~ist~~~bOYce.~l~S,A~ resultsfr~~mandrO~Yconti~P'Jng ~irwOlthin~ss .

mfonnaholl.(MCAI) OnglP.a~edby an av~at:I;H1:autrntY'O~:~N~cr'count.ryto ldeDtlf~ '

and corre,ct llJ.1'unsafe:con\.ht~on on an aVl.a~lOn product. The ·,¥OATdcscnbes the. unsafe

. .

~-:~:n~~

condition-as:

IMU "

Duong testing, it was.dlscovered·that when the out(low 'Valve (OFV)

, , ,-

maulj.a,I'-n)ode connector is npt conoect¢d, the maniia:,Fmode motol: ;:Iud

altit~de-!imitation arenat-properly tested, GonsdQill~hily,a,disconnect of

the 0.FV m~l;l<ilm9,d_e'alld/Qr arela~ widngf;ijn.li~,c_o~lidp,otehtially

r:e~I.\1tin a d.orrna~1t.lo~~,ofseveral'CPC [i:,:abiri"preS~lre, C,qOtf9.1l

-, '_ _',""--.' '. '. ,.. I,.' , ' , ,

bacl{up/safety fUll.t;:U'ons, mcllldmg 0 FV, mlj,ml'aI--coqtfQli"a:Jtltiirle

ji mitatioh, eillci.g-eri¢y·depressuflzation ullcll'snioke ,c'rJ<i{lince. "-" >i' *

, ',~" M r(i

• • • • • • •
§ 2105.21 When will the Agency deny a request or procedural benefits? ( a ) The Agency denies a request when it makes a decision that: ( 1 ) A requested record is exempt, in full or in part;
( 2 ) The request does not reasonably describe the records sought;
( 3 ) A requested record does not exist, cannot be located, or is not in the Agency's possession and/or control; or
( 4 ) A requested record is not readily reproducible in the form or format you seek.
( b ) The Agency denies a procedural benefit only, and not access to the underlying records, when it makes a decision that: ( 1 ) A fee waiver, or another fee-related issue, will not be granted; or
( 2 ) Expedited processing will not be provided.
( c ) The Agency must consult with legal counsel before it denies a fee waiver request or withholds all or part of a requested record.
August 13, 2015 

Dear Bulanov: 

This letter is to inform you that the following information is missing from your petition 

(Docket No. FAA-2015-1824). This information is necessary for the Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA) to process your petition. 

 Provide a copy of the Motion Picture and Television Operations Manual (MPTOM) 

which is required by Order 8900.1, Volume 3, Chapter 8, Section 1. If you wish for us to 

proceed without this manual and remove closed-set filming from your proposed operation 

please inform of us of your intention by the requested response date listed below. 

Please submit the additional information (non-proprietary) to your docket at 

www.regulations.gov and submit any proprietary information to the FAA Headquarters or 

electronically via email to 333exemptions@faa.gov. If you want us to process your request any 

further, we must receive the information described above by 8/27/15. If we do not receive the 

information, we will close the docket without notifying you further. 

If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at (202) 267-4712. 

Sincerely, 

/s/ 

Brenda Robeson 

Program Analyst
AFS-12-268-E May 25, 2012

Exemption No. 4296R Regulatory Docket No. FAA-2001-8754

Mr. James A. Young Director of Operations Everts Air Fuel, Inc.

P.O. Box 60908 Fairbanks, AK 99706

Dear Mr. Young:

This letter is to inform you that we have granted your petition to extend Exemption No. 4296, as amended. It explains the basis for our decision, describes its effect, and lists the conditions and limitations, including the date it ends.

The Basis for Our Decision

By letter dated March 5, 2012, you petitioned the Federal Aviation Adm inistration (FAA) on behalf of Everts Air Fuel, Inc. (Everts), for an extension of Exemption No. 4296, as amended. That exemption from § 91.9(a) of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) allows Everts to operate certain McDonnell Douglas DC-6 (DC-6) aircraft at a 5 percent increased zero fuel weight and landing weight for all-car go aircraft to provide supplies to people in isolated villages in Alaska. The amendment you requested would allow an additional aircraft (N6586C) to be operated under this exemption.

In your petition, you indicate that there has been no change in the conditions and reasons relative to public interest and safety that were the basis for granting the original exemption.

The FAA has determined that good cause exists for not publishing a summary of the petition

in the Federal Register because the requested amendment would not set a precedent, and any delay in acting on this petition would be detrimental to Everts.2

Our Decision

The FAA has determ ined that the justification for the issuance of Exemption No. 4296, as amended, remains valid with respect to this exemption and is in the public interest. Therefore, under the authority provided by 49 U.S.C. 40113 and 44701, which the FAA Administrator has delegated to me, I grant your petition, subject to the conditions and

limitations listed below.

Conditions and Limitations

1. This exemption applies to only the following DC-6 aircraft operated by Everts and included on its part 125 operations specifications: Registration Nos. N251CE, N400UA, N444CE, N451CE, N7780B, N7919C, N51599, N555SQ, N888DG, N747CE, and N6586C.

2. Each aircraft’s maximum zero fuel and landing weights must not exceed 87,460 pounds and 92,360 pounds, respectively.

3. In addition to the normal inspection program, Everts must inspect each aircraft in accordance with Douglas Reports LB-306-73, Special Inspection Procedures for Cargo Operation, as revised and approved by the FAA.

4. Everts must revise the FAA-approved airplane flight manual for each aircraft operated under this exemption to include the operating limitations and information needed for operation at the increased weights.

5. Everts must include a copy of this exemption in each FAA-approved airplane flight

manual.

6. This exemption is not valid for operation outside of the United States.3

The Effect of Our Decision

Our decision extends the term ination date of Exemption No. 4296, as amended, to June 30, 2014, unless sooner superseded or rescinded

Sincerely,

/s/

John S. Duncan Deputy Director, Flight Standards

Service
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . 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 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

## FILED September 8, 2006 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-50023 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus JESUS JOSE GALVAN-BUSTILLOS, also known as Jesus Ordorico-Vasquez, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 3:05-CR-1264-ALL

-------------------- Before KING, GARWOOD, and JOLLY, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Jesus Jose Galvan-Bustillos raises arguments that are foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v. United States , 523 U.S. 224, 235 (1998), which held that 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2) is a penalty provision and not a separate criminal offense. The Government’s motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED, and the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
**OFFICE OF**  **THE ATTORNEY**  **GENERAL OF**  **TEXAS AUSTIN**  G-c. YIANW .-n .II1UL Bonozablo 'zm L. Boauohamp

Saorrtuy 

### or &ate kutin, Torsr

on to the requireaents tatutes of Texas, **pnrrid** and anurndnrnts

to oh&n

8 ot our statutesrelstlng to the inion of mob aooletlerare Artlolem i R&.18*d Civil Statutes. We arm in the above statute8 that would **aorperatlotu do**  

### not **roqulre** the **Attorney** Generalto a~- ~rorm the dlmolution of a corporation.

You are idvimd that& is the opinionof thlr drQart&mt that it la 

### not noaommry for the AttorneyMkn-'Eonorable Tom L. Beauhhamp,Page Z .eralto appi-ove

the diesolution **of** a **farmers1 cooperative**  

### boOi8tg. **Yours v&y**  **truly** ATTORNEX **GiMEWU OP**  **TXMl** By M0RH.SHODGES (si@mdj

""ESX ,: ~xw3cJ PPRLIVQ)JrIL:sl, 19m APPROVIFD

.. -;i, **F,** MOORB (Signedi opinion colmltto* ~By.R.W.F. Chz FZFt3T **S38TSTANT** ATl'C= -RAL
Exhibit 10.3(M)


                           CIT Business Credit                 T:  212-536-1200
                           1211 Avenue of the Americas
                           New York, NY  10036


CIT

                                                                 May 19, 2000

ICC INDUSTRIES INC.
460 Park Avenue
New York, New York  10022

                  Re:     Pharmaceutical Formulations, Inc.
                          (the "Borrower")

Ladies and Gentlemen:

Reference is made to the Limited Guaranty executed by you, the Guarantor in
favor of the Lender (which as of January 1, 2000 is the CIT Group/Business
Credit, Inc. as successor by merger to The CIT Group/Credit Finance, Inc.) dated
April 1, 1999 (the "Guaranty"), whereby you guaranteed the Obligations of the
Borrower owing to Lender limited to $2,000,000.00 plus interest, costs and
expenses (as further defined therein). Capitalized terms used and not otherwise
defined herein shall have the same meanings given them in the Guaranty.

This letter is to confirm that pursuant to mutual consent and understanding,
your maximum liability under the Guaranty shall be, and hereby is increased to
$2,500,000.00 in the aggregate plus interest thereon at the then applicable rate
provided in the Financing Agreement, plus any and all costs and expenses of
collection hereunder, including, without limitation reasonable attorneys' fees
and legal expenses.

Except as herein specifically provided, the Guaranty remains in full force and
effect in accordance with its terms and no other changes in the terms or
provisions of the Guaranty is intended or implied. If you are in agreement with
the foregoing, please so indicate by signing and returning to us the enclosed
copy of the letter.

                                Very truly yours,

                                 THE CIT GROUP/BUSINESS CREDIT, INC.
                                 As successor by merger to
                                 The CIT Group/Credit Finance, Inc.



                                 By:  /S/ ________________________________
                                 Title:  Assistant Vice President

Read and Agreed to:

ICC INDUSTRIES INC.



By:  /S/ JOHN ORAM
   __________________________________
Title:  President
#### § 2400.45 Special consideration: Junior Fellows' Plan of Study.

Applicants for Junior Fellowships who seek or hold baccalaureate degrees in education are strongly encouraged to pursue master's degrees in history or political science. Those applicants who hold undergraduate degrees in history, political science, government, or any other subjects may take some teaching methods and related courses, although the Foundation will not pay for them unless they are required for the degree for which the Fellow is matriculated. The Foundation will review each proposed Plan of Study for an appropriate balance of subject matter and other courses based on the Fellow's goals, background, and degree requirements.
§ 2508.1 Definitions. ( a ) *Amend* means to make a correction to, or expunge any portion of, a record about an individual which that individual believes is not accurate, relevant, timely, or complete.
( b ) *Appeal Officer* means the individual delegated the responsibility to act on all appeals filed under the Privacy Act.
( c ) *Chief Executive Officer* means the Head of the Corporation.
( d ) *Corporation* means the Corporation for National and Community Service.
( e ) *Individual* means any citizen of the United States or an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence.
( f ) *Maintain* means to collect, use, store, disseminate or any combination of these recordkeeping functions; exercise of control over and therefore, responsibility and accountability for, systems of records.
( g ) *Personnel record* means any information about an individual that is maintained in a system of records by the Corporation that is needed for personnel management or processes such as staffing, employment development, retirement, grievances, and appeals.
( h ) *Privacy Act Officer* means the individual delegated the authority to allow access to, the release of, or the withholding of records pursuant to an official Privacy Act request. The Privacy Act Officer is further delegated the authority to make the initial determination on all requests to amend records.
( i ) *Record* means any document or other information about an individual maintained by the agency whether collected or grouped, and including, but not limited to, information regarding education, financial transactions, medical history, criminal or employment history, or any other personal information that contains the name or other personal identification number, symbol, etc. assigned to such individual.
( j ) *Routine use* means, with respect to the disclosure of a record, the use of such record for a purpose which is compatible with the purpose for which it was collected.
( k ) *System of records* means a group of any records under the maintenance and control of the Corporation from which information is retrieved by use of the name of an individual or by some personal identifier of the individual.
EXHIBIT 35.2
                  SERVICER COMPLIANCE STATEMENT (ITEM 1123)
                               GMAC MORTGAGE, LLC
             RALI SERIES 2006-QS10 TRUST (THE "ISSUING ENTITY")

The undersigned,  a duly authorized  officer of GMAC Mortgage,  LLC, as servicer
(the "Servicer")  pursuant to the applicable  servicing  agreement,  does hereby
certify that:

1.   A review of the  Servicer's  activities  during the  period  covered by the
     Issuing  Entity's  report  on Form 10-K and of the  Servicer's  performance
     under  the   applicable   servicing   agreement  has  been  made  under  my
     supervision.

2.   To the  best of my  knowledge,  based  on such  review,  the  Servicer  has
     fulfilled all of its obligations under the applicable  servicing  agreement
     in all material respects throughout such period.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has duly executed this Certificate this 26th
day of March 2007.

By:      /s/ Anthony N. Renzi
      ------------------------
      Name:  Anthony N. Renzi
      Title:    Executive Vice President
---

Exhibit
32.1





Certification
of the Chief Executive Officer 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 MetroCorp Bancshares, Inc. (the
“Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2009 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I,
George M. Lee, Executive Vice Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer of
the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:





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





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





/s/
      George M. LeeGeorge
      M. Lee
              Executive
      Vice Chairman, President andChief
      Executive Officer


November
6, 2009
| 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. |
|----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Date:      November 3, 2009 | By:    | /s/  Neil      K.Warma         |
|-----------------------------|--------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                        |   | Neil      K. Warma                                                               |
|                        |   | President      and Chief Executive Officer                                       |
|                        |   | (Principal      Executive Officer)                                               |
|                        |   | Acting      Chief Financial Officer                                              |
|                        |   | (Principal      Financial and AccountingOfficer)                                 |
No. 5265.

#### Sam Early *v.*The State.

Plating CardsSaloon”—“ House for Retailing Spirituous Liquors”—Indictment charged in one count that the accused played at a game with cards “at a house for retailing spirituous liquors,” and in another count alleged the place as “a certain room attached to a house for retailing spirituous liquors.” The proof is that the game was played in a room over a store-room in which spirituous liquors were “sold,” and that there was no immediate connection between the “saloon where liquors were sold and the upper room” where the cards were played. *Held*that the offense was well charged in each count of the *365indictment, but the proof fails to support the conviction because it fails to prove that liquors were *retailed*anywhere. A *sale*does not import a retailing, nor does the word “saloon” designate a house for retailing spirituous liquors.

Appeal from the County Court of Parker. Tried below before the Hon. B. L. Richey, County Judge.

A fine of twenty dollars was the punishment adjudged against the appellant. All material facts are disclosed in the opinion of the court.

No brief for the appellant.

*W. L. Davidson,*Assistant Attorney General, for the State.

White, Presiding Judge.

By one count in the indictment appellant was charged with “ playing at a game with cards at a house for retailing spirituous liquors,” and by the other that he did “unlawfully play at a game with cards in a certain room attached to a house for retailing spirituous liquors.” A statutory offense is sufficiently charged by either of these counts. (Penal Code, arts. 409 and *410;*Tummins v. The State, 18 Texas Ct. App., 13 ; Bacchus v. The State, Id., 15.) In each count the offense is made to depend upon the fact that it was committed in connection with a house for retailing spirituous liquors, and it consequently became essential to a valid conviction under one or the other of these counts to prove that the playing was done at either a house for, or in a room attached to a house for, *retailing*spirituous liquors.

The proof is that the playing took place in a room over a store room in which spirituous liquors were sold, but whether sold at wholesale or retail we are not informed. If at wholesale, then the fact that liquor was or was not sold in the store house would cut no figure in the matter. Again, the witness says “there was no immediate connection between the *saloon*where liquors were sold and the upper room where he saw the cards played.” He does not say where spirituous liquors were *retailed,*but in a *saloon*where liquors were *sold.*Now, does the word *saloon*necessarily imply that it is,—or is the word convertible with the expression,—“a house for retailing spirituous liquors?” We think not, and the authorities in effect have declared otherwise *366in this State. (State v. Mansker, 36 Texas, 364; Jackson v. The State, 16 Texas Ct. App., 373).

Opinion delivered May 18, 1887.

In that the testimony does not prove the allegation in either of the counts in the indictment, the judgment is reversed and the cause remanded.

*Reversed and remanded.*
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

JOHN MICHAEL TEDESCO,

Petitioner :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 457 MAL 2022

Petition for Allowance of Appeal

from the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 25th day of April, 2023

, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is

DENIED

.
**BG** IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 2 1 - 0013 STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee, v. KELLY BEVERLY BALL ,

Defendant and Appellant.

**GRANT OF EXTENSION** Upon consideration of Appellee’s motion for a 30 - day extension of time, and good cause appearing therefor, Appellee is gran ted an extension of time to and including July 2 6 , 2022 , within which to prepare, serve, and file its response brief.

Electronically signed by: Bowen Greenwood Clerk of the Supreme Court June 24 2022

06/24/2022

Case Number: DA 21-0013
§ 1613.4 Authorized representation. Legal assistance may be provided with respect to a criminal proceeding. ( a ) Pursuant to a court appointment made under a statute or a court rule of equal applicability to all attorneys in the jurisdiction, if authorized by the recipient after a determination that acceptance of the appointment would not impair the recipient's primary responsibility to provide legal assistance to eligible clients in civil matters.
( b ) When professional responsibility requires representation in a criminal proceeding arising out of a transaction with respect to which the client is being, or has been, represented by a recipient.
[43 FR 32775, July 28, 1978, as amended at 79 FR 21150, Apr. 15, 2014]