alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Thompson, appellant, v. Fargo.

*Evidence—a/rmy discharge presumptive evidence of existence of person therein named.*

T. collected money for two persons supposed to he in the United States service, and delivered it to an express company directed to them, but the company was unable to find them. *Held,*that the fact that discharges from the army were issued in the names of such persons was evidence that they were not fictitious persons, notwithstanding their names did not appear in the muster-rolls of the company named in such discharge, and that they were entitled to the money as against T., and the company was not liable to T. therefor.

Appeal from a judgment in favor of defendant entered upon the report of a referee. The action was brought by George S. Thompson against James 0. Fargo, treasurer of the American Express Company, to recover the value of a package of money. The money in question was the proceeds of back pay collected by plaintiff for two persons as soldiers in the United States service, and forwarded by defendant to such persons at their supposed address.' The consignees were never found, and plaintiff sought to obtain the money again. The case was tried before a referee, who found in favor of plaintiff; the general term affirmed the decision and judgment, and the court of appeals reversed the same and ordered a new trial. *666The former decisions in the ease are reported in 58 Barb. 575; 44 How. 176, and 49 N. Y. 188. The second trial resulted in favor of the defendant.

*Edward Van Ness,*for appellant.

*Beardslee & Cole,*for respondent.

Daniels, J.

The head-note states the only points of any importance passed upon in the opinion, which held that no material change in the facts from the former trial was manifest.

*Judgment affirmed.*
§ 2540.400 Under what circumstances will the Corporation suspend or terminate a grant or contract? ( a ) *Suspension of a grant or contract.* In emergency situations, the Corporation may suspend a grant or contract for not more than calendar 30 days. Examples of such situations may include, but are not limited to: ( 1 ) Serious risk to persons or property;
( 2 ) Violations of Federal, State or local criminal statutes; and
( 3 ) Material violation(s) of the grant or contract that are sufficiently serious that they outweigh the general policy in favor of advance notice and opportunity to show cause.
( b ) *Termination of a grant or contract.* The Corporation may terminate or revoke assistance for failure to comply with applicable terms and conditions of this chapter. However, the Corporation must provide the recipient reasonable notice and opportunity for a full and fair hearing, subject to the following conditions: ( 1 ) The Corporation will notify a recipient of assistance by letter or telegram that the Corporation intends to terminate or revoke assistance, either in whole or in part, unless the recipient shows good cause why such assistance should not be terminated or revoked. In this communication, the grounds and the effective date for the proposed termination or revocation will be described. The recipient will be given at least 7 calendar days to submit written material in opposition to the proposed action.
( 2 ) The recipient may request a hearing on a proposed termination or revocation. Providing five days notice to the recipient, the Corporation may authorize the conduct of a hearing or other meetings at a location convenient to the recipient to consider the proposed suspension or termination. A transcript or recording must be made of a hearing conducted under this section and be available for inspection by any individual.
Quick Links for Bankers
Quick Links for Consumers
Quick Links for Analysts
Quick Links for Investors
Quick Links for Press

|  |  |  |  |  |  |
|--|--|--|--|--|--|
||
|  |
||
|  |
UASolutions Group, Inc. www.uasolutionsgroup.com

2518 Auburn Drive, Cocoa, FL 32926 (321)-261-2547 

uasolutionsgroup@uasolutionsgroup.com

December 15, 2015

U. S. Department of Transportation

Federal Aviation Administration

Office of Rulemaking, Bldg. 10A

800 Independence Avenue, SW

Washington, DC 20591

RE: Summary Grant for Namkrow Aerial Visuals Exemption Request Under 

Section 333 of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Modernization and 

Reform Act of 2012, 49 U.S.C. § 44701(f), and 14 C.F.R. Part 11

Dear Sir or Madam:

Pursuant to Section 333 of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (FMRA), 49 

U.S.C. § 44701(f), and 14 C.F.R. Part 11, Namkrow Aerial Visuals, an operator of Small 

Unmanned Aircraft Systems (“sUAS”) equipped to conduct full service photography and 

videography, seeks exemption from the following listed Code of Federal Regulations

(CFR) to allow commercial operation of the previously approved DJI Phontom 3 Pro, DJI 

Inspire 1, DJI Inspire 1 Pro, DJI S900, DJI S1000, DJI Matrice 100, Tarot T960, Foxtech 

D130, and the Foxtech K130 X8 within the National Airspace System (NAS) for controlled, 

low-risk, aerial video and photography, aerial mapping and survey, precision agriculture, 

powerline inspection, news media, and potential closed set filming over certain areas of 

the United States, conducted within and under the conditions outlined herein, or as may 

be established by the FAA, as required by Section 333 requirements. 

Namkrow Aerial Visuals in the accompanying petition, seeks exemption from the 

requirements of 14 C.F.R. §§ 45.27(a), 61.113(a) and (b), 91.7(a), 91.105, 91.119(c), 

91.121, 91.151(b), 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(1) and (2),and 91.417(a) and (b). 

Namkrow Aerial Visuals has requested that the FAA not request public comment on its

petition because it would not set any precedent and because the relief requested is 

identical to numerous exemptions granted previously by the FAA. 14 C.F.R. § 11.87. 

In addition, Namkrow Aerial Visuals will be utilizing the proven technologies the FAA has 

already accepted and approved in numerous other approved exemptions. Combined, the

comprehensive Section 333 Exemption and the approvals the FAA has already given to 

these chosen products and the technology, should provide the support necessary to the 
UASolutions Group, Inc. www.uasolutionsgroup.com

2518 Auburn Drive, Cocoa, FL 32926 (321)-261-2547 

uasolutionsgroup@uasolutionsgroup.com

FAA for a Summary Grant of Namkrow Aerial Visuals’s Section 333 Petition and expedite 

the process. 

Kelly J. Neubecker

CEO

UASolutions Group, Inc.
Exhibit 31(ii)
                                --------------


                                CERTIFICATIONS
                                --------------

     I,   Steve Bailey, certify that:


          1.   I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K and all reports on
               Form 10-D required to be filed in respect of the period covered
               by this report on Form 10-K of Alternative Loan Trust 2006-28CB
               (the "Exchange Act periodic reports");

          2.   Based on my knowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken
               as a whole, do 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, all of the distribution, servicing and
               other information required to be provided under Form 10-D for
               the period covered by this report is included in the Exchange
               Act periodic reports;

          4.   I am responsible for reviewing the activities performed by the
               servicer(s) and based on my knowledge and the compliance
               review(s) conducted in preparing the servicer compliance
               statement(s) required in this report under Item 1123 of
               Regulation AB, and except as disclosed in the Exchange Act
               periodic reports, the servicer(s) have fulfilled their
               obligations under the servicing agreement(s) in all material
               respects; and

          5.   All of the reports on assessment of compliance with servicing
               criteria for asset-backed securities and their related
               attestation reports on assessment of compliance with servicing
               criteria for asset-backed securities required to be included in
               this report in accordance with Item 1122 of Regulation AB and
               Exchange Act Rules 13a-18 and 15d-18 have been included as an
               exhibit to this report, except as otherwise disclosed in this
               report. Any material instances of noncompliance described in
               such reports have been disclosed in this report on Form 10-K.

          In giving the certifications above, I have reasonably relied on
          information provided to me by the following unaffiliated parties:
          The Bank of New York, as Trustee.

     Date: March 27, 2007


          /s/ Steve Bailey
          -------------------------
          Steve Bailey
          Senior Managing Director, Loan Administration
§ 410.2003 Organization of the UC Office of the Ombuds. ( a ) The UC Ombuds shall be hired as a career civil servant.
( b ) The UC Ombuds shall have the requisite knowledge and experience to effectively fulfill the work and the role, including membership in good standing of a nationally recognized organization, association of ombudsmen, or State bar association throughout the course of employment as the Ombuds, and to also include but not be limited to having demonstrated knowledge and experience in: ( 1 ) Informal dispute resolution practices;
( 2 ) Services and matters related to unaccompanied children and child welfare;
( 3 ) Oversight and regulatory matters; and
( 4 ) ORR policy and regulations.
( c ) The Ombuds may engage additional staff as it deems necessary and practicable to support the functions and responsibilities of the Office.
( d ) The Ombuds shall establish procedures for training, certification, and continuing education for staff and other representatives of the Office.
§ 155.10 Basis and scope. ( a ) *Basis.* This part is based on the following sections of title I of the Affordable Care Act: ( 1 ) 1301. Qualified health plan defined
( 2 ) 1302. Essential health benefits requirements
( 3 ) 1303. Special rules
( 4 ) 1304. Related definitions
( 5 ) 1311. Affordable choices of health benefit plans.
( 6 ) 1312. Consumer choice
( 7 ) 1313. Financial integrity.
( 8 ) 1321. State flexibility in operation and enforcement of Exchanges and related requirements.
( 9 ) 1322. Federal program to assist establishment and operation of nonprofit, member-run health insurance issuers.
( 10 ) 1331. State flexibility to establish Basic Health Programs for low-income individuals not eligible for Medicaid.
( 11 ) 1334. Multi-State plans.
( 12 ) 1402. Reduced cost-sharing for individuals enrolling in QHPs.
( 13 ) 1411. Procedures for determining eligibility for Exchange participation, advance premium tax credits and reduced cost sharing, and individual responsibility exemptions.
( 14 ) 1412. Advance determination and payment of premium tax credits and cost-sharing reductions.
( 15 ) 1413. Streamlining of procedures for enrollment through an exchange and State Medicaid, CHIP, and health subsidy programs.
( b ) *Scope.* This part establishes minimum standards for the establishment of an Exchange, minimum Exchange functions, eligibility determinations, enrollment periods, minimum SHOP functions, certification of QHPs, and health plan quality improvement.
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT

_________________________________

FREE SPEECH, 

 Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION, 

 Defendant - Appellee.

No. 13-8033

_________________________________

ORDER

_________________________________

Before BRISCOE, Chief Judge, BRORBY, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges.

_________________________________

This matter is before the court on the “Petition for Rehearing En Banc” filed by 

the appellant. Appellee is directed to file a response to the petition for rehearing en banc

on or before August 19, 2013.

Entered for the Court

ELISABETH A. SHUMAKER, Clerk

FILED

United States Court of Appeals

Tenth Circuit

August 9, 2013

Elisabeth A. Shumaker

Clerk of Court

Appellate Case: 13-8033 Document: 01019107021 Date Filed: 08/09/2013 Page: 1
**EXHIBIT
      32.2**




**CERTIFICATION
      OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER**


**PURSUANT
      TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**


**AS
      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**


**SECTION
      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**




Solely
      for the purposes of complying with 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant
      to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, I, the undersigned Chief
      Financial Officer of Flexible Solutions International, Inc. (the “Company”),
      hereby certify that, to the best of my knowledge, the Quarterly Report on Form
      10-QSB of the Company for the quarter ended September 30, 2007 (the “Report”)
      fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
      Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in the Report fairly
      presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
      operations of the Company.




Date:  November
                  14, 2007
            
            /s/
              Daniel B.
              O’BrienDaniel
              B.
              O’BrienChief
                Financial Officer
#### § 2105.37 How does your requester category affect the fees you are charged?

You will be charged as shown in the following table:

| Requester category | Search fees | Review fees | Duplication fees |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Commercial use requester | Yes | Yes | Yes. |
| Educational and noncommercial scientific institutions and representative of news media requester | No | No | Yes (first 100 pages, or equivalent volume, free). |
| All other requesters | Yes (first two hours free) | No | Yes (first 100 pages, or equivalent volume, free). |

Table 1 to § 2105.37
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 250 (Friday, December 29, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Page 78466]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 06-9919]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE


Notice of Lodging of a Consent Decree Under the Comprehensive 
Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act

    Notice is hereby given that on December 21, 2006 a proposed Consent 
Decree ``Consent Decree'' in United States v. Ashland Inc. et. al, 
Civil Action No. 06-1378 was lodged with the United States District 
Court for the District of Kansas.
    In this action the United States sought recovery of costs incurred 
by the Environmental Protection Agency in responding to the release and 
threat of release of hazardous substances at the Chemical Commodities 
Inc. Superfund Site in Olathe, Johnson County, Kansas. Under the 
Consent Decree, the Defendants and Settling Federal Agencies will 
reimburse the Untied States and each other for the past costs incurred 
through December 31, of 2000.
    The Department of Justice will receive for a period of thirty (30) 
days from the date of this publication comments relating to the Consent 
Decree. Comments should be addressed to the Assistant Attorney General, 
Environment and Natural Resources Division, P.O. Box 7611, U.S. 
Department of Justice, Washington, DC 20044-7611, and should refer to 
United States. v. Ashland, Inc. D.J. Ref. 90-11-3-1686. The Consent 
Decree may be examined at the Office of the United States Attorney, 
District of Kansas, Suite 1200, 301 No. Main Street, Wichita, Kansas. 
During the public comment period, the Consent Decree may also be 
examined on the following Department of Justice Web site, to http://www.usdoj.gov/enrd/Consent_Decrees.html. A copy of the Consent Decree 
may also be obtained by mail from the Consent Decree Library, P.O. Box 
7611, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC 20044-7611 or by 
faxing or e-mailing a request to Tonia Fleetwood 
(<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#d9adb6b7b0b8f7bfb5bcbcadaeb6b6bd99acaabdb6b3f7beb6af"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="acd8c3c2c5cd82cac0c9c9d8dbc3c3c8ecd9dfc8c3c682cbc3da">[email protected]</span></a>), fax no. (202) 514-0097, phone confirmation 
number (202) 514-1547. In requesting a copy for the Consent Decree 
Library, please enclose a check in the amount of $9.00 (25 cents per 
page reproduction cost) payable to the U.S. Treasury or, if by e-mail 
or fax, forward a check in that amount to the Consent Decree Library at 
the stated address.

Robert E. Maher, Jr.,
Assistant Section Chief, Environmental Enforcement Section, Environment 
and Natural Resources Division.
[FR Doc. 06-9919 Filed 12-28-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-15-Mt


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
#### §§ 606.71-606.99 [Reserved]
United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

____________

No. 11-1354 September Term 2011

FEC-AO2011-15

Filed On: February 10, 2012

Abdul Karim Hassan,

Petitioner

v.

Federal Election Commission,

Respondent

BEFORE: Henderson, Tatel, and Griffith, Circuit Judges

O R D E R

Upon consideration of the motion to certify questions to the Supreme Court or to

expedite the case, the opposition thereto, and the reply; and the motion to dismiss, the

opposition thereto, and the reply, it is

ORDERED that the motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction be granted. This

court does not have jurisdiction to review directly the Federal Election Commission’s

advisory opinion issued under 2 U.S.C. §§ 437d(a)(7), 437f. See Public Citizen, Inc. v.

Nat’l Highway Traffic Safety Admin., 489 F.3d. 1279, 1287 (D.C. Cir. 2007) (“Initial

review [of agency decisions] occurs at the appellate level only when a direct-review

statute specifically gives the court of appeals subject-matter jurisdiction to directly

review agency action.”). It is

FURTHER ORDERED that the motion to certify questions to the Supreme Court

or to expedite the case be dismissed as moot.

Pursuant to D.C. Circuit Rule 36, this disposition will not be published. The Clerk

is directed to withhold issuance of the mandate herein until seven days after resolution

USCA Case #11-1354 Document #1357641 Filed: 02/10/2012 Page 1 of 2
United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

____________

No. 11-1354 September Term 2011

of any timely petition for rehearing or petition for rehearing en banc. See Fed. R. App.

P. 41(b); D.C. Cir. Rule 41.

Per Curiam

2

USCA Case #11-1354 Document #1357641 Filed: 02/10/2012 Page 2 of 2
§ 2509.24 How may the public submit a petition to CNCS for the withdrawal or modification of a guidance document? ( a ) Interested parties may submit petitions to CNCS requesting withdrawal or modification of any effective guidance document by sending an email to *Guidance@cns.gov* or by sending the request to Corporation for National and Community Service ATT: Associate Director of Policy, 250 E Street SW, Washington, DC 20525.
( b ) Interested parties should include the guidance document's title and a summary justification describing why the document should be withdrawn, how it should be modified, or the nature of the concern with the guidance.
( c ) The responsible CNCS department, in consultation with OGC, will review the petition, determine if withdrawal or modification is necessary or the best way to resolve the concern, and respond to the petitioner no later than 90 days after receipt of the request.
-82 -80 -78 -76 -74

 36

 38

 40

★

▲

▲

▲

▲

★ ▲ ▲

▲

▲

 500

 1000

 1500

 100

18 12 06 00

10/09

NOAA HYSPLIT MODEL

 Backward trajectory ending at 2300 UTC 09 Oct 07

 EDAS Meteorological Data

Source

★ at 38.90 N 76.65 W Meters AGL
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                     5


<S>                                              <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                         9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                               DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                    SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                            2,588,327
<SECURITIES>                                              0
<RECEIVABLES>                                       734,519
<ALLOWANCES>                                              0
<INVENTORY>                                               0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                  2,588,327
<PP&E>                                          114,115,862
<DEPRECIATION>                                   15,366,762
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  111,842,978
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                             2,915,476
<BONDS>                                          96,064,932
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                     0
<PREFERRED>                                               0
<COMMON>                                          2,666,966
<OTHER-SE>                                       10,195,604
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    111,842,978
<SALES>                                          15,193,780
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 15,452,826
<CGS>                                             7,268,726
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    14,916,069
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                          0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                          0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                5,326,222
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                     536,757
<INCOME-TAX>                                        214,523
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                 322,234
<DISCONTINUED>                                            0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                           0
<CHANGES>                                                 0
<NET-INCOME>                                        322,234
<EPS-BASIC>                                            0.15
<EPS-DILUTED>                                          0.14



</TABLE>
**AR B and U.S. EPA**  **Region IX Meeting California Draft 111(d) Plan; Emission Units** 

**Ap ril 30, 2015**  **11A M**  **- 12PM** 

1. Differences in the affected units list: a. Primary differences b. Definitions c. Overall Significance 2. Technical corrections to affected EGU list and State performance goals after rule is final. 3. New versus modified/reconstructed (EGU versus facility) and “once in always in.” 4. Next Steps
§ 402.12 Use of SLIAG Funds for Costs Incurred Prior to October 1, 1987. ( a ) Except as indicated in (b) and (c) of this section, States may not use funds provided under this part of costs incurred prior to October 1, 1987.
( b ) A State may use funds provided under this part for administrative costs incurred prior to October 1, 1987, but after November 6, 1986, that are directly associated with implementation of this part. Such costs may include planning, preparing the application, establishing fund accounting and reporting systems, data development associated with the application, and other costs directly resulting from planning for implementation of this part.
( c ) A State may use funds provided under this part for costs incurred prior to October 1, 1987, but after November 6, 1986, in providing public health assistance to eligible legalized aliens and to applicants for lawful temporary residence under sections 210, 210A and 245A of the INA, in conformity with the provisions of § 402.10(a).
[53 FR 7858, Mar. 10, 1988, as amended at 56 FR 21247, May 7, 1991]