alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### RECORD OF CONVERSATION 

# I CONTACT INFORMATION 

### Date ofCon v ersation : Jan u ary 9, 20 1 5**-- --~** **~~---- ----** **---- ------** **---------- ----** **------ ---**  

### Company: Lone S t ar F li g h t M u se um 

### ContactName:

_ M

__**re ryL_** ____________________________________ ___ 

### Dock e t Numb e r : F AA

- 2006

- 25 4 34

Pho ne : 

# 0 Email : 

# 0 Phone Number : Email Address: 

## -- -------- ------------ ------ ---------------- - CONVERSATION INFORMATION

Subj e ct : Need for mo r e E L OS i nforma t ion o n the to pi cs be l ow D e tail s:

Conclus ion o r Acti o n Tak e n:

NAME T ho m as J. Lea h OFFICE A F S-83 0 Lone Sta r w ill prov i de needed i nfo r mat ion , Comments o r revisions, of additiona l documents or clarifications i n 30 days, Fe b ruary 9, 20 1 5

FAA EMPLOY EE INFORMATION

Lone S tar i n c lu des an S M S docume n t in su p port of i t s comm i tme nt t o ELOS , whic h it i nte nd s to i m p l ement i f gran t ed. Lo n e S t ar s u b mitted a n Op erations M an u al in suppor t of EL O S, whic h i t i n t e n ds to i mple m e nt if granted.This office proposes a teleconference or me et in g to clarify th e FAA position and discuss the following topics:**~** Lone Star ' s SMS may be acceptable w ith minor modifications and when used in conjunction with a s ufficient operations Manual.**~** Lone S tar 's operations manual do es not interface with the SMS Manual, nor does the SMS Manual support the operations manual. Neither document is s ufficient as a standa lone document.**~** Lone Star's operations manual lacks operational control s tructure and the elements required to support an SMS program, and while pilot aircraft trainin g and qualification is mentioned , no general subjects training or maintenance provider training is provided to the pilots or Maintenance group.**~** Provide an operational control s tructure or chain of command within yo ur operations manual for pilot's maintenance , and support personnel or supporting documents that these safeg uards are · in place.**~** Please list th e qualifications required to hold an operational control position.**~** Please provide an outline or explanat ion of your proposed ge neral subjects and maintenance training. Comment s or s ubmi ss ion of additional documents or clarifications addressing these concerns would be helpful in evaluating Lone Star's ELOS position. Absent requested information Lone Star will not meet an ELOS lAW CFR 14 Part II. Plea se provide the requested information within 30 day s.

2
From: herbert@herbertrosenthal.com

To: Finamore, Robert (OST); Herbert ROSENTHAL

Subject: Re: Transportes Aeromar

Date: Wednesday, January 25, 2012 9:35:19 PM

I got an email this evening from Aeromar approving your analysis and proposed grant of authority.

Please put this email exchange in the docket. Thanks for your assistance

Herbert a. Rosenthal

Counsel for Transportes Aeromar

------Original Message------

From: Robert.Finamore@dot.gov

To: Herbert ROSENTHAL

Subject: RE: Transportes Aeromar

Sent: Jan 25, 2012 5:05 PM

Herb,

I'm working my way back through the various Aeromar applications that are pending in Docket 1995-

379/2005-20954 and just wanted to check in with you one last time as I prepare to move forward. I

understand that Aeromar wishes only to renew its San Luis Potosi/Manzanillo-San Antonio authority and

wants grant of the standalone Saltillo-San Antonio authority that it was recently designated for.

I also assume the carrier wants renewal of its charter authority.

With respect to all of the other authority that had previously been granted to Aeromar in the docket by

Notices dated 6/22/05 and 11/2/05, we plan to dismiss that authority based upon Aeromar's

confirmation to you that indicated as much. That would include any other markets in which Aeromar

had previously held authority to operate with its own aircraft, as well as the code-share authority it

previously held with Aeromexico in OST-2005-20954.

As a result, Aeromar would then only hold exemption authority in the San Luis Potosi/Manzanillo-San

Antonio markets, the Saltillo-San Antonio market, and charter authority.

Upon confirmation I'll place a copy of the e-mail in the Dockets so that the record will be updated

accordingly.

Regards,

Bob

-----Original Message-----

From: Herbert Rosenthal [mailto:herbert@herbertrosenthal.com]

Sent: Tuesday, January 17, 2012 6:16 PM

To: Finamore, Robert (OST)

Subject: RE: Transportes Aeromar

Thanks. Have a good evening.

-----Original Message-----

From: Robert.Finamore@dot.gov [mailto:Robert.Finamore@dot.gov]

Sent: Tuesday, January 17, 2012 6:15 PM

To: herbert@herbertrosenthal.com

Subject: RE: Transportes Aeromar

I believe it will Herb, I'll look at it further tomorrow and be in touch if

there are any other issues.

Bob
________________________________________

From: Herbert Rosenthal [herbert@herbertrosenthal.com]

Sent: Tuesday, January 17, 2012 6:08 PM

To: Finamore, Robert (OST)

Subject: Transportes Aeromar

Aeromar has sent me the following in response to your email:

\

Aeromar wishes only to renew its San Luis Potosi/Manzanillo-San Antonio

authority and wants grant of standalone Saltillo-San Antonio authority"

Will that help things along??

Thanks.

Herb Rosenthal

Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry
EXHIBIT 35.1
                  SERVICER COMPLIANCE STATEMENT (ITEM 1123)
                        RESIDENTIAL FUNDING COMPANY, LLC
              RAMP SERIES 2006-RS5 TRUST (THE "ISSUING ENTITY")

The undersigned,  a duly authorized officer of Residential Funding Company, LLC,
as servicer (the  "Servicer")  pursuant to the Pooling and Servicing  Agreement,
dated as of August  1, 2006 (as  amended  from time to time,  the  "Agreement"),
among  Residential  Asset  Mortgage  Products,  Inc., as depositor,  Residential
Funding  Company,  LLC (formerly  Residential  Funding  Corporation),  as master
servicer, and JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., as trustee, 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 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  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: Managing Director
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Stephen J. Markman, Chief Justice

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano 

Richard H. Bernstein

Kurtis T. Wilder

Elizabeth T. Clement, Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

 December 14, 2018

a1211

Order 

Clerk

December 14, 2018

156463

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 156463

COA: 338921

Wayne CC: 15-003518-FC

JOSHUA MAURICE ROBINSON,

Defendant-Appellant.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the July 28, 2017 order 

of the Court of Appeals is considered. We DIRECT appellate counsel, Tracie Gittleman, 

to file a supplemental brief addressing the reason for her failure to file an application for 

leave to appeal in the Court of Appeals on the defendant’s behalf within the deadlines set 

forth in MCR 7.205(G)(3), which led to the defendant losing his right to direct first-tier 

review of his plea-based conviction. Counsel shall file the supplemental brief within 28 

days of the date of this order. 

The application for leave to appeal remains pending.
#### Continental Bank Note Company v. Industrial Exhibition Company, appellants.

*Reference*— *compulsory of long account.*

In an action for work, labor and services done in engraving a quantity of bonds, coupons and certificates, and for materials furnished, the answer consisted of a general denial, an admission of thd delivery of certain bonds and certificates, leaving the plaintiff “to prove the amount, character and value thereof,” and a counter-claim. The plaintiff, on moving for a reference, made an affidavit in which it was stated, positively, that the trial of the action would require the examination of a long account. *Held,*that as the answer put the plaintiff to proof of the demand made in the complaint, and as the plaintiff’s affidavit was in no way contradicted on the part of the defendant, the court had sufficient before it to justify the ordering of a reference.

Appeal from an order referring the action to a referee to hear and determine the whole issues.

*John L. Cadwallader,*for appellant.

*Joseph J. Marrin,*for respondent.

Daniels, J.

The head-note fully states the only point passed upon in the opinion.

*Order affirmed.*
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED APRIL 14, 2022

NO. 03-21-00679-CV

Greg Abbott, in his Official Capacity as Governor of the State of Texas, and John Scott, in 

his Official Capacity as Secretary of State of Texas, Appellants

v.

Mexican American Legislative Caucus, Roland Gutierrez, Sarah Eckhardt, Ruben Cortez, 

and The Tejano Democrats, Appellees

APPEAL FROM THE 250TH DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY

BEFORE CHIEF JUSTICE BYRNE, JUSTICES KELLY AND SMITH

DISMISSED FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION –

OPINION BY CHIEF JUSTICE BYRNE

This is an appeal from the judgment signed by the trial court on December 22, 2021. Having

reviewed the record, the Court holds that Greg Abbott, in his Official Capacity as Governor of 

the State of Texas, and John Scott, in his Official Capacity as Secretary of State of Texas have

not prosecuted their appeal and did not comply with a notice from the Clerk of this Court. 

Therefore, the Court dismisses the appeal for want of prosecution. The appellants shall pay all 

costs relating to this appeal, both in this Court and in the court below.
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATIONS OF THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

(18 U.S.C. Section 1350)

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
Remi Barbier, Chairman of the Board of Directors, President and Chief Executive Officer and Peter S. Roddy, Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Pain Therapeutics, Inc. (the Company), hereby certify that to the best of our
knowledge:



| | 1. | The Companys Periodic Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2008, and to which this certification is attached as Exhibit 32.1 (the Periodic
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 Periodic Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| | -- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Date: May 7, 2008/s/ REMI BARBIERRemi Barbier,Chairman of the Board of Directors, President and
Chief Executive Officer




/s/ PETER S. RODDYPeter S. Roddy,Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
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 Transportation

###### Federal Aviation Administration

# AGENCY:

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

# ACTION:

Notice of RTCA Special Committee 204 meeting. 

# SUMMARY:

The FAA is issuing this notice to advise the public of a meeting of RTCA Special Committee 204: 406 MHz Emergency Locator Transmitters.

# DATES:

The meeting will be held on January 16-17, 2007, from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.

# ADDRESSES:

The meeting will be held at RTCA, Inc., Colson Board Room, 1828 L Street, NW., Suite 805, Washington, DC 20036-533.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        RTCA Secretariat, 1828 L Street, NW., Suite 805, Washington, DC 20036-5133; telephone (202) 833-9339; fax (202) 833-9434; Web site                         *http://www.rtca.org*.                    

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Pursuant to section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463, 5 U.S.C., Appendix 2), notice is hereby given for a Special Committee 202 meeting. The agenda will include:

*January 16-17:*

Approval of Summary for the      ( print page 77862)                        Seventh meeting held on 23-24 October 2006, RTCA Paper No. 279-06/SC204-019.                

                    Attendance is open to the interested public but limited to space availability. With the approval of the chairmen, members of the public may present oral statements at the meeting. Persons wishing to present statements or obtain information should contact the person listed in the                     **FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT**                     section. Members of the public may present a written statement to the committee at any time.                

Issued in Washington, DC, on December 19, 2006.

Francisco Estrada C.,

RTCA Advisory Committee.

[FR Doc. 06-9861 Filed 12-16-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-M
<PAGE>

                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.13



                             AMENDMENT TO LEASE

     This AMENDMENT TO LEASE made this 25th day of May, 2000, by and between
MISSION-TAYLOR PROPERTIES, A CALIFORNIA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, LESSOR, (FORMERLY
KIFER/MENDELL INDUSTRIAL WAY II ASSOCIATES LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, a California
Limited Partnership) and BRIAZZ, INC., A WASHINGTON CORPORATION, LESSEE,
hereinafter respectively called "Lessor" and "Lessee."

                                  WITNESSETH

1.   On June 28, 1996,a Lease was executed by and between Kifer/Mendell
     Industrial Way II Associates Limited Partnership, A California Limited
     Partnership, (Currently Mission-Taylor Properties, A California Limited
     Partnership) Lessor, and Briazz, Inc., a Washington Corporation, Lessee,
     for those certain premises commonly known and designated as 255 Mendell
     Street, San Francisco, CA.

2.   The parties do hereby agree to:

     a)   Increase the rentable square footage by 500 square feet as Lessee
          agrees to lease a portion of 275 Mendell Street, San Francisco, CA.
          The new total square footage commencing July 1, 000 is 7,940 square
          feet.

     b)   Paragraph 39 [initials] is amended with the new monthly rent payable
          to Lowenberg Corporation as follows:

          The sum of FIVE THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED FIFTY-NINE AND 00/100
          ($5,559.00) commencing on the first day of July, 2000 and continuing
          on the first day of each and every month thereafter to and including
          the first day of October 2001.

     c)   Paragraphs 6(b), 7, 8, 10 and 15 of Lease dated June 28, 1996 shall be
          amended to reflect this increase in square footage by increasing
          Lessee's percentage of occupancy and pro-rate share to 12.27% of all
          expenses outlined in the paragraphs above.

3.   All other terms and conditions of the above Lease shall remain the same.

     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned "Lessor" and "Lessee" has executed
these presents the day and year first above mentioned.

LESSOR:                               LESSEE:
MISSION-TAYLOR PROPERTIES,            BRIAZZ, INC.,
A CALIFORNIA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP      A WASHINGTON CORPORATION


By: /s/ William J. Lowenberg          By: /s/ Victor D. Alhadeff
    -------------------------             --------------------------------
    William J. Lowenberg                  Victor Alhadeff
§ 2556.365 May a VISTA appeal a grievance? ( a ) A VISTA may appeal the Deputy Regional Administrator's response to the grievance under § 2556.360(b)(3) by submitting a written appeal to the appropriate Regional Administrator. To be eligible to appeal a grievance response to the Regional Administrator, the VISTA must first have exhausted all appropriate actions as set forth in § 2556.360.
( b ) A VISTA's grievance appeal must be in writing, contain sufficient detail to identify the subject matter of the grievance, specify the relief requested, and be signed by the VISTA.
( c ) A VISTA must submit a grievance appeal to the appropriate Regional Administrator no later than 10 calendar days after the Deputy Regional Administrator issues their response to the grievance.
( d ) Certain matters contained in a grievance appeal may be rejected, rather than denied on the merits, by the Regional Administrator. A grievance appeal may be rejected, in whole or in part, for any of the following reasons: ( 1 ) The grievance appeal was not submitted to the appropriate Regional Administrator within the time limit specified in paragraph (c) of this section;
( 2 ) The grievance appeal consists of matters not contained within the definition of a grievance, as specified in section § 2556.350(a);
( 3 ) The grievance appeal consists of matters excluded from the VISTA program grievance procedure, as specified in § 2556.350(b); or
( 4 ) The grievance appeal contains matters that are moot, or for which relief has otherwise been granted.
( e ) Within 14 calendar days of receipt of the grievance, the appropriate Regional Administrator will decide the grievance appeal on the merits, or reject the grievance appeal in whole or in part, or both, as appropriate. The Regional Administrator shall notify the VISTA in writing of the decision and specify the grounds for the appeal decision. The appeal decision will include a statement of the basis for the decision and is a final decision of AmeriCorps.
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 State

          - [Public Notice 5627] 

The Shipping Coordinating Committee (SHC) through the Subcommittee on Standards of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping will conduct an open meeting at 9:30 a.m. on January 10, 2007. The meeting will be held in Room 1420 of Jemal's Riverside Building, 1900 Half Street, SW., Washington, DC 20593. The purpose of the meeting is to prepare for the 38th session of the International Maritime Organization (IMO) Sub-Committee on Standards of Training and Watchkeeping (STW 38) to be held on January 22-26, 2007, at the Royal Horticultural Halls and Conference Centre in London, England. 

The primary matters to be considered include:

—Comprehensive review of the STCW Convention and the STCW Code; 

—Measures to enhance maritime security; 

—Unlawful practices associated with certificates of competency; 

—Large passenger ship safety; 

—Review of the principles for establishing the safe manning levels of ships; 

—Education and training requirements for fatigue prevention, mitigation, and management; 

—Training requirements for the control and management of ship's ballast water and sediments; and 

—Development of competences for ratings. 

Please note that hard copies of documents associated with STW 38 will not be available at this meeting, the documents will be available at the meeting in portable document format (.pdf) on CD-ROM. To request documents before the meeting please write to the address provided below, and include your name, address, phone number, and electronic mail address. Copies of the papers will be sent via electronic mail to the address provided. 

Members of the public may attend the meeting up to the seating capacity of the room. Interested persons may seek information by writing: Luke Harden, U.S. Coast Guard (G-PSO-1), Room 1210, 2100 Second Street, SW., Washington, DC 20593-0001 or by calling; (202) 372-1408. 

Dated: December 18, 2006. 

Michael Tousley, 

Executive Secretary, Shipping Coordinating Committee, Department of State. 

[FR Doc. 06-9894 Filed 12-27-06; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4710-09-P
§ 171.1002 Notice of disincentive. Following referral of a determination of information blocking by OIG, an appropriate agency that imposes a disincentive or disincentives specified in § 171.1001 shall send a notice to the health care provider subject to the disincentive or disincentives, via usual methods of communication for the program or payment system under which the disincentive is applied, that includes: ( a ) A description of the practice or practices that formed the basis for the determination of information blocking referred by OIG;
( b ) The basis for the application of the disincentive or disincentives being imposed;
( c ) The effect of each disincentive; and
( d ) Any other information necessary for a health care provider to understand how each disincentive will be implemented.
#### § 2540.560 How do I renew authority to use a national service insignia?

Requests for renewed authority to use an insignia must follow the procedures for initial approval as set out in § 2540.540.