alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 169.625 Compartments containing diesel machinery. ( a ) Spaces containing machinery must be fitted with adequate dripproof ventilators, trunks, louvers, etc., to provide sufficient air for proper operation of the propulsion and auxiliary engines.
( b ) Air-cooled propulsion and auxiliary engines installed below deck must be fitted with air intake ducts or piping from the weather deck. The ducts or piping must be arranged and supported to safely sustain stresses induced by weight and engine vibration and to minimize transfer of vibration to the supporting structure. Prior to installing ventilation for the engines, plans or sketches showing the machinery arrangement including air intakes, exhaust stack, method of attachment of ventilation ducts to the engine, location of spark arresting mufflers and capacity of ventilation blowers must be submitted to the OCMI for approval.
( c ) Spaces containing machinery must be fitted with at least two ducts to furnish natural or mechanical supply and exhaust ventilation. One duct must extend to a point near the bottom of the compartment, and be installed so that the ordinary collection of water in the bilge will not trap the duct. Where forced ventilation is installed, the duct extending to the bottom of the compartment must be the exhaust. The total inlet area and the total outlet area of ventilation ducts must be not less than one square inch for each foot of beam of the vessel. These minimum areas must be increased when such ducts are considered part of the air supply to the engines.
( d ) All ducts must be of rigid permanent noncombustible construction, properly fastened, supported, and reasonably gastight from end to end.
( e ) All supply ducts for ventilation purposes must be provided with cowls or scoops having a free area not less than twice the required duct area. When the cowls or scoops are screened, the mouth area must be increased to compensate for the area of the screen wire. Dampers are prohibited in supply ducts. Cowls or scoops must be kept open at all times except when weather would endanger the vessel if the openings were not temporarily closed. Supply and exhaust openings must not be located where the natural flow of air is unduly obstructed, or adjacent to possible sources of vapor ignition, and must not be located where exhaust air may be taken into the supply vents.
# C_2011238EN.01003604.xml

| 13.8.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 238/36 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.8.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 238/36

---

Order of the General Court of 14 June 2011 — Timab Industries and CFPR v Commission

(Case T-14/11) (1)

1

2011/C 238/65

Language of the case: French

The President of the Sixth Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

---

(1)  OJ C 80, 12.3.2011.

1

---
#### § 144.505 Location of escapes.

The two required means of escape must be widely separated and, if possible, at opposite ends or sides of the space. Means may include normal and emergency exits, passageways, stairways, ladders, deck scuttles, doors, and windows.
---

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER UNDER SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Annual Report of Trans-Orient Petroleum
Ltd. (the Company) on Form 20-F for the fiscal year ending July 31, 2008 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
Report), I, Garth Johnson, 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 to the best of my knowledge:

| | 1. | The Report fully complies with the requirements of
      section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended;
      and                   
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| |    |                                                                                                                                                                 
| | 2. | The information contained in the Report fairly presents,
      in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
      operations of the Company.

Garth Johnson ____________________________

Name: Garth Johnson Title: Chief Executive Officer
October 27, 2008

---
#### § 15.816 Automatic radar plotting aids (ARPAs).

Every person in the required complement of deck officers, including the master, on seagoing vessels equipped with automatic radar plotting aids (ARPAs), except those vessels listed in § 15.105(f) and (g) of this part, must hold an appropriate STCW endorsement valid for vessels equipped with ARPA.

[USCG-2004-17914, 78 FR 78007, Dec. 24, 2013]
# C_2012039EN.01001502.xml

| 11.2.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 39/15 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

11.2.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 39/15

---

Order of the President of the General Court of 12 December 2011 — Akhras v Council

(Case T-579/11 R)

(Interim measures - Common foreign and security policy - Restrictive measures against Syria - Freezing of funds and economic resources - Application for suspension of operation and provisional measures - Lack of urgency - Lack of serious and irreparable harm)

(2012/C 39/31)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Tarif Akhras (Homs, Syria) (represented by: S. Ashley and S. Millar, Solicitors, D. Wyatt QC and R. Blakeley, Barrister)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: M. Bishop and M.-M. Joséphidès, acting as Agents)

Re:

In essence, application for provisional measures and suspension of operation of Council Decision 2011/522/CFSP of 2 September 2011 amending Decision 2011/273/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against Syria (OJ 2011 L 228, p. 16), Council Regulation (EU) No 878/2011 of 2 September 2011 amending Regulation (EU) No 442/2011 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Syria (OJ 2011 L 228, p. 1), Council Decision 2011/628/CFSP of 23 September 2011 amending Decision 2011/273/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against Syria (OJ 2011 L 247, p. 17), and Council Regulation (EU) No 1011/2011 of 13 October 2011 amending Regulation (EU) No 442/2011 (OJ 2011 L 269, p. 18), in so far as those texts refer to the applicant

Operative part of the order

| 1. | The application for interim measures is rejected. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The application for interim measures is rejected.

| 2. | Costs are reserved. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Costs are reserved.

---
EXHIBIT 32.2 CERTIFICATIONS PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 The undersigned hereby certifies in his capacity as Chief Financial Officer of Belcrest Capital Fund LLC (the Fund), that based on his knowledge: (a) the Annual Report of the Fund on Form 10-Q for quarter ended September 30, 2011 (the Report) fully complies withthe requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and(b) the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and theresults of operations of the Fund for such period. Date: November 8, 2011 /s/ Andrew C. FrenetteAndrew C. FrenetteChief Financial Officer A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Fund and will be retained by the Fund and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request. 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

DYNELL EL TRIBE WRIGHT,

Plaintiff, CASE NUMBER: 14-14783

HONORABLE VICTORIA A. ROBERTS

v.

CAPITAL ONE AUTO FINANCE, et al.,

Defendants.

/

ORDER

On December 18, 2014, Dynell El Tribe Wright filed a pro se Complaint against:

(1) Capital One Auto Finance, and (2) Dave Lawson, DBA Capital One Auto Finance. 

Wright’s claims include violations of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic [Relations]

10(a) and multiple sections of United States Code causing Wright to overpay the

Defendant “in the amount of $2,778.89 as well as negative information being reported to

the credit bureaus.” Wright also alleges that Defendants have agreed to pay Wright

$3,500,000.00 in charges for use of his name and intellectual property for unlawful gain.

Wright requests to proceed in forma pauperis.

Wright’s Complaint is DISMISSED as frivolous, and his request to proceed in

forma pauperis is GRANTED.

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B), the Court shall dismiss an action filed in

forma pauperis at anytime if the Court finds that it is factually frivolous, malicious, fails to

state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or seeks monetary relief against a

defendant who is immune from suit. Factual frivolousness includes allegations that are

“clearly baseless,” “fantastic,” or “delusional.” See Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319,

2:14-cv-14783-VAR-MKM Doc # 4 Filed 01/23/15 Pg 1 of 2 Pg ID 39
327-28 (1989). Further, Neitzke explains that, “a complaint. . . is frivolous where it lacks

an arguable basis either in law or in fact. . . [and] when applied to a complaint,

embraces not only the inarguable legal conclusion, but also the fanciful factual

allegation.” Id. at 325.

Wright’s complaint is frivolous in that it alleges violations of laws that provide no

claims for relief for his issues and facts that seek fantastical amounts of damages.

Wright’s Complaint states that Defendants have “already agreed to pay plaintiff

$3,500,000.00 in charges” as well as protection under the Vienna Convention on

Diplomatic Relations and several sections of United States Code that have no relation

to his claims for relief.

The Court finds Wright’s Complaint frivolous pursuant to Section 1915(e), as it is

fantastic, delusional, and clearly baseless. 

Wright’s Complaint is DISMISSED. Wright’s request to proceed in forma

pauperis is GRANTED.

IT IS ORDERED.

s/Victoria A. Roberts

Victoria A. Roberts

United States District Judge

Dated: January 23, 2015

The undersigned certifies that a copy of this

document was served on the attorneys of

record by electronic means or U.S. Mail on

January 23, 2015.

s/Carol A. Pinegar

Deputy Clerk

2

2:14-cv-14783-VAR-MKM Doc # 4 Filed 01/23/15 Pg 2 of 2 Pg ID 40
# CITYOFRHINELANDE R

Offic e o f th e Mayo rHom e o f th e Hoda g Januar y 9,201 2 U . S . Department

o f Transportatio n Offic e o f Aviatio n Analysi s Essential Air

Servic e Divisio n • - 120 0 Ne w Jerse y Avenue , S E i : ^ Washington , D C 2059 0 Attn : Mr . Denni s J . DeVany , Chie f Essential Air

Servic e Divisio n ' r R£ : Docke t

OST-2011-010 9 Rhinelander , Wisconsi n Dea r Mr . DeVany , A s Mayo r o f th e Cit y o f Rhinelander , I hav e receive d th e proposal b y Grea t Lake s Airlines . Ou

r Airpor t Commissio n ha s provide dm e arevie w o f th e proposa l an d base d o n th e Reques t fo r Proposal s w e concur

with Grea

t Lake s thre e roun d trip s per da y durin g of

f pea k month s wit

h a n increase dflight

schedul e durin g ou r

pea k summer month s to b e determine d b y Grea t Lake s t o mee t th e histori c traffi c demands . Th e Cit y o f Rhinelande r

an dit s surroundin g communitie s depen d o n this critical air servic e to suppor t business , tourism , an deconomi c growt h t o th e region . I t

will b e critical that

Grea t Lake s an dDelt aAirline s coordinat e a n upgrad e o f

electroni c communicatio n system s t o enabl e Grea t Lake s to provid e Delt aareservation , boardin g passe s an d Sk y Mile s processing , aseamles s proces s t o th e travelin g public . I n partnershi p with th e Commissio n w e ar e lookin g forward t o workin g closel y wit h Grea t Lake s Airline s t o mak

e thi s crucial servic e successfu l an d t o gro w ou r marke t t o it s fulles t

potential . Sincerel y 

# /P

RichardJ . JoHns Mayo r cc ; Michae l Matthews , Airport Commissio n

Cit y Hal l Telephon e (715)365-860 0 13 5 Sout h Steven s Stree t Fax (715 ) 365-863 0 Rhinelande rW l 54501-343 4 mayor@rhinelandercityhall.or g
# C_2011347EN.01004602.xml

| 26.11.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 347/46 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.11.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 347/46

---

Action brought on 23 September 2011 — ZZ v Commission

(Case F-93/11)

2011/C 347/87

Language of the case: French

Parties

Parties

Applicant: ZZ (represented by: S. Rodrigues and A. Blot, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Commission

Defendant:

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Annulment of the decision adopted by the chairman of the selection board for Competition EPSO/AST/111/10 — Secretaries (AST 1) not to admit the applicant to the assessment tests

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

| — | Annul the decision adopted on 15 June 2011 not to allow the applicant to take part in the assessment tests for Competition EPSO/AST/111/10 — Secretaries, grade AST 1; |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the decision adopted on 15 June 2011 not to allow the applicant to take part in the assessment tests for Competition EPSO/AST/111/10 — Secretaries, grade AST 1;

| — | as a result, rule that the applicant must be reinstated within the recruitment process initiated by that competition, if necessary, through the organisation of fresh assessment tests; |
| --- | --- |

—

as a result, rule that the applicant must be reinstated within the recruitment process initiated by that competition, if necessary, through the organisation of fresh assessment tests;

| — | in any event, request EPSO to disclose the information in its possession regarding the results obtained by all the candidates in test (d); |
| --- | --- |

—

in any event, request EPSO to disclose the information in its possession regarding the results obtained by all the candidates in test (d);

| — | in the alternative, in the event that the main claim is not upheld, quod non, pay the applicant an amount fixed provisionally and ex aequo et bono at EUR 50 000; |
| --- | --- |

—

in the alternative, in the event that the main claim is not upheld, quod non, pay the applicant an amount fixed provisionally and ex aequo et bono at EUR 50 000;

| — | in any event, pay the applicant, by way of non-material damages, an amount fixed provisionally and ex aequo et bono at EUR 50 000. |
| --- | --- |

—

in any event, pay the applicant, by way of non-material damages, an amount fixed provisionally and ex aequo et bono at EUR 50 000.

---
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

PATRICIA ROUSSETY,

Plaintiff,

v.

GREEN TREE SERVICING, L.L.C., and

NATIONAL CREDITORS CONNECTION, INC.,

Defendants.

 /

Case No. 14-11677

Honorable John Corbett O’Meara

ORDER OF PARTIAL DISMISSAL

Plaintiff Patricia Roussety recently filed a seven-count complaint in this court alleging the

following causes of action: Count I, violations of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act

("TCPA"), 47 U.S.C. §§ 227 et seq.; Count II, violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act

("FDCPA"), 15 U.S.C. § 1692k(d); Count III, violations of the Michigan Collection Practices Act

("MCPA"), Mich. Comp. Laws Ann. §§ 445.251 et seq.; Count IV, violations of the TCPA; Count

V, violations of the FDCPA; Count VI, violations of the Michigan Occupational Code ("MOC"),

Mich. Comp. Laws Ann. §§ 339.901 et seq.; and Count VII, violations of the MCPA as alternative

to claims under the MOC.

Although Plaintiff's causes of action arising under federal law are cognizable in this court

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331, the remaining allegations of the complaint are based solely on state

law. There is no allegation that the parties to this action are diverse, and the court declines to

exercise supplemental jurisdiction over Plaintiff's state law claims in order to avoid jury confusion. 

See 28 U.S.C. § 1367(c); United Mine Workers v. Gibbs, 383 U.S. 715 (1966); and Padilla v. City

of Saginaw, 867 F. Supp. 1309 (E.D. Mich. 1994).

5:14-cv-11677-JCO-MJH Doc # 15 Filed 06/30/14 Pg 1 of 2 Pg ID 74
Therefore, it is hereby ORDERED that Counts III, VI, and VII are DISMISSED.

s/John Corbett O'Meara 

United States District Judge

Date: June 30, 2014

I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was served upon counsel of record on

this date, June 30, 2014, using the ECF system.

s/William Barkholz 

Case Manager

2

5:14-cv-11677-JCO-MJH Doc # 15 Filed 06/30/14 Pg 2 of 2 Pg ID 75
Editorial Note on Part 160
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 160 appear by USCG-2012-0832, 77 FR 59785, 59786, Oct. 1, 2012.

§ 160.064-1 Applicable specifications. ( a ) *Specifications.* There are no other Coast Guard specifications applicable to this subpart.
( b ) [Reserved]
[CGFR 64-30, 29 FR 7388, June 6, 1964]
September 8, 2015 

Dear Mr. Masterson: 

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

(Docket No. FAA-2015-2348). 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 9/22/15. 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
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

Pio Peter Zammit,

Plaintiff(s),

v. Case No. 2:14−cv−14155−NGE−MJH

Hon. Nancy G. Edmunds

Internal Revenue Service, et al.,

Defendant(s),

ORDER OF REFERENCE TO UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

IT IS ORDERED that this matter is referred to U.S. Magistrate Judge Michael J.

Hluchaniuk for all pretrial proceedings, including a hearing and determination of all

non−dispositive matters pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A) and/or a report and

recommendation on all dispositive matters pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B).

s/Nancy G. Edmunds 

Nancy G. Edmunds

United States District Judge

Certificate of Service

 I hereby certify that on this date a copy of the foregoing notice was served upon the parties

and/or counsel of record herein by electronic means or first class U.S. mail.

s/C Bethel 

Case Manager

Dated: December 9, 2014

2:14-cv-14155-NGE-MJH Doc # 6 Filed 12/09/14 Pg 1 of 1 Pg ID 37
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE

FIRST DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON

ORDER ON MOTION

Cause Number: 01-09-00437-CR

Trial Court Cause 

Number: 1198372

Style: Gerald Hayes

v The State of Texas

Date motion filed*: January 22, 2013

Type of motion: "Motion for Leave to File and Judicial Notice"

Party filing motion: Appellant

Document to be filed:

Is appeal accelerated? YES NO

Ordered that motion is:

 Granted

If document is to be filed, document due: 

Absent extraordinary circumstances, the Court will not grant additional motions to extend time

 Denied

 Dismissed (e.g., want of jurisdiction, moot)

 Other: 

Judge's signature: /s/ Sherry Radack_________________________________________________ 

 Acting individually Acting for the Court

Panel consists of ________________________________________

Date: February 7, 2013____________________________
**EXHIBIT 32.2**

 

**CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER**

 

**Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-OxleyAct of 2002 (18 U.S.C. 1350)**

 

The undersigned executive officer of FirstFederal Bancshares of Arkansas, Inc. (the “Registrant”) hereby certifies thatthe Registrant’s Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2003 fullycomplies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained therein fairlypresents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results ofoperations of the Registrant.

 

 
|   | /s/ Sherri R. Billings |   |
|--------|-----------------------------|--------|
|   | Sherri R. Billings          |
|   | EVP/Chief Financial Officer |

 

 

Date: March 5, 2004

 

----
<PAGE>
                                                                    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

         This certification is provided pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, and accompanies the quarterly
report on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended June 30, 2003 (the "Form 10-QSB") of
Community Shores Bank Corporation (the "Issuer").

         I, Jose' A. Infante, Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer of
the Issuer, certify that:

         (i)      the Form 10-QSB fully complies with the requirements of
                  Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act
                  of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m(a) or 78o(d)); and

         (ii)     the information contained in the Form 10-QSB fairly presents,
                  in all material respects, the financial condition and results
                  of operations of the Issuer.

Dated: August 14, 2003
                               /s/ Jose' A. Infante
                               ------------------------------
                               Jose' A. Infante
                               Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer
§ 172.020 Incorporation by reference. ( a ) Certain material is incorporated by reference into this part with the approval of the Director of the Federal Register under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. To enforce any edition other than that specified in this section, the Coast Guard must publish a notice of change in the Federal Register and the material must be available to the public. All approved material is available for inspection at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this material at NARA, call 202-741-6030 or go to *http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/ibr_locations.html .* It is also available for inspection at Coast Guard Headquarters. Contact Commandant (CG-ENG-2), Attn: Naval Architecture Division, U.S. Coast Guard Stop 7509, 2703 Martin Luther King Jr. Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20593-7509. The material is also available from the source listed in paragraph (b) of this section.
( b ) International Maritime Organization (IMO), Publications Section, 4 Albert Embankment, London SE1 7SR, United Kingdom, + 44 (0)20 7735 7611, *http://www.imo.org/ .* ( 1 ) Amendment to Chapter VI of the International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea, 1960, Resolution A.264(VIII), incorporation by reference (IBR) approved for § 172.015.
( 2 ) Publication No. 240-E, International Code for the Safe Carriage of Grain in Bulk, IBR approved for § 172.015.
( 3 ) Resolution MEPC.117(52), Amendments to the Annex of the Protocol of 1978 Relating to the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships, 1973 (IMO Res. MEPC.117(52)), Adopted on 15 October 2004, IBR approved for § 172.070.
[USCG-2007-0030, 75 FR 78086, Dec. 14, 2010, as amended by USCG-2012-0832, 77 FR 59788, Oct. 1, 2012; USCG-2013-0671, 78 FR 60163, Sept. 30, 2013]