alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
U.S. Department of Transportation Office ofthe Secretary OfTransportation
October 1, 2012
Mr. TedVallas President Carlsbad-PalomarAirlines, Inc.

d/b/aCaliforniaPacific Airlines 5670 El Camino Real, Suite D Carlsbad, CA92008

Dear Mr. Vallas: i .• 

### I /: r.: (ll \.-. \) ' 1200 NewJersey Ave., S.E. Washington, DC 20590

Re: Docket DOT-OST-2010-0126, Application of Carlsbad-Palomar Airlines, Inc. d/b/a California Pacific Airlines for a certificate of public convenience and necessity

This responds to your letter ofAugust 7, 2012, requesting on behalfofCarlsbad-Palomar Airlines, Inc. d/b/a California Pacific Airlines ("CP Air"), an extension under section 204.7 ofour rules, in which tofulfill the conditions in Order 2011-8-3 issued August**25~** 2011, and commence operations as a U.S. certificated air carrier. In support ofits request, CP Air states that it is continuing to work with the Federal Aviation Administration ("FAA") to obtain the required safety authority for its proposed operation, it has entered into an aircraft lease and it 1s negotiating additional aircraft leases, and it has retained an investment banker to aid it in the acquisition ofadditional capital to support its proposed operations.
After reviewing the infom1ation you submitted in support ofan extension and conferring with the FAA, it appears that CP Air is taking steps to commence certificated operations. Therefore, we conclude that there is good cause to grant the company tmtil February 25, 2013, to commence actualf1ight operations. Finally, we remind CP Air that it is not our common practice to grant requests for extensions absent a clear expectation, on our part, that our actions in these matters will allow CP Air to fulfill the conditions of Order 2011-8-3, and that the air carrier will commence operations as a certificated air carrier by February 25, 2013. Any additional requests for a waiver from section 204.7 ofour rules must be received 45-days before the expiration ofCP Air's authority and be accompanied by adequate information evidencing that CP Air still meets.the Department's fitness criteria and that ithas completednearly all ofthe steps to commence operations (i.e., has the necessary personnel, financial resources,2
aircraft, and FAA operating authority). Furthermore, any suchwaiver request would have to be filed with the Department ofTransportation Dockets (via www.regulations.gov and accompaniedby a $280 applicationfee).
If you have any questions concerning this matter, please contact Damon Walker ofmy staffon (202) 366-7785. Sincerely,

Chief, Air CarrierFitness Division Office ofAviationAnalysis

cc: DocketDOT-OST-2010-0126 RadamesNaveira, Jr. FAAPrinciple Operations Inspector Eugene Jester FAAPrinciple Maintenance Inspector
EXHIBIT 32    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER   I, Steven L. White, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly Report of United Restaurant Management, Inc. on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended March 31, 2009 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Form 10-Q fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and results of operations of United Restaurant Management, Inc.  Date:  April 30, 2009  By:/s/ Steven L. White Steven L. White, President Chief Executive Officer and Principal Accounting Officer
**Exhibit 31.2**

 

STREAMLINE HEALTH SOLUTIONS, INC.

 

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

 

I, Nicholas A. Meeks, certify that:

 

I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K/A of Streamline Health Solutions, Inc.

 

Based on my knowledge, this report does 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.

 
| May 30,   2018 | /s/   Nicholas A. Meeks   |
|---------------------|---------------------------|
|                | Chief   Financial Officer |

 

----
Editorial Note on Part 2
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 2 appear by USCG-2009-0702, 74 FR 49223, Sept. 25, 2009, and USCG-2013-0671, 78 FR 60144, Sept. 30, 2013.

§ 2.01-13 Inspection requirements—foreign vessels. ( a ) Foreign vessels registered in countries which are parties to the effective International Convention for Safety of Life at Sea are normally subject to the examination provided for in chapter I of that Convention. However, in the case of any vessel involving novel features of design or construction, upon which that Convention is silent or which involve potential unusual operating risks, a more extensive inspection may be required when considered necessary to safeguard the life or property in United States ports where such vessel may enter. In such a case, pertinent plans and/or calculations may be required to be submitted sufficiently in advance to permit evaluation before inspection.
( b ) Foreign vessels registered in countries which are not parties to the effective International Convention for Safety of Life at Sea, or foreign vessels registered in countries which are parties to the effective Convention but which vessels are exempted from part or all of the Convention, may under conditions specified in applicable inspection laws be subject to inspection and certification as specified in regulations governing specific categories of vessels.
( c ) For details concerning application of regulations to foreign vessels, see part 30 (Tank Vessels), part 70 (Passenger Vessels), part 90 (Cargo and Miscellaneous Vessels), § 147.1 (Dangerous Cargoes), part 148 (Bulk Solid Hazardous Materials), parts 153 and 154 (Certain Bulk Dangerous Cargoes), and part 175 (Small Passenger Vessels) of this chapter.
[CGFR 65-50, 30 FR 16604, Dec. 30, 1965, as amended by CGD 73-96, 42 FR 49022, Sept. 26, 1977; CGD 97-057, 62 FR 51041, Sept. 30, 1997]
Exhibit 10.36


 


Enterprise
Bancorp


Executive
Officer Supplemental Bonus Table


Fiscal
Year 2005


 


Net
Income growth*


 


	
  Name

  	
   

  	
  Bonus %

  of salary,

  NI Growth

  10.000%

  	
   

  	
  Bonus %

  of salary,

  NI Growth

  11.000%

  	
   

  	
  Bonus %

  of salary,

  NI Growth

  12.000%

  	
   

  	
  Bonus %

  of salary,

  NI Growth

  13.000%

  	
   

  	
  Bonus %

  of salary,

  NI Growth

  14.000%

  	
   

  	
  Bonus %

  of salary,

  NI Growth

  15.000%

  	
   

  	
  Bonus %

  of salary,

  NI Growth

  16.000%

  	
   

  	
  Bonus %

  of salary,

  NI Growth

  17.000%

  	
   

  	
  Bonus %

  of salary,

  NI Growth

  18.000%

  	
   

  	
  Bonus %

  of salary,

  NI Growth

  19.000%

  	
   

  	
  Bonus %

  of salary,

  NI Growth

  20.000%

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
  George L. Duncan

  	
   

  	
  10.000

  	
  %

  	
  18.300

  	
  %

  	
  26.600

  	
  %

  	
  35.000

  	
  %

  	
  43.300

  	
  %

  	
  51.600

  	
  %

  	
  59.900

  	
  %

  	
  68.200

  	
  %

  	
  76.500

  	
  %

  	
  84.800

  	
  %

  	
  93.100

  	
  %

  
	
  Richard W. Main

  	
   

  	
  10.000

  	
  %

  	
  18.300

  	
  %

  	
  26.600

  	
  %

  	
  35.000

  	
  %

  	
  43.300

  	
  %

  	
  51.600

  	
  %

  	
  59.900

  	
  %

  	
  68.200

  	
  %

  	
  76.500

  	
  %

  	
  84.800

  	
  %

  	
  93.100

  	
  %

  
	
  Jack P Clancy

  	
   

  	
  10.000

  	
  %

  	
  18.300

  	
  %

  	
  26.600

  	
  %

  	
  35.000

  	
  %

  	
  43.300

  	
  %

  	
  51.600

  	
  %

  	
  59.900

  	
  %

  	
  68.200

  	
  %

  	
  76.500

  	
  %

  	
  84.800

  	
  %

  	
  93.100

  	
  %

  
	
  James A. Marcotte

  	
   

  	
  5.714

  	
  %

  	
  10.457

  	
  %

  	
  15.200

  	
  %

  	
  20.000

  	
  %

  	
  24.743

  	
  %

  	
  29.486

  	
  %

  	
  34.229

  	
  %

  	
  38.971

  	
  %

  	
  43.714

  	
  %

  	
  48.457

  	
  %

  	
  53.200

  	
  %

  
	
  Robert R. Gilman

  	
   

  	
  5.714

  	
  %

  	
  10.457

  	
  %

  	
  15.200

  	
  %

  	
  20.000

  	
  %

  	
  24.743

  	
  %

  	
  29.486

  	
  %

  	
  34.229

  	
  %

  	
  38.971

  	
  %

  	
  43.714

  	
  %

  	
  48.457

  	
  %

  	
  53.200

  	
  %

  
	
  Stephen J. Irish

  	
   

  	
  5.714

  	
  %

  	
  10.457

  	
  %

  	
  15.200

  	
  %

  	
  20.000

  	
  %

  	
  24.743

  	
  %

  	
  29.486

  	
  %

  	
  34.229

  	
  %

  	
  38.971

  	
  %

  	
  43.714

  	
  %

  	
  48.457

  	
  %

  	
  53.200

  	
  %

  



 










%’s in table represent  bonus to be paid as a % of base salary.


 


*  Net income growth % is the % increase in Net
Income as compared to the prior Fiscal Year.
# C_2013225EN.01003102.xml

| 3.8.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 225/31 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

3.8.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 225/31

---

Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 6 June 2013 — Chafiq Ayadi v European Commission, Council of the European Union

(Case C-183/12 P) (1)

1

(Appeal - Common foreign and security policy (CFSP) - Restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities associated with Usama bin Laden, the Al-Qaida network and the Taliban - Regulation (EC) No 881/2002 - Action for annulment - Removal of the interested party from the list of persons and entities concerned - Interest in bringing proceedings)

2013/C 225/52

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Appellant: Chafiq Ayadi (represented by: P. Moser QC and E. Grieves, Barrister, instructed by H. Miller, Solicitor)

Appellant:

Other parties to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: M. Konstantinidis, T. Scharf and E. Paasivirta, Agents), Council of the European Union (represented by: E. Finnegan and G. Étienne, Agents)

Other parties to the proceedings:

Intervener in support of the Commission: Ireland (represented by: E. Creedon, Agent, E. Regan SC and N. Travers BL)

Intervener in support of the Commission:

Re:

Re:

Appeal against the order of the General Court (Second Chamber) of 31 January 2012 in Case T-527/09 Chafiq Ayadi v European Commission, by which the General Court held that there was no longer any need to adjudicate on an action seeking the annulment in part of Commission Regulation (EC) No 954/2009 of 13 October 2009 amending for the 114th time Council Regulation (EC) No 881/2002 imposing certain specific restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities associated with Usama bin Laden, the Al-Qaida network and the Taliban (OJ 2009 L 269, p. 20) — Removal of the interested party from the list of persons and entities concerned

Chafiq Ayadi

European Commission

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Sets aside the order of the General Court of the European Union of 31 January 2012 in Case T-527/09 Ayadi v Commission in so far as the order decides that there is no longer any need to adjudicate on the action for annulment brought before the General Court by Mr Chafiq Ayadi; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Sets aside the order of the General Court of the European Union of 31 January 2012 in Case T-527/09 Ayadi v Commission in so far as the order decides that there is no longer any need to adjudicate on the action for annulment brought before the General Court by Mr Chafiq Ayadi;

| 2. | Refers the case back to the General Court of the European Union for it to rule again on Mr Chafiq Ayadi’s action for annulment; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Refers the case back to the General Court of the European Union for it to rule again on Mr Chafiq Ayadi’s action for annulment;

| 3. | Reserves the costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Reserves the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 194, 30.6.2012.

1

---
#### § 308.406 Issuance of policies; terms and conditions.

Upon acceptance of an application, a policy in the form specified in § 308.409 will be issued with endorsements MA-283(A) and MA-283(D), or MA-283(B) and MA-283(D), or MA-283(C), and MA-283(D), as appropriate.
§ 25.45-2 Cooking systems on vessels carrying passengers for hire. ( a ) No fuel may be used in any cooking system on any vessel carrying passengers for hire without the approval of Commandant (CG-ENG) except those listed in § 25.45-1, subject to the requirements stated therein, and liquefied petroleum gas (LPG), or compressed natural gas (CNG).
( b ) Cooking systems using LPG or CNG must meet the following requirements: ( 1 ) The design, installation, and testing of each LPG system must meet ABYC A-1-78 or chapter 6 of NFPA 302.
( 2 ) The design, installation, and testing of each CNG system must meet ABYC A-22-78 or chapter 6 of NFPA 302.
( 3 ) Cooking systems using chapter 6 of NFPA 302 as the standard must meet the following additional requirements: ( i ) The storage or use of CNG containers within the accommodation area, machinery spaces, bilges, or other enclosed spaces is prohibited.
( ii ) LPG or CNG must be odorized in accordance with ABYC A-1.5.d or A-22.5.b, respectively.
( iii ) The marking and mounting of LPG cylinders must be in accordance with ABYC A-1.6.b.
( iv ) LPG cylinders must be of the vapor withdrawal type as specified in ABYC A-1.5.b.
( 4 ) Continuous pilot lights or automatic glow plugs are prohibited for an LPG or CNG installation using ABYC A-1 or A-22 as the standard.
( 5 ) CNG installations using ABYC A-22 as the standard must meet the following additional requirements: ( i ) The stowage or use of CNG containers within the accommodation area, machinery spaces, bilges, or other enclosed spaces is prohibited.
( ii ) The CNG cylinders, regulating equipment, and safety equipment must meet the installation, stowage, and testing requirements specified in paragraph 6-5.12 of NFPA 302.
( iii ) The use of stowage of stoves with attached CNG cylinders is prohibited as specified in paragraph 6-5.1 of NFPA 302.
( 6 ) If the fuel supply line of an LPG or CNG system enters an enclosed space on the vessel, a remote shut-off valve must be installed that can be operated from a position adjacent to the appliance. The valve must be located between the fuel tank and the point where the fuel supply line enters the enclosed portion of the vessel. A power operated valve installed to meet this requirement must be of a type that will fail closed.
( 7 ) The following variances from ABYC A-1.11.b(1) are allowed for CNG: ( i ) The storage locker or housing access opening need not be in the top.
( ii ) The locker or housing need not be above the waterline.
( 8 ) The following variances from NFPA 302 are allowed: ( i ) The storage locker or housing for CNG tank installations need not be above the waterline as required by paragraph 6-5.12.1.1(a).
( ii ) Ignition protection need not be provided as required by paragraph 6-5.4.
Note to § 25.45-2 :
The ABYC and NFPA standards referenced in this section require the posting of placards containing safety precautions for gas cooking systems.
[CGD 83-013, 54 FR 6402, Feb. 10, 1989, as amended by CGD 83-013, 55 FR 3960, Feb. 6, 1990; CGD 95-072, 60 FR 50461, Sept. 29, 1995; CGD 96-041, 61 FR 50726, Sept. 27, 1996; USCG-2000-7790, 65 FR 58458, Sept. 29, 2000; USCG-2009-0702, 74 FR 49225, Sept. 25, 2009]
§ 184.115 Applicability to existing vessels. ( a ) An existing vessel need not comply with §§ 184.402(c), 184.404, 184.410, and 184.602 unless the cognizant OCMI specifically requires compliance due to the route or service of the vessel.
( b ) An existing vessel need not comply with the requirements of § 184.610 until March 11, 2001, or 10 years after its keel was laid or the vessel was at a similar stage of construction, whichever is later.
( c ) An existing vessel need not comply with the requirements of § 184.710 until March 11, 1997.
----

*go to a larger version of Plate 8 (7.1MB)**go to metadata for this field activity, A-1-98-HW*

----

----

----

SusanA. Cochran

U.S. Department of the Interior,U.S.Geological Survey,Western RegionCoastal and Marine Geology
Exhibit 12.1  I, Martin Cotter, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, certify that:  1. I have reviewed this Annual Report on Form 20-F of Portrush Petroleum Corp.;  2. Based on my knowledge, this report does 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 Annual Report;  3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the company as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;  4. The companys other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the company and have: (a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the company, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared; (b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the companys disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and (c) Disclosed in this report any change in the companys internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the period covered by the Annual Report that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the companys internal control over financial reporting; and  5. The companys other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the companys auditors and the audit committee of the companys board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions): (a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the companys ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and (b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the companys internal control over financial reporting.   Date: June 29, 2006  /s/ Martin Cotter Martin Cotter, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer
§ 196.15-18 Loading doors. ( a ) The master of a vessel fitted with loading doors shall assure that all loading doors are closed watertight and secured during the entire voyage except that— ( 1 ) If a door cannot be opened or closed while the vessel is at a dock, it may be open while the vessel approaches and draws away from the dock, but only as far as necessary to enable the door to be immediately operated.
( 2 ) If needed to operate the vessel, or embark and disembark passengers when the vessel is at anchor in protected waters, loading doors may be open provided that the master determines that the safety of the vessel is not impaired.
( b ) For the purposes of this section, “loading doors” include all weathertight ramps, bow visors, and openings used to load personnel, equipment, cargo, and stores, in the collision bulkhead, the side shell, and the boundaries of enclosed superstructures that are continuous with the shell of the vessel.
( c ) The master shall enter into the log book the time and door location of every closing of the loading doors.
( d ) The master shall enter into the log book any opening of the doors in accordance with paragraph (a)(2) of this section setting forth the time of the opening of the doors and the circumstances warranting this action.
[CGD 89-037, 57 FR 41828, Sept. 11, 1992]
#### § 308.547 Application for return premium, Form MA-317.

An application for the return of premium must be filed in duplicate with the Underwriting Agent on Form MA-317, which may be obtained from MARAD's underwriting agent or MARAD.
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    EXHIBIT 21.1



                            HORSESHOE GAMING, L.L.C.
                         SUBSIDIARIES OF THE REGISTRANT
                             AS OF DECEMBER 31, 1998


SUBSIDIARY                                                STATE OF INCORPORATION

Horseshoe GP, Inc. (1)                                           Nevada
        New Gaming Capital Partnership (2)                       Nevada
           Horseshoe Entertainment L.P.                          Louisiana
              Bossier City Land Corporation (3)                  Louisiana
        Robinson Property Group, Limited Partnership             Mississippi
Horseshoe Ventures (4)                                           Nevada
Red Oak Insurance Company Ltd. (5)                               Barbados



(1)  100% owned by Horseshoe Gaming, L.L.C. and is the 1% General Partner of
     both New Gaming Capital Partnership and Robinson Property Group Limited
     Partnership.

(2)  New Gaming Capital Partnership is the 89% General Partner and a 2.92%
     Limited Partner of Horseshoe Entertainment L.P.

(3)  Bossier City Land Corporation is 100% owned by Horseshoe Entertainment.

(4)  Horseshoe Ventures is owned 50% by Horseshoe Gaming, L.L.C.

(5)  Red Oak Insurance Company Ltd is owned 100% by Horseshoe Gaming, L.L.C.
# C_2012258EN.01002001.xml

| 25.8.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 258/20 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.8.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 258/20

---

Judgment of the General Court of 12 July 2012 — Hand Held Products v OHIM — Orange Brand Services (DOLPHIN)

(Case T-361/11) (1)

1

(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community word mark DOLPHIN - Earlier Community word mark DOLPHIN - Opposition refused in part - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)

2012/C 258/36

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Hand Held Products, Inc. (Wilmington, Delaware, United States) (represented by: J. Güell Serra and M. Curell Aguilà, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented: initially by P. Bullock and R. Pethke and subsequently by P. Bullock and G. Schneider, Agents)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Orange Brand Services Ltd (Bristol, United Kingdom)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM:

Re:

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 6 April 2011 (Case R 1443/2010-1), concerning opposition proceedings between Hand Held Products, Inc. and Orange Brand Services Ltd.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Annuls the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) of 6 April 2011 (Case R 1443/2010-1) in so far as it rejected the opposition in respect of electrical and electronic accessories; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Annuls the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) of 6 April 2011 (Case R 1443/2010-1) in so far as it rejected the opposition in respect of electrical and electronic accessories;

| 2. | Dismisses the action as to the remainder; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

| 3. | Orders Hand Held Products, Inc. and OHIM each to bear their own costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders Hand Held Products, Inc. and OHIM each to bear their own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 269, 10.9.2011.

1

---