alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
In the matter of 

RECE\VED 

BEFORE THE APR 0 8 2015 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION . ·. T 

oFFicE oF HEARINGs HEARING oocKE. 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 

Docket No. F AA-2013-0291 

FAA Case No. 2011 S0290032 

AIRBORNE MAINTENANCE AND 

ENGINEERING SERVICES 

Respondent 

NOTICE OF APPEAL 

Administrative Law Judge 

J .E. Sullivan 

On April 1, 2015, the Honorable J .E. Sullivan served in the above-captioned case 

an Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part the FAA's Motion for Summary Judgment 

(the "April!, 2015 Order"). Pursuant to 14 C.F.R. § 13.233, Respondent Airborne 

Maintenance and Engineering Services ("AMES") hereby files with the FAA 

Decisionmaker this Notice of Appeal ofthe April!, 2015 Order. 

Also in connection with this matter, Judge Sullivan served on March 30, 2015 an 

Order Denying the AMES Motion for Summary Judgment (the "March 30, 2015 Order"). 

By a separate notice of appeal, AMES is seeking review of the March 30, 2015 Order. 

As the Judge's Orders arise out of the same proceeding, AMES requests that the appeals 

be consolidated for consideration by the FAA Decisionmaker. 
Dated: April 7, 2015 

Respectfully submitted, 

SILVERBERG GOLDMAN, L.L.P. 

Attorneys for 

AIRBORNE MAINTENANCE AND 

EN~NG SE)VICES 

By: L ~r I~~ 1:, 

Robert P. Silverberg, Esq. 

1101 301

h Street, N.W. 

Suite 300 

Washington, D.C. 20007 

Tel: (202) 944-3304 

Fax: (202) 944-3306 

Email: rsilverberg@sgbdc.com 

2 
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I hereby certify that on this 7th day of April 2015, I caused a true copy of the foregoing 

Respondent's Notice of Appeal to be served upon the following: 

Federal Aviation Administration 

600 Independence Avenue, S.W. 

Wilbur Wright Building 

Suite 2Wl000 

Washington, D.C. 20591 

(Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430) 

Tel: (202) 267-0377 

(original and one copy by FedEx) 

The Ron. J.E. Sullivan 

Administrative Law Judge 

Office of Hearings, M-20 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. (El1-310) 

Washington, D.C. 20590 

Fax: (202) 366-7536 

(one copy by First Class Mail and facsimile) 

Christopher R. Stevenson, Attorney 

Federal Aviation Administration 

Office of the Regional Counsel, AS0-7 

Southern Region 

P.O. Box 20636 

Atlanta, Georgia 30320 

Fax: ( 404) 305-5223 

(one copy by First Class Mail and e-mail) 

7h-' lJ'.:4:'-'1 

Robert P. Silverberg
###### Editorial Note on Part 173

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 173 appear at 70 FR 56098, Sept. 23, 2005.

#### § 173.413 Requirements for Type B packages.

Except as provided in § 173.416, each Type B(U) or Type B(M) package must be designed and constructed to meet the applicable requirements specified in 10 CFR part 71.
I

104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 2359

To clarify the method of execution of Federal prisoners.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

SEPTEMBER 19, 1995

Mr. MCCOLLUM introduced the following bill; which was referred to the

Committee on the Judiciary

A BILL

To clarify the method of execution of Federal prisoners.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. IMPLEMENTATION OF SENTENCE OF DEATH.

4 Subsection (a) of section 3596 of title 18, United

5 States Code, is amended to read as follows:

6 ‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—A person who is sentenced to

7 death shall be committed to the custody of the Attorney

8 General. At the time the sentence is to be carried out,

9 it shall be implemented pursuant to regulations prescribed

10 by the Attorney General.’’.
2

•HR 2359 IH

1 SEC. 2. USE OF FEDERAL FACILITIES.

2 Subsection (a) of section 3597 of title 18, United

3 States Code, is amended to read as follows:

4 ‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—A United States marshal

5 charged with supervising the implementation of a sentence

6 of death shall use the appropriate Federal facilities for

7 this purpose.’’.

Æ
Exhibit 35.1


COMPLIANCE STATEMENT


OF


OHIO EDISON COMPANY, AS SERVICER


The undersigned hereby certifies that he is the duly elected and acting Vice President and Treasurer of Ohio Edison Company, as servicer (the “ Servicer ”) under the Phase-In-Recovery Property Servicing Agreement, dated as of June 20, 2013 (the “ Servicing Agreement ”), between the Servicer and OE Funding LLC, as Bond Issuer, and further certifies on behalf of the Servicer that:


1. A review of the activities of the Servicer and of its performance under the Servicing Agreement during the period that commenced January 1, 2021 and ended December 31, 2021 has been made under the supervision of the undersigned pursuant to Section 3.03 of the Servicing Agreement; and


2. To the best of the undersigned’s knowledge, based on such review, the Servicer has fulfilled all of its obligations in all material respects under the Servicing Agreement throughout the period that commenced January 1, 2021 and ended December 31, 2021.


Executed as of this 25th day of March 2022.





OHIO EDISON COMPANYBy:/s/ Steven R. StaubName:Steven R. StaubTitle:Vice President and Treasurer
-----Original Message----- 

From: jcsdsm@sbcglobal.net [mailto:jcsdsm@sbcglobal.net] 

Sent: Monday, April 26, 2010 4:19 PM 

To: EBSA, E-OHPSCA - EBSA 

Subject: Comment in support of RIN 1210-AB30 

April 26, 2010 

I am writing to support the interim final rule under the Paul Wellstone 

and Pete Domenici Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act of 2008 

(RIN 1210-AB30). 

I support the strong rule that would forbid insurance companies from 

charging higher copayments, deductibles, and other out-of-pocket 

expenses for mental health treatment than they would for other physical 

health care. Thank you for ensuring that mental health care and 

physical health care coverage are included in a single deductible. 

Sincerely, 

Jackie Smith 

1016 E Green Tree Ct 

Appleton, WI 54915
Docket: EBSA-2009-0010 

The Paul Wellstone and Pete Domenici Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act of 2008 

Comment On: EBSA-2009-0010-0409 

Interim Final Rules Under the Paul Wellstone and Pete Domenici Mental Health Parity and 

Addiction Equity Act of 2008 

Document: EBSA-2009-0010-DRAFT-0710 

Comment on FR Doc # 2010-2167 

Submitter Information 

Name: Thomas Stennis Bearden 

Address: 

101 Aupuni St. Suite 1014 A-2 

hILO, 96720 

Phone: 808-935-2605 

Organization: Bearden Psychological Services, LLC 

General Comment 

. The interim final rules do not define clearly enough the rules regulating the comprehensive 

scope of services parity between mental health/substance abuse (MH/SA) services and 

medical/surgical services. Given the language of the Act and the positions already taken by the 

Departments in the interim final regulations, I request that the Final Rules clarify that benefits for 

MH/SUD must be comparable in scope to the benefits provided in medical/surgical care both 

across and within each classification. Unless parity in scope of services is required in the final 

regulations, the intent of the Act will not be achieved. 

2. In order to implement the intent of the Act, the regulations must specify more clearly that any 

treatment limitations (based on scientific review criteria) that are applied by plans must be 

comparable for MH/SUD and medical surgical benefits, and that scientific review criteria 

employed for MH/SUD services must be no more restrictive than those that are predominant 

across the broad range of medical/surgical benefits. 

PUBLIC SUBMISSION

As of: May 04, 2010 

Received: May 03, 2010 

Status: DoNotPost 

Tracking No. 80ae5c64 

Comments Due: May 03, 2010

Submission Type: Web

Page 1 of 1

https://fdms.erulemaking.net/fdms-web-agency/component/submitterInfoCoverPage?Call=P... 5/4/2010
#### HELEN A. ELLIOTT, Respondent, *v.*ANN BARRY, Appellant.

*■Gwil damage act*— *a wife who aids the husband, to procure liquor and consents to his intoxication cannot recover for damages thereby occasioned to her.*

Appeal from a judgment in favor of the plaintiff, enteréd upon a verdict of the Steuben County Court, and from an order denying a motion for a new trial made upon the minutes of the judge before whom the action was tried.

This action was brought under the civil damage act to recover damages which the plaintiff claims to have sustained in her means of support by reason of the sale of intoxicating liquors to her husband by the defendant. The sale is alleged to have taken place in the Globe Hotel in the village of Corning.

. It is contended on the part of the defendant that she is not the person that was engaged in keeping the hotel or in the sale of strong and spirituous liquors therein, and that the- verdict of the jury finding that she was the person is not warranted by the evidence.

The General Term, after holding that the' court had erred in a portion of its charge, said: *“*Again, the defendant requested the court to charge the jury that if the plaintiff contributed to the intoxication of her husband by consenting to the use by him of intoxicating liquor, and aiding him in procuring it or furnishing it to him, the plaintiff is not entitled to recover for injuries sustained by her in her means of support by and in consequence of such intoxication. This the court refused to charge, and the defendant by her counsel *130excepted. This, we are also of the opinion, was error. Evidence was given on the part of the defense tending to show that the plaintiff had on different occasions purchased beer and other liquors for and in company with her husband. It is true that this was controverted by the plaintiff, but it became a question of fact for the jury and it can hardly be claimed that the plaintiff would be entitled to recover damages for the intoxication of her husband produced from liquor which she herself had procured and furnished to him.

“We are of the opinion that the judgment and order should be reversed and a new trial ordered in the Steuben County Court, and that the costs should abide the event.”

*A. S.*Kendall, for the appellant.

*Francis A.*Williams, for the respondent.

Opinion by

Haight, J.;

Smith, P. J., and Barker, J., concurred; Bradley, 1., not sitting.

J udgment and order reversed and new trial ordered in the Steuben County Court, costs to abide the event.
E XHIBIT 31.1


CERTIFICATE PURSUANT TO RULE 13A-14(A)


UNDER THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934


I, Jeffry M. Householder, certify that:


1. I have reviewed this Amendment to the annual report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2022 of Chesapeake Utilities Corporation;


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 report;


Date: October 23, 2023








/S/ JEFFRYM. HOUSEHOLDERJeffry M. HouseholderPresident and Chief Executive Officer
#### In the Matter of the Accounting of William Simpson, and In the Matter of Walter Stevenson.

Order modified as directed in opinion. Opinion by

Brady, J.
#### § 234.235 Insulated rail joints.

Each insulated rail joint used to separate train detection circuits of a highway-rail grade crossing shall be maintained to prevent current from flowing between rails separated by the insulation in an amount sufficient to cause a failure of the train detection circuit.
§ 232.13 Preemptive effect. ( a ) Under 49 U.S.C. 20106, issuance of the regulations in this part preempts any State law, rule, regulation, order or standard covering the same subject matter, except for a provision necessary to eliminate or reduce a local safety hazard if that provision is not incompatible with this part and does not impose an undue burden on interstate commerce. Nothing in this paragraph shall be construed to preempt an action under State law seeking damages for personal injury, death, or property damage alleging that a party has failed to comply with the Federal standard of care established by this part, has failed to comply with its own plan, rule, or standard that it created pursuant to this part, or has failed to comply with a State law, regulation, or order that is not incompatible with the first sentence of this paragraph.
( b ) Preemption should also be considered pursuant to the Locomotive Boiler Inspection Act (now codified at 49 U.S.C. 20701-20703), the Safety Appliance Acts (now codified at 49 U.S.C. 20301-20304), and the Commerce Clause based on the relevant case law pertaining to preemption under those provisions.
( c ) FRA does not intend by issuance of the regulations in this part to preempt provisions of State criminal law that impose sanctions for reckless conduct that leads to actual loss of life, injury, or damage to property, whether such provisions apply specifically to railroad employees or generally to the public at large.
[66 FR 4193, Jan. 17, 2001, as amended at 73 FR 61552, Oct. 16, 2008]
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 165 (Monday, August 27, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Page 48995]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 07-4171]


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

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Department of the Air Force

[No. USAF-2007-0024]


Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request

ACTION: Notice.

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

    The Department of Defense has submitted to OMB for clearance, the 
following proposal for collection of information under the provisions 
of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35).

DATES: Consideration will be given to all comments received by 
September 26, 2007.
    Title, Form and OMB Number: United States Air Force Academy School 
Official's Evaluation of Candidate; United States Air Force Form 145; 
OMB Control Number 0701-0152.
    Type of Request: Extension.
    Number of Respondents: 4,100.
    Responses Per Respondent: 1.
    Annual Responses: 4,100.
    Average Burden Per Response: 45 minutes.
    Annual Burden Hours: 3,075.
    Needs and Uses: The information collection requirement is necessary 
to obtain data on candidate's background and aptitude in determining 
eligibility and selection to the Air Force Academy.
    Affected Public: Individuals or households.
    Frequency: On Occasion.
    Respondent's Obligation: Required to obtain or retain benefits.
    OMB Desk Officer: Ms. Hillary Jaffe.
    Written comments and recommendations on the proposed information 
collection should be sent to Ms. Jaffe at the Office of Management and 
Budget, Desk Officer for DoD, Room 10236, New Executive Office 
Building, Washington, DC 20503.
    You may also submit comments, identified by docket number and 
title, by the following method:
    <bullet> Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. 
Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
    Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency 
name, docket number and title for this Federal Register document. The 
general policy for comments and other submissions from members of the 
public is to make these submissions available for public viewing on the 
Internet at http://www.regulations.gov as they are received without 
change, including any personal identifiers or contact information.
    DoD Clearance Officer: Ms. Patricia Toppings.
    Written requests for copies of the information collection proposal 
should be sent to Ms. Toppings at WHS/ESD/Information Management 
Division, 1777 North Kent Street, RPN, Suite 11000, Arlington, VA 
22209-2133.

    Dated: August 21, 2007.
Patricia L. Toppings,
Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
[FR Doc. 07-4171 Filed 8-24-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001-06-M
```

[Journal of the House of Representatives, 1995]
[Thursday, May 25, 1995 (73), Para 73.9 Providing for the Further Consideration of H.R. 1561]
[Page 817]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]

para.73.9  providing for the further consideration of h.r. 1561

  Mr. GOSS, by direction of the Committee on Rules, reported (Rept. No. 
104-130) the resolution (H. Res. 156) providing for the further 
consideration of the bill (H.R. 1561) to consolidate the foreign affairs 
agencies of the United States; to authorize appropriations for the 
Department of State and related agencies for fiscal years 1996 and 1997; 
to responsibly reduce the authorizations of appropriations for United 
States foreign assistance programs for fiscal years 1996 and 1997, and 
for other purposes.
  When said resolution and report were referred to the House Calendar 
and ordered printed.
```
**Exhibit 31.1**
**CEO CERTIFICATION**
I, W. Douglas Parker, certify that:
1.  I have reviewed this Amendment No. 1 to Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q/A of America WestHoldings Corporation; 2.  Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report; 3.  Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisreport; 4.  The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:
 (a)  Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controlsand procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material informationrelating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us byothers within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is beingprepared;  (b)  [intentionally omitted]  (c)  Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controlsand procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and  (d)  Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (theregistrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal controlover financial reporting; and
5.  The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and theaudit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions):
 (a)  All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affectthe registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information;and  (b)  Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees whohave a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.   Date: April 25, 2005 /s/ W. Douglas Parker      W. Douglas Parker Chief Executive Officer
§ 232.700 Applicability. ( a ) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, this subpart applies to standard gage railroads.
( b ) This subpart does not apply to: ( 1 ) A railroad that operates only on track inside an installation which is not part of the general railroad system of transportation; or
( 2 ) Rapid transit operations in an urban area that are not connected with the general railroad system of transportation.
( c ) As used in this subpart, carrier means “railroad,” as that term is defined by 49 CFR 232.5
```

[Journal of the House of Representatives, 1995]
[Monday, September 18, 1995 (116), Para 116.28 Leave of Absence]
[Page 1373]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]

para.116.28  leave of absence

  By unanimous consent, leave of absence was granted to Mr. SISISKY, for 
today and the balance of the week.
  And then,
```
-----Original Message----- 

From: Dnaforest09@gmx.com [mailto:Dnaforest09@gmx.com] 

Sent: Tuesday, April 27, 2010 11:13 AM 

To: EBSA, E-OHPSCA - EBSA 

Subject: Comment in support of RIN 1210-AB30 

April 27, 2010 

I am writing to support the interim final rule under the Paul Wellstone 

and Pete Domenici Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act of 2008 

(RIN 1210-AB30). 

I support the strong rule that would forbid insurance companies from 

charging higher copayments, deductibles, and other out-of-pocket 

expenses for mental health treatment than they would for other physical 

health care. Thank you for ensuring that mental health care and 

physical health care coverage are included in a single deductible. 

Sincerely, 

Donna Goebeler 

440 bates Rd. 

Frankfort, KY 40601
[Coös,

December, 1881.]

#### Cole *v.*Smith *& a.*

*Ladd Fletcher,*for the defendants.

*W. 8f E. Eeyivood,*for the plaintiff.

Foreig-n Attachment. The writ was not served on the trustee ; the plaintiff was allowed to amend by striking out the trustee clause of the writ, and the defendants excepted.

*Exception overruled.*

Allen, J., did not sit: the others concurred.