alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
SERVED: JANUARY 31, 2013 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS 

WASHINGTON, DC 

IN THE MATTER OF 

ADDISON JET MANAGEMENT, INC. 

FAA DOCKET No. [TO BE ASSIGNED] 

(Civil Penalty Case) 

FDMS No. F AA-2012-0205 

ORDER OF DISMISSAL 

!} FEB -- I P l: 30 

On April 6, 2012, the Federal Aviation Administration ("Complainant") filed a 

Complaint. On March 20, 2012, Respondent Addison Jet Management, Inc. ("Respondent") had 

requested a hearing. On January 30, 2013, Complainant moved to withdraw its Complaint and 

dismiss the case, citing settlement. 

14 C.F.R. § 13.215 states: "At any time before or during a hearing, an agency attorney 

may withdraw a complaint or party may withdraw a request for a hearing without the 

consent of the administrative law judge. If an agency attomey withdraws the complaint or 

a patiy withdraws the request for a hearing and the answer, the administrative law judge 

shall dismiss the proceedings under this subpart with prejudice." 

WHEREFORE, the within filed Withdrawal of Complaint having been read and 

considered, it is ORDERED as follows: 
2 

1. Complainant's Withdrawal of Complaint be and is hereby granted; and 

2. This proceeding be and is hereby dismissed with prejudice. 

Richard C. Goodwin 

U.S. Administrative Law Judge 

Attachment - Service List 
SERVJ[CE LIST 

ORIGINAL& ONE COPY 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence A venue, S. W. 

Washington, DC 20591 

Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2W1000 1 

ONE COPY 

Gerald P. Shaw, Director of Operations 

Addison Jet Management, Inc., Respondent 

7515 Lemmon A venue 

Dallas, TX 75209 

Autumn Killingham, Complainant's Counsel 

Attorney, Enforcement Division, AGC-300 

Office of the Chief Counsel 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue, S.W. 

Washington, DC 20591 

TEL: 202-267-7728 

FAX: 202-267-5106 

The Honorable Richard C. Goodwin, Administrative Law Judge 

Office ofHearings, M-20 · 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

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

Washington, DC 20590 

TEL: 202-366-2139 Attorney-Advisor 

202-366-5121 Staff Assistant 

FAX: 202-366-7536 

FDMS No. FAA-2012-0205 

(Civil Penalty Action) 

1 Service was by U.S. Mail. For service in person or by expedited courier, use the following address: Federal 

Aviation Administration, 600 Independence Avenue, S.W., Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2WIOOO, Washington, 

DC 20591, Attention: Hearing Docket Cleric,AGC-430. 

-2-
#### B. F. Wade v. The State.

No. 1952.

Decided March 7, 1900.

1. Recognizance on Appeal.

A recognizance on appeal from a misdemeanor conviction, to be sufficient must allege that appellant has been convicted of the misdemeanor. Code Crim. Proc., art. 887.

*2.*Same.

A recognizance on appeal must state the same offense as it is alleged in the indictment or information.

3. Same—Selling Intoxicating Liquor on Election Day.

A recognizance on appeal from a conviction for selling intoxicating liquor on election day must allege that the sale was “at or near” the polling place where the election was held. -

Appeal from the County' Court of Holán. Tried below before Hon. John H. Cochran, County Judge.

Appeal from a conviction of selling liquor on an election day; penalty, a fine of $100..

Ho statement necessary.

*Ragland & Durham,*for appellant.

*RoVt A. John,*Assistant Attorney-General, for the State.'

*581BBOOKS, Judge.

Appellant was convicted of selling intoxicating liquor on an election day, and his punishment assessed at a fine of $100. The Assistant Attorney-General has filed a motion to dismiss this appeal, setting up the following reasons, to wit: “(1) The recognizance does not set forth that appellant has been convicted of a misdemeanor as required by article 887, Code of Criminal Procedure (Acts 1897, page '5). (2) The offense described in said recognizance is as follows: TJulawfully informing another of the whereabouts of spirituous, vinous, malt, and intoxicating liquors on an election day, and in a town where an election was then and there being held by lawful authority/ there being no such offense known to the law as is above attempted to be described. (3) The offense alleged in the indictment is at variance to the purported offense described in the recognizance, in this: that the indictment charges defendant with unlawfully informing one John Bryan of the whereabouts of intoxicating liquor on the inhibited day, ‘at and near the polling place/ as required by article 185 of the Penal Code. (4) The gravamen of the offense,charged in the indictment and defined by the Penal Code in said article,is that the location of said liquors disclosed must be ‘at or near’ the polling place where said election is held. (5) That said offense is not eo nomine an offense against the laws of this State.” We have examined the recognizance, and think the motion of the Assistant Attorney-General is well taken, and the appeal is accordingly dismissed.

*Appeal dismissed.*

Davidson, Presiding Judge, absent.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA WESTERN DISTRICT COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, Respondent

v. DAVID LYNN HEFLIN, Petitioner : : : : : : : : : : : No. 491 WAL 2014 Petition for Allowance of Appeal from the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER PER CURIAM AND NOW , this 18th day of March, 2015, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is DENIED
.
From: Jim Flaherty

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: RIN 1210-AB44 Mandatory Birth Control

Date: Thursday, August 04, 2011 12:43:47 AM

To Whom it May Concern,

I object in the strongest of terms to mandating birth control with no co-pays under

the Affordable Care Act.

Birth control is already widely available to all women, subsidized largely by

taxpayers. Demanding that we further subsidize other people's birth control by

increasing our insurance premiums in these days when families are struggling just to

make ends meet is an outrage. 

The mandate violates my conscience and that of millions of Americans who oppose

birth control on moral and religious grounds. 

It is undisputed that one of the operations of contraceptives is to render the

endometrium hostile to implantation, so that if fertilization occurs, the newly

conceived child may be lost to an early abortion. I also strongly object to the

inclusion of free sterilization as well as abortifacient pills like ella, which can work

weeks after a person's biological beginning to cause an abortion.

And what of Catholic employers and others who oppose birth control, but are now

going to be forced to participate in these plans and/or offer it to their employees?

This flies in the face of the conscience protections that Americans have historically

enjoyed.

The conscience provisions attached to the rule are so narrowly crafted that they

would appear to force Catholic institutions to make free birth control and sterilization

available in health plans, or cease hiring and providing services to non-Catholics. 

It is incomprehensible that such a mandate is being forced upon the people of the

United States.

It is no secret that Planned Parenthood, the largest abortion chain in America, is

behind this mandate, and will reap huge financial benefits from it at a time when

citizens in the United States are working on both the state and federal levels to

defund the abortion giant. 

The majority of Americans are pro-life and we do not want our tax dollars and

insurance premiums supporting the nation's largest abortion chain.

It is imperative that you give credence to my personal objection along with those of

millions of other Americans who do not want to be forced to pay for and provide

medication, devices, and procedures that do not treat or prevent any disease or

illness, but distort and render inoperable a healthy reproductive system. This rule is

unjust, untenable, and un-American--and it should be stricken.

Sincerely,

Jim Flaherty
Monroeville, Pennsylvania
From: Laura Walker

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Thank you for supporting women"s reproductive health

Date: Tuesday, August 02, 2011 9:05:02 PM

Dear Kathleen Sebelius, Secretary of Health & Human Services,

I applaud the Department of Health & Human Services for requiring health insurers to cover the full

cost of contraception - without co-pays - beginning in August 2012.

For the first time that I am aware, women's reproductive health is now a legitimate health priority. Birth

control/contraception is a vital part of preventative care. Making contraception available, without the copay requirement, sets a powerful precedent and goes a long way to significantly reduce long-term

health care costs associated with unplanned and/or life-threatening pregnancies.

Thank you for prioritizing women's basic health care needs.

Sincerely,

Laura Walker

1574 NW Settlers Lane

Silverdale, Wa 98383
NUMBER 13-08-00079-CV

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

______________________________________________________________

AZTEC FINE HOMES, INC. AND 

OSCAR DURAN, Appellants,

v.

MARIA DE LURDES ALVAREZ, Appellee. 

_____________________________________________________________

On appeal from the 93rd District Court of Hidalgo County, Texas.

______________________________________________________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices Yañez, Rodriguez, and Vela

Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam

Appellants, Aztec Fine Homes, Inc. and Oscar Duran, perfected an appeal from a

judgment entered by the 93rd District Court of Hidalgo County, Texas, in cause number C834-07-B. Appellants have filed an amended unopposed motion to dismiss the appeal on
2

grounds that the parties have reached an agreement to settle and compromise their

differences. Appellants request that this Court dismiss the appeal.

The Court, having considered the documents on file and appellants’ amended

unopposed motion to dismiss the appeal, is of the opinion that the motion should be

granted. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.1(a). Appellants’ amended motion to dismiss is granted,

and the appeal is hereby DISMISSED. Costs will be taxed against appellants. See TEX.

R. APP. P. 42.1(d) ("Absent agreement of the parties, the court will tax costs against the

appellant."). Having dismissed the appeal at appellants’ request, no motion for rehearing

will be entertained, and our mandate will issue forthwith.

PER CURIAM

Memorandum Opinion delivered and 

filed this the 10th day of April, 2008.
Here's how you know
 **Official websites use .mil** .mil
 **Secure .mil websites use HTTPS** lock () https://


Skip to main content (Press Enter).
 Toggle navigation
            
            U.S. Central Command
                CENTCOM
        Search
                    Search CENTCOM:
                        Search
                Search CENTCOM:
                    Search
    Home

    ABOUT US
    
        COMMAND PRIORITIES

    LEADERSHIP

    COMPONENT COMMANDS

    HISTORY

    POSTURE STATEMENT

    CENTCOM AOR
    
        CENTCOM COALITION

    OPERATIONS AND EXERCISES
    
        USMTM

    CIVILIAN CASUALTY REPORT

    CONTACT
    
        OPERATIONAL CONTRACT SUPPORT

    COMMUNITY RELATIONS

    THEATRE MEDICAL CLEARANCE

    INNOVATION VENDOR PORTAL

    MILITARY MEMBER INNOVATION PORTAL

    MEDIA
    
        SOCIAL MEDIA

    NEWS ARTICLES

    PRESS RELEASES

    STATEMENTS

    IMAGERY

    VIDEOS

    TRANSCRIPTS

    VISITORS AND PERSONNEL
    
        FAMILY CENTER

    FAMILY READINESS

    CENTCOM WEBMAIL

    SOCIAL MEDIA SECURITY

    ACCOUNTABILITY

    EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS

    USCENTCOM UNCLASSIFIED REGULATIONS

    FOIA LIBRARY

    INNOVATION OASIS

    WELCOME GUIDE  Search
 Search
 All Images All ImagesCommunity RelationsOtherPreviousCommanders
 Upload Date Upload DatePhoto DateTitle
  Share
  
 Small () Medium () Full Size (2.87 MB)
 Photo Gallery
 About UsCommand PrioritiesLeadershipComponent
   CommandsHistoryPosture Statement
   Area of
   ResponsibilityCENTCOM Coalition
   Operations And
   ExercisesOperation Inherent
   ResolveResolute Support
   MediaSocial MediaNews ArticlesPress ReleasesVideo And Imagery
   Visitors And
   PersonnelFamily ReadinessCENTCOM WebmailSocial MediaSecurityAccountabilityEmergency
   Preparedness
   ContactCommunity Relations
                    Stay Connected
                
                Privacy & Security  Inspector General  FOIA  Privacy Act
            

Hosted by Defense Media Activity - WEB.mil
From: Constance Roberts

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Thank you for supporting birth control access for all women

Date: Wednesday, August 03, 2011 12:33:30 AM

Dear Kathleen Sebelius, Secretary of Health & Human Services,

I commend the Department of Health & Human Services' landmark decision requiring health insurers to

cover the full cost of contraception, with no co-pay, beginning in August 2012.

This policy places a much-needed importance on women's health that is too-often not a priority in

health care policy. Birth control is a critical part of preventive care, and making contraception available

to all women, regardless of their insurance or ability to pay for it, will significantly reduce long-term

health care costs associated with unplanned pregnancies.

Thank you for prioritizing women's basic health care needs.

Sincerely,

Constance Roberts

319 Smugglers Cv

Camarillo, CA 93012
```

[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 62 (Friday, March 30, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 19408]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-7656]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Dynamic Mobility Applications and Data Capture Management 
Programs; Notice of Public Meeting

AGENCY: ITS Joint Program Office, Research and Innovative Technology 
Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation.

ACTION: Notice.

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

    The U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT) Intelligent 
Transportation System Joint Program Office (ITS JPO) will host a free 
public meeting to provide stakeholders an update on the Data Capture 
and Management (DCM) and Dynamic Mobility Applications (DMA) programs 
in the Washington DC area. The public meeting will take place following 
the conclusion of the ITS America Annual Meeting on May 24, 2012 at the 
Gaylord National Hotel and Convention Center, 201 Waterfront Street, 
National Harbor, Maryland 20745, (301) 965-2000. Persons planning to 
attend the workshop or participate in the Webinar should register 
online at www.itsa.org/dma no later than May 20, 2012.
    The workshop is intended to inform stakeholders on the progress, 
products, and plans of the two programs, and to seek input from 
stakeholders on the direction of the programs. The morning agenda is 
planned as an informational session (with concurrent webinar), while 
the afternoon features interactive breakout sessions on critical issues 
designed to garner stakeholder feedback.

About the Dynamic Mobility Application and Data Capture Management 
Programs

    The DMA program seeks to identify, develop, and deploy applications 
that leverage the full potential of connected vehicles, travelers and 
infrastructure to enhance current operational practices and transform 
future surface transportation systems management. The DCM is the 
creation and expansion of access to high-quality, real-time and 
archived, multi-modal transportation data that is captured from 
connected vehicles (automobiles, buses, trucks, fleets), mobile 
devices, and infrastructure. To learn more about the ITS JPO or the 
connected vehicle program, please visit www.its.dot.gov.
    If you have any questions or you need any special accommodations, 
please send an email to Adam Hopps at Ahopps@itsa.org.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on the 23rd day of March 2012.
John Augustine,
Managing Director, ITS Joint Program Office.
[FR Doc. 2012-7656 Filed 3-29-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-HY-P
```
### Court of Appeals, S ta te o f Michi ga n OR D E R In re A E G raha m , Minor Docket No. 332240 

### LC No . 1-t
- 516109
- NA Cynthia Diane Stephens Presiding Judge I l cnry William Saad Patrick M. Meter

Judges T he Court o rde rs that the Ocrobe r 10. 20 1 6 op ini o n is hereby AMENDED to correct a cler ical erro r. T he opinio n is corrected to read November 10 , 20 1 6 as the date 

### o f t he opinio n. In all other respects , the opinion remain s unch anged.

A true copy entered a nd ce rtified by J e rome W. Z im mer Jr . • Chief Cle rk , on 

# NOV 16 201 6 Date

# ~ 

# a _**h~-5.-**
```

[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 174 (Monday, September 9, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 54968-54969]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-21835]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Defense Acquisition Regulations System

48 CFR Parts 201 and 206

Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement; Technical 
Amendments

AGENCY: Defense Acquisition Regulations System, Department of Defense 
(DoD).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: DoD is making technical amendments to the Defense Federal 
Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS) to provide needed editorial 
changes.

DATES: Effective Date: September 9, 2013.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Manuel Quinones, Defense 
Acquisition Regulations System, OUSD (AT&L)DPAP (DARS), Room 3B855, 
3060 Defense Pentagon, Washington, DC 20301-3060. Telephone 571-372-
6088; facsimile 571-372-6094.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This final rule amends the DFARS as follows:
    1. Corrects at 201.170(b) the email address for the submission of 
the rolling annual forecast of acquisitions that will be subject to DoD 
peer review.
    2. Revises the section heading at 206.302-3 for consistency with 
the FAR.

List of Subjects in 48 CFR Parts 201 and 206

    Government procurement.

Manuel Quinones,
Editor, Defense Acquisition Regulations System.

    Therefore, 48 CFR parts 201 and 206 are amended as follows:

0
1. The authority citation for 48 CFR parts 201 and 206 continues to 
read as follows:

    Authority: 41 U.S.C. 1303 and 48 CFR chapter 1.

PART 201--CONTRACTOR QUALIFICATIONS

201.170   [Amended]

0
2. Section 201.170 paragraph (a)(2) is amended by removing 
``peerreviews@osd.mil'' and adding

[[Page 54969]]

``osd.pentagon.ousd-atl.mbx.peer-reviews@mail'' in its place.

PART 206--COMPETITION REQUIREMENTS

0
3. Revise the section heading of 203.302-3 to read as follows:

206.302-3   Industrial mobilization, engineering, developmental, or 
research capability, or expert services.

[FR Doc. 2013-21835 Filed 9-6-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001-06-P
```
From: mtraley [mailto:mtraley@yahoo.com] 

Sent: Tuesday, March 02, 2010 1:24 PM 

To: EBSA, E-ORI - EBSA 

Subject: Lifetime Income RFI

Lifetime Income RFI: 

Background: I am aged 76. Formerly I sold annuities. I have purchased annuities. 

1. Advantages and disadvantages of distributing benefits as a lifetime income stream: 

The major and overriding disadvantage is the impact of inflation on a fixed income over time. 

Inflation seems to be a desirable goal of government. The adjustments necessary to compensate 

for unknown inflation are, perhaps, more daunting than the actuarial arts can overcome. 

The lifetime income stream is good but the declining value is not good. An option available to a 

participant might be to be able to begin the income at a lower level without full “annuitization” 

with the provision that the stream could be increased in increments, not to exceed the amount 

required to “annuitize” the stream from the date of increase. 

An additional disadvantage of the lifetime income is that the entity providing the income may 

collapse and the income would cease. Security must be available. 

2. Information participants need to make informed decisions: the participant needs to understand the 

safety of the income stream as opposed to the risks of investing in the hope of increasing the 

principal sum. The participant also needs to project how long the income will continue if there is 

no annuity stream but, instead, income based upon various types of investment. A topic frequently 

not fully understood is that the principal sum no longer exists when the annuity income stream has 

begun. For some, the annuity stream is not an option they can get their minds around. 

3. If there is to be any hope that participants will act with accurate information and understanding, 

disclosure of account balances and income streams must take place. 

4. The marketplace evolves; the annuity principle does not. Some products are marketed which do 

not involve adequate prudence; they are enticing; they promise more but the certainty that their 

promises will be met is weak. It’s a concern that the financial industry seeks to add the annuity 

option as “an additional arrow in the quiver” of a 401(k) participant. But it’s only a concern 

because of the injudicious behavior exhibited by some in that industry. The participant in a 401(k) 

must not be put at risk when it comes to the acceptance of annuities. Only annuity streams that 

can be faithfully maintained can be permitted as options.

Regards, 

William C. Morley
From: Maria Alisa Santiago

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Thank you for supporting birth control access for all women

Date: Wednesday, August 03, 2011 8:46:12 PM

Dear Kathleen Sebelius, Secretary of Health & Human Services,

I commend the Department of Health & Human Services' landmark decision requiring health insurers to

cover the full cost of contraception, with no co-pay, beginning in August 2012.

This policy places a much-needed importance on women's health that is too-often not a priority in

health care policy. Birth control is a critical part of preventive care, and making contraception available

to all women, regardless of their insurance or ability to pay for it, will significantly reduce long-term

health care costs associated with unplanned pregnancies.

Thank you for prioritizing women's basic health care needs.

Sincerely,

Maria Alisa Santiago

66 Railroad St

Amherst, MA 01002