alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
SERVED: SEPTEMBER 10,2014 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

. OFFICE OF HEARINGS 

WASHINGTON, DC 

IN THE MATTER OF 

LEARJET INC. 

DOCKET NO. FAA 2014-0113 

(Civil Penalty Action). 

AMENDED PROCEDURAL ORDER 

Learjet, Inc., (hereinafter "Learjet") has requested an extension of discovery 

deadlines. Realistically, the court does not anticipate reaching this case prior to 2015. 

Accordingly, paragraphs #2 and #3 of the Procedural Order are amended as 

follows: 

WHEREFORE, the parties be and are hereby ORDERED to adhere to the 

following procedural schedule: 

1. On or before January 9, 2015, the parties shall conclude all discovery 

including, but not limited to, depositions, document production, responses 

to production requests and/or interrogatories. If the parties cannot resolve 

a discovery dispute they shall submit the dispute to the undersigned for 

resolution in a timely manner; 

2. The parties shall be prepared to present this case at a hearing on or after 

January 9, 2015, subject to the availability of courtroom facilities. The 

specific date and time for the hearing will be forthcoming in a separate 

Order. 

Richard C. Goodwin 

U.S. Administrative Law Judge 

Attachment - Service List 

1 
SERVICE LIST- BY U.S. MAIL 

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 2Wl 0001 

ONE COPY 

Mr. Ralph Acs, Vice President & General Manager 

Learjet, Inc., Respondent 

P.O. Box 7707 

Wichita, KS 67277-7707 

TEL: NOT PROVIDED 

FAX: NOT PROVIDED 

Brenda R. Mesker, 

Director of Legal Services . 

Learjet, Inc. 

One Learjet Way 

Wichita, KS 67209 

TEL: NOT PROVIDED 

FAX: NOT PROVIDED 

Kenneth P. Quinn, Esquire, Respondent's Counsel 

Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman 

2300 N Street, NW 

Washington, DC 2003 7-1122 

TEL: 202-663-8000 

FAX: 202-663-8007 

David Kessler, Complainant's Counsel 

Federal Aviation Administration 

901 Locust, Room 506 

Kansas City, MO 64106-2641 

TEL: 816-329-3763 

FAX: 816-329-3771 

Docket No. FAA-2014-0113 

(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 2W1000, Washington, 

DC 20591; Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430. 

2 
The Honorable Richard C. Goodwin, Administrative Law Judge 

Office ofHearings, M-20 

U.S. Department ofTr~msportation 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. (E11-310) 

Washington, DC 20590 

TEL: 202-3 66-5121 Staff Assistant 

FAX: 202-366-7536 

3
From: shopptodrop@gmail.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: health mandate

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 3:59:41 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing today to ask in the strongest way possible that you rescind the unjust and coercive

mandate that all "contraceptives" and sterilization procedures be covered by private health insurance

with no co-pay to patients. If you do not reverse course I ask you to expand conscience protections for

any organizations that provide individual and group insurance and have moral or religious objections. I

strongly oppose the government forcing free insurance coverage on Americans especially for drugs and

devices that I oppose because some of these can cause an abortion (such as ella and Plan B).

I also ask you to reconsider your definition of religious employer and offer an authentic conscience

protection for any organization and business that has moral or religious objection to providing such

insurance to their employees. This legal mandate clearly violates the spirit of conscience laws which

prohibit government discrimination against those who object to various health services on moral or

religious grounds. The definition of "religious employer" in the regulation is so narrow as to only include

churches, but will still mean that a host of businesses and organizations that have conscience objections

will be required to choose between either violating their conscience or not being able to offer employees

health insurance.

Please protect the conscience rights of insurers, providers and people like me who object to being

forced by the federal government to offer or subsidize contraceptives and sterilization services, especially

when some of these drugs can take the life of early unborn children. No Americans should be forced by

the federal government to essentially subsidize services they object to. I again urge you in the strongest

way possible to reverse course and remove contraceptives and sterilizations from the list of mandatory

preventive services.

Sincerely,

Lu Meinke

Ruidoso, NM 88345
**Exhibit 32.2**

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 1350, CHAPTER 63 OF TITLE 18, UNITED STATES CODE,**

**AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

Pursuant to Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code,as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned, as Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer of GigOptix, Inc. (the “Company”), does hereby certify that to the undersigned’s knowledge:

*1)*the Company’s Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008 fully complies with the requirementsof Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and 

*2)*the information containedin the Company’s Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008 fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. 

 

Dated: March 31, 2009
From: jimaperez@comcast.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 2:33:45 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing today to ask in the strongest way possible that you rescind the unjust and coercive

mandate that all "contraceptives" and sterilization procedures be covered by private health insurance

with no co-pay to patients. If you do not reverse course I ask you to expand conscience protections for

any organizations that provide individual and group insurance and have moral or religious objections. I

strongly oppose the government forcing free insurance coverage on Americans especially for drugs and

devices that I oppose because some of these can cause an abortion (such as ella and Plan B).

I also ask you to reconsider your definition of religious employer and offer an authentic conscience

protection for any organization and business that has moral or religious objection to providing such

insurance to their employees. This legal mandate clearly violates the spirit of conscience laws which

prohibit government discrimination against those who object to various health services on moral or

religious grounds. The definition of "religious employer" in the regulation is so narrow as to only include

churches, but will still mean that a host of businesses and organizations that have conscience objections

will be required to choose between either violating their conscience or not being able to offer employees

health insurance.

Please protect the conscience rights of insurers, providers and people like me who object to being

forced by the federal government to offer or subsidize contraceptives and sterilization services, especially

when some of these drugs can take the life of early unborn children. No Americans should be forced by

the federal government to essentially subsidize services they object to. I again urge you in the strongest

way possible to reverse course and remove contraceptives and sterilizations from the list of mandatory

preventive services.

Sincerely,

Mariolga Franco

Corvallis, OR 97333
Case No. 8,784.

#### McFADDEN v. The ILLINOIS.

[N. Y. Times.

Sept. 19. 1857.]

Circuit Court, S. D. New York.

Sept. 18, 1857.

Collision — Wrrn Dock — Tow—Neglect to Mini> Helm.

• [Appeal from the district court of the United States for the Southern district of New York.]

The libel in this case was filed by the owner [William McFaddenl of the barge Davis Archer, to recover damages occasioned by the *85barge being run into a dock while in tow of the steamboat. The court below declared the steamboat free from fault, and dismissed the libel, from which decree the libelant appealed.

Mr. Cutting, for appellant.

Mr. Van Santvoord, for appellees.

NELSON, Circuit Justice.

We are inclined to agree with the court below that the proofs are as strong, if not stronger, that the injury to the tow happened through the neglect of the master of the barge in not attending to his helm in season, as to any improper management of the tug. We think there was nothing in that necessarily leading to the collision if the master of the tow had ported his helm in time. Decree of the court below affirmed.
From: djrieg@yahoo.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 3:56:42 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing today to ask in the strongest way possible that you rescind the unjust and coercive

mandate that all "contraceptives" and sterilization procedures be covered by private health insurance

with no co-pay to patients. If you do not reverse course I ask you to expand conscience protections for

any organizations that provide individual and group insurance and have moral or religious objections. I

strongly oppose the government forcing free insurance coverage on Americans especially for drugs and

devices that I oppose because some of these can cause an abortion (such as ella and Plan B).

I also ask you to reconsider your definition of religious employer and offer an authentic conscience

protection for any organization and business that has moral or religious objection to providing such

insurance to their employees. This legal mandate clearly violates the spirit of conscience laws which

prohibit government discrimination against those who object to various health services on moral or

religious grounds. The definition of "religious employer" in the regulation is so narrow as to only include

churches, but will still mean that a host of businesses and organizations that have conscience objections

will be required to choose between either violating their conscience or not being able to offer employees

health insurance.

Please protect the conscience rights of insurers, providers and people like me who object to being

forced by the federal government to offer or subsidize contraceptives and sterilization services, especially

when some of these drugs can take the life of early unborn children. No Americans should be forced by

the federal government to essentially subsidize services they object to. I again urge you in the strongest

way possible to reverse course and remove contraceptives and sterilizations from the list of mandatory

preventive services.

Sincerely,

Daniel Rieg

Sharps Chapel, TN 37866
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 01-11247 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus VICTOR SANDOVAL CONTRERAS, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 6:95-CR-12-5-C

-------------------- April 11, 2002 Before SMITH, DeMOSS, and PARKER, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Victor Sandoval Contreras has filed a motion for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief as required by Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Contreras has not filed a response. Our independent review of the brief and the record discloses no nonfrivolous issue in this direct appeal. Accordingly, the motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5 TH C IR . R. 42.2.
A Federal Advisory Committee for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s Office of Research and Development 

45th EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE FACE-TO-FACE MEETING 

DRAFT AGENDA

October 18 - 19, 2010 

Hilton Garden Inn 

815 14th Street NW 

Washington, DC 20005 

Monday, October 18, 2010

8:00 a.m. – 8:30 a.m. Registration 

8:30 a.m. – 8:45 a.m. Welcome and Introductions Dr. Gary S. Sayler, Chair, 

- Review of July and August Executive Committee 

 Meeting Minutes 

- Overview of Agenda 

8:45 a.m. – 8:50 a.m. BOSC DFO Remarks Mr. Greg Susanke, Designated 

 - Administrative Issues Federal Officer (DFO), Office 

 of Research and Development 

 (ORD) 

 

8:50 a.m. – 9:30 a.m. ORD Remarks Mr. Lek Kadeli, Deputy 

 Assistant Administrator for 

 Management, ORD 

9:30 a.m. – 12:00 p.m. Informatics/Data Mining/Knowledgebase Session

9:30 a.m. – 10:30 a.m. Information Technology and Mr. Robert Cottingham, 

Advances in Knowledgebase Oak Ridge National 

 Development Laboratory, 

 - DOE Systems Biology U.S. Department of Energy 

 Knowledgebase R&D Project 

 10:30 a.m. – 10:45 a.m. Break 

10:45 a.m. – 11:30 p.m. Health and Environmental Research Dr. Debra Walsh, 

 Online (HERO) Database Deputy Director, National 

 Center for Environmental 

 Assessment, ORD 

11:30 p.m. – 12:00 p.m. ORD Data Mining Techniques Dr. Myles Morse, 

 National Center for 

 Environmental Research, ORD 

12:00 p.m. – 1:00 p.m. Lunch 
 Agenda for October 18 - 19, 2010 Executive Committee Meeting 

 2

1:00 p.m. – 5:00 p.m. Research Program Performance Evaluation Session

1:00 p.m. – 2:30 p.m. STAR METRICS Dr. Stefano Bertuzzi, 

 National Institute of Health 

 

2:30 p.m. – 2:45 p.m. Break

 2:45 p.m. – 3:00 p.m. Overview of ORD Evaluation Ms. Mya Sjogren, 

 Techniques: Past and Present Performance and 

 Accountability, ORD 

 

 3:00 p.m. – 4:00 p.m. New Bibliometric Techniques for Dr. Dorothy Miller, 

 BOSC Program Evaluations Recent AAAS Fellow to ORD 

 

 Dr. Audrey Levine, ORD 

 4:00 p.m. – 5:00 p.m. Discussion of Informatics/Data Dr. Susan Cozzens, 

 Mining and Program Performance BOSC Executive Committee 

 Evaluation Sessions 

 

 5:00 p.m. Recess 

 

Tuesday, October 19, 2010

8:30 a.m. – 9:15 a.m. ORD Update Dr. Kevin Teichman, Deputy 

 Assistant Administrator for 

 Science for ORD 

 

9:15 a.m. – 11:30 a.m. Discussion of BOSC Consultation Mr. Jeff Morris, 

 on ORD Research: Safer National Program Director for 

 Products for a Sustainable World Nanotechnology, ORD 

 

10:15 a.m. – 10:30 a.m. Break 

11:30 a.m. – 11:45 a.m. Public Comment 

 11:45 a.m. – 12:00 p.m. ORD Response to BOSC Decision Dr. Fred Hauchman, Director, 

 Analysis Report Office of Science Policy, ORD 

 12:00 p.m. – 12:45 p.m. Executive Committee Open Forum Dr. Gary Sayler, Chair, 

 Executive Committee 

 

 12:45 p.m. – 1:00 p.m. Future Discussion/Future Business Dr. Gary Sayler, Chair, 

 - EC Meetings in 2011 Executive Committee 

 - Future Work 

1:00 p.m. Adjourn
Exhibit 10.6







Base Salaries of Executive Officers of the Registrant







As of April 1, 2018, the following are the base salaries (on an annual basis) of the executive officers of Old Point Financial Corporation:








	
Robert F. Shuford, Sr.

	 	
$

	
300,000

	 
	
Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer


Old Point Financial Corporation

	 	 	 	 
	 	 	 	 	 
	
Robert F. Shuford, Jr.

	 	
$

	
330,000

	 
	
Executive Vice President/Bank


Old Point Financial Corporation

	 	 	 	 
	 	 	 	 	 
	
Joseph R. Witt

	 	
$

	
297,030

	 
	
Chief Business Development Officer & Senior Vice President


Old Point Financial Corporation

	 	 	 	 
	 	 	 	 	 
	
Jeffrey W. Farrar

	 	
$

	
285,000

	 
	
Chief Financial Officer & Senior Vice President/Finance


Old Point Financial Corporation

	 	 	 	 
	 	 	 	 	 
	
Eugene M. Jordan, II

	 	
$

	
190,000

	 
	
Secretary to the Board & Executive Vice President/Trust


Old Point Financial Corporation

	 	 	 	 
	 	 	 	 	 
	
Donald S. Buckless (53)

	 	
$

	
187,200

	 
	
Chief Lending Officer & Senior Vice President


Old Point Financial Corporation
---

EXHIBIT 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

The undersigned, Mirosław Kranik, the Chief Executive Officer
and Acting Chief Financial Officer of SUNSET SUITS HOLDINGS, INC. (the
Company), DOES HEREBY CERTIFY that:

1. The Companys Annual Report on Form
10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2010 (the Report), fully complies
with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;
and

2. Information contained in the Report
fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results
of operation of the Company.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this statement
this 30th day of April, 2011.

| | /s/ Mirosław
      Kranik                 
| | ------------------------------------------
| | Mirosław Kranik                           
| | Chief Executive Officer and Acting        
| | Chief Financial Officer                   
| | (Principal Executive Officer and          
| | Principal Financial and AccountingOfficer)

A signed original of this written statement required by Section
906 has been provided to Sunset Suits Holdings, Inc. and will be retained by
Sunset Suits Holdings, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.

The forgoing certification is being furnished to the Securities
and Exchange Commission pursuant to § 18 U.S.C. Section 1350. It is not being
filed for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as
amended, and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the
Company, whether made before or after the date hereof, regardless of any general
incorporation language in such filing.

---
#### Carl Benit COOPER, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. Arthur F. BEELER, Warden, Defendant—Appellee.

No. 04-7487.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: Aug. 3, 2005.

Decided: Aug. 23, 2005.

Carl Benit Cooper, Appellant Pro Se.

Before NIEMEYER, KING, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM:

Carl Benit Cooper appeals a district court judgment denying his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2000) petition. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s order and affirm on the reasoning of the district court. *See Cooper v. Beeler,*No. CA-04-551-5-BO (E.D.N.C. Aug. 25, 2005). We also deny Cooper’s motion for summary judgment. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the ma*196terials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*AFFIRMED*
From: vaughnthomas@comcast.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 7:11:48 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing today to ask in the strongest way possible that you rescind the unjust and coercive

mandate that all "contraceptives" and sterilization procedures be covered by private health insurance

with no co-pay to patients. If you do not reverse course I ask you to expand conscience protections for

any organizations that provide individual and group insurance and have moral or religious objections. I

strongly oppose the government forcing free insurance coverage on Americans especially for drugs and

devices that I oppose and which are morally offensive and, in some cases, actually cause abortions.

I also ask you to reconsider your definition of religious employer and offer an authentic conscience

protection for any organization and business that has moral or religious objection to providing such

insurance to their employees. This legal mandate clearly violates the spirit of conscience laws which

prohibit government discrimination against those who object to various health services on moral or

religious grounds. The definition of "religious employer" in the regulation is so narrow as to only include

churches, but will still mean that a host of businesses and organizations that have conscience objections

will be required to choose between either violating their conscience or not being able to offer employees

health insurance.

Please protect the conscience rights of insurers, providers and people like me who object to being

forced by the federal government to offer or subsidize contraceptives and sterilization services, especially

when some of these drugs can take the life of early unborn children. No Americans should be forced by

the federal government to essentially subsidize services they object to. I again urge you in the strongest

way possible to reverse course and remove contraceptives and sterilizations from the list of mandatory

preventive services.

Sincerely,

Vaughn Thomas

Jeannette, PA 15644
No. P69/38.

protests 62/4344, etc. (Philadelphia).

#### F. B. Vandegrift & Co., Inc. *v.*United States,

Ford, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise covered by the foregoing protests consists of melting furnaces imported as entireties with electric motors of more than 1/10 horsepower similar in all material respects to those the subject of *F. B. Vandegrift &*Co., *Inc.*v. *United States*(56 Cust. Ct. 325, C. D. 2644), wherein it was held that the ovens and motors were separate articles of commerce, the protests were dismissed and the matter remanded for further proceedings to a single judge sitting in reappraisement for determination of the separate value of the ovens and motors in the manner provided by law (28 U.S.C. § 2636(d)).