alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
1.Install the servo of the main wing.

2.Fix the quick connector to the control horn, 

and then glue it.

3.Slip the pushrod for the main wing into the

hole, and then tighten the screw.

4.Install the servo of the V-tail and then glue 

the control horn and slip the pushrod as the 

above pictures show.

5.Put the main wooden frame together as the 

picture shows, then glue it in the fuselage.

6.Glue the main wheel, slider and the motor

 mount of the fuselage.

7.Distinguish between the front and back when

 you glue the wooden frame of the canopy.

8.Glue the fuselage.

9.Glue the V-tail to the fuselage and install the

main wings, then finish the model.Fix the quick

connector to the control horn, and then glue it.

55mm

ASSEMBLY:

LY-T08-08 Decal

Mini Talon LY-T08

: 1300mm(51.1in)

: 830mm(32.6in)

: 33~66g/dm2(10~21oz/sq.ft)

: 1000~2000g(35~70oz)

: 30dm2(465sq.in)

LY-T08-01 Main Wing(Left) LY-T08-03 Fuselage

LY-T08-04 Canopy LY-T08-05 V-tail

LY-T08-02 Main Wing(Right)

LY-T08-06 Wooden Frame

LY-T08-07 Wheel LY-T08-09 Push Road

LY-T08-10 Carbon Tubes LY-T08-11 Carbon Rod Fastener LY-T08-12 Wire Line

LY-T08-13 Control Horn LY-T08-14 Velcro Tape LY-T08-15 Manual
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA 

Petitioner, :Jc• t;J 9 2.0\5 * 

v. No.: 04-680-06 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, * 

Respondent. * 

NOTICE OF APPEAL 

Now respectfully comes the Petitioner, TYRONE TRADER, pro se, and hereby notifies 

this Court of his desire and intention to appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the 

Third Circuit. The appeal will contest this Court's Judgment and Orders of August 18, 2015 (and 

filed on August 19, 2015: Docs. 760 and 761), which denied petitioner's Motion to Vacate, Set 

Aside, or Correct Sentence, pursuant Title 28, United States Code,§ 2255. 

Ol 'l -0'-' ....... 

ONE TRADER, Petitioner, pro se 

Register Number - 40143-066 

UNITED STATES PENITENTIARY 

Post Office Box 2099 

Pollock, Louisiana 71467-2099 

Executed this 17th day of September, 2015 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I, TYRONE TRADER, Petitioner, hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing has been 

mailed to: Kaiayoun M. Copeland, Assistant United States Attorney, Office of the United States Attorney, 615 

Chestnut Street, Suite 1250, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19106-4476. The envelope was placed in the hands of 

federal prison officials for prompt mailing v.ia first-class United States Mail, postage prepaid, on the 17th day of 

September,2015. ~ 

~ \ ~ "\a \'-l ~- O\.IN' 

~ TYRONE TRADER, Petitioner, prose
p.1 

OAR Box 1837 

Prepped by Keeia Richards 

Document Number: 

180) IV-E-14 

Docket Number: 

A-84-33 

Printed 11/14/2008 3:48:12 PM Sheet 180 of 238 
P.2 

, ^ 0 S M *, 

§ ^W 7 S UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 

\*W+f WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460 

%*w ^ November 3, 1987 

OFFICE OF 

AIR AND RADIATION 

SUBJECT: Conversation with Larry Boggs, AMC, on Proposed NSR 

Surface Coal Mine Rulemaking -- New Docket Entry: 

Docket No. A-84-33 

FROM: Barbara Brown ^ — & 

Office of Air and Radiation 

TO: Central Docket Section (LE-131) 

On November 2, 1987, Larry Boggs called for an update on the Agency's 

deliberations on the Surface Coal Mine Proposal rulemaking. I told him 

that we were still deliberating but hoped to have a decision soon. 

cc: Kirt Cox, Project Officer, OAQPS
##### 



EXHIBIT 32.1

SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATIONS



---



##### 



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF
2002


In connection with the Form 10-K/A
(Amendment No. 1) to the Annual Report of Inco Limited (the
registrant) on Form 10-K for the year ending
December 31, 2003 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (this Form 10-K, as amended
by Amendment No. 1, the report), we, Scott M.
Hand, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer and Farokh S. Hakimi,
Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, of the
registrant, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as
adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that to our 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 registrant.

August 10th, 2004

| |                                                         
| | --------------------------------------------------------
| | /s/ SCOTT M. HAND                                       
| |                                                         
| | Scott M. Hand                                           
| | Chairman and Chief Executive Officer                    
|
| | /s/ FAROKH S. HAKIMI                                    
| |                                                         
| | Farokh S. Hakimi                                        
| | Executive Vice President and Chief Financial
    Officer

The foregoing information is being furnished
solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350 and is not being
filed as part of the report or as a separate disclosure document.
No. 58922.

protests 147956-K and 150845-K (New York).

#### Grafmueller-Hamilton, Inc. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Rao, J.

It was stipulated that the merchandise consists of paper napkins the same in all material respects as those the subject of *Freund Mayer & Co., Inc.*v. *United States*(39 C. C. P. A. 123, C. A. D. 474). Upon the agreed statement of facts, the items entered prior to January 1, 1948, were held dutiable at 30 percent under paragraph 1413, and the items entered subsequent to said date were held dutiable at 15 percent under said paragraph, as modified, *supra.*
June 20, 2011

Mr. Micah Farney

2754 South 118 th East Avenue Tulsa, OK 74129

Dear Mr. Farney:

This letter is to inform you that we are unable to process your request for an exemption from § 65.71(a)(2) of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR). It explains why we can’t process your request and what you should do in the next 30 days.

Why We Can’t Process Your Request

We entered your May 4, 2011, exemption request into the public docket (No. FAA-2011- 0466), but we are unable to process your request any further. The information you sent doesn’t comply with the requirements of 14 CFR 11.81 (copy enclosed). For us to consider the request any further, you must send us all of the following:

 The reasons why granting the request would be in the public interest; that is, how it would benefit the public as a whole.

 Verification that all other requirements of § 65.71(a)(2) can be met.

 The reasons why the exemption wouldn’t adversely affect safety or how the exemption would provide a level of safety at least equal to that provided by the rule from which you seek an exemption.

 Any additional information, views, or arguments available to support your request.

What You Should Do

If you want us to process your request any further, you must send the information described earlier to reach us within 30 days. We will consider the docket on your request open until we receive this required information from you. Please note that 14 CFR 11.63(d) requires you to send your petition for exemption at least 120 days before the proposed effective date of the exemption.2

If We Don’t Hear From You

If we don’t hear from you within 30 days, we will close the docket without notifying you further. If you have any questions or require additional time, you may call (202) 267-9677.

Sincerely,

/s/ Brenda D. Courtney Manager, Aircraft and Airports Rules Division

Enclosure
**Cancellations of Expenditure Transfers Receivable/Payable**

**This scenario illustrates cancellations that occur between TAFS with an expenditure transfer receivable/payable relationship established on the books.  The expenditure transfer between two TAFS is represented by the transferring entity having a payable in USSGL account 4901, “Delivered Orders – Obligations, Unpaid,” and the receiving entity having a receivable in USSGL account 4225, “Appropriation Trust Fund Expenditure Transfers – Receivable.”  In most instances, this will occur between a trust fund and a general fund; however, an exception has been made for SSA’s Limitation on Administration Expenses account.  *Note:  This scenario follows the fiscal 2008 crosswalks (except for the fiscal 2007 P&F crosswalk) illustrated in USSGL TFM S2-07-01, Part 2, dated July 2007.**

This scenario uses the following USSGL accounts:

**BEGINNING TRIAL BALANCES**

**Transferring TAFSReceiving TAFS (expired status)**

1. **To record receipts credited to the Transferring TAFS.**

**Transferring TAFSReceiving TAFS (expired status)**

2. **To invest receipts in U.S. Treasury securities issued by the Bureau of Fiscal Service at par value.**

**Transferring TAFSReceiving TAFS (expired status)**

**3.  At the end of the 5th expired year, the Receiving TAFS must be canceled, and all remaining balances must be adjusted.**

**3A.  The Receiving TAFS records the cancellation/adjustment of all remaining prior-year unobligated balances and corresponding receivables.  The Transferring TAFS records the cancellation of authority and the adjustment of the corresponding expenditure transfer payable (prior-year obligated balance).  There is no movement of fund balance.**

**Transferring TAFSReceiving TAFS (expired status)**

**3B.  The Receiving TAFS records the cancellation/adjustment of all remaining prior-year obligated balances and corresponding receivables.  The Transferring TAFS records the cancellation of authority and the adjustment of the corresponding expenditure transfer payable (prior-year obligated balance).  There is no movement of fund balance.**

**Transferring TAFSReceiving TAFS (expired status)**

**PRE-CLOSING TRIAL BALANCES**

**Transferring TAFSReceiving TAFS (expired status)**

**Closing Entries**

**4.  To reclassify the cancellation.**

**Transferring TAFSReceiving TAFS (expired status)**

**5.  In the Transferring TAFS, close appropriation to total actual resources collected.  In both TAFS, close revenue and financing sources transferred to cumulative results of operations.**

**Transferring TAFSReceiving TAFS (expired status)**

**Closing Entries (continued)**

6. **To record the closing of downward adjustments to delivered orders – obligations, unpaid.**

**Transferring TAFSReceiving TAFS (expired status)**

7. **To record the closing of downward adjustments to undelivered orders – obligations, unpaid.**

**Transferring TAFSReceiving TAFS (expired status)**

**POST-CLOSING TRIAL BALANCES**

**Transferring TAFSReceiving TAFS (expired status)**

� Budget authority is classified as discretionary in this scenario. 

PAGE  

1 of 13                   Revised from July 2006

August 2007
II 

115TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1525 

To authorize the Secretary of Education to review and score TRIO 

applications with minor budgeting errors. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JULY 11, 2017 

Mr. MANCHIN introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred 

to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions 

A BILL 

To authorize the Secretary of Education to review and score 

TRIO applications with minor budgeting errors. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Defending Educational 

5 Opportunities for West Virginia Students Act of 2017’’. 

6 SEC. 2. AUTHORIZATION TO REVIEW AND SCORE TRIO AP7 PLICATIONS WITH MINOR BUDGETING ER8 RORS. 

9 The Secretary of Education shall— 


lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 1525 IS

1 (1) notify an applicant that submits an applica2 tion for assistance under chapter 1 of subpart 2 of 

3 part A of title IV of the Higher Education Act of 

4 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1070a–11 et seq.) that has a minor 

5 budgeting error, of such error; 

6 (2) permit such applicant to resubmit a cor7 rected application not later than 30 days after the 

8 date of such notification; and 

9 (3) review and score such corrected application. 

Æ 


lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with BILLS
Before the Second Division,

April 28, 1959

No. 63003.

#### Hensel, Bruckmann & Lorbacher, Inc., et al. *v.*United States,

protests 58/9732, etc. (New York).

Opinion by

Rao, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of grape shears similar in all material respects to those the subject of *John S. Graham & Co., Inc.,*v. *United States*(41 Cust. Ct. 67, C.D. 2022), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
No. 62511.

#### R. J. Saunders & Co., Inc. *v.*United States,

protest 201270-K (New York).

*423Opinion by

Oliver, C. J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of so-called electron microscopes and parts thereof the same in all material respects as those the subject of *R. J. Saunders & Co., Inc.*v. *United States*(45 C. C. P. A. 87, C. A. D. 678), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002  In connection with the Annual Report of Independence Lead Mines Company (the "Company") on Form 10-KSB/A No. 1 for the period ended December 31, 2004, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Bernard C. Lannen, President 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:  1. The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and  2. The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition, and results of operations of the Company.  /s/ Bernard C. Lannen President  Dated: October 20, 2006
AAM

- 1 3

- 135

- E January 11, 2013

Exemption No. 10685

Regulatory Docket No. FAA

- 20 12

- 1 302

Ms. Maria Rodriguez

Caribbean Buzz , LLC

P.O. Box 7702

St. Thomas, Virgin Islands 00801

Dear M s. Rodri guez :

This letter is to inform you that we have granted your request for exemption. It transmits our

decision, explains its basis, and gives you the conditions and limitations of the exemption,

including the date it ends.

The Basis for Our Decision

By l etter dated December 20 , 2012 , you petitioned the Federal Aviation Administration

(FAA) on behalf of Caribbean Buzz , LLC ( Caribbean Buzz ) for an exemption from part 120

of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) to the extent necessary to allow Cari bbean

Buzz to cover its safety

- sensitive employees under one drug and alcohol testing program

.

The FAA has determined that good cause exists for not publishing a summary of the petition

in the Federal Register because the requested exemption would not set a precedent, and any

delay in acting on this petition would be detrimental to Caribbean Buzz

.

The FAA has issued a grant of exemption in circumstances similar in all material respects to

those presented in your petition. In Grant of Exemption No. 9703 ( copy enclosed), the FAA

found that Solid Edge’s § 91.147 air tour operations were closely connected to its part 135

operations. The FAA also found that combining the petitioner’s two drug and alcohol testing

programs into one would be in the public interes t and would maintain an equivalent level of2

safety to that provided by the current regulations. Thus, the FAA concluded it was

unnecessary to burden the petitioner by requiring it to conduct two separate testing programs.

Having reviewed your reasons for requesting an exemption, I find that

—

• they are similar in all material respects to relief previously requested in the enclosed Grant

of Exemption No. 9703 ;

• the reasons stated by the FAA for granting the enclosed Grant of Exemption No. 9703 also

apply to t he situation you present; and

• a grant of exemption is in the public interest.

Our Decision

Under the authority contained in 49 U.S.C. 40113 and 44701, which the FAA Administrator

has delegated to me, I hereby grant Caribbean Buzz , LLC an exemption from 1 4 CFR part 120

to the extent necessary to allow Caribbean Buzz to cover its safety

- sensitive employees under

one drug and alcohol testing program , subj ect to the conditions and limitations described

below.

Conditions and Limitations

1. Employees of Caribbea n Buzz are subject to the drug and alcohol regulations at all

times while conducting operations under part 135 or part 91.

2. The drug and alcohol program must be implemented under the same auspices of

the Caribbean Buzz part 135 operation, not under part 91

.

This exemption terminates on January 31, 2015 , unless sooner superseded or rescinded.

Sincerely,

/s/

James R. Fraser

Deputy Federal Air Surgeon

Enclosure
No. 63583.

protests 310895-K and 324560-K (New York).

#### The Hague Laral Trading Corp. and Laral Trading Corp. *v.*United States,

*426Opinion by

Ford, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of synthetic filaments similar in all material respects to those the subject of *Empire Brushes, Inc., et al.*v. *United States*(42 Cust. Ct. 145, C.D. 2078), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
Before the Third Division,

April 2, 1947

No. 51644.

#### Protests 125049-K, etc., of Comex Wine *&*Spirits Co. et al. (New York).

Opinion by

Cline, J.

It was stipulated that the merchandise and issues herein are similar in all material respects to those involved in *United States*v. *Somerset*(33 C. C. P. A. 138, C. A. D. 328), and that a quantity of liquor amounting to 10 percent or more of the total contents of the various barrels, casks, packages, etc., was lost in transit from the port of exportation to the port of destination because of breakage, leakage, or damage. In accordance therewith it was held that an allowance should have been made for the loss appearing upon the gaugers’ returns as verified by the affidavits of the importers. The protests were sustained to this extent.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

PNC BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION : CIVIL ACTION

:

vs. :

: 

ADMIRAL WINE & LIQUOR CO : NO. 04-5012

O R D E R

AND NOW, TO WIT: This 13th day of April,2005, it having

been reported that the issues between the parties in the above

action has been settled and upon Order of the Court pursuant to

the provisions of Rule 41.1(b) of the Local Rules of Civil

Procedure of this Court, it is

ORDERED that the above action is DISMISSED with

prejudice, pursuant to agreement of counsel without costs.

MICHAEL E. KUNZ, Clerk of Court

BY: 

 MATTHEW J. HIGGINS 

 Deputy Clerk

Case 2:04-cv-05012-RB Document 6 Filed 04/13/05 Page 1 of 1
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

 :

LORAYA FIELDS-WILLIAMS : CIVIL ACTION

Plaintiff, :

 :

v. :

: NO. 05-CV-3868

JO ANNE B. BARNHART, :

COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY : 

Defendant. :

 

ORDER

AND NOW, this _____ day of August, 2006, upon careful review and independent

consideration of the parties’ cross-motions for summary judgment, Plaintiff’s brief, Defendant’s

brief, and the administrative record; and after careful review of the Report and Recommendation of

United States Magistrate Judge Carol Sandra Moore Wells; and no objections having been filed, IT

IS HEREBY ORDERED AND DECREED that:

1. The Report and Recommendation dated July 27, 2006, is APPROVED and

ADOPTED;

2. The Commissioner’s Motion for Summary Judgment is DENIED; and

3. The Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED IN PART and

DENIED IN PART.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the matter is REMANDED to the Commissioner of the

Social Security Administration, so that the Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”) can conduct

additional proceedings consistent with this Report and Recommendation. Specifically, upon remand

the ALJ should (a) determine the true extent of Plaintiff’s mental impairment and its impact, in

combination with her other impairments, on her ability to perform work activities; (b) allow Plaintiff

to update the medical records to establish the severity of her impairments during her period of

Case 2:05-cv-03868-PBT Document 9 Filed 08/23/06 Page 1 of 2
2

disability coverage; (c) assess the impact of Plaintiff’s obesity on each physical limitation and make

a proper material finding; (d) reconsider the severity of each of her impairments, both singly and in

combination; (e) reassess and fully explain whether Plaintiff’s impairments meet or equal a Listing;

(f) evaluate Plaintiff’s Residual Functional Capacity (“RFC”) and, if necessary, submit a complete

and accurate hypothetical question to a vocational expert, allowing Plaintiff the opportunity to

respond to the expert’s conclusions; and (g) thoroughly explain the new decision.

BY THE COURT:

/S/ Petrese B. Tucker

________________________________

Hon. Petrese B. Tucker, U.S.D.J. 

Case 2:05-cv-03868-PBT Document 9 Filed 08/23/06 Page 2 of 2
SERVED JUNE 17,2011 ^ •, ..v.virNl'^^ 

• lLru:li;-ulUi1 

; LN K i '^^ {•• 3 0 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS 

WASHINGTON, DC 

IN THE MATTER OF 

EMPIRE FLIGHT ACADEMY 

FAA DOCKET No. [TO BE ASSIGNED] 

FDMS No. FAA-2011-0290 

(Civil Penalty Case) 

ORDER GRANTING MOTIONS 

FOR EXTENSIONS OF TIME 

Respondent Empire Flight Academy ("Respondent") filed a Motion for Partial 

Summary Judgment and, three days later, a Motion for Decision. Complainant, the 

Federal Aviation Administration ("Complainant" or "agency") moved for an extension of 

time of 14 days, or until June 24, 2011, to file an answer to Respondent's Motion for 

Partial Summary Judgment. It then moved for an extension of time of 11 days, or until 

June 24, 2011, to file an answer to Respondent's Motion for Decision. The agency 

represents that Respondent has no objection in either instance to the requested extension. 

Complainant's motions are granted.' The date by which Complainant is required 

to file answers to Respondent's Motion for Partial Summary Judgment and Respondent's 

Motion for Decision is in both instances hereby extended to June 24, 2011. 

This matter was reassigned to the undersigned by Order of the Chief Administrative Law Judge dated 

June 10,2011. 
SO ORDERED. 

c 

Attachment ~ Service List 

Richard C. Goodwin 

Administrative Law Judge 
FDMS No. FAA-2011-0290 

(Civil Penalty Action) 

SERVICE LIST 

ORIGINAL i& ONE COPY 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue, S.W. 

Washington, DC 20591 

Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Wilbur Wright Building—Suite 2W1000' 

ONE COPY (VIA FIRST-CLASS MAIL, WITH COURTESY COPY BY FAX) 

Gregory S. Winton, Respondent's Counsel 

The Aviation Law Firm 

One Research Court, Suite 450 

Rockville, MD 20850 

TEL: 301-294-8550 

FAX: 301-294-2525 

Zachary M. Berman, Complainant's Counsel 

Office of the Regional Counsel, AEA-7 

Eastern Region 

Federal Aviation Administration 

1 Aviation Plaza, Room 561 

Jamaica, NY 11434 

TEL: 718-553-3258 

FAX: 718-995-5699 

The Honorable Richard C. Goodwin, Administrative Law Judge 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

Office of Hearings, M-20, 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. 

East Building Ground Floor, Room El2-320 

Washington, DC 20590 

TEL: Attorney-Advisor 202-366-2139 

Legal Assistant 202-366-5121 

FAX: 202-366-7536 

' Service was by U.S. Mail. For service in person or by expedited courier, use tlie following address: 

Federal Aviation Administration, 600 Independence Avenue, S. W., Wilbur Wright Building—Suite 2W1000, 

Wasl ington, DC 20591; Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk. AGC-^30. 

- 2 -