alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
II 

115TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1561 

To repeal the Jones Act restrictions on coastwise trade, and for other 

purposes. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JULY 13, 2017 

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

to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation 

A BILL 

To repeal the Jones Act restrictions on coastwise trade, 

and for other purposes. 

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 ‘‘Open America’s 

5 Waters Act of 2017’’. 

6 SEC. 2. REPEAL OF CERTAIN LIMITATIONS ON COASTWISE 

7 TRADE. 

8 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 12112(a) of title 46, 

9 United States Code, is amended to read as follows: 


rfrederick on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 1561 IS

1 ‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—A coastwise endorsement may be 

2 issued for a vessel that qualifies under the laws of the 

3 United States to engage in the coastwise trade.’’. 

4 (b) REGULATIONS.—Not later than 90 days after the 

5 date of the enactment of this Act, the Commandant of 

6 the United States Coast Guard shall issue regulations to 

7 implement the amendment made by subsection (a) that 

8 require all vessels permitted to engage in the coastwise 

9 trade to meet all appropriate safety and security require10 ments. 

11 (c) CONFORMING AMENDMENTS.— 

12 (1) TANK VESSEL CONSTRUCTION STAND13 ARDS.—Section 3703a(c)(1)(C) of title 46, United 

14 States Code, is amended by striking ‘‘and is quali15 fied for documentation as a wrecked vessel under 

16 section 12112 of this title’’. 

17 (2) LIQUIFIED GAS TANKERS.—Section 12120 

18 of such title is amended by striking ‘‘, if the 

19 vessel—’’ and all that follows and inserting a period. 

20 (3) SMALL PASSENGER VESSELS.—Section 

21 12121(b) of such title is amended by striking 

22 ‘‘12112,’’. 

23 (4) LOSS OF COASTWISE TRADE PRIVILEGES.— 

24 Section 12132 of such title is repealed. 


rfrederick on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with BILLS
3 

•S 1561 IS

1 (5) CLERICAL AMENDMENT.—The table of sec2 tions for chapter 121 of title 46, United States 

3 Code, is amended by striking the item relating to 

4 section 12132. 

Æ 


rfrederick on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with BILLS
**Exhibit      32**

**CERTIFICATION      PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. 1350**

**(As      adopted pursuant to 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of      2002)**

|  | (i) | the                Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d)                of                the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and |
|--|-----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|  | (ii) | the                information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material                respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the                Company                as of and for the periods covered in the Report. |
|--|------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|                               |                                                |               |
|------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------|--------------------|
|                          |                                           |          |
| Dated:                July 6, 2007 |                                                | /s/ Brian D. Pardo |
|                               | Chief              Executive Officer                |
|                               |                                                     |
|                               |                                                |
|                               | /s/ Nina Piper Chief              Financial Officer |

----
# Main

&"ARIAL,Bold"&8Bulletin 2020-15	&"ARIAL,Bold"&8Statement of Changes in Net Position	&"ARIAL,Bold"&8June 2020

# Footnotes and Additional Inform
No. 52946.

#### L. A. Brewing Co. *v.*United States,

protest 126481-K (Los Angeles).

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

For the reasons stated in *Austin, Nichols & Co., Inc:*v. *United States*(22 Cust. Ct.33,.C.D. 1155), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained. The protest was overruled in all other respects.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>          5
<MULTIPLIER>       1,000

<S>                                   <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                        3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                  Sep-30-1999
<PERIOD-START>                                     Apr-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                       Jun-30-1999
<CASH>                                                   7,478
<SECURITIES>                                                 0
<RECEIVABLES>                                                0
<ALLOWANCES>                                                 0
<INVENTORY>                                                  0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                        15,784
<PP&E>                                                       0
<DEPRECIATION>                                               0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                          65,858
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                    2,639
<BONDS>                                                      0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                        0
<PREFERRED>                                              2,600
<COMMON>                                                 1,225
<OTHER-SE>                                              59,088
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                            65,858
<SALES>                                                      0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                         2,740
<CGS>                                                        0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                                0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                         1,245
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                             0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                          85
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                          2,955
<INCOME-TAX>                                               843
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                          0
<DISCONTINUED>                                               0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                              0
<CHANGES>                                                    0
<NET-INCOME>                                             2,060
<EPS-BASIC>                                              .16
<EPS-DILUTED>                                              .16


</TABLE>
18400 VON KARMAN AVENUE, SUITE 800 IRVINE, CALIFORNIA 92612-0514

TELEPHONE (949) 760-1121 / FAX (949) 720-0182

Direct Dial Number: (949) 224-6247

Direct Facsimile Number: (949) 224-6407

E-Mail Address: pfraidenburgh@buchalter.com

December 18, 2015

SUBMITTED ELECTRONICALLY (VIA REGULATIONS.GOV)

Ms. Thuy H. Cooper

Senior Rulemaking Analyst

Airspace and Airmen Rules Division

Office of Rulemaking

Federal Aviation Administration

Re: Request for Amendment to New Sky Perspectives, LLC’s Exemption No. 12857

Dear Ms. Cooper:

This is a request for an amendment to New Sky Perspectives, LLC’s existing Section 333 

Exemption to add additional aircraft to the exemption-holder’s authorized commercial 

operations. The Petitioner seeks an amendment authorizing the operation of the Acecore NEO

aircraft as documented in the confidential and proprietary manuals submitted in support of this 

amendment request.

Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter. Please do not hesitate to contact me 

if you should have any questions.

Best regards,

BUCHALTER NEMER

A Professional Corporation

By

Paul J. Fraidenburgh

Counsel for New Sky Perspectives, LLC

Los Angeles • Irvine • San Francisco • Scottsdale

BN 18975993v1
Part 2

SUPPLEMENT

DRAFT F

Edit

No

Prior 

Year 

USSGL 

Account

Beginning

Ending 

Balance 

Indicator

Authority

Type Code

TAS 

Status

Reporting

Type Code

TAS Status 

Transitioning 

Code

21 439701 E 45 679500 E E/U 

U.S. Standard General Ledger

Closing Edits Detail Report

Bulletin No. 2016-XX DRAFT VII CER - 1
Refinery ICR Component 2 Reporting ToolTable Structure for Advanced Data EntryTable: emissions_inventory_dataEnter data into this table after entering the Facility ID but before entering emissions data by pollutant.Field Name Data Type SizeInstructionNumber Notesfacility_id Text 255The entry in this field must EXACTLY match the Facility ID you entered onthe PART I form. This field is part of the primary key.emissions_point_id Text 255 1The entry in this field must be unique for this facility. This field is part of theprimary key.emissions_point_desc Text 255 2unit_id Text 255 3The Unit ID need not exactly match the Unit IDs entered in Component 1.scc_type_id Text 255 4The SCC code must EXACTLY match one of the codes provided in the list.release_type_id Text 255 5Enter either "point" or "fugitive" to avoid an error.release_height Number Double 6For point sources, value in feet.internal_vent_diameter Number Double 6For point sources, value in feet.exit_temperature Number Double 6For point sources, value in degrees Fahrenheit.gas_flow_rate Number Double 6For point sources, value in actual cubic feet per minute.length Number Double 7For fugitive sources, value in feet.width Number Double 7For fugitive sources, value in feet.angle Number Double 7For fugitive sources, value in degrees from the North (can be positive ornegative).latitude Number Double 8longitude Number Double 8comments Text 255 19Enter comments related to the emissions point.Refinery ICR Component 2 Reporting ToolTable Structure for Advanced Data EntryTable: emissions_inventory_data_pollutantsEnter data into this table after entering the Facility ID and after entering all emissions points.Field Name Data Type SizeInstructionNumber Notesfacility_id Text 255The entry in this field must EXACTLY match the Facility ID youentered on the PART I form. This field is part of the primary key.emissions_point_id Text 255 1The entry in this field must be unique for this facility. This field is partof the primary key.pollutant_code Text 255 10The SCC code must EXACTLY match one of the codes provided in thelist. This field is part of the primary key.emissions_2010 Number Double 11estimation_methodology Text 255 12The methodology must EXACTLY match one of the following:Direct measurementsStack testingEngineering calculationsOtheremissions_non_routine_2010 Number Double 13emissions_maximum_hourly Number Double 14annual_emissions_NESHAP Number Double 15hourly_emissions_NESHAP Number Double 16annual_emissions_permit Number Double 17hourly_emissions_permit Number Double 18Comments Memo 19The memo field has unlimited characters. This field is provided forcomments regarding the emissions of this pollutant.
BEFORE THE FEDERALAVIATION ADMINISTRATION WASHINGTON, D.C.

UNITED AIRLINES, INC., Complainant, v. THE PORTAUTHORITY OF NEWYORK AND NEWJERSEY, Respondent. Docket FAA-16-14-13

OPPOSITION OF UNITED AIRLINES, INC. TO RESPONDENT'S MOTION FORLEAVE TO FILE A REPLY Communications withrespect to this document shouldbe addressed to: Marc L. Warren Keith J. Harrison Gerald F. Murphy Steven J. Seiden CROWELL & MORING 

### LLP 1001 PennsylvaniaAvenue, NW Washington, DC 20004 (202) 624-2500 mwarren@crowell.com Robert S. Span Alan K. Steinbrecher Sophy Chen STEINBRECHER & SPAN LLP 1155 F Street, NW, Suite 1050 Washington, DC 20004 (202) 559-8680 rspan@steinbrecherspan.com

Counselfor UnitedAirlines, Inc.BEFORE THE FEDERALAVIATION ADMINISTRATION WASHINGTON, D.C.

UNITED AIRLINES, INC., Complainant, v. THE PORTAUTHORITY OF NEWYORK AND NEWJERSEY, Respondent. Docket FAA-16-14-13

OPPOSITION OF UNITED AIRLINES, INC. TO RESPONDENT'S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE A REPLY ComplainantUnitedAirlines, Inc. ("United") opposes Respondent The Port Authority ofNew York and New Jersey's ("Port Authority") unauthorizedApril 27, 2015 Motion for Leaveto File a Reply to United's March 27, 2015 Answer to the PortAuthority's Motion for Summary Judgment (the "April 27 Motion"). The April 27 Motion is: (1) moot in light ofthe FAA Order entered that same day denying the Port Authority's Motion for SummaryJudgment; (2) not expressly authorized under Pm·t Hi's administrative proeedures; and (g) untimely insofar as the Portl.uthority filed it on the date the FAA's decision on the Port Authority's Motion for Summary Judgment was due. Because the April27 Motion is essentially a nullity, United respectfully requests that it be withdrawn or, alternatively, rejected out ofhand.May 1, 2015 Respectfully submitted,

\Robert S. Span Alan K. Steinbrecher Sophy Chen STEINBRECHER & SPAN LLP 1155 F Street, NW, Suite 1050 Washington, DC 20004 (202) 559-8680 rspan@steinbrecherspan.com

2 Marc Warren Keith J. Harrison Gerald F. Murphy Steven J. Seiden CROWELL & MORING LLP 1001 PennsylvaniaAvenue NW Washington, DC 20004 (202) 624-2500 mwarren@crowell.com Counsel for UnitedAirlines, Inc.CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I certify that I have this date served the foregoing Opposition ofUnited Airlines, Inc. on the following persons 

### by overnight express mail, in accordance with the Department's Rules ofPractice: ChiefCounsel Attn: FAA Part 16 Docket Clerk AGC-600 FederalAviation Administration 800 Independence Ave., SW Washington, DC 20591

May 1, 2015 Carlene V. Mcintyre Arnold D. Kolikoff Faith Tabafunda Law Department The Port Authority ofNew York and New Jersey 150 Greenwich Street, 25th Floor New York, NY 10006

StevenJ. Seiden
EXHIBIT 99.8
March 28, 2002


Robert K. Herdman
Chief Accountant
Securities and Exchange Commission
450 Fifth Street, N. W.
Washington, D.C.  20549


Dear Mr. Herdman:


As it relates to the audit of the consolidated financial statements of Vectren
Utility Holdings, Inc. as of and for the year ended December 31, 2001 included
in this Form 10-K, Arthur Andersen LLP (Arthur Andersen) has represented to us
that this audit was subject to Arthur Andersen's quality control system for the
U.S. accounting and auditing practice to provide reasonable assurance that the
engagement was conducted in compliance with professional standards, that there
was appropriate continuity of Arthur Andersen personnel working on the audit,
availability of national office consultation. Availability of personnel at
foreign affiliates of Arthur Andersen is not relevant to this audit.


Sincerely,


/s/ Niel C. Ellerbrook
------------------------------
Niel C. Ellerbrook
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
Vectren Utility Holdings, Inc.
No. 61301.

protests 270186-K (A), etc. (New York).

#### Alltransport, Inc., and North American Foreign Trading Corp. et al. *v.*United States,

*473Opinion by

Olives, C. J.

The issue presented herein was decided adversely to plaintiffs’ contention in *Dale Products Corp. et al.*v. *United States*(31 Cust. Ct. 170, C. D. 1565) and *United States*v. *Astra Trading Corp.*(44 C. C. P. A. 8, C. A. D. 627). When the case was called for trial, plaintiffs requested a continuance pending trial of a new test case. The request was denied and an order of dismissal for lack of prosecution was entered. The protests were, therefore, dismissed.
IN THE

TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

No. 10-23-00351-CR

No. 10-23-00367-CR

AMAAR ABDULRAHAM TAYEH,

Appellant

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

Appellee

From the County Court at Law No. 2

McLennan County, Texas

Trial Court Nos. 20220292CR2 and 20221062CR2

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant’s briefs in these appeals were due February 23, 2024. No briefs have 

been filed. We abated and remanded these appeals to the trial court on April 2, 2024 to 

determine whether, among other items, appellant was receiving effective assistance of 

counsel. In response to the abatement order, appellant has signed, and this Court’s Clerk 

has filed, motions to dismiss both of these appeals. 

In light of the motions to dismiss, we withdraw the Abatement Order issued on 
Tayeh v. State Page 2

April 2, 2024, and reinstate these appeals. 

After consideration by the Court, appellant’s “Motion to Dismiss Appeal” filed on 

April 9, 2024 in both appellate case numbers is granted, and these appeals are dismissed.

TOM GRAY

Chief Justice

Before Chief Justice Gray, 

Justice Johnson, and 

Justice Smith 

Motions granted

Appeals dismissed

Opinion delivered and filed April 18, 2024

Do not publish 

[CR25]
Case No. 13,121.

#### SMITH v. UNION PAC. R. CO.

[2 Dill. 278.] 1

Circuit Court, D. Nebraska.

1872.

Courts — Federal Jurisdiction — Union Pacific Railroad Company Charter.

Under the act of congress creating the Union Pacific Railroad Company (12 Stat. 489, § 1), the federal courts have jurisdiction in actions by and against that corporation whenever these courts would have jurisdiction of the same class of actions between other parties.

[Cited in Bauman v. Union Pac. R. Co., Case No. 1,117.]

NOTE. The previous decisions of the supreme court referred to are: Bank of U. S. v. Deveaux, 5 Cranch [9 U. S.] 61, 1809, holding that the charter of the Bank of the United States did not enable it to sue in the courts of the United States. The language of the charter was, “to sue and' be sued * * * in courts of record, or in any other place whatsoever.” Bank of U. S. v. Martin, 5 Pet. [30 U. S.] 479; Osborn v. Bank of U. S., 9 Wheat. [22 U. S.] 738, 1824. The court holds in this case that the act of congress then before it did give, in terms, the bank the right to sue in the circuit court, and that under the constitution it was competent to congress to confer such jurisdiction. Bank of U. S. v. Northumberland Bank [Case No. 931].

The plaintiff is a citizen of the state of Ohio, and brings suit to recover damages for injuries received while coupling cars on defendant’s road, and while in the employ of defendant as a brakeman. The defendant demurred to the complaint on the ground that the court had no jurisdiction of the person of the defendant or of the subject-matter of the action. The demurrer was submitted to Mr. Justice MILDER, at the May term, 1872, and taken .by him under advisement.

Mr. Redick and Mr. Howe, for plaintiff.

Poppleton & Wakeley, for defendant,

MILLER, Circuit Justice. •

The act of congress creating the defendant corporation (12 ' Stat. 490) contains this provision: “The • Union Pacific Railroad Company” by “that: name shall have perpetual succession, and. shall be able to sue and to be sued, plead and be impleaded, defend and be defended, in all courts of law and equity within the United States, and may make and have a common seal,” etc., (section 1).

I have examined the previous decisions of the supreme court of the United States supposed to have an important bearing on the •question now presented, and, after reflection, am still of opinion that congress intended to make the defendant capable of suing and being sued in the federal courts which have jurisdiction of the same class of actions between other parties. Demurrer overruled.
EXHIBIT 31.2

Rule 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a) Certification

I, Bonnie M. Klein, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of BCSB Bankcorp, Inc.;

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;

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
registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4. The registrant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 registrant 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 registrant, 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 registrant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 registrants
internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter (the registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to
materially affect, the registrants internal control over financial reporting; and

5. The registrants other certifying
officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the audit committee of the registrant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 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 who have a significant role in the registrants internal control over financial reporting.

Date: February 13, 2007



/s/ Bonnie M. KleinBonnie M. KleinSenior Vice President and Treasurer(Principal Financial Officer)
<PAGE>



                                                                  EXHIBIT 32 (a)


     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 Quarterly Report of Northland Cable Television, Inc. and
Subsidiary (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2004
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Form 10-Q"), I, John Whetzell, Chief Executive Officer 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 Form 10-Q fully complies with the requirements of Section 13
               (a) or (15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C.
               78m or 78(d)); and

          (2)  The information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents in all
               material respects, the financial condition and results of
               operations of the Company.


DATE: 11-12-04


/s/ JOHN S. WHETZELL
    ----------------
    John S. Whetzell
    Chief Executive Officer


A signed original of this written statement will be retained by Northland Cable
Television, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its
staff upon request.
----

Prior notification of a concentration

(Case COMP/M.4331 — Arcelor/Bamesa/Bamesa Otel)

Candidate case for simplified procedure

(2006/C 193/07)

(Text with EEA relevance)

----

(1)OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

(2)OJ C 56, 5.3.2005, p. 32.

----
No. 49588.

#### Protests 980107-G, etc., of Pacific Customs Brokerage Co. (Portland, Maine).

Opinion by

Walker, J.

In view of Pacific Customs Brokerage Co. (31 C. C. P. A. 102, C. A. D. 256) the claim for free entry under paragraph 1803 was sustained.