alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
212 Airport Drive

www.bradfordairport.net 

### •...



# -, BRRDFORD 

## REGIOnnL RIRPORT ;(00]- 

## /'/>:<~ IlrAdf~N.(. /li"fO,-1 

### fi..11.<4-;iy reJpbMC ~ 

### !s~J 

## kee/... LewisRun, PA 16738 814-368-5928 EX10

= January 16,2014

Mr. Koch,- N W

Iwas copiedonyour 12/12/13letter to Mr. Smisek, President and CEOofUni.ted Airlines. While I am sympathetic and sorry foryour bad experience, I do appreciate you taking the time to writc a letter to United Airlines. Your letter captures and portrays exactly what is going on with many airlines which provide air service to rural communities through the Essential AirService (EAS)program. The Department ofTransportation through an act ofCongress is holding rural airports (not the airlines) accountable for sustaining a minimum of 10enplanements per day to continue eligibility in the EAS program. Unfortunately, as your letter portrays the airlines are providing sub-standard service which is turning potential passengers away; yet the rural airports are held accountable for marketing and advertising a product and service we cannot control. Your question "Why isn't the Essential Air Service program working in some areas?" is right on target. I have passed along your letter on to Federal representatives and others and hopeyour negative experience can invoke somepositive changes inthe future. As you indicated in your letter; Cape Air is one airline that appears to be working; providing reasonable, safe and dependable service. Also Cape Air gets involved in the communities they serve. The Bradford Regional Airport is hopeful we can survive this next obstacle in the EAS program and obtain Cape Air as our future air service provider; ifsoplease giveour airport another opportunity onyour next flight into the Bradford area. Please contact me at (814) 368.5928 EX 10 or tllm(Ulin'"i'ordairport.net if I can be of any assistance. Again, thanks fortaking the time towrite your letter. Sincerely, 

# ~c:lJ
Thomas C.Frungillo, A.A.E. Airport Director Bradford RegionalAirport
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

FORREST G. KRAMER : CIVIL ACTION

:

:

v. :

: NO. 02-4355

:

WEBCRAFT TECHNOLOGIES :

INC. :

ORDER

AND NOW, this day of November, 2002, it is hereby ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff’s expert report(s) shall be exchanged no later than January 3, 2003. 

Defendant’s expert report(s) shall be exchanged no later than February 18, 2003.

2. All discovery shall be completed no later than March 31, 2003. 

3. All dispositive motions shall be filed no later than April 10, 2003; responses to

such motions shall be filed no later than April 28, 2003. The Parties may file supplemental

briefs, however, such filings will not necessarily delay the Court’s ruling on the subject motion.

4. This case will be placed in the Court's trial pool on June 2, 2003. Once placed in

the trial pool, a case may be called upon 24 hours notice to Counsel.

5. Originals of all filings required under this Order shall be filed with the Clerk of the

Court, and a courtesy copy of the same shall be submitted to the chambers of the Honorable R.

Barclay Surrick (Room 5118).

6. Deadlines for the exchange of trial exhibits and witness lists, motions in limine and

other pretrial submissions will be set by further Order of this Court.

Case 2:02-cv-04355-RBS Document 9 Filed 11/07/2002 Page 1 of 2
2

7. The unavailability of any witness, as defined in Federal Rule of Civil Procedure

32(a)(3), will not be a ground to delay the commencement or progress of an ongoing trial. A

party may, however, use oral or videotape depositions at trial of any witness whose testimony a

party believes essential to the presentation of that party's case, regardless of whether that witness

is a party, a non-party or an expert, provided that such witness, including any witness offered for

purpose of impeachment, has been identified to all parties at least thirty (30) days prior to the

discovery deadline.

BY THE COURT:

___________________________

R. Barclay Surrick, Judge

Case 2:02-cv-04355-RBS Document 9 Filed 11/07/2002 Page 2 of 2
Exhibit
32(b)








This
Certification is being furnished and shall not be deemed “filed” for purposes of
Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or otherwise
subject to the liability of that section.  This Certification shall
not be incorporated by reference into any registration statement or other
document pursuant to the Securities Act of 1933, except as otherwise stated in
such filing.








Certification
Pursuant to Section 1350 of Chapter 63


of Title
18 of the United States Code








In
connection with the Annual Report of Indiana Michigan Power Company (the
“Company”) on Form 10-K (the “Report”) for the year ended December 31, 2007 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Holly
Keller Koeppel, the Chief Financial 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, based on my knowledge (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.








/s/ Holly Keller
Koeppel_


Holly
Keller Koeppel


Chief
Financial Officer








February
28, 2008








A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to
American Electric Power Company, Inc. and will be retained by American Electric
Power Company, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or
its staff upon request.
Before the Third Division,

September 19, 1947

No. 51909.

#### American Import Company *v.*United States,

protest 117728-K (Los Angeles).

Opinion by

Cline, J.

It was stipulated that the trays in question are in chief value of copper (not brass) similar in all material respects to those the subject of *Ignaz Strauss & Co., Inc.*v. *United States*(9 Cust. Ct. 342, C. D. 710) and Abstract 48768. On the authority of the decisions cited the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
(Reap. Dec. 8624)

Entry Nos. 39680; 40338; 42027.

#### Raylite Electric Corp. *v.*United States

(Decided July 13, 1956)

*Barnes, Richardson & Colburn*for the plaintiff.

*George Cochran Doub,*Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Wilson, Judge:

These appeals for reappraisement have been submitted for decision upon the following stipulation of counsel for the parties hereto:

> IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by and between the attorneys for the parties hereto, subject to the approval of the Court, that the merchandise covered by the appeals to reappraisement enumerated in Schedule A, attached hereto and made a part hereof, consist of electric bulbs from Japan.

> IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED, that the appraised values of the merchandise covered by the appeals to reappraisement enumerated herein, less the amount of buying commission as noted on the invoices, is equal to the market value or the price at the time of exportation of such merchandise to the United States, at which such or similar merchandise was freely offered for sale to all purchasers in the principal markets of Japan, in the usual wholesale quantities and in the ordinary course of trade, for exportation to the United States, packing included.

> IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED that on or about the date of exportation such or similar merchandise was not freely offered for sale for home consumption in Japan.

> IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED that the appeals to reappraisement enumerated in Schedule A may be submitted on this stipulation.

On the agreed facts I find the export value, as that value is defined in section 402 (d) of the Tariff Act of 1930, to be the proper basis for the determination of the value of the merchandise here involved, and that such values were the appraised values, less the amounts of buying commission as noted on the invoices.

Judgment will be entered accordingly.
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on this date I caused a true and correct copy of Defendants’ Second

Motion In Limine to Preclude Evidence to be served by United States Mail, First Class

Service, properly addressed and postage prepaid, upon the following:

Anita F. Alberts, Esquire

301 South Main Street

The Atrium, Suite W-2

Doylestown, PA 18901

(Attorney for Plaintiff)

 /s/Sidney L. Gold, Esquire SG1387 

SIDNEY L. GOLD, ESQUIRE

Attorney for Defendants 

DATE: September 12, 2005

Case 2:02-cv-04421-PBT Document 53-2 Filed 09/12/2005 Page 1 of 1
Part 3

SUPPLEMENT

Fiscal Year 2014 Reporting

Section V

Bulletin No. 2014-07 Draft V - 52 IRC Handout August 14, 2014

SBR 

Line 

No.

USSGL 

Account USSGL Account Title

Begin / 

End 

Debit / 

Credit Auth Type 

Trans 

Partner 

TAFS 

Status 

Fund 

Type

Addl. 

Info.

1000 3

1000 4384 Temporary Reduction/Cancellation Returned by Appropriation B P E 1

1020 5

1020 4384 Temporary Reduction/Cancellation Returned by Appropriation E P E 1

1020 4392 Permanent Reduction - New Budget Authority E C U 2

1290

1290 4384 Temporary Reduction/Cancellation Returned by Appropriation E P E 1 1

1290 4384 Temporary Reduction/Cancellation Returned by Appropriation B P E 1 1

1690

1690 4131 Current-Year Contract Authority Realized E U 1/2/3/4/7

1690 4392 Permanent Reduction - New Budget Authority E C U 1/2/3/4/7

Appropriations (discretionary and mandatory)

Contract authority (discretionary and mandatory)

USSGL Crosswalk - Statement of Budgetary Resources for Fiscal 2014 Reporting USSGL Account Attributes TAFS Attributes

Budgetary Resources:

Unobligated balance brought forward, October 1

Adjustment to unobligated balance brought forward, October 1 (+ or -) (Note 28)
Exhibit
32.2





CERTIFICATIONS
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 Ardent Mines Limited on Form 10-K for the
year ended June 30, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Luis Feliu, Principal Financial 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, to my knowledge
that:





(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
Company.





Date:
September 28, 2010





By:
              /s/ Luis FeliuName:   
      Luis FeliuTitle:     
      Principal Financial
Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
 
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND> This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from 
Illinois Bell Telephone Company's December 31, 1995 Financial Statements and 
is qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial statements. 
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1995
<CASH>                                             300
<SECURITIES>                                         0<F1>
<RECEIVABLES>                                  864,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                    48,800
<INVENTORY>                                     17,800
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               859,700      
<PP&E>                                       8,444,700    
<DEPRECIATION>                               4,689,400   
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               4,980,300     
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,341,300   
<BONDS>                                      1,061,200 
<COMMON>                                     1,638,800
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                   (399,800)      
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 4,980,300        
<SALES>                                              0<F2>         
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             3,414,000     
<CGS>                                                0<F3>         
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                2,396,800     
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               (7,500)      
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                44,700     
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             117,200      
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                907,500      
<INCOME-TAX>                                   334,200    
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            573,300     
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0 
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0     
<CHANGES>                                            0 
<NET-INCOME>                                   573,300
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
<FN>

<F1> Securities are not material and therefore have not been stated separately
     in the financial statements. This amount is included in the Cash tag.

<F2> Net sales of tangible products is not more than 10% of total operating 
     revenues and therefore has not been stated separately in the financial 
     statements pursuant to Regulation S-X, Rule 5-03(b). This amount is 
     included in the "Total Revenues" tag.

<F3> Cost of tangible goods sold is included in cost of service and products in 
     the financial statements and the "Total Cost" tag, pursuant to Regulation 
     S-X, Rule 5-03(b).
</FN>
        



</TABLE>
No. 67822.

#### Falcon Sales Co. *v.*United States,

protest 60/31348 (Tampa).

Opinion by

Oliver, O.J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise and issues are similar in all material respects to those involved in *Falcon Sales Company*and *J. J. Murphy & Co.*v. *United States*(47 Cust. Ct. 129, C.D. 2292), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
EXHIBIT 31.1 

CERTIFICATIONS

I, Edwin A. Miller, certify that: 

1.              I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB of Infodata Systems Inc.; 

2.              Based on my knowledge, this annual 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 annual report; 

3.              Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information          included in this annual 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 annual report; 

4.              The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for          establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in          Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and have: 

a)              designed such disclosure controls and procedures 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 annual report is being prepared; 

b)              evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and          procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of this annual          report (the “Evaluation Date”); and 

c)              presented in this annual report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the          disclosure controls and procedures based on our evaluation as of the Evaluation          Date; 

5.              The registrant’s other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on          our most recent evaluation, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit          committee of registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the          equivalent functions): 

a)              all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal controls          which could adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process,          summarize and report financial data and have identified for the          registrant’s auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and 

b)              any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees          who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal controls; and 

6.              The registrant’s other certifying officers and I have indicated in this          annual report whether there were significant changes in internal controls or in          other factors that could significantly affect internal controls subsequent to          the date of our most recent evaluation, including any corrective actions with          regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses. 

Date: March 31, 2005 

/s/ Edwin A. Miller
# sec5_sbr_2022

&"Arial,Bold"&10Bulletin No. 2022-12	&"Arial,Bold"&10V SBR - &P	&"Arial,Bold"&10IRC Handout April 20, 2022
Case No. 8,999.

#### MALTBY v. CONVERSE.

[Cited in Maltby v. Graham, 35 Fed. 20G, 37 Fed. GDI. Nowhere reported; opinion not now accessible.]
No. 58481.

protest 195983-K (Milwaukee).

#### Salentine and Company, Inc. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Rao, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise is the same in all material respects as that the subject of *United States*v. *Geo. Wm. Rueff, Inc.*(41 C. C. P. A. 95, C. A. D. 535), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT SERVICE
P.O. BOX 51318
PHILADELPHIA, PA 19115-6318

May 23, 2013
TO: Agencies Serviced by tie Check Resolution Division (CRD)
SUBJECT: — Transition of Check Claims and Check Reclamations Workload

The purpose of this communication is to notify you of upcoming changes that will affect
your organization’s interactions with the Bureau of the Fiscal Service (BFS). As you may
be aware, BFS is working to consolidate and reorganize various payment and post-
payment operations. In this restructuring, the BFS realignment of work will result in two
focused activities:

e Kansas City Financial Center (KFC) as the BFS Payment Processing Center

e Philadelphia Financial Center (PFC) as the BFS Post-Payment Processing
Center

Listed below are key dates related to the transition:
e Check claims rezeived prior to January 1, 2013 are being adjudicated by CRD
personnel. Eifective January 1, 2013 PFC began handling all new check claims.

e Effective May 13, 2013 all correspondence previously mailed to P.O. Box 1849 in
Hyattsvillle, MD should now be mailed to P.O. Box 51322 in Philadelphia, PA.

e Effective June 3, 2013 agencies should contact PFC at 855-868-0151 option #1
instead of 202-874-8445 regarding all post-payment inquiries.
e As of September 30, 2013 all check post-payment work will be supported by PFC

as CRD will no longer exist.

We appreciate your patience with this current initiative and strive to provide your agen
with the same quaiity of customer service you have come to expect. If you have any
questions leading up to and during the transition, please use the below points of contacts:

Check Resolution Division
Ronald Cymbor, Director, Check Resolution D

(202) 874-7913

Philadelphia Financial Center

Lisa Andre, Manager, Customer S Branch (215) 516-8142
Kevin McDaniels, Deputy Manager. Customer Service Branch (215) 516-8040
PFC Fax Number (215) 516-8162

Sincerely,

ie ald cy mb6r Elizdpeth A. ’‘Belinsky
Director egional Director
Check Resolution Division Philadelphia Financial Center
```

                                                                    EXHIBIT 13.1

               CERTIFICATION UNDER SARBANES-OXLEY ACT SECTION 906

     Pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a)
and (b) of section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code), the
undersigned officer of Industrial Development Bank of Israel Limited ("the
Company"), herby certifies, to such officer's knowledge, that:

     The Annual Report on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2007 (the
"Report") of the Company fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a)
or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and all information contained in
the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition
and results of operations of the Company.

Dated: September 11, 2008

                                                     /s/ Uri Galili
                                                     --------------
                                                     General Manager
```
----

Order of the Court of First Instance of 6 July 2006 — Cofira-Sac v Commission

(Case T-43/06) (1)

(2006/C 212/81)

Language of the case: Italian

The President of the Second Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

----

(1)OJ C 86, 8.4.2006.

----
JUDGMENT

Court of Appeals 

 

First District of Texas 

NO. 01-14-00536-CR

DENNIS ROY REDDING, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

Appeal from the 212th District Court of Galveston County. (Tr. Ct. No. 12-CR-2363).

This case is an appeal from the final judgment signed by the trial court on 

May 15, 2014. After submitting the case on the appellate record and the arguments 

properly raised by the parties, the Court holds that the trial court’s judgment contains no 

reversible error. Accordingly, the Court affirms the trial court’s judgment.

The Court orders that this decision be certified below for observance.

Judgment rendered October 15, 2015.

Panel consists of Chief Justice Radack and Justices Bland and Huddle. Opinion delivered 

by Justice Huddle.
Case 2:05-cv-02330-CMR   Document 408   Filed 08/29/08   Page 1 of 25

Case 2:05-cv-02330-CMR   Document 408   Filed 08/29/08   Page 2 of 25

Case 2:05-cv-02330-CMR   Document 408   Filed 08/29/08   Page 3 of 25

Case 2:05-cv-02330-CMR   Document 408   Filed 08/29/08   Page 4 of 25

Case 2:05-cv-02330-CMR   Document 408   Filed 08/29/08   Page 5 of 25

Case 2:05-cv-02330-CMR   Document 408   Filed 08/29/08   Page 6 of 25

Case 2:05-cv-02330-CMR   Document 408   Filed 08/29/08   Page 7 of 25

Case 2:05-cv-02330-CMR   Document 408   Filed 08/29/08   Page 8 of 25

Case 2:05-cv-02330-CMR   Document 408   Filed 08/29/08   Page 9 of 25

Case 2:05-cv-02330-CMR   Document 408   Filed 08/29/08   Page 10 of 25

Case 2:05-cv-02330-CMR   Document 408   Filed 08/29/08   Page 11 of 25

Case 2:05-cv-02330-CMR   Document 408   Filed 08/29/08   Page 12 of 25

Case 2:05-cv-02330-CMR   Document 408   Filed 08/29/08   Page 13 of 25

Case 2:05-cv-02330-CMR   Document 408   Filed 08/29/08   Page 14 of 25

Case 2:05-cv-02330-CMR   Document 408   Filed 08/29/08   Page 15 of 25

Case 2:05-cv-02330-CMR   Document 408   Filed 08/29/08   Page 16 of 25

Case 2:05-cv-02330-CMR   Document 408   Filed 08/29/08   Page 17 of 25

Case 2:05-cv-02330-CMR   Document 408   Filed 08/29/08   Page 18 of 25

Case 2:05-cv-02330-CMR   Document 408   Filed 08/29/08   Page 19 of 25

Case 2:05-cv-02330-CMR   Document 408   Filed 08/29/08   Page 20 of 25

Case 2:05-cv-02330-CMR   Document 408   Filed 08/29/08   Page 21 of 25

Case 2:05-cv-02330-CMR   Document 408   Filed 08/29/08   Page 22 of 25

Case 2:05-cv-02330-CMR   Document 408   Filed 08/29/08   Page 23 of 25

Case 2:05-cv-02330-CMR   Document 408   Filed 08/29/08   Page 24 of 25

Case 2:05-cv-02330-CMR   Document 408   Filed 08/29/08   Page 25 of 25
# Main

&"Arial,Bold"Bulletin No. 2017-16	&"Arial,Bold"RBS  - &PDRAFT	&"Arial,Bold"IRC Handout  12 05 17