alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Apri116, 2012. VIA CERTIFIED MAIL 

### DocketManagement Facility U.S. 

### Department ofTransportation 1200 NewJersey Avenue, SE West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140 Washington, DC 20590
Dear Sir orMadam: D/B/A Vertical Solutions



### D
w .c:-

Please acceptthis letter as ourformal petitionfor a relieffrom 14 CFRpart 120.1 (Applicability).
· We wantto combine ourDrug & Alcohol abatement program so that we may operate our

established Part 91 Sight Seeing Tours with our established Part 135 operations under one drug program. PlanetAir, Inc. d/b/aVertical Solutions operates one aircraft underPart 135 Single Pilot On Demand and also has a LOA under Part 91.147 to conduct Tour Operations in all its aircraft. Atthis time, we have one drug program inthe company, which was intended to satisfy both ofthese operations and all pilots and mechanics are enrolled underthis drug and alcohol testing program. As instructed, by the Federal Aviation Drug Abatement Division, after a recent Drug Program Inspection the one Drug Programis notrecognized by both the LOA(91.147) for Tour Operations andthe 135 Single Pilot Operations. We are requesting that inlieu ofmaintaining two drug programs for the same company to combine the LOA and 135 under our current drug and alcohol testing program due to the size and scope ofour operations and for the fact we are one company doing both 135 and 91 tour operations. Planet Air, Inc. d/b/a Vertical Solutions hasmetthe public interest inensuring that illicit drug users are detected andpreventedfrom performing a safety sensitive position. Requiring Planet Air, Inc. d/b/aVertical Solutions to duplicate drug testing programs for Part 91.147 and Part 135 isrepetitive and is adding unnecessary financial and administrative burden to such a small company. Combining the programs would continue to meetthe intent of 14 C.P.R. 120. The request for this exemption would not adversely affect safety because all ofthe employees who will perform safety sensitive functions for PlanetAir, Inc. d/b/a Vertical Solutions have been subject to the drug testing requirements as outlined in 14 C.P.R. 120.The regulation which we seek the exemption is the following: 

### 14 C.F.R. 120.1 a) All air carriers and operators certificated under part 119 of this chapter authorized to conduct operations under part 121 or part 135 ofthis chapter, all air traffic control facilities not operated by 

### the FAA or by 

### or under contract to the 

### U.K military; and all operators as defined in 14 CFR91.147. PlanetAir, Inc. d/b/aVertical Solutions respectfully requests that we receive an exemption from having two separate drug and alcohol programs and are able to combine the Part 135 and the Part 91.147 drug testing programs. Ifyourequire any additional information orhave questions concerning ourpetition, please do not' hesitateto give us a call.

P.O. BOX 9686 San juan, P.R. 00908- 787.944.3014/787.944.0086 info@verticalsolutionspr.com
- www.verticalsolutionspr.com
No. 58476.

protests 138025-K, etc. (New York).

#### Stephen Rug Mills, Inc. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Rao, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise is similar in all material respects to the linoleum the subject of *United States*v. *Pacific Overseas Co., W. J. Byrnes & Co.*(42 C. C. P. A. 1, C. A. D. 559), the claims of the plaintiff were sustained.
AMENDMENT
      NO. 1 TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT

     

    This
      Amendment No. 1 to the letter agreement ("Amendment") is made and entered into
      as of July 1, 2008 by and between Peerless Systems Corporation, a Delaware
      corporation ("Peerless") and Richard L. Roll ("Executive").

     

    WHEREAS,
      Executive is currently employed by Peerless pursuant to a written letter
      agreement executed as of June 12, 2008 (the "Letter Agreement");

     

    WHEREAS,
      Executive and Peerless wish to add a provision to his Letter
      Agreement;

     

    THEREFORE,
      the parties agree as follows:

     

    1.  The
      Executive will also be nominated as a director of Peerless for the 2008 Annual
      Meeting and for successive meetings provided that he continues to be President
      and Chief Executive Officer of Peerless. 

     

    2.  In
      the
      event that Executive is no longer the President and Chief Executive Officer
      of
      Peerless, Executive agrees to immediately resign from his position as a director
      of Peerless and any of its subsidiaries. 

     

    3.  Any
      capitalized terms in this Amendment that are not defined herein shall have
      the
      same meaning as set forth in the Employment Agreement.

     

    4.  Except
      as
      expressly set forth above, this Amendment shall not amend, supersede or
      otherwise modify any provision of the Letter Agreement.

     

     

    
      	 	 	 
	 	Peerless
              Systems
              Corporation
	 	 
	 	/s/ Steven M. Bathgate
	 	
              
                

              

              By:  Steven
                M. Bathgate

              Chairman,
                Compensation Committee

            
	 
 	 
 	 
 
	 	 	 
	 	
              EXECUTIVE

            
	 	 
	 	
              /s/
                Richard L. Roll

            
	 	
              

              Richard
                L. Roll
No. 52229.

protests 52894-K, etc. (Rochester).

#### H. C. Cohn & Co. *v.*United States,

*285Opinion by

Ekwall, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel the court found that the facts herein agreed upon were such as to bring the case within the holding in *John Barr*v. *United States*(11 Cust. Ct. 88, C. D. 801), which record was incorporated herein. (See *John Barr*v. *United States,*324 U. S. 83.) In accordance therewith it was held that the currency of the invoices should be converted at the buying rate in the New York market at noon on the day of exportation (the “free” rate of exchange for pounds sterling), as certified by the Federal Reserve-bank and set forth by the collector on each of the entries. Tfie protests were sustained to this extent.
Choose a diet low in fat, saturated fat, and cholesterol

to reduce your risk of heart 

accidents and can lead 

to addiction.

The Food Groups 19

What Counts as a Serving, Selection Tips

The Pyramid Food Choices Chart 25

How To Rate Your Diet 28
2 

maintain or improve your

weight.

The Pyramid also 

focuses on fat because

saturated fat.The Pyramid is an 

outline of what to eat 

each day. It’s not a rigid

prescription, but a general

for you.

The Pyramid calls for

eating a variety of foods to

get the nutrients you need
servings of these foods each day.

4 
vitamins and minerals

without excess calories.

Some fat or sugar symbols are shown in the food

foods that come from

plants. But there are many

lowfat dairy and lean 

meat choices available,

☛ Choose fewer foods

that are high in sugars—

candy, sweet desserts, and

soft drinks.

6 

Calories: 225

Fat: 11 grams
Sciences and on calorie

intakes reported by people

in national food consumption surveys.

active women.

8

details on how to count amounts of meat and other foods in this group.) 3

See the Pyramid Food Choices Chart for details on how to count total fat

(pages 25 to 27).

4

See chart on page 16 for details on how to count teaspoons of

added sugars.
increase your physical

activity and reduce the fat

and sugars in your diet. 

10 1

2-3 ounces of

cooked lean meat,

poultry, or fish

1/2 cup of cooked dry beans or 1 egg

counts as 1 ounce of lean meat.

2 tablespoons of peanut butter or 1/3 cup

of nuts count as 1 ounce of meat. 
fat to less than 10 percent

of calories, or about onethird of total fat intake.

All fats in foods are mix

and palm kernel oils. 

Monounsaturated fats

are found mainly in olive,

peanut, and canola oils. 

12 1

= 660 calories from fat.

B. Divide calories from fat per day by 9 (each gram 

of fat has 9 calories) to get grams of fat per day. 

Example: 660 calories from fat ÷ 9 = 73 grams of fat

C A L 
14 1

Whole Milk 33mg

1 cup

Skim Milk 4mg

1 cup

OIL
pp

of sugars in some popular

foods. 

16 1
bread, cream or cheese

sauces on pasta, and the

sugar and fat used with the

flour in making cookies.

or cream is called for, use

lowfat milk.

18 1
❥ deep-yellow vegetables

(carrots, sweet potatoes);

dressing.

20 2
—2 oz. of sliced turkey in

a sandwich at lunch; and 

—a 3 oz. cooked lean

hamburger for dinner.

22 2

or canned in oil 

are higher
*Check product label

(continued..

24 2
26 2

Beer, 12 fl. oz. (1 regular can) 150

Wine, dry, 5 fl. oz. 100

Liquor, 1-1/2 oz.* 100

*A mixer such as a soft drink will add more calories.
28 2

☛ Use nutrition labels on packaged foods you ate to

find out the grams of fat they contained.
From: Randi Walker

To: Adams, Lucy H.

Cc: Steve DeSantis

Subject: RE: Chromium Electroplating information request

Date: Monday, February 28, 2011 10:45:44 AM

Attachments: Chromium facilities Region 6.xls

Chromium facilities Region 9.xls

Hi Lucy,

We have some additional information to send and a correction. Attached you will find an additional

facility (West Falls Machine) in our Region 9 area of the state. The second Excel workbook, corrects an

error we reported for the emissions from Utica Metals.

Regarding the test reports. We are not certain they would be useful as, they would be more than 15

years old.

I am still waiting for information for one more facility. When I receive that, I will send it to you.

Randi
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

SUSANNE H. LINN, et al. : CIVIL ACTION

:

v. :

:

NORTHAMPTON COUNTY, et al. : NO. 02-4417

O R D E R

AND NOW, this day of October, 2003, it is hereby

ORDERED that a settlement conference is scheduled before the

undersigned on Wednesday, October 29, 2003 at 10:00 a.m. in Room

3029, U.S. Courthouse, 601 Market Street, Philadelphia, PA 

19106.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that trial counsel, clients and

any other person necessary to negotiate and agree to a settlement

shall appear in person at said conference. 

ATTEST: or BY THE COURT:

 

BY: Juanita M. Davis DIANE M. WELSH

 Deputy Clerk UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Copy faxed on 10/8/03 to:

Anne P. Felker, Esq.

Jordan Yeager, Esq.

Robert L. Sharpe, Jr., Esq.

L. Kristen Blanchard, Esq.

Amy L. Rosenberger, Esq.

Case 2:02-cv-04417-AB Document 44 Filed 10/08/2003 Page 1 of 1
----

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.4244 — Ravago/Muehlstein)

(2006/C 183/07)

(Text with EEA relevance)

On 31 July 2006, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

----
Case 2:05-cv-01099-ER Document 93 Filed 07/07/06 Page 1 of 8
Case 2:05-cv-01099-ER Document 93 Filed 07/07/06 Page 2 of 8
Case 2:05-cv-01099-ER Document 93 Filed 07/07/06 Page 3 of 8
Case 2:05-cv-01099-ER Document 93 Filed 07/07/06 Page 4 of 8
Case 2:05-cv-01099-ER Document 93 Filed 07/07/06 Page 5 of 8
Case 2:05-cv-01099-ER Document 93 Filed 07/07/06 Page 6 of 8
Case 2:05-cv-01099-ER Document 93 Filed 07/07/06 Page 7 of 8
Case 2:05-cv-01099-ER Document 93 Filed 07/07/06 Page 8 of 8
October 25, 1960

No. 64822.

Suit 5009.

#### Jack and Jill Togs, Inc. *v.*United States (W. T. Grant Co., Party in Interest).

C.D. 2092 affirmed July 20, 1960. C.A.D. 749.
Before the Third Division,

October 23, 1957

No. 61294.

protests 293006-K, etc. (New York).

#### Bloomingdale Bros., a Div. of Fed. Dept. Stores, Inc., et al. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of figures similar in all material respects to those passed *471upon in *Wm. S. Pitcairn Corp.*v. *United States*(39 C. C. P. A. 15, C. A. D. 458), the items of merchandise marked with the letter “A” were held dutiable at 20 percent under paragraph 1547 (a), Tariff Act of 1930, and the items marked with the letter “B” at 10 percent under the provision in said paragraph, as modified by the Annecy Protocol to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (T. D. 52373), supplemented by Presidential proclamation (T. D. 52476), for “Works of art * * * statuary, sculptures, or copies, replicas, or reproductions thereof, valued at not less than $2.50.”
DRAFT

ID

Simple or

Special Name Type Description Error Message 

118 SPECIAL

Restricted Use of USSGL Accounts 

113510 and 123500 Compound

The use of USSGL accounts 113510 and 123500 is 

restricted to specific Department of Defense TAS only.

This TAS is not permitted to report USS

113510 and 123500. 

123 SIMPLE

BUDGET OBJECT CLASS Bulk File Special

The Budget Object Class must be valid based on the OMB Circular A-11

The Budget Object Class is not valid. RA-11. 

U.S. Standard General Ledger

Data Validations - Summary

Part 1SUPPLEMENT

Bulletin No. 2021-20 DRAFT VII VSR - 1
# C_2016454EN.01002002.xml

| 5.12.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 454/20 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

5.12.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 454/20

---

Order of the President of the Court of 8 July 2016 — European Commission v Romania

(Case C-62/16) (1)

(2016/C 454/36)

Language of the case: Romanian

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

---

(1)  OJ C 145, 25.4.2016.

---
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

:

DOLORES (DEE) BARRETT, :

Plaintiff, : CIVIL ACTION

:

v. : NO. 02-4421

:

THE GREATER HATBORO CHAMBER : 

OF COMMERCE, INC., et al., :

Defendants. :

:

ORDER

AND NOW, on this 7th day of September, 2005, upon consideration of the Motion of Sidney

L. Gold, Esquire for Leave to Withdraw from Representation of Defendant John Aiken (Doc. 42),

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the motion is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART.

The Court will GRANT Mr. Gold leave to file a Withdrawal of Appearance on behalf of Defendant

Aiken. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Mr. Gold’s request to adjourn the trial is DENIED. All

parties shall be ready to proceed to trial on Monday, September 19, 2005 at 9:30a.m.

BY THE COURT:

/s/ Petrese B. Tucker

____________________________

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

Case 2:02-cv-04421-PBT Document 45 Filed 09/08/2005 Page 1 of 1
Exhibit 32.2


                            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 on Form 10-Q of Merrill Lynch
Preferred Capital Trust IV and Merrill Lynch Preferred Funding IV, L.P.
(the "Partnership") for the period ended March 26, 2004 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
I, John J. Fosina, Controller of Merrill Lynch & Co., Inc., the General
Partner of the Partnership, 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
    Partnership.




                              MERRILL LYNCH PREFERRED FUNDING IV, L.P.

                              By:  MERRILL LYNCH & CO., INC., as General Partner


                              By:  /s/ JOHN J. FOSINA
                                   ---------------------------------------------
                              Name:    John J. Fosina *
                              Title:   Controller, Merrill Lynch & Co., Inc.








Dated: May 6, 2004
__________________

*  John J. Fosina functions as the equivalent of the Chief Executive Officer
   and Chief Financial Officer of the Partnership for purposes of Section 906
   of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
Exhibit 23.2

Consent of Independent Engineers

We refer to our report auditing estimates of the natural
gas, natural gas liquids and oil reserves attributable to Husky Energy Inc. (the Company) as of December 31, 2012 (the Report).

We hereby consent to references to our name in the Companys Annual Report on Form 40-F to be filed with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission pursuant to the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934, as amended, and the Companys registration statement on Form F-10 (File No. 333-174554). We also confirm that we have read the Companys Annual Information Form for the year ended December 31, 2012, dated
March 8, 2013, and that we have no reason to believe that there are any misrepresentations in the information contained in it that was derived from the Report or that is within our knowledge as a result of the services we performed in
connection with such Report.



|                                      
|--------------------------------------
|Sincerely,                            
|                                      
|McDaniel & Associates Consultants Ltd.
|                                      
|/s/ B.J. Wurster, P. Eng.             
|B.J. Wurster, P.Eng.                  
|Vice President                        

Calgary, Alberta, Canada

March 8, 2013
EXHIBIT 32.1

                            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 IQ Biometrix, Inc. (the "Company") on
Form 10-QSB for the period ending March 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, William Scigliano,
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 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/ William Scigliano
                                -----------------------------
                                William Scigliano
                                Chief Executive Officer



May 16, 2005
# C_2019139EN.01010802.xml

| 15.4.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 139/108 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.4.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 139/108

---

Order of the General Court of 27 February 2019 — Bowles v BCE

(Case T-677/16) (1)

(2019/C 139/111)

Language of the case: French

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

---

(1)  OJ C 419, 14.11.2016.

---
Order filed, January 10, 2013.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-12-01088-CV

____________

REMOTE CONTROL HOBBIES LLC, ET AL, Appellant

V.

AIRBORNE FRIEGHT CORP., ET AL, Appellee

On Appeal from the Co Civil Ct at Law No 1

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 829934-401

ORDER

The reporter’s record in this case was due December 14, 2012. See Tex. R. 

App. P. 35.1. The court has not received a request to extend time for filing the 

record. The record has not been filed with the court. Because the reporter’s record 

has not been filed timely, we issue the following order.

We order Lettie Witter, the official court reporter, to file the record in this 

appeal within 10 days of the date of this order. 

PER CURIAM
No. 59479.

protest 145111-K (New York).

#### Sterling Factors Company *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Ford, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that certain items of the merchandise consist of woven silk fabrics in the piece, bleached, dyed, colored, or printed, the same in all material respects as those the subject of *Walter Strassburger & Co., Inc., et al.*v. *United States*(26 Cust. Ct. 210, C. D. 1326), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
# C_2016392EN.01001301.xml

| 24.10.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 392/13 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.10.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 392/13

---

Appeal brought on 12 August 2016 by Moreda-Riviere Trefilerías, S.A. against the judgment of the General Court (Sixth Chamber) delivered on 2 June 2016 in Joined Cases T-426/10 to T-429/16 and T-438/12 to T-441/12, Moreda-Riviere Trefilerías and Others v Commission

(Case C-455/16 P)

(2016/C 392/17)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Parties

Appellant: Moreda-Riviere Trefilerías, S.A. (represented by: F. González Díaz, A. Tresandi Blanco and V. Romero Algarra, lawyers)

Appellant:

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission

Other party to the proceedings:

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The appellant claims that the Court should:

| — | set aside the judgment of the General Court of 2 June 2016 in Cases T-438/12 to T-441/12 and, in particular, in Case T-440/12, Moreda–Riviere Trefilerías S.A. v Commission; |
| --- | --- |

—

set aside the judgment of the General Court of 2 June 2016 in Cases T-438/12 to T-441/12 and, in particular, in Case T-440/12, Moreda–Riviere Trefilerías S.A. v Commission;

Moreda–Riviere Trefilerías S.A.

Commission

| — | order the Commission to pay the costs incurred in both the present proceedings and the proceedings before the General Court. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the Commission to pay the costs incurred in both the present proceedings and the proceedings before the General Court.

Grounds of appeal and main arguments

Grounds of appeal and main arguments

| 1. | The General Court erred in law in declaring inadmissible the plea in law relating to the infringement of the appellant’s rights of defence. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The General Court erred in law in declaring inadmissible the plea in law relating to the infringement of the appellant’s rights of defence.

| 2. | The General Court erred in law by applying an incorrect legal standard when evaluating the second request for inability to pay and, consequently, the admissibility of the action. |
| --- | --- |

2.

The General Court erred in law by applying an incorrect legal standard when evaluating the second request for inability to pay and, consequently, the admissibility of the action.

| 3. | The General Court erred in law in evaluating the evidence or clearly distorting the evidence, failing to carry out a full review exercising its powers of unlimited jurisdiction, infringing the right to effective judicial protection and failing to state reasons. |
| --- | --- |

3.

The General Court erred in law in evaluating the evidence or clearly distorting the evidence, failing to carry out a full review exercising its powers of unlimited jurisdiction, infringing the right to effective judicial protection and failing to state reasons.

---
No. 54603.

#### Belgard & Frank, Inc., et al. *v.*United States,

protests 122054-K, etc. (New York).

Opinion by

Oliver, C. J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of synthetic stones the same in all material respects as those the subject of *S. Nathan & Co., Inc.*v. *United States*(37 C. C. P. A. 99, C. A. D. 426), the claim at 10 percent under paragraph 1528 was sustained.
March 15, 1948

No. 52225.

Suit 4573.

#### Charles C. Perry *v.*United States.

C. D. 1032 affirmed January 27, 1948. C. A. D. 383.