alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
February 24, 2014 

President Barack Obama 

The White House 

1600 Pennsylvania Avenue Northwest

Washington DC 20500 

Dear Mr. President: 

As leading medical and public health organizations, we write you to urge you to direct the U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency to adopt the Tier 3 Motor Vehicle Emissions and Fuel Standards no 

later than February 28, 2014. These stronger public health protections will significantly reduce toxic air 

pollution from the U.S. passenger vehicle fleet, and are urgently needed. Nearly 150 million Americans 

still live in areas where the air is too dangerous to breathe. Cleaner gasoline will benefit their health 

immediately.

Passenger vehicles remain one of the major sources of volatile organic compounds and nitrogen oxide 

emissions that react in the atmosphere to form ozone, which triggers asthma attacks, worsens lung 

disease and shortens life. Cars, light trucks and SUVs also contribute to ambient fine particulate matter 

which threatens heart and lung health, as well as increased risk of premature death. Emerging health 

research indicates that people who live or work near roadways suffer disproportionate adverse health 

effects from air pollution. 

Not only does the nation need these reductions in ozone and particulate matter to protect public health, 

lower sulfur gasoline and vehicle emissions standards are one of the most cost-effective paths to cleaner 

air. The National Association of Clean Air Agencies estimates that by lowering the sulfur content in 

gasoline, the nation could immediately reduce the amount of air pollution equal to removing 33 million 

cars and light trucks from our roads. Reducing the sulfur in gasoline will build on the strong foundation 

of your efforts to increase fuel efficiency and cut carbon pollution in half by 2025. 

Americans have the right to breathe clean and healthy air. In our work to improve the health of our 

patients and the public, we know first-hand that the air too many Americans breathe puts their health 
and their lives at risk. The new standards will protect the health of all, especially those who are most 

vulnerable: our children; the elderly; those with chronic lung disease, heart disease or diabetes; and 

those who have low incomes. We urge you to direct EPA to adopt the Tier 3 Motor Vehicle Emissions 

and Fuel Standards by February 28, 2014.

Sincerely, 

American Academy of Pediatrics

American Heart Association

American Lung Association

American Public Health Association

American Thoracic Society

Asthma and Allergy Foundation of America

Health Care Without Harm

National Association of County and City Health 

 Officials

Trust for America’s Health

cc: Gina McCarthy, Administrator, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Michael Boots, Acting Chair, Council on Environmental Quality 

Dan Utech, Special Assistant to the President for Energy and Climate Change 

Janet McCabe, Acting Assistant Administrator, Office of Air and Radiation, US EPA 

Chris Grundler, Director, Office of Transportation and Air Quality, US EPA

Howard Shelanski, Administrator, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, OMB
**EXHIBIT 32.2**

 

CERTIFICATION OF THE CHIEF FINANCIALOFFICER PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

 

 

In connection with the Annual Report of International AluminumCorporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the period ending June 30,2003, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), I,Mitchell K. Fogelman, the Senior Vice President-Finance and Chief FinancialOfficer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, asadopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

1.               The Reportfully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

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

 

 
| Date:   September 19,  2003 | /s/    MITCHELL K. FOGELMAN                   |
|-------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------|
|                                            | Mitchell K. Fogelman                                         |
|                                            | Senior Vice President - Finance  and Chief Financial Officer |

 

----
No. 55903.

protests 130972-K (A), etc. (New York).

#### Alleman & Gisiger et al. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Lawrence, J.

It was stipulated that the items of merchandise marked *“A”*or “B” on the invoices consist of watch movements similar in all *324material respects to those which were the subject of *United States*v. *Helbros Watch Co. et al.*(38 C. C. P. A. 1, C. A. D. 430). Upon the agreed statement of facts and the cited authority, the items marked “A” were held properly dutiable at the base rate of 90 cents each as watch movements more than 1 inch but less than 1.77 inches wide, and the items marked “B” were held dutiable at $1.20 each as watch movements more than *%o*of 1 inch but not more than 1 inch wide under paragraph 367 (a) (1), as modified, *supra.*
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

----oo0oo----

ALFRED J. ANOTONINI,

NO. CIV. 2:04-0505 WBS KJM

Plaintiff, PS

v. ORDER

THE PRUDENTIAL INSURANCE 

COMPANY OF AMERICA; THE 

PRUDENTIAL WELFARE BENEFITS

PLAN; THE PRUDENTIAL

RETIREMENT PLAN, 

Defendants.

_____________________________/

----oo0oo----

 This matter came on regularly for Pretrial Conference

on December 5, 2005. Plaintiff appeared pro se, and defendants

were represented by Richard T. Copeland. Pursuant to agreement

of the parties, the current trial date of February 14, 2006 is

hereby vacated; a new trial date is set for April 25, 2006 at

9:00 a.m. in Courtroom No. 5; and the Final Pretrial Conference,

pursuant to Rule 16(d) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 

is continued to March 17, 2006 at 10:00 a.m. in Courtroom No. 5. 

///

///

Case 2:04-cv-00505-WBS -KJM Document 22 Filed 12/06/05 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2

All other provisions of the court’s previous scheduling orders

remain in full force and effect.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: December 5, 2005

Case 2:04-cv-00505-WBS -KJM Document 22 Filed 12/06/05 Page 2 of 2
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION OFFICE OF HEARINGS WASHINGTON, DC

TRAVEL GROUP, INC., D/B/A REPUBLIC AIRTRAVEL AND SCOT SPENCER AIRLIFT GROUP, INC. AND RICHARD BERNARD 

### UnauthorizedAir Transportation, Unfair andDeceptivePractices and UnfairMethods of Competition, and Violations of Public CharterRules EXPRESS ONE INTERNATIONAL, INC. 

### Unfair andDeceptivePractices and UnfairMethods of Competition, and Violations of Public CharterRules EnforcementProceeding . ;·. ____ ,

. ''
-- ; ,j "; j

DOT-OST-1995-272 formerly Docket 49233

STATUS REPORT AND NOTICE OF SUBSTITUTION OF COUNSEL

The Office ofthe Assistant General Counsel for Aviation Enforcement and Proceedings ("Enforcement Office"), pursuantto Your Honor's March 22,2006, Order staying this proceeding, files this report detailing the current status ofthis proceeding and settlement negotiations. The Department has not ruled on the outstanding motions filed by Respondents and opposed by the Enforcement Office in Ascend Aviation Group, Docket OST-2004- 17486.2

There have beenno further settlement discussions. In addition, due to the retirement ofprior counsel, Mr. William J. Wagner, the Office ofAviation Enforcement and Proceedings has assigned as substitute counsel Mr. Vinh Q. Nguyen, Senior Trial Attorney, and Ms. Lisa Swafford-Brooks, Chief, Aviation Licensing Compliance Branch, to serve as his substitute.
Date: January 31, 2013
Respectfully submitted,
) Samuel Podberesky · Assistant General Counsel for Aviation Enforcement and Proceedings

United States Department ofTransportation Office ofAviation Enforcement and Proceedings 1200 NewJersey Avenue, S.E. Room 96-429 Washington, D.C. 20590 TEL: 202-366-9342 FAX: 202-366-7152

### 3

Docket No. DOT-OST-1995-272 I hereby certify that on this 31th day ofJanuary, 2013, a true and correct copy ofthe foregoing Status Report was served in the following manner to the following: Original U.S. Department ofTransportation Docket Operations, M-30 West Building Ground Floor Room W12-140 1200 NewJersey Avenue, S.E. Washington, D.C. 20590 By First Class Mail The Honorable Ronnie A. Yoder ChiefAdministrative Law Judge Office ofHearings, M-20 U.S. Department ofTransportation Washington, D.C. 20590 TEL: (202) 366-2142 FAX: (202) 366-7536 ByFirst Class Mail Scot Spencer SBD Aircraft Services 255 S Leland Norton Way Sam Bernardino, CA 92408
No. 52570.

petition 6646-R (San Francisco).

#### Pacific Trading Co. *v.*United States,

*208Opinion by

Cline, J.

The merchandise was appraised on the basis of the American selling price under the provisions of section 402 (g), Tariff Act of 1930, by virtue of a Presidential proclamation (T. D. 47031). Appeals were taken to reappraisement and to re-reappraisement and the court held that the American selling price was the proper basis of valuation but found values higher than the appraised and entered values. (Reap. Decs. 5815 and 5950.) At the trial the customs broker testified that the value he adopted as the American selling price was $6.40 per case, less a discount of *1}i*percent, which value was obtained from the Government examiner, and that he had no knowledge at the time of entry that the proper American selling price was $6.60. On the record presented it was held that the petitioner acted without intention to defraud the revenue of the United States or to conceal or misrepresent the facts of the case or to deceive the appraiser as to the value of the merchandise. The petition was therefore granted.
----

----

I Comunicações

Comissão

----

CATÁLOGO COMUM DE VARIEDADES DE ESPÉCIES HORTÍCOLAS

Sexto suplemento à 24.a edição integral

(2006/C 241 A/01)

SUMÁRIO

Legenda

Lista das espécies hortícolas

----

LEGENDA

----

(1)JO C 275 A de 8.11.2005, p. 1. Catálogo com a última redacção que lhe foi dada pelo quinto suplemento (JO C 158 A de 7.7.2006, p. 23).

(2)JO L 193 de 20.7.2002, p. 33. Directiva com a última redacção que lhe foi dada pela Directiva 2004/117/CE (JO L 14 de 18.1.2005, p. 18).

----

1.ALLIUM ASCALONICUM L.

2.ALLIUM CEPA L.

5.ALLIUM SATIVUM L.

16.BRASSICA OLERACEA L. CONVAR. CAPITATA (L.) ALEF. VAR. ALBA DC.

17.BRASSICA OLERACEA L. CONVAR. CAPITATA (L.) ALEF. VAR. RUBRA DC.

20.BRASSICA RAPA L. VAR. RAPA

21.CAPSICUM ANNUUM L.

23.CICHORIUM INTYBUS L. (PARTIM)

24.CICHORIUM INTYBUS L. (PARTIM)

26.CUCUMIS MELO L.

27.CUCUMIS SATIVUS L.

32.DAUCUS CAROTA L.

34.LACTUCA SATIVA L.

35.LYCOPERSICON LYCOPERSICUM (L.) KARSTEN EX FARW.

38.PHASEOLUS VULGARIS L.

39.PISUM SATIVUM L. (PARTIM)

40.RAPHANUS SATIVUS L.

43.SOLANUM MELONGENA L.

----
No. 64102.

protests 971949-G, etc. (Los Angeles).

#### H. H. Elder & Co. and Schenley Import Co. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Richardson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise and issues are similar in all material respects to those involved in *United States*v. *R. G. Williams & Co., Inc.*(40 C.C.P.A. 130, C.A.D. 508), and *Austin, Nichols & Co., Inc.*v. *United States*(22 Cust. Ct. 33, C.D. 1155), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
exhibit10_1.htm


    


      


       

      
        	
                Exhibit
      10.1

              


      

       

      


      


      


      “[United
Letterhead]”

      


      


      


      


      Chautauqua
Airlines, Inc.

      2500
South High School Road, Suite 160

      Indianapolis,
Indiana 46214

      Attn:
Bryan Bedford

      


      July 1,
2008

      


      Re: United Express Agreement
between United Air Lines, Inc. and Chautauqua Airlines, Inc. – United Contract
#165974 (the “Agreement”)

      


      Dear
Bryan,

      


      This
letter provides notification that, pursuant to Section II.B.1 of the Agreement,
United hereby exercises its right to terminate the Agreement, effective December
31, 2009.

      


      We look
forward to continuing our favorable relationship with the Republic family
through our relationship with you affiliate, Shuttle America.

      


      Thank you
and please let us know if you have any questions.

      


      Regards,

      


      “/s/
Cynthia C. Szadokierski”

      


      Cynthia
Szadokierski

      Vice
President – United Express and airport Operations Planning

      


      Cc:
Wexford Capital LLC

      411 West
Putnam Avenue

      Greenwich,
CT 06830

      Attn:
President & General Counsel
exv4w1






EXHIBIT 4.1




AMENDMENT




          This AMENDMENT (the “Amendment”) is entered into as of July 11, 2008 between American
Pacific Corporation, a Delaware corporation (the “Company”), and American Stock Transfer &
Trust Company (the “Rights Agent”).




          WHEREAS, the Company and the Rights Agent are parties to that certain Rights Agreement, dated
as of August 3, 1999 (the “Rights Agreement”);




          WHEREAS, the Rights Agreement provides that the Final Expiration Date (as defined in the
Rights Agreement) is August 2, 2009; and




          WHEREAS, the Company’s Board of Directors has determined that extending the Final Expiration
Date is in the best interests of the Company and its stockholders;




          NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual benefits arising from extension of the Rights
Agreement, and for other good and valuable consideration, the adequacy and sufficiency of which are
hereby acknowledged, the parties hereto agree as follows:




     1. Amendment.




The Rights Agreement is amended as set forth in this Amendment. Except as
specifically provided for in this Amendment, all of the terms and conditions of the
Rights Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. Each reference in the
Rights Agreement to “hereof,” “hereunder” and “this Agreement” shall, from and after
the date of this Amendment, refer to the Rights Agreement, as amended by this
Amendment.



     2. Amendment to Rights Agreement.




A. Section 7 of the Rights Agreement is amended by deleting “August 2, 2009” and
replacing such date with “August 2, 2019.” All references in the Rights Agreement to
the “Final Expiration Date” shall refer to “August 2, 2019”.




B. Exhibits B and C of the Rights Agreement are amended by deleting each reference
to “August 2, 2009” therein and replacing such date with “August 2, 2019.”



[Signature Page Follows]














 





          IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Amendment to be executed and delivered
as of the date first written above.




	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	American Pacific Corporation	 	 	 	American Stock Transfer & Trust Company	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	By:  	 	/s/ JOHN R. GIBSON 	 	 	By:  	 	/s/ HERBERT J. LEMMER 	 	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 
	 	Name:   	 	John R. Gibson	 	 	 	 	 	Name:   	Herbert J. Lemmer 	 	 
	 
	 	Title:   	 	Chairman & CEO	 	 	 	 	 	Title:   	Vice President 	 	 





Page 2 of Exhibit 4.1
### Page 1 of 3 **Disposition Comments Docket No:**  

### FAA - 2012 - 0986 These comments are in **Directorate ID:** 

### 2012 -NM - 077 - AD response to an SNPRM Originating Office Tracking No.: **Next Step:** FRAN SNPRM 

### N o C omments/Only

Supportive Comments Received

– If this box is checked, no signatures are required. No 

### Has the reference d service information been revised since the NPRM was issued? I f ye s, lis t latest revision and attach a cop y. Note that changes beyond the scope of the previously published NPRM will require a new notice. Contact the Directorate focal point for guidance. Instructions: Summarize all comments **by issue** (not by commenter) and provide your recommended resolution of each issue. **All comments relating to the sam e issue should be discussed together.**  Do not list all of the issues from one commenter togeth er. If changes to the AD are required based on the comments received, explain why and describe in detail what change(s) you recommend. Reference FAA - IR- M - 8040.1C Chapter 9. **ISSUE 1:** Select one o

f the following : If other, explain : Commenter(s): What change to the AD action is requested? Why is the change requested or how is it justified? Do we agree? If **YES,** we agree because Make the following changes to the AD: If **PARTIALLY AGREE** , we agree with because We disagree with because

Make the following changes to the AD: If **NO** , we don’t agree because **ISSUE 2**  **:** Select one of the following :

If other, explain : Commenter(s): What change to the AD action is requested? Why is the change requested or how is it justified? Do we agree? If **YES,** we agree because Make the following changes to the AD: If **PARTIALLY AGREE** , we agree w ith because We disagree with because Make the following changes to the AD:

### Page 2 of 3

If **NO** , we don’t agree because **For additional issues, do uble**  **- click**  **here**

### Page 3 of 3 **S ignature Section**  Signature indicates concurrence with this action. Originating Office Tracking No.: **ASE** Printed Name **: Date** 

**Branch M anager**  **Date**
Part 1

SUPPLEMENT

Fiscal Year 2016 Reporting

Section V

Line

No.

USSGL

Acct. USSGL Account Title Begin/End Exch/Nonexch Cust/Noncust

Budgetary Impact 

Indicator

Reporting Type 

Code Addl. Info.

4

15 6

23

Footnotes and Additional Information

6. This amount will agree with the net cost of operations as reported on the Statement of Net Cost.

Other Adjustments (Recissions, etc.) (+/-)

Net Cost of Operations (+/-)

Other Adjustments (Recissions, etc.) (+/-)

USSGL Crosswalk - Statement of Changes in Net Position

Bulletin No. 2016-XX DRAFT V SCNP - 1 IRC Handout 7/21/2016
No. 58513.

protest 202817-K (Los Angeles).

#### James G. Wiley *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

In accordance with oral stipulation of counsel that the correct dutiable weight was 196,165 pounds and that actually 196,165 pounds of goods were imported, the collector was directed to refund all duties taken in excess.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

JAMES REEVES, III : CIVIL ACTION

:

 v. :

:

VANESSA CARTER-MORAGNE et al. : NO. 02-4428

 ORDER

AND NOW, this 21st day of March, 2003, upon

consideration of plaintiff's motion requesting dismissal without

prejudice of claims against the defendant City of Philadelphia

pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(2) (docket entry # 17), it is

hereby ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff's motion is GRANTED; and

2. All claims against the City of Philadelphia in this

matter are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.

BY THE COURT:

 _______________________

 Stewart Dalzell, J.

Case 2:02-cv-04428-SD Document 18 Filed 03/21/2003 Page 1 of 1
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS **AUSTIN**

Honorable Kla Pike County Attorney Hartley County Dalhart, Texas Dear Sir: Opinion No. 0-M lcdependent ec
;:‘ehave your lette upon a question stated in sub **uesting** our oplnlon

Kay the Coun territory rrom one independect school the trusteee of th such territor.y is majority of the qu rusteea transter let to another fer la opposed by riot iroE which

as follows from one school dlstrlct and ,and further ProvldlnE for the s an? uelng,the latest legislative is controlling under the facts set s statute amongother things provides ded further that before any portion of any any part thereof detached anelection shall be held 

### atuhich the qualified t&x ;~ayin~:voters oi such district sou&t to be divided shall first vote by an;ajorlty vote to divide said district andshall define the part of said orlsinal district sdu@t to be detached;” Tze lax pertaining to **your** question is fully~\ALBGU3SBd Lr our opinion X0. O-275, written byilonorable Cecil C. Cammck, Fionorablo i-iilliaz J. R. Wng and t&is writer, addressed to h‘onOrable Gilbert Smith, County Attorney, Jones County, Uson, Texas, andapproved in conference by this Dopartnent; a copy **of** said opinion is enolosed herewith._I

.

ERS :AxK

F;NCLOSURE Honorable King Fiks, tags 2

Trusting that the above satisfeotorlly answers your question, weare Very truly yours

ASSISTAXT 

### APPROVED **OPINION** 

# 0
**COMMITTEE By**  **65%2& c** ****‘ “** **Y4***
No. 52962.

#### The Old Quaker Co. *v.*United States,

protest 140455-K (Indianapolis) .

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.
April 8, 1958

No. 61817.

#### Martin M. Jordan Corp. *v.*United States,

protest 295930-K.

—Protest abandoned March 21, 1958. (Not published.) (Initial No. 282999-K.) Plaintiff’s application for rehearing granted.
No. 49627.

#### Protest 686470-G of Millinery Clearing House (New York).

Opinion by

Tilson, J.

The record showed that certain of the items consisted of hats known as harvest hats, valued at less than $3 per dozen, and similar to those involved in *Caradine*v. *United States*(9 Cust. Ct. 69, C. D. 664). In accordance therewith those imported and withdrawn for consumption prior to the effective date of said trade agreement (T. D. 48075) were held dutiable at 25 percent ad valorem under paragraph 1504 (b) (5), and those imported or with, drawn for consumption subsequent to said date were held dutiable at 12)4 percent ad valorem under paragraph 1504 (b) (5) and said trade agreement.