alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION 

WASHINGTON, DC 

SPA RENTAL, LLC, d/b/a/ MSI AVIATION, 

Complainant, 

v. 

SOMERSET- PULASKI COUNTY AIRPORT 

BOARD, 

Respondent. 

FAA Docket No. 16-13-02 

NOTICE OF EXTENSION OF TIME 

This matter is before the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) based on the abovereferenced complaint, filed in accordance with FAA Rules of Practice for Federally-Assisted 

Airport Eriforcement Proceedings, 14 CFR Part 16. Pursuant to 14 CFR Part 16, subpart B, 

the date by which the Director's Determination will be issued in this matter is hereby 

extended to November 18,2014. 

Ao extension of time is necessary and appropriate for a fair and complete determination in this 

case. 

Ra'ndall S. Fiertz 

Director, Airport Compliance 

and Management Aoalysis 

cr 

Date 
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I HEREBY CERTIFY that on September 5, 2014, I caused to be placed in the United 

States mail (first class mail, postage paid) a true copy ofthe Notice of Extension of Time to 

November 18,2014 for FAA Docket No. 16-13-02 addressed to: 

Counsel for Complainant: 

Komad Kuczak 

130 West Second Street, Suite 1010 

Dayton, OH 45402 

Counsel for Respondent: 

Rachel Owsley 

Bethany A. Breetz 

Stites & Harbison, PLLC 

400 West Market Street, Suite 1800 

Louisville, KY 40202 

Hand delivered to: 

FAA Part 16 Airport Proceedings Docket 

FAA Airport Compliance and Management Analysis, AC0-1 00 

(7. [' ;} . __ · - -- ' ~! / tC/ !Puf {ll 1cl 

audia Roberts 

Office of Airport Compliance and 

Management Analysis
.IED STq T ~ S UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Q WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460 y ~ 11t/► z

0 F ylqC PROt

~ G ~~ 

### JUN 2 0 2011

OFFICE OF AIR AND RADIATION
J. R. Stroble Director, National TRU Program Carlsbad Field Office Department of Energy P.O. Box 3090 Carlsbad, NM 88221 Dear Mr. Stroble: This is in response to your June 16, 2011, request for the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA's) concurrence with the Department of Energy's (DOE) draft expansion certification letter to the Central Characterization Project (CCP) characterizing transuranic (TRU) waste at the Savannah River Site (SRS). Your request is in accordance with the Carlsbad Field Office (CBFO) procedures that are intended to ensure that DOE's Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) site certifications correlate appropriately with EPA approvals for waste characterization activities at DOE TRU waste generator sites. We concur that DOE's latest draft expansion certification letter comports with all of EPA's existing approvals for CH TR[1 waste (debris, soils, and solids) and RH TRU waste (debris and solids) at SRS. The purpose of this draft expanded certification is to add a new methodology for calibrating the Nondestructive Assay Box Counter (approved by EPA on May 31, 201 l) and adding a drum of RH waste generated at Battelle Columbus Laboratory (BCL), characterized by CCP at SRS (approved by EPA June 8, 2011). EPA has also received and reviewed quarterly tiering reports covering Tier 2 changes to the waste characterization program implemented by CCP at SRS and have found all changes made to be acceptable. Thank you for providing us with an opportunity to review the draft expanded certification memo for SRS-CCP. If you have any questions or concerns, please contact me at 202-343-9422.

Sincerely,

Edward Feltcorn Center for Waste Management and Regulations

Intemet Address (URL) • http://www.epa.gov Recycled/Recyclable 0 Printed with Vegetable Oil Based Inks on 100% Postconsumer, Process Chlorine Free Recycled Papercc: Norma Castaneda, CBFO

Court Fesmire, CBFO Dennis Miehls, CBFO Martin Navarrete, CBFO Donna Sellmer, CTAC
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 39 (Wednesday, February 28, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Page 9005]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-3470]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)


Disease, Disability, and Injury Prevention and Control Special 
Emphasis Panel: Scientific, Technical and Operational Services for 
Epidemiology, Surveillance and Laboratory Program, Contract 
Solicitation Number (CSN) 2006-N-08556

    In accordance with section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory 
Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463), the Centers for Disease Control and 
Prevention (CDC) announces a meeting of the aforementioned Special 
Emphasis Panel.
    Time And Date: 12 p.m.-3 p.m., March 21, 2007 (Closed).
    Place: Teleconference.
    Status: The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with 
provisions set forth in section 552b(c)(4) and (6), Title 5 U.S.C., and 
the Determination of the Director, Management Analysis and Services 
Office, CDC, pursuant to Public Law 92-463.
    Matters To Be Discussed: The meeting will include the review, 
discussion, and evaluation of the scientific merit of research 
applications in response to CSN 2006-N-08556, ``Scientific, Technical 
and Operational Services for Epidemiology, Surveillance and Laboratory 
Program.''
    Contact Person For More Information: Christine Morrison, PhD., 
Designated Federal Officer, 1600 Clifton Road, Mailstop D72, Atlanta, 
GA 30333, telephone (404) 639-3098.
    The Director, Management Analysis and Services Office, has been 
delegated the authority to sign Federal Register notices pertaining to 
announcements of meetings and other committee management activities, 
for both CDC and the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry.

Elaine L. Baker,
Acting Director, Management Analysis and Services Office, Centers for 
Disease Control and Prevention.
 [FR Doc. E7-3470 Filed 2-27-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4163-18-P
# C_2018190EN.01001803.xml

| 4.6.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 190/18 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.6.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 190/18

---

Order of the President of the Court of 16 February 2018 — Council of the European Union v PT Perindustrian dan Perdagangan Musim Semi Mas (PT Musim Mas), European Commission, European Biodiesel Board (EBB)

(Case C-606/16 P) (1)

1

(2018/C 190/27)

Language of the case: English

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

---

(1)  OJ C 30, 30.1.2017.

1

---
No. 61313.

protest 291952-K (New York).

#### Johaneson, Wales & Sparre, Inc., and R. J. Saunders & Co., Inc. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise, facts, and issues are the same in all material respects as those the subject of *R. J. Saunders & Co., Inc.*v. *United States*(37 Cust. Ct. 267, C. D. 1834), the collector was directed to reliquidate the entries, assessing duty upon the basis of the unit appraised value per conditioned pound or kilo, multiplied by the total number of conditioned pounds or kilos, as set forth in the invoice.
|     |                                                                                                                                 |
|-----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| (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. |

|        |
|--------|
|        |  |  |  |
| Date:  | February 26, 2020 | By | /s/ Abu M. Arif |
|   | Abu M. ArifChief Executive Officer |

|        |
|--------|
|        |  |  |  |
| Date:  | February 26, 2020 | By | /s/ Jason S. Bartylla |
|   | Jason S. BartyllaChief Financial Officer |
No. 47830.

#### Protests 897586-G, etc., of Manhattan Shirt Co. et al. (New York).

Opinion by

Kincheloe, J.

Following the authorities cited in Abstract 15400 the protests were dismissed.
### en \.U 

## z -J September 16, 2013



## a:: Docket FAA-2012-0740

602-685-4000 Fax: 888-228-4659 410 N. 44th St. Suite 700 Phoenix, AZ 85008 www.mesa-air.com Docket Management Facility US DepartmentofTransportation 1200 NewJerseyAvenue, SE West Building Ground Floor Room W12-140 Washington, DC 20590 RE: Exemption No. 10599- Requestfor Update
Dear Sir or Madam: On August 10, 2012, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) granted Exemption No. 10599 in response to Mesa Airlines, Inc. letterdated June 29, 2012 request forexemption from certain sections ofTitle 14 ofthe Code of Federal Regulations. The exemption was granted until August 31, 2014 unless soonersuperseded or rescinded. On July 15, 2013,the FAA published the Pilot Certification and Qualification Requirements for Air Carrier Operations Final Rule which renumbered or removed certain regulations that impactthis exemption. Therefore, Mesa Airlines, Inc. respectfully requeststhe FAA update Exemption No. 10599to reflect the correct regulatory references. Please do not hesitateto contact me ifyou have any questions or require additional information.

Sincerely,

# 1i:i~O~ DirectorofTraining, Mesa Airlines, Inc. 602-685-6639 Mickey.moman@mesa-air.com Cc: Captain Mike Ferverda, Sr. V.P. Flight Operations, Mesa Airlines, Inc. Captain Alvin Isaacs, Certificate Chief Pilot, Mesa Airlines, Inc. Captain Rebecca Barbaria, Manager Flight Standards, Mesa Airlines, Inc.
**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 European Micro Holdings, Inc. (the
      “ Company ”)
      on
      Form 10-QSB for the fiscal quarter ended September 30, 2001 as filed with the
      Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “ Report ”),
      the
      undersigned, in the capacities and on the dates indicated below, hereby
      certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
      Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to his knowledge:




1.  The
      Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
      Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and




2.  The
      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
      the financial condition and results of operation of the Company.


Date:
                October
                16, 2006
            By:
            */s/
              John B. Gallagher*Name:John
                B. GallagherTitle:Co-Chief Executive Officer


Date:
                October
                16, 2006
            By:
            */s/
              Harry D. Shields*Name:Harry
                D. ShieldsTitle:Co-Chief Executive Officer




A
      signed
      original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document
      authentications, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears
      in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required
      by Section 906, has been provided to European Micro Holdings, Inc. and will
      be
      retained by European Micro Holdings, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and
      Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Exhibit 32.01




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 Welwind Energy International Corporation
(the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2008 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”),
I, Tammy-Lynn McNabb, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the
Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to
§906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge and
belief:
  (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 result of operations of the Company.
 
 /s/
      Tammy-Lynn McNabbBy:
      Tammy-Lynn McNabbChief
      Executive Officer and Chief Financial OfficerDated:
      July 31, 2008
  A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document
authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears
in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement has been
provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
In its Memorandum of Law, Defendant, Liberty International raises several issues that it contends, entitles it to 1

summary judgment on Plaintiff’s claims. Summary judgment is appropriate “if the pleadings, depositions, answers to

interrogatories, and admissions on file, together with affidavits, if any, show that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact

and that the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.” FED. R. CIV. P. 56(c). An issue is “genuine” if the

evidence is such that a reasonable jury could return a verdict for the non-moving party. Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477

U.S. 242, 248 (1986). A factual dispute is “material” if it might affect the outcome of the case under the governing law. Id. A

party seeking summary judgment bears the initial responsibility for informing the district court of the basis for its motion and

identifying those portions of the record that it believes demonstrate the absence of a genuine issue of material fact. Celotex

Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 322 (1986). Where the non-moving party bears the burden of proof on a particular issue at trial,

the movant’s initial Celotex burden can be met simply by “pointing out to the district court that there is an absence of evidence to

support the non-moving party’s case.” Id. at 325. After the moving party has met its initial burden, “the adverse party’s

response, by affidavits or otherwise as provided in this rule, must set forth specific facts showing that there is a genuine issue for

trial.” FED. R. CIV. P. 56(e). Summary judgment is appropriate if the non-moving party fails to rebut by making a factual

showing “sufficient to establish the existence of an element essential to that party’s case, and on which that party will bear the

burden of proof at trial.” Celotex, 477 U.S. at 322. After reviewing the record and the parties briefs, the Court finds that there

remain material issues of fact that prevent summary judgment in favor of the Defendant.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR

THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

BLACKWATER SECURITY, |

CONSULTING, LLC, ET AL. |

Plaintiffs, |

| CIVIL ACTION NO. 05-CV-6020

v. |

|

WESTCHESTER SURPLUS LINES |

INSURANCE COMPANY, ET AL. |

Defendants. |

ORDER

AND NOW, on this ____ day of March, 2008, upon consideration of Defendant Liberty

International Underwriters’ Motion for Summary Judgment and (Doc. 55 & 62), Plaintiff’s Response in

Opposition (Doc. 61), IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendant’s Motion is DENIED.

1

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Plaintiff’s sur-reply shall be STRICKEN from the record

and will not be considered by the Court. (Docs. 70, 71 & 73). Defendant’s Motion for Leave to File a

Supplemental Brief in Support of its Motion for Summary Judgment is DENIED. (Doc. 72).

BY THE COURT:

/s/ Petrese B. Tucker

__________________________

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

BLACKWATER SECURITY CONSULTING, LLC et al v. WESTCHESTER SURPLUS LINES INSURANCE COMPANY et al Doc. 84

Dockets.Justia.com
exh10-3_note.htm


     

    
      

      

    

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

    EXHIBIT 10.3

     

    DEMAND PROMISSORY NOTE IN FAVOR OF

    VICTOR J. YOSHA DATED JULY 2, 2008

     

    
 

    
      
         


      

      
         


        
          

        

      

      
         


      

    


    DEMAND
PROMISSORY NOTE

     

    $50,000.00                                                                                                                                          Lakewood,
Colorado

                                                                                                                                                                               
July 2, 2008

    


    For value
received, the undersigned, V2K INTERNATIONAL, INC., a Colorado corporation (the
“Borrower”),
hereby promises to pay on demand, to the order of Victor J. Yosha (the “Lender”), at, 7276
Orion Street, Arvada, CO 80007, or at any other place designated at any time by
the holder hereof, in lawful money of the United States of America and in
immediately available funds, the principal sum of FIFTY THOUSAND AND NO/100
DOLLARS ($50,000.00) together with interest on the principal amount hereunder,
computed on the basis of the actual number of days elapsed and a 365-day year,
from the date hereof until this Note is fully paid at the rate of TWELVE PERCENT
(12%) per annum.

    


    The
Borrower hereby agrees to pay all costs of collection, including attorneys’ fees
and legal expenses, in the event this Note is not paid when due, whether or not
legal proceedings are commenced.

    


    Presentment
or other demand for payment, notice of dishonor and protest are expressly
waived.

    


    
      	 
      	
              V2K
      INTERNATIONAL, INC., a Colorado corporation

            
	 
      	
               

              By   /s/ Jerry A.
      Kukuchka                         
      

               

              Its      
      CFO
(Reap. Dec. 10367)

Entry No. 41173.

#### Auto Imports, Inc. *v.*United States

(Decided November 8, 1962)

*Stein & Sliostah*for the plaintiff.

*Joseph D. Gnilfoyle,*Acting Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

JOHNSON, Judge:

This appeal for reappraisement has been submitted upon the following stipulation of counsel for the respective parties:

> IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by and between counsel for the respective parties hereto, subject to the approval of the Court, that the merchandise covered by the appeal for reappraisement listed on the Schedule hereto attached and made a part hereof, consists of catalogues exported from Sweden during 1961.

> *442IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED that the merchandise'the subject of the Appeals for Reappraisement enumerated in the attached Schedule is not included on the list of articles designated by the Secretary of the Treasury in T.D. 54521, as provided for in Section 6(a) of the Customs Simplification Act of 1956, Public Law 927, 84th Congress, which is subject to appraisement under Section 402a of the Tariff Act of 1930 as amended; and that said merchandise is subject to appraisement under Section 402 of the Tariff Act of 1930 as amended by the Customs Simplification Act of 1956.

> IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED that at the time of exportation herein, there was no export value or United States value as those terms are defined in Section 402 (b) or (c) respectively,' of the Tariff Act of 1930 as amended by the Customs Simplification Act of 1956, for such or similar merchandise, and that the constructed value as defined in Section 402(d) of said Act for said catalogues is 15$ per unit.

> IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED that this appeal for reap-praisement may be submitted on this stipulation.

On the agreed facts, I find that constructed value, as that value is defined in section 402(d) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended by the Customs Simplification Act of 1956, Y0 Stat. 943, is the proper basis for the determination of the value of the catalogs involved herein and that such value is 15 cents per unit.

Judgment will be rendered accordingly.
Case 2:05-cv-06020-PBT Document 55-16 Filed 07/27/2007 Page 1 of 18

BLACKWATER SECURITY CONSULTING, LLC et al v. WESTCHESTER SURPLUS LINES INSURANCE COMPANY et al Doc. 55 Att. 15

Dockets.Justia.com
Case 2:05-cv-06020-PBT Document 55-16 Filed 07/27/2007 Page 2 of 18
Case 2:05-cv-06020-PBT Document 55-16 Filed 07/27/2007 Page 3 of 18
Case 2:05-cv-06020-PBT Document 55-16 Filed 07/27/2007 Page 4 of 18
Case 2:05-cv-06020-PBT Document 55-16 Filed 07/27/2007 Page 5 of 18
Case 2:05-cv-06020-PBT Document 55-16 Filed 07/27/2007 Page 6 of 18
Case 2:05-cv-06020-PBT Document 55-16 Filed 07/27/2007 Page 7 of 18
Case 2:05-cv-06020-PBT Document 55-16 Filed 07/27/2007 Page 8 of 18
Case 2:05-cv-06020-PBT Document 55-16 Filed 07/27/2007 Page 9 of 18
Case 2:05-cv-06020-PBT Document 55-16 Filed 07/27/2007 Page 10 of 18
Case 2:05-cv-06020-PBT Document 55-16 Filed 07/27/2007 Page 11 of 18
Case 2:05-cv-06020-PBT Document 55-16 Filed 07/27/2007 Page 12 of 18
Case 2:05-cv-06020-PBT Document 55-16 Filed 07/27/2007 Page 13 of 18
Case 2:05-cv-06020-PBT Document 55-16 Filed 07/27/2007 Page 14 of 18
Case 2:05-cv-06020-PBT Document 55-16 Filed 07/27/2007 Page 15 of 18
Case 2:05-cv-06020-PBT Document 55-16 Filed 07/27/2007 Page 16 of 18
Case 2:05-cv-06020-PBT Document 55-16 Filed 07/27/2007 Page 17 of 18
Case 2:05-cv-06020-PBT Document 55-16 Filed 07/27/2007 Page 18 of 18