alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
March 20

, 2015

U.S. Department of Transportat ion

Docket Management System

1200 New Jersey Ave., SE

Washington, DC 20590

Re: Delivery of Dronair Solutions' Operating Documents [Docket No. FAA

- 2015

- 0648]

To Whom it May Concern:

As you are aware, this office represents Dronair Solutions ("Dronai r") regarding the above re ferenced

Petition for Exemption

, in which Dronair seeks regulatory relief to allow commercial operation of small

unmanned aerial vehicles. Please accept this letter as confirmation that the following operating documents,

which co ntain proprietary information, were hand

- delivered to Jake J. Troutman, Program Analyst, Federal

Aviation Administration, Office of Aviation Safety, Airmen and Airspace Rules Division, on March 19, 2015:

 Dronair sUAS Flight Operations Manual

 Dronair DJI S1 000 sUAS Aircraft Flight Manual

 Dronair Aeryon SkyRanger Aircraft Flight Manual

If you have any other questions, or need any additional information to process this exemption

request, please contact the undersigned or John McGraw at:

John McGraw Aeros pace Consulting, LLC

Phone: 540

- 219

- 1638

Email: john@jmacaerospace.aero

Very truly yours,

Matthew J. Clark

Mark E. McKinnon

Counsel for Dronair Soluti ons Albany

Atlanta

Brussels

Denver

Los Angeles

Miami

New York 1676 International Drive • Penthouse

McLean, VA 22102

Tel: 703.336.8800

mckennalong.com Northern Virginia

Orange County

Rancho Santa Fe

San Diego

San Francisco

Seoul

Washington, DC

Mark E. McKi nnon

703.336.8714

Matthew J. Clark

703.336.871 Email Address

mmckinnon@mckennalong.com

mclark@mckennalong.com
P.1 

RCRA Box 1883 

Prepped by Ollie Stewart 

Document Number: 

5) ll-B-166 

Docket Number: 

A-90-19 

Printed 12/3/200810:42:10 AM Sheet 5 of 171 
P.2 

A-90-19 

ll-B-166 

PENDING CONFIDENTIAL 

The following information is located in the cbnTidential 

files of the Director, Emission Standards Division, Office of Air 

Quality Planning and Standards, U. S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711. This 

information is confidential pending final determination by the 

Administrator and is not available for public inspection. 

W. Floyd, Radian Corporation, to Process Vents Docket 

A-90-19, December 1991, HON NESHAP: Industry 

Characteristics/Diphenyl Oxide. 16 pages. 

CBI Document Control No. 86/23, PPS-166.
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 47 (Monday, March 12, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Page 11012]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-4352]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RP07-318-000]


Midwestern Gas Transmission Company; Notice of Proposed Changes 
in FERC Gas Tariff

March 5, 2007.
    Take notice that on February 28, 2007, Midwestern Gas Transmission 
Company (Midwestern) tendered for filing to become part of its FERC Gas 
Tariff, Third Revised Volume No. 1, the tariff sheets attached to the 
filing, to become effective on April 1, 2007.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must 
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of 
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Protests will be 
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to 
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the 
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of 
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices, 
motions, or protests must be filed in accordance with the provisions of 
Section 154.210 of the Commission's regulations (18 CFR 154.210). 
Anyone filing an intervention or protest must serve a copy of that 
document on the Applicant. Anyone filing an intervention or protest on 
or before the intervention or protest date need not serve motions to 
intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and 
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an 
original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal 
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the 
``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's 
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription'' 
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail 
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For 
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#f5b3b0a7b6ba9b999c9b90a68085859a8781b593908796db929a83"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="24626176676b4a484d4a41775154544b565064424156470a434b52">[email protected]</span></a>, or call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For 
TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

Philis J. Posey,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. E7-4352 Filed 3-9-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### A PPEAL 

### O F 

### T HE 

### S TATE 

### O F 

### F LORIDA
F OURTH D ISTRICT

A.M. , t he Mother, Appellant,

v.

DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILIES and GUARDIAN AD LITEM PROGRAM , Appellee s

.

No. 4D2023

- 2782

[ April 15, 2024 ]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County; Jose Izquierdo, Judge; L.T. Case No. 20 23

- 1384

- CJ

- DP.

Sean Conway, Deland, and Linda E. Singer

, Hollywood

, for appellant.

Sara Elizabeth Goldfarb and Sarah Todd Weitz , Statewide Directors of Appeals

, Statewide Guardian ad Litem Office, Tallahassee

, for appellee Guardian ad Litem.

Carolyn Schwarz, Children’s Legal Services, Fort Lauderdale, for appellee Department of Children and Families.

P ER C URIAM

.
Affirmed

.

K LINGENSMITH , C.J., C IKLIN and F ORST , JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
**EXHIBIT 31.4****CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER****PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF2002**I, Shum Mukherjee, certify that:     1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K/A(Amendment No. 1) of OpenTV Corp. for the period endedDecember 31, 2004; and     2. Based on my knowledge, this annual report does notcontain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to statea material fact necessary to make the statements made, in lightof the circumstances under which such statements were made, notmisleading with respect to the period covered by this annualreport.     /s/ Shum Mukherjee           Shum Mukherjee *Chief Financial Officer*Date: October 18, 2005
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan

October 31, 2006 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh
Elizabeth A. Weaver 131482 Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markman, PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Justices Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 131482 COA: 265652 Mecosta CC: 95-003702-FH KEVIN LYALL TOWER, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the May 4, 2006 order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because the defendant has failed to meet the burden of establishing en titlement to relief under MCR 6.508(D).

d1023 I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

October 31, 2006

Clerk
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 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER Case No. CIV.S-04-1149 WBS CMK

MODIFYING THE PRETRIAL ORDER 

LYNN HUBBARD, III SBN 69773 

SCOTTLYNN J HUBBARD, IV, SBN 212970 

LAW OFFICES OF LYNN HUBBARD

12 WILLIAMSBURG LANE 

CHICO, CA. 95926 

(530) 895-3252 

Attorney for Plaintiff 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

TONY HARRIS, 

Plaintiff, 

 

 v. 

CHICO NISSAN, INC., RAYMOND 

L. BOWEN, 

Defendants. 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

Case No. CIV.S-04-1149 WBS PAN 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] 

ORDER MODIFYING THE 

PRETRIAL ORDER 

WHEREAS, on January 18, 2006, the Court issued a Pretrial Order for 

this action; 

WHEREAS, the Pretrial Order provided that each party shall exchange 

copies of all exhibits identified in the Pretrial Order not later than 30 days before the 

trial date; 

WHEREAS, the Pretrial Order provided that any and all objections to 

such exhibits be filed and served not later than fourteen days before the trial date; 

PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com

Case 2:04-cv-01149-DFL-CMK Document 87 Filed 03/23/06 Page 1 of 3
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 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER Case No. CIV.S-04-1149 WBS CMK

MODIFYING THE PRETRIAL ORDER 

WHEREAS, the lead counsel for defendants has just suffered the loss 

of an immediate family member and was unable to complete preparation of 

defendants’ exhibits for the exchange; 

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by and among the 

parties hereto that the Pretrial Order shall be amended to provide as follows: 

(1) Each party shall exchange copies of all exhibits identified in the 

Pretrial Order, not later than March 23, 2006; 

(2) Any and all objections to such exhibits shall be filed and served 

not later than April 7, 2006. 

DATED: March 21, 2006 LAW OFFICES OF LYNN HUBBARD, III 

By: /s/ Lynn Hubbard, III 

Lynn Hubbard, III 

Attorney for Plaintiff 

DATED: March 21, 2006 LAW OFFICES OF K. STEPHEN SWENSON 

By: /s/ K. Stephen Swenson 

K. Stephen Swenson 

Attorney for Defendants 

/// 

/// 

/// 

/// 

PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com

Case 2:04-cv-01149-DFL-CMK Document 87 Filed 03/23/06 Page 2 of 3
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 3 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER Case No. CIV.S-04-1149 WBS CMK

MODIFYING THE PRETRIAL ORDER 

ORDER

IT HAVING BEEN STIPULATED BY THE PARTIES, IT IS 

HEREBY ORDERED that the Pretrial Order shall be modified to provide as 

follows: 

(1) Each party shall exchange copies of all exhibits identified in the 

Pretrial Order, not later than March 23, 2006; 

(2) Any and all objections to such exhibits shall be filed and served 

not later than April 7, 2006. 

DATED: March 22, 2006 

PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com

Case 2:04-cv-01149-DFL-CMK Document 87 Filed 03/23/06 Page 3 of 3
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 of m-Wise, Inc. ("the Company") on Form
10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2009, as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof ("the Report"), I, Gabriel Kabazo, Chief
Financial Officer, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my
knowledge:





(1)  the Report fully
comply 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/ Gabriel KabazoGabriel
      Kabazo, Chief Financial Officer





Dated:
May 14, 2009
Before the Third Division,

October 30, 1951

No. 55949.

protest 136062-K (San Francisco).

#### Dohrmann Commercial Company *v.*United States,

*339Opinion by

Ekwall, J.

At the trial the customhouse broker testified that duress certificates were filed for both invoices and the office copy of the certificates covering invoice Nos. 1 and 2 was received in evidence as collective exhibit 1. Upon the record presented, the claim of the plaintiff was sustained, the court finding that the plaintiff had overcome the presumption of correctness attaching to the collector’s action by positive proof that the missing duress certificate was actually filed by plaintiff’s agent. The collector was therefore directed to re-liquidate and make allowance for the British purchase tax, in accordance with the judgment in Reap. Dec. 7053, *supra.*
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 9 (Tuesday, January 16, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Page 1798]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-421]


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

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice 5665]


Industry Advisory Panel: Notice of Open Meeting

    The Industry Advisory Panel of Overseas Buildings Operations will 
meet on Tuesday, February 13, 2007 from 9:30 a.m. until 3:30 p.m. 
Eastern Standard Time. The meeting will be held in room 1107 of the 
U.S. Department of State, located at 2201 C Street, NW., (entrance on 
23rd Street) Washington, DC. For logistical and security reasons, it is 
imperative that everyone enter and exit using only the 23rd Street 
entrance. The majority of the meeting is devoted to an exchange of 
ideas between the Department's Bureau of Overseas Building Operations' 
senior management and the panel members, on design, operations and 
building maintenance. Members of the public are asked to kindly refrain 
from joining the discussion until Director Williams opens the 
discussion to the public.
    Entry to the building is controlled; to obtain pre-clearance for 
entry, members of the public planning to attend should provide, by 
February 2, 2007, their name, professional affiliation, date of birth, 
citizenship, and a valid government-issued ID number (i.e., U.S. 
government ID, U.S. military ID, passport, or drivers license (and 
state)) by e-mailing: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#cea7afbebc8ebdbaafbaabe0a9a1b8"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="761f17060436050217021358111900">[email protected]</span></a><mailto:<a href="mailto:iapr@state.gov"><a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection" class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="5b323a2b291b282f3a2f3e753c342d">[email protected]</a></a><ls-thn-eq>. 
Due to limited space, please remember that only one person per company 
may register.
    If you have any questions, please contact Andrea Specht at 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#93e0e3f6f0fbe7f2fed3e0e7f2e7f6bdf4fce5"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="0a797a6f69627e6b674a797e6b7e6f246d657c">[email protected]</span></a> or on (703) 516-1544.

    Dated: January 7, 2007.
Charles E. Williams,
Director & Chief Operating Officer, Overseas Buildings Operations, 
Department of State.
[FR Doc. E7-421 Filed 1-12-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-24-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
No. 48530.

#### Protests 70694-K, etc., of American Straw Goods Co. et al. (New York).

Opinion by

Tilson, J.

The record showed that certain of the items consist of hats in chief value of manila hemp similar to those involved in *United States*v. *Armand Schwab*(30 C. C. P. A. 72, C. A. D. 218). The claim at 25 percent under paragraph 1504 (b) (1) was therefore sustained.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-2100
JOSEPH THOMAS YUTZY, Petitioner - Appellant, versus COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent - Appellee. On Appeal from the United States Tax Court. (Tax Ct. No. 05-14960-L) Submitted: December 21, 2006 Decided: December 29, 2006 Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and KING, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Joseph Thomas Yutzy, Appellant Pro Se. Eileen J. O’Connor, Assistant Attorney General, Mary Roccapriore Pelletier, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.- 2 - PER CURIAM: Joseph Thomas Yutzy appeals the tax court’s order upholding the Commissioner’s determination of a deficiency and penalty with respect to Yutzy’s 2000 federal income tax liability. Our review of the record and the tax court’s opinion discloses no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the tax court. Yutzy v. Commissioner, IRS , No. 05-14960-L (U.S.T.C. July 6, 2006). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal c ontentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MICHAEL ASBERRY,

Plaintiff,

v.

CITY OF SACRAMENTO,

Defendant.

CIV. S-04-2467 LKK PAN

ORDER 

—NFN—

 Plaintiff was employed by the City of Sacramento as a

sanitation worker in September 1992. He was terminated in

September 1999 but reinstated in March 2000 when the EEOC found

defendant had discriminated against plaintiff based upon a

disability. Plaintiff then filed a civil action claiming damages

for discrimination. December 16, 2004, one or two days before

the jury returned a verdict in his favor, defendant again

terminated plaintiff, this time because he allegedly had not

disclosed on his job application two prior felony convictions. 

Case 2:04-cv-02467-LKK -PAN Document 45 Filed 07/12/05 Page 1 of 3
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

2

He sued again, alleging the December 2004 termination was in

retaliation for pressing his civil damages claim in court. He

alleged the grounds for the second termination were pretextual. 

In support he alleged his supervisor in the Sanitation Department

knew of his criminal record “years prior” and that the Sanitation

Department employed “several other employees with felony

records.” Complaint ¶ 6.

 Plaintiff requested defendant produce personnel records of

anyone with a criminal conviction who worked for defendant during

the past ten years. Defendant declined and plaintiff moved for

an order compelling production of the records. At the hearing

June 8, 2005, discussion quickly focused upon “three sanitation

employees whom plaintiff believes have criminal records.” When

counsel for defendant referred to “these three employees

regarding any past criminal convictions”, the court said

plaintiff should be permitted “to look at the entire personnel

files of anyone with a criminal conviction.” Transcript pp. 2-6.

The court also ordered, however, that plaintiff could disclose

the content of those files to no one except pursuant to further

order of the court obtained pursuant to duly noticed motion.

 Thereafter, plaintiff moved for an order enforcing the June

8 order and defendant moved for an order clarifying it. 

Plaintiff construed the order as requiring defendant to produce

the personnel records of all City employees convicted of any

crime. That was not the court’s intention and there has never

been any demonstration how such records would be relevant to

Case 2:04-cv-02467-LKK -PAN Document 45 Filed 07/12/05 Page 2 of 3
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

3

plaintiff’s claims. 

 Accordingly, plaintiff’s request is denied and defendant’s

request is granted. Defendant’s obligation under the June 8,

2005, order was to produce the personnel records of all

Sanitation Department employees with criminal convictions.

 So ordered.

Dated: July 11, 2005. 

 /s/ Peter A. Nowinski 

 PETER A. NOWINSKI

 Magistrate Judge

Case 2:04-cv-02467-LKK -PAN Document 45 Filed 07/12/05 Page 3 of 3
No. 53017.

#### Edgar S. Bibas, Inc., et al. *v.*United States,

protests 144374-K, etc. (New York).

Opinion by

Ekwall, J.

Following the authorities cited in Abstract 15400 the court dismissed the protests.
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

1

 Neither of these documents were served on respondents. Petitioner is advised that

every document submitted to the court for consideration must be served on respondents. Fed. R.

Civ. P. 5; Rule 11, 28 U.S.C. § 2254. As a prisoner proceeding pro se, petitioner is required to

serve all documents in this action conventionally in accordance with the relevant provisions of

Fed. R. Civ. P. 5. See Local Rule 5-135(b). Since an attorney has filed a document with the

court on behalf of respondents, documents submitted by petitioner must be served on that

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DAVID DANIEL CEPEDA,

Petitioner, No. CIV S-04-1899 LKK JFM P

vs.

MENDOZA-POWERS, et al.,

Respondents. ORDER

 /

Petitioner is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with an application for a writ of

habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. By order filed March 9, 2005, the court granted

petitioner’s motion to consolidate this action with another filed in this court, Case No. CIV S-04-

2562 WBS JFM P, and both petitions were dismissed with leave to file one amended petition in

this action. On April 11, 2005, petitioner filed a request for an extension of time to file an

amended petition, and on April 21, 2005, petitioner filed a request for a copy of each original

petition.1

Case 2:04-cv-01899-LKK -JFM Document 27 Filed 05/09/05 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

attorney and not on the respondents. Fed. R. Civ. P. 5(b)(1). Conventional service is usually

accomplished by mailing a copy of the document to the attorney’s address of record. See Fed. R.

Civ. P. 5(b)(2)(B). Petitioner must include with every document filed in this action a certificate

stating the date an accurate copy of the document was mailed to respondents’ attorney and the

address to which it was mailed. See Local Rule 5-135(b) and (c).

2

Good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Petitioner’s April 11, 2005 request for extension of time is granted;

2. Petitioner’s April 21, 2005 request for one copy of each of his original habeas

corpus petitions is granted;

3. The Clerk of the Court is directed to send petitioner a copy of the original

habeas corpus petition filed in this action and a copy of the original habeas corpus petition filed

in Case No. CIV S-04-2562 WBS JFM P; and

4. Petitioner is granted thirty days from the date of this order to file an amended

petition in accordance with this court’s March 9, 2005 order. 

DATED: May 6, 2005.

12

cepe1899.ext 

Case 2:04-cv-01899-LKK -JFM Document 27 Filed 05/09/05 Page 2 of 2
Before the First Division,

December 4, 1946

No. 51444.

#### Protests 12964-K, etc., of Butler Bros. et al. (New York).

Opinion by

Oliver, P. J.

Following the authorities cited in Abstract 15400 the court dismissed the protests.