alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by 9th C i r . R . 36- 3.

T he pa ne l una ni m ous l y c onc l ude s thi s c a s e i s s ui t abl e f orde c i s i on ** w ith o u t o r a l a r g u m e n t. See F ed. R . A pp . P . 34 (a )( 2). NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T OR VI L L E ME AU X, P la in tif

f - A p p e lla n t, v. N O R T H W E S T A I R L I N E S , I N C ., a D e la w a r e c o rp o r a tio n ; e t a l., D efen d an t s - A p p el l ees. N o. 09- 17560 D . C. N o . 4 : 0 9 - c v - 0 2 4 4 7 - CW ME MOR AN DU M *

A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f o rth e N o rth e rn D is tr ic t o f C a lif o rn ia C l audi aW i l ke n, D i s tr i c tJ udge , P r e s i di ng S ubm i tt e d J une 15, 2011 ** B efo re: C A N B Y , O ’ S C A N N L A IN , an d F IS H E R , C i rcu i tJu d g es. O rv ille M e au x ap p e a ls f r o m th e d is tr ic t c o u rt’s ju d g m e n t d is m is s in g h is c om pl a i nta ga i ns tN orthw e s tA i r l i ne s , I nc . a s ba rr e d by the ba nkrupt c y di s c ha r ge i nj unc t i on i s s ue d i n N orthw e s t ’ s ba nkrupt c ypr oc e e di ngs . W e ha ve j ur i s di c t i on 

# FI LED JU L 6 2 011 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS09- 17560 2 u n d e r2 8 U .S .C . § 1 2 9 1 , a n d w e a f f irm . M e aux doe s notc ha l l e nge the di s tr i c tc ourt ’ s or de rdi s m i s s i ng hi s c om pl a i nt a g a in s t N o rth w e s t, a n d th u s h a s ab a n d o n e d a n y c h a lle n g e to th e d is m is s a l. See C o o k v. Sch ri ro , 538 F . 3d 1000, 1014 n. 5 ( 9th C i r . 2008) ( i s s ue s not r a i s e d on appeal ar e dee m ed abando ned). W e do notc ons i de rM e aux’ s c ont e nt i on tha tthe di s tr i c tc ourts houl d ha ve tr e a t e d hi s R a i l w a y L aborA c tc l a i m a ga i ns tN or thw e s ta s a n a m e ndm e ntt o the c om pl a i nti n hi s 2004 a c t i on a ga i ns tN or thw e s t , be c aus e M e aux di d notr a i s e the a r g u m e n t in th e d is tr ic t c o u rt a n d c o n s id e r a tio n is n o t “‘n e c e s s a ry to p r e v e n t a m isca rr iag e o f ju stice o r to p re se rv e th e in teg rity o f th e ju d icial p ro ce ss .’ ” A laska v. U ni ted Stat es , 20 1 F . 3d 11 54 , 11 63 -64 (9th C i r. 20 00 ) ( ci t at i on om i tt ed). M e aux’ s r e que s tf

orj udi c i a l not i c e i s gr a nt e d i n pa rta s t o E xhi bi t s 1, 2, a nd 5. T he r e que s ti s othe rw i s e de ni e d. AF F I RME D.
REVOLVING
      LOAN AGREEMENT

    AMENDMENT
      FOUR

     

    Amendment
      Date: June
      20,
      2008

     

    Amended
      Credit Limit: $50,000.00            

     

    RFG
      Acquisition I Inc., a Delaware corporation, promises to pay RICHARD F. BESTON,
      JR. (“Lender”), an individual, the amended sum of FIFTY THOUSAND and 00/100
      DOLLARS ($50,000.00) (the “Amended Credit Limit”) or such other principal amount
      that may be outstanding, in no case to exceed the Amended Credit Limit, as
      evidenced by the books and records of the Lender. 

     

    This
      Amendment Four hereby amends the Credit Limit as defined in the Revolving Loan
      Agreement, dated November 20, 2006, as amended, by and among RFG Acquisition
      I
      Inc. and Richard F. Beston, Jr. All other terms and conditions of the original
      Revolving Loan Agreement, dated November 20, 2006, as amended, remain unchanged
      and in full force and effect.

    


    This
      Amendment Four is effective as of the date listed above.

     

    RFG
      Acquisition I Inc.

     

    By: 
      /s/
      David
      W. Matre

    
      
        

      
David
      W.
      Matre

    Chief
      Financial Officer  


    


    “Lender”


    


    /s/
      Richard F. Beston, Jr. 
      

    

    RICHARD
      F. BESTON, JR., an individual

     

    DO
      NOT DESTROY THIS ORIGINAL AGREEMENT AMENDMENT
**Exhibit 31.1**
**CERTIFICATIONS**
I, Robert L.G. White, certify that:
     1. I have reviewed this first amended quarterly report on Form 10-Q/A-1 ofTransTechnology Corporation;
     2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain anyuntrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessaryto make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which suchstatements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by thisquarterly report;
     3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this quarterly report, fairly present in all materialrespects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of theregistrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this quarterly report;
     4. The Registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined inExchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and we have:
          (a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused suchdisclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, toensure that material information relating to the registrant, including itsconsolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities,particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;
          (b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controlsand procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about theeffectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of theperiod covered by this report based on such evaluation; and
          (c) disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s mostrecent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of anannual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely tomaterially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting;and
     5. The Registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, basedon our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, tothe registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board ofdirectors (or persons performing the equivalent function):
          (a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design oroperation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonablylikely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process,summarize and report financial information; and
          (b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or otheremployees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting.        Date: June 21, 2004 /s/ Robert L. G. White   Robert L. G. White   President & Chief Executive Officer
|                                      |
|--------------------------------------|
|                                      |  |
| Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas | BNY Mellon Trust of Delaware |
| As Indenture Trustee                 | As Owner Trustee |
| Attn:  Michelle H.Y. Voon  | Attn:  Kristine Gullo |
| 100 Plaza One 6th Floor         | 301 Bellevue Parkway 3rd Floor |
| Jersey City, NY 07311                | Wilmington, DE  19809 |

|                                                 |
|-------------------------------------------------|
|                                                 |  |
| The Bank of New York Mellon Trust Company, N.A. | Ally Auto Assets LLC |
| Attn:  Robert Castle                  | Ally Financial Inc. |
| 2 North LaSalle Street, Suite 1020              | 200 Renaissance Center |
| Chicago, IL  60602                    | 10th Floor, MC 482-B10-A68 |
|                                            | Detroit, MI |

|        |
|--------|
|        |  |
| Re:    | Ally Auto Receivables Trust 2010-3 |
|   | Annual Statement as to Compliance |

|    |
|----|
|    |  |
| a. | A review of the activities of the Servicer during the period of January 1, 2013 through December 31, 2013, and of its performance under the Pooling and Servicing Agreement and the Trust Sale and Servicing Agreement has been under his supervision, and |

|    |
|----|
|    |  |
| b. | To the best of his knowledge, based on such review, the Servicer has fulfilled all of its obligations under the Pooling and Servicing Agreement and the Trust Sale and Servicing Agreement throughout such period. |

|        |
|--------|
|        |  |  |
|   | Very truly yours, |
|   |   |
|   | /s/ David J. DeBrunner |   |
|   | David J. DeBrunner |
|   | Vice President, Controller and Chief Accounting Officer |
|   | Ally Financial Inc. |
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan 

April 28, 2008 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 134175 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman, PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Justices 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 134175 

 COA: 273419 

Kent CC: 01-008281-FC 

ANTHONY EARL PRICE,

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the April 20, 2007 order 

of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because the defendant has 

failed to meet the burden of establishing entitlement to relief under MCR 6.508(D). 

d0421 

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

April 28, 2008 

 Clerk
**EXHIBIT 15.1**

Board of Directors 

Texas Industries, Inc. 

We areaware of the incorporation by reference in the Post-Effective Amendment Number 9 to Registration Statement Number 2-48986 on Form S-8, Registration Statement Number 33-53715 on Form S-8, Registration Statement Number 333-11604 on Form S-8 (asamended), Registration Statement Number 333-121860 on Form S-8, and Registration Statement Number 333-50517 on Form S-3 (as amended) and in the related Prospectuses of our report dated September 25, 2007 relating to the unaudited consolidatedinterim financial statements of Texas Industries, Inc. which are included in its Form 10-Q for the quarter ended August 31, 2007. 

Pursuant to Rule436(c) of the Securities Act of 1933 our report is not part of the Registration Statement prepared or certified by accountants within the meaning of Section 7 or 11 of the Securities Act of 1933. 

 

Dallas, Texas 

September 25, 2007
# C_2008296EN.01000201.xml

| 19.11.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 296/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.11.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 296/2

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

1

18 November 2008

(2008/C 296/03)

1 euro=

1 euro

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,2653 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 121,92 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4484 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,8421 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 10,1845 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,5166 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | 215 |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 8,9 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 25,655 |
| EEK | Estonian kroon | 15,6466 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 271,09 |
| LTL | Lithuanian litas | 3,4528 |
| LVL | Latvian lats | 0,7093 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 3,8295 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 3,838 |
| SKK | Slovak koruna | 30,38 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 2,0995 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,9511 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,5554 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 9,8061 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 2,2983 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 1,9312 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 839,11 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 12,99 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 8,64 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,134 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 15 278,5 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,5582 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 63,01 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 34,687 |
| THB | Thai baht | 44,317 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 2,9279 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 16,6767 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,2653

JPY

Japanese yen

121,92

DKK

Danish krone

7,4484

GBP

Pound sterling

0,8421

SEK

Swedish krona

10,1845

CHF

Swiss franc

1,5166

ISK

Iceland króna

215

NOK

Norwegian krone

8,9

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

25,655

EEK

Estonian kroon

15,6466

HUF

Hungarian forint

271,09

LTL

Lithuanian litas

3,4528

LVL

Latvian lats

0,7093

PLN

Polish zloty

3,8295

RON

Romanian leu

3,838

SKK

Slovak koruna

30,38

TRY

Turkish lira

2,0995

AUD

Australian dollar

1,9511

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,5554

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

9,8061

NZD

New Zealand dollar

2,2983

SGD

Singapore dollar

1,9312

KRW

South Korean won

1 839,11

ZAR

South African rand

12,99

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

8,64

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,134

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

15 278,5

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,5582

PHP

Philippine peso

63,01

RUB

Russian rouble

34,687

THB

Thai baht

44,317

BRL

Brazilian real

2,9279

MXN

Mexican peso

16,6767

---

(1)

1

Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

Source:

---
No. 45131.

#### Petition 6058-R of J. D. Smith Co., Inc. (New York).

Opinion by

Tilson, J.

The testimony introduced in this case satisfied the court that the entry of the merchandise at a value less than that returned upon final appraisement was without any intent to defraud the revenue of the United States, conceal or misrepresent any of the facts, or to deceive the appraiser. The petition was therefore granted.
Joseph D. Barbera 14706 NE Erickson Dr. La Center, WA 98629 Tel: 360 263 5359 United States Department ofTransportation Office of Hearings

Washington, DC In the Matter of: Joseph D. Barbera FAA Case No. 2013NM090056 FDMS No. FAA 2013-1083 Judge Richard Goodwin 

# RECEIVED OCT 022014 

## HEARING DOCKET

ResponsetoComplaintant's Motions (dated 6 May 2014) 

### A) 

### Complainant's Motionfor Reconsideration of Denial of Motionto Deem AllegationsAdmitted and to DismissAppeal B) 

### Motionfor Decision (SummaryJudgement) C) 

### Motionto Extend Discovery Deadline
Response to Motion A Nothing new on my part toadd. Response to Motion B In this motion, the Complainant stated that"

...

### it should 

### be clear that there is no genuine issue as tothe material facts

.." Nothing could be further from the truth. The heart ofthe matter is whether or notthere is ample evidence to prove the allegations. There is anecdotal information that the FAA has taken from the internet (ll that in no way shape or form can be considered to be accurate, a "fact", or meetthe standards of evidence. Just because the FAA read iton the internet does not make ittrue. Also noted is a reference to a signed letter, which refers to the same anecdotal information. This is from the same Face Book data source. Just because I referred to it in the technical explanation to the FAA does not make the information any more accurate or reliable. There was no altimeter on board and there was no tracking by radar. 

### 1The source ofthe data in Exhibit 2 ofthe motion is a device not initial designed forthis purpose, was not certified oreven calibrated. Additionally, the FAA conveniently showed only a portion ofthe data. 

### Itdid notshow the device moving 

### lO's of knots when itwas known to be sitting on the ground, jumping a hundred feet in a second, or the fact thatthe device totally stopped transmitting for an hour in flight. Notthe characteristics ofan accurate flight instrument. Resoonse to Motion C 

### Itis my desire to move to the hearing as quickly and efficiently as possible. Ifthefacts are as black and white as the Complainant suggests, then we should be able to proceed immediately.

Joseph D rbera, Respondent Cll see LawnchairPilots on Face Book

2Service List Federal Aviation Administration Attn: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 Wilbur Wright Building - Suite 2W1000 800 Independence Ave. SW Washington D.C. 20591 David Shayne, 

### Complainant's Counsel Northwest Mountain Region, ANM-7 Federal Aviation Administration 1601 Lind Ave., SW Renton, WA 98057 The Honorable Richard C. Goodwin, 

### Administrative Law

### Judge Office of Hearings, M-20 US Department ofTransportation 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE (Ell-310) Washington, DC 20590



### 3
CHIEF JUSTICE

 CAROLYN WRIGHT

JUSTICES

 DAVID L. BRIDGES

 MOLLY FRANCIS

 DOUGLAS S. LANG

 ELIZABETH LANG-MIERS

 ROBERT M. FILLMORE

 LANA MYERS

 DAVID EVANS

 DAVID LEWIS

 ADA BROWN

 CRAIG STODDART

 BILL WHITEHILL

 DAVID J. SCHENCK

Court of Appeals

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

600 COMMERCE STREET, SUITE 200

DALLAS, TEXAS 75202

(214) 712-3400

LISA MATZ

CLERK OF THE COURT

(214) 712-3450

lisa.matz@5th.txcourts.gov

GAYLE HUMPA

BUSINESS ADMINISTRATOR

(214) 712-3434

gayle.humpa@5th.txcourts.gov

FACSIMILE

(214) 745-1083

INTERNET

HTTP://5TH.TXCOURTS.GOV

October 26, 2015

Honorable Elizabeth Frizell

Presiding Judge

Criminal District Court No. 7

Frank Crowley Courts Building

133 N. Riverfront Blvd., LB-54

Dallas, TX 75207

RE: SECOND STATUS REQUEST

05-14-01468-CR, Clarence Hines v. The State of Texas

Dear Judge Frizell:

On August 10, 2015, the Court ordered the trial court to make findings regarding the 

jury charges and verdicts for both the guilt and punishment phases of trial. On August 14, 2015, 

we received a supplemental clerk’s record containing the jury charge and verdict form for the 

punishment phase. However, the supplemental clerk’s record does not contain the jury charge 

or verdict form from the guilt phase. To date, we have not received the trial court’s findings or

the jury charge and verdict from the guilt phase, nor have we received a response to our 

previous letter inquiring about the status of the findings. The appeal cannot proceed until the 

matter of the guilt phase jury charge and verdict is resolved and I have been instructed to follow 

up on the matter. Therefore, please notify us of the status of the findings within SEVEN DAYS

of the date of this letter. We appreciate your assistance with this matter.

Sincerely,

/s/ Lisa Matz, Clerk of the Court

cc: Felicia Pitre, Dallas County District Clerk

Riann Moore

Lori Ordiway

ltr:mrh
III 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. RES. 154 

Designating October 21, 2005, as ‘‘National Mammography Day’’. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MAY 25, 2005 

Mr. BIDEN (for himself, Mr. ALLARD, Mr. ALLEN, Mr. BUNNING, Ms. CANTWELL, Mr. COCHRAN, Mr. DORGAN, Mrs. HUTCHISON, Mr. ISAKSON, Ms. 

LANDRIEU, Mr. LAUTENBERG, Mr. SANTORUM, and Mr. WYDEN) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on 

the Judiciary 

RESOLUTION 

Designating October 21, 2005, as ‘‘National Mammography 

Day’’. 

Whereas according to the American Cancer Society, in 2005, 

212,930 women will be diagnosed with breast cancer and 

40,410 women will die from this disease; 

Whereas it is estimated that about 2,000,000 women were diagnosed with breast cancer in the 1990s, and that in 

nearly 500,000 of those cases, the cancer resulted in 

death; 

Whereas African-American women suffer a 30 percent greater mortality rate from breast cancer than White women 

and more than a 100 percent greater mortality rate from 
2 

•SRES 154 IS

breast cancer than women from Hispanic, Asian, and 

American Indian populations; 

Whereas the risk of breast cancer increases with age, with a 

woman at age 70 having twice as much of a chance of 

developing the disease as a woman at age 50; 

Whereas at least 80 percent of the women who get breast 

cancer have no family history of the disease; 

Whereas mammograms, when operated professionally at a 

certified facility, can provide safe screening and early detection of breast cancer in many women; 

Whereas mammography is an excellent method for early detection of localized breast cancer, which has a 5-year survival rate of more than 97 percent; 

Whereas the National Cancer Institute and the American 

Cancer Society continue to recommend periodic mammograms; and 

Whereas the National Breast Cancer Coalition recommends 

that each woman and her health care provider make an 

individual decision about mammography: Now, therefore, 

be it 

1 Resolved, That the Senate— 

2 (1) designates October 21, 2005, as ‘‘National 

3 Mammography Day’’; and 

4 (2) encourages the people of the United States 

5 to observe the day with appropriate programs and 

6 activities. 

Æ
|   | 1. | I have reviewed this report on Form 20-F/A of Arabella Exploration, Inc.; and |
|--------|----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | 2. | Based on my knowledge, this 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 report. |
|--------|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | By:  | /s/ Jason Hoisager      |
|--------|-----------|-------------------------|
|   |      | Jason Hoisager          |
|   |      | Chief Executive Officer |
### Regulatory Evaluation

Docket No. FAA

- 

### 2012

- 0071 Directorate Identifier: 

### 2012

-NE

- 05

- AD If you make changes to the values in the table below, you must ensure the totals update accordingly. If they do not, click (or Tab) into an d then out of the changed cell

. **Estimated Costs:**  Action (e.g., Inspection, replacement) Do not include on

condition costs here Costs per **Product** (e.g., aircraft, engine,

propeller, appliance) Work

- h ours (include access, testing, and close

- up) Labor

co st ( @ $8 5 /h our) Part s Cost Total Costs ( labor + parts) Number of

**U.S. Registered**  **Products** Total Cost

for U

. S

. Fleet 

### Replacement done at next scheduled overhaul 0.0 $ 0.00 $39,899 $39,899.00 

### 135 $5,386,365.0 0 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0 .00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 

### The known number of products in compliance: 

### 0 Total Costs of compliance for U.S. fleet: $5,386,365 

### Costs covered under warranty ( if known ) $ 

### 0
**On**
**- Condition Costs:**  Action (e.g., Inspection, replacement) Work

- h ours

(include access, testing, and close

up) Labor cost

( @ $8 5 /h our) Parts Cost Cost per Product

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 

### Special considerations for Economic Analysis ( Use this field to explain anything in the Estimated Costs table that was assumed or might not be obvious. This field can also be used to explain warranty costs) 

### :

### Executive Order 12866:

Could the AD be considered a “significant regula tory action”? YES * NO
* Explanation: **DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures:** Is the AD significant? YES * NO
* Explanation: **Regulatory Flexibility Act:** Will the AD have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities? Explain for eith er a Yes or No answer. YES NO Explanation: **Intrastate Aviation in Alaska:** This AD could affect intrastate aviation in Alaska. Is it appropriate to include specific requirements for aircraft operated in Alaska where aviation might be the only mode of tran sportation? YES * NO


### * Explanation 

### :