alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
SERVED: December 17, 2013 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS 

WASHINGTON, DC 

IN THE MATTER OF 

MESA AIRLINES, INC. 

FAA DOCKET NO. [TO BE ASSIGNED] 

(Civil Penalty Action) 

FDMS NO. FAA 2013- 0616 

ORDER OF DISMISSAL 

Respondent moves to withdrawn its Request for Hearing. 

C:: 32 

14 C.P.R.§ 13.215 states: "At any time before or during a hearing, an agency attorney 

may withdraw a complaint or party may withdraw a request for a hearing without the 

consent of the administrative law judge. If an agency attorney withdraws the complaint or 

a party withdraws the request for a hearing and the answer, the administrative law judge 

shall dismiss the proceedings under this subpart with prejudice." 

WHEREFORE, the within filed Request to Withdraw Request for Hearing having been 

read and considered, it is ORDERED as follows: 

1. Respondent's motion to Withdraw Request for Hearing be and is hereby granted; 

and 

2. This proceeding be and is hereby dismissed with prejudice. 

Richard C. Goodwin 

U.S. Administrative Law Judge 

Attachment - Service List 
SERVICE LIST- BY U.S. MAIL 

ORIGINAL & ONE COPY 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue, S.W. 

Washington, DC 20591 

Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC--430 

Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2W1 0001 

ONE COPY 

Theodore P. Byrne, Complainant's Counsel 

Attorney, Office of the Regional Counsel, A WP-7 

Western-Pacific Region 

Federal Aviation Administration 

P. 0. Box 92007 

Los Angeles, CA 90009-2007 

TEL: 310-725-7112 

FAX: 310-725-6816 

Robert F. Cohn, Esq., Respondent's Counsel 

Patrick R. Rizzi, Esq. 

Hogan Lovells US LLP 

555 Thirteenth Street, N.W. 

Washington, DC 20004 

TEL: 202-637-5600 

FAX: 202-637-5910 

Chris J. Pappaioanou, Vice President 

Mesa Airlines, Inc., Respondent 

410 N. 44th Street 

Phoenix, AZ 85008 

The Honorable Richard C. Goodwin, Administrative Law Judge 

Office of Hearings, M-20 · 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. (Ell-310) 

Washington, DC 20590 

TEL: 202-366-5121 Legal Assistant FAX:202-366-7536 

FDMS No. FAA-2013-0616 

(Civil Penalty Action) 

1 Service was by U.S. Mail. For service in person or by expedited courier, use the following addres~: Federal 

Aviation Administration, 600 Independence Avenue, S.W., Wilbur Wright Building---'-Suite 2Wl000, Washington, 

DC 20591; Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430. 

2
EXHIBIT 32.1

                            SECTION 906 CERTIFICATION

<PAGE>

                                  Exhibit 32.1

                     CERTIFICATION OF DISCLOSURE 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 Infinity  Capital Group,  Inc. (the
"Company")  on Form 10-QSB for the period ending June 30, 2007 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the "Report") I, Gregory
H. Laborde, Chief Executive Officer of the Company,  certify, pursuant to 18 USC
section 1350, as adopted  pursuant to section 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 results of operations of the
Company.

Dated: August 20, 2007

/s/Gregory H. Laborde
------------------------------------------------------------------
Gregory H. Laborde, Chief Executive Officer and President


This  certification  accompanies  the  Report  pursuant  to  Section  906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002 and shall not,  except to the extent required by the
Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002,  be deemed  filed by the  Company  for  purposes of
Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
February 1, 1950

No. 7791.

#### Keer, *Maurer Company*v. *United States.*

Entered at Philadelphia, Pa. Reap. Dec. 7764. Motion by plaintiff.
Exhibit 10.1

                              MINDEN BANCORP, INC.
                            415 MAIN * P. O. BOX 797
                          MINDEN, LOUISIANA 71058-0797
                    -----------------------------------------
                             318-377-0523 TELEPHONE
                                318-377-0038 FAX
                                  mblminden.com

                                October 11, 2006

Mr. Michael S. Harper
Director, Minden Bancorp, Inc.
Minden, Louisiana

Dear Mike,

On May 15, 2003, the Stock Option Plan (SOP) and the  Recognition  and Retention
Plan (RRP) for common stock awards from Minden Bancorp became effective for each
current  director and  executive  officer of the bank.  The  directors of Minden
Bancorp and Minden  Building  and Loan voted  unanimously  at their  meetings on
October  10,  2006,  to provide you with cash  compensation  for the years 2006,
2007, and 2008, that is comparable to the other members of the Boards. In accord
with the enclosed  resolution  adopted at the meetings on October 10, 2006,  the
Boards of Directors of both companies  approved an additional cash  compensation
award for you in the amount of $7,875  for 2006.  Additionally,  the  resolution
sets forth the method of computation  for the cash  compensation  awards for the
years 2007 and 2008.

For your information each director  received 561 Stock Options and 224 Shares of
Stock on  5/15/2006.  For the years 2007 and 2008,  they will  receive  the same
amounts.  Your cash compensation award for these two years will be determined by
the closing price of the stock on 5/15/07 and 5/15/08.

I think this action by the Boards  indicate their  confidence in your expertise,
and  appreciation  for your  contributions  to  discussions  and  actions by the
Boards.

As a personal word, please let me add that is a pleasure to work with you, and I
am pleased this action has been taken by the Boards.

We have an exciting  future for our bank. I'm glad that you are an integral part
of that future.

Sincerely,

/s/A. David Evans
A. David Evans
President/CEO

cc:  Dr. F. Dare Lott, Jr., Chairman Audit Committee
cc:  Mrs. Becky T. Harrell, Chief Financial Officer
FILED

United States Court of Appeals

Tenth Circuit

September 20, 2012

Elisabeth A. Shumaker

Clerk of Court

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

TENTH CIRCUIT

THERESA L. DOWLING, 

Plaintiff–Appellant, No. 11-1554

v. (D.C. No. 1:10-CV-01118-REB-KMT)

STURGEON ELECTRIC; WILLIAM

LONG; WILLIAM FREDRICKS, 

(D. Colorado)

Defendants–Appellees.

 

ORDER AND JUDGMENT*

Before BRISCOE, Chief Judge, McKAY and HOLMES, Circuit Judges.

After examining the briefs and the appellate record, this panel has determined

unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist in the determination of this

appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2); 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). This case is therefore ordered

submitted without oral argument.

Plaintiff Theresa Dowling, proceeding pro se, appeals the district court’s grant of

summary judgment for the Defendants on her claims under Title VII of the Civil Rights

Act of 1964. The magistrate judge recommended granting summary judgment because

*

 This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of

law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. It may be cited, however, for its

persuasive value consistent with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1 and 10th Cir. R. 32.1.
Plaintiff could not satisfy her burden of establishing a prima facie case for her gender

discrimination, retaliation, and hostile work environment claims. The district court

agreed. It appears Plaintiff also argues that the district court erred by denying her motion

to extend the deadline for discovery and her motions for post-judgment relief. 

Plaintiff’s appeal is based largely on allegations of fraud on the part of defense

counsel and bias on the part of the district court and magistrate judge. After a thorough

review of the appellate record, we have found no evidence to support these allegations. 

Furthermore, nothing in Plaintiff’s brief or the appellate record persuades us there was

any error in the magistrate judge’s analysis or the district court’s orders. Therefore, for

substantially the same reasons given by the magistrate judge and the district court, we

AFFIRM the grant of summary judgment on Plaintiff’s Title VII claims and the denial of

her motion to extend the deadline for discovery and her motions for post-judgment relief. 

Plaintiff’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal is GRANTED. 

Entered for the Court

Monroe G. McKay

Circuit Judge

-2-
<PAGE>
                                                                   EXHIBIT 23.1


                         Consent of Independent Auditors



         We consent to the use of our report dated March 11, 1999, including
Note I[1] which is dated March 23, 1999, Note E which is dated July 23, 1999 and
August 27, 1999 and Note J[2] which is dated August 19, 1999, and the financial
statements for the period ended December 31, 1998 in the Annual Report on Form
10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 1998 of Teletrak Environmental Systems,
Inc.



Richard A. Eisner & Company, LLP

/s/ Richard A. Eisner & Company, LLP

New York, New York

October 13, 1999
# Dziennik Urzędowy C 48/2013

| | ISSN 1977-1002
  doi:10.3000/19771002.C_2013.048.pol |
| --- | --- |
| Dziennik Urzędowy
  Unii Europejskiej | C 48 |
| | |
| Wydanie polskie | Informacje i zawiadomienia | Tom 5619 lutego 2013 |

ISSN 1977-1002

doi:10.3000/19771002.C_2013.048.pol

Dziennik Urzędowy

Unii Europejskiej

C 48

Wydanie polskie

Informacje i zawiadomienia

Tom 5619 lutego 2013

---

| Powiadomienie nr | Spis treśći | Strona |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | V   Ogłoszenia |
| | POSTĘPOWANIA ADMINISTRACYJNE |
| | Parlament Europejski |
| 2013/C 048/01 | Decyzja | 1 |

Powiadomienie nr

Spis treśći

Strona

V   Ogłoszenia

POSTĘPOWANIA ADMINISTRACYJNE

Parlament Europejski

2013/C 048/01

Decyzja

1

| PL | |
| --- | --- |

PL

---

V Ogłoszenia

POSTĘPOWANIA ADMINISTRACYJNE

Parlament Europejski

| 19.2.2013 | PL | Dziennik Urzędowy Unii Europejskiej | C 48/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.2.2013

PL

Dziennik Urzędowy Unii Europejskiej

C 48/1

---

DECYZJA

2013/C 48/01

SEKRETARZ GENERALNY PARLAMENTU EUROPEJSKIEGO,

uwzględniając rozporządzenie (EWG, Euratom, EWWiS) nr 259/68 Rady, zmienione rozporządzeniem (WE, Euratom) nr 723/2004 i ostatnio zmienione rozporządzeniem Parlamentu Europejskiego i Rady (UE, Euratom) nr 1080/2010 z dnia 24 listopada 2010 r. zmieniającym regulamin pracowniczy urzędników Wspólnot Europejskich i warunki zatrudnienia innych pracowników Wspólnot Europejskich, w szczególności art. 30 tego regulaminu,

uwzględniając decyzję Prezydium z dnia 3 maja 2004 r. w sprawie przekazania uprawnień organowi uprawnionemu do mianowania (organ powołujący) oraz organowi uprawnionemu do zawierania umów o pracę, ostatnio zmienioną przez Prezydium w dniu 4 maja 2009 r.,

uwzględniając termin wygaśnięcia (dnia 31 grudnia 2012 r.) następujących list rezerwowych Parlamentu Europejskiego:

PE/96/A, PE/97/A, A/94, A/95, A/96, AD/4/08, PE/99/S, PE/103/S, PE/104/S, PE/106/S, PE/107/S, PE/109/S, PE/117/S, PE/118/S, C/348, AST/1/2005, AST/1/2006, AST/5/2008, PE/69/S, PE/96/S, PE/110/S, PE/119/S,

uwzględniając opinię Wspólnego Komitetu wydaną podczas jego posiedzenia w dniu 21 listopada 2012 r.,

STANOWI, CO NASTĘPUJE:

Artykuł 1

Okres ważności list rezerwowych:

AD/4/08, PE/99/S, PE/103/S, PE/104/S, PE/106/S, PE/107/S, PE/109/S, PE/117/S, PE/118/S, AST/5/08, PE/96/S, PE/110/S, PE/119/S

zostaje przedłużony do dnia 31 grudnia 2013 r.

Artykuł 2

Okres ważności list rezerwowych:

PE/96/A, PE/97/A, A/94, A/95, A/96, C/348, AST/1/2005, AST/1/2006 i PE/69/S

nie zostaje przedłużony.

Sporządzono w Luksemburgu dnia 20 grudnia 2012 r.

Klaus WELLE

Sekretarz Generalny

---
Final Listing of Questionnaire Files for Steam Electric Rulemaking Record

Plant ID 00562

Removed 

from Public 

(Non-CBI) 

Docket1

Copyright 

Flag2File Name3

Description

x 00562\00562_Checklist.xls EPA Technical Review Checklist Workbook

00562\00562_Completeness_Checklist.xls EPA Completeness Review Checklist

x 00562\00562_Part A.xls EPA log of hardcopy documents submitted

x 00562\00562_Part B.xls Plant submitted survey file

x 00562\00562_Part C.xls Plant submitted survey file

x 00562\00562_Part D.xls Plant submitted survey file

x 00562\00562_Part H.xls Plant submitted survey file

x 00562\Supplemental Documents\00562_10381519B001-MAP-1.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

00562\Supplemental Documents\00562_10381519B001-MAP-2.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

x 00562\Supplemental Documents\00562_10381519B002-D-1.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

x 00562\Supplemental Documents\00562_10381519B002-WB-1.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

00562\Supplemental Documents\00562_Block Diagram CCS Flyash Lines.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

00562\Supplemental Documents\00562_CCS AC report.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

00562\Supplemental Documents\00562_Coal Creek Final Report - Toxicon2.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

00562\Supplemental Documents\00562_Final Report FG063006.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

x 00562\Supplemental Documents\00562_Pond diagram.xlsx Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

00562\Supplemental Documents\Certification Statement Plant ID 00562.pdf Plant certification statement

1

 Final reviewed survey responses are located in the Steam Electric Technical Questionnaire Database . 

2

 Copyright documents are available from the docket. 

3

 No hardcopy log is included for this plant as no hardcopy materials were received.
| Name                               |           | Jurisdiction in which incorporated |
|------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------|
| Tempress Systems, Inc.             |                                                   | State of Texas                     |
|                               |                                                   |                               |
| Tempress Holdings B.V.             |                                                   | The Netherlands                    |
|                               |                                                   |                               |
| Tempress Systems B.V.              |                                                   | The Netherlands                    |
|                               |                                                   |                               |
| Tempress Manufacturing B.V.        |                                                   | The Netherlands                    |
|                               |                                                   |                               |
| Tempress Engineering B.V.          |                                                   | The Netherlands                    |
|                               |                                                   |                               |
| Tempress Onroerend Goed B.V        |                                                   | The Netherlands                    |
|                               |                                                   |                               |
| P.R. Hoffman Machine Products, Inc |                                                   | State of Arizona                   |
|                               |                                                   |                               |
| Bruce Technologies, Inc            |                                                   | State of Massachusetts             |
|                               |                                                   |                               |
| Bruce Technologies Europe GmbH     |                                                   | Federal Republic of Germany        |
|                               |                                                   |                               |
| R2D Automation SAS                 |                                                   | France                             |

----
II 

112TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 2385 

To suspend temporarily the duty on Imidacloprid. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

APRIL 26, 2012 

Mr. ROCKEFELLER introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 

referred to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To suspend temporarily the duty on Imidacloprid. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. IMIDACLOPRID. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter II of chapter 99 of 

5 the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is 

6 amended by inserting in numerical sequence the following 

7 new heading: 

‘‘ 9902.01.00 Product mixtures containing 1-[(6-Chloro-3- 

pyridiyl)methyl]-N-nitro-2- 

imidazolidinimine 

(Imidacloprid) (CAS No. 

138261–41–3) and (Z)-9- 

Tricosene (CAS No. 

27519–02–4) (provided for 

in subheading 3808.91.25) Free No change No change On or before 

12/31/2015 ’’. 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 2385 IS

1 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

2 subsection (a) applies with respect to goods entered, or 

3 withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or after 

4 the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
N OTE : This order is nonprecedential

. 

# United States **Court of Appeals** 
**for the Federal Circuit**

______________________

CHARLES J. RAYBINE,

Claimant

- Appellant

v.

DENIS MCDONOUGH, SECRETARY OF VETERANS AFFAIRS, Respondent

- Appellee

______________________

2020

- 1218

______________________

Appeal from the United States Court of Appeals for

Veterans Claims in No. 18

- 6117, Judge Joseph L. Falvey

, Jr., Judge Joseph L. Toth, Judge William S. Greenberg.

______________________

ON MOTION

______________________

P ER C URIAM

. 1

O R D E R

1 Circuit Judge Newman did not participate. Case: 20-1218 Document: 48 Page: 1 Filed: 09/27/2023RAYBINE v. MCDONOUGH 2

Upon consideration of the Secretary’s unopposed motion to remand the case to the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims,

I T I S O RDERED T HAT :

The motion is granted. The case is remanded to the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claim s to reconsider its decision in light of Taylor v. McDonough , 71
F.4th 909 (Fed. Cir. 2023) (en banc) , which held

that when a veteran has been determined to be entitled to benefits for one or more disabilities connected to participation in the Edgewood pro gram at issue, the required effective date of such benefits is

the date that the veteran would have had in the absence of the challenged government conduct

— imposition of the secrecy oath with no VA route for claim presentation and proof to vindicate the be nefits entitlement.

Taylor , 71 F.4th at 946.

September 27, 2023

Date F OR THE C OURT Case: 20-1218 Document: 48 Page: 2 Filed: 09/27/2023
THE STATE OF TEXAS

M A N D A T E

*********************************************

TO THE 7TH DISTRICT COURT OF SMITH COUNTY, GREETING:

Before our Court of Appeals for the 12th Court of Appeals District of Texas, on the 30th

day of January, 2015, the cause upon appeal to revise or reverse your judgment between

JUSTIN DAVIS, Appellant

NO. 12-13-00367-CR; Trial Court No. 007-0653-13

Opinion by James T. Worthen, Chief Justice.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

was determined; and therein our said Court made its order in these words:

“THIS CAUSE came to be heard on the appellate record and briefs filed herein, and the 

same being considered, it is the opinion of this court that there was no error in the judgment.

It is therefore ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED that the judgment of the court 

below be in all things affirmed, and that this decision be certified to the court below for 

observance.”

WHEREAS, WE COMMAND YOU to observe the order of our said Court of Appeals 

for the Twelfth Court of Appeals District of Texas in this behalf, and in all things have it duly 

recognized, obeyed, and executed.

WITNESS, THE HONORABLE JAMES T. WORTHEN, Chief Justice of our Court 

of Appeals for the Twelfth Court of Appeals District, with the Seal thereof affixed, at the City of 

Tyler, this the 27th day of March, 2015.

CATHY S. LUSK, CLERK

By: _______________________________

Chief Deputy Clerk
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

MEMORANDUM OPINION

No. 04-21-00163-CV

IN RE INTERVENTIONAL PAIN MANAGEMENT, P.A.

on behalf of Tracy Hack, Relator

Original Proceeding1

PER CURIAM

Sitting: Rebeca C. Martinez, Chief Justice

Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice

Beth Watkins, Justice

Delivered and Filed: June 23, 2021

PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS DENIED 

Relator has filed a petition for writ of mandamus. We have the power to issue writs of 

mandamus when “agreeable to the principles of law regulating those writs.” TEX. GOV’T CODE 

§ 22.221(b). For mandamus, a relator has the burden to file a petition and record showing “the trial 

court abused its discretion and that no adequate appellate remedy exists.” In re H.E.B. Grocery 

Co., 492 S.W.3d 300, 302 (Tex. 2016) (orig. proceeding) (per curiam). Having reviewed the 

petition, the record, and the response, we conclude relator has not satisfied this burden. 

Accordingly, we deny the petition. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.8(a).

PER CURIAM

1

This proceeding arises out of Cause No. 2019-CI-01372 pending in the 73rd Judicial District Court, Bexar County, 

Texas, the Honorable David A. Canales presiding.
**EXHIBIT
      32.1**


**CERTIFICATION
      PURSUANT TO THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT**


**18
      U.S.C. SECTION 1350**


**AS
      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906**


**OF
      THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**





I,
      Walt
      Tatum, Chief Executive Officer of Rhino Outdoor International, Inc.
      (the "Company") do hereby 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:





This
      Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of the Company for the quarter ended September 30,
      2006,
      as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "report"), fully
      complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange
      Act of 1934; and





The
      information contained in the report fairly presents, in all material respects,
      the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.





Date:
      November 22, 2006




/s/
      WALT TATUM


Walt
      Tatum


*Chief
      Executive Officer*
#### Walter A. LOFTON v. GLASS CONTAINER CORPORATION et al.

No. 49404.

Supreme Court of Mississippi.

May 18, 1977.

James M. Abram, Patricia A. Catchings, Jackson, for appellant.

Daniel, Coker, Horton, Bell & Dukes, Roger C. Clapp, Jackson, for appellees.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Rankin County; Rufus W. Broome, Judge.

Before PATTERSON, P. J., and SUGG and WALKER, JJ.

AFFIRMED.