alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
-A A, 

(facile ^teM (^ifiation, 9,fuu moH--

Big Bear City Airport • French Valley Airport 

W^mi 

' ! - 1 , P 

Pacific Crest Aviation, Inc 

37730 Sky Canyon Rd 

MiuTieta, CA 92563 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

Docket Management System 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE 

West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140 

Washington, DC 20590 

Date: 6/22/2010 

To Whom It May Concern: 

Pacific Crest Aviation, Inc currently has two drug testing programs; one for our LOA and 

a separate one for our Part 135 operation Certificate # 21PA947L. We would like to 

request and exemption for our LOA drug testing program for 14 CFR Part 91.174 (d)and 

Part 120; due to there being only one pilot that flies for the Scenic Tours, which is also a 

135 pilot for the company and is under our drug testing for the 135 certificate. We 

request this exenlption because of the added expense to maintain a second drug program 

for one person on the LOA. This would not adversely affect safety because our pilots and 

fiiture pilots will all be Part 135 pilots under that drug-testing program. We do not wish 

to exercise the privileges outside of the United States. 

Thank 

'•^•-''-'^^*'^-^:::';tS'^ 

jallagher 

Pacific Crest Aviation, Inc 

951-696-0160 office 951-698-0019 fax 

ig(a),pacificcrestaviation.com 

Air Charter • Scenic Tours • Instruction • Air Attack • Reconnaissance 

3/}J2Wlncfie!lierRd., Murrieta, CA 92563 • Ph: 951-696-0160 • Fax: 951-698-0019
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

JOHNSON, MIRMIRAN & THOMPSON, INC.,

a foreign corporation for profit,

Appellant,

v.

TAMMY SIRMONS, as Personal Representative of the ESTATE OF 

CLEVELAND ODOM and RUBIE ODOM, as Personal Representative of 

the ESTATE OF ANGELICA ODOM,

Appellees.

No. 4D20-0884

[November 12, 2020]

Appeal of a nonfinal order from the Circuit Court for the Nineteenth 

Judicial Circuit, Indian River County; Janet Croom, Judge; L.T. Case No. 

312017CA000881.

Diane H. Tutt of Conroy Simberg, Hollywood, for appellant.

F. Malcolm Cunningham, Jr. and Amy L. Fischer of The Cunningham 

Law Firm, P.A., West Palm Beach, and Lorenzo Williams and Elaine James 

of Gary, Williams, Parenti, Watson & Gary, P.L., Stuart, for appellees.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

DAMOORGIAN, CIKLIN and ARTAU, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 148 (Friday, August 1, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 41387]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-20271]


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

FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM


Formations of, Acquisitions by, and Mergers of Bank Holding 
Companies

    The companies listed in this notice have applied to the Board for 
approval, pursuant to the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 (12 U.S.C. 
1841 et seq.) (BHC Act), Regulation Y (12 CFR Part 225), and all other 
applicable statutes and regulations to become a bank holding company 
and/or to acquire the assets or the ownership of, control of, or the 
power to vote shares of a bank or bank holding company and all of the 
banks and nonbanking companies owned by the bank holding company, 
including the companies listed below.
    The applications listed below, as well as other related filings 
required by the Board, are available for immediate inspection at the 
Federal Reserve Bank indicated. The application also will be available 
for inspection at the offices of the Board of Governors. Interested 
persons may express their views in writing on the standards enumerated 
in the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1842(c)). If the proposal also involves the 
acquisition of a nonbanking company, the review also includes whether 
the acquisition of the nonbanking company complies with the standards 
in section 4 of the BHC Act. Unless otherwise noted, nonbanking 
activities will be conducted throughout the United States.
    Unless otherwise noted, comments regarding each of these 
applications must be received at the Reserve Bank indicated or the 
offices of the Board of Governors not later than August 25, 1997.
    A. Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta (Lois Berthaume, Vice President) 
104 Marietta Street, N.W., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-2713:
    1. Rockdale National Bankshares, Inc., Conyers, Georgia; to become 
a bank holding company by acquiring 100 percent of the voting shares of 
Rockdale National Bank, Conyers, Georgia (in organization).
    B. Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis (Karen L. Grandstrand, Vice 
President) 250 Marquette Avenue, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55480-2171:
    1. Citizens Bancshares of Woodville, Inc., Woodville, Wisconsin; to 
merge with Investors Bancorporation, Inc., Hudson, Wisconsin, and 
thereby indirectly acquire Bank St. Croix, Roberts, Wisconsin.

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, July 28, 1997.
Jennifer J. Johnson,
Deputy Secretary of the Board.
[FR Doc. 97-20271 Filed 7-31-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6210-01-F
#### William H. ELLIOTT v. DEPT. OF PUBLIC SAFETY, etc.

No. 60268.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Sept. 27, 1977.

In re: William H. Elliott applying for certiorari, or writ of review to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, Parish of East Baton Rouge. 346 So.2d 839.

Writ denied.
# C_2013189EN.01000501.xml

| 29.6.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 189/5 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

29.6.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 189/5

---

Appeal brought on 15 April 2013 by nfon AG against the judgment of the General Court (Fourth Chamber) delivered on 29 January 2013 in Case T-283/11 Fon Wireless Ltd. v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

(Case C-193/13 P)

2013/C 189/09

Language of the case: German

Parties

Parties

Appellant: nfon AG (represented by: V. von Bomhard, Rechtsanwältin)

Appellant:

Other parties to the proceedings: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs), Fon Wireless Ltd.

Other parties to the proceedings:

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

| — | Set aside the judgment under appeal; |
| --- | --- |

—

Set aside the judgment under appeal;

| — | In the alternative, set aside the judgment in so far as it upholds a likelihood of confusion on the basis of the earlier Community trade mark No 4719738 ‘fon’ (figure); |
| --- | --- |

—

In the alternative, set aside the judgment in so far as it upholds a likelihood of confusion on the basis of the earlier Community trade mark No 4719738 ‘fon’ (figure);

| — | Order the applicant in the proceedings at first instance to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

Order the applicant in the proceedings at first instance to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

The present appeal is directed against the judgment of the General Court of 29 January 2013 in Case T-283/11, by which the General Court altered the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 18 March 2011 (Case R 1017/2009-4) relating to opposition proceedings between Fon Wireless Ltd. and nfon AG to the effect that nfon AG’s appeal to the Board of Appeal was dismissed.

The only ground of appeal relied upon by the appellant is an infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 of 26 February 2009 on the Community trade mark. (1) There must, in the examination of the likelihood of confusion under Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009, be a detailed assessment of all the relevant facts of the individual case. The appeal claims that there has been a failure to comply with that requirement in three respects: first, the error of law made in the identification of the distinctive elements of the opposing marks in the comparison of the signs, second, the error made in automatically assuming the existence of a likelihood of confusion and, third, the lack of a comprehensive assessment of the likelihood of confusion on account of the failure to take into account sufficiently the limited distinctiveness of the element ‘fon’.

1

---

(1)  OJ 2009 L 78, p. 1.

1

---
I 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1181 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JUNE 24, 2005 

Referred to the Committee on Government Reform 

AN ACT 

To ensure an open and deliberate process in Congress by 

providing that any future legislation to establish a new 

exemption to section 552 of title 5, United States Code 

(commonly referred to as the Freedom of Information 

Act) be stated explicitly within the text of the bill. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
2 

S 1181 RFH 

1 SECTION 1. SPECIFIC CITATIONS IN EXEMPTIONS. 

2 Section 552(b) of title 5, United States Code, is 

3 amended by striking paragraph (3) and inserting the fol4 lowing: 

5 ‘‘(3) specifically exempted from disclosure by 

6 statute (other than section 552b of this title), pro7 vided that such statute— 

8 ‘‘(A) if enacted after July 1, 2005, specifi9 cally cites to this section; and 

10 ‘‘(B)(i) requires that the matters be with11 held from the public in such a manner as to 

12 leave no discretion on the issue; or 

13 ‘‘(ii) establishes particular criteria for 

14 withholding or refers to particular types of mat15 ters to be withheld;’’. 

Passed the Senate June 24, 2005. 

Attest: EMILY J. REYNOLDS, 

Secretary.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Nat Schlesinger, :

:

Petitioner, :

v. : Civil Action No. 08-1668 (CKK)

:

Michael Mukasey et al., :

:

Respondents. :

MEMORANDUM OPINION

In this mandamus action filed pro se, petitioner, a federal prisoner, seeks to compel the

United States Attorney General and the United States Attorney for the Eastern District of New

York to “investigate and prosecute” offenses allegedly committed by individuals involved in his

criminal prosecution. Petition for Writ of Mandamus at 1. He accuses said individuals of

obstruction of justice, perjury, witness tampering and subordination of perjury. Petitioner also

seeks a declaratory judgment to establish his rights. Id. The United States Attorney General has

absolute discretion in deciding whether to investigate claims for possible criminal or civil

prosecution. As a general rule applicable to the circumstances of this case, such decisions are not

subject to judicial review. Shoshone-Bannock Tribes v. Reno, 56 F.3d 1476, 1480-81 (D.C. Cir.

1995). The complaint therefore must be dismissed. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(h)(3) (requiring the

Court to dismiss a case “at any time” it determines that it lacks subject matter jurisdiction). A

separate Order accompanies this Memorandum Opinion.

__________s/s_________________

COLLEEN KOLLAR-KOTELLY

United States District Judge

Date: March 3, 2009
Exhibit 23.0 

 

Consent of Independent Auditors 

 

The Board of Directors and Shareholders 

Planar Systems, Inc. andSubsidiaries: 

 

We consent to incorporation by reference in the RegistrationStatement on Form S-3 (File No. 333-89372) and the Registration Statements on Forms S-8 (File Nos. 33-82696, 33-82688, 33-90258, 333-45191, 333-37502, 333-86886, 333-101145, 333-101147, and 333-101148) of Planar Systems, Inc. and subsidiaries of ourreport dated October 20, 2003, except as to Note 14, which is as of December 16, 2003 relating to the consolidated balance sheets of Planar Systems, Inc. and subsidiaries as of September 26, 2003 and September 27, 2002, and the related consolidatedstatements of operations, shareholders’ equity and cash flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended September 26, 2003, which report appears in the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Planar Systems, Inc. and subsidiaries for the yearended September 26, 2003. Our report refers to a change in method of accounting for goodwill in 2002. 

 

 

/s/    KPMG LLP 

 

Portland, Oregon 

December 22, 2003
Exhibit 10.11(b)


       Schedule of 12% Secured Convertible Notes issued by NCT Group, Inc.
            to Carole Salkind and outstanding as of February 28, 2006



                                                                  Conversion
     Issue Date           Due Date             Principal           Price(a)
     ----------           --------             ---------           --------
      02/13/06            08/13/06              $652,655           $0.0100


                                            -----------------
                                                $652,655
                                            =================


(a)  Note  conversion  price will be the  greater  of: (i) the lowest  last sale
     price of NCT's common stock during the two-day period comprised of the date
     of the note and the  preceding  date; or (ii) the par value of NCT's common
     stock on the date the conversion notice is delivered to NCT.
<PAGE>

EXHIBIT 99.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 as adopted, pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, each of the undersigned officers of Echo Bay Mines
Ltd. (the "Company"), does hereby certify, to such officer's knowledge that:

The Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2002 of the
Company fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and information contained in the Form 10-K
fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results
of operations of the Company.

March 26, 2003                           /s/
                                         -------------------------------
                                         Robert M. Buchan
                                         Chief Executive Officer



                                         /s/
                                         -------------------------------
                                         Brian W. Penny
                                         Vice President
An official website of the United States government         Here's how you know         
**Official websites use .mil**
A **.mil** website belongs to an official U.S. Department of Defense organization in the United States.
**Secure .mil websites use HTTPS**
 A **lock (lock )** or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .mil website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Skip to main content (Press Enter).

Defense Logistics AgencyThe Nation's Combat Logistics Support Agency

Search
Search

Search

-  Home		 
-  What DLA Offers    -  Excess Property Disposal             
  -  Document Services             
  -  Products             
  -  Services             
  -  Programs 
-  Working With DLA    -  Applications             
  -  Small Business             
  -  Federal and International Cataloging             
  -  Defense Data Standards             
  -  Events             
  -  Procurement Policies             
  -  Government Programs             
  -  Forms 
-  Organizations    -  DLA Headquarters             
  -  DLA Aviation             
  -  DLA Disposition Services             
  -  DLA Distribution             
  -  DLA Energy             
  -  DLA Land and Maritime             
  -  DLA Troop Support             
  -  DLA CENTCOM & SOCOM             
  -  DLA Europe & Africa             
  -  DLA Indo-Pacific 
-  Customer Support    -  Self Help Tools             
  -  How to Order             
  -  Find Your Order             
  -  Customer Facing Offices             
  -  Training             
  -  Brochures             
  -  Warfighter Support             
  -  Customer Service Management 
-  Careers		 
-  About DLA    -  Contact Us             
  -  Locations             
  -  Leaders             
  -  News             
  -  History             
  -  Media Gallery             
  -  DLA Campaigns 

HomeAbout DLANewsNews Article View

PHOTO INFORMATION

** Download

** Details

** Share

#  DLA Troop Support Subsistence hosts town hall

By Michael Hong

                PHILADELPHIA  –              
Defense Logistics Agency Troop Support Subsistence supply chain hosted a town hall on 30 May in Philadelphia. The Subsistence supply chain provides food support for the military all over the world. From individually packaged meals in a soldier's ruck sack, to a ship's galley and to full-service dining facilities on military installations, Subsistence gets that food there. Subsistence also supports other non-Department of Defense activities, such as the Federal Emergency Management Agency, the State Department, Veterans’ Homes and more.

**                    SHARE                

**                    PRINT
Draft Proposal CA-9 

This concept has been developed by the DOE Building Energy Codes Program (BECP) as a possible code

change proposal to the Commercial provisions of the 2012 International Energy Conservation Code

(IECC).   Interested parties are asked to submit any and all comments on DOE's initial concepts and draft

code change proposals. For instructions on submitting comments, visit:

www.energycodes.gov/development/commercial/codes/iecc/concepts/

Continuous Air Barrier Compliance Path Continuity (CA-9) 

Objective:  Clarify the language pertaining to the sealing of penetrations in the building thermal

envelope associated with continuous air barriers so that all three compliance options associated with air

barriers are equivalent.

Suggested Code Change Proposal  

Revise Sections C402.4 and C402.4.1.2 and Delete Section C402.4.1.2.3 as follows:  

C402.4 Air leakage (Mandatory). The thermal envelope of buildings shall comply with Sections 

C402.4.1 through C402.4.8. Alternatively the building thermal envelope shall be permitted to be tested in 

accordance with ASTM E779 at a pressure differential of 0.3 inches water gauge, or an equivalent method 

approved by the code official, and deemed to comply with the provisions of this section when the tested 

air leakage rate of the building thermal envelope does not exceed 0.40 cfm/ft2. When compliance is based 

on such testing the building shall also meet the provisions of Sections C402.4.5, 402.4.6 and 402.4.7.

C402.4.1.2 Air barrier compliance options. A continuous air barrier for the opaque portions of the 

building thermal envelope shall comply with Section C402.4.1.2.1, or C402.4.1.2.2. or C402.4.1.2.3. 

Reason:  The current code lists three options for meeting the provisions of the opaque building

envelope.  Clearly the first two that deal with the opaque components only are valid and allow

compliance based on either the materials used or the assemblies of the envelope.  The test is also a valid

way of addressing air leakage on a performance basis.  Unfortunately a whole building test includes

fenestration such that the test cannot address only opaque sections of the envelope as is the case with

the other two options.  All three options should be comparable and have the same scope.  For this

reason the text has been more appropriately rearranged.  One approach maintains the approach of

prescriptively addressing the particular components of the building thermal envelope and their

construction and installation as well as individual air leakage properties.  The other provides a more

performance oriented approach that is based on the testing currently allowed because when tested, all

possible means of air leakage through the envelope are measured.

Cost Impact:  There is no cost impact associated with this proposed change.
U.S. Dept Commerce/NOAA/NMFS/NWFSC/Publications NOAA-NMFS-F/NWC-201: Status Review for Snake River Fall Chinook Salmon 
Figure 1. Map showing location of Snake River dams (with first date of operation), rivers, and hatcheries described in the text. 1 = Kalama Falls hatchery; 2 = Bonneville Hatchery; 3 = Priest Rapids Hatchery; 4 = Lyons Ferry Hatchery; 5 = Hagerman Hatchery. Locations for Bonneville Dam and other Columbia River dams are also indicated. 

Use your browser's BACK button to return to the text.

Table of Contents
No. 00-712.

#### Steinberger *v.*Texas.

Ct. App. Tex., 2d Dist. Certiorari denied.
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 American Spectrum Realty, Inc.(the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Anthony Eppolito, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to and for purposes of 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge:





(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 of the Company as of the dates indicated and results of operations of the Company for the period indicated.





Dated:  May 13, 2011





/s/ G. Anthony EppolitoG. Anthony EppolitoVice President and Chief Financial Officer
No.6107.

#### STATE OF LOUISIANA, EX REL. WALTER PONS vs. ANTOINETTE PONS SUAREZ.

Application for Writ of Habeas Corpus.

Lazarus, Michel and Lazarus, for relators.

Per Curiam:

This Court has, in general, appellate jurisdiction only. It is true that by Article 104 of the Constitution of 1913, it has original jurisdiction to issue writs of habeas corpus, but only “ at the instance of any person in actual custody. ’ *’*

We construe this Article to mean that this Court has jurisdiction to liberate a person actually and illegally detained against his own will; but we. do not think that it was intended to give this Court original jurisdiction over minors and insane persons so as to take cognizance of conflicting claims to the custody of such persons, or to give such custody to one party in preference to another; at least, when the right to such custody has not been previously decreed by a competent tribunal.

Moreover, the question of the status and custody of the alleged insane person is now pending before the proper tribunals; which, of itself excludes any concur*291rent jurisdiction that we might otherwise have in the premises.

Writ refused, March 13th, 1914.

Rehearing refused, March 18th, 1914.

Claiborne, J., takes no part.
**Exhibit 32**

 

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

 

In connection with theQuarterly Report of American Spectrum Realty, Inc.(the “Company”) on Form 10-Qfor the period ending June 30, 2004 as filed with the Securities and ExchangeCommission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, William J. Carden, President,Chief Executive Officer and Acting Chief Financial Officer of the Company,certify, pursuant to and for purposes of 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuantto § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge:

 

(1)                                  TheReport fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

(2)                                  Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition of the Company as of the dates indicated and results ofoperations of the Company for the period indicated.

 

 
| */s/ William J. Carden*                   |   |
|-------------------------------------------|--------|
| William J.  Carden                        |
| President,  Chief Executive Officer       |
|  and  Acting Chief Financial Officer |
|                                      |
| August 3,  2004                           |

 

----