alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
```
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 165 (Tuesday, August 26, 1997)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 45156]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-22507]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Airspace Docket No. 97-ASW-09]

Revision of Class E Airspace; Altus, OK

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Direct final rule; confirmation of effective date.

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

SUMMARY: This action confirms the effective date of a direct final rule 
which revises the Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above 
the surface at Altus, OK. The development of a Instrument Landing 
System (ILS) Standard Instrument Approach Procedure (SIAP) to Runway 
(RWY) 17R at Altus Air Force Base (AFB) has made this rule necessary. 
The direct final rule is intended to provide adequate Class E airspace 
for aircraft operating under Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) and 
executing the ILS SIAP to RWY 17R at Altus AFB, Altus, OK.

EFFECTIVE DATE: The direct final rule published at 62 FR 28337 is 
effective 0901 UTC, September 11, 1997.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Donald J. Day, Airspace Branch, Air 
Traffic Division, Southwest Region, Federal Aviation Administration, 
Forth Worth, TX 76193-0520, telephone: 817-222-5593.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FAA published this direct final rule 
with a request for comments in the Federal Register on May 23, 1997 (62 
FR 28337). The FAA uses the direct final rulemaking procedure for a 
non-controversial rule where the FAA believes that there will be no 
adverse public comment. This direct final rule advised the public that 
no adverse comments were anticipated, and that unless a written adverse 
comment, or a written notice of intent to submit such an adverse 
comment, were received within the comment period, the regulation would 
become effective on September 11, 1997. No adverse comments were 
received, and thus this action confirms that the direct final rule will 
be effective on that date.

    Issued in Fort Worth, TX, on August 5, 1997.
Albert L. Viselli,
Acting Manager, Air Traffic Division, Southwest Region.
[FR Doc. 97-22507 Filed 8-25-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-M
```
Exhibit




Exhibit 10.1 


CONFIDENTIAL TREATMENT REQUESTED FOR PORTIONS OF THIS DOCUMENT. PORTIONS FOR WHICH CONFIDENTIAL TREATMENT IS REQUESTED HAVE BEEN MARKED WITH THREE ASTERISKS [***] AND A FOOTNOTE INDICATING "CONFIDENTIAL TREATMENT REQUESTED". MATERIAL OMITTED HAS BEEN FILED SEPARATELY WITH THE SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION.




FRAMEWORK AGREEMENT
AMENDMENT #2


This Amendment #2 (this “Amendment”) is entered into by and between New Skies Satellites B.V. (“SES”), and Global Eagle Entertainment Inc. (“Customer”), and amends the Framework Agreement between SES and Customer dated 28 October 2014, as amended by Amendment No. 1 dated 11 February 2015 (the “Agreement”).  Defined terms used herein and not defined herein shall have the meanings assigned to them in the Agreement.


WHEREAS, the Parties desire to revise the prepayment requirements under the Agreement.


NOW, THEREFORE, the Parties agree as follows:


Effective Date: The effective date of this Amendment shall be 30 June 2015 (the “Effective Date”)


Section 2 PRE PAYMENT AND SECURITY: The schedule provided in the table under Subsection (a) (Pre-Payment) of Section 2 (PRE PAYMENT AND SECURITY) is replaced with the following:


***




In Witness Whereof, the Parties have caused this Amendment to be executed as of the date of last signature below.


	
		
	GLOBAL EAGLE ENTERTAINMENT INC.
	NEW SKIES SATELLITES B.V.



	By:__/s/ Michael Pigott_________
	By:__/s/ Gerson Souto_______ __

	Name:  Michael Pigott__________
	Name:  Gerson Souto__________

	Title:   VP Legal Affairs_________
	Title:_Director______________ _

	Date:_7/22/2015____________ ___
	Date:_24 July 2015_________ _ _






___________________________________________________ 
*** Confidential treatment requested.
# C o u rt o f

A p p ea ls

o f t h e S t a te o f

G eo rg ia

ATLANTA,_

_ _ __ _ _ __ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ __ _
Th e Co u rt

o f Ap p ea l s h er eb y p a s s es t h e f

o ll owi n g o r der :

A1 9 A0 78 9 . LEW I S v . THE STATE.

Th i s cas e was d o ck et ed b y t h i s Co u rt o n No v em b er 1 6, 2 01 8
, an d ap p el l an t ’ s b ri e f an d en um erat i o n s o f erro r were d u e Decem b er 6
, 2 0 1 8

. A s o f t h e d at e o f t h i s

o rd er, ap p el l an t s t i l l h as n o t fi l ed a b ri ef an d en u m erat i o n o f e r r o rs an d h as n ot

req u es t ed an ex t en si o n o f t i m e i n wh i ch t o d o s o. Acco rd i ng l y , t h i s ap p eal is h ereb y DISM ISSED as ab an d on ed p u rs u an t t o Co u rt o f Ap p eal s Ru les 1 3 an d 2 3

.

C o u r t o f A p p e a l s o f t h e S t a t e o

f G e o r g ia C le r k ’ s O f f i c e , A t la n t a ,

_

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ I c e r ti fy t h a t t h e a b o v e is a tr u e e x t r a c t f r o m

t h e m i n u t e s o

f t h e C o u r t o

f A p p e a l s o f G e o r g i a

. W i tn e s s m y s i g n a t u r e a n d t h e s e a l o

f s a i d c o u r t
h e r e t o a f f i x e d t h e d a y a n d y e a r l a s t a b o v e w r i t t e n

.

, C l e r k

. December 12, 2018

12/12/2018
#### Lesley WINSTON, Appellant, v. Andrea Jill WINSTON, Appellee.

No. 78-109.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Sept. 12, 1978.

*150Krongold & Bass, P.A. and Paul H. Bass, Coral Gables, for appellant.

Leo Greenfield and John M. Greenfield, North Miami, for appellee.

Before PEARSON, HUBBART and KE-HOE, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Lesley Winston, the former husband, appeals the final judgment of dissolution of his marriage to Andrea Jill Winston. Two points are presented: (1) that the trial judge abused his discretion in requiring the father to pay $175 per week for the support of a child with learning disabilities; (2) that the court erred in requiring the husband to pay the wife’s attorney’s fees.

Appellant’s contention that the record did not support the need for $175 per week for the disabled child required us to examine the record carefully. This is especially true because appellant argued that the wife had requested only $125.00 per week for this child. We hold that the record supports the award. Appellant has misread or misinterpreted the record. The wife sought $225.00 per week for the disabled child and $25.00 per week for the second child. Both the need of the mother and the ability of the father are established for the child support award. Cf. *Bordman v. Bordman,*231 So.2d 543, 544 (Fla. 3d DCA 1970).

Appellant’s second point urges that the award to the wife of an attorney’s fee of $2,500 must be reversed because of the financial positions of the parties. We are compelled to agree upon the basis of the holding of the Supreme Court of Florida in *Cummings v. Cummings,*330 So.2d 134, 136 (Fla.1976).1 The record is uncontroverted that the appellee wife is better off financially than the husband and her prospects for future earnings are better. We think that the wife’s need for a shifting of this burden to the husband has not been shown.

The judgment is affirmed in all respects except for the requirement that the appel*151lant pay the appellee’s attorney the sum of $2,500.00, which provision is reversed.

Affirmed in part, reversed in part.

1

. “We think Petitioner [husband] is justified in his protest [regarding the order requiring him to pay the Respondent-wife’s attorney’s fees]. As stated in *Mertz v. Mertz*[287 So.2d 691 (Fla. 2d DCA 1973)]:

> ‘ . . . the purpose of awarding attorney fees under the new dissolution of marriage law has not changed, in our view, from the purposes contemplated by its predecessors; that purpose is to insure that both parties will have reasonably the same ability to secure competent legal counsel. Here, the wife is clearly on equal if not superior footing with the husband to secure such counsel.

> We find it was an abuse of the court’s discretion to require Petitioner to pay Respondent’s attorney’s fees.”
<PAGE>

EXHIBIT 32.2


                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2003

In connection with the amended Annual Report of Miracor Diagnostics, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-KSB for the period ending December 31, 2004 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Ross S. Seibert, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
USC ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2003,
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.

                                                         /s/ Ross S. Seibert
                                                         -----------------------
                                                         Ross S. Seibert,
                                                         Chief Financial Officer

Dated: August 16, 2005
# Deputy command chaplain broadens religious support to DLA reservists, HQC employees

/ Published July 6, 2017
#### Norma A. ROMAN, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 68-508.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. Third District.

June 24, 1969.

Rehearing Denied Sept. 9, 1969.

J. Carrington Gramling, Jr., and Thomas B. Duff, Miami, for appellant.

Earl Faircloth, Atty. Gen., and Harold Mendelow, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

Before PEARSON and HENDRY, JJ. and LOPEZ, AQUILINO, Jr., Associate Judge.

LOPEZ, AQUILINO, Jr., Associate Judge.

Reversed and remanded for new trial on authority of Garcia v. State of Florida Fla.App., 226 So.2d 17, decided this date and being the same case.

Reversed and remanded for new trial.
San Joaquin’s Mackay promoted to Master Sgt.
 
  By Annette Silva, DLA Distribution San Joaquin, Calif., Public Affairs
  During a Jan. 4 ceremo­ny, Army Sgt. 1st Class Scotty Mackay put on the rank of Master Sgt. on before a small crowd of fellow soldiers and employ­ees of DLA Distribution San Joaquin, Calif.  Distribution center commander Marine Col. Dre Harrell administered the oath of office to Mackay and placed his new rank insignia on his uniform.  "Master Sgt. Mackay has earned the right to be selected as an elite senior non-commissioned officer in the U.S. Army.  We are proud of his dedicated service to ‘Team San Joaquin’ and his professional commitment to being a servant leader,” said Harrell.  “We look forward to gainfully watching him ascend through the enlisted ranks of the Army as he continues to have a positive and lasting impact with everyone who has the privilege of serving with him." Filled with emotion, Mackay said, “This honor is a testament to the support network that serves as my foundation and the reason for OUR [distribution center] success." Mackay is currently serving as the SNCO in the Program Support Office overseeing the kitting mission. Prior to this assignment, he served as the Operations NCO for the Bin and Bulk Divisions. Born in Norfolk, Va., and raised in Atlanta, Ga., he joined the Army in 2000.  He completed basic training in Fort Benning, Ga., and advanced individual training at Fort Gordon, Ga., where he received his military occupational specialty of 31P Microwave System Operator/Maintainer. Later in 2006, he re-classed to become a 92A Automated Logistics Specialist. Mackay holds a Bachelor of Science in Business Administration from the University of Maryland – University College in Adelphia, Md., and recently completed his last class for a Master of Business Administration degree from Northcentral University in Prescott, Ariz.
#### Morris Lee JAVERS, Jr., Dennis Reed and Genevieve Cole v. COUNCIL OF the CITY OF NEW ORLEANS, etc.

No. 61204.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Jan. 27, 1978.

In re: Morris Lee Javers, Jr. and Genevieve Cole applying for certiorari or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit. Parish of Orleans. 351 So.2d 247.

Writ denied.

TATE, DENNIS and CALOGERO, JJ., voted to grant.
# DLA Troop Support continues hurricane relief support

/ Published Sept. 14, 2017
PHILADELPHIA, 
The Defense Logistics Agency Troop Support continues to manage the delivery of more than 30 million meals and 82 generators to support the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s hurricane relief efforts.

That’s in addition to materials provided to U.S. Northern Command in support of state and local disaster response efforts in Texas, and U.S. Southern Command relief efforts in the Caribbean.

**Hurricane Irma support**

DLA Troop Support’s Subsistence supply chain managed a rush delivery of fresh fruit and vegetables to the dock loading ship USS Oak Hill before it departed for the U.S. Virgin Islands. 

Subsistence also delivered 298,500 MREs to military units supporting SOUTHCOM relief efforts, including Joint Forces Headquarters Virgin Islands, the Florida Army National Guard and two military installations: Fort Bragg, North Carolina and Maxwell Air Force Base, Alabama.

Subsistence is also delivering 13.7 million meals to FEMA, and has delivered 600 meals and 900 liters of bottled water to the Transportation Security Administration on the island of St. Thomas.

The Construction and Equipment supply chain is managing the delivery of 40 generators to northern Florida. Another 31 generators will be delivered to Puerto Rico. 

**Hurricane Harvey support**

Subsistence managed the delivery of 4.8 million meals and 1.5 million bottles of water to FEMA.

Subsistence also managed the delivery of 298,752 MREs to the Texas Army National Guard, Marines Corps Reserves and Coast Guard, all in support of NORTHCOM. 

C&E managed the delivery of 14,500 sandbags to three Texas military installations: Lackland Air Force Base, Fort Sam Houston and Randolph Air Force Base. C&E also provided 8,573 cots to the Texas Army National Guard. 

C&E also provided 11 generators and 575 flotation devices to FEMA.

See more about the Defense Department's hurricane relief response here:

Hurricane Irma | Hurricane Harvey
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1497 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1497

  To require the Secretary of the Interior to provide incidental take 
permits to public electric utilities that adopt avian protection plans.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             July 26, 2005

 Ms. Murkowski (for herself and Mr. Stevens) introduced the following 
bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment 
                            and Public Works

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To require the Secretary of the Interior to provide incidental take 
permits to public electric utilities that adopt avian protection plans.

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

SECTION 1. INCIDENTAL TAKE PERMITS FOR PUBLIC ELECTRIC UTILITIES WITH 
              AVIAN PROTECTION PLANS.

    (a) In General.--Notwithstanding the Act of June 8, 1940 (16 U.S.C. 
668 et seq.) (commonly known as the ``Bald and Golden Eagle Protection 
Act'') and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (16 U.S.C. 703 et seq.), the 
Secretary of the Interior shall provide an incidental take permit to a 
public electric utility that has adopted an avian protection plan, if 
the Secretary determines that the public utility has included in the 
plan specific measures to mitigate hazards to eagles and other 
migratory birds.
    (b) Penalties.--Any public utility that receives an incidental take 
permit under this section (including an officer, director, or employee 
of the public utility) shall not be subject to criminal or civil 
penalty under an Act referred to in subsection (a) for the incidental 
death by electrocution of a bird described in subsection (a)(1) by a 
power line of the public utility during the period the permit is in 
effect.
                                 <all>
```
#### STATE of Louisiana v. Leroy MYLES.

No. 61636.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Feb. 20, 1978.

In re: Leroy Myles, applying for writs of certiorari, prohibition, mandamus and for stay order. Parish of St. Charles.

Writ denied.
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 23.1


                   CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS

As independent public accountants, we hereby consent to the incorporation of our
report included in the Form 10-K/A, into the Company's previously filed
Registration Statements on Form S-8 (File Nos. 33-52168, 33-69322, 33-71450,
33-89072, 333-02115, 333-10349, 333-16531, 333-16015, 333-30279, 333-30281,
333-45079, 333-45095, 333-45083, 333-62609, 333-62613, 333-36901, 333-85393,
333-85389, 333-85919, 333-44374 and 333-44368) and Form S-3 (File Nos.
333-10455, 333-10459, 333-85431, 333-34578 and 333-44380).


ARTHUR ANDERSEN LLP


Jackson, Mississippi
April 25, 2001
#### STATE of Louisiana v. Ronald J. DANIEL.

No. 61433.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Feb. 24, 1978.

In re: Ronald J. Daniel applying for writs of prohibition, mandamus and a stay order. Parish of East Baton Rouge.

Denied.
#### DADE COUNTY, a political subdivision of the State of Florida, Petitioner, v. The Honorable Paul BAKER, Judge of the Circuit Court, Eleventh Judicial Circuit in and for Dade County, Florida, State of Florida, Albert Thomas, a/k/a Albert Rossi and Zebedee W. Wright, Respondents.

No. 77-1769.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

March 14, 1978.

Rehearing Denied April 7, 1978.

Stuart Simon, County Atty. and Murray A. Greenberg, Asst. County Atty., for petitioner.

Zebedee W. Wright, Ft. Lauderdale, for respondents.

*66Before PEARSON, HUBBART and KE-HOE, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Dade County brings this petition for writ of certiorari to review an order of the respondent judge ordering Dade County to pay to the attorney for one Albert Thomas, a respondent herein, the money that Thomas had expended for a bail bond premium while he was a criminal defendant in the circuit court upon a charge that was ultimately dismissed due to the state’s failure to produce a witness for deposition.

Respondents urge that such payments should be refundable pursuant to Article I, Section 19, of the Florida Constitution, and Sections 939.06 and 939.07, Florida Statutes (1975). This court has previously dealt with this assertion and has held that the premiums for bail bonds are not taxable. See *Holton v. State,*311 So.2d 711 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975); and see *Dinauer v. State,*317 So.2d 792 (Fla. 1st DCA 1975); and *Daniel v. State,*309 So.2d 248 (Fla. 4th DCA 1975).

Upon authority of the cited cases, the order of the respondent judge dated July 20, 1977, ordering the County Comptroller to pay Zebedee W. Wright the sum of $735.00, is quashed.

It is so ordered.
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 Annual  Report of American  Physicians  Service Group,
Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-KSB for the year ending  December 31, 2003 as
filed with the  Securities  and  Exchange  commission  on the date  hereof  (the
"Report"),  the  undersigned,  in the capacity and on the date indicated  below,
hereby  certifies  pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  Section 1350,  as adopted  pursuant to
Section  906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act  of  2002,  that  to  the  best  of his
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 and results of operation of
         the Company.


/s/ William H. Hayes                                        March 30, 2004
---------------------------                                ------------------
William H. Hayes                                            Date
Chief Financial Officer
##### 



EXHIBIT 32.1

Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as Adopted Pursuant to

Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002


In connection with the quarterly report for the
period ended September 30, 2003 of Marconi Corporation plc
(the Company) on Form 10-Q-K as
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
hereof (the Report), each of the undersigned
officers of the Company certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of such
officers 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 and
    results of the operations of the Company.

|                               |  |                               
|------------------------------ |  | ------------------------------
|By: /s/ M PARTON               |  | By: /s/ P S BINNING           
|                               |  |                               
|Name: Michael Parton           |  | Name: Pavi Binning            
|Title: Chief Executive Officer |  | Title: Chief Financial Officer
|Date: November 12, 2003        |  | Date: November 12, 2003       

This certification shall not be deemed filed by
the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.

A signed original of this written statement has
been provided to Marconi Corporation plc.

87
#### Harold HAMMOCK and Jackie W. Martin, Appellants, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 77-630.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Dec. 28, 1977.

Jack 0. Johnson, Public Defender, and W. C. McLain, Asst. Public Defender, and Howard L. Dimmig, II, Legal Intern, Bar-tow, for appellants.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Robert J. Landry, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tampa, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

After reviewing the briefs and record on appeal, we find the appellants have failed to demonstrate reversible error; therefore, the judgment appealed is affirmed.

The only point which merits discussion is the propriety of the appellants’ sentences to confinement “at hard labor.” To be imprisoned “at hard labor” is improper because no existing state statute provides for its imposition as a sentence for any offense. *Brooks v. State,*349 So.2d 794 (Fla.2d DCA 1977).

Remanded for the purpose of striking the language “at hard labor” from the sentencing order; otherwise affirmed. Appellants need not be present for this purpose.

HOBSON, Acting C. J., and GRIMES and RYDER, JJ., concur.