alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
1

 Petitioner’s alien number, gleaned from documents submitted by the

government in its response to the petition, is: A43 577 406. 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MARLON BROWNE, : CIVIL ACTION NO. 4:05-CV-0036

:

Petitioner : (Judge Conner)

:

v. :

:

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND :

SECURITY IMMIGRATION AND :

CUSTOM ENFORCEMENT :

:

Respondent :

ORDER

AND NOW, this 23rd day of June, 2005, upon consideration of respondent’s

motion to transfer the above-captioned case (Doc. 10) pursuant to amendments to

8 U.S.C. § 1252 enacted on May 11, 2005, as part of the Real ID Act of 2005, Pub. L.

No. 109- 13, § 106, 119 Stat. 231, 310-11, stating that, “[i]f a alien’s case, brought

under [28 U.S.C. § 2241] and challenging a final administrative order of removal, . . .

is pending in a district court on the date of the enactment of this division, then the

district court shall transfer the case . . . to the court of appeals for the circuit in

which a petition for review could have been properly filed under [8 U.S.C.

§ 1252(b)(2)],” see Real ID Act § 106, 119 Stat. at 310-11 (emphasis added), and it

appearing that petitioner is an alien1 (Doc. 1 at 1), see 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(3), that the

above-captioned case was brought under 28 U.S.C. § 2241, challenges a final

administrative order of removal, and was pending in this court on May 11, 2005

Case 4:05-cv-00036-CCC Document 12 Filed 06/23/05 Page 1 of 2
(Doc. 1), see 28 U.S.C. § 2241; INS v. St. Cyr, 533 U.S. 289, 314 (2001), and that a

petition for review of the final administrative order of removal under 28 U.S.C.

§ 1252(b)(2) could have been properly filed in the United States Court of Appeals

for the Third Circuit, as “the court of appeals for the judicial circuit” encompassing

York, Pennsylvania, where “the immigration judge completed the proceedings”

(Doc. 11 at 1), see 28 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(2), it is hereby ORDERED that:

1. The motion to transfer (Doc. 11) is GRANTED. See Real ID Act § 106,

119 Stat. at 310-11. 

2. The Clerk of Court is directed to TRANSFER the above-captioned

case, to be identified as a “petition for review,” to the United States

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. See id. 

3. The Clerk of Court is directed to CLOSE this case. 

 S/ Christopher C. Conner 

CHRISTOPHER C. CONNER

United States District Judge

Case 4:05-cv-00036-CCC Document 12 Filed 06/23/05 Page 2 of 2
**EXHIBIT      32.2**

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

|  | 3. | The                Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d)                of                the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;                and |
|--|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|  | 4. | The                information contained in the report fairly presents, in all material                respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the                Company. |
|--|----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|                                                                                                     |   |   |   |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|--------|--------|
| /s/ Kent                Puckett                                                                     |   |   |   |
|                                                                                                          |   |   |        |
| Kent                  PuckettChief                  Financial OfficerSeptember                  20, 2006 |   |   |   |

----
# National Preparedness Month comes to a close

/ Published Oct. 2, 2017
COLUMBUS, Ohio, 
The Defense Supply Center Columbus participated in National Preparedness Month activities throughout September 2017 in support of the Department of Defense, Department of Homeland Security and Federal Emergency Management Agency National Preparedness Month initiative. 

Each year, September is designated as National Preparedness Month by presidential proclamation. Its purpose is to educate and empower citizens to prepare for and respond to all types of emergencies and to raise their awareness of security issues. The theme for 2017 was “Disasters Don’t Plan Ahead.  YOU CAN.”  The DSCC goal for this year was to provide informational material and event opportunities for installation employees to help them become better prepared for emergencies at home, at work and in the community. 

Events and activities were planned and coordinated by the Operations Branch of the Security & Emergency Services Division, DLA Installation Support.  Events included a radiological exercise, emergency preparedness displays in buildings 20 and 21, See Something, Say Something Day and an event at the Child Development Center where Police encouraged parents dropping off children to develop an emergency plan at home.

Some key points emphasized throughout the month for all associates to remember include:

**Home Preparedness:** Make a family emergency plan and communicate that plan to your family.  Additional information is available from the Installation Emergency Manager at 614-692-9578 or on the FEMA website. 

**Work Preparedness**: Become familiar with your organization’s emergency action plan.  Learn now what to do during different emergencies.  Also, safety officials strongly recommended you enter a text notification device in DLA’s AtHoc alert notification system to ensure you’re kept aware during ongoing emergencies.

**Community Preparedness:** Always be aware of your surroundings.  Know where exits are when inside.  Make a plan in your head as to what to do in the event of an emergency.

**Anywhere:** If you “See Something, Say Something.”  Don’t ignore suspicious activity.  Report it to the proper authorities.

For more information, visit www.ready.gov.
#### Sonia Feldmann RISOLIA v. FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF MIAMI.

No. 38936.

Supreme Court of Florida.

Nov. 1969.

Certiorari denied without opinion. 224 So.2d 714.
#### Edith M. FOSTER, Appellant, v. STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellee.

No. 70-89.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

May 27, 1970.

Rehearing Denied June 18, 1970.

Daniel Scarritt, of Icard, Merrill, Cullis & Timm, Sarasota, for appellant.

Luke R. Kaleel, of Kaleel, Kaleel & Ka-leel, St. Petersburg, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

This is an interlocutory appeal in a common law action. It appears that the order under attack is not of the type from which such an appeal may be taken.1

Accordingly, *ex mero motu,*the appeal is hereby dismissed.

Dismissed.

' HOBSON, C. J., and PIERCE and Mc-NULTY, JJ., concur.

1

. *See*Rule 4.2, F.A.R., 32 F.S.A.
September 17, 2015

Mr. Robert A. Carroll

7 Breeze Hill Lane

Palm Coast, FL 32137

Dear Mr. Carroll:

This letter is to inform you that we are unable to process your petition for an exemption from 

§§ 61.113, 91.7(a), 91.119(c), 91.121, 91.151, 91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(1)(2), and 91.417(a)(b) 

of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR). It explains why we can not process your 

request and what you should do in the next 30 days.

Why We Can Not Process Your Request

We received your June 5, 2015 exemption request filed in Docket No. FAA−2015−2719, but 

we are unable to process your request any further. Your petition does not comply with the 

requirements of § 11.81 (copy enclosed). For us to consider the request any further, you must 

send us all of the following:

 The reasons why granting the request would be in the public interest; that is, how it would 

benefit the public as a whole.

 Any additional information, views, or arguments available to support your request.

For more detailed information relating to submitting petitions for exemption, please visit 

http://aes.faa.gov/petition/index.html. This website helps the petitioner to meet Federal 

Aviation Administration (FAA) requirement outlines in § 11.81 and helps answer any 

questions you may have.

What You Should Do

If you want us to process your request any further, you must submit the requested information 

within 30 days. Please note that § 11.63(d) requires you to send your petition for exemption 

at least 120 days before the proposed effective date of the exemption. 
2

If We Do Not Hear From You

If we do not receive the information, we will close the docket without notifying you further. 

If you have any questions you may call the 333 Information Line (202) 267-2999.

Sincerely,

/s/

Brittany Newton

Program Analyst, Airmen and

Airspace Rules Division

Enclosures
3
4
Exhibit 32.2
 
 STATEMENT OF ACTING CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER UNDER 18 U.S.C. SS 1350
 
 I, Anita K. Ho, the acting chief financial officer of Alliance Fiber Optic Products, Inc. (the "Company"), certify for the purposes of section 1350 of chapter 63 of title 18 of the United States Code that, to the best of my knowledge,
 
 (i)  the Quarterly Report of the Company on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2010 (the "Report"), fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and
 
 (ii)  the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
 
 
 
 /s/Anita K. Ho
 Anita K. Ho
 
 November 12, 2010
# Children learn about the agency and ways to make themselves safer

/ Published April 27, 2018
Battle Creek, Michigan, Cyber Safety Initiative
- BMVIT - IVIL 1 (Strategie und Internationales) 

• Postanschrift Postfach 201 , 1000 Wien 

BOroanschrift: Radetzkystraße 2 , 1030 Wien 

E-Mail: 

Internet: 

11 @bmvit.gv.at 

www.bmvit.gv.at 

(Antwort bitte unter AnfOhrung der GZ. 

an die oben angefOhrte E-Mail-Adresse) 

GZ. BMVIT-40.005/0003-IV/L 1/2015 DVR:0000175 

To 

Paul Gretch 

Director, Office of International Aviation 

Office of the Assistant Secretary for 

Aviation and International Affairs 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

400 7th Street, S.W. Room 6402 

Washington, DC 20590 

Paul. Gretch@dot.gov 

CC: Miriam.Zammit@vistajet.com 

Dear Mr. Gretch, 

ltJ ov 

Vienna, 22 April 2015 

With reference to the intentions of VistaJet Luftfahrtunternehmen GmbH in continuing 

nonscheduled (charter) air services to/from the United States based on fifth, sixth or seventh 

freedom traffic rights and referring to the designation of the said airline the Austria CiJ~ Aviation 

Authority and according to the provisions of the bilateral air services agreement (Air S~rvices Agreement between the Austri an Federal Government and the Government of the Un ted States of 

America, done at Vienna on 16th of March 1989, as amended), the Austria Civil Aviat on Authority 

hereby confirms that similar requests submitted by the U.S. carrierswill be treated on the basis of 

reciprocity. 

Sincerely Yours, 

Antonia Hatler 

Acting Director, Air Transport Aiffairs 

Federal Ministry of Transport, 

Innovation and Technology 

Civil Aviation Authority
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

PAUL H. ELINE,

Plaintiff

 v.

JOHN E. WETZEL, Secretary,

Commonwealth of Pennsylvania

Department of Corrections, et al.,

Defendants

:

:

:

: 

: CIVIL NO. 3:CV-15-1619

:

: (Judge Caputo)

:

: 

:

:

O R D E R

AND NOW, this 19th day of JANUARY, 2016, in accordance with the

accompanying memorandum, it is ORDERED that:

1. Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b), Mr. Eline’s Complaint is

dismissed with prejudice for failure to prosecute and to

comply with a court Order.

2. The Clerk of Court is directed to close this case.

3. Any appeal from this Order would not be taken in good

faith.

/s/ A. Richard Caputo 

A. RICHARD CAPUTO

United States District Judge 

Case 3:15-cv-01619-ARC-PT Document 15 Filed 01/19/16 Page 1 of 1
II 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 193 

To increase the penalties for violations by television and radio broadcasters 

of the prohibitions against transmission of obscene, indecent, and profane 

language. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JANUARY 26, 2005 

Mr. BROWNBACK (for himself, Mr. GRAHAM, Mr. ALLEN, Mr. LIEBERMAN, 

Mr. DEMINT, Mr. SANTORUM, Mr. HAGEL, Mr. MCCAIN, Mr. SESSIONS, 

Mrs. DOLE, Mr. INHOFE, Mr. ENZI, Mr. THUNE, Mr. LOTT, Mr. KYL, 

Mr. MARTINEZ, Mr. GRASSLEY, Mr. PRYOR, Mr. ROBERTS, Mr. ENSIGN, 

Mrs. LINCOLN, and Mr. THOMAS) introduced the following bill; which was 

read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and 

Transportation 

A BILL 

To increase the penalties for violations by television and 

radio broadcasters of the prohibitions against transmission of obscene, indecent, and profane language. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Broadcast Decency 

5 Enforcement Act of 2005’’. 
2 

•S 193 IS

1 SEC. 2. INCREASE IN PENALTIES FOR OBSCENE, INDECENT, 

2 AND PROFANE BROADCASTS. 

3 Section 503(b)(2) of the Communications Act of 

4 1934 (47 U.S.C. 503(b)(2)) is amended— 

5 (1) by redesignating subparagraphs (C) and 

6 (D) as subparagraphs (D) and (E), respectively; 

7 (2) by inserting after subparagraph (B) the fol8 lowing new subparagraph: 

9 ‘‘(C) Notwithstanding subparagraph (A), if the viola10 tor is— 

11 ‘‘(i)(I) a broadcast station licensee or permittee; 

12 or 

13 ‘‘(II) an applicant for any broadcast license, 

14 permit, certificate, or other instrument or authoriza15 tion issued by the Commission; and 

16 ‘‘(ii) determined by the Commission under 

17 paragraph (1) to have broadcast obscene, indecent, 

18 or profane language, the amount of any forfeiture 

19 penalty determined under this subsection shall not 

20 exceed $325,000 for each violation or each day of a 

21 continuing violation, except that the amount as22 sessed for any continuing violation shall not exceed 

23 a total of $3,000,000 for any single act or failure to 

24 act.’’; and 
3 

•S 193 IS

1 (3) in subparagraph (D), as redesignated by 

2 paragraph (1), by striking ‘‘subparagraph (A) or 

3 (B)’’ and inserting ‘‘subparagraph (A), (B), or (C)’’. 

Æ
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 175 (Wednesday, September 10, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 47659]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-23931]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
[Docket No. ER97-3929-000]


PPM Four LLC; Notice of Filing

September 4, 1997.
    Take notice that on July 25, 1997, PM Four LLC tendered for filing 
FERC Rate Schedule No. 1 in the above-referenced docket.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest said filing should 
file a motion to intervene or protest with the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426, in 
accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice 
and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 18 CFR 385.214). All such motions or 
protests should be filed on or before September 15, 1997. Protests will 
be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action 
to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the 
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a motion to 
intervene. Copies of this filing are on file with the Commission and 
are available for public inspection.
Lois D. Cashell,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 97-23931 Filed 9-9-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
     This Schedule  Contains Summary  Financial  Information  Extracted from The
Pepsi Bottling Group, Inc. Condensed  Consolidated  Financial Statements for the
12 Weeks Ended March 18, 2000 and is  Qualified  in its Entirety by Reference to
such Financial Statements.
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                         0001076405
<NAME>                        The Pepsi Bottling Group, Inc.
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-30-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                   MAR-18-2000
<CASH>                                         81
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  882
<ALLOWANCES>                                   48
<INVENTORY>                                    298
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               1,395
<PP&E>                                         4,837
<DEPRECIATION>                                 2,613
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 7,483
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          868
<BONDS>                                        3,268
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       2
<OTHER-SE>                                     1,534
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   7,483
<SALES>                                        1,545
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               1,545
<CGS>                                          845
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  845
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               1
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             45
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                27
<INCOME-TAX>                                   10
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            17
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   17
<EPS-BASIC>                                  0.11
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  0.11



</TABLE>
#### AMERICAN CAN COMPANY (Self-Insured), Petitioner, v. William C. CROZIER, and Florida Industrial Commission, Respondents.

No. 38398.

Supreme Court of Florida.

July 2, 1969.

Richard R. Crooke, of Macfarlane, Ferguson, Allison & Kelly, Tampa, for petitioner.

T. Terrell Sessums, of Albritton, Ses-sums & Ryder, Tampa, Patrick H. Mears and J. Franklin Garner, Tallahassee, for respondents.

PER CURIAM.

Our consideration of the record, briefs and arguments leads us to the conclusion that the order of the Judge of Industrial Claims is supported by competent substantial evidence and comports with the essen*296tial requirements of law. United States Casualty Co. v. Maryland Casualty Co., 55 So.2d 741 (1951). Its affirmance by the Full Industrial Commission is therefore without error. Certiorari is denied.

The attorneys for respondent William C. Crozier are awarded a fee in the amount of Three Hundred Fifty Dollars ($350.00) for services in this Court.

It is so ordered.

ERVIN, C. J., and ROBERTS, DREW, ADKINS and BOYD, JJ., concur.
UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549
 FORM 40-F/A
 (Amendment No. 1)
 (Check One)o
    
    Registration statement pursuant to Section 12 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934Orþ
    
    Annual report pursuant to Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
 For the fiscal year ended: December 31, 2008
 Commission file number: No. 001-14460
 AGRIUM INC.
  Canada
 2870
 98-0346248
 13131 Lake Fraser Drive S.E.

Calgary, Alberta

T2J 7E8 Canada

(403) 225-7000
 CT Corporation System

111 Eighth Avenue, 13th Floor

New York, New York 10011

U.S.A.

(212) 894-8940
  Title of each class:
    
    Name of each exchange on which registered:Common Shares
    
    New York Stock Exchange
  Not applicable
  Not applicable
  þ   Annual Information Form
    
    þ   Audited Annual Financial Statements
  156,782,323 Common Shares outstanding as of December 31, 2008




---



##### 



Yes   o
    
    No   þ
  Yes   þ
    
    No   o
  Yes   o
    
    No   o




---



##### 



EXPLANATORY NOTE
    PRINCIPAL DOCUMENTS
  (1)
    
    Revised Reconciliation with United States Generally Accepted Accounting Principles For the
Years Ended December 31, 2008, 2007 and 2006 (included as Exhibit 99.4 hereto).
 CERTIFICATIONS
  UNDERTAKING AND CONSENT TO SERVICE OF PROCESS
 A. Undertaking.
  B.     Consent to Service of Process.




---



##### 



SIGNATURES
  AGRIUM INC.Date: September 10, 2009
    By:
    /s/ Michael M. WilsonName:
    Michael M. WilsonTitle:
    President & Chief Executive Officer




---



##### 



EXHIBIT INDEX
 Exhibits
    
    Description99.1**
    
    Annual Information Form for the Year Ended December 31, 200899.2**
    
    Managements Discussion and Analysis from the 2008 Annual Report to Shareholders99.3**
    
    Audited Annual Financial Statements for the Year Ended December 31, 200899.4*
    
    Revised Reconciliation with United States Generally Accepted Accounting Principles
For the Years Ended December 31, 2008, 2007 and 200699.5*
    
    Consent Letter from KPMG LLP99.6**
    
    Comments by Auditors for U.S. Readers on Canada  U.S. Reporting Differences99.7*
    
    Chief Executive Officers Certification Required by Rule 13a-14(a) or Rule 15d-14(a)99.8*
    
    Chief Financial Officers Certification Required by Rule 13a-14(a) or Rule 15d-14(a)99.9*
    
    Chief Executive Officers Certification Required by Rule 13a-14(b) or Rule
15d-14(b) and Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code99.10*
    
    Chief Financial Officers Certification Required by Rule 13a-14(b) or Rule
15d-14(b) and Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code
 
 *
    
    Filed herewith.**
    
    Previously filed with the Registrants annual report on Form 40-F for the fiscal year ended
December 31, 2008, filed on March 9, 2009.