alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Materials Not Included in

Airworthiness Directive (AD) Docket

 Docket Number: FAA-2015-0678

 Directorate Identifier: 2013NM207AD

A320-32-1346, R06 --- 1/12/15

A320-32-1346, R05 --- 1/13/12

A320-32-1349, R02 --- 6/16/10

A320-32-1349, R01 --- 8/31/09

A320-32-1349 --- 12/4/08

Name/Description of Item(s) Not Included in FDMS Docket and Maintained in the 

Supplemental AD Docket

MAY BE VIEWED AT: Federal Aviation Administration

Transport Airplane Directorate

Rules Docket

1601 Lind Ave. SW.,

Renton, WA 98057

425.227.1221

DURING THE HOURS OF: 9 a.m. and 3 p.m., Monday through Friday,

except Federal holidays.

Form Date: 03/05/2008
-84 -82 -80 -78 -76 -74 -72

 36

 38

 40

 42

★

▲

▲

▲

▲

★ ▲ ▲

▲

▲ 500

 1000

 1500

 100

18 12 06 00

05/29

NOAA HYSPLIT MODEL

 Backward trajectory ending at 2300 UTC 29 May 07

 EDAS Meteorological Data

Source

★ at 38.92 N 77.01 W Meters AGL
#### Jack SOKOL v. STATE.

No. 38343.

Supreme Court of Florida.

April 1969.

Certiorari denied without opinion. 217 So.2d 843.
DENY; and Opinion Filed May 6, 2019.

In The

Court of Appeals

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05-19-00480-CV

IN RE PETRONA DEL CARMEN VALENCIA-DE RIVAS, Relator

Original Proceeding from the 101st Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. DC-18-10235

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices Myers, Molberg, and Nowell

Opinion by Justice Molberg

In this original proceeding, relator complains of the trial court’s order denying relator’s 

motion to disqualify the real party in interest Guadalupe Vielma Ramirez’s trial counsel. 

“Mandamus is available where a motion to disqualify is inappropriately denied as there is no 

adequate remedy on appeal.” In re Turner, 542 S.W.3d 553, 555 (Tex. 2017) (quoting In re 

Columbia Valley Healthcare Sys., L.P., 320 S.W.3d 819, 824 n.2 (Tex. 2010) (orig. proceeding)). 

We review a trial court’s refusal to disqualify a law firm under an abuse of discretion standard. Id. 

Based on the record before us, we conclude relator has not shown that the trial court abused 

its discretion. Accordingly, we deny relator’s petition for writ of mandamus. See TEX. R. APP. P.
–2–

52.8(a) (the court must deny the petition if the court determines relator is not entitled to the relief 

sought).

190480F.P05

/Ken Molberg/

KEN MOLBERG

JUSTICE
#### SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA FEDERAL SAVINGS & LOAN ASSOCIATION, Local Holdings, Inc., Arbur, Inc., Larry B. Thrall, Beverly W. Thrall, Roy Doumani, Preston Martin, William E. Simon, William E. Simon Jr., J. Peter Simon, and George Gillespie, III, Plaintiffs, v. Gerald L. PARSKY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. United States, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 02-5087.

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.

Aug. 2, 2002.

Before LOURIE, GAJARSA, and LINN, Circuit Judges.

*494ON MOTION

LOURIE, Circuit Judge.

*ORDER*

The United States moves to dismiss Gerald L. Parsky’s appeal as premature. Parsky responds. The United States replies.

Parsky filed a complaint in the Court of Federal Claims asserting Wmstar-related claims regarding, inter aha, Southern California Federal Savings and Loan Association (SoCal). The claims regarding SoCal were consolidated with other plaintiffs claims regarding SoCal, and Parsky’s claims regarding other institutions were consolidated with other plaintiffs’ claims regarding those institutions. On December 12, 2001, the Court of Federal Claims issued an order determining that his claims against SoCal were untimely. On December 14, 2001, the Court of Federal Claims directed the clerk to enter judgment, apparently to dismiss Parsky’s claims against SoCal.*

The United States argues that, absent a certification pursuant to RCFC 54(b), Par-sky’s appeal is premature because the other plaintiffs’ claims remain to be adjudicated. We agree. In *Spraytex, Inc. v. DJS&T,*96 F.3d 1377,1382 (Fed.Cir.1996), we held that a Rule 54(b) certification, stating that there is no just reason for delay and directing entry of judgment, is required to permit an appeal of a disposition of one claim or case in a consolidated action. Parsky does not strongly disagree that *Spraytex*governs the filing of his appeal. Instead, Parsky states that the appeal was filed as a precautionary matter and requests guidance concerning when an appeal would be timely filed.

As we stated in *Spraytex,*absent a certification pursuant to Rule 54(b), an appeal “is not proper until there is a final judgment disposing of all aspects of the consolidated case.” *Id.*at 1382. Thus, when a Rule 54(b) judgment is entered or a final judgment is entered that disposes of all aspects of the consolidated case, an appeal may be timely filed.

Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED THAT:

(1) The United States’ motion to dismiss is granted.

(2) Each side shall bear its own costs.

*

 The United States states that Parsky's claims against another entity, Honolulu Federal Savings and Loan Association, remain pending.
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

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 Phoenix Footwear Group, Inc. (the Company), does hereby certify with respect to the quarterly report of the Company on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended April 3, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (the 10-Q Report), that:



| | (1) | The 10-Q Report fully complies with the requirements of Sections 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (2) | The information contained in the 10-Q Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The undersigned have executed this Certification effective as of May 12, 2010.



/s/ Russell D. HallRussell D. HallPresident and Chief Executive Officer/s/ Dennis T. NelsonDennis T. NelsonChief Financial Officer, Secretary and Treasurer


A
signed original of this Certification required by Section 906 has been provided to Phoenix Footwear Group, Inc. and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

**CERTIFICATE PURSUANT TO SECTION 906****OF SARBANES — OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

The undersigned, Mark Dillon, Executive Vice President, serving as Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of Golden Growers Cooperative, (the “Company”), does hereby certify that to his knowledge:

 

1.             The Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K/A for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2011 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

 

2.             Information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operation of the Company.

 

The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350 and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document.

 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has caused this instrument to be executed this 15th day of June, 2012.

 

 
| By:    | /s/   Mark Dillon |                                                                            |
|--------|-------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   | Name:             | Mark   Dillon                                                                   |   |
|   | Title:            | Executive   Vice President, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer |   |

 

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

 

----
|    |                                                                                  |
|----|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| 1. | I have reviewed this Annual Report on Form 10-K/A of Customers Bancorp, Inc. and |

|    |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            |
|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| 2. | Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report. |

|                                      |
|--------------------------------------|
|                                      |
| /s/ Jay S. Sidhu                     |
| Jay S. Sidhu                         |
|                                 |
| Chairman and Chief Executive Officer |
| (Principal Executive Officer)        |
|                                 |
| Date: April 24, 2019            |
#### Shirley TAPLIN, Appellant, v. Sol TAPLIN, Appellee.

No. 77-1742.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Aug. 22, 1978.

Snyder, Young, Stern, Barrett & Tan-nenbaum and William L. Rogers, North Miami Beach, for appellant.

Podhurst, Orseck & Parks and Joel D. Eaton, Miami, for appellee.

Before HAVERFIELD, C. J., and PEARSON and HENDRY, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

The appellant wife appeals an order denying her petition for modification and her petition for attorney’s fees. She urges error upon the argument that the manifest weight of the evidence established her need for, and the husband’s ability to respond to, an increase in alimony. We find that no error has been shown. See *Herzog v. Herzog,*346 So.2d 56 (Fla.1977); and *Shaw v. Shaw,*334 So.2d 13 (Fla.1976).

Affirmed.
#### Edward CAFFIN, Appellant, v. Rena Frances Crawford CAFFIN, Appellee.

No. M-349.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

July 9, 1970.

Rehearing Denied Aug. 18, 1970.

Paul R. Stern, Daytona Beach, for appellant.

Coble, van Wert, Stewart & Tiller, Day-tona Beach, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

A final judgment of divorce was entered in favor of appellee herein, granting inter alia, custody of children and making provision for child support and alimony, as well as some property division. The court retained jurisdiction by use of the following language: “This court specifically reserves jurisdiction of this entire matter”. There was a post-decretal order based on a rule to show cause, in which the court directed both parties to do certain things with reference to property (which property had been dealt with in the final decree).

This appeal is from the final decree as well as an interlocutory appeal from the post-decretal order.

It appears to this court that the questions raised by the parties in the appeal from the final judgment as well as in the interlocutory appeal, are more factual than otherwise, and it further appearing to us from the record in both cases that the trial court acted within his duly authorized discretion based upon competent evidence before him to support his findings and conclusions, we fail to find any error.

Therefore the orders or judgments appealed from are affirmed.

JOHNSON, C. J., and RAWLS and SPECTOR, JJ., concur.
TBAC RECOMMENDED US TREASURY FINANCING SCHEDULE FOR 1st QUARTER 2023*

BILLIONS OF DOLLARS

NEW

MONEY

Net BILLS Issuance for the quarter 655.00

SETTLEMENT OFFERED MATURING NEW

ISSUE DATE AMOUNT AMOUNT** MONEY

COUPONS

CHANGE^

20-Year Bond (r) 1/3 12.00 0.00

2-Year Note 1/3 42.00 0.00

5-Year Note 1/3 43.00 0.00

7-Year Note 1/3 35.00 0.00 92.91 39.09

3-Year Note 1/17 40.00 0.00

10-Year Note (r) 1/17 32.00 0.00

30-Year Bond (r) 1/17 18.00 0.00 73.49 16.51

20-Year Bond (r) 1/31 12.00 0.00

10-Year TIPS 1/31 17.00 0.00

2-Year Note 1/31 42.00 0.00

2-Year FRN 1/31 24.00 0.00

5-Year Note 1/31 43.00 0.00

7-Year Note 1/31 35.00 0.00 183.54 -10.54

3-Year Note 2/15 40.00 0.00

10-Year Note 2/15 35.00 0.00

30-Year Bond 2/15 21.00 0.00 67.12 28.88

2-Year FRN (r) 2/24 22.00 0.00 0.00 22.00

20-Year Bond 2/28 15.00 0.00

30-Year TIPS 2/28 9.00 0.00

2-Year Note 2/28 42.00 0.00

5-Year Note 2/28 43.00 0.00

7-Year Note 2/28 35.00 0.00 93.23 50.77

3-Year Note 3/15 40.00 0.00

10-Year Note (r) 3/15 32.00 0.00

30-Year Bond (r) 3/15 18.00 0.00 30.93 59.07

20-Year Bond (r) 3/31 12.00 0.00

10-Year TIPS (r) 3/31 15.00 0.00

2-Year Note 3/31 42.00 0.00

5-Year Note 3/31 43.00 0.00

2-Year FRN (r) 3/31 22.00 0.00

7-Year Note 3/31 35.00 0.00 97.77 71.23

916.00 639.00 277.00

Estimates are italicized. r = Reopening

NET CASH RAISED THIS QUARTER: 932

* This Financing table is meant to be illustrative based on meeting discussions and does not indicate how Treasury will actually issue

debt in the future.

** Maturing amount is based on private holdings as of 01/27/2023 and subject to change based on Fed purchases.

^ Change is with respect to previous auction. For securities with reopenings, change from new cusip to new cusip, 1st reopening

 to 1st reopening, and etc.
Treasury Tribal Advisory Committee (TTAC) Public Meeting

September 18, 2019

9:00 a.m.-4:30 p.m.

U.S. Department of the Treasury

1500 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Cash Room

Washington, DC 20220

Agenda

Designated Federal Officer Krishna Vallabhaneni

Chairperson Lacey Horn

Call to Order

Roll Call 

Lacey Horn, Chair, TTAC

Tribal Opening

Approval of Minutes from June 20, 2019 Meeting

Committee Protocols and Governance

Public/Tribal Comments 

Priority Issues Matrix and Work Plan Priorities 

Priority / matrix topics

Statutory Mandates (GWE Act Sections 2(c)(3) and Section 3(b))

Discussion of Subcommittee Members, Assignments, and Deliverables: 

• General Welfare Exclusion Subcommittee

• Dual Taxation Subcommittee

• Tribal Pensions / Parity Subcommittee

Other Subcommittees

Assignment of TTAC Members to Subcommittees

Review Subcommittee reporting framework to TTAC 

Treasury Participation

Other Items 

Next Meeting/Procedural Items

Closing Business

Adjourn
<PAGE> 31

                                                                  Exhibit 12

             AMERICAN GENERAL FINANCE, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
            Computation of Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges
                               (Unaudited)



                                                        Nine Months Ended
                                                          September 30,
                                                        2003          2002
                                                      (dollars in thousands)

Earnings:
  Income before provision for income
    taxes                                             $428,740      $370,795
  Interest expense                                     412,104       411,734
  Implicit interest in rents                            13,444        12,816

Total earnings                                        $854,288      $795,345


Fixed charges:
  Interest expense                                    $412,104      $411,734
  Implicit interest in rents                            13,444        12,816

Total fixed charges                                   $425,548      $424,550


Ratio of earnings to fixed charges                        2.01          1.87
CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
AND

CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

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 ePhoto Image, Inc. (the
“Company”) on Form 10-K for the year ended April 30, 2011 filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”),
I, Petra Jaeger, Chief Executive Officer 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:



1.The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934; and



2.The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the consolidated
financial condition of the Company as of the dates presented and the consolidated result of operations of the Company for the periods
presented.



|By:    | /s/ Petra Jaeger                                                             
|------ | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|Name:  | Petra Jaeger                                                                 
|Title: | Principal Executive Officer,
        Principal Financial Officer and Director
|Date:  | August 18, 2011                                                              



This certification has been furnished solely pursuant to Section
906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
#### John ALLEN d/b/a B. J. Nursery, Appellant, v. FAR WEST BOTANICALS, INC., a Florida Corporation, Appellee.

No. 77-224.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

March 7, 1978.

*856Horton, Perse & Ginsberg, Miami, for appellant.

Rosenberg, Rosenberg, Reisman & Glass, Miami, for appellee.

Before HAVERFIELD, C. J., and NATHAN and HUBBART, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. *Paul v. Kanter,*155 So.2d 402, 403 (Fla. 3d DCA 1963).
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1995
<CASH>                                         2828000
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  3837000
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                    2687000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                              10626000
<PP&E>                                        15900000
<DEPRECIATION>                                12672000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                14250000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          9613000
<BONDS>                                        2049000
<COMMON>                                        166000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                   (2411000)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                  14250000
<SALES>                                       12221000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                              12221000
<CGS>                                         10838000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                 12733000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              229000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (374000)
<INCOME-TAX>                                 (1110000)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             736000
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    736000
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.04
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.04
        

</TABLE>
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1

                          INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT



We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration
Statements on Forms S-8 (No. 333-83392, No. 333-54980, No. 333-31138) of
Escalon Medical Corp. of our reports dated August 17, 2001 and August 16, 2002
relating to the financial statements, which appear in this Annual Report on
Form 10-K/A for the years ended June 30, 2001 and June 30, 2002, respectively.

/s/ Parente Randolph, LLC

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
March 3, 2003
II 

Calendar No. 330 

117TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 2324 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

FEBRUARY 9, 2022 

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and 

Governmental Affairs 

APRIL 4 (legislative day, MARCH 31), 2022 

Reported by Mr. PETERS, without amendment 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 2800 South Adams Street in Tallahassee, 

Florida, as the ‘‘D. Edwina Stephens Post Office’’. 

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

3 SECTION 1. D. EDWINA STEPHENS POST OFFICE BUILDING. 

4 (a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States 

5 Postal Service located at 2800 South Adams Street in Tal6 lahassee, Florida, shall be known and designated as the 

7 ‘‘D. Edwina Stephens Post Office Building’’. 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 2324 RS

1 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg2 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

3 States to the facility referred to in subsection (a) shall 

4 be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘D. Edwina Stephens 

5 Post Office Building’’. 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS

kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
Calendar No. 330 

117TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 2324 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States Postphens Post Office’’. in Tallahassee, Florida, as the ‘‘D. Edwina Ste- al Service located at 2800 South Adams Street 

APRIL 4 (legislative day, MARCH 31), 2022 

Reported without amendment 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
. 

OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAE 

AUSTIN 

Bonorable Prank XI Vanor 

County kttom*y 

;arQlim county 

&oado, Tea8 

e whether ox not tha tohlolA8 

rry~ or thlr -@to, boP for tho 

pnoumlw that ths]r an 80 
:34 

Article QQwkb~, aupra, lo all lnoluairc End doer not 

&co u&y provfoion to axeqt rabialoo mmd by politfoal oub- 

~&Yiaiono or the akteh. 

Eowwer the isglalatture pasosd Artfoh BWISa-J, Verrion'o 

&m&ate6 Ciy'lf Statute*, rhloh provlbeo In part an foll~vmt 

%mioro af motor Ybbioho, . , . abloh are the 

pawprty of an6 uad rroluol~*ly In the samfee of 

tb4 Gnitad SW** OoYernmQnt tbs fate Of Tnxuo, or 

aSly CQUtY, City or Sohosl D&riot thereof, ohall 

epply l nnwALly to ro #t*T 8U. srroh YthiOh8‘ but 

ohall not be require f 80 pay the rogf.atratlon foe8 

km&s presoribsd, . . ." 

hi ardor wordo, tho Le@inlatwo bar oaia that all oQz%aro 

of, aotor rebloloa whiot: are opanto6 upon Ebr public hl&WyO 

ef tha ntate rhall 

P 

uy th, lkonoo tee, sxoept tlroco rbfoh atO 

wnimaratml in Qtlo 0 6693a-3, oupmd 

Tb& XXI&O Or BttitUtO~ 6CQMtFUO$fQtr riu I@ QM'Sit UO 

to sxtend tba szqtion to 

P 

aLlt$oti rub4iYicio~s of th4 @tat@ 

not HIntfonsb la l i4id Artio a WTba-3. 60 are, therdkiro, of 

the 0 inion that Bexar-t2s4fau-Atuoo6o~ Countlso Wtor Impmropunt s iotrlot go. 1 lo rot e%wt frQn the polymant of th@ motQr 

YbhiQl* 1i0~0. fora, 

kiot* tbat tbs foregoing fully nnow8ro your lntiulry, 

w am 

APTROW AUG 14, 1940 

You20 very truly