alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
The aircraft mentioned above travels at a maximum speed of 35.7 mph and is powered by 

a 6000mAh LiPo battery. It has a semi-autonomous navigation system run by the DJI 

Pilot Application through a Samsung SM-G920V, which is mounted on the remote controller. 

The Phantom 3 uses First Person Viewing (FPV) from a monitor that is in high 

definition. Flights can be pre-programmed with precision GPS guidance and do not 

require human intervention. In the case of unplanned events, the operator may

allow the aircraft to follow the pre-programmed evasive maneuvers from the controller or 

enable assisted steering for direct control. The pilot software is equipped with telemetry 

that shows altitude (AGL), airspeed, vertical ascent/decent speed, battery strength and 

direction of flight. In the event of a malfunction, the aircraft has a fail-safe mode that 

enables the machine to automatically return and land within one meter of where it took 

off. In addition, the aircraft is programmed to fly back to where it took off in the event of 

the battery level going below 20 percent strength. These features are tested on

a regular basis to insure that they function properly.

Carroll Engineers PLLC has owned and operated the Phantom 3 for four months and have logged 

over 50 hours of flight time. The PIC has been piloting UAS aircraft for more than a year 

and has logged 250 hours of flight time as Pilot-In-Command (PIC). The PIC has been 

operating radio controlled airplanes and helicopters for more than 5 years. He also holds a 

BLS/CPR certificate.

The UAS will always be flown in Class G airspace and will conform to all regulation regarding 

proximity to airports and other restricted areas.

The PIC will always use a Visual Observer. The two will carefully review the flight

plan prior to each takeoff and will maintain constant communication throughout the flight. 

The maximum altitude for any flight is 400 feet (AGL). All flights with the Inspire 1 are 

conducted within visual line of sight (VLOS). Favorable weather conditions is paramount 

in any of my flying. I strictly adhere to daytime only flying, with surface winds being 

below 15 mph, clouds at a minimum of 500 feet above my maximum flying altitude as 

well as 2000 feet horizontal clearance.

A thorough pre-flight inspection will be performed prior to each flight, making sure that all 

parts of the aircraft and GCS are in good working order. I regularly change props and 

run periodic tests on the batteries to ensure they are in optimum condition. I carefully 

check each motor, making sure the props spin freely without any roughness or abnormal 

sound. It is my practice to review, on a regular basis, the Phantom 3 Maintenance Manual 

and User Manual (both of these manuals are included in my petition as attachments). I 

maintain two logbooks - a pilot log and a maintenance log. I have provided more

details about pre-flight inspection in the section on Safety Protocols and System 

Controls.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          NOV-30-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             DEC-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               NOV-30-1997
<CASH>                                         814,156
<SECURITIES>                                   225,000
<RECEIVABLES>                                   62,637
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (4,338)
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,224,923
<PP&E>                                       2,515,808
<DEPRECIATION>                                (49,656)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               3,980,073
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          895,703
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        71,865
<OTHER-SE>                                   7,702,791
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 3,980,703
<SALES>                                        417,913
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               417,913
<CGS>                                           46,047
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                2,143,141
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               8,677
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (1,643,059)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (1,643,059)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (.023)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (.000)
        

</TABLE>
U.S. Dept. of Transportation, Docket Operations West Building Ground Floor, Room w12

- 140 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590
7 April 2016 Submitted Electronically via the Federal Docket Management System (FDMS)

Dear Sir or Madam: KellAIR Aerial Solutions, LLC has prepared the following addendum to Exemption # 11823 under Docket FAA

- 2015

- 1106 This addendum adds any aircraft identified on the List of Approved Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS) under S ection 333 at regulatory docket FAA

– 2007

– 3330 at www.regulations.gov , (which is updated regularly) when weighing less than 55 pounds including payload. Allowing the use of any aircraft on the List of Approved Unmanned Systems (UAS) has been used recently in exemptions:

x Exemption No. 15233 Regulatory Docket No. FAA

– 2015

– 5418

x Exemption No. 15234 Regulatory Docket No. FAA

– 2015

– 5360

x Exemption No. 15235 Regulatory Docket No. FAA

– 2015

– 5272

x Exemption No. 15236 Regulatory Docket No. FAA

– 2015

– 5 253

x Exemption No. 15237 Regulatory Docket No. FAA

– 2015

– 5236 The exemptions listed above are identical in nature to KellAIR ’ s exemption and therefore no new precedent would be set by extending the same List to KellAIR Aerial Solutions

. In addition to the above mentioned change, KellAIR would also like to amend it ’ s address on file.

The amended contact information of the applicant is : KellAIR Aerial Solutions, LLC 756 S

. Edgemon Ave Winter Springs, FL 32708 (757)650

- 7018 brad@kellair.net

This addendum makes no other changes to the currently approved exemption 11823 , reasons for exemption request, and/or operating parameters.

Sincerely,

Harrison Keller Owner KellAIR Aerial Solutions 756 S Edgemon Ave Winter Springs, FL 32708
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 9

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                          12,793
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                               0
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                 2,123
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                     76,665
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                          23,516
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                            23,242
<LOANS>                                        238,960
<ALLOWANCE>                                      2,740
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 371,657
<DEPOSITS>                                     325,541
<SHORT-TERM>                                     1,304
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                              1,628
<LONG-TERM>                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         5,116
<OTHER-SE>                                      36,753
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 371,657
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                 20,339
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                6,254
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                     0
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                26,593
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                              11,536
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              11,602
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                           14,991
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                      673
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   1
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                 10,974
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  6,101
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                       6,101
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     4,487
<EPS-BASIC>                                       2.19
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     2.19
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                 350,182
<LOANS-NON>                                        399
<LOANS-PAST>                                        98
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                  7,183
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                 2,286
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                    (291)
<RECOVERIES>                                        72
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                2,740
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                               703
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                          2,037


</TABLE>
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 5 (Wednesday, January 8, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 1147]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-364]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY


Departmental Offices, Debt Management Advisory Committee; Meeting

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. App. section 10(a)(2), 
that a meeting will be held at the U.S. Treasury Department, 15th and 
Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C., on February 4 and 5, 1997, 
of the following debt management advisory committee: Public Securities 
Association, Treasury Borrowing Advisory Committee.
    The agenda for the meeting provides for a technical background 
briefing by Treasury staff on February 4, followed by a charge by the 
Secretary of the Treasury or his designate that the committee discuss 
particular issues, and a working session. On February 5, the committee 
will present a written report of its recommendations.
    The background briefing by Treasury staff will be held at 11:30 
a.m. Eastern time on February 4 and will be open to the public. The 
remaining sessions on February 4 and the committee's reporting session 
on February 5 will be closed to the public, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. App. 
section 10(d).
    This notice shall constitute my determination, pursuant to the 
authority placed in heads of departments by 5 U.S.C. App. section 10(d) 
and vested in me by Treasury Department Order No. 101-05, that the 
closed portions of the meeting are concerned with information that is 
exempt from disclosure under 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(9)(A). The public 
interest requires that such meetings be closed to the public because 
the Treasury Department requires frank and full advice from 
representatives of the financial community prior to making its final 
decision on major financing operations. Historically, this advice has 
been offered by debt management advisory committees established by the 
several major segments of the financial community. When so utilized, 
such a committee is recognized to be an advisory committee under 5 
U.S.C. App. section 3.
    Although the Treasury's final announcement of financing plans may 
not reflect the recommendations provided in reports of the advisory 
committee, premature disclosure of the committee's deliberations and 
reports would be likely to lead to significant financial speculation in 
the securities market. Thus, these meetings fall within the exemption 
covered by 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(9)(A).
    The Office of the Under Secretary for Domestic Finance is 
responsible for maintaining records of debt management advisory 
committee meetings and for providing annual reports setting forth a 
summary of committee activities and such other matters as may be 
informative to the public consistent with the policy of 5 U.S.C. 552b.

    Dated: January 2, 1997.
John D. Hawke, Jr.,
Under Secretary (Domestic Finance).
[FR Doc. 97-364 Filed 1-7-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4810-25-M
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 Daxor Corporation (the "Company") on
Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2004 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date thereof (the "Report"), I, Stephen Feldschuh,
Vice President of Operations and Chief Financial 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) or
            15 (d) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934; and

      (2)   The information contained in the Report fairly represents, in all
            material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
            of the Company.


/s/ Stephen Feldschuh
Stephen Feldschuh
Vice President of Operations and Chief Financial Officer
August 11, 2004


                                        9
<PAGE>
<PAGE> 18

                                                             Exhibit 12

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


<CAPTION>
                                                    Six Months Ended   
                                                        June 30,       
                                                   1997          1996  
                                                 (dollars in thousands)
<S>                                              <C>          <C>
Earnings:

  Income before provision for income
    taxes                                        $ 83,338      $ 91,645
  Interest expense (including $23,221
    for 1997 to fund assets held for
    sale)                                         248,868       247,251
  Implicit interest in rents                        5,408         6,249

Total earnings                                   $337,614      $345,145

Fixed charges:

  Interest expense (including $23,221
    for 1997 to fund assets held for
    sale                                         $248,868      $247,251
  Implicit interest in rents                        5,408         6,249

Total fixed charges                              $254,276      $253,500


Ratio of earnings to fixed charges                   1.33          1.36
</TABLE>
<PAGE>
J. Turner Whitted

P.O. Box 1515

Pittsboro, NC 27312

turner.whitted@mindspring.com

919.542.0261

Aircraft registration number: N222HM

Make: Mooney

Model: M20M

Serial number: 27-0183

Regulation from which relief is requested:

14 CFR 91.403(c) : No person may operate an aircraft for which a manufacturer's maintenance 

manual or instructions for continued airworthiness has been issued that contains an 

airworthiness limitations section unless the mandatory replacement times, inspection intervals, 

and related procedures specified in that section or alternative inspection intervals and related 

procedures set forth in an operations specification approved by the Administrator under part 

121 or 135 of this chapter or in accordance with an inspection program approved under 

§91.409(e) have been complied with.

Extent of relief:

The extent of requested relief is to allow the check valve manifold assembly (P/N 2H3-47) to be 

installed in freshly overhauled condition instead of being replaced with an assembly newer than 

10 years from date of manufacture as indicated by the date code stamped in the part’s serial 

number.

Chapter 4 of the Mooney M20M Service and Maintenance Manual specifies time limits of Check 

Valve Manifolds, Check Valves and Regulator Check Valve Manifolds (Parker P/Ns 2H3-39 and 

2H3-47) of 10 years from date of manufacture. These assemblies are not available with a date 

of manufacture newer than 10 years. However, the assemblies can be sent for overhaul and 

installed with fresh components with the assembly tested by the overhaul facility.

Public interest:

Since this limitation affects several Mooney models it would provide relief to numerous owners 

who are unable to obtain check valve manifold assemblies that meet the 10 year from date of 

manufacture time limit.
No adverse safety effect:

Overhaul of the assembly would achieve the equivalent level of safety as a newly manufactured 

part since all parts that are in question after 10 years, i.e. the rubberized diaphragms, would be 

replaced at overhaul.

Summary:

This exemption from 14 CFR 91.403(c) would permit check valve manifold assemblies to be 

replaced with overhauled parts rather than assemblies with a date of manufacture newer than 

10 years. Assemblies with date of manufacture newer than 10 years old are not currently 

available and overhauled parts will achieve an equivalent level of safety.

Supporting information:

The solution proposed in this petition for exemption was suggested by experienced personnel 

of Epps Aviation, an Authorized Mooney Service Center.
#### June REAVES, Plaintiff, v. L. W. ROZZO, INC., a Florida corporation, and United States Fidelity and Guaranty Company, a foreign corporation, Defendants.

No. 73-889.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Dec. 7, 1973.

*222Eleanor Levingston Schockett, Kates Ress Gomez & Rosenberg, North Miami, for plaintiff.

Alan B. Whitaker, Jr., Carey, Dwyer, Austin, Cole & Selwood, Fort Lauderdale, for defendants.

MAGER, Judge.

Pursuant to Rule 4.6, F.A.R., 32 F.S.A.,1 the trial court certified to this court the following question:

> “Whether a wife is allowed to maintain an action for loss of her husband’s consortium where the husband has already fully litigated his action for the injuries he sustained, received satisfaction in full for said injuries, and his wife did not join him in litigation.”

It is clear from a reading of Rule 4.6 that in order for certification to be effected the question or proposition of law certified to the appellate court must be one “without controlling precedent in this state”. (See discussion of certified questions by the late Fuller Warren in 9 Miami Law Quarterly 375.) The question posed by the trial court and certified to this court for disposition was determined by the Supreme Court of Florida in Scudder v. Seaboard Coast Line Railroad, Fla.1971, 247 So.2d 46; Banores v. Austin, Fla.1971, 248 So.2d 648, and Gates v. Foley, Fla. 1971, 247 So.2d 40. Although numerous authorities have been cited to this court (by the defendants below) suggesting a position contrary to that espoused by our Supreme Court in the above cited cases, “a District Court of Appeal does not have the authority to overrule a decision of the Supreme Court of Florida”, Hoffman v. Jones, Fla. 1973, 280 So.2d 431.2 Any departure from the aforementioned decisions “should be at the hands of the Supreme Court rather than [at the hands of] the District Court of Appeal”, Hoffman v. Jones, supra.3

Inasmuch as the question presented is not without controlling precedent in the State such question does not fall within Rule 4.6. Jaworski v. City of Opa-Locka, Fla.App. 1963, 149 So.2d 566. The trial court has the power to adjudicate the question which may be reviewed on appeal if desired. See Miller v. Esca Rosa Development Corp., First District Court of Appeal, 284 So.2d 227, opinion filed October 23, 1973.

Certified question denied.

CROSS and DOWNEY, JJ„ concur.

1

.“Rule 4.6. Certified Questions Prom State Courts

> “a. *When Certified.*When it shall appear to a judge of the lower court that there is involved in any cause pending before him questions or propositions of law that are determinative of the cause and are without controlling precedent in this state and that instruction from the Court will facilitate the proper disposition of the cause, said judge, on his own motion or on motion of either party, may certify said question or proposition of law to the Court for instruction.”

2

. But see Bussey v. Shingleton, Fla.App. 1968, 211 So.2d 593; Shingleton v. Bussey, Fla.1969, 223 So.2d 713; Lunney v. Post, Fla.App.1971, 248 So.2d 504; Post v. Lunney, Fla.1972, 261 So.2d 146.

3

. See footnote 2, infra.
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

A copy of the January 12, 2014 reply filed by the Richard Trurnka, President of the American Federation of Labor, Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO) and Edward Wytkind, President of the Transportation Trades Department, AFL-CIO (TTD) has been served this 14th day of January, 2014, upon the following persons via email:
ejames @jamhoff.com efisaacson @jamhoff.com

romanow @ pillsburylaw.com peter.nelson®pillsburylaw.com steve.morrissey®united.com thomas.bolling ®united.com dan

. weiss @ coair.com sascha.vanderbellen @ delta.com howard.kass®Usairways

. com robert. wirick @ aa.com francis.heils e aa.com rpommer @ atlasair.com

cc @ eurocockpit.be mlbenge @ zsrlaw.com jesse.elliot @ faa

. gov douglas.schwab @ faa.gov nicholas. tsokris @ faa.gov john.allen @ faa.gov anita.mosnere shklaw

. com jennifer

. nowak @ hklaw.com nssparkss s fedex.com gbleopard sefedex

. com russell.baileyee alpa.org jonathan.cohen @ alpa.org dberg@airlines.org jcasey @ airlines.org kglatz @ airlines.org urskre s state.gov pvs @ eurocockpit.be sshur@traveltech.org eugene.alford @ trade.gov felix.leinemann @ eeas.europa.eu clytle@Portoakland.comkgeorge@broward.org mrichardson@swapa.org David.Batchelor@sesarju.eu attar .Ostnes@sd.dep.no John.Hanlon@ELFAA.com paul.gretch@dot.gov Robert.Finamore@dot.gov cc@eurocockpit.be
255 La. 916

#### Winston DUBOIS v. OLYMPIC INSURANCE COMPANY et al.

No. 50497.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

April 20, 1970.

In re: Winston Dubois applying for certiorari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, Parish of St. Mary. 231 So.2d 714.

Writ refused. On the facts found by the Court of Appeal we find no error of law in its judgment.