alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
August 6, 2015

Dear Mr. Kadiwal:

This letter is to inform y ou that the following informati on is missing from your petition (Docket No. FAA

− 2015

− 1804). This information is necessary for the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to process your petition.

 Provide a copy of the Motion Picture a nd Television Operations Manual (MPTOM) which is required by Order 8900.1, Volume 3, Chapter 8, Section 1. If you wish for us to proceed without this manual and remove clos ed-set filming from your proposed operation please inform of us of your intention by the requested response date listed below.

Please submit the additional information (non-proprietary) to your docket at www.regulations.gov and submit any proprietary information to the FAA Headquarters or electronically via email to 333exemptions@faa.gov. If you want us to process your request any further, we must receive the information desc ribed above by 8/20/15. If we do not receive the information, we will close the doc ket without notifying you further.

If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at (202) 267-4712.

Sincerely,

/s/

Brenda Robeson Program Analyst
# Facilities & construction vendor resources

The following resources are offered for current vendors or those wishing to sell off a GSA schedule.

## Getting on a GSA schedule

Industry partners should consider the following resources to learn how to be successful under the GSA Schedules program:
                        - Current Schedule Contractors .
                        - Getting Started With GSA Schedules .
                        - Marketing to the Federal Government .
                        - MAS Modification Help Center .
                        - Roadmap for New Schedule Offerors .
                        - Training Resources .

## Current vendor support

The GSA Vendor Support Center is available for for new and existing industry partners. The VSC maintains a staff ready to assist vendors in the preparation and submission of electronic catalog files to GSA *Advantage!*®, and in the submission and reporting of sales data. Vendors may contact the VSC staff Monday - Friday, 8:30 a.m. - 5:30 p.m. Eastern Time, at 877-495-4849, or via email at vendor.support@gsa.gov. Information is available online 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.

##           Join the Community    

Be more productive and effective. Join the Facilities & Construction Community on GSA Interact.

Print PageEmail Page

Top

-  Facilities and construction-  Overview 
-  About facilities & construction 
-  Construction Related Materials 
-  Construction related services 
-  Facilities purchase and lease 
-  Facility Related Materials 
-  Facility related services 
-  FAQ for facilities and construction 
-  Training for facilities & construction 
-  E-Tools 
-  Sustainable solutions - facilities & construction 
-  Facilities & construction vendor resources
##### 



Exhibit 32.2
 Certification Required by 18 U.S.C. Section 1350  (as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002)
  (1)
    
    the accompanying Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarter ended June 30, 2007 (the
Report), filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, fully
complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934, as amended; 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/ Randy L. KotlerRandy L. KotlerExecutive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
#### Priscilla K. REYNOLDS, Appellant, v. W. A. REYNOLDS, Appellee.

No. R-27.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

Aug. 31, 1972.

James E. Moore, Jr., of Moore & Crump,1 Niceville, for appellant.

James W. Grimsley, of Smith, Tolton, Grimsley & Barron, and Virginia Searcy Barr, Fort Walton Beach, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

The briefs and the record on appeal having been read and given full consideration, and the appellant having failed to demonstrate reversible error, the judgment of the lower court is affirmed.

CARROLL, DONALD K., Acting C. J., and RAWLS and JOHNSON, JJ., concur.
# Court of Appeals **First District of Texas**

BILL OF COSTS

No. 01

- 14

- 00940

- CV

Dawn Comeaux

v . Villages of Louetta

NO. 1053972 IN THE CO CIVIL CT AT LAW N O 4 OF HARRIS C OUNTY

TYPE OF FEE CHARGES PAID/DUE STATUS PAID BY FILING $195.00 11/24/2014 NOT PAI D ANT


### The costs incurred on appeal to the First Court of Appeals Houston, Texas are $195.00. Court costs in this case have been taxed in this Court’s judgment

I, Christopher A. Prine , Clerk o f the Court of Appeals for the First District of Texas, do he reby certify that this is a true statement of the costs of appeal in this case.
IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, witness my hand and the seal of the Court of Appeals for the First District of Texas, this May 1 3 , 2015

.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
 
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
UNAUDITED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS INCLUDED IN THE COMPANY'S QUARTERLY
REPORT ON FORM 10-QSB FOR THE THREE MONTHS ENDED MARCH 31, 1997 AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<CURRENCY> CHINESE RENMINBI
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                 .12048
<CASH>                                           5,138
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   55,773
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     60,515
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               240,393
<PP&E>                                         130,658
<DEPRECIATION>                                  24,252
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 454,362
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          249,582
<BONDS>                                          7,089
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            48
<OTHER-SE>                                     149,865
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   454,362
<SALES>                                         44,215
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                44,215
<CGS>                                           33,430
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   33,430
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               2,456
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  4,573
<INCOME-TAX>                                       500
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              4,391
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     4,391
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .74
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

NOTICE OF PROPOSED RULINGMAKING PUBLIC MEETING ON 

TELEVISION SETS

U.S. Department of Energy

1000 Independence Avenue, SW

Washington, DC 20585

Thursday, March 22, 2012

Room 8E-089 Review Center

Purpose

The Department of Energy (DOE) is holding this public meeting to provide an overview 

of the rulemaking process for establishing a test procedure for television sets.

Agenda

9:00-9:30 am Welcome; Introductions; Agenda Review; and Opening 

Statements

Doug Brookman

9:30-10:00 am Rulemaking Overview

Victor Petrolati

10:00-11:00 am NOPR Summary, Scope, and Definitions

Christopher Yoder

11:00-11:15 am Break

11:15 -12:30 pm Testing Conditions and Testing

Anthony Rotolo and Christopher Yoder

12:30-1:30 pm Lunch

1:30-4:45 pm Testing (continued, including ABC testing and 3D 

testing) and Energy Efficiency Metrics

Anthony Rotolo, Christopher Yoder, Louis-Benoit Desroches, and Mia 

Forbes Pirie

4:45-5:00 pm Next Steps and Closing Remarks

Doug Brookman

At the end of each section, time will be set aside for web participants to ask 

questions and/or make statements.

Questions e-mailed during webinar will be included in the transcript.
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 326 Engrossed in House (EH)]

H. Res. 326

                In the House of Representatives, U. S.,

                                                      January 25, 1994.
    Resolved, That the Clerk of the House inform the Senate that a quorum of the 
House is present and that the House is ready to proceed with business.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```
#### Ben SKILES, Petitioner, v. RYDER TRUCK LINES, INC., a Florida corporation, Respondent.

No. 43086.

Supreme Court of Florida.

March 13, 1973.

Certiorari denied. 267 So.2d 379.

' ROBERTS, Acting C. J., and ERVIN, ADKINS and BOYD, JJ., concur.

McCAIN, J., dissents.
EXHIBIT 21.1

THE PMI GROUP, INC.  SUBSIDIARIES



|                                                                       |  |                              
|---------------------------------------------------------------------- |  | -----------------------------
|Subsidiary Name                                                        |  | Jurisdiction of Incorporation
|PMI Mortgage Insurance Co.                                             |  | Arizona                      
|PMI Capital Corporation                                                |  | Delaware                     
|PMI Guaranty Co.                                                       |  | New Jersey                   
|PMI Insurance Co.                                                      |  | Arizona                      
|PMI Mortgage Guaranty Co.                                              |  | Arizona                      
|Residential Insurance Co.                                              |  | Arizona                      
|PMI Reinsurance Co.                                                    |  | Arizona                      
|PMI Mortgage Insurance Australia (Holdings) Pty Limited                |  | Australia                    
|PMI Mortgage Insurance Ltd                                             |  | Australia                    
|PMI Mortgage Insurance Asia Limited                                    |  | Hong Kong                    
|PMI Mortgage Insurance Holdings Canada Inc.                            |  | Canada                       
|PMI Europe Holdings Limited                                            |  | Ireland                      
|PMI Mortgage Insurance Company Limited                                 |  | Ireland                      
|PMI Insurance Services Limited                                         |  | United Kingdom               
|PMI Plaza LLC                                                          |  | Delaware                     
|RAM Holdings Ltd (unconsolidated, partially owned)                     |  | Bermuda                      
|CMG Mortgage Insurance Company (unconsolidated, partially owned)       |  | Wisconsin                    
|CMG Mortgage Reinsurance Company (unconsolidated, partially owned)     |  | Wisconsin                    
|CMG Mortgage Assurance Company (unconsolidated, partially owned)       |  | Wisconsin                    
|FGIC Corporation (unconsolidated, partially owned)                     |  | Delaware                     
|Financial Guaranty Insurance Company (unconsolidated, partially owned) |  | Delaware
## F IRST 

## D ISTRICT 

## C OURT OF 

## A PPEAL 

## S TATE OF 

## F LORIDA

_____________________________
No. 1D2022

- 2447

_____________________________
N AYMONTIE N ASHARED E NOCH , Appellant,

v.

S TATE OF F LORIDA , Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Alachua County

. David P. Kreider , Judge

.

December 18, 2023

P ER C URIAM

.
A FFIRMED

.
O STERHAUS , C.J., and B.L. T HOMAS and N ORDBY , JJ., concur

.

_____________________________ Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331

.

_____________________________2 Jessica J. Yeary, Public Defender, and Kevin P. Steiger, Assistant Public Defender, Tallahassee, for Appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and Julian E

. Markham
, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
#### Clifford J. BOWLING, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 73-134.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Sept. 28, 1973.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
EXHIBIT 15



ACCOUNTANTS REVIEW REPORT



Shareholders

Frischs Restaurants, Inc.



We have reviewed the accompanying consolidated balance sheet of Frischs Restaurants,
Inc. (an Ohio Corporation) and subsidiaries as of March 6, 2005, the related consolidated statements of earnings, shareholders equity and cash flows for the twelve and forty week periods then ended. These financial statements are the
responsibility of the Companys management.



We conducted our review in
accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). A review of interim financial information consists principally of applying analytical procedures to financial data and making inquiries of persons
responsible for financial and accounting matters. It is substantially less in scope than an audit conducted in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), the objective of which is the expression
of an opinion regarding the financial statements taken as a whole. Accordingly, we do not express such an opinion.



Based on our review, we are not aware of any material modifications that should be made to the accompanying financial statements for them to be in conformity with
accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.



We
have previously audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), the consolidated balance sheet as of May 30, 2004, and the related consolidated statements of earnings, shareholders
equity and cash flows for the year then ended and in our report dated July 7, 2004, we expressed an unqualified opinion on those consolidated financial statements.



|                      
|----------------------
|GRANT THORNTON LLP    
|                      
|/s/ Grant Thornton LLP
|Cincinnati, Ohio      
|April 8, 2005
JACKET: 571-929

TITLE: Red Evidence Tape

AGENCY: DHS/CBP

ABSTRACT FOR FORMAL JACKET 571-929

CONTRACTOR PRICE DISCOUNT DISCOUNTED PRICE

NovaVision $138,240.00 Net - 30 Days $138,240.00

I.R. Industries $185,14.50 1% - 20 Days $183,758.36

AWARDED TO: I.R. INDUSTRIES
Jacket: 418-001

Title:

Forms Booklets 1040 & 

1040-SR (2021 rev)---Bulk 

Ship

Agency: Treasury/IRS

Bid Opening: November 9, 2021 at 11:00am

Bid Terms Discounted Total

$519,070.00 0.25% 20 days $517,772.33

$663,167.00 2.0% 20 days $649,903.66

Contractor Name

Colonial Press Int'l

LSC Communications LLC
#### Fuller, *et al., ex parte.*

Mandamus. The writ of mandamus can be granted only on the motion of the *party aggrieved,*or of the *State*when the public interests are affected.

The petition of the party, other than the State, must show wherein he is aggrieved.

Clark & Williams, for petitioners.

McClure, J.

Section 519 of the Code declares that “the writ of mandamus, as treated of in this chapter, is an order of a court of competent and original jurisdiction, commanding an executive or ministerial officer to perform an act, or omit to do an act, the performance or omission of which is enjoined by law, and *444Is granted on the. motion of *the party*aggrieved, or of the State, when the public interest is affected.”

It will be observed that the writ or order of mandamus is only granted “on the motion of *the party*aggrieved, or of the State, when the public interest is affected.”

The petition in this case does not allege any interest of the petitioners that would be promoted, or that their rights are in any degree diminished, by the omission to appoint commissioners to locate a site for county buildings. True, these petitioners say that “the county court have refused to appoint the commissioners,” but how this omission in any manner *aggrieved,*these parties, is not stated.. If they have not been “aggrieved” they are not entitled to the order. If they have been aggrieved they must state wherein. If it affects them as individuals, they must so state; because, if it is a matter “where the *public interest*is affected,” the writ can only be granted on the application of the State.

*~Wq*have refrained from expressing any opinion as to the jurisdiction -of this court in granting, a mandamus, in cases other than may be necessary to the proper exercise of a superintending control of and over inferior courts. The petition is not verified, or the matters recited in it in any manner corroborated, by transcript of the records of the county court.

The application is dismissed.
| 1. | The Bank is Servicer under the Pooling and Servicing Agreement. |
|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------|

| 2. | The undersigned is duly authorized as required pursuant to the Pooling and Servicing Agreement to execute and deliver this Certificate to the Trustee. |
|----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 3. | This Certificate is delivered pursuant to Section 3.05 of the Pooling and Servicing Agreement. |
|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 4. | A review of the Servicer’s activities during the twelve-month period ended June 30, 2011 and of its performance under the Pooling and Servicing Agreement has been made under my supervision. |
|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 5. | To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Servicer has fulfilled all of its obligations under the Pooling and Servicing Agreement in all material respects throughout such twelve-month period. |
|----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| By:    |  /s/ Michelle D. Dumont                              |
|--------|-----------------------------------------------------------|
|   |  Name:  Michelle D. Dumont                 |
|   |  Title:    Senior Vice President |

----

----
EXHIBIT 15


            May 8, 1998


            To Mirage Resorts, Incorporated

            We  are  aware   that  Mirage   Resorts,  Incorporated   has
            incorporated by reference in its Registration Statements  on
            Form S-8  (File No.  33-16037), on  Form S-8  (File No.  33-
            48394), on Form S-8 (File No.  33-63804), on Form S-8  (File
            No. 33-60183) and on  Form S-3 (File No. 333-39029) its Form
            10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 1998 which includes our
            report  dated  May  8, 1998  covering  the unaudited interim
            financial  information  contained   therein.    Pursuant  to
            Regulation C  of the Securities  Act of 1933, that report is
            not considered a part of these registration  statements or a
            report prepared  or certified by our firm within the meaning
            of Sections 7 and 11 of the Act.

            Very truly yours,



            ARTHUR ANDERSEN LLP
Exhibit 13.1**Certification of CEO and CFO Pursuant to 18 U.S.C.Section 1350, as Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 ofthe Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**In connection with the Annual Report onForm 20-F of ASMLHolding N.V. (the “Company”) for the fiscal year endedDecember 31, 2006 as filed with the Securities and ExchangeCommission on the date hereof (the “Report”), EricMeurice, as Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and PeterT.F.M. Wennink, as Chief Financial Officer of the Company, eachhereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, asadopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Actof 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    operations of the Company./s/ Eric MeuriceName: Eric MeuriceTitle: Chief Executive OfficerDate: January 26, 2007/s/ Peter T.F.M. WenninkName: Peter T.F.M. WenninkTitle: Chief Financial OfficerDate: January 26, 2007A signed original of this written statement required bySection 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 has beenprovided to the Company and will be retained by the Company andfurnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staffupon request.This certification accompanies the Report pursuant to section906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except tothe extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemedfiled by the Company for purposes of section 18 of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934.ASML ANNUAL REPORT 2006F- 45