alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
From: Christopher Grundler/AA/USEPA/US

To: "Epstein, Alan PW" <Alan.Epstein@pw.utc.com>

Cc: "Sepulveda, Domingo PW" <domingo.sepulveda@pw.utc.com>, Glenn 

Passavant/AA/USEPA/US@EPA, Michael Samulski/AA/USEPA/US@EPA

Date: 02/10/2012 12:52 PM

Subject: Re: Aircraft

Hi Alan:

I apologize for not getting back sooner on this But as I'm sure you know our staffs have 

worked closely through this entire process and I now understand that both the concerns 

about the six engines and the potential impacts on military sales have been resolved to our 

mutual satisfaction. So at this point I see no need for you and your staff to come to 

Michigan to discuss these matters further. We are moving forward quickly to complete our 

internal reviews of the final rule and am hopeful that Pratt will be in a position to support 

the final package at OMB.

By the way, I note that in the current and upcoming CAEP cycles we are expecting to 

consider a PM test procedure and certification requirement and a CAEP/8 NOx production 

cut-off. We look forward to working with P&W to craft a way forward in these important 

areas.

Christopher Grundler

Deputy Director

Office of Transportation and Air Quality

734-214-4207

"Epstein, Alan PW" ---01/31/2012 07:46:18 AM---Chris,

From: "Epstein, Alan PW" <Alan.Epstein@pw.utc.com>

To: Christopher Grundler/AA/USEPA/US@EPA

Cc: Rich Wilcox/AA/USEPA/US@EPA, "Walsh, Susan M PW" <SUSAN.WALSH@UTC.COM>, 

"Martella, Roger" <rmartella@sidley.com>, "Sepulveda, Domingo PW" 

<domingo.sepulveda@pw.utc.com>, Glenn Passavant/AA/USEPA/US@EPA

Date: 01/31/2012 07:46 AM

Subject: Di

Chris,

As I am sure you know, your team, working with the FAA, has engaged P&W on the proposed NOx 

regulation and production cutoff. I believe the ongoing dialog has been productive to both parties by 

helping further the understanding of respective issues and concerns. We appreciate the government’s 

recent proposal to AIA on a potential path forward, but several aspects of the proposal raise some 

questions and potential concerns. We share EPA’s goal of wanting to close on this matter at the earliest 

opportunity but need a clear understanding of EPA’s intentions and path forward before being in a 
position to endorse a proposed rapid enactment of the rule before OMB. To that end I would request the 

opportunity to meet with you to gain a fuller understanding of the EPA’s position on these issues. Given 

the time pressures EPA has identified, I believe it would be most efficient if we could have such a 

conversation in person, if possible. We are willing to come to Ann Arbor or meet in DC if you wish. Since 

time is important in this matter, sometime in the next two weeks is preferable. If a face to face meeting is 

not feasible, then perhaps we can arrange a teleconference. We will be standing by to discuss further at 

your convenience; thank you for your consideration.

Best 

Alan

P.S. I am constrained to be in DC next Tuesday and Wednesday (could meet there), but am otherwise 

free to meet in Ann Arbor.
Exhibit 21.1


                      NETWORK EQUIPMENT TECHNOLOGIES, INC.


                     Wholly Owned Subsidiaries of Registrant
                               As of June 14, 2002
<TABLE>

<S>                                                        <C>
N.E.T. APLA, Inc. .................................  (State of Incorporation: Delaware)

N.E.T. China, Inc. ................................  (State of Incorporation: Delaware)

N.E.T. Europe, Ltd. ...............................  (Incorporated Under the Laws of England)

N.E.T. Europe S.A. ................................  (Incorporated Under the Laws of France)

N.E.T. Federal, Inc. ..............................  (State of Incorporation: Delaware)

N.E.T. Japan, Inc. ................................  (State of Incorporation: Delaware)

Netdotcom Broadband Technologies, Inc. ............  (Incorporated Under the Laws of Canada)

Network Equipment Technologies Europe GmbH ........  (Incorporated Under the Laws of Germany)

Network Equipment Technologies Pacific Pty Ltd. ...  (Incorporated Under the Laws of Australia)
</TABLE>


                                    Page 55
<PAGE>

    EXHIBIT 32.2

                  CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER
                        REQUIRED BY RULE 13a-14(b) OF THE
                SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934, AS AMENDED, AND
                 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                 SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002.

         Pursuant to Rule 13a-14(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as
amended, and 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned officer of International Wire Group,
Inc. (the "Company"), hereby certifies, to such officer's knowledge, that:

         (i)      the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the
quarter ended September 30, 2003 (the "Report") fully complies with the
requirements of Section 13a or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934, as amended; and

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

Dated: November 14, 2003                          /s/ GLENN J. HOLLER
                                                  ------------------------------
                                                  Name: Glenn J. Holler
                                                  Title: Chief Financial Officer


         A signed original of this written statement, or other document
authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears
in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement, has been
provided to International Wire Group, Inc. and will be retained by
International Wire Group, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.
**EXHIBIT 31.1(A)**

**Certification required by Rules 13a-14(a) and 15d-14(a)**

I, Dr. Lionel L. Reilly, certify that:

| 1. | I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Professional Veterinary Products, Ltd.; |
|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

2.         Based on my knowledge, this quarterly 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 quarterly report;

3.         Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this quarterly report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this quarterly report;

4.         The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) for the registrant and we have:

a)         designed such disclosure controls and procedures or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this quarterly report is being prepared;

b)         evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this quarterly report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this quarterly report based on such evaluation;

c)         disclosed in this quarterly report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and

5.         The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

a)         all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

b)         any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.

| Dated: | June 12, 2008 |
|--------|---------------|

 

| /s/ Dr. Lionel L. Reilly         |
|---------------------------------------|
| Dr. Lionel L. Reilly             |
| President and Chief Executive Officer |
<PAGE>
                                                                 Exhibit 12.1



                          NORDSTROM CREDIT, INC.
               Computation of Ratio of Earnings Available for
                        Fixed Charges to Fixed Charges
                           (Dollars in thousands)
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>


Year ended January 31,               1996     1995     1994     1993     1992
----------------------            -------  -------  -------  -------  -------
<S>                               <C>      <C>      <C>      <C>      <C>    
Earnings before 
income taxes                      $35,086  $32,045  $32,372  $29,321  $24,023

Fixed charges 
  (gross interest expense)         42,245   31,187   29,600   33,841   35,037
                                  -------  -------  -------  -------  -------

Earnings available for
  fixed charges                   $77,331  $63,232  $61,972  $63,162  $59,060
                                  =======  =======  =======  =======  =======

Ratio of earnings available
  for fixed charges to fixed
  charges                            1.83     2.03     2.09     1.87     1.69
                                  =======  =======  =======  =======  =======


</TABLE>
1

Brunner, Christine

From: Sargeant, Kathryn

Sent: Thursday, February 27, 2014 1:36 PM

To: Whiteman, Chad

Subject: EPA Response to EO 12866 Comments on EPA Tier 3 draft final rule (2060-AQ86)

Attachments: EPA Summary Response to EO12866_Comments on EPA_Tier 3 draft final rule preamble - 2

_26_2014.docx; EO12866_Tier 3 2060-AQ 86 redlined preamble_02272014.docx

Attached is a summary response document to your comments from 2/26. 

I am also attaching a new preamble version that shows redline as compared to the 2/25 version (on which you 

commented). 

There are a couple of typos fixed since the 2/25 version (that show up in redline), as well as one minor correction in 

section VI.A. that changes from this sentence: 

“We were conveying that obligated parties may use either monthly composites or batch testing.” 

to this sentence: 

“In this final rule, we are finalizing requirements for use of either monthly composites or batch testing. “ 

Let me know if you have any questions. 

From: Whiteman, Chad [mailto:Chad_S_Whiteman@omb.eop.gov] 

Sent: Wednesday, February 26, 2014 6:01 PM 

To: Sargeant, Kathryn 

Subject: EO 12866 Comments on EPA Tier 3 draft final rule (2060-AQ86) 

Kathryn, 

 I’ve attached the latest round of EO 12866 comments on the EPA Tier 3 draft final rule. Comments can be identified 

by searching for “EO12866” found in comment bubbles. Let me know if you would like to discuss. 

Thanks, 

Chad
<PAGE>
                                                                      EXHIBIT 12
                     GE GLOBAL INSURANCE HOLDING CORPORATION
                                AND SUBSIDIARIES

                Computation of Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges

                      Nine Months Ended September 28, 1996

                                   (Unaudited)



(In millions)

Earnings:
  Earnings before income taxes and minority interest (1)          $630
  Add:  Fixed charges (2)                                           31
                                                                  ----
                                                                  $661
                                                                  ====

Fixed charges:
  Dividends on subsidiary's preferred stock (3)                   $ 78
  Interest expense                                                  31
                                                                  ----
                                                                  $109
                                                                  ====

Ratio of earnings to fixed charges                                6.06
                                                                  ====


(1)  Minority interest includes dividends on subsidiary's preferred stock.

(2)  The fixed charges  adjustment to earnings  before income taxes excludes the
     dividends on  subsidiary's  preferred stock as this amount was not deducted
     in the determination of earnings before income taxes.


(3)  The fixed charges  amount for  dividends on  subsidiary's  preferred  stock
     represents the pretax earnings amount which would be required to cover such
     fixed charges as calculated below:




                Subsidiary's Preferred Stock Dividend Requirement
                -------------------------------------------------
                             100% - Income Tax Rate

     The  income  tax rate is based on the  relationship  of the  provision  for
     income tax  expense to  earnings  before  income  taxes for the  respective
     period.





                                       7
Exhibit 4.11
  (LOGO)
    
    (BT LOGO)
 Phil Hodkinsonc/o BT Centre81 Newgate StreetLondonEC1A 7AJ
    
    13th January 2009
     /s/ Andrew J. ParkerANDREW J. PARKER
 To:
    
    Andrew ParkerCompany Secretary
  /s/ Phil Hodkinson
    
    
    
    14/1/9Phil Hodkinson
    
    
    
    Date
 Andrew J ParkerCompany SecretaryBT GroupBT Centre
81 Newgate Street
London EC1A 7AJ
United Kingdom
    
    tel
fax
mob
e-mail
    
    +44 (0)20 7356 5237
+44 (0)20 7356 6135
+44 (0)7802 773635
andrew.j.parker@bt.com
    
    (LOGO)
    
    BT Group plc
Registered Office:
81 Newgate Street, London EC1A 7AJ
Registered in England and Wales no. 4190816www.bt.com
<PAGE>   1





                                 EXHIBIT 10.20


                    AMENDMENT NO. 5 TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT


     AGREEMENT dated as of November 1, 1995 between William R. Griffin
("Employee") and Roto-Rooter, Inc. (the "Company").

     WHEREAS, Employee and the Company have entered into an Employment
Agreement dated November 1, 1990 ("Employment Agreement"); and

     WHEREAS, Employee and the Company desire to amend the Employment Agreement
in certain respects.

     NOW, THEREFORE, Employee and the Company mutually agree that the
Employment Agreement shall be amended, effective as of November 1, 1995 as
follows:

         A.    The date of October 31, 1999 set forth in Section 1.2 of the
               Employment Agreement, is hereby deleted and the date of October
               31, 2000 is hereby substituted therefor.

         B.    The base salary amount of $291,000 per annum as set forth in the
               first sentence of Section 2.1 of the Employment Agreement is
               hereby deleted and the base salary amount of $310,000 per annum
               is hereby substituted therefor.

         Except as specifically amended by this Amendment No. 5 to Employment
Agreement, the Employment Agreement shall continue in full force and effect in
accordance with its original terms, conditions and provisions.

         IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have duly executed this amendatory
agreement as of the date first above written.

                                        EMPLOYEE


                                        /s/ William R. Griffin   
                                        ----------------------------------
                          

                                        ROTO-ROOTER, INC.


                                        /s/ Edward L. Hutton     
                                        ----------------------------------
U.S. Department of Transportation

Docket Management System

1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE.

West Bui lding Ground Floor, Room W12

- 140

Washington, DC 20590

February 25, 2013



### PETITION FOR EXEMPTION

14 CFR § 11.61

- 11.01

2(a). Cardinal Air Services Inc.

3710 Artesia Ave.

Fullerton CA 92833

Telephone : 714

- 739

- 4880

2(b). Please accept this as a petition for exemption from 14 CFR part 121 appendices I

and J which requires an operator conducting FAR 135 charter operations and FAR 91.147 air tour

operations to implement separate and distinct drug and alcohol testing programs.

2(c). Cardinal Air Services Inc. seeks to be allowed to operate its FAR 91 operations

FAR 135 operations under one drug and alcohol program. Cardina l Air Services Inc is a small

helicopter company and both our 135 and 91 operations are managed by and employ the same

people. At this time we are employing 2 pilots and one director of maintenance

. All employees

are currently on and will continue to be m onitored under the Part 135 program if the exemption is

granted.

2(d). In granting this request Cardinal Air Services Inc. would be provided with more effective drug and

alcohol program mon itoring. This would benefit the public in two ways. First, by com bining the

two programs our oversight is simplified thus limiting our potential for mistakes and increasing

the overall safety of the program . Second, with only one program the FAA would only need to

make one yearly inspection thus saving the public money and providing the Drug Abatement

Division more time to use in its interest.

2(e). Granting this exemption will not adversely affect safety as all employees who perform safety

sensitive functions will remain covered by an approved drug program under the s ame

management. As stated above we believe the combination of the se programs will actually increase

its safety by limiting the potential for errors or omissions

.

2(f). Federal Registry Summary: I was informed that because this request was not precedent s etting that

a summary would not be necessary.

2(g). No additional information, views or arguments.

2(h). Cardinal Air Services Inc will not exercise this exemption outside of the United States.

Thank you for your time.

Sincerely,

Charles Street

Director of Operations

Cardinal Air Services Inc.
* This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the

doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. The court

generally disfavors the citation of orders and judgments; nevertheless, an order

and judgment may be cited under the terms and conditions of 10th Cir. R. 36.3. 

F I L E D

United States Court of Appeals

Tenth Circuit

OCT 3 2003

PATRICK FISHER

Clerk

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT

SHERRONE BURLESON,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.

SPRINT PCS GROUP,

Defendant-Appellee.

No. 03-6261

(D.C. No. 02-CV-1000-C)

(W.D. Okla.)

ORDER AND JUDGMENT*

Before BRISCOE, Circuit Judge, BRORBY, Senior Circuit Judge, and

MURPHY, Circuit Judge.

Sherrone Burleson petitions the Chief Judge of the Tenth Circuit for an

emergency stay of a trial set for October 14, 2003, pending her interlocutory

appeal of an order of the district court. We initially conclude that Ms. Burleson

has failed to establish an “emergency” requiring the consideration of only one

judge. See 10th Cir. R. 8.3. 
1 We note, however, that a pretrial order regarding discovery is not

immediately appealable as a final order. Graham v. Gray , 827 F.2d 679, 681

(10th Cir. 1987). Thus, if that issue had been raised in her notice of appeal, it

would have to be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

-2-

In order to demonstrate her entitlement to a stay, Ms. Burleson must first

establish our jurisdiction over her appeal. See 10th Cir. R. 8.1, 18.1; Desktop

Direct, Inc. v. Digital Equip. Corp. , 993 F.2d 755, 756-57, 760 (10th Cir. 1993),

aff’d , 511 U.S. 863 (1994). The record indicates that she has not paid the

appellate filing fee. See Fed. R. App. P. 3(e); 10th Cir. R. 3.3. 

According to her motion for stay, Ms. Burleson seeks interlocutory appeal

from two orders: (1) an order denying her request that the district court judge

recuse herself for bias and (2) an order denying Ms. Burleson’s request to extend

the discovery deadline in which to identify expert and lay witnesses and exhibits

for trial. But a review of her notice of appeal reveals that she has appealed only

from the order denying recusal. U.S. Dist. Ct. R. Doc. 123. We therefore address

only the issue raised in the notice of appeal. 1

We have jurisdiction only over appeals from final orders, see 28 U.S.C.

§ 1291, or certain kinds of interlocutory orders, see 28 U.S.C. § 1292. “An order

denying a motion to recuse is interlocutory and is, therefore, not immediately

appealable.” Nichols v. Alley, 71 F.3d 347, 350 (10th Cir. 1995).
-3-

Because we have no jurisdiction over the issue raised in the notice of appeal, we

must dismiss the appeal and deny the motion for stay as moot. 

Even if we were to designate Ms. Burleson’s notice of appeal on the issue

of recusal as a petition for a writ of mandamus, see id. ; In re Bennett, 283 B.R.

308, 321 (10th Cir. B.A.P. 2002), we would still deny relief. Adverse rulings are

ordinarily insufficient to justify recusal. Nichols, 71 F.3d at 351.

The appeal is DISMISSED and the motion for emergency stay is DENIED.

ENTERED FOR THE COURT

PER CURIAM
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 of Golden Enterprises, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the second quarter ended November 27, 2009, as filed
with  the  Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
I, Mark W. McCutcheon, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant
to  18  U.S.C. ' 1350, as adopted pursuant to ' 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002,  that,  to  the  best  of  my  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.

Dated: January 14, 2010



/s/ Mark W. McCutcheon
----------------------
Mark W. McCutcheon
President and Chief Executive Officer

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


                                       40