alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### SERVED: MARCH 30, 2015 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION OFFICE OF HEARINGS

WASHINGTON, DC IN THE MATTER OF HORTMAN AVIATION SERVICES, INC. DOCKETNO. FAA-2015-0635 (Civil Penalty Action)


### NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT OF PROCEEDING This proceeding (heretofore designated as Case No. 2010EA170Q43) has been assigned to Administrative Law Judge J.E. Sullivan. All future pleadings and other communications regarding this proceeding shall be served onthe Judge, the FAA Hearing Docket, and the other persons onthe attached Service List.

--··· ..

**~**.....--····

**_,~··** ChiefAdministrati · Law

**Ju~~e** Ronnie ArYo 

### ,e(



## ·~· Attachment
- Service ListSERVICE LIST- BY 

### U.S. MAIL ORIGINAL & ONE COPY 

### Federal Aviation Administration 800 Independence Avenue, S.W. Washington, DC 20591 Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2W10001 ONE COPY 

### H.M. Hortman, President Hortman Aviation Services, Inc., Respondent 

### 9800 Ashton Road Philiadelphia, PA 19114 TEL: 215-969-0311 FAX: 215-677-6408 Christian Lewerenz, Complainant's Counsel 

### Office ofRegional Counsel, Eastern Region Federal Aviation Administration 1 Aviation Plaza Jamaica, NY 11434 TEL: 718-553-3273 FAX: 718-995-5699 Hon. J.E. Sullivan,Administrative Law Judge 

### Office ofHearings, M-20 U.S. Department ofTransportation 1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. (E11-310) Washington, DC 20590 TEL: 202-366-6941 FAX: 202-366-7536 DocketNo. FAA-2015-0635 (Civil Penalty Action)

1 Service was byU.S. Mail. For service in person or by expedited courier, use the following address: Federal Aviation Administration, 600 Independence Avenue, S.W., Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2Wl000, Washington, DC 20591; Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430. 

### -2-
No. 11554.

#### Mateer *v.*The Ohio Central Traction Co.

Decided October 12, 1909.

Error to Circuit Court of Richland county.

*Messrs. Brucker & Cummins,*for plaintiff in error.

*Mr. Dan Babst*and *Messrs. Cummings, McBride & Wolfe,*for defendant in error.

Judgment affirmed.

Crew, C. J., Summers, Spear, Davis and Shauck, JJ., concur.
#### Ethne E. LaFRANCE, Appellant, v. Frances D. BRYANT, Appellee.

No. 1144.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. Fourth District.

May 31, 1968.

Rehearing Denied June 24, 1968.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
RFS 2014 NPRM Table I-1 p.6 Table I-2. p. 7

Proposed 2014 Actual RFS2 Etoh-equiv Actual Etoh-equiv Etoh-eqv delta

Volume Requirements Bill gal Bill gal Bill gal Bill gal Bill gal

Cellulosic biofuel 1.75 1.75 0.023 0.023 -1.727

Biomass-based diesel 1 1.5 1.28 1.92 0.42

Advanced biofuels 3.75 3.75 2.21 2.21 -1.54

Renewable fuel 18.15 18.15 15.21 15.21 -2.94

Reviewer's calcs

Table IV.B.3-1 calculations, p. 92 US -ocean EPA's calcs

US (STEO) calc. AK (SEDS 2011) AKe ocean AK-ocean US ocean (AEO2013) -AK-oc calc RVO terms

Term MMBD Bill Gal MM Bbl Bill Gal Bill Gal Bill Gal Trill Btu Bill Gal Bill Gal Bill Gal

G 8.66 132.758 6.321 0.265 132.49 132.79

D 3.61 55.341 7.621 0.320 0.016 0.304 50.6509 0.365 54.67 47.45

RG 0.868 13.306 0.733 0.0308 13.28 13.84

RD 0.09 1.380 1.38 1.32

GE confidential 0? Not shown

GD confidential 0? Not shown

I-2, p. 7 I.B.4-2, p. 14

EPA EPA Recalc Reviewer if only 2 digits

Final % Std 2014 Bill gal % std % std % std

Cellulosic biofuel 0.023 0.017% 0.013%

Biomass-based diesel 1.28 1.16% 1.113% 1.11%

Advanced biofuels 2.21 1.36% 1.281% 1.28%

Renewable fuel 15.21 9.33% 8.817% 8.82%

Source: STEO Sep. 2013 (released 9/10/13), AK (SEDS 2011), AEO 2013, calculations from EIA-821.

U.S. vessel bunkering (inc. coastal) in 2011: 2.651 bill gal. AK: 0.1198 bill gal. AK = 4.5% of U.S. vessel bunkering. AK est ocean = 0.365 * 0.045 = 0.016

AEO 2013 table 37. Transportation Sector Energy Use by Fuel Type Within a Mode, International Shipping: Distillate Fuel Oil (tril Btu), 1 gallon = 138,690 Btu
#### CITY OF MIAMI, a municipal corporation, Appellant, v. AEROLAND OIL COMPANY, a Florida corporation, Appellee.

No. 67-645.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. Third District.

Sept. 13, 1967.

PER CURIAM.

Appeal dismissed.

See also Fla.App., 196 So.2d 31.
Docket Management Facility

U.S. Department of Transportation

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E.

West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140

Dear Sir or Madam:

Northrop Grumman Systems Corporation requests an exemption to 14 CFR 61.57(e)(3) for night 

currency requirements to include type-rated aircraft, operated by a two-pilot crew.

The primary contact for this petition is:

James Wayne

Chief Pilot/Safety Officer

Northrop Grumman Systems Corporation

Office (310) 332-0151, mobile (310) 200-3354

Email: james.wayne@ngc.com

Basis in Regulation

14 CFR 61.57(b) requires night currency for pilots-in-command of aircraft carrying passengers at 

night requiring at least 3 takeoffs and landings at night in the past 90 days in that category and 

class; and type, if the aircraft requires a type rating. 

14 CFR 61.57(c)(3) provides exceptions to 14 CFR 61.57(b) only for the pilot-in-command of 

turbine-powered airplane that are type certificated for more than one pilot crewmember.

Extent of Relief Requested

14 CFR 61.57(c)(3) provides exceptions to a pilot of a type rated aircraft, that requires twopilots by certification. Northrop Grumman requests approval to use the exceptions provided in 

61.57(c)(3) in a type rated aircraft, that uses two-pilots by operational standards.

Reason for Seeking Relief

Only a few aircraft types are certificated requiring only one pilot. Northrop Grumman’s training 

and operating program uses a two person crew at all times, but is not afforded relief under this 

exception. We believe that our operating standards meet the intent of the rule.

Supporting Documentation and Public Benefit

Northrop Grumman operates two BE-1900 aircraft, a type-rated aircraft requiring one pilot 

crewmember by certification. Northrop’s operating standards require that all company aircraft 

are operated with two-pilot crews, including the BE-1900, at all times. All Northrop corporate 

pilots complete annual recurrent aircraft training under a Part 142 simulator training program
at Flight Safety International using only two-pilot crews. Northrop’s BE-1900 aircraft are based 

in southern California and the nearest BE-1900 simulator is located in Seattle, Washington; thus 

making the use of a simulator for night currency every 90 days impractical. The only other 

option is to use the actual aircraft for accomplishing the night takeoff and landings every 90 

days which is not only an economic burden, but further overloads the already congested 

airspace in the Los Angeles area.

Safety Standards

Type-rated aircraft operated by a two-pilot crew are an obvious improvement in the level of 

safety over single pilot operations. Aircraft that already benefit from the exceptions in 14 CFR 

61.57(c)(3) require two-pilot crews. Requiring two-pilot crews by company operational 

standards instead of by aircraft certification provides an equivalent level of safety.

Thank you for your consideration.

Respectfully,

James Wayne

Chief Pilot/ Safety Officer

Northrop Grumman Systems Corporation
Exhibit 10.79


 


AMENDMENT TO


 


MEMBERSHIP INTEREST PURCHASE AGREEMENT


 


This Amendment dated
as of September 15, 2022 (“Amendment”) amends the Membership Interest Purchase Agreement (this “Agreement”),
dated as of January 6, 2022 (the “Effective Date”), by and among La Rosa Holdings Corp., a Nevada corporation
(the “Buyer”), and RICKY MILLER, (the “Seller”), and LA ROSA REALTY LAKELAND LLC, a Florida
limited liability company located at 145 Horizon Ct., Lakeland Florida 33813 (the “Company,” and together with
the Buyer and Seller, the “Parties,” and individually, the “Parties”).”


 


The Parties hereby
agree to amend the Agreement as follows:


 


		1.	Schedule A of the Agreement shall be deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following:



 


SCHEDULE A


 


	Buyer:	 	La Rosa Holdings Corp.
	Company:	 	LA ROSA REALTY 

LAKELAND LLC
	Seller:	 	RICKY MILLER
	Percentage of Seller’s Membership Interest in the Company being sold to the Buyer:	 	51%
	Aggregate Purchase Price:	 	$579,322.50
	Cash:	 	$50,000.00
	Common Stock (1):	 	Shares valued at $529,322.50


 


	 	(1)	The number of shares issued will be the dollar amount of the Common Stock divided by the final sales price of the Company’s common stock in its underwritten public offering.


  


 2.       Except as otherwise stated herein, the Agreement shall continue in full force and effect.




 


3.       All
matters relating to this Amendment shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the internal laws of the State of Florida
without giving effect to any choice or conflict of law provision or rule (whether of the State of Florida or any other jurisdiction).


 


4.       This
Amendment and the schedules and exhibits to be delivered hereunder constitute the sole and entire agreement of the Parties with
respect to the subject matter contained herein, and supersede all prior and contemporaneous understandings and agreements, both
written and oral, with respect to such subject matter hereof.


 


5.       This
Amendment may be executed in counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, but all of which together shall be deemed
to be one and the same agreement. A signed copy of this Amendment delivered by facsimile, e-mail, or other means of electronic
transmission shall be deemed to have the same legal effect as delivery of an original signed copy of this Agreement.


 


[SIGNATURES APPEAR ON THE NEXT PAGE.]


 




    	 



     


    

 


IN
WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties hereto have caused this Amendment to be executed as of the date set forth above by their
respective representatives thereunto duly authorized.


 


	Buyer:	LA ROSA HOLDINGS CORP.
	 	 	 
	 	By:	/s/ Joseph La Rosa
	 	Name:	Joseph La Rosa
	 	Title:	Chief Executive Officer
	 	 	 
	Company:	LA ROSA REALTY LAKELAND LLC
	 	 	 
	 	By:	/s/ Ricky Miller
	 	Name:	Ricky Miller
	 	Title:	Manager
	 	 	 
	Seller:	RICKY MILLER
	 	 	 
	 	By:	/s/ Ricky Miller
	 	Name:	Ricky Miller
	 	Address:	145 Horizon Ct., Lakeland Florida 
	 	 	33813
<TABLE> <S> <C>



<ARTICLE> UT
<CIK> 0000023426
<NAME> THE CONNECTICUT LIGHT AND POWER COMPANY AND SUBSIDIARIES
<MULTIPLIER>1,000
       
<S>                           <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                 YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                    DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                         DEC-31-1997
<BOOK-VALUE>                                            PER-BOOK
<TOTAL-NET-UTILITY-PLANT>                              3,737,113
<OTHER-PROPERTY-AND-INVEST>                              493,848
<TOTAL-CURRENT-ASSETS>                                   519,799
<TOTAL-DEFERRED-CHARGES>                               1,330,463
<OTHER-ASSETS>                                                 0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                         6,081,223
<COMMON>                                                 122,229
<CAPITAL-SURPLUS-PAID-IN>                                641,333
<RETAINED-EARNINGS>                                      419,972
<TOTAL-COMMON-STOCKHOLDERS-EQ>                         1,183,534
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                    151,250
<PREFERRED>                                              116,200
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-NET>                                   2,023,316
<SHORT-TERM-NOTES>                                        96,300
<LONG-TERM-NOTES-PAYABLE>                                      0
<COMMERCIAL-PAPER-OBLIGATIONS>                                 0
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-CURRENT-PORT>                             20,011
<PREFERRED-STOCK-CURRENT>                                  3,750
<CAPITAL-LEASE-OBLIGATIONS>                               18,042
<LEASES-CURRENT>                                         140,076
<OTHER-ITEMS-CAPITAL-AND-LIAB>                         2,328,744
<TOT-CAPITALIZATION-AND-LIAB>                          6,081,223
<GROSS-OPERATING-REVENUE>                              2,465,587
<INCOME-TAX-EXPENSE>                                     (67,009)
<OTHER-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                             2,532,642
<TOTAL-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                             2,473,206
<OPERATING-INCOME-LOSS>                                   (7,619)
<OTHER-INCOME-NET>                                        (5,484)
<INCOME-BEFORE-INTEREST-EXPEN>                            (5,530)
<TOTAL-INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 134,067
<NET-INCOME>                                            (139,597)
<PREFERRED-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                               15,221
<EARNINGS-AVAILABLE-FOR-COMM>                           (154,818)
<COMMON-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                                   5,989
<TOTAL-INTEREST-ON-BONDS>                                132,127
<CASH-FLOW-OPERATIONS>                                    72,793
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                               0.00
<EPS-DILUTED>                                               0.00
#### T. M. ANDERSON et ux. v. Elmer L. GOSSETT et ux.

No. 44813.

Supreme Court of Mississippi.

March 11, 1968.

Lester Clark, Hattiesburg, for appellants.

Bruce Caldwell, Boyd, Holifield & Harper, Laurel, for appellees.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
Table 20.  Homeownership Rates by Race and Ethnicity of Householder:  1994 to 2004

 

 

                                                1994     1995    1996\1    1997     1998     1999     2000     2001     2002    2002\r

 

 

U.S. total...................................    64.0     64.7     65.4     65.7     66.3     66.8     67.4     67.8     67.9     67.9

 

  White alone, total.........................    67.7     68.7     69.1     69.3     70.0     70.5     71.1     71.6     71.8     71.7

    Non-Hispanic White alone..................   70.0     70.9     71.7     72.0     72.6     73.2     73.8     74.3     74.5     74.7

  Black alone, total.........................    42.3     42.7     44.1     44.8     45.6     46.3     47.2     47.7     47.3     47.4

  All Other Races alone, total...............    47.7     47.2     51.0     52.5     53.0     53.7     53.5     54.2     54.7     54.5

      American Indian or Alaskan Native alone.   51.7     55.8     51.6     51.7     54.3     56.1     56.2     55.4     54.6     54.0

      Asian or Pacific Islander..............    51.3     50.8     50.8     52.8     52.6     53.1     52.8     53.9     54.7     54.6

      Other..................................    36.1     37.4        NA       NA       NA       NA       NA       NA       NA       NA

 

  Hispanic or Latino.........................    41.2     42.1     42.8     43.3     44.7     45.5     46.3     47.3     48.2     47.0

  Non-Hispanic...............................    65.9     66.7     67.4     67.8     68.3     68.9     69.5     69.9     70.0     70.2

 

 

 

                                                 2003     2004

 

 

U.S. total...................................    68.3     69.0

 

  White alone, total.........................    72.1     72.8

    Non-Hispanic White alone.................    75.4     76.0

  Black alone, total.........................    48.1     49.1

  All Other Races alone, total...............    56.0     58.6

      American Indian or Alaskan Native alone    54.3     55.6

      Asian or Pacific Islander..............    56.3     59.8

 

  Hispanic or Latino.........................    46.7     48.1

  Non-Hispanic...............................    70.8     71.5

 

 

 

 

\1 Beginning in 1996, those answering 'other' for race were allocated to one of the 4 race categories--

White, Black, American Indian, Aleut, or Eskimo (one category), or Asian or Pacific Islander.

NA - Not Applicable.

\2 Asian, Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander, Americn Indian or Alaska Native (only one race reported) and Two
#### Melvin Louis NOISETTE, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. P-257.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

Dec. 7, 1971.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.



## United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 2009-1180 SHIRE LLC, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v. SANDOZ, INC.,

Defendant-Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Colorado in

case no. 07-CV-00197, Judge Philip A. Brimmer.

ON MOTION Before NEWMAN, Circuit Judge. ORDER The William Mitchell College of Law Intellectual Property Institute moves for leave to file a brief amicus curiae in support of Sandoz, Inc. Upon consideration thereof, IT IS ORDERED THAT: The motion is granted. FOR THE COURT 

## MAY 18 2009 /s/ Jan Horbaly Jan Horbaly Clerk PILE US. COURT QF A pD

pgAts Fon THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT MAY 1 8 2009 Pt; iiükeshLY CLERK Date

cc: Keith D. Parr, Esq. Edward H. Haug, Esq. R. Carl Moy, Esq. s19
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                                                              5

<S>                                                           <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                                        6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                              DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                                   JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                                             1811544
<SECURITIES>                                                             0
<RECEIVABLES>                                                      4340735
<ALLOWANCES>                                                      (122353)
<INVENTORY>                                                              0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                                   3698869
<PP&E>                                                           163803007
<DEPRECIATION>                                                  (73892865)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                                   131403246
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                             20798721
<BONDS>                                                          150189407
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                                    0
<PREFERRED>                                                              0
<COMMON>                                                                 0
<OTHER-SE>                                                               0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                                     131403246
<SALES>                                                                  0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                                  27803288
<CGS>                                                                    0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                                     26665549
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                                     75096
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                                         0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                                10806473
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                                          0
<INCOME-TAX>                                                             0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                                      0
<DISCONTINUED>                                                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                                    2030590
<CHANGES>                                                                0
<NET-INCOME>                                                     (7713240)
<EPS-BASIC>                                                              0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                            0




</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                                        <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                          63,193
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   22,147
<ALLOWANCES>                                     1,399
<INVENTORY>                                      9,962
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                98,696
<PP&E>                                         379,598
<DEPRECIATION>                                 110,138
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 419,438
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          112,130
<BONDS>                                        230,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            65
<OTHER-SE>                                      73,853
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   419,438
<SALES>                                        135,947
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               140,015
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  118,560
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               5,938
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 16,020
<INCOME-TAX>                                     1,061
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             14,959
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    14,959
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.23
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.22


</TABLE>
August 3, 2015

Mr. Aaron Reedy

EvoImagery, LLC

127 West Main

Lexington, KY 40507

Dear Mr. Reedy:

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

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

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

Why We Can Not Process Your Request

We entered your May 4, exemption request into the public docket (No. FAA-2015-1611), but 

we are unable to process your request any further. The information you sent does not comply

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

you must send us all of the following:

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

benefit the public as a whole.

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

What You Should Do

If you want us to process your request any further, you must send the information described 

earlier to reach us within 30 days. Please note that § 11.63(d) requires you to send your 

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

If We Do Not Hear From You

If we do not hear from you within 30 days, we will close the docket without notifying you 

further. If you have any questions or require additional time, you may call (202) 267-9677.

Sincerely,

/s/

Brittany Newton

Program Analyst, Airmen and 

 Airspace Rules Division

Enclosure