alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
September 14, 2016

 Exemption No. 11067D

 Regulatory Docket No. FAA–2014–0357

Mr. Chris White

Pictorvision Inc.

2320 Shasta Way, Unit H

Simi Valley, CA 93065

Dear Mr. White:

This letter is to inform you that we have granted your petition to extend Exemption No. 

11067C. It explains the basis for our decision, describes its effect, and lists the conditions and 

limitations.

The Basis for Our Decision

By letter dated August 2, 2016, you petitioned the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) on 

behalf of Pictorvision Inc. (hereinafter petitioner or operator) for an extension to your current 

exemption. That exemption from §§ 61.23(a) and (c), 61.101(e)(4) and (5), 61.113(a), 

61.315(a), 91.7(a), 91.119(c), 91.121, 91.151(a)(1), 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(1) and 

(2), and 91.417(a) and (b) of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) allows the 

petitioner to operate a UAS to perform closed-set motion picture and television filming. 

In your petition, you indicate that there has been no change in the conditions and reasons 

relative to public interest and safety that were the basis for granting the original exemption.

The FAA has determined that good cause exists for not publishing a summary of the petition 

in the Federal Register because the requested extension of the exemption would not set a 

precedent, and any delay in acting on this petition would be detrimental to the petitioner.

Our Decision

The FAA has determined that the justification for the issuance of Exemption No. 11067,

remains valid with respect to this exemption and is in the public interest. Therefore, under the 
2

authority provided by 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 40113 and 44701, delegated to me by the 

Administrator, the operator is granted an extension to its exemption. 

The operator shall add this amendment to its original exemption.

 

Conditions and Limitations

All conditions and limitations within Grant of Exemption No. 11067 remain in effect. The 

termination date has been updated. 

Failure to comply with any of the conditions and limitations of this grant of exemption will be 

grounds for the immediate suspension or rescission of this exemption.

This exemption terminates on September 30, 2017, unless sooner superseded or rescinded.

Sincerely,

/s/

John S. Duncan

Director, Flight Standards Service
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 9

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                      26,269,492
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                               0
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                            87,000,000
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                374,445,537
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                   1,434,972,349
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                     1,421,527,921
<LOANS>                                    123,567,213
<ALLOWANCE>                                    100,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                           2,159,004,433
<DEPOSITS>                               1,337,627,126
<SHORT-TERM>                               653,845,211
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                         17,682,436
<LONG-TERM>                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                       24,203,561
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       145,792
<OTHER-SE>                                 125,500,307
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>           2,159,004,433
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                717,074
<INTEREST-INVEST>                           24,303,405
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                     0
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                            25,020,479
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                           9,390,300
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                          16,389,654
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                        8,630,825
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                        0
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                             32,831,779
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              8,151,485
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                   8,151,485
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 5,269,755
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.36
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.35
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    1.97
<LOANS-NON>                                          0
<LOANS-PAST>                                         0
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                               100,000
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                        0
<RECOVERIES>                                         0
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                              100,000
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                           100,000
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0


</TABLE>
# C_2011310EN.01000801.xml

| 22.10.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 310/8 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.10.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 310/8

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

1

21 October 2011

2011/C 310/05

1 euro =

1 euro =

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,3798 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 105,82 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4456 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,86775 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 9,1031 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,2307 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 7,7060 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 24,993 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 298,46 |
| LTL | Lithuanian litas | 3,4528 |
| LVL | Latvian lats | 0,7053 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 4,3935 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 4,3304 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 2,5513 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,3401 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,3957 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 10,7353 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,7304 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 1,7577 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 584,02 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 11,2490 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 8,8120 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,4775 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 12 228,04 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,3390 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 59,959 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 43,0250 |
| THB | Thai baht | 42,760 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 2,4638 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 18,9171 |
| INR | Indian rupee | 69,0240 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,3798

JPY

Japanese yen

105,82

DKK

Danish krone

7,4456

GBP

Pound sterling

0,86775

SEK

Swedish krona

9,1031

CHF

Swiss franc

1,2307

ISK

Iceland króna

NOK

Norwegian krone

7,7060

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

24,993

HUF

Hungarian forint

298,46

LTL

Lithuanian litas

3,4528

LVL

Latvian lats

0,7053

PLN

Polish zloty

4,3935

RON

Romanian leu

4,3304

TRY

Turkish lira

2,5513

AUD

Australian dollar

1,3401

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,3957

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

10,7353

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,7304

SGD

Singapore dollar

1,7577

KRW

South Korean won

1 584,02

ZAR

South African rand

11,2490

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

8,8120

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,4775

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

12 228,04

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,3390

PHP

Philippine peso

59,959

RUB

Russian rouble

43,0250

THB

Thai baht

42,760

BRL

Brazilian real

2,4638

MXN

Mexican peso

18,9171

INR

Indian rupee

69,0240

---

(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

1

Source

---
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460 

Mr. J. R. Stroble 

Manager, National TRU Program 

Carlsbad Field Office 

U.S. Department of Energy 

P.O. Box 3090 

Carlsbad, NM 88221 -3090 

Dear Mr. Stroble: 

APR 1 6 2014 

OFFICE OF 

AIR AND RADIATION 

On October I, 2013, the Carlsbad Field Office (CBFO) requested that, as a Tier I (TI) change, the U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) approve remote-handled (RH) transuranic (TRU) waste stream 

10-EBR-SSOOO (Lot 5B) at the Idaho National Laboratory (INL) for disposal at the Waste Isolation Pilot 

Plant (WIPP). EPA has reviewed the information provided and approves the addition of this waste 

stream to those approved for disposal at WIPP. The enclosed report (EPA Docket No. A-98-49; II-A4-

183) details EPA's evaluation. This approval also allows the future addition of debris waste to this 

stream with a similar waste pedigree (radiological and physical contents) and characterized using the 

processes discussed in the enclosed report. 

If you have any questions regarding this approval, please contact Raj ani Joglekar at (202) 343-9462 or 

Ed Feltcorn at (202) 343-9422. 

Enclosure 

cc: Electronic Distribution 

Alton Harris, DOE EM 

Joe Franco, CBFO 

Marcus Pinzel, CBFO NTP 

Ben Roberts, DOE ID 

Trais Kilphuis, NMED 

Site Documents 

Sincerely, 

~~ Tom Peake, Director 

Center for Waste Management and Regulations 

lntemet Address (URL) • http://www.epa.gov 

Rec:ycledfRecyclable • Printed with Vegetable Oil Based Inks on 1 OO"'o Postconsumer, Process Chlorine Free Recycled Paper
#### Ivy J. BONAVENTURE et al. v. Sam FEDELE.

No. 8487.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana, First Circuit.

March 9, 1971.

Suspensive Appeal Dismissed June 4, 1971.

ALTERNATE WRITS OF MANDAMUS, CERTIORARI AND PROHIBITION

The petition of the relator in the above entitled and numbered case having been duly considered,

It is hereby ordered that an alternative writ of mandamus issue herein, commanding the Honorable Lewis S. Doherty, III, Judge of the Nineteenth Judicial District Court for the Parish of East Baton Rouge, to recall and vacate that portion of the judgment of March 8, 1971, denying relator *313a suspensive appeal, and to grant relator a suspensive appeal upon the relator’s furnishing bond within twenty-four hours in an amount set by the court.

Or, in the alternative, said Judge and the respondents, Ivy J. Bonaventure, Eloise St. Romain and John St. Romain, shall show cause in this Court, by briefs, on or before the 9th day of April, 1971, why this writ should not be made peremptory; and

Should said Judge elect the alternative, it is ordered that a writ of certiorari issue herein, directing said Judge to transmit to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, State of Louisiana, on or before the date aforesaid, the record, or a certified copy of the record, of the proceedings complained of by the relator- — herein, to the end that the validity of the proceedings may be ascertained ; and

It is further ordered, in the event the alternative is elected, that, in the meantime and until further orders of this Court, all proceedings against the relator — in this cause in said Nineteenth Judicial District Court for the Parish of East Baton Rouge shall be stayed and suspended.
#### John E. ANDREWS, Jr., Appellant, v. Patricia A. ANDREWS, Appellee.

No. 77-261.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

April 4, 1978.

*1334Lane & Lane, Miami, for appellant.

Franklin, Ullman, Kimler & Entin, North Miami Beach, for appellee.

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

PER CURIAM.

The trial court erred in awarding lump sum alimony to the wife where such alimony was not asked for in the wife’s complaint and the record is devoid of evidence establishing her need. *Calligarich v. Calligarich,*256 So.2d 60 (Fla. 4th DCA 1971); *Cann v.*Cann, 334 So.2d 325 (Fla. 1st DCA 1976). Therefore, upon motion of either party, the trial court shall conduct an evi-dentiary hearing regarding the property rights of the parties as well as any award of alimony. See Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.190(b).

Reversed.
#### George W. TUBBS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 73-721.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Jan. 18, 1974.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
**Exhibit 31.2**
**CERTIFICATION**
I, Amy Vidrine Samson, certify that:
1. I have reviewed this Annual Report on Form 10-K/A for the period ended March 28, 2004 of Crown Crafts, Inc.; 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a materialfact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, notmisleading with respect to the period covered by this report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairlypresent 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 report; 4. The registrant’s other certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controlsand procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and we have:
 (a) Designed such disclosure controlsand procedures, or caused suchdisclosure controls and proceduresto be designed under oursupervision, to ensure thatmaterial information relating tothe registrant, including itsconsolidated subsidiaries, is madeknown to us by others within thoseentities, particularly during theperiod in which this report isbeing prepared;  (b) Evaluated the effectiveness of theregistrant’s disclosure controlsand procedures and presented inthis report our conclusions aboutthe effectiveness of the disclosurecontrols and procedures, as of theend of the period covered by thisreport based on such evaluation;and;  (c) Disclosed in this report any changein the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reportingthat occurred during theregistrant’s most recent fiscalquarter (the registrant’s fourthfiscal quarter in the case of anannual report) that was materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likelyto materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting; and
5. The registrant’s other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internalcontrol over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board ofdirectors (or persons performing the equivalent function):
 (a) All significant deficiencies andmaterial weaknesses in the designor operation of internal controlover financial reporting which arereasonably likely to adverselyaffect the registrant’s ability torecord, process, summarize andreport financial information; and  (b) Any fraud, whether or not material,that involves management or otheremployees who have a significantrole in the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting.
Date: June 28, 2004         /s/ Amy Vidrine Samson   Amy Vidrine Samson   Vice President & Chief Financial Officer
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 01-7917

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

BYRON KEITH COLLINS,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

South Carolina, at Aiken. Cameron McGowan Currie, District Judge.

(CR-91-312, CA-01-2729-1-22)

Submitted: February 14, 2002 Decided: February 28, 2002

Before WIDENER, LUTTIG, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Byron Keith Collins, Appellant Pro Se. Beth Drake, Assistant

United States Attorney, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Byron Keith Collins seeks to appeal the district court’s order

dismissing his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp.

2001). Because Collins failed to obtain authorization from this

court to file a successive § 2255 motion, the district court

properly denied the motion. 28 U.S.C.A. § 2244 (West 1994 & Supp.

2001). Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and

dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. See

United States v. Collins, Nos. CR-91-312; CA-01-2729-1-22 (D.S.C.

filed Oct. 17, 2001; entered Oct. 18, 2001); see also United

States v. Sanders, 247 F.3d 139 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, U.S.

, 122 S. Ct. 573 (2001) (holding claims pursuant to Apprendi v.

New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000), are not cognizable on collateral

review). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and

legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before

the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
#### CITY OF MIAMI, a municipal corporation, Appellant, v. Clarence G. WATKINS et al., Appellees.

No. 71-102.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

June 9, 1971.

PER CURIAM.

Appeal dismissed.
I

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 2863

To amend title 13, United States Code, to require that any data relating

to the incidence of poverty produced or published by the Secretary

of Commerce for subnational areas is corrected for differences in the

cost of living in those areas.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

AUGUST 4, 1993

Mr. GALLO (for himself, Ms. KAPTUR, and Ms. MOLINARI) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Post Office and Civil

Service

A BILL

To amend title 13, United States Code, to require that

any data relating to the incidence of poverty produced

or published by the Secretary of Commerce for

subnational areas is corrected for differences in the cost

of living in those areas.

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Poverty Data Correc5 tion Act of 1993’’.
2

•HR 2863 IH

1 SEC. 2. REQUIREMENT.

2 (a) IN GENERAL.—Title 13 of the United States

3 Code is amended by adding after subchapter V the

4 following:

5 ‘‘Subchapter VI—Poverty Data

6 ‘‘SEC. 197. CORRECTION OF SUBNATIONAL DATA RELATING

7 TO POVERTY.

8 ‘‘(a) Any data relating to the incidence of poverty

9 produced or published by or for the Secretary for

10 subnational areas shall be corrected for differences in the

11 cost of living, and data produced for State and sub-State

12 areas shall be corrected for differences in the cost of living

13 for at least all States of the United States.

14 ‘‘(b) Data under this section shall be published in

15 1995 and at least every second year thereafter.

16 ‘‘SEC. 198. DEVELOPMENT OF STATE COST-OF-LIVING

17 INDEX AND STATE POVERTY THRESHOLDS.

18 ‘‘(a) To correct any data relating to the incidence of

19 poverty for differences in the cost of living, the Secretary

20 shall—

21 ‘‘(1) develop or cause to be developed a State

22 cost-of-living index which ranks and assigns an index

23 value to each State using data on wage, housing,

24 and other costs relevant to the cost of living; and

25 ‘‘(2) multiply the Federal Government’s statis26 tical poverty thresholds by the index value for each
3

•HR 2863 IH

1 State’s cost of living to produce State poverty

2 thresholds for each State.

3 ‘‘(b) The State cost-of-living index and resulting

4 State poverty thresholds shall be published prior to Sep5 tember 30, 1994, for calendar year 1993 and shall be up6 dated annually for each subsequent calendar year.’’.

7 (b) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—The table of sub8 chapters of chapter 5 of title 13, United States Code, is

9 amended by adding at the end the following:

‘‘SUBCHAPTER VI—POVERTY DATA

‘‘Sec. 197. Correction of subnational data relating to poverty.

‘‘Sec. 198. Development of State cost-of-living index and State poverty thresholds.’’.

Æ
260 La. 137

#### STATE of Louisiana ex rel. Herbert Lee SIMS v. C. Murray HENDERSON, Warden, Louisiana State Penitentiary.

No. 51974.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Dec. 20, 1971.

In re: Herbert Lee Sims applying for writ of habeas corpus.

Writ refused. The showing made is insufficient to warrant the exercise of our original or supervisory jurisdiction.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

EASTERN DISTRICT

**DWAYNE ANDERSON,**

**Petitioner**

**v.**

**COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF PHILADELPHIA COUNTY,** 

**Respondent :** 

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**: No. 142 EM 2015** 

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW **, this 24th day of December, 2015, the Application f or Leave to File** 

**Original Process is** GRANTED **, and the Petition for Writ of Mandamus is** DENIED

**.**

**Mr. Justice Eakin did not participate in the decision of t his matter.**
January 28, 2015

Christopher Prine, Clerk of the Court Fourteenth Court of Appeals 301 Fannin Houston, Texas 77002-2066 RE: Ex parte Riku Melartin, 14-14-0926-CR Dear Mr. Prine: This letter will confirm that I will be responsible for presenting oralargument on behalf of Mr. Melartin on March 25, 2015, in the abovestyled and numbered case. Pursuant to T EX .R.A PP .P. 9.5(d), I have today served this notice on opposing counsel via e-filing. Sincerely yours,

/s/ Brian W. Wice Brian W. Wice BRIAN W. WICE BWW:dje cc: Melissa Hervey (HERVEY_MELISSA@dao.hctx.net) ACCEPTED 14-14-0926-CR FOURTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

HOUSTON, TEXAS 1/28/2015 11:26:18 AM CHRISTOPHER PRINE

CLERK
# #02.1

U.S 

# ofaw" Energy MOO Iticy and Renew3bte Energy

TIrriaie Deployment 

## ziE Search Help : More Search Options r

About Standards, I_rro.s C% Itr3rulations r -PACT 2001 Test Prttcedlure Peer Revietq Infern-,ation Reso rye, NIOtiL e€ & Rules c dt0t, betting R'uh ir. 6Verkslt ps FIc^^^rs'noys state P F'tittans

enau^ts:, °c .l E: tiet,rrrar,nL kesltle nti& Prnl$uct,- 

## Residential Clothes Dryer and

Room Air Conditioners Framework Document Public Meeting DATE : [ October 24, 2007 TIME : 9:00 a

. m. - 5:00 p.m. EDT LOCATION: Holiday Inn Capital

550 C Street SW Washington, DC] 

### Purpose : The purpose of this meeting is to discuss the procedural and analytical approaches the U.S. Department of Energy anticipates using to evaluate energy conservation standards for residential clothes dryers and room air conditioners. Some of the following documents are available as Adobe Acrobat PDFs. E:-vi^ . i be 0.:^+ 1bi tt iilr 

### Public Meeting Materials • Notice of public meeting and availability of the Framework Document (ADl"76K3 PLEASE NOTE : The correct date for submitting comments to this document is November 7, 2007 , not October 3, 2007 , as listed in the notice. • Agenda (PDF_26 KB) • Framework Document (PDF 740. KB) 

### Contact Information t_r h:r'•'1s ti rar_.: , P.E. Project Manager (202) 586-7436Bu !ding Technologies Program Home I EERE Home U.S. Department of Energy Content Last Updated : 10/15/2007