alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
In The Matter Of: 

SERVED: March 30,2016 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS 

WASHINGTON, DC :· ..... 1 · .•• ·• 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

Docket No. FAA-2014-0814 

DELTA AIR LINES, INC. 

Case No. 2014S0670010 

Respondent 

NOTICE OF CASE STATUS ON PENDING MOTION 

On October 16, 2014, the FAA filed its Complaint. 

l j' 

1/ •;: 

On October 28, 2014, Judge Richard C. Goodwin was assigned to preside over the case. 

Between November 13, 2014 and November 26, 2014 the parties filed arguments on a disputed 

motion in this case. Between November 26, 2014 and September 4, 2015 no ruling was issued on 

the motion. On September 4, 2015, Judge Goodwin transferred to a different federal agency. 

On October 8, 2015, this proceeding was reassigned to the undersigned Judge. 

The parties are hereby notified that the undersigned is currently reviewing the pending 

November 2014 motion. A ruling will issue shortly by separate Order. 

Attachment: Service List 
Docket No. FAA-2014-0814 

(Civil Penalty Action) 

SERVICE 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 2Wl 0001 

Mr. Christopher R. Stevenson 

Complainant's Counsel 

Office of the Regional Counsel, AS0-7 

Southern Region · 

1701 Columbia Avenue 

College Park, GA 30337 

TEL: 404-305-5200 

FAX: 404-305-5223 

Mr. Jon-Peter F. Kelly 

Respondent's Counsel 

Assistant General Counsel 

Delta Air Lines, Inc. 

Department 981 

1030 Delta Boulevard 

Atlanta, GA 30354-1989 

TEL: 404-714-5631 

FAX: 404-677-2972 

Judge J.E. Sullivan 

U.S. Administrative Law Judge 

Office of Hearings, M-20 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. (Ell-310) 

Washington, DC 20590 

TEL: 202-366-2132 

FAX: 202-366-7536 

ONE COPY 

1 Service was by U.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 2WIOOO, Washington, 

DC 20591; Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430.
The Honorable William R. Wilson, Jr., United States District 1

Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas, adopting the report and

recommendations of the Honorable Henry L. Jones, Jr., United States

Magistrate Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas.

___________

No. 96-2385

___________

Thomas Grady, *

 *

Appellant, *

 *

v. *

 *

M. Aud, CO-I Officer, Cummins * Appeal from the United States

Unit, Arkansas Department of * District Court for the

Correction; Blankenship, * Eastern District of Arkansas.

Disciplinary Court Judge, *

Cummins Unit, Arkansas * [UNPUBLISHED]

Department of Correction; M.D. *

Reed, Warden, Cummins Unit, *

Arkansas Department of *

Correction, *

 *

Appellees. *

___________

 Submitted: June 27, 1996

 Filed: July 12, 1996

___________

Before BOWMAN, HEANEY, and BEAM, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Arkansas inmate Thomas Grady brought a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action

against prison officials, alleging they deprived him of good-time credit

based on a false prison disciplinary. The district court dismissed

1

Grady's claim as frivolous, citing Heck v. Humphrey, 114 S. Ct. 2364

(1994). Grady appeals.
-2-

After the district court ruled, we held that Heck bars section 1983

damage claims for loss of good-time credit until the claimant has had the

disciplinary proceeding invalidated. Sheldon v. Hundley, 83 F.3d 231, 233

(8th Cir. 1996). Absent any allegation that Grady has successfully

challenged the disciplinary decision, his claim is not cognizable under

section 1983.

Accordingly, the district court's judgment is affirmed. See 8th Cir.

R. 47B.

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                   DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                         13,780
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  0
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               14,780
<PP&E>                                         128,911
<DEPRECIATION>                                 88,250
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 58,940
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          1,875,753
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       652
<OTHER-SE>                                     (1,817,465)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   58,940
<SALES>                                        0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               5,541
<CGS>                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               3,636,646
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (3,631,105)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (3,631,105)
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (3,631,105)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  (0.57)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (0.57)
        


</TABLE>
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF CO-PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICERS AND PRINCIPAL

FINANCIAL OFFICER

PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION
1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

Each of the undersigned hereby certifies, in accordance with 18 U.S.C. 1350,
as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, in his or her capacity as an officer of American Technology Corporation (the Company), that, to his or her knowledge, the Annual Report of the Company on Form
10-K for the fiscal year ended September 30, 2008 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (except as to the due date for filing) and that the information contained in such report fairly
presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operation of the Company as of the dates and for the periods presented in the financial statements included in such report.

Dated: December 4, 2008



|                                                   
|---------------------------------------------------
|/s/    THOMAS R.
BROWN                             
|Thomas R. Brown, President, Chief Executive Officer
|(Principal Executive Officer)                      
|                                                   
|/s/    KATHERINE H.
MCDERMOTT                      
|Katherine H. McDermott Chief Financial Officer     
|(Principal Financial Officer)                      

This certification accompanies the Form 10-K to which it relates, is not deemed filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of American Technology Corporation under the Securities Act of 1934, as amended (whether made before or after the date of the Form 10-K), irrespective of
any general incorporation language contained in such filing.
Date: 

 Time:

 Location:

Preflight Checklist

1.) A complete pre-flight systematic check by the PIC of the Phantom’s physical condition, i.e. 

props, prop guards, landing gear, position indicator lights, battery capacity and overall 

airframe condition. If any of the above are not within the manufacturers minimum 

standards no flight will take place until such time as the issue(s) is repaired to 

manufacturers standards. 

2.) Written documentation of each physical inspection and repairs if any, by the PIC (pilot in 

command) will be kept with the Phantom and will be on-site and available for review.

3.) Software in relation to the Phantom’s operation will be checked for proper function. The 

most current DJI APP and the current firmware will be installed to assure the most up to 

date safety features. 

4.) Prior to every flight, the compass on the Phantom 3 Professional will be calibrated as to 

ensure precision location.

5.) John Desmedt will ensure the altimeter setting on the Phantom 3 Professional is that of AGL 

(above ground level) rather than GPS or barometric pressure derived settings.

6.) Every safety feature offered through the DJI APP will be enabled for every flight, every time.

Additions to the checklist as deemed warranted by the PIC and the Observer/Spotter as warranted 

by the flight, area, weather conditions etc.

_________________________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________________________
# In the United States Court of Federal Claims

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

No. 19

- 0524 V

UNPUBLISHED

DAYNA CLARK

,

Petitioner,

v.

SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND

HUMAN SERVICES,

Respondent. Chief Special Master Corcoran

Filed: August 3, 2020

Special Processing Unit (SPU) ;

Rul ing on Entitlement; Concession;

Table Injury; Influenza (Flu) Vaccine;

Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine

Administration (SIRVA)

Gerald S . Sack, Law Offices of Gerald S. Sack, L LC, West Hartford, CT , for petitioner.

Althea Walker Davis , U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.

RULING ON ENTITLEMENT 1

On April 10, 2019

, Dayna C lark filed a petition for compensation under the National

Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, 42 U.S.C. §300aa

- 10, et seq

. 2 (the “Vaccine

Act”). Petitioner alleges that she suffered a left Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine Injury

(SIRVA) as a result of an influenza ( “ flu ” ) vaccination administered on October 10, 2017

. Second Amended Petit ion at Preamble (ECF 27) . The case was assigned to the Special

Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters.

On August 3, 2020

, R espondent filed his Rule 4(c) report in which he concedes

that P etitioner is entitled to compensa tion in this case. Respondent’s Rule 4(c) Report at

1. Specifically, it is R espondent ’ s position that Petitioner has satisf ied the criteria set forth

in the Vaccine Injury Table and Qualifications and Aids to Interpretation: “ petitioner had

1 Because this unpublished ruling contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, I am required

to post it on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website in accordance with the E

- Government Act

of 2002. 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2012) (Federal Management and Promotion of Electronic Government

Services). This means the ruling will be available to anyone with access to the internet. In accordance

with Vaccine Rule 18(b), Petitioner has 14 days to identify and move to redact medical or other information,

the disclosure of which would constitute an unwarranted invasion of privacy. If, upon review, I agree that

the identified material fits within this definition, I will redact such material from public access.

2 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, Pub. L. No. 99

- 660, 100 Stat. 3755

. Hereinafter, for ease

of citation, all “§” references to the Vaccine Act will be to the pertinent subpara graph of 42 U.S.C. § 300aa

(2012 ).2 no history of pain, inflammation, or d ysfunction in her left shoulder; her pai n and reduced

range of motion occurred within 48 hours of receipt of an intramuscular vaccination; her

sy mptoms were limited to the shoulder in whi ch the vaccine was administered; and no

other condition or abnormality was identified to explain her symptoms. ” ECF 33 at 5

- 6

.

In view of R espondent’s position and the evidence of record, I find that

P etitioner is entitle d to compensation.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/ Brian H. Corcoran

Brian H. Corcoran

Chief Special Master
TLLP EX.10.14 12.31.2013






Exhibit 10.14


2014 Incentive Compensation Program


On February 7, 2014, the Chairman of the Board and independent directors, acting pursuant to authority delegated by the Board of Directors (the "Board"), approved the participation of the Company’s President and Vice President of Operations in the Tesoro Corporation 2014 Incentive Compensation Program (the “2014 ICP” or the “2014 Program”). In addition, the Board approved the target payout for such officers. Similar to the 2013 Program, the 2014 Program consists of two equally weighted components: Tesoro Corporation’s overall performance and Business Unit performance outlined below. The performance results of Tesoro Corporation and the individual business units may be adjusted to take into account unbudgeted business decisions, unusual or non-recurring items, and other factors, as approved by Tesoro Corporation’s Compensation Committee, to determine the total amount, if any, available under the 2014 ICP. The Chairman of the Board and independent directors of the Company have discretion to adjust individual awards, if any, for Company executives based on their assessment of an individual executive’s performance relative to successful achievement of goals, business plan execution and other leadership attributes.


Component 1 - Corporate Performance - measured against target with the range of outcomes between 0% to 200%. Tesoro Corporation performance metrics include the following:


		
	•
	Achievement of earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization ("EBITDA") measured on a margin neutral basis (this is the more heavily weighted metric, constituting 50% of the bonus opportunity for the corporate performance component);


		
	•
	Safety - Targeted improvement in recordable incidents (this metric constitutes 5% of the bonus opportunity for the corporate performance component);


		
	•
	Process Safety Management - Targeted improvement in the number of process safety incidents (this metric constitutes 5% of the bonus opportunity for the corporate performance component);


		
	•
	Environmental - Targeted improvements in the number of environmental incidents (this metric constitutes 5% of the bonus opportunity for the corporate performance component); 


		
	•
	Cost Management - Measurement of non-capital cash expenditure versus budget (this metric constitutes 17.5% of the bonus opportunity for the corporate performance component); and


		
	•
	Business Improvement - Targeted improvements from value creation projects/initiatives (this metric constitutes 17.5% of the bonus opportunity for the corporate performance component).




Component 2 - Business Unit Performance - measured against target with the range of outcomes between 0% to 200%. Business Unit performance is measured through balanced scorecards with performance metrics including, but not limited to:


		
	•
	Safety and Environmental;


		
	•
	Cost Management;


		
	•
	Improvements in EBITDA; and


		
	•
	Business improvement and value creation initiatives.
EXHIBIT 32.1





CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER





PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 (18 U.S.C. 1350)





In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2016 (the “Report”) of New Mountain Finance Corporation (the “Registrant”), as filed with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Robert A. Hamwee, the Chief Executive Officer of the Registrant, hereby certify, to the best of my knowledge, that:





|    |                                                                                                                                  
|--- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|(1) | The Report 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 Registrant.




/s/ ROBERT A. HAMWEEName:Robert A. HamweeDate:November 8, 2016
#### Luther CAIN v. STATE of Mississippi.

No. 47668.

Supreme Court of Mississippi.

Feb. 4, 1974.

Brewer, Deaton & Evans, Greenwood, for appellant.

A. F. Summer, Atty. Gen., by Karen Gilfoy, Sp. Asst. Atty. Gen., Jackson, for appellee.

WALKER, Justice:

Appellant, Luther Cain, was indicted for arson by the Grand Jury of Leflore County, Mississippi, tried at the March 1973 term of circuit court, convicted and sentenced to serve a term of ten years in the state penitentiary with two years suspended. From that conviction and sentence, he prosecutes this appeal. We affirm.

Appellant assigns as error that the verdict of the jury was contrary to the overwhelming weight of the credible evidence and that the trial court erred in overruling his motion for a new trial.

A recital of the facts admitted into evidence would serve no useful purpose. However, we would point out that two eyewitnesses testified that Cain, whom they knew, approached the house in question with a gas can, poured gas thereon and set fire thereto. A third witness for the State testified that on the morning of November 20, 1972, the date of the occurrence, Cain had come to her house and caused a disturbance; and, that before leaving, he stated that he was going to get her if it was the last thing he did, “. . . if he had to burn it [the house] down on me.” She also stated that she saw him approach the house immediately before the fire with a gas can, at which time she ran to the telephone to call the police; and that when she returned from placing the call, she looked through a window and saw the front porch burning.

The defendant put on four witnesses who testified that they saw three young boys start the fire and that the appellant Cain was not one of them. The credibility of these witnesses was put in 'serious doubt upon cross-examination by the State.

The conflicting evidence presented a classic jury issue and we are unable to say that the verdict was manifestly wrong or the result of bias, passion, prejudice, fraud or corruption.

Affirmed.

GILLESPIE, C. J., and INZER, ROBERTSON and BROOM, JJ., concur.
Ex 4.2a 2013 Class B Amendment






AMENDMENT TO
RESTATED STOCKHOLDERS AGREEMENT
REGARDING MANAGEMENT AND TRANSFER OF
SHARES OF CLASS B COMMON STOCK OF
FBL FINANCIAL GROUP, INC.
EFFECTIVE FEBRUARY 14, 2013






WHEREAS, FBL Financial Group, Inc. (“FBL”) and the holders of the Class B common stock of FBL, have all entered into a stockholders agreement last restated effective February 14, 2013 (“Class B Shareholders Agreement”); and


WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 11.02 of the Class B Shareholders Agreement, the agreement may be amended in writing effective when signed by FBL and the holders of at least two-thirds of the outstanding Class B common stock; and 


WHEREAS, holders of at least two-thirds of the Class B common stock and FBL wish to amend the Class B Shareholders Agreement as hereinafter provided.


NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises contained in the Class B Shareholders Agreement, and other good and valuable consideration, the parties below hereby agree as follows:


1.    Effective August 26, 2013, the Class B Shareholders Agreement shall be amended by deleting Section 10 in its entirety and inserting in lieu thereof the following:


“10.  Term. This agreement shall terminate upon the occurrence of any of the following events:


		
	(a)
	Cessation of the Company’s business;


		
	(b)
	The bankruptcy, receivership or dissolution of the Company;


		
	(c)
	The voluntary agreement of Stockholders who are then bound by the terms hereof and who then own at least two-thirds of the outstanding Shares of Class B Common Stock;


		
	(d)
	The effectiveness of a Sale Transaction or a Merger Transaction.”




IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this amendment to be executed by the duly authorized representatives as of the dates noted below.








[SIGNATURES ON FOLLOWING PAGE]















FBL FINANCIAL GROUP, INC.






/S/ JAMES P. BRANNEN
By:    ___________________________________        
James P. Brannen




Its:        Chief Executive Officer            Date:    8/26/13










IOWA FARM BUREAU FEDERATION
(representing two-thirds of Class B Common Shares)




/S/ CRAIG D. HILL
By:    ___________________________________        
Craig D. Hill




Its:        President                    Date:    8/26/13
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM (A) BALANCE
SHEET AND CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS FOR THE YEAR ENDED JANUARY 3,
1999 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH (B) 10-K
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JAN-03-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             DEC-29-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JAN-03-1999
<CASH>                                          16,863
<SECURITIES>                                    13,567
<RECEIVABLES>                                   15,679
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     11,191
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                64,629
<PP&E>                                         194,323
<DEPRECIATION>                                  25,341
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 255,527
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           14,893
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       186,764
<OTHER-SE>                                      26,298
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   255,527
<SALES>                                        211,761
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               213,892
<CGS>                                           60,468
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  184,688
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 7,001
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 22,203
<INCOME-TAX>                                     7,549
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             14,654
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                      (3,916)
<NET-INCOME>                                    10,738
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.42
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.42
        

</TABLE>