alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
AD Economic Evaluation

Docket No. FAA-2011-1182 Directorate ID: 2010-SW-010-AD

Airworthiness Directives; Bell Helicopter Textron, Inc. (Bell), Model 205A–1, 205B, 210, and 

212 Helicopters.

Number of Helicopters (U.S. Operators): We estimate 132 helicopters of U.S. registry.

Reason: This amendment supersedes an existing airworthiness directive (AD) for Bell

Model 205B and 212 helicopters with certain main rotor blade (blade) assemblies installed. That 

AD requires washing the upper and lower surfaces of each blade and visually inspecting the grip 

plates, doublers, and the remaining upper and lower surfaces of the blades in the area between 

blade stations 24.5 to 40 for an edge void, corrosion, or a crack. This amendment retains the 

requirements of that AD for the affected part-numbered blades but increases the scope and 

frequency of the inspections and expands the applicability to include the Model 205A–1 and 210 

helicopters, additional blade part numbers, and all helicopter serial numbers for the affected

helicopter models. This amendment also requires applying a light coat of preservative oil

(C–125) to all surfaces of the blade in addition to the inspection areas as required in the

existing AD. This amendment is prompted by an additional report of a fatigue crack on a blade 

installed on a Model 212 helicopter. The actions specified by this AD are intended to detect an 

edge void, corrosion, or a crack on a blade, and to prevent loss of a blade and subsequent loss of 

control of the helicopter. 

Costs:

Parts per Helicopter $85,597 for a replacement

blade.

Labor per Helicopter

(XX x $85/work-hour)

Washing and inspecting each blade: about 1

work hour X $85 = $85.

Replacing a blade with an airworthy blade: about 24 

work hours X $85 = 2,040. 

Other (Explain)

Total Cost per Helicopter $85 for inspection; $87,637 to replace blade. 

Total US Fleet Cost $356,917, assuming that 24 inspections are done 

each year on each helicopter and that 1 blade is 

replaced.

Executive Order 12866:

Could the AD be considered a “significant regulatory action?” Yes ( ) No ()

DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures:

Is the AD significant? Yes ( ) Explain Below No ()

Regulatory Flexibility Act:

Will the AD have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities?
Yes ( ) No ()

Project Engineer: Michael Kohner
HON. UTA INDZEL COHEN (RETIRED) MEMBER 309 MEADOW LANE MERION. PA 19066

Honorable Ray LaHood secretary ofTransportation 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE Washington, DC 200590

Dear Secretary LaHood: 

### HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA HARRISBURG 

### S I 0-1 OOClI ()-023

PHONE: (610) 667-7795 E-MAIL; iitacohenfWcomcast. r.et

Because my ten year old grandson has a severe peanut allergy and travels often by air with his parents, I felt it necessary tocontactyou concerning the proposed airtravel rules. I have founded the Food Allergy Research Initiative (FARI), an unique project designed to studythe immune system and identify and target key cells ofthat immune system by using immune modulation to alter the response ofthese cells
. There are many facets involved with these allergies
. Obviously, seriously sensitive children and adults run the risk of instant death upon exposure to the irritating sources. Needless to say, airplane travel is difficult and hazardous for these individuals. Iwould be more than happy to testify and/or present information concerning these allergies and airplane travel. I am in touch with numerous people touched in some way by this issue, and I believe that I could be ofassistance to you in yourendeavor. Respectful/y,
II 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 2076 

To suspend temporarily the duty on titanium dioxide. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

OCTOBER 29, 2009 

Mr. CASEY introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred 

to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To suspend temporarily the duty on titanium dioxide. 

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

3 SECTION 1. TITANIUM DIOXIDE. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter II of chapter 99 of 

5 the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is 

6 amended by inserting in numerical sequence the following 

7 new heading: 

‘‘ 9902.01.00 Titanium dioxide, containing 

80 percent or more by weight 

based on the dry matter 

(CAS No. 13463–67–7) (provided for in subheading 

3206.11.00) ........................... Free No change No change On or before 

12/31/2011 ’’. 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 2076 IS

1 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

2 subsection (a) applies to goods entered, or withdrawn from 

3 warehouse for consumption, on or after the 15th day after 

4 the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
Exhibit 21.1

Subsidiaries of the Registrant

|Name of Subsidiary                   |                                                   | Jurisdiction of Incorporation
|------------------------------------ | ------------------------------------------------- | -----------------------------
|Manhattan Bagel Company, Inc.        |                                                   | New Jersey                   
|Chesapeake Bagel Franchise Corp.     |                                                   | New Jersey                   
|                                     | (f/k/a Chesapeake Bagel Bakery Acquisition Corp.) |                              
|Willoughby's Incorporated            |                                                   | Connecticut                  
|Manhattan Bagel Company Genesee, LLC |                                                   | New York                     
|New World ENBCDEB Corp.              |                                                   | New York                     
|Einstein and Noah Corp.              |                                                   | Delaware                     
|                                     | (f/k/a Einstein Acquisition Corp.)                |                              
|Einstein/Noah Bagel Partners, Inc.   |                                                   | California                   
|I. & J. Bagel, Inc.                  |                                                   | California                   
|Paragon Bakeries, Inc.               |                                                   | New Jersey                   

---

QuickLinks
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 Report on Form 10-K of Investors Financial Services Corp. (the "Company") for the period ending December 31, 2003 as filed on
February 20, 2004 and amended on the date hereof by the filing of an amendment on Form 10-K/A (the "Report"), I, Kevin J. Sheehan, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, hereby certify,
pursuant to 18. U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to my knowledge:



|/s/KEVIN J. SHEEHANKevin J. Sheehan
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
November 15, 2004 |  | 
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ |  | 

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Investors Financial Services Corp. and will be retained by
Investors Financial Services Corp. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

In
connection with the Report on Form 10-K of Investors Financial Services Corp. (the "Company") for the period ending December 31, 2003 as filed on February 20,
2004 and amended on the date hereof by the filing of an amendment on Form 10-K/A (the "Report"), I, John N. Spinney, Jr., Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, hereby certify,
pursuant to 18. U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to my knowledge:



|/s/JOHN N. SPINNEY, JR.John N. Spinney, Jr.
Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
November 15, 2004 |  | 
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |  | 

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Investors Financial Services Corp. and will be retained by
Investors Financial Services Corp. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

---



QuickLinks
Exhibit 32.2

Certification Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

The undersigned hereby certifies that,
to his or her knowledge, (i) the Form 10-Q filed by Cape Fear Bank Corporation (the Issuer) for the quarter ended June 30, 2006, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, and (ii) the information contained in that report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Issuer on the dates and for the periods presented therein.



|                        |  |                        
|----------------------- |  | -----------------------
|Date: November 10, 2006 |  | /s/ Betty V. Norris    
|                        |  | Betty V. Norris        
|                        |  | Chief Financial Officer
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Miguel Cruz, Appellant.

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Clifford Scott, J.), rendered on June 28, 1989, convicting defendant of attempted robbery in the third degree and sentencing defendant to an indeterminate term of imprisonment of 1 Vi to 3 years, unanimously affirmed.

Application by appellant’s counsel to withdraw as counsel is granted. *(See, Anders v California,*386 US 738; *People v Saunders,*52 AD2d 833.) We have reviewed this record and agree with appellant’s assigned counsel that there are no non-frivolous points which could be raised on this appeal.

Pursuant to CPL 460.20, defendant has the right to apply for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals by making application to the Chief Judge of that court and by submitting such application to the Clerk of that court or to a Justice of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of this Department on reasonable notice to the respondent within thirty (30) days after service of a copy of this order, with notice of entry.

Denial of the application for permission to appeal by the Judge or Justice first applied to is final and no new application may thereafter be made to any other Judge or Justice. Concur—Milonas, J. P., Rosenberger, Kassal and Rubin, JJ.
#### Terry Hugh KELSO, Appellant, v. STATE of Oklahoma, Appellee.

No. F-86-34.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma.

May 26, 1987.

*1226Wesley E. Johnson, Tulsa, for appellant.

Michael C. Turpén, Atty. Gen., Tomilou Gentry Liddell, Asst. Atty. Gen., Oklahoma City, for appellee.

OPINION

BRETT, Presiding Judge:

The appellant, Terry Hugh Kelso, was convicted by jury in the District Court of Tulsa County, Case No. CRF-84-4402, of Murder in the First Degree and Assault and Battery With a Dangerous Weapon. He was sentenced to life imprisonment and ten years’ imprisonment, respectively, with the sentences to run concurrently.

The only assignment of error urged on appeal is that the trial court erred in refusing to grant probation. This complaint is premised on a statement by the Honorable Joe Jennings, District Judge, wherein he expressed his sentiment that “[First-Degree Murder is] an offense that the court considers not to be a probationary type case_” Appellant’s construction of this statement is that Judge Jennings did not know that he has the authority to suspend all or part of a life sentence.

We disagree. We believe that a fairer reading of the statement is that Judge Jennings believes probation is inappropriate, rather than unauthorized, in first-degree murder cases.

The granting of a suspended sentence lies within the trial court’s discretion, and that decision will not-be disturbed on appeal absent abuse of discretion. *White v. State,*702 P.2d 1058 (Okl.Cr.1985). This Court is unable to say that Judge Jennings abused his discretion since this Court was not presented even the barest facts underlying the conviction. All the record before this Court shows is that, according to the information, the appellant shot and killed Bobby Jack Reynolds and also shot Gregory Martin Sharp. Accordingly, the judgments and sentences are AFFIRMED.

In closing, we note that the Attorney General does not dispute appellant’s contention that a trial judge has the authority to suspend a life sentence. The appellant may again apply for a suspended sentence within ten days of the final order of this Court. *See*22 O.S.1981, § 994.

PARKS, J. concurs.

BUSSEY, J., concurs in results.
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-50129

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

MAURICIO ALEXANDER DIAZ-LARIO,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. 2:13-CR-870-1

Before KING, JOLLY, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Mauricio Alexander Diaz-Lario (Diaz) appeals the 80-month, withinguidelines sentence imposed following his conviction of illegal reentry into the 

United States. He argues that the sentence is substantively unreasonable and 

greater than necessary to meet the goals of 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a). Diaz asserts 

that when sentencing him, the district court failed to account for his personal 

history and circumstances, including that his motive for returning was to 

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not 

be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH 

CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

December 1, 2014

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 

 Case: 14-50129 Document: 00512852797 Page: 1 Date Filed: 12/01/2014
No. 14-50129

escape a gang in El Salvador and that he had a past addiction to cocaine. He 

maintains that the presumption of reasonableness should not apply to his 

sentence because U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2 is not supported by empirical data, but he 

acknowledges that this argument is foreclosed. See United States v. 

Mondragon-Santiago, 564 F.3d 357 (5th Cir. 2009).

We review sentences for reasonableness in light of the § 3553(a) factors, 

applying an abuse of discretion standard. Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 

49-50 (2007). Under the bifurcated review process adopted in Gall, we first 

consider whether the district court committed procedural error and next 

examine the sentence for substantive reasonableness. Id. at 51; United States 

v. Johnson, 619 F.3d 469, 471-72 (5th Cir. 2010). 

The district court considered Diaz’s request for a low sentence and for a 

reduction in his criminal history category and ultimately determined that a 

sentence within the advisory guidelines range was appropriate under the 

circumstances and the § 3553(a) factors. Diaz’s argument that the court failed 

to consider his personal history and characteristics is insufficient to rebut the 

presumption of reasonableness afforded his within-guidelines sentence. See 

United States v. Gomez-Herrera, 523 F.3d 554, 565-66 (5th Cir. 2008); United 

States v. Rodriguez, 523 F.3d 519, 526 (5th Cir. 2008); see also Gall, 552 U.S. 

at 51 (“The fact that the appellate court might reasonably have concluded that 

a different sentence was appropriate is insufficient to justify reversal of the 

district court.”). Therefore, Diaz has failed to show that his 80-month, withinguidelines sentence is substantively unreasonable. 

AFFIRMED.

2

 Case: 14-50129 Document: 00512852797 Page: 2 Date Filed: 12/01/2014
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2185 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

111th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 2185

   To extend the temporary suspension of duty on mixtures of tris(4-
isocyanatophenyl)thiophosphate and ethyl acetate and monochlorobenzene 
                              as solvents.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            October 29, 2009

Mr. Specter (for himself and Mr. Casey) introduced the following bill; 
     which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To extend the temporary suspension of duty on mixtures of tris(4-
isocyanatophenyl)thiophosphate and ethyl acetate and monochlorobenzene 
                              as solvents.

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

SECTION 1. MIXTURES OF TRIS(4-ISOCYANATOPHENYL)THIOPHOSPHATE AND ETHYL 
              ACETATE AND MONOCHLOROBENZENE AS SOLVENTS.

    (a) In General.--Heading 9902.12.17 of the Harmonized Tariff 
Schedule of the United States (relating to mixtures of tris(4-
isocyanatophenyl)thiophosphate and ethyl acetate and monochlorobenzene 
as solvents) is amended by striking ``12/31/2009'' and inserting ``12/
31/2011''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or 
after the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
**Exhibit 32.2**

 

**WrittenStatement of the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer**

 

**Pursuantto Section 906**

 

**ofthe Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. Section 1350)**

 

Theundersigned, the Chief Executive Officer and the Chief Financial Officer ofEmergency Medical Services Corporation, as general partner of Emergency MedicalServices L.P., a Delaware limited partnership (the “Company”), each herebycertifies that, to his knowledge on the date hereof:

 

(a)          the Form 10-Qof the Company for the fiscal quarter ended March 31, 2008, filed on thedate hereof with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), fullycomplies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

(b)         the informationcontained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 
|   | /s/ William A. Sanger                                                                            |
|--------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   | William A. Sanger                                                                                |
|   | Chief Executive Officer                                                                          |
|   | Emergency Medical  Services Corporation, as  general partner of Emergency Medical  Services L.P. |
|   | May 9, 2008                                                                                 |
|   |                                                                                             |
|   | /s/ Randel G. Owen                                                                               |
|   | Randel G. Owen                                                                                   |
|   | Chief Financial Officer                                                                          |
|   | Emergency Medical  Services Corporation, as  general partner of Emergency Medical  Services L.P. |
|   | May 9, 2008                                                                                 |

 

35

----
II 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1861 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide a 2-year extension 

of the increased rehabilitation credit for structures in the Gulf Opportunity Zone. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

OCTOBER 22, 2009 

Ms. LANDRIEU (for herself, Mr. WICKER, and Mr. VITTER) introduced the 

following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide 

a 2-year extension of the increased rehabilitation credit 

for structures in the Gulf Opportunity Zone. 

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

3 SECTION 1. 2-YEAR EXTENSION OF INCREASED REHABILI4 TATION CREDIT FOR STRUCTURES IN THE 

5 GULF OPPORTUNITY ZONE. 

6 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 1400N(h) of the Internal 

7 Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by striking ‘‘December 

8 31, 2009’’ and inserting ‘‘December 31, 2011’’. 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 1861 IS

1 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

2 this section shall apply to expenditures paid or incurred 

3 after December 31, 2009. 

Æ 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with BILLS
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

I, Jeffrey J. ONeill, as Chief Executive Officer of Einstein Noah Restaurant Group, Inc. (the Company), certify, pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



| | (1) | the Annual Report of the Company on Form 10-K for the year ended December 29, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (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.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                  |  |  |  |     |  |                                                                       
|----------------- |  |  |  | --- |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------------
|February 25, 2010 |  |  |  | By: |  | /S/    JEFFREY J. ONEILL                                             
|                  |  |  |  |     |  | Jeffrey J. ONeill Chief Executive Officer Principal Executive
Officer

This certification is furnished with this Report on Form 10-K pursuant to Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by such Act, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the Exchange Act). Such
certification will not be deemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Exchange Act, except to the extent that the Company specifically incorporates it by reference.