alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
• 08/26/2010 15:58 FAX 3107256816 AWP-7 121002 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS 

WASHINGTON, D.C 

In the Matter of BUD F. RAYMOND, * FAA Docket No.: CP10WP 0001 

* 

Respondent. * FAA Region: Western-Pacific 

* Judge: Richard C. Goodwin 

* DMS No.: FAA-2010-0018 

MOTION TO WITHDRAW COMPLAINT 

To: The Honorable Richard C Goodwin and Respondent through his attorneys 1 lerein: 

The Regional Counsel for the Western-Pacific Region, Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA) through counsel, hereby files this Motion for Withdrawal of 

Complaint and seeks dismissal of this action, with prejudice. This motion is baj;ed on the 

fact the parties have settled this matter. 

Respectfiilly submitted, 

Naomi Tsuda-^ 

Regional Counsej 

By: 

Dafe 

AUG 2 6 2010 
• 08/26/2010 15:58 FAl 3107256816 

r 

AWP-7 11003 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I hereby certify that on this date I have faxed and placed in the United St i tes mail, 

postage prepaid, the executed original of the MOTION TO WITlclDRAW 

COMPLAINT, addressed as follows: 

The Honorable Richard C. Goodwin 

Administrative Law Judge 

OfBce of Hearings, M-20 

U.S. Department of Trasnportation 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. 

East Building Ground Floor, Room El2-320 

Washington DC 20590 

Facsimile: (202)366-7536 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue, S.W. 

Washington DC 20591 

Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Wilbur Wright Building- Suite 2W1000 

Facsimile: (202) 493-5142 

Dated: AUG 2 6 2010 

Arthur Wasserman, Esq. 

LAW OFFICE OF ARTHUR WASSERMAN 

16380 Roscoe Boulevard, Suite 120 

Van NuySjCA 91406 

Facsimile: (818)895-0675 

Jeff Kambei;;^^^ ^ 

Legal Technician 

Office of the Regional Counsels 

Federal Aviation Administration 

Western-Pacific Region 

Hawthorne, California
#### J. Bradley Scott et al., Respondents, *v.*Benjamin McClung, as Mayor of the City of Newburgh, et al., Appellants.

*Scott*v. *McClung,*161 App. Div. 890, affirmed.

(Argued February 3, 1916;

decided March 24, 1916.)

Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the second judicial department, entered February 6, 1914, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiffs entered upon a decision of the court on trial *702at Special Term in an action for an injunction. The question involved is the right of the city of Newburgh to permanently improve Grand street, one of its principal thoroughfares, by laying a modern pavement thereon. The charter of the city contains a provision in substance that after any street shall have been once graded according to the grade line fixed by order of the city council, the grade of that street shall not be changed except upon petition. The respondents seek to enjoin the improvement, alleging that the contemplated improvement violates this charter provision, because it involves a change of grade in the street to be improved, and such change of grade has not been petitioned for. The appellants contend that the changes in the surface of the street incident to the laying of a modern pavement thereon do not constitute a change of grade within the meaning of that term, and that in any event it does not appear that the grade of the street as established by order of the city council is in any degree affected by the contemplated improvement.

*Graham Witschief, Corporation Counsel (John B. Corwin*of counsel), for appellants.

*Howard Thornton, W. F. Cassedy*and *J. B. Scott*for respondents.

Judgment affirmed, with costs, on the ground that according to the findings unanimously affirmed there was a change of grade; no opinion.

Concur: Willard Bartlett, Ch. J., Hiscock, Chase, Collin, Hogan, Cardozo and Seabury-, JJ.
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO  18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,  AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Huntsman Advanced Materials LLC (the "Company") for the period ended June 30,
2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Peter R. Huntsman, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §
1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to my knowledge:



|/s/PETER R. HUNTSMANPeter R. Huntsman Chief Executive OfficerAugust 10, 2005 |  | 
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------- |  | 

---



QuickLinks
<TABLE> <S> <C>
                                              
<ARTICLE>                                          5

                                                    
<S>                                                <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                      12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                  DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                       DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                                 216,337
<SECURITIES>                                            90,000
<RECEIVABLES>                                                0
<ALLOWANCES>                                                 0
<INVENTORY>                                                  0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                       554,032
<PP&E>                                                  95,977
<DEPRECIATION>                                         (15,159)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                       2,608,034
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                1,073,937
<BONDS>                                                      0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                        0
<PREFERRED>                                                  0
<COMMON>                                               169,590
<OTHER-SE>                                           4,819,772
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                         2,608,034
<SALES>                                                 33,091
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                        33,091
<CGS>                                                   50,547
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                           50,547
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     2,774,875
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                             0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                     132,304
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                     (2,751,598)
<INCOME-TAX>                                                 0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                 (2,751,598)
<DISCONTINUED>                                        (774,020)
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                              0
<CHANGES>                                                    0
<NET-INCOME>                                        (3,525,618)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                                (.23)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                (.23)
        
 

</TABLE>
##### 



EXHIBIT (31.2)
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
RULE 13A-14 OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 I, Caroline Rook, certify that:  1.
    I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q/A of PeopleSupport, Inc.;2.
    Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue
statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact
necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances
under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to
the period covered by this report;3.
    Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this report, fairly present in all material
respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows
of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this
report;4.
    The registrants other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as
defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the
registrant and have:  (a)
    Designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that
material information relating to the registrant, including its
consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those
entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being
prepared;(b)
    Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls
and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the
effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end
of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and(c)
    Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal
control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrants
most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is
reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal
control over financial reporting; and  5.
    The registrants other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed,
based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial
reporting, to the registrants auditors and the audit committee of the
registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
functions):  (a)
    All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or
operation of internal control which could adversely affect the
registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report
financial information; and(b)
    Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the registrants internal
controls. Date: February 25, 2005 /s/ Caroline Rook Chief Financial Officer
(Principal Financial and Accounting Officer) 43
EXHIBIT 32.2





CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL


FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO


18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,


AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002








In connection with this Amendment No. 1 to the quarterly report of Profire Energy, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q/A for the period ended September 30, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Andrew Limpert, Chief Financial Officer of 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 Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13 (a) or 15 (d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.











Date:
March 17, 2011

By:
/s/ Andrew LimpertAndrew LimpertChief Financial Officer(Principal Financial Officer)
##### 



Exhibit 10.1
 BIRMINGHAM BLOOMFIELD BANCSHARES, INC.
2006 STOCK INCENTIVE PLAN
 1.
    
    PURPOSE
  2.
    
    DEFINITIONS




---



##### 


































---



##### 




         3.
    
    SHARES AVAILABLE UNDER THE PLAN
 Shares Subject to the Plan




---



##### 



Forfeited Awards
 Shares Used to Pay Exercise Price and Taxes
 Adjustments on Changes in Stock
 4.
    
    ADMINISTRATION
 Procedure
 Powers of the Committee




---



##### 



Effect of Decision of the Committee and Board of Directors
 Liability of Board of Directors or the Committee
 5.
    
    ELIGIBILITY
  6.
    
    TERMS AND CONDITIONS APPLICABLE TO OPTIONS UNDER THE PLAN
  Medium and Time of Payment
 Number of Shares




---



##### 



Designation of Option
 Exercise Price
 Option Term
 Exercise of Options
 Stock Certificates
  Date of Exercise




---



##### 



Termination of Service
 Transferability
 No Rights as a Participant
 No Rights as a Shareholder
 Tax Withholding
  Change of Control




---



##### 



Additional Restrictions and Conditions
 Repricing
 7.
    
    AMENDMENT AND TERMINATION OF THE PLAN
   8.
    
    LEGALITY OF GRANT




---



##### 



9.
    
    NO EMPLOYMENT/SERVICE RIGHTS
   10.
    
    EFFECTIVE DATE
  11.
    
    RESERVATION OF SHARES
  12.
    
    MINIMUM CAPITAL REQUIREMENTS




---



##### 



13.
    
    ADMINISTRATION OF PLAN
  14.
    
    GENERAL
 Burden and Benefit
 Interpretation
 Costs and Expenses
 Unfunded Status of Plan




---



##### 



Governing Law
 Severability
 Certain Conflicts
 Notices
 IN WITNESS WHEREOF
 BIRMINGHAM BLOOMFIELD BANCSHARESBy:Robert Farr, President
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906
OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the quarterly report of QC Holdings, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q
for the period ended March 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Douglas E. Nickerson, Chief Financial Officer of 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 Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (2) | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dated: May 9, 2007



/s/ Douglas E. NickersonDouglas E. NickersonChief Financial Officer




Page 32
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





Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, and in
connection with the annual report on Form 10-K of Simtrol, Inc. (the "Company")
for the year ended December 31, 20089 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on or about the date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned, who are
the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, each
hereby certify that (1) the Report fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and (2) the
information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.





This Certification shall not, except to
the extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed for
purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.





This Certification is signed on March
26, 2010.





/s/ Oliver M. Cooper,
IIIOliver
      M. Cooper, IIIPresident
      and Chief Executive Officer/s/ Stephen N. SampStephen
      N. SampChief
      Financial Officer
<PAGE>
 
                                  Exhibit 24

                               POWER OF ATTORNEY


       KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, that the undersigned constitutes and
appoints Frank L. Conner, his true and lawful attorney in fact and agent with
full powers of substitution and resubstitution, for him and in his name, place
and stead, in any and all capacities to sign the Annual Report on Form 10-K, and
any or all amendments thereto (including post-effective amendments), to be filed
by American Freightways Corporation in accordance with the rules and regulations
governed by the Securities and Exchange Commission.

       IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned hereby sets his hand this 4th day of
February, 1997.



/s/Ben A. Garrison
----------------------------------------
Ben A. Garrison, Director



State of  Arkansas  )
                    )
County of  Boone    )

       This 4th day of Febuary, 1997, personally came before me Ben A. Garrison,
who, being by me duly sworn says that he is a Director for American Freightways
Corporation, an Arkansas corporation, and that said writing was signed and
sealed by him, on behalf of said corporation, by its authority given.



                                      /s/Serena McBee
                                      ------------------------------------
                                      Notary Public


My commission expires:    3-28-04
                      ---------------



                                                (SEAL)
## F IRST 

## D ISTRICT 

## C OURT OF 

## A PPEAL 

## S TATE OF 

## F LORIDA

_____________________________
No. 1D2022

- 2275

_____________________________
S ARA R IDGEWAY ,
Appellant,

v.

S TATE OF F LORIDA ,
Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Dixie County

. Jennifer Jones Johnson , Judge

.

July 17, 2024

B.L. T HOMAS , J.

Sar a Ridgeway challenges her judgment and sentence following a plea where she reserved the right to appeal the denial of a dispositive motion to suppress. For the following reasons

, we agree and reverse.

Here, a citizen approached a law enforcement officer and told him a woman in a nearby car was using drugs or could possibly be having a seizure. The officer approached the vehicle

, and Appellant was in the car with her head on the steering wheel, possibly sleeping. Appellant rolled down her window

, and the officer asked her to step out of the car. She accidentally put the car in reverse before she got out, but she quickly stopped it. When she2 stepped out the car began to roll back again

, and she put the car in park.

When the officer arrived , he could see there was no medical
emergency , so he did not call EMS. The officer did not smell alcohol or marijuana. Appellant was not swaying or slurring her words. The officer did not see any paraphernalia in the car. He did not see any furtive movements.

Appellant told the officer how embarrassed she was at being detained at the gas station. She was pacing and stayed close to the car; she indicated her child was in the car.

The officer asked for consent to search her car but she declined. The officer then called an officer with a dog

, who took about 10 minutes to arrive. The dog alerted

, and the car was searched , which led to her arrest.

A suspect can be detained if there was reasonable suspicion of criminal activity. The investigation into that suspicion can be for a reasonable period of time. See Flowers v. State , 290 So. 3d 642

, 644 (Fla. 1st DCA 2020). But once the investigation is over, the detention must stop. Rodriguez v. United States , 575 U.S. 348 , 357 (2015). There is no de minimis exception to an unlawful detention. Wooden v. State , 244 So. 3d 1170 , 1171 (Fla. 1st DCA 2018).

Here, the tip provided a basis for approaching Appellant. But after the officer ’ s initial investigation revealed no indication of medical emergency or drug use , there was no reasonable suspicion to hold Appellant for an additional 10 minutes to wait for the K

- 9 to ar r ive

. Accordingly, the trial court erred in denying the motion to suppress.

R EVERSED

.
B ILBREY and T ANENBAUM , JJ., concur

.3 _____________________________ Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331

.

_____________________________

Jessica J. Yeary, Public Defender, and Lori A. Willner

, Assistant Public Defender, Tallahassee, for Appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and Christina Day Piotrowski

, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent *

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision **

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff - Appellee,

 v.

URIEL CASTANEDA,

 Defendant - Appellant.

No. 10-30008

D.C. No. 2:90-cr-00323-BJR

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Washington

Barbara Jacobs Rothstein, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted August 23, 2010** 

Before: LEAVY, HAWKINS, and THOMAS, Circuit Judges. 

Uriel Castaneda appeals pro se from the district court’s order denying his 

18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) motion for reduction of sentence. We have jurisdiction

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

FILED

SEP 03 2010

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 10-30008

Castaneda contends he is entitled to a sentence reduction based on

Sentencing Guideline Amendment 484, which clarified that the attributable drug

quantity under U.S.S.G. § 2D1.1 did not include any substance that had to be

removed before the drugs were usable. The district court properly denied the

motion because Castaneda’s “sentence is not ‘based on a sentencing range that has

subsequently been lowered by the Sentencing Commission,’ as required by 

§ 3582(c)(2).” See United States v. Leniear, 574 F.3d 668, 673 (9th Cir. 2009)

(quoting 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2)); see also United States v. Sprague, 135 F.3d

1301, 1306-07. (9th Cir. 1998) (finding that it is the movant’s burden to show that

the retroactive amendment is applicable to the challenged sentence and that, under

Amendment 484, he or she must show, by a preponderance of the evidence, that

“the mixture or substance used in sentencing contained materials that must be

separated to render the controlled substance useable.”).

With respect to Castaneda’s argument that the district court denied the

motion by erroneously changing the drug amounts used in calculating his sentence,

the record reflects that the district court used the same base offense level that

applied when it imposed the original sentence, and that any discrepancy was

inadvertent. Accordingly, this argument lacks merit.
3 10-30008

Finally, because the record is devoid of any evidence that the drugs used in

calculating Castaneda’s sentence contained an unusable substance that had to be

removed prior to consumption, the district court did not abuse its discretion in

failing to hold an evidentiary hearing. See United States v. Townsend, 98 F.3d 510,

513 (9th Cir. 1996). 

AFFIRMED.
ZUCKERT SCOUTT & RASENBERGER, L.L.E 

ATTORNEY S AT LAW ' [••J\ j"».JT QT, 

888 Seventeenth Street, NW Washington, DC 2iXV6-?>5Q9 ''''''•''0\i lAt !0-N 

Telephone |202| 298-8660 Fax 1202)^2-0683 ', , i''^P^RAl k}i;!i^ 

wwwzsrlawcom 

.: ..;•:: :^; ^ s;: n 3 

RICHARD D. MATHIAS DIRECT DIAL (202) 973-7917 

rdinjlhia5@zsrlaw.com 

April 19,2011 

BY HAND 

George Wellington, Chief 

Foreign Air Carrier Licensing Division 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE 

Washington, DC 20590 

Re: Polling Results, Application of Avianca, S.A. 

for an Exemption (Docket OST-2011-0077) 

Dear Mr. WeUington: 

This is to advise that Avianca S.A. has completed polling of carrier representatives as to 

their position on the above-referenced application, filed on April 15, 2011. A copy of this letter 

is today being filed with the Department's Docket Section and served upon all parties. 

No objections were received. Accordingly, Avianca urges that the requested authority be 

granted as soon as possible. 

Sincerely, 

Richard D. Mathias 

David M. Endersbee 

Counsel to Avianca S.A. 

cc: service list