alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Louis BROWN, Jr., Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 88-1774.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

Aug. 30, 1988.

Rehearing Denied Oct. 4, 1988.

Louis Brown, Jr., pro se.

No appearance for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Pursuant to Rule 9.315(a), Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure, the trial court’s order denying Brown’s motion for existing records or motion for acquittal is AFFIRMED.

SHIVERS, JOANOS and WIGGINTON, JJ., concur.
From: Yanca, Catherine

To: Yanca, Catherine

Subject: RE: Response to 2/25 EO 12866 Comments - Tier 3

Date: Friday, May 17, 2013 1:32:38 PM

From: Sargeant, Kathryn 

Sent: Friday, March 01, 2013 9:25 AM

To: Whiteman, Chad

Cc: Charmley, William; Stewart, Lori; Ghanta, Venu; Jutras, Nathaniel; Nickerson, William; Nagelhout,

Peter; Brunner, Christine

Subject: RE: Response to 2/25 EO 12866 Comments - Tier 3

The regulatory text related to Part 1065 was not included in the original submission (and therefore

shows up as redline now) because of issues with formatting and proper amendatory language. 

However, as described in the preamble you have been reviewing (Section IV.D and IV.F, with a

scattering of additional references in other parts of the preamble), we are proposing changes to

existing CFR language; Part 1065 itself is not new.  I am pasting in a preamble excerpt:

“The proposal also includes various technical amendments to 40 CFR part 1065.  The proposed

technical amendments have no effect on the stringency of the regulations.  These revisions include

several minor changes to clarify regulatory requirements, align with chassis-testing procedures

where appropriate, and correct typographical errors.”

We would be happy to provide a version of Part 1065 that shows changes from the existing CFR in

redline, if that would be helpful. 

From: Whiteman, Chad [mailto:Chad_S_Whiteman@omb.eop.gov] 

Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2013 4:41 PM

To: Sargeant, Kathryn

Cc: Charmley, William; Stewart, Lori; Ghanta, Venu; Jutras, Nathaniel; Nickerson, William; Nagelhout,

Peter; Brunner, Christine

Subject: RE: Response to 2/25 EO 12866 Comments - Tier 3

Thank you for the responses.  Concerning the additions to the package, the entire section of Part

1065 is redlined (80 pages).  Is this all new language or just parts of it? 

From: Sargeant, Kathryn [mailto:sargeant.kathryn@epa.gov] 

Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2013 4:05 PM

To: Whiteman, Chad

Cc: Charmley, William; Stewart, Lori; Ghanta, Venu; Jutras, Nathaniel; Nickerson, William; Nagelhout,

Peter; Brunner, Christine

Subject: Response to 2/25 EO 12866 Comments - Tier 3

Attached please find responses to the comments from 2/25, including responses to both the

summary comments and the comment balloons that were inserted in the preamble.

We are also including a new version of the preamble and RIA (with changes tracked) that includes

edits in response to your comments, as well as edits we have made to the package to seek

comment on some additional program design details and to make various corrections. 
From: Whiteman, Chad [mailto:Chad_S_Whiteman@omb.eop.gov] 

Sent: Monday, February 25, 2013 10:01 AM

To: Sargeant, Kathryn

Subject: EO 12866 Comments - Tier 3

Hi Kathryn,

   Attached are some additional EO 12866 comments on Tier 3.  I know that there are more coming

and will get them to you as soon as possible.

Regards,

Chad
BEFORE THE 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 

Motion of 

 DELTA AIR LINES, INC. 

 

for a start up date extension 

(Tokyo-Guangzhou) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

Docket DOT-OST-2010-0285 

MOTION OF DELTA AIR LINES, INC.

Communications with respect to this document should be addressed to: 

 

Alexander Van der Bellen 

Managing Director – Government Affairs 

 & Associate General Counsel 

Jeff Morgan 

Regional Director – Government Affairs 

DELTA AIR LINES, INC. 

1212 New York Avenue, N.W. 

Washington, D.C. 20005 

(202) 842-4184 

sascha.vanderbellen@delta.com

March 25, 2011 
BEFORE THE 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 

Motion of 

 DELTA AIR LINES, INC. 

 

for a start up date extension 

(Tokyo-Guangzhou) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

Docket DOT-OST-2010-0285 

MOTION OF DELTA AIR LINES, INC.

Delta Air Lines, Inc. (“Delta”) hereby moves for an extension of the start up date 

condition on the frequencies for its new daily service between Tokyo, Japan (NRT) and 

Guangzhou, People’s Republic of China (CAN). Due to the severe impact on travel 

demand resulting from the after effects of the earthquake in Japan, Delta intends to 

postpone the launch of this service from April 6, 2011 to July 5, 2011. This is exactly 90 

days later than the original planned start, and on the cusp of the Department’s dormancy 

condition.1 Because of the fluid situation in Japan, we request a 90 day extension of the 

start-up condition to allow for planning flexibility. 

The relief requested here is fully consistent with the Department’s precedents, and 

with the public interest. Accordingly, Delta urges the Department to grant this motion and 

the start up flexibility as set forth above. 

 

 

1

 By Notice of Action Taken November 24, 2010 in Docket DOT-OST-2010-0285, Delta was allocated 

seven U.S.-China frequencies for daily combination service between Tokyo and Guangzhou. These 

frequencies were allocated subject to the condition that service must begin within 90 days of April 6,

2011 (i.e. by July 5, 2011). 
Motion of Delta 

Page 2 

 

Respectfully submitted,

_________________________________ 

Alexander Van der Bellen 

Managing Director, Government Affairs 

 & Associate General Counsel 

DELTA AIR LINES, INC. 
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

A copy of the foregoing document has been served this 25th day of March, 2011, upon 

the following persons via email: 

carl.nelson@aa.com 

dan.weiss@coair.com 

jeffrey.manley@united.com 

howard.kass@usairways.com 

benjamin.slocum@usairways.com 

paul.gretch@dot.gov 

keith.glatz@dot.gov 

esta.rosenberg@dot.gov 

UrsKR@state.gov 

info@airlineinfo.com
| 1.   | Employer      and Employee agree that Employee’s annual base salary increase from      $633,000 to $667,000 shall not be placed into effect as otherwise provided      in Section 3 of the Agreement.  Employee’s base annual salary      increase to $700,000 will go into effect as provided in the Agreement, on      May 10, 2010.  Employee’s target bonus of 75% applicable to the      third year of the Agreement shall remain  unchanged. |
|----------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 2.   | In      the event of the termination of employment of Employee, the Employer      agrees that the payments and benefits to which Employee is entitled under      the Agreement shall be calculated for all purposes as if Employee had not      waived his contractually guaranteed salary  increase. |
|----------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 3.   | Except      as set forth herein, the terms of the Agreement shall remain in full force      and effect. |
|----------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
Exhibit 11.1 - Statement of Computation of Per Share Earnings

                                                   June 30,
                                                   --------

                                    2002(A)         2001(A)       2000(A)
                                    -------         -------       -------

BASIC:
Average shares outstanding         49,880,494     24,977,353     20,863,271

Net income (loss) applicable
  to Common Shares                $ 1,578,108    ($  293,169)   ($4,701,285)
                                  ===========    ===========    ===========
Per share amount                  $      0.03    ($     0.01)   ($     0.23)
                                  ===========    ===========    ===========

FULLY DILUTED:
Average shares outstanding
  disregarding dilutive
  outstanding stock options
  and warrants and conversion
  of debentures for each year      49,880,494     24,977,353     20,863,271

Dilutive stock options and
  warrants, based on the treasury
  stock method using the average
  market price                      2,685,171      1,637,441      2,168,747

Floating convertible
  debentures                        1,500,000      1,500,000      1,585,574
                                  -----------    -----------    -----------
Shares outstanding                 54,065,665     28,114,794     24,597,592
                                  ===========    ===========    ===========
Net income (loss)                 $ 1,578,108    ($  293,169)   ($4,701,285

Interest on Floating
  Convertible Debenture,
  net of taxes                        201,368         90,430        113,613
                                  -----------    -----------    -----------

Net income (loss) for fully
  diluted calculation             $ 1,779,476    ($   202,739)  ($4,587,672)
                                  ===========    ===========    ===========

Per share amount                  $      .033    ($    0.007)   ($    0.187)
                                  ===========    ===========    ===========

Note A:   The fully-diluted calculation is submitted in accordance with
          Regulation S-K, Item 601(b)(11), although it is contrary to
          paragraph 13 of Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 128
          because it produces an anti-dilutive result.
#### Darlene Wagner, Wife of and Edward Thomas CATANIA v. Charles A. STUART.

No. 87-C-1097.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

June 12, 1987.

In re Catania, Darlene Wagner; Catania, Edward Thomas; applying for writ of cer-tiorari and/or review; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. CA86 0261; Parish of St. Tammany, 22nd Judicial District Court, Div. “C”, No. 77597.

Denied.
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 of Crescendo Acquisition Corp. (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending March 31, 2005 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
I, William Tay, President 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, to 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; and

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


Date: April 15, 2005


/s/ William Tay
-------------------------------------------
William Tay, President
(principal executive officer and principal
 accounting officer)
No. 75-1767.

#### Y. Hata & Co., Ltd., et al. *v.*United States.

C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

I, Paul Kim, Chief Financial Officer of Cogent, Inc. (the
Registrant), do hereby certify in accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, based on my knowledge:

(1) the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Registrant, to which this certification is attached as an exhibit (the Report),
fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) 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 Registrant.

This certification has not been, and shall not be deemed, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

Dated: May 9, 2007



|                              |  | 
|----------------------------- |  | 
|/s/ PAUL KIM                  |  | 
|Paul Kim                      |  | 
|Chief Financial Officer       |  | 
|(Principal Financial Officer) |  |
-/•T"-;' ! 

### i SERVE D AUGUS T 20,201 0

U.S
. DEPARTMEN T O FTRANSPORTATIO N

OFFIC E O FHEARING S WASHINGTON , D C
IN TH E MATTE RO F WISCONSI N AVIATION , INC
. FA A DOCKE T No
. CP10SW000 9 (Civil Penalt

y Action) DM S No
. FAA-2010-054 2
ORDE RO FDISMISSA L O n Ma y 18 , 2010 , th e Federa l Aviatio n Administratio n (hereinafte r referre dt o a s "Complainant" ) file daComplaint
. O n Ma y 11 , 2010 , Responden t Wisconsi n Aviation , Inc
. (hereinafte r

"Respondent" ) ha drequeste dahearing
. O n Augus t 19 , 2010 , Complainan t

withdre w it s Complaint , citin g settlement
. 1 4 C.F.R
. § 13.21 5 states : "A t an y tim e befor e o r

durin g ahearing , an agenc y attorne y ma y withdra w acomplain t o r part y may withdra w areques t for ahearing withou t th e consen t

o f th e administrativ e law judge
. I f an agenc y attorne y withdraw s th e complain t

o r apart y withdraw s th e reques t for ahearin g an dth e answer , th e administrativ e la w judg e shal l dismis s th e proceeding s unde r thi s subpart withprejudice. " WHEREFORE , th e withi n file dWithdrawa l o f Complain t

havin g bee n rea dan d considered , i t

i s ORDERE D a s follows : 1
. Complainant' s Withdrawa l o f Complain t

b e an di s hereb y granted ; an d 2
. Thi s proceedin g b e an di s hereb y dismisse dwit hprejudice
.S O ORDERED

.



### Attachmen

t - Servic e Lis t Richar dC
. Goodwin Administrativ e La

w Judg eFA A Docke t No
. CP10SW0009 (Civi l Penalt y Action ) SERVIC E LIS T ORIGINA L& ON E COP Y Federal Aviatio n Administratio n 80 0 Independenc e Avenue , S.W
. Washington , D C 2059 1 Attention : Hearin g Docke t Clerk , AGC-43 0 Wilbu r Wrigh t Building—Suit e 2W1000 '

ON E COP Y Jeffer y Baum , Presiden t Wisconsi n Aviation , Inc. , Responden t 174 1 Rive r

Driv e Watertown , WI5309 4 TEL : 920-261-456 7 Autum n Killingham , Complainant' s Counse l Attorney , Enforcemen t

Division , AGC-30 0 Offic e o f Regiona l Coimse l Federa l Aviatio n Administratio n 80 0 Independenc e Avenue , S.W
. Washington , D C 2059 1 TEL : 202-267-772 8 FAX : 202-267-510 6 Th e Honorabl e Richar dC
. Goodwin , Administrativ e Law Judg e Dfficc^ef Hearings , M-2 0 U.S
. Departmen t

o f Transportatio n 120 0 Ne w Jerse y Avenue , S.E
. Eas t Buildin g Groun dFloor , Roo mEl2-32 0 Washington , D C 2059 0 TEL : 202-366-213 9 Attorney-Adviso r 202-366-512 1 Lega l Assistan t FAX : 202-366-753 6

' Service wa

s b y U.S
. Mail
. Fo r

servic e i n person o r b y expeditedcourier , us e the following address : Federa l Aviation Administration , 600 Independenc e Avenue , S.W. , Wilbu r Wrigh t Building—Suit

e 2W1000 , Washington , D C 20591 ; Attention : Hearing Docke t Clerk , AGC-430
.
EXHIBIT 21
 
 
 LIST OF SUBSIDIARIES
 
 
 Name of Subsidiary

Jurisdiction of IncorporationGulfport Shipping Limited

BahamasInternational Consulting and Management Limited

St. Vincent & the GrenadinesKaplan Shipping Co. Limited

BahamasKokomo Shipping Limited

BahamasMC Chantilly Limited

BahamasMC Cormorant Shipping Limited

BahamasMC Eid Shipping Limited

BahamasMC Egret Shipping Limited

BahamasMC Heron Shipping Limited

BahamasMC Ibis Shipping Limited

BahamasMC Kite Shipping Limited

BahamasMC Link Shipping Limited

St. Vincent & the GrenadinesMC Pelerin Shipping Limited

BahamasMC Petrel Shipping limited

BahamasMC Shipping S.A.M.

MonacoMC Shrike Shipping Limited

BahamasMC Tercel Shipping Limited

BahamasSphinx Limited

St. Vincent & the GrenadinesUrbana Shipping Limited

Bahamas
#### STATE ex rel. Chester BARTHOLOMEW v. Robert H. BUTLER, Warden, Louisiana State Penitentiary.

No. 89-KH-1334.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

June 30, 1989.

In re Bartholomew, Chester; — Plaintiff(s); applying for writ of certiorari and/or review, prohibition, supervisory and/or remedial writs; Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court, Div. “I”, No. 257-069; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 89KW-0585.

Denied.
#### James H. CURTIS, Plaintiff and Appellant—Phares & Lites, v. Billy TABOR, Defendant and Appellee—Tri-State Underwriters.

No. 88-618.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Third Circuit.

June 28, 1989.

Cook, Yancey, King & Galloway, Brian Homza, Shreveport, for appellant.

Fish, Montgomery & Robinson, Roy Fish, Minden, for appellee.

Before GUIDRY, FORET and DOUCET, JJ.

*1326DOUCET, Judge.

For the reasons assigned in the consolidated case of *Charlotte Krueger v. Billy Tabor, et al.,*546 So.2d 1317 (La.App. 3rd Cir.1989), rendered this day, the judgment appealed is REVERSED IN PART, AMENDED IN PART, AND AS AMENDED, AFFIRMED in accordance with the views expressed in the companion case.

REVERSED IN PART; AMENDED IN PART, AND AS AMENDED, AFFIRMED.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 20
- 0605 STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee, v. CLAY BRADY RIPPLE ,

Defendant and Appellant .

**GRANT** Pursuant to authority granted under Mont. R. App. P. 26(1), the Appellant is given an extension of time until April 30 , 2021, to prepare, file, and serve the Appellant’s opening brief.

Electronically signed by: Bowen Greenwood Clerk of the Supreme Court March 31 2021

03/31/2021

Case Number: DA 20-0605
** **

** **

**EXHIBIT 31.1**

**CERTIFICATIONS**

I, Steven D. Hunt, certify that: 

     1. I havereviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of U.S. Premium Beef, LLC; 

     2. Basedon my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue statement ofa material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make thestatements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements weremade, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report; 

     3. Basedon my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial informationincluded in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financialcondition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, andfor, the periods presented in this report; 

     4. Theregistrant's other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishingand maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange ActRules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have: 

     a)designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosurecontrols and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure thatmaterial information relating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this report is being prepared; 

     b)evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectivenessof the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period coveredby this report based on such evaluation; and 

     c)disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal control overfinancial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most recent fiscalquarter (the registrant's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annualreport) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materiallyaffect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting; and 

     5. The registrant'sother certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant'sauditors and the audit committee of the registrant's Board of Directors (orpersons performing the equivalent functions): 

     a)all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operationof internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely toadversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process, summarize andreport financial information; and 

     b)any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employeeswho have a significant role in the registrant's internal control over financialreporting. 

|     |  |                                         |
|-----|--|-----------------------------------------|
| By: |  | /s/ Steven D. Hunt                      |
|     |  | Steven D. Hunt*Chief Executive Officer* |

Date: January 5, 2007

 

 

 

----
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 of QC Holdings, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the
period ended September 30, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Don Early, Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive 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: November 8, 2006



/s/ Don EarlyDon EarlyChairman of the Board andChief Executive Officer




Page 41
#### James Kay NYBURG, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. HOTELS STATLER CO., Inc., Defendant-Appellant.

No. 182.

Circuit Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.

Jan. 2, 1940.

Christensen & Eberlein, of New York City (Lester P. Dodd, of Detroit, Mich., of counsel), for appellant.

Fearey, Allen & Johnston, of New York City (Morton L. Fearey and Theodore R. Finder, both of New York City, of counsel), for appellee.

' Before SWAN, AUGUSTUS N. HAND, and PATTERSON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Judgment affirmed.