alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

EITAN LEASCHAUER,

 Petitioner,

 v.

NATIONAL TRANSPORTATION 

SAFETY BOARD; FEDERAL AVIATION 

ADMINISTRATION,

 Respondents.

No. 13-73818

NTSB No. EA-5680

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

National Transportation Safety Board

Submitted June 14, 2016**

Before: BEA, WATFORD, and FRIEDLAND, Circuit Judges.

Eitan Leaschauer petitions pro se for review of the National Transportation

Safety Board’s (“NTSB”) final order suspending Leaschauer’s private pilot

certificate pending reexamination. We have jurisdiction under 49 U.S.C. § 1153. 

 

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent 

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

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

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

FILED

JUN 23 2016

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
 2 13-73818 

We review the NTSB’s final order under the arbitrary and capricious standard.

Gilbert v. NTSB, 80 F.3d 364, 368 (9th Cir. 1996). We deny the petition for 

review.

The NTSB’s determination that a reasonable basis existed for the Federal 

Aviation Administration (“FAA”) to request reexamination of Leaschauer was not 

arbitrary or capricious because substantial evidence supported the NTSB’s finding 

that Leaschauer took off without prior clearance. See Arrington v. Daniels, 516 

F.3d 1106, 1112 (9th Cir. 2008) (arbitrary and capricious standard requires agency 

to base decision on consideration of relevant factors and avoid clear error); 49 

U.S.C. § 1153(b)(3) (“Findings of fact by the Board, if supported by substantial 

evidence, are conclusive.”); 49 U.S.C. § 44709 (empowering FAA to reexamine 

certificate holders).

The NTSB’s determination that the chief administrative law judge (“ALJ”)

did not err by denying Leaschauer’s motion to disqualify the ALJ was not arbitrary 

or capricious because Leaschauer failed to show that the ALJ had any bias or 

prejudice from an extra-judicial source. See Arrington, 516 F.3d at 1112; Adm’r

v. Lackey, NTSB Order. No. EA-5419 at 11 (2008) (setting forth standard). 

The NTSB’s determination that the ALJ’s grant of leave for the FAA to 
 3 13-73818 

amend its complaint did not warrant relief was not arbitrary or capricious because 

the amendment did not prejudice Leaschauer. See Janka v. NTSB, 925 F.2d 1147, 

1152 (9th Cir. 1991) (reversal is warranted only for substantial and prejudicial 

errors in administrative procedure).

We reject as unsupported by the record Leaschauer’s contentions that he was 

denied due process during proceedings. Id.

We reject as without merit Leaschauer’s contentions regarding misconduct 

by the ALJ or NTSB.

All pending motions and requests are denied.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
**Exhibit 32.2**

 

**Prestige Brands International, LLC90 North BroadwayIrvington, New York 10533**

 

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

 

In connection with the Quarterly Report ofPrestige Brands International, LLC on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period endedDecember 31, 2004 (the “Report”), I, Peter C. Mann, Chief Executive Officer ofPrestige Brands International, LLC, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section1350, 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 allmaterial respects, the financial condition and results of operations ofPrestige Brands International, LLC.

 
| January 24, 2005 |                               |
|------------------|------------------------------------|
|             | Prestige Brands International, LLC |
|             |                               |
|             | By:                                | /s/ Peter  C. Mann |   |
|             | Peter C.  Mann                     |   |
|             | Chief  Executive Officer           |   |
|                  |                                    |  |  |  |

 

1

----
​

**Exhibit 35.2**

**Servicer Compliance Statement of Deere Credit Services, Inc.**

​

I, Steven N. Owenson, Senior Vice President and Finance Director of Deere Credit Services, Inc., state:

​

A review of Deere Credit Services, Inc.’s activities for the period from October 31, 2022 through October 29, 2023 (the “Reporting Period”) and of Deere Credit Services, Inc.’s performance under the Sale and Servicing Agreement dated as of October 19, 2022 among John Deere Capital Corporation, John Deere Receivables LLC and John Deere Owner Trust 2022-C has been made under my supervision, and to the best of my knowledge based on such review, Deere Credit Services, Inc. has fulfilled all its obligations under all relevant agreements in all material respects throughout the Reporting Period. 

​

​

| ​               | ​                     | ​                                    |
|-----------------------|-----------------------------|--------------------------------------------|
| Date: January 9, 2024 | Deere Credit Services, Inc. |
| ​               | ​                     | ​                                    |
| ​               | By:                         | */s/ Steven N. Owenson*                    |
| ​               | ​                     | Steven N. Owenson                          |
| ​               | ​                     | Senior Vice President and Finance Director |
| ​               | ​                     | ​                                    |
| ​               | ​                     | ​                                    |

​

​

----
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

DA 23-0564

_________________

ANTHONY CORDERO, on behalf of

himself and all others similarly situated,

 Plaintiffs and Appellants, 

 v.

MONTANA STATE UNIVERSITY and

WADED CRUZADO,

 Defendants and Appellees.

O R D E R

_________________

Pursuant to the Internal Operating Rules of this Court, this cause is classified for 

submission on briefs to a five-justice panel of this Court. 

The Clerk is directed to provide a copy hereof to all counsel of record and to the 

Honorable Michael F. McMahon, District Judge.

For the Court,

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

June 5 2024

06/05/2024

Case Number: DA 23-0564
**B. STATISTICAL METHODS** 

Data collection methods and procedures will vary; however, the primary purpose of these collections will be for internal management purposes; there are no plans to publish or otherwise release this information.
**1. Universe and Respo**  **ndent Selection** The activities under this clearance may involve samples of self

- selected customers, as well as convenience samples, and quota samples, with respondents selected either to cover a broad range of customers or to include specific characterist ics related to certain products or services. Results will not be used to make statements representative of the universe of study, to produce statistical descriptions (careful, repeatable measurements), or to generalize the data beyond the scope of the sam ple. The specific sample planned for each individual collection and the method for soliciting participation will be described fully in each collection request. Qualitative surveys are tools used by program managers to change or improve programs, products, or services. The accuracy, reliability, and applicability of the results of these surveys are adequate for their purpose. The samples associated with this collection are not subjected to the same scrutiny as scientifically drawn samples where estimat es are published or otherwise released to the public.

**2. Procedures for Collecting Information**  Data collection methods and procedures will vary and the specifics of these will be provided with each collection request. The Agency expects to use a variety of methodologies for these collections

. For example, the Agency or its contractors may use commercial survey

- specific software to automate its collection and analysis of feedback. In addition to physical copies, information collection instruments may be electronically disseminated and/or posted on target pages of the Agency’s web site. Telephone scripts, personal interviews, and focus groups with professional guidance and moderation may also be used.

**3. Methods to Maximize Response**  Information collected under this generic clearance will not yield generalizable quantitative findings; it can provide useful customer input, but it does not yield data about customer opinions that can be generalized.
**4. Testing of Procedures**  Pretesting may be done with intern al staff, a limited number of external colleagues, and/or customers who are familiar with the programs and products. If the number of pretest respondents exceeds nine members of the public, the Agency will submit the pretest instruments for review under t his generic clearance.**5. Contacts for Statistical Aspects and Data Collection** 

Each program will obtain information from statisticians in the development, design, conduct, and analysis of customer/partner service surveys, when appropriate. This statistica l expertise will be available from agency statisticians or from contractors and the Agency will include the names and contact information of persons consulted in the specific information collection requests submitted under this generic clearance.
IA 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. J. RES. 17 

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States regarding 

health care. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 3, 2019 

Ms. MCCOLLUM submitted the following joint resolution; which was referred 

to the Committee on the Judiciary 

JOINT RESOLUTION 

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United 

States regarding health care. 

1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives 

2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled (two3 thirds of each House concurring therein), That the fol4 lowing article is proposed as an amendment to the Con5 stitution of the United States, which shall be valid to all 

6 intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when 

7 ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several 

8 States within seven years after the date of its submission 

9 for ratification: 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
2 

•HJ 17 IH 

1 ‘‘ARTICLE— 

2 ‘‘SECTION 1. Health care, including care to prevent 

3 and treat illness, is the right of the people and necessary 

4 to ensure the strength of the Nation. 

5 ‘‘SECTION 2. The Congress shall have power to en6 force and implement this article by appropriate legisla7 tion.’’. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

IN THE MATTER OF M.L.M.,

A JUVENILE. §

§

§

§

§

§ No. 08

- 13

- 00250

- CV

Appeal from

323rd District Court

of Tarrant County, Texas

(TC # 98263

- J)

J U D G M E N T

The Court has considered this cause on the record and concludes there was no error in the

judgment. We therefore affirm the judgment of the court below.

It has been determined that Appellant is indigent for purposes of appeal; th erefore, this

Court makes no other order with respect to the payment of costs on appeal. This decision shall

be certified below for observance.

IT IS SO ORDERED THIS 30 TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2015.

ANN CR AWFORD McCLURE, Chief Justice

Before McClure, C.J., Rodriguez, and Hughes, JJ.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 95-3103

LORIE C. PRETZEL,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

CRSS FLEXIBLE BENEFITS PLAN; JOHN HANCOCK

MUTUAL LIFE INSURANCE COPANY; CRRS, INCORPORATED,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Fox, Chief District Judge.

(CA-94-998-5-F)

Submitted: May 29, 1997 Decided: June 23, 1997

Before NIEMEYER, LUTTIG, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Lorie C. Pretzel, Appellant Pro Se. James M. Powell, HAYNSWORTH,

BALDWIN, JOHNSON & GREAVES, Greensboro, North Carolina, for

Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals the district court's order granting summary

judgment in favor of the Defendants in this action alleging a deprivation of Appellant’s rights under the Employee Retirement Income

Act of 1974. 29 U.S.C. §§ 1001-1461 (West 1985 & Supp. 1997). We

have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find

no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the

district court. Pretzel v. CRSS Flexible, No. CA-94-998-5-F

(E.D.N.C. Oct. 27, 1995). We dispense with oral argument because

the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional

process.

AFFIRMED
```

[Congressional Bills 115th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Res. 692 Agreed to Senate (ATS)]

<DOC>

115th CONGRESS
  2d Session
S. RES. 692

   Recognizing November 24, 2018, as ``Small Business Saturday'' and 
celebrating the vital role of small businesses, along with the efforts 
  of the Small Business Administration, to help people in the United 
               States start, build, and grow businesses.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           November 15, 2018

   Mr. Risch (for himself, Mr. Cardin, Mr. Barrasso, Mr. Coons, Mr. 
   Boozman, Mr. Markey, Mrs. Capito, Mr. Whitehouse, Mr. Crapo, Mr. 
  Booker, Mr. Enzi, Mr. Manchin, Mrs. Ernst, Ms. Heitkamp, Mr. Hatch, 
 Mrs. Shaheen, Mr. Hoeven, Mrs. Feinstein, Mr. Inhofe, Ms. Hirono, Mr. 
   Kennedy, Ms. Cantwell, Mr. Moran, Ms. Duckworth, Mr. Roberts, Ms. 
Harris, Mr. Rounds, Mr. Wyden, Mr. Rubio, Ms. Klobuchar, Mr. Scott, Mr. 
 Udall, Mr. Thune, Mr. Tester, Ms. Hassan, Mr. King, Mr. Donnelly, Mr. 
 Van Hollen, Mr. Menendez, Mrs. Murray, Mrs. Hyde-Smith, Mr. Portman, 
  Mr. Alexander, Mr. Daines, and Mr. Perdue) submitted the following 
             resolution; which was considered and agreed to

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
   Recognizing November 24, 2018, as ``Small Business Saturday'' and 
celebrating the vital role of small businesses, along with the efforts 
  of the Small Business Administration, to help people in the United 
               States start, build, and grow businesses.

Whereas, as of November 2018, there are more than 30,200,000 small businesses in 
        the United States;
Whereas small businesses in the United States--

    (1) represent 99.9 percent of all businesses in the United States;

    (2) employ nearly 48 percent of private sector employees in the United 
States;

    (3) constitute almost 2 of every 3 new jobs; and

    (4) constitute 97.6 percent of firms that export goods; and

Whereas November 24, 2018, is an appropriate day to recognize ``Small Business 
        Saturday'': Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the Senate joins the Small Business Administration 
in--
            (1) supporting the designation of November 24, 2018, as 
        ``Small Business Saturday'';
            (2) celebrating the entrepreneurial spirit of small 
        business owners in the United States;
            (3) recognizing the importance of creating policies that 
        promote a business-friendly environment for small business 
        owners that is free of unnecessary and burdensome regulations 
        and red tape;
            (4) supporting and encouraging young entrepreneurs to 
        pursue passions and create more startup businesses; and
            (5) celebrating the invaluable contribution that small 
        businesses make to the United States as the backbone of the 
        economy.
                                 <all>
```
Exhibit 32.0














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 Kearny Financial Corp. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2011 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Craig L. Montanaro, President 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 result of operations of the Company.




















Date: May 10, 2011

/s/ Craig L. MontanaroCraig L. MontanaroPresident and Chief Executive Officer

































































Exhibit 32.0














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 Kearny Financial Corp. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2011 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Eric B. Heyer, Senior Vice President and 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 result of operations of the Company.




















Date: May 10, 2011

/s/ Eric B. HeyerEric B. HeyerSenior Vice President andChief Financial Officer
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-7216

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus BRIAN BACON, a/k/a Brian Hillard, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. James C. Turk, District Judge. (CR-95-28, CA-97-821-R) Submitted: November 19, 1998 Decided: December 3, 1998 Before HAMILTON and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Brian Bacon, Appellant Pro Se. Anthony Paul Giorno, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Brian Bacon seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West 1994 & Supp. 1998). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion andfind no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. United States v. Bacon , Nos. CR-95-28; CA-97-821-R (W.D. Va. July 20, 1998). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
EX-10.1




 Exhibit 10.1 
  


					
	



	  		  	





  
 May 19, 2022

 Joseph J. Aristone 
 Executive Vice President - Leasing 

Pennsylvania Real Estate Investment Trust 
 2005 Market Street,
Suite 1000 
 Philadelphia, PA 19103 
  

	 	Re:	 PREIT Services, LLC Severance Pay Plan for Certain Officers (“Plan”)



 Dear Joseph: 
 This
letter will constitute an amendment to the Plan solely with respect to you and shall not affect the Plan in any respect as to any other past, present or future Eligible Employee. The Executive Compensation and Human Resources Committee has approved,
subject to your acceptance by signing a copy of this letter, the following amendment to the Plan applicable solely to you. You understand that similar or dissimilar individual amendments may be entered into concurrently or from time to time
hereafter with other individual employees, which amendments will not affect the Plan as applied to you. Subject to your acceptance below, the following amendments to the Plan shall be given effect on and as of May 19, 2022: 

1. Section 3.1(c) is hereby amended by adding a new subsection (4) at the end thereof: 

“(4) Offset of Special Retention Bonus. Notwithstanding any Plan provision to the contrary, if Joe becomes entitled to receive
severance benefits on or after a Change in Control under this Section 3.1(c), such severance benefits shall be reduced by the amount of the special retention bonus previously paid (if any) to Joe in accordance with the terms of that certain
retention bonus letter agreement dated May 19, 2022 between Joe and PREIT Services, LLC. Weeks of Pay first shall be reduced by the amount of the special retention bonus and, to the extent such retention bonus exceeds the Weeks of Pay, the
prorated bonus shall be reduced.” 
 2. Except as expressly amended hereby, none of your rights or obligations or those of the Company
under the Plan or under the amendment to the Plan dated May 8, 2013 as it relates solely to you, shall be affected hereby. Capitalized terms used, but not defined, in this amendment shall have the meanings ascribed to such terms in the Plan.
This letter contains the entire agreement of the signatories with respect to the amendment to the Plan set forth herein. Except as provided in the preceding sentence, no modification or claim of waiver of any of the provisions hereof shall be valid
unless in writing and signed by the party against whom such modification or waiver is sought to be enforced. The law of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania shall be the controlling state law in all matters relating to this amendment (without reference
to principles of conflict of laws) and shall apply to the extent it is not superseded by ERISA. 
  

 

  
 



 














					
	



	  		  	





  
  

 
			
	PREIT SERVICES, LLC
		
	By:	 	 /s/ Joseph F. Coradino

		 	Joseph F. Coradino
		 	President


  

	
	ACCEPTED AND AGREED:
	
	 /s/ Joseph J. Aristone

	Joseph J. Aristone