alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
1 

### Daniels, Nia (FAA)

From: Daniels, Nia (FAA)

Sent: Wednesday, January 07, 2015 10:44 AM

To: 'lane@advancedaerialcine.com'

Cc: Pappas, Rob (FAA); Pearson, Lakisha (FAA); C ooper, Thuy (FAA); Ferritto, Michelle (FAA) Subject: Request for Additional Information - Advanced Aerial Cinematography, LLC



### January 7, 2015

Mr. Lane Wooder Advanced Aerial Cinematography, LLC

5909 Chatham Court Tucker, GA 30084

Dear Mr. Wooder:

This letter is to inform you that the following information is missing from your petition (Docket No. FAA2014-0990). This information is necessary for the Federal Aviation Administration to process your petition. Please submit the additional information to your docket at www.regulations.gov and submit any proprietary information to the FAA Headqua rters or electronically via e-mail to nia.daniels@faa.gov

.

 Describe the aircraft make and model for the prop osed UAS operation. The description should include

the size.

 List the aircraft’s cruise speed.

 Provide information regarding the radio frequency sp ectrum. This information can be located in the

aircraft manual.

 Provide description of proximity to airports.

 Your petition references a pre-fli ght inspection. Describe the process used to determine if the UAS is airworthy and in safe conditi on for operation in the NAS.

 Your petition references an aircraft manufacturer’s manual, however it was not submitted for the record. Please provide a copy of the aircraft.

Please provide the additional information by January 21, 2015.

If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at (202) 267-7626.

Sincerely,

Nia Daniels2 

### Program Analyst

Nia Daniels, ARM

‐ 108

Federal Aviation Administration

Office of Rulemaking, Airmen & Airspace Rules Division

800 Independence Avenue, SW Washington, DC 20591

PH: (202) 267 ‐ 7626

Fax: (202) 267 ‐ 5075 nia.daniels@faa.gov
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). Accordingly, Singh’s request

for oral argument is denied.

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

GURWINDER SINGH,

 Petitioner,

 v.

ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,

 Respondent.

No. 10-72875

Agency No. A079-611-520

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted February 11, 2013** 

Before: FERNANDEZ, TASHIMA, and WARDLAW, Circuit Judges.

Gurwinder Singh, a native and citizen of India, petitions for review of the

Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal from an

immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying his application for asylum,

withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture

FILED

FEB 14 2013

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 10-72875

(“CAT”). Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for

substantial evidence the agency’s factual findings, including adverse credibility

determinations. See Chebchoub v. INS, 257 F.3d 1038, 1042 (9th Cir. 2001). We

deny in part and dismiss in part the petition for review.

Boota Singh Basi and his business partner prepared Singh’s asylum

application. The agency found Singh’s application to be a blatant fabrication,

based on Basi’s testimony that he made up Singh’s claim, and the government’s

submission of an unrelated application Basi prepared and filed four months prior to

Singh’s, which was nearly identical in content and form. Substantial evidence

supports the agency’s adverse credibility determination. See Desta v. Ashcroft, 365

F.3d 741, 745 (9th Cir. 2004) (fraudulent documents going to the heart of claim

may justify adverse credibility determination); see also Fernandes v. Holder, 619

F.3d 1069, 1075 (9th Cir. 2010) (adverse credibility determination was supported

by substantial evidence based, in part, on Boota Singh Basi’s testimony that every

application he filed was false). In the absence of credible testimony, Singh’s

asylum and withholding of removal claims fail. See Farah v. Ashcroft, 348 F.3d

1153, 1156 (9th Cir. 2003).

Singh’s CAT claim fails because it is based on the same statements found

not credible, and he does not point to any other evidence that shows it is more
3 10-72875

likely than not he would be tortured if returned to India. See id. at 1156-57.

We lack jurisdiction to consider Singh’s contention that the IJ failed to

consider and weigh all the evidence he provided, because he did not raise this

claim to the BIA. See Barron v. Ashcroft, 358 F.3d 647, 678 (9th Cir. 2004). 

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Consumer Product Safety Commission

# TIME AND DATE: 

Wednesday, April 11, 2012; 10 a.m.-11 a.m.

# PLACE: 

Hearing Room 420, Bethesda Towers, 4330 East West Highway, Bethesda, Maryland.

# STATUS: 

Closed to the Public.

# MATTER TO BE CONSIDERED: 

*Compliance Status Report.*

The Commission staff will brief the Commission on the status of compliance matters.

For a recorded message containing the latest agenda information, call (301) 504-7948.

# CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: 

Todd A. Stevenson, Office of the Secretary, U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, 4330 East West Highway, Bethesda, MD 20814, (301) 504-7923.

Dated: April 6, 2012.

Todd A. Stevenson,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 2012-9040 Filed 4-11-12; 4:15 pm]

BILLING CODE 6355-01-P
| (1) | The                Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13 (a) of                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. |
|-----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| December                6, 2005 |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       |                                       |
|---------------------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------|
|                            |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       |
|                       |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  |                                  |
|                            |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  | /s/ Jeffrey                O. Nyweide |
|                            | Jeffrey                  O. NyweideChief                  Financial Officer, Executive Vice President,Corporate                  Development and Secretary (PrincipalFinancial                  Officer and Principal Accounting                  Officer) |

----
Exhibit 31.1

              Certification of Chief Executive Officer Pursuant to
            Securities and Exchange Act Rules 13a-14(a) and 15d-14(a)
                             as Adopted Pursuant to
                  Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

I, Alan Gaines, certify that:

      1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of ABC Funding,
Inc.

      2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly 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
quarterly report;

      3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this quarterly 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 quarterly report;

      4. The registrant's other certifying officer 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, or caused such
disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, 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 quarterly report is being prepared;
and

            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

      5. The registrant's other certifying officer 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 registrant's board of
directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

            a) all significant deficiencies and material weakness in the design
or operation of internal controls over financial reporting which are reasonably
likely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process,
summarize and report financial data; and

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


Dated: February 1, 2007                 By: /s/ Alan Gaines
                                            ------------------------------------
                                            Alan Gaines, Chief Executive Officer
                                            ABC Funding, Inc.
EXHIBIT 32.2




CERTIFICATION
OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER


PURSUANT
TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350


AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002







The
undersigned, the Chief Financial Officer of Cross Canyon Energy Corp. (the
“Company”), does hereby certify under the standards set forth and solely for the
purposes of 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the
Company for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2009, fully complies with
the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 and information contained in that Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.





Dated:  November
      16, 2009
            
            /s/  Carl
      A. ChaseCarl
      A. ChaseChief
      Financial Officer
              (Principal
      Financial and Accounting Officer)




A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to
the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities
and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE

FIRST DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON

ORDER ON MOTION

Cause number: 01-14-01030-CV

Style: Tarris Woods

v. Sandra T. Kenner and Charles E. Twymon, Jr.

Date motion filed*: March 26, 2015

Type of motion: Motion to Abate and Remand for the Execution of Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law

Party filing motion: Appellant

Document to be filed:

Is appeal accelerated? No

If motion to extend time:

Original due date:

Number of previous extensions granted: Current Due date: 

Date Requested:

Ordered that motion is:

 Granted

If document is to be filed, document due: 

 The Court will not grant additional motions to extend time absent extraordinary circumstances.

 Denied

 Dismissed (e.g., want of jurisdiction, moot)

 Other: _____________________________________ 

The clerk’s record includes “Findings of Fact” and Conclusions of Law” signed by the trial court and filed on 

December 22, 2014. See TEX. R. CIV. P. 297; see also Vickery v. Comm’n for Lawyer Discipline, 5 S.W.3d 241,

253 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 1999, pet. denied) (citing Grossnickle v. Grossnickle, 935 S.W.2d 830, 

837 n.1 (Tex. App.—Texarkana 1996, writ denied)) (recognizing practice of prevailing party submitting

proposed findings of fact).

Judge’s signature: _/s/ Terry Jennings

 

Panel consists of ____________________________________________

Date: April 7, 2015
**Exhibit 31.1****Rule 13a-14(a) Certification of the Chief Executive Officer**I, J. Michael Allen, President and Chief Executive Officer, certify that:1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Georgia Trust Bancshares, Inc. 2. Based on my knowledge, this annual report does not contain any untrue statement of a materialfact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report. 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the small business issuer as of, and for, the periods presentedin this report; 4. The small business issuer’s other certifying officers and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange ActRules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the small business issuer and have: a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosurecontrols and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the small business issuer, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly duringthe period in which this report is being prepared;  b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer’s disclosure controlsand procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness ofthe disclosure controls and procedures as of the end of the period covered by thisreport based on such evaluation; and  c) Disclosed in this report any change in the small business issuer’s internalcontrol over financial reporting that occurred during the small business issuer’sfourth fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely tomaterially affect, the small business issuer’s internal control over financialreporting; and5. The small business issuer’s other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based onour most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the small businessissuer’s auditors and the audit committee of the small business issuer’s board of directors(or persons performing the equivalent functions): a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operationof internal controls over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adverselyaffect the small business issuer’s ability to record, process, summarize and reportfinancial information; and  b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employeeswho have a significant role in the small business issuer’s internal control overfinancial reporting.   Date: November 14, 2005    /s/ J. Michael Allen     J. Michael Allen, President and C.E.O.
**
**Exhibit 31.1**

**CERTIFICATION**

I, CoreyHenry, certify that: 

1. I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K and all reports on Form 10-D required to be filed in respect of the period covered by this report on Form 10-K of Santander Drive Auto Receivables Trust 2022-5(the “Exchange Act periodic reports”); 

2. Based on my knowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as a whole, do notcontain 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 thisreport; 

3. Based on my knowledge, all of the distribution, servicing and other information required to be provided under Form 10-D for the period covered by this report is included in the Exchange Act periodic reports; 

4. Basedon my knowledge and the servicer compliance statement required in this report under Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as disclosed in the Exchange Act periodic reports, the servicer has fulfilled its obligations under the servicing agreement inall material respects; and 

5. All of the reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria forasset-backed securities and their related attestation reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities required to be included inthis report in accordance with Item 1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange Act Rules 13a-18 and 15d-18 have been included as an exhibit to this report, except as otherwisedisclosed in this report. Any material instances of noncompliance described in such reports have been disclosed in this report on Form 10-K.

In giving the certifications above, I have reasonably relied on information provided to me by the following unaffiliated parties: Citibank,N.A. 

 
By: /s/ Corey HenryName: Corey HenryTitle: President and Chief Executive Officer Santander Drive Auto Receivables LLC, as Depositor (senior officer in charge of securitization of the depositor)Date: March 31, 2023**
#### Frances BRADY, now Herriman, Appellant, v. William P. BRADY, Appellee.

No. 52778.

Court of Appeals of Oklahoma, Division No. 2.

Oct. 23, 1979.

Released for Publication by Order of Court of Appeals Nov. 15, 1979.

*362Richard E. Butner, Butner & Butner, We-woka, for appellant.

Howard W. Conyers, Mattingly & Con-yers, Seminole, for appellee.

BRIGHTMIRE, Judge.

After seven years of marriage the parties were divorced and their three little girls— ages six, four and one — were placed in the custody of the mother. Five years later the father asked the court to grant him custody of the children alleging that conditions affecting their welfare had materially changed since the time of the divorce. After hearing the evidence the court agreed and placed the girls in their father’s charge. The mother contends that the court was without authority to modify the original child custody order because there was no evidence to support his conclusion.

There is no disagreement about the applicable law but only about whether the movant met the burden it imposed upon him — to prove that there was a substantial change in circumstances affecting the children’s welfare and that a change of custody would be mentally and morally beneficial to the minors.

After reviewing the record we think a sufficient showing was made and that the trial court’s order is not clearly against the weight of the evidence. The mother admitted a live-in intimacy with a 16-year-old boy and expressed no concern about the shocking indiscretion of permitting her young girls to find him in bed with her upon awakening of a morning. Was the mother aware of any adverse effect this might have had on, say, her now 11-year-old girl? “Well,” she said, “it didn’t seem to have anything, it didn’t bother her or come (sic) to me and say anything about it.”

The father in the meantime achieved stable employment with an electronics firm, remarried and established what he described as a suitable “Christian” home near Dallas, Texas. The children, it appears, got along well with his wife and her nine-year-old daughter.

Though the mother said her young lover had moved out of her house she still saw him occasionally. And though she said she no longer had the boy “baby-sit” the children, he was with them in her lawyer’s office at the very moment she so testified.

Conditions had indeed changed.

Moreover, confiding custody of the children in the father comports with his explicit statutory entitlement under 10 O.S.1978 Supp. § 5 and with the preference statutorily accorded the father with regard to children of “an age to require education” by 30 O.S.1971 § 11.

Of course, the ultimate criterion in child custody cases is always that which serves the youngsters’ best interest. *Miracle v. Miracle,*Okl., 388 P.2d 9 (1964). Here the mother’s lack of concern for or awareness of minimal standards of morality coupled with the grossly immoral example she had been setting for her little girls leaves scant room for doubt that the best interest of the children will be served by placing them in the charge of their father.

Affirmed.

BACON, P. J., and NEPTUNE, J., concur.
Order entered October 12, 2022

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-22-00685-CV

TIFFANY LONG AND ALL OCCUPANTS, Appellant/Cross-Appellee

V.

PARATHEKE ENTERPRISES, LLC, Appellee/Cross-Appellant

On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 1

Grayson County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 2021-1-195CV

ORDER

Before the Court is appellee/cross-appellant’s October 11, 2022 unopposed 

first motion for extension of time to file its combined appellee/cross-appellant’s 

brief. We GRANT the motion and ORDER the brief be filed no later than 

November 21, 2022.

/s/ BONNIE LEE GOLDSTEIN

JUSTICE