alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS RESTATED DATA SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED
FROM THE BURLINGTON NORTHERN AND SANTA FE RAILWAY COMPANY'S CONSOLIDATED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0000015511
<NAME> THE BURLINGTON NORTHERN AND SANTA FE RAILWAY COMPANY
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                              81
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      530<F1>
<ALLOWANCES>                                        67<F1>
<INVENTORY>                                        249
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 1,163<F1>
<PP&E>                                          26,848
<DEPRECIATION>                                   5,448
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  23,343<F1>
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            2,164<F1>
<BONDS>                                          4,354
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                       9,107
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    23,343<F1>
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 6,726
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    5,126
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 226
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  1,405
<INCOME-TAX>                                       527
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                878
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       878
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
<FN>
<F1>RESTATEMENT REFLECTED HEREIN IS THE RESULT OF RECLASSIFICATIONS TO PRIOR
PERIODS' FINANCIAL STATEMENTS TO CONFORM TO THE CURRENT PERIOD PRESENTATION.
</FN>


</TABLE>
Thomas M. Gray 

211(b) Technical Manager 

1220 L Street, Northwest

Washington, DC 20005-4070

Tel 202-682-8480 

Fax 202-682-8270 

E-mail grayt@api.org

July 27, 2010 

Karl Simon 

Director 

Compliance and Innovative Strategies Division 

1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, N. W. 

Mail Code: 6406J 

Washington, DC 20460 

• RE: CAA Section 211(b) Fuels and Fuel Additives Health Effects Testing Regulation: Second Draft Final Report: 

Gasoline DIPE Vapor Condensate : A One-Generation Whole-Body Inhalation Reproduction Toxicity Study in 

Rats (Study No. 00-4205) 

Dear Mr. Karl Simon: 

The American Petroleum Institute (API), on behalf of the Section 211(b) Research Group (RG), is submitting the following 

information for EPA second review and approval as partial fulfillment of the CAA Section 211(b) Alternative Tier 2 

requirements of the testing regulation: 

• Second Draft Final Report: Gasoline DIPE Vapor Condensate: A One-Generation Whole-Body Inhalation 

Reproduction Toxicity Study in Rats (Study No. 00-4205)

• Reviewer Checklist 

The Second Draft Final Report addresses all EPA and independent reviewer comments as indicated, with page citation, in the 

Reviewer Checklist. 

When the RG receives EPA’s approval of the second draft report, the final study report will be submitted to you at the EPA 

Office of Transportation and Air Quality, Transportation and Regional Programs Division, as part of the requirements of 

Clean Air Act Section 211(b)(2) and 211(e) (Docket No. A-90-07). If you require further information, please contact me by 

mail at this address. 

Regards, 

Thomas M. Gray 

Encl (2): 

• Second Draft Final Report: Gasoline DIPE Vapor Condensate: A One-Generation Whole-Body Inhalation 

Reproduction Toxicity Study in Rats (Study No. 00-4205) 

• Reviewer Checklist 

 

cc: Joe Sopata, EPA (via email) 

 

An equal opportunity employer
FORMAL RECOMMENDATION BY THE

NATIONAL ORGANIC STANDARDS BOARD (NOSB) 

TO THE NATIONAL ORGANIC PROGRAM (NOP) 

Date: ____6-10-06___________________

Subject: Aquaculture Working Group Interim Final Report 

Chair: Kevin O’Rell 

Recommendation

The NOSB hereby recommends to the NOP the following: 

Rulemaking Action: ________ 

Guidance Statement: ________ 

Other: ___XX_____ 

Statement of the Recommendation (including Recount of Vote):

Recommendation for the NOSB officially receive the AWG Interim Final Report. 

Moved: Hue Karreman Second: 

Yes – 12 

No – 0 

Abstain – 0 

Absent – 2 

Rationale Supporting Recommendation (including consistency with OFPA and NOP):

To accept the report for work to begin at the Board level and recognize the hard work of the 

AWG in preparing this interim final report. 

Response by the NOP:
NOSB Recommendation 

Interim Final Report 

Aquaculture Working Group 

April 20, 2006 

The Livestock Committee recommends that the NOSB officially receive the Interim Final Report 

from the Aquaculture Working Group. The Aquaculture Working Group members are 

commended for the excellent work they have done preparing these recommendations. The 

Livestock Committee and NOSB will begin consideration of the Aquaculture Working Group 

Interim Final Report immediately and will continue to be in contact with the Working Group as 

needed for clarification, advice and counsel. 

Moved - Dan Giacomini, Second - Kevin Engelbert 

Vote 5-yes, 0-no, 0-abstain 

Voting were Rigo Delgado, Nancy Ostiguy, Mike Lacy, Dan Giacomini, Kevin Engelbert 

NOSB Vote: 

Moved: Hue Karreman Second:

Yes – 12 

No – 0 

Abstain – 0 

Absent – 2
### ..

SERVED: JUNE 

### 11,2012

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION OFFICE OF HEARINGS

WASHINGTON, DC

.IN THE MATTER OF 

### MIDWESTJET CHARTER, INC. FAA DOCKETNo. [TO BEASSIGNED] (Civil Penalty Case) DMS FAA-2012-0029


### ORDEROF DISMISSAL

·<>.- On February 16, 2012, the Federal AviationAdministration ("Complainant") filed a Complaint. OnJanuary 28, 2012, Midwest Jet Charter, Inc. ("Respondent") had filed a Request for Hearing. On June 4, 2012, Respondent withdrew its request for hearing. 14 C.P.R.§ 13.215 states: "At any time before or during a hearing, an agency attorney may withdraw a complaint orparty may withdraw a request for-a hearing withoutthe consent ofthe administrative lawjudge. Ifan agency attorney withdraws the complaint or a party withdraws the request for a hearing and the answer, the administrative lawjudge shall dismiss the proceedings under this subpart withprejudice."2 WHEREFORE, the within filed Withdrawal ofRequest for Hearing having been read and considered, it is ORDERED as follows: 1. Respondent's Withdrawal ofRequest for Hearing be and is hereby granted;·and
... 2. This proceeding be and is hereby dismissed with prejudice.

# ~tlJ('_~IA Richard C. Goodwin U.S. Administrative Law Judge Attachment

- Service List•

SERVICE LIST ORIGINAL & ONE COPY Federal Aviation Administration 800 Independence Avenue, S.W. Washington, DC 20591 Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2W1000 1

Tim Lodes Director ofHuman Resources Midwest Jet Charter, Inc. 4216 Dewitt Avenue Mattoon, IL 61938 TEL: 217-236-7102 FAJ{: 217-235-0573 ONE COPY

BrianaMartino, Complainant's Counsel Attorney, Office ofthe Regional Counsel, AGL-7 Great Lakes Region Federal Aviation Administration 2300 East Devon Avenue Des Plaines, IL 60018 TEL: 847-294-7313 FAJ{: 847-294-7498 The Honorable Richard C. Q()odwin, Administrative

### Law Judge Office ofHearings, M-20 U.S. Department ofTransportation 1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. (E11-310) Washington, DC 20590 TEL: 202-366-2139 Attorney-Advisor 202-366-5121 StaffAssistant FAJ{: 202-366-7536 FDMS No. FAA-2012-0029 (Civil Penalty Action)

1 Service was by U.S. Mail. For service inperson orbyexpedited courier, use the following address: Federal Aviation Administration, 600 Independence Avenue, S.W., Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2W1000, Washington, DC 20591, Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430.
#### Donald Zent et al., Respondents, v Board of Education of Cleveland Hill School District, Appellant.

—Order unanimously reversed on the law without costs, motion granted and complaint dismissed. Memorandum: It is well *1048settled that a party resisting a motion to dismiss for failure to comply with a 90-day demand must demonstrate a reasonable excuse for the failure to comply with the demand and a good and meritorious cause of action (CPLR 3216 [e]; *Papadopoulas v R.B. Supply Corp.,*152 AD2d 552; *Charlotte Lake Riv. Assocs. v American Ins. Co.,*130 AD2d 947, *lv denied*70 NY2d 605; *McDonald v Song Mountain,*125 AD2d 1006, 1007; *Cox v Edmister,*122 AD2d 557; *Highlands Ins. Co. v Maddena Constr. Co.,*109 AD2d 1071, 1072). In the absence of such a showing, it was an abuse of discretion for Special Term to deny defendant’s motion to dismiss *(see, Cox v Edmister, supra).*

Here, plaintiffs wholly failed to make the required showing. The affidavit of plaintiffs’ attorney does not attempt to explain the failure to comply with the demand, nor can it serve as an affidavit of merit because it is made by one with no personal knowledge of the facts *(see, Charlotte Lake Riv. Assocs. v American Ins. Co., supra,*at 947). Plaintiffs’ affidavits are likewise insufficient because they are "couched in conclusory terms and merely paraphrase the complaint and bill of particulars” *(Meth v Maimonides Med. Center,*99 AD2d 799, 800; *see also, Billings v Berkshire Mut. Ins. Co.,*149 AD2d 895, 897). (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Erie County, Joslin, J. —Dismiss Complaint.) Present—Doerr, J. P., Green, Pine, Balio and Lawton, JJ.
EXHIBIT 99.1

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 Annual Report of Tom Brown, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-K for the year ending December 31, 2002 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, James D. Lightner, Chairman, Chief Executive Officer and President of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



James
D. Lightner Chairman, Chief Executive Officer and PresidentMarch 18, 2003



QuickLinks
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

OF TEXAS

NO. WR-89,397-01

EX PARTE BILLY JOE THOMPSON, Applicant

ON APPLICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS

CAUSE NO. 1358558-A IN CRIMINAL DISTRICT COURT NO. 1

FROM TARRANT COUNTY

Per curiam.

O R D E R

Pursuant to the provisions of Article 11.07 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure, the

clerk of the trial court transmitted to this Court this application for a writ of habeas corpus. Ex parte

Young, 418 S.W.2d 824, 826 (Tex. Crim. App. 1967). Applicant was convicted of aggravated sexual

assault of a child under 14 years of age and indecency with a child by contact and sentenced to 75

and 20 years’ imprisonment, respectively, to run concurrently.

On January 4, 2019, the trial court made findings of fact and conclusions of law rejecting

Applicant’s allegations of ineffective assistance of counsel and false expert testimony. The trial

court did not hold an evidentiary hearing. The trial court adopted the State’s proposed
2

findings of fact and conclusions of law recommending that the relief sought be denied.

This Court has reviewed the record with respect to the allegations made by applicant.

We agree with the trial judge’s recommendation and adopt the trial judge’s findings and

conclusions with the following exceptions: Findings paragraph 20 and Conclusions

paragraph 16. Therefore, based on the trial court’s findings of fact and conclusions of law as well

as this Court’s independent review of the record, we deny relief.

IT IS SO ORDERED THIS THE 13th DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2019.

Filed: February 13, 2019

Do not publish
#### Ismet Delosovic, Individually and as Administrator of the Estates of Vaid Delosovic and Another, Deceased, et al., Respondents, v City of New York, Appellant, et al., Defendants. (And Two Third-Party Actions.)

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Edward Lehner, J.), entered on or about January 12, 1990, unanimously affirmed for the reasons stated by Edward Lehner, J., without costs. (143 Mise 2d 801.) No opinion. Concur—Murphy, P. J., Carro, Kupferman, Asch and Rubin, JJ.
EeA ; ' Federal Aviation

Administration

U.S. Department of 'I`ransportation Federal Aviation Administration Airman Details Report Personal Information: WILLIAM SCOTT LINCICOME Acldress is not availablc
Medical Information: Medical Class: Secoiid, Medical Date: 5/ 1995

Certificate Information: Certificate: COMMERCIAL PILOT Date of Issue: 6/5/ 1995 Ratings: 

### COMMERCIAL PILOT AIRPLANE SINGLE ENGINE LAND AIRPLANE MULTIENGINE LAND INSTRUMENT AIRPLANE
^ 01/18/201 1 13:0 7 FA X 84 7 29 4 749 8 FA ARE Q COUNS L AGL 7 11002/00 3 

# < S ^ U . S . Departmen t ofTransportatJOi ) Federa l Aviatio n Administratio n Grea t Lake s Regio n 230 0 Eas t Devo n Avenu e De s Plaincs . Illinoi s 60018-469 6 

# I Januar y 18,201 1

I n Repl y Refe r to ; AGL-7B CP09GL000 7 CP09GL000 9 FIRS T CLAS S MAI

L Hearin g Docket , Attn ; Hearin g Docke t Cler k Federa l Aviatio n Administratio n AGC-430 , Wilbe r

Wrigh t Building , Suit e 2W100 0 80 0 Independenc e Avenue , S . W . Washington , D C 2059 1 Are aCod e 84 7 294-786 2

Re : Midwes t

Helicopte r

Airways , Inc . T o Who mit Ma y Concern : I n accordanc e wit

h 1 4 CF R13.215 , th e Federa

l Aviatio n Administratio n (Complainant) , respectfull y withdraw s th e Complaint s i n th e tw o above case s agains t Midwes t Helicopte r Airways , Inc . (Respondent) . Sincerely , 

# i Kat e Barbe r Attorney Federa l Aviation Administratio n Grea t Lake s Region , AGL-7 B 230 0 Eas t Devo n Avenue De s Plaines , I

L 60018-469 6

Cc : Th e Honorabl e Richar dC . Goodwin

, Administrativ

e La w Judg e cc : Mr . JefF«a y Clement , Attorne y fo r Responden tV 01/18/201 1 13:0 7 FA X 84 7 29 4 749 8 FA ARE G COUNS L ASL 7 1^1003/00 3 \ 2 

### Certificat e o

f Servic e I hereby certif

y tha t th e foregoing Withrawa

l of th e Complaint s hav e been faxedan dmaile dthi s dat e to : Origina l an dOn e Copv : Hearin g Docke

t Federa l Aviatio n Administratio n 800 Independenc e Avenue , S . W . Washington , D C 2059 1 Attn : Hearin g Docket

Cler k AGC-430 , Wilbe

r Wrigh t Building Suit e 2W100 0 Fax:(202)493-514 2 The Honorabl e RicardC . Goodwin , Administrativ e La w Judg e Offic e o f Hearings , M-2 0 U.S . Departrnen

t o f Transportatio n 120 0 New Jersey Avenue , S E Eas t Buildin g GroundFloor , Roo mE l 2-32 0 Washington , D C 2059 0 Fax : (202 ) 366-753 6 Mr . Jeffeiy Clemen

t HoffandHerran 2 0 Sout h Clar k Street Chicago , I L 6060 3 Fax : (312)-853-3924 Dated : Januar

y 18,201 1 Yoland aQuile s Lega l Technicia

n FA A Grea t Lake s
The American Seed Trade Association supports the following positions with regard to implementation of federal and state hemp regulations:

- The term ‘hemp’ should be defined consistently as the plant Cannabis sativa L. and any part of that plant, including the seeds thereof and all derivatives, extracts, cannabinoids, isomers, acids, salts, and salts of isomers, whether growing or not, with a delta-9 tetrahydrocannabinol concentration of not more than 0.3 percent on a dry weight basis. 

Seed supply sourcing should only include free market accessibility from commercial production.

The Association of Official Seed Certifying Agencies standards for production of industrial hemp seed should be used for all production to ensure quality and differentiation between hemp and marijuana because of the difficulty in differentiating between the two crop seeds. 

Interstate transportation rules should be clarified to eliminate the disparate and confusing standards on commerce for hemp seed and plant shipments.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment.

Pat Miller

American Seed Trade Association

Alexandria, VA
AGREEMENT
                                    ---------



The advent of the retirement of Lew Stone requires a transition period and
responsibilities defined such that an orderly transition can be implemented.  As
such the following is agreed to by Lew Stone and Community West Bancshares
("CWB").

     I.   Lew Stone will be an employee of CWB retaining the title of Chief
          Executive Officer from the period starting September 1, 2001 to
          December 31, 2001 with abbreviated responsibilities as defined below:

               a)   Source of information relating to current and past bank
                    business endeavors
               b)   Surveillance of Payday loan litigation, advising management
                    and Board of appropriate action
               c)   Sounding board for new endeavors contemplated by management
                    and Board
               d)   Any other tasks (within the parameters of this agreement)
                    deemed applicable by management and the Board

          The above responsibilities shall be implemented from Mr. Stone's place
          of residence or if required in the Goleta headquarters not to exceed
          two weeks per month.

          Mr. Stone will not manage the daily operations of CWB or GNB (these
          activities will be carried out by Steve Haley and Lynda Nahra).

          Mr. Stone will be compensated at one half his current salary during
          the period of September 1, 2001 through December 31, 2001. When in
          Goleta, Mr. Stone will cover his living expenses and CWB will cover
          travel costs.

          During the period of September 1, 2001 through December 31, 2001 Mr.
          Stone will continue as a Board member of CWB and GNB.

     II.  After December 31, 2001 Mr. Stone will be a consultant to CWB and an
          aide to management and the Board along with the above stated
          responsibilities. However, residence in Goleta will be as mutually
          agreed upon relative to timing and compensation.

          Mr. Stone will be an employee of CWB for the 26 months following
          December 31, 2001. Mr. Stone will be compensated at a monthly rate
          determined by dividing 6 months severance pay by 26.



-------------------------                        -------------------------
Lew Stone                                        Michael Alexander
Chief Executive Officer                          Chairman of the Board
Community West Bancshares                        Community West Bancshares


<PAGE>
##### 



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 Annual Report of White Electronic Designs
Corporation (the Company) on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended September
27, 2003 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
hereof (the Report), I, William J. Rodes, Chief Accounting 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.

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or
other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the
signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this
written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to White
Electronic Designs Corporation and will be furnished to the Securities and
Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

Date: December 24, 2003

| |                                                               
| | --------------------------------------------------------------
| | /s/ William J. Rodes
William J. Rodes
Chief Accounting Officer
**AD Economic Evaluation**



### Docket No . FAA - 20 13 - 0679 Directorate ID : 20 13 - SW - 015 - AD Helicopter Model: Eurocopter France Model AS350B, BA, B1, B2, B3, C, D, and D1 Helicopters Number of Helicopters (U.S. Operators): 651 Helic opters in the US Registry . Reason : The actions of this AD are intended to prevent the collective from becoming inadvertently

locked in the low position and subsequent loss of control of the helicopter. Costs : Parts per Helicopter $ 95 Labor per Helicop ter ( 1 work-hour to measure the clearance and repair the locking stud and strip x 

### $ 8 5 /work -hour . ) $ 85

Other (Explain) Total Cost per Helicopter $ 180 Total US Fleet Cost $ 117,180 Executive Order 12866 : Could the AD be considered a “significant regu latory action?” Yes ( ) No (  ) DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures : Is the AD significant? Yes ( ) Explain Below No (  ) Regulatory Flexibility Act : Will the AD have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities? Yes ( ) No (  ) Project Engineer : Robert Grant
#### Gerald Layton LAVELL, Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Appellee.

No. 18338.

United States Court of Appeals Ninth Circuit.

Nov. 5, 1963.

James W. Stewart, San Jose, Cal., for appellant.

Sidney I. Lezak, U. S. Atty., and William B. Borgeson, Asst. U. S. Atty., Portland, Or., for appellee.

Before CHAMBERS, POPE and MERRILL, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

The judgment is vacated for the reason that it incorrectly states the offenses for which Lavell was convicted. The indictment and the jury verdict clearly indicate that defendant was convicted under one conspiracy count and under one substantive count; not two conspiracy counts.

We find the trial court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to grant a continuance and that its remarks during the course of the trial were not prejudicial to appellant.

 The sentence as to count one (upon which the evidence must be admitted to be adequate) is clearly above the limit permitted by 18 U.S.C. § 371. We do not reach the question of adequacy of the evidence on count three. Normally, under Sinclair v. United States, 279 U.S. 263, 49 S.Ct. 268, 73 L.Ed. 692, if the concurrent sentences were within permissible limits, one good count would result in affirmance.

Upon resentencing, the court can eliminate the objection that defendant was *233not expressly offered new counsel. At this time, we do not pass on the point.

We cannot agree with appellant that a new trial is required.

The case is remanded to the district court.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Brian Biancavilla, Appellant.

—Judgment unanimously affirmed. Counsel’s application to withdraw granted *(see, People v Crawford,*71 AD2d 38). (Appeal from Judgment of Oswego County Court, Brandt, J.—Attempted Burglary, 3rd Degree.) Present—Callahan, J. P., Doerr, Green, Pine and Lowery, JJ.