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

Alexander Van der Bellen

Managing Director and

Associate General Counsel

Delta Air Lines, Inc.

1212 New York Avenue NW

Washington, DC 20005

202.842.4184

sascha.vanderbellen@delta.com

October 12, 2012

via email and regulations.gov

The Honorable Susan Kurland

Assistant Secretary for Aviation and International Affairs

Department of Transportation

1200 New Jersey Ave, SE

Washington, DC 20590

Re: Congressional Support for Delta’s Seattle-Haneda service proposal

Dear Assistant Secretary Kurland:

Please find enclosed letters from members of the congressional delegations of Alaska, Idaho, 

Montana, Oregon and Utah expressing support for Delta’s Seattle-Haneda service proposal. 

These letters are in addition to the letter of support signed by the ten-member Washington state 

delegation that was filed in the docket on August 8, 2012.

Respectfully submitted,

Alexander Van der Bellen

CC: DOT-OST-2010-0018

Service List




CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

A copy of the foregoing document has been served this 12th day of October, 2012, upon 

the following persons via email:

Francis.Heil@aa.com

Robert.Wirick@aa.com

dan.weiss@united.com

thomas.bolling@united.com

lhalloway@crowell.com

gmurphy@crowell.com

howard.kass@usairways.com

benjamin.slocum@usairways.com

jhill@dowlohnes.com

paul.gretch@dot.gov

keith.glatz@dot.gov

esta.rosenberg@dot.gov

brett.kruger@dot.gov

todd.homan@dot.gov

urskr@state.gov

eugene_alford@ita.doc.gov

info@airlineinfo.com

Tim.OMalley@alpa.org

Ishiwata.K@portseattle.org

Safora.I@portseattle.org

Kyle.Levine@alaskaair.com

Megan.Lawrence@alaskaair.com
#### Darryl HUFF, Appellant, v. STATE of Alaska, Appellee.

No. 3740.

Supreme Court of Alaska.

Nov. 17, 1978.

Linda L. Walton, Rice, Hoppner, Hed-land, Fleisher & Ingraham, Fairbanks, for appellant.

Rhonda F. Butterfield, Asst. Dist. Atty., Harry L. Davis, Dist. Atty., Fairbanks, Av-rum M. Gross, Atty. Gen., Juneau, for ap-pellee.

OPINION

Before BOOCHEVER, C. J., and RABI-NOWITZ, CONNOR, BURKE and MATTHEWS, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Convicted on two counts of the sale of heroin in violation of AS 17.10.010, Huff has now been sentenced to serve four years in prison on both counts, the sentences to run consecutively. The entire sentence on the second count was suspended and Huff was placed on probation for its duration. The sentence is not excessive and is consistent with the mandate of this court in *Huff v. State,*568 P.2d 1014 (Alaska 1977), because our order that Huff should be sentenced to a term of imprisonment for not more than four years did not preclude a suspended sentence for a longer period.

AFFIRMED.

*622RABINOWITZ, Justice,

dissenting.

The superior court’s sentence is inconsistent with our mandate in *Huff*v. *State,*568 P.2d 1014 (Alaska 1977). There we concluded that Huff should not have been given concurrent sentences of more than four years. After remand *from*this court, Huff was resentenced to consecutive four year terms with the second four year term suspended subject to Huff’s being placed on probation.

I therefore disagree with the majority’s conclusion that the opinion and mandate in *Huff*do not preclude imposition of a suspended sentence beyond four years. In my view, *Huff*contemplated that upon resen-tencing, the superior court was precluded from imposing a sentence exceeding four years. In the past this court has consistently held that in determining whether a sentence is excessive it will consider the total sentence including any period of supervision.1

1

. *Sandvik v. State,*564 P.2d 20, 25 (Alaska 1977); *Andrews v. State,*552 P.2d 150, 152 (Alaska 1976).
process claim. See Hudson, 468 U.S. at 533. Although appellant also 

asserted that his Fourth Amendment right to be free from an illegal 

seizure was violated, this allegation essentially restated his due process 

claim, and regardless, the Fourth Amendment does not apply within the 

confines of a prison cell. Id. at 528 & n.8. Thus, his illegal seizure claim 

fails for the same reason as his due process claim. See id. at 526, 533. To 

the extent that appellant asserted a state tort claim for negligence, the 

district court lacked jurisdiction to consider such a claim based on the 

facts alleged, as the value of the property at issue was well under $10,000. 

See NRS 4.370(1)(b) (justice courts have jurisdiction over actions for 

detaining or damaging personal property valued under $10,000); see also 

Nev. Const. art. 6, § 6(1) (district courts "have original jurisdiction in all 

cases excluded by law from the original jurisdiction of justices' courts"). 

As appellant could not establish either a constitutional claim 

or a state tort claim within the district court's jurisdiction under the facts 

alleged in the complaint, dismissal was proper, see Buzz Stew, 124 Nev. at 

228, 181 P.3d at 672, and we 

ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED. ,c).--; A 

- 

1. 

- 

Saitta 

Gibbons Pickering 

cc: Hon. James Todd Russell, District Judge 

Demetrious Stewart 

Attorney General/Carson City 

Carson City Clerk 

SUPREME COURT 

OF 

NEVADA 2 

(0) 1947e)
* Pursuant to Local Rule 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent

except under the limited circumstances set forth in Local Rule

47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

__________________

No. 95-30525

Conference Calendar

__________________

JAMES BOLTON,

 Petitioner-Appellant,

versus

BURL CAIN, Acting Warden; RICHARD P. IEYOUB, 

Attorney General, State of Louisiana, 

 Respondents-Appellees.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Louisiana

USDC No. 95-CV-531

- - - - - - - - - -

February 29, 1996

Before GARWOOD, JONES, and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Appellant James Bolton challenges the denial of his second

petition for a writ of habeas corpus. The district court

dismissed the petition after Bolton failed to file a timely

response to the court's direction that he complete a form

explaining why his petition should not be dismissed as an abuse

of the writ, pursuant to Rule 9(b) of the Rules Governing 28

U.S.C. § 2254 Proceedings. On appeal, Bolton addresses only the

merits of his substantive claims but does not address the Rule 
No. 95-30525

-2-

9(b) issue, which he thereby abandons. Yohey v. Collins, 985

F.2d 222, 224-25 (5th Cir. 1993). Because no challenge to the

Rule 9(b) grounds is before us, we may not reach the merits. See

Foret v. Whitley, 965 F.2d 18, 20 (5th Cir. 1992). The appeal is

frivolous and is dismissed as such. See 5th Cir. R. 42.2.

APPEAL DISMISSED.
EXHIBIT 32.2

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

      In connection with the Quarterly Report of Sun Network Group, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended June 30, 2004 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), I, T. Joseph Coleman, chief
financial officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as
adopted pursuant to ss. 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: August 23, 2004



                                          /s/ T. Joseph Coleman
                                          -----------------------
                                          T. Joseph Coleman
                                          Chief Financial Officer
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 6 (Wednesday, January 9, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Page 1848]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-00226]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Department of the Army


Intent To Grant an Exclusive License of a U.S. Government-Owned 
Invention

AGENCY: Department of the Army, DoD.

ACTION: Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: In accordance with 35 U.S.C. 209(e), and 37 CFR 404.7(a)(1)(i) 
and 37 CFR 404.7(b)(1)(i), announcement is made of the intent to grant 
an exclusive, revocable license to the invention claimed in U.S. Patent 
No. 6,316,197, entitled ``Method of Diagnosing of Exposure to Toxic 
Agents by Measuring Distinct Pattern in the Levels of Expression of 
Specific Genes,'' issued on November 13, 2001, and foreign rights to 
Cascade Biotherapeutics, Inc., with its principal place of business at 
4938 Hampden Lane <greek-i>319, Bethesda, Maryland 20814-2914.

ADDRESSES: Commander, U.S. Army Medical Research and Materiel Command, 
ATTN: Command Judge Advocate, MCMR-JA, 504 Scott Street, Fort Detrick, 
MD 21702-5012.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For licensing issues, Dr. Paul Mele, 
Office of Research & Technology Applications, (301) 619-6664. For 
patent issues, Ms. Elizabeth Arwine, Patent Attorney, (301) 619-7808; 
both at telefax (301) 619-5034.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Anyone wishing to object to grant of this 
license can file written objections along with supporting evidence, if 
any, within 15 days from the date of this publication. Written 
objections are to be filed with the Command Judge Advocate (see 
ADDRESSES).

Brenda S. Bowen,
Army Federal Register Liaison Officer.
[FR Doc. 2013-00226 Filed 1-8-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3710-08-P
**Exhibit 23.1** **CONSENT    OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**     The Board of Directors    Bowne & Co., Inc.:     We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration    statements (Nos.    333-102046,333-64836,333-79409,333-81639,    2-96887,    33-48831,33-35810 and    333-57045)    on    Forms S-8    and in the registration statements (Nos.    333-109810,333-25861,333-25849,    and    333-18629)    filed on    Forms S-3    of Bowne & Co., Inc. of our reports dated    April 10, 2006, with respect to the Consolidated Balance    Sheets of Bowne & Co., Inc. as of December 31,    2005 and 2004, and the related Consolidated Statements of    Operations, Stockholders’ Equity, and Cash Flows, and the    related financial statement schedule, management’s    assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over    financial reporting as of December 31, 2005 and the    effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting as of    December 31, 2005, which reports appears in the    December 31, 2005 annual report on    Form 10-K    of Bowne & Co., Inc.     Our report dated April 10, 2006, on management’s    assessment of effectiveness of internal control over financial    reporting and the effectiveness of internal control over    financial reporting as of December 31, 2005, expresses our    opinion that Bowne & Co., Inc. did not maintain effective    internal control over financial reporting as of    December 31, 2005 because of the effect of material    weaknesses on the achievement of the objectives of the control    criteria and contains an explanatory paragraph that states that    Bowne & Co., Inc. lacked effective procedures to reconcile    the income tax general ledger accounts to supporting detail and    adequately verify data used in income tax computations and    lacked effective policies and procedures for review and approval    of amounts recorded in income tax accounts.     As discussed in Note 2, the Consolidated Financial    Statements as of December 31, 2004 and for each of the    years ended December 31, 2004 and 2003 have been restated.     /s/ KPMG LLP     New York, New York    April 10, 2006
FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF FLORIDA

_____________________________

No. 1D17-3268

_____________________________

WILLIAM LEE WILSON,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Columbia County.

Leandra G. Johnson, Judge.

July 27, 2018

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

WOLF, LEWIS, and RAY, JJ., concur.

_____________________________

Not final until disposition of any timely and 

authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 

9.331.

_____________________________
2

William Lee Wilson, pro se, Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
10-K

| 1.   | The Report      fully complies with the requirements of Sections 13(a) or 15(d) of the      Securities Exchange Act of 1934; andthat |
|----------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

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

| March      24, 2010 |   | /s/Robert      P. Ambrosini                              |
|---------------------|--------|----------------------------------------------------------|
| Date           |   | Executive      Vice President and Chief FinancialOfficer |

----
EXHIBIT 32

                                 CERTIFICATIONS

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             10 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 Yang Holding Company ("the
Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended Sep 30, 2003 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report), I. James
Chow, Principal Financial and Accounting Officer of the Company, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 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 Act of 1934; and

         (2)      The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in
                  all Material respects, the financial condition and result of
                  operation of the Company.

                                                  /s/ James Chow
                                                  ------------------------------
                                                  James Chow
                                                  President, Treasurer and
                                                  Secretary, Principal Financial
                                                  and Accounting Officer

November 10, 2003
Sent: Thursday, May 26, 2011 8:15:11 AM  

To: DistributionTransformers‐2010‐STD‐0048  

Subject: 10 CFR Part 431 ; EERE‐2010‐BT‐STD‐0048 ‐ RIN 1904‐AC04 ; Energy Conservation Standards for

Distribution Transformers: Public Meeting and Availability of the Preliminary Technical Support

Document  

Auto forwarded by a Rule

Dear Ms. Brenda Edwards

  

Here is document #1 referred in a previous email (see bellow) that was made available to the public by

WIPO today.

  

Document #2 will follow in a separate e‐mail since attached files are limited to 5Mb.

  

Regards,

  

Bruno Francoeur

Hydro‐Quebec Research Institute ‐ IREQ

1800 Lionel‐Boulet

Varennes, Quebec, Canada

J3X 1S1

Phone: 450‐652‐8988

Fax: 450‐652‐8181

Email: francoeur.bruno@ireq.ca

  

De : Francoeur, Bruno  

Envoyé : 11 avril 2011 15:41

À : 'distributiontransformers‐2010‐std‐0048@ee.doe.gov'

Cc : Couture, Pierre

Objet : 10 CFR Part 431 ; EERE‐2010‐BT‐STD‐0048 ‐ RIN 1904‐AC04 ; Energy Conservation Standards for

Distribution Transformers: Public Meeting and Availability of the Preliminary Technical Support

Document

Ms. Brenda Edwards

U.S. Department of Energy

Building Technologies Program

10 CFR Part 431

EERE‐2010‐BT‐STD‐0048

RIN 1904‐AC04

Energy Conservation Standards for Distribution Transformers: Public Meeting and Availability of the

Preliminary Technical Support Document
  

Dear Ms. Edwards,

  

We would like to inform you of two new technologies under development that are related to

distribution transformers and which will be partially disclosed to the public next month.  They are:

  

1 ‐ A new iron‐based amorphous alloy ribbon for making distribution transformer cores and having

enhanced magnetic properties while remaining ductile after annealing, and

2 ‐ A new distribution transformer assembly made with the new alloy and method of making.

  

These new technologies will be disclosed in the following documents that have been filed for patents at

the World Intellectual Property Organization:

1‐ PCT/CA2010/001844, "SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR TREATING AN AMORPHOUS ALLOY RIBBON",

Inventors: Bruno Francoeur & Pierre Couture, Applicant: Hydro‐Quebec

2‐ PCT/CA2010/001845, "ELECTRICAL TRANSFORMER ASSEMBLY", Inventors: Bruno Francoeur & Pierre

Couture, Applicant: Hydro‐Quebec

You will be able to access them through the WIPO's website patent applications database

(http://www.wipo.int/pctdb/en/) starting May 19, 2011.  

We want to bring them at your attention for your present ongoing analysis towards amending or not the

current ruled efficiency standards.

Yours truly,

Bruno Francoeur

Hydro‐Quebec Research Institute ‐ IREQ

1800 Lionel‐Boulet

Varennes, Quebec, Canada

J3X 1S1

Phone: 450‐652‐8988

Fax: 450‐652‐8181

Email: francoeur.bruno@ireq.ca
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1290 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1290

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to exempt certain emergency 
 medical devices from the excise tax on medical devices, and for other 
                               purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           February 14, 2019

Mr. Turner (for himself and Mr. Joyce of Ohio) introduced the following 
      bill; which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to exempt certain emergency 
 medical devices from the excise tax on medical devices, and for other 
                               purposes.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``First Responder Medical Device Tax 
Relief Act''.

SEC. 2. REPEALING FIRST RESPONDERS EMERGENCY MEDICAL EQUIPMENT TAX.

    (a) In General.--Paragraph (2) of section 4191(b) of the Internal 
Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by striking ``and'' at the end of 
subparagraph (C), by redesignating subparagraph (D) as subparagraph 
(E), and by inserting after subparagraph (C) the following new 
subparagraph:
                    ``(D) qualified emergency medical devices, and''.
    (b) Qualified Emergency Medical Device.--Subsection (b) of section 
4191 of such Code is amended by adding at the end the following new 
paragraph:
            ``(3) Qualified emergency medical device.--The term 
        `qualified emergency medical device' means any medical device 
        of a type furnished by first responders or ambulance services 
        in providing out-of-hospital or pre-hospital care, or transport 
        to a medical care facility, for individuals--
                    ``(A) with illnesses, injuries, or other medical 
                emergencies, or
                    ``(B) in need of medical transport, extrication, or 
                evacuation.''.
    (c) Certain Exemptions Made Applicable.--
            (1) The last sentence of subsection (a) of section 4221 of 
        such Code is amended by striking ``(4),''.
            (2) The last sentence of paragraph (2) of section 6416(b) 
        of such Code is amended by striking ``(C),''.
    (d) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section shall 
apply to sales after December 31, 2019.
                                 <all>
```
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<CIK>       0000715273
<NAME>      Wyndham International, Inc.
       
<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998             DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998             JUL-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998             DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                          69,069                  27,076
<SECURITIES>                                         0                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  185,994                  46,340
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0                       0
<INVENTORY>                                     23,583                   9,144
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               325,950                 100,662
<PP&E>                                         662,135                  29,686
<DEPRECIATION>                                  36,032                   1,304
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               2,006,821                 252,088
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          602,494                 115,656
<BONDS>                                              0                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0                       0
<PREFERRED>                                         36                       0
<COMMON>                                         2,135                     733
<OTHER-SE>                                     132,923                  80,132
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 2,006,821                 252,088
<SALES>                                      1,842,682                 167,727
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             2,002,227                 204,134
<CGS>                                                0                       0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,294,746                 142,562
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               752,751                  60,266
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              35,690                     933
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 77,826                     373
<INCOME-TAX>                                  (14,381)                   (481)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0                       0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                (1,257)                       0
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (112,419)                    (20)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.84)                       0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.84)                       0
        

</TABLE>