alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
AFS-11-113-E 

February 28, 2011 

 Exemption No. 8844B 

 Regulatory Docket No. FAA-2006-26736 

Mr. David L. Jones 

Corporate Aviation Education Director 

Aviation Institute of Maintenance 

4455 South Boulevard 

Virginia Beach, VA 23452 

Dear Mr. Jones: 

This letter is to inform you that we have granted your petition to extend Exemption No. 8844, 

as amended. It explains the basis for our decision and describes its effect. 

The Basis for Our Decision 

By letter dated December 26, 2010, you petitioned the Federal Aviation Administration 

(FAA) on behalf of Technical Educational Services, Inc., d.b.a. Aviation Institute of 

Maintenance (Aviation Institute) (operating under Air Agency Certificate V18T077K) for an 

extension of Exemption No. 8844, as amended. That exemption from § 65.75(a) of Title 14, 

Code of Federal Regulations allows Aviation Institute to administer the aviation mechanic 

general written test to students immediately following their successful completion of the 

general curriculum but before they meet the experience requirements of § 65.77. 

In your petition, you indicate that there has been no change in the conditions and reasons 

relative to public interest and safety that were the basis for granting the original exemption. 

The FAA has determined that good cause exists for not publishing a summary of the petition 

in the Federal Register. The requested extension of the exemption would not set a precedent, 

and any delay in acting on this petition would be detrimental to Aviation Institute. 

Our Decision 

The FAA has determined that the justification for the issuance of Exemption No. 8844, as 

amended, remains valid with respect to this exemption and is in the public interest. 
2 

Therefore, under the authority provided by 49 U.S.C. 40113 and 44701, which the FAA 

Administrator has delegated to me, I grant your petition. 

The Effect of Our Decision 

Our decision extends the termination date of Exemption No. 8844, as amended, to 

February 28, 2013, unless sooner superseded or rescinded. 

All conditions and limitations of Exemption No. 8844 remain the same. This letter must be 

attached to, and is a part of, Exemption No. 8844. 

Sincerely, 

/s/ 

John W. McGraw 

Acting Director, Flight Standards 

 Service
20563

#### Yoshioka v. Punalu'u Development, Inc.

Affirmed
```

                                                                    Exhibit 32.1

                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. &1350)

Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. &1350), the
undersigned,  Joseph V. Roberts, Chief Executive Officer of Nutrition Management
Services  Company,  a  Pennsylvania  corporation  (the  "Company"),  does hereby
certify, to his knowledge, that:

The  Quarterly  Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter  ended March 31, 2004 of the
Company (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of section 13 (a) or
15 (d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and the information  contained in
the Report fairly presents,  in all material respects,  the financial  condition
and results of operations of the Company.

                                              /s/ Joseph V. Roberts
                                             -----------------------------------
                                             Joseph V. Roberts
                                             Chief Executive Officer

May 24, 2004
```
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 205 Introduced in House (IH)]

114th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. RES. 205

   Congratulating the administration, staff, students, and alumni of 
     Roosevelt University on the occasion of the University's 70th 
                              anniversary.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 15, 2015

Mr. Quigley (for himself, Mr. Rush, Mr. Danny K. Davis of Illinois, Mr. 
Gutieerrez, Ms. Duckworth, Mr. Foster, Mr. Lipinski, and Mr. Kinzinger 
of Illinois) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to 
              the Committee on Education and the Workforce

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
   Congratulating the administration, staff, students, and alumni of 
     Roosevelt University on the occasion of the University's 70th 
                              anniversary.

Whereas, on April 17, 2015, Roosevelt University, located in Chicago, Illinois, 
        will celebrate the 70th anniversary of the founding of the University on 
        April 17, 1945;
Whereas Roosevelt University has graduated more than 95,000 students who have 
        become leaders in their professions and careers, including Chicago's 
        first African-American mayor, Harold Washington;
Whereas Roosevelt University was founded at a time when most American 
        universities and colleges did not enroll large numbers of minority or 
        immigrant students;
Whereas Roosevelt University became one of the Nation's first colleges to admit 
        all qualified students, regardless of race, religion, or national 
        origin;
Whereas throughout its history, Roosevelt University has always remained true to 
        the values of inclusiveness, opportunity, and social justice; and
Whereas today, Roosevelt remains one of the most diverse universities in the 
        Midwest: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the House of Representatives--
            (1) congratulates the administration, staff, students, and 
        alumni of Roosevelt University on the occasion of the 
        University's 70th anniversary; and
            (2) wishes the entire Roosevelt community many years of 
        continued success in the future.
                                 <all>
```
1

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO

Docket No. 43878

STATE OF IDAHO,

Plaintiff-Respondent,

v.

DEANGELO LAMAR HANKSTON,

Defendant-Appellant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

2016 Unpublished Opinion No. 660

Filed: August 25, 2016

Stephen W. Kenyon, Clerk

THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED

OPINION AND SHALL NOT

BE CITED AS AUTHORITY

Appeal from the District Court of the First Judicial District, State of Idaho, 

Bonneville County. Hon. Jon J. Shindurling, District Judge. 

Judgment of conviction and unified sentence of ten years, with a minimum period 

of confinement of two years, for possession of Oxycodone with the intent to 

deliver, affirmed.

Eric D. Fredericksen, Interim State Appellate Public Defender; Elizabeth A. 

Allred, Deputy Appellate Public Defender, Boise, for appellant. 

Hon. Lawrence G. Wasden, Attorney General; Lori A. Fleming, Deputy Attorney 

General, Boise, for respondent. 

________________________________________________

Before MELANSON, Chief Judge; GUTIERREZ, Judge;

and HUSKEY, Judge

________________________________________________

PER CURIAM

Deangelo Lamar Hankston pled guilty to possession of Oxycodone with the intent to 

deliver, Idaho Code § 37-2732(a)(1)(A). In exchange for his guilty plea, an additional charge 

and enhancement were dismissed. The district court imposed a unified sentence of ten years, 

with a minimum period of confinement of two years. Hankston appeals, contending that his

sentence is excessive.

Sentencing is a matter for the trial court’s discretion. Both our standard of review and the 

factors to be considered in evaluating the reasonableness of the sentence are well established and 
2

need not be repeated here. See State v. Hernandez, 121 Idaho 114, 117-18, 822 P.2d 1011, 1014-

15 (Ct. App. 1991); State v. Lopez, 106 Idaho 447, 449-51, 680 P.2d 869, 871-73 (Ct. App. 

1984); State v. Toohill, 103 Idaho 565, 568, 650 P.2d 707, 710 (Ct. App. 1982). When reviewing 

the length of a sentence, we consider the defendant’s entire sentence. State v. Oliver, 144 Idaho 

722, 726, 170 P.3d 387, 391 (2007). Applying these standards, and having reviewed the record 

in this case, we cannot say that the district court abused its discretion.

Therefore, Hankston’s judgment of conviction and sentence are affirmed.
#### State v. Zabanal

23022

08/30/2001

Affirmed
#### Brewton, Appellee, *v.*Jeffries, Appellant.

(No. 31760

Decided May 25, 1949.)

*Mr. Frank W. Emslie,*for appellee.

*Mr. Alexander E. Martin,*for appellant.

It is ordered and adjudged that this appeal as of right be, and the same hereby is, dismissed for the-*556reason that no debatable constitutional question is ■involved.

*Appeal dismissed.*

Weygandt, C. J., Matthias, Hart, Zimmerman, Stewart, Turner and Taet, JJ., concur.
Record of Discussion Docket No. FAA- Directorate Identifier: - AD



### With whom outside the FAA has this AD action been discussed (i.e., Design Approval Holder, manufacturer, ATA, NBAA, RAA, AOPA, ALPA, GAMA, etc)?

ORGANIZATION PERSON CONTACTED DATE TOPICS DISCUSSED Boe ing Buhpinder Singh 8 /1 2/2 015 WFD Analysis A4A Robert Ireland 8/2 7/ 2015 Service Action

Other/ Additional Information:
133 P.3d 815

#### DFS GROUP L.P., a Delaware limited partnership, dba Hawaiian King Candies, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. PAIEA PROPERTIES, a Hawaii limited partnership, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 25662.

Supreme Court of Hawai'i.

May 3, 2006.

*ORDER DISMISSING “REAL PARTY IN INTEREST ALSTON HUNT FLOYD & ING’S MOTION FOR PARTIAL RECONSIDERATION OF CONCURRING OPINION OF CHIEF JUSTICE MOON, FILED APRIL 3, 2006*

MOON, C.J.,

with whom LEVINSON, J., joins.

Having considered “Real Party in Interest Alston Hunt Floyd & Ing’s Motion for Partial Reconsideration of Concurring Opinion of Chief Justice Moon, Filed April 3, 2006,” the papers in support thereof, and the record herein,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the motion for partial reconsideration of the minority position is dismissed on the ground that the relief sought is not available under Hawaii Rules of Appellate Procedure Rule 40 (permitting reconsideration of “the opinion, dispositional order or ruling” that a party asserts *“the court*the majority)] has overlooked or misapprehended” (emphasis added)).

NAKAYAMA and ACOBA, JJ., and Circuit Judge POLLACK, assigned by reason of vacancy.

*STATEMENT OF NO POSITION*

Inasmuch as the motion for partial reconsideration of the concurring opinion of Chief Justice Moon does not request relief from the majority opinion, we take no position on the motion.
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CORY A. TATE

,

Petitioner

,

v. Case No. 5D 17

- 3562

ST ATE OF FLORIDA

,

Respondent

. ________________________________/

Opinion filed March 2, 2018

Petition for Belated Appeal A Case of Original Jurisdiction.

Cory A. Tate, Wewahitchka

, pro se.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Att orney G eneral Tallahassee, and, Kayl ee D. Tatman

, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM.

The petition for belated appeal is granted. A copy of this opinion shall be filed

with the trial court and be treated as the notice of appeal from the October 1 6 , 2015

judgment s and sentence s in C ase N o. 2014

- CF

- 003479

- A

- O

, in the Circuit Court in and

for Orange County, Florida. See Fla. R. App. P. 9.141(c)( 6 )(D).

PETITION GRANTED

.

BERGER, WALLIS and LAMBERT

, JJ., concur.
H. R. 960 

One Hundred Fourteenth Congress 

of the 

United States of America 

AT THE SECOND SESSION 

Begun and held at the City of Washington on Monday, 

the fourth day of January, two thousand and sixteen 

An Act 

Designate the Department of Veterans Affairs community-based outpatient clinic 

in Newark, Ohio, as the Daniel L. Kinnard VA Clinic. 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 

the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

SECTION 1. FINDINGS. 

Congress finds the following: 

(1) Daniel L. Kinnard was born on October 21, 1949, in 

Mount Vernon, Ohio. 

(2) While residing in Newark, Ohio, Daniel L. Kinnard 

enlisted in the Army at Fort Hayes, Ohio, on November 14, 

1966, and served as a Specialist Fourth Class in the 101st 

Airborne Division. 

(3) Specialist Kinnard was awarded the National Defense 

Service Medal, Vietnam Service Medal, Vietnam Campaign 

Medal, Parachutist Badge, Sharpshooter Badge with Rifle Bar, 

Bronze Star for Valor, Purple Heart, Good Conduct Medal, 

and the Combat Medical Badge. 

(4) Specialist Kinnard’s citation for the Bronze Star said, 

‘‘For heroism in combat against a hostile force in the Republic 

of Vietnam on 17 February 1968. Specialist Four Kinnard 

distinguished himself while attached as a medic on a combat 

operation near Quang Tri, Republic of Vietnam. The point 

platoon made contact with enemy positions in a hedgerow and 

two of the point men were seriously wounded. Without hesitation, Specialist Kinnard rushed through the heavy volume 

of enemy fire to reach the wounded men. With complete disregard for his own personal safety, Specialist Kinnard remained 

exposed to enemy fire while he treated the wounded men. 

Once he administered first aid to the wounded, Specialist 

Kinnard organized their evacuation under fire. His personal 

bravery and devotion to duty were in keeping with the highest 

traditions of the military service and reflect great credit upon 

himself, his unit, and United States Army.’’. 

(5) Specialist Kinnard was killed in action on March 9, 

1968, while rendering aid to his fellow paratroopers. 

SEC. 2. DANIEL L. KINNARD VA CLINIC. 

(a) DESIGNATION.—The Department of Veterans Affairs community-based outpatient clinic located in Newark, Ohio, shall after 

the date of the enactment of this Act be known and designated 

as the ‘‘Daniel L. Kinnard VA Clinic’’. 
H. R. 960—2 

(b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, regulation, 

document, paper, or other record of the United States to the Department of Veterans Affairs community-based outpatient clinic referred 

to in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the 

Daniel L. Kinnard VA Clinic. 

Speaker of the House of Representatives. 

Vice President of the United States and

President of the Senate.
#### The People of the State of New York, Plaintiff, *v.*Henry Di Franco, Defendant.

County Court, Kings County,

April 10, 1959.

*178
      *Edward 8. Silver, District Attorney (David Diamond*of counsel), for plaintiff.

*Charles A. Schneider*for defendant.

John R. Starkey, J.

This is a motion by the defendant for an order dismissing the indictment on the ground that the defendant was denied a speedy trial pursuant to sections 668 and 669-a of the Code of Criminal Procedure because he was not speedily indicted.

The defendant was indicted on January 30, 1959 for the crimes of attempted robbery in the first degree, petit larceny, and assault in the first and second degrees, all alleged to have been committed on or about January 30, 1957. The defendant was released from jail on another charge on March 11, 1959 at which time he was arrested on a warrant issued in the instant case, and on March 12 was arraigned on the said indictment. On April 1,1959 the case appeared on the Call Calendar in Part V of this court and was marked off the calendar at the request of the defendant for the purpose of making this motion and without waiving his rights to make the motion. It is the contention of the defendant that sections 668 and 669-a of the code apply because the defendant was not speedily indicted. We must also consider the Statute of Limitations (Code Crim. Pro., § 142) which permits an indictment within five years. The court is not of the opinion that sections 668 and 669-a supersede section 142 and, of course, the court is without power to legislate and cannot of itself repeal section 142 or shorten the period set forth therein.

The court is of the opinion that good cause has been shown for not bringing defendant to trial during the February Term of the court instead of the March Term under section 668 while section 669-a has no application whatever. Accordingly this motion to dismiss the indictment herein is denied.

District Attorney will enter order in conformity with this decision.
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1558 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1558

 To delay by 5 weeks the time for individuals to file certain calendar 
                     year 2018 income tax returns.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 6, 2019

   Mr. Casten of Illinois (for himself, Ms. Underwood, Mrs. Davis of 
  California, Mr. Cisneros, Mr. Van Drew, Mr. Sires, Mr. Swalwell of 
California, Ms. Moore, Mr. Nadler, Ms. Norton, Ms. Hill of California, 
Mr. Sean Patrick Maloney of New York, and Mr. Cicilline) introduced the 
 following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To delay by 5 weeks the time for individuals to file certain calendar 
                     year 2018 income tax returns.

    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 ``Taxpayer Extension Act''.

SEC. 2. DELAY OF TIME FOR INDIVIDUALS TO FILE CERTAIN INCOME TAX 
              RETURNS.

    (a) In General.--For purposes of any return made under section 
6012(a)(1), 6013, or 6017 on the basis of calendar year 2018, section 
6072(a) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 shall be applied by 
substituting ``20th day of May'' for ``15th day of April''.
    (b) Interest on Withholding Overpayments.--For the purposes of any 
tax deducted and withheld at the source during calendar year 2018, 
section 6513(b)(1) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 shall be 
applied by inserting ``(the 20th day of May in the case of a taxable 
year ending on December 31, 2018)'' before the period at the end.
    (c) Failure by Individual To Pay Estimated Income Tax.--In the case 
of an installment of estimated tax with respect to 2018, section 
6654(b)(2)(A) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 shall be applied by 
inserting ``(the 20th day of May in the case of a taxable year ending 
on December 31, 2018)'' before the comma at the end.
                                 <all>
```
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> UT
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
STATEMENT OF INCOME, STATEMENT OF CASH FLOWS AND BALANCE SHEET AND IS QUALIFIED
IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0000762129
<NAME> CILCORP INC.
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<BOOK-VALUE>                                  PER-BOOK
<TOTAL-NET-UTILITY-PLANT>                      868,430
<OTHER-PROPERTY-AND-INVEST>                    188,503
<TOTAL-CURRENT-ASSETS>                         245,723
<TOTAL-DEFERRED-CHARGES>                        32,163
<OTHER-ASSETS>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,334,819
<COMMON>                                       192,567
<CAPITAL-SURPLUS-PAID-IN>                            0
<RETAINED-EARNINGS>                            160,026
<TOTAL-COMMON-STOCKHOLDERS-EQ>                 352,593
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                           22,000
<PREFERRED>                                     44,120
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-NET>                           298,528
<SHORT-TERM-NOTES>                              40,850
<LONG-TERM-NOTES-PAYABLE>                            0
<COMMERCIAL-PAPER-OBLIGATIONS>                  21,300
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-CURRENT-PORT>                   22,185
<PREFERRED-STOCK-CURRENT>                            0
<CAPITAL-LEASE-OBLIGATIONS>                      2,182
<LEASES-CURRENT>                                   439
<OTHER-ITEMS-CAPITAL-AND-LIAB>                 530,622
<TOT-CAPITALIZATION-AND-LIAB>                1,334,819
<GROSS-OPERATING-REVENUE>                      995,383
<INCOME-TAX-EXPENSE>                            11,305
<OTHER-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                     933,976
<TOTAL-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                     945,281
<OPERATING-INCOME-LOSS>                         50,102
<OTHER-INCOME-NET>                               1,177
<INCOME-BEFORE-INTEREST-EXPEN>                  48,925
<TOTAL-INTEREST-EXPENSE>                        29,314
<NET-INCOME>                                    19,611
<PREFERRED-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                      3,216
<EARNINGS-AVAILABLE-FOR-COMM>                   16,395
<COMMON-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                        33,482
<TOTAL-INTEREST-ON-BONDS>                       20,024
<CASH-FLOW-OPERATIONS>                          91,014
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.20
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.20
        

</TABLE>
Breadcrumb

1. Home

2. Print 

3. Pdf 

4. Node 

5. Entity Print 

Aquaculture Health

Last Modified: 

Print

Aquaculture, the production of aquatic animals and plants under controlled

conditions, is an ever-growing agribusiness in the United States and worldwide. The

impact of disease on aquatic livestock, like all livestock sectors, includes production

and market loss and increased costs. APHIS supports U.S. aquaculture industries by

protecting aquatic livestock health, promoting U.S. farm-raised aquaculture

products, and protecting natural resources.
APHIS works with U.S. aquaculture producers, allied businesses, associations, and

partners to improve, establish, and maintain healthy aquatic livestock and promote

sustainable production practices. We support risk-based approaches to demonstrate

and protect aquatic livestock health and ensure farm-raised aquatic animals' safe

and secure movement.

Infectious Salmon Anemia Virus 

Infectious salmon anemia (ISA) is a serious viral fish disease that affects wild and

farm-raised Atlantic salmon, rainbow trout and brown trout.

Spring Viremia of Carp Virus 

Spring viremia of carp (SVC) is a viral disease of fish that primarily affects farmed

carp and related species. It is an acute and highly contagious disease.

Tilapia Lake Virus 

Tilapia lake virus is a serious viral fish disease that affects farmed and wild tilapia.

Viral Hemorrhagic Septicemia Virus 

Viral hemorrhagic septicemia virus (VHSV) is a highly contagious and often fatal viral

disease of freshwater and saltwater fish.

World Organisation for Animal Health and

Emerging Diseases

We encourage reporting detections of all World Organisation for Animal Health-listed

aquatic animal diseases to state animal health officials. Producers should work with

aquatic animal veterinarians and other aquatic animal health experts to address

issues on the production site.

Comprehensive Aquaculture Health Program

Standards
The Comprehensive Aquaculture Health Program Standards (CAHPS) provide a

framework for improving and verifying the health of farmed aquatic animals

produced in the United States.

The goals of the standards are to:

Improve the health of U.S. farm-raised aquatic animals

Facilitate safe interstate and international trade or movement of live aquatic

animals

Improve the marketability of animals produced by CAHPS participants

To be effective, our program standards need cooperation from States, other Federal

agencies, and private industry. With industry support, APHIS initiated the rulemaking

process to codify CAHPS. Stay tuned for open commenting opportunities in the

Federal Register.

Related Programs and Studies

National Animal Health Monitoring System Aquaculture Studies

National Aquaculture Health Plan & Standards