alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
AFS-13-396-E

July 14, 2013

 Exemption No. 10824

 Regulatory Docket No. FAA-2013-0494

Ms. Margaret Dickens

Parent of Katherine Dickens

2055 Lee Davis Road

Utica, MS 39175

Dear Ms. Dickens:

This letter is to inform you that we have granted your request for exemption. It transmits our 

decision, explains its basis, and lists the conditions and limitations of the exemption, 

including the date it ends.

The Basis for Our Decision

By letter received May 31, 2013, you petitioned the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) 

on behalf of Katherine Dickens for an exemption from § 121.311(b)(2)(iii)(B) of Title 14, 

Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR). That exemption, if granted, would allow Katherine to 

exceed the specified weight limit for an FAA-approved child restraint system (CAReS, 

manufactured by AmSafe Corporation) during use of that child restraint system (CRS) aboard 

a United States (U.S.) aircraft.

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

in the Federal Register because the requested exemption would not set a precedent and any 

delay in acting on this petition would be detrimental to Katherine.

The FAA has issued grants of exemption in circumstances similar in all material respects to 

those presented in your petition. In Grant of Exemption No. 9834 (copy enclosed), the FAA 

found that numerous people with physical challenges had previously completed flights using 

restraint systems that addressed unique physical needs regarding safety, support, and security 

in the same manner of operations as described in this petition. The FAA further found that the 
2

petition, if granted, would not set any new precedents regarding the use of restraint systems by 

persons with disabilities.

Having reviewed your reasons for requesting an exemption, I find that—

• they do not differ materially from those presented by the petitioner in the enclosed Grant 

of Exemption No. 9834.

• the reasons stated by the FAA for granting the enclosed Grant of Exemption No. 9834 also 

apply to the situation you present; and 

• a grant of exemption is in the public interest.

Our Decision

Under the authority contained in 49 U.S.C. 40113 and 44701, which the FAA Administrator 

has delegated to me, I hereby grant Katherine Dickens an exemption from § 121.311(b). In 

addition, any air carrier or commercial operator operating under part 121 while Katherine is

aboard its aircraft is granted an exemption from 14 CFR § 121.311(b) to the extent necessary 

to allow her to use an FAA-approved CRS aboard a U.S. aircraft.

All operations under this exemption must be conducted with at least one of Katherine’s

parents or a caregiver accompanying her. Katherine Dickens may only occupy a passenger 

seat with no passenger seated behind her. In addition, Katherine’s parent or caregiver must 

carry a copy of this exemption and advise the air carrier about the contents of the exemption at 

least 48 hours before the date of each flight.

This exemption terminates on July 31, 2018, unless sooner superseded or rescinded.

Sincerely,

Enclosure
<PAGE>   1
                                                                     EXHIBIT 5.1
                               RIORDAN & McKINZIE
                         A PROFESSIONAL LAW CORPORATION

                       695 TOWN CENTER DRIVE, SUITE 1500
                          COSTA MESA, CALIFORNIA 92626


                                January 29, 1997
                                                                       4-157-006


Data Processing Resources Corporation
4400 MacArthur Boulevard, Suite 600
Newport Beach, California 92660


Ladies and Gentlemen:

         You have requested our opinion with respect to the additional 550,000
shares of common stock (the "Stock Option Shares") of Data Processing Resources
Corporation, a California corporation (the "Company"), remaining to be issued
upon the exercise of stock options granted, or to be granted, under the 1994
Stock Option Plan, As Amended (the "Stock Option Plan").

         The Stock Option Shares are the subject of a Registration Statement on
Form S-8 (the "Registration Statement"), to which this opinion is attached as
an exhibit, to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
("Commission") under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended.

         We have examined (i) the Company's Articles of Incorporation, as
amended and restated and currently in effect, (ii) the Company's Bylaws, as
amended to date, (iii) the Stock Option Plan, (iv) the Registration Statement
and (v) the originals or copies, certified to our satisfaction, of such
records, documents, certificates, memoranda and other instruments as in our
judgment are necessary or appropriate to enable us to render the opinion
expressed below.  We have also examined the records of corporate proceedings
taken in connection with the adoption and amendment of the Stock Option Plan.

         Based upon the foregoing examinations and subject to compliance with
the applicable state securities and "blue sky" laws, we are of the opinion that
the Stock Option Shares, when offered, sold and paid for pursuant to the
exercise of stock options granted pursuant to the Stock Option Plan, will be
duly authorized, validly issued, fully paid and non-assessable.

         We hereby consent to the use of this opinion as an exhibit to the
Registration Statement.

                                           Very truly yours,

                                           /s/ RIORDAN & McKINZIE
UN PUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 21
- 7721

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee ,

v. SREEDHAR POTARAZU , Defendant

- Appellant

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia , at Alexandria

. Anthony John Trenga , Senior District Judge. ( 1:16

- cr - 00261

- AJT

- 1 )

Submitted : June 30, 2023 Decided: July 10, 2023

Before WYNN and HARRIS , Circuit Judges , and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit Judge

.
Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

. Sreedhar Potarazu, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. USCA4 Appeal: 21-7721 Doc: 15 Filed: 07/10/2023 Pg: 1 of 22 PER CURIAM: Sreedhar Potarazu appeals the district court’s order denying his motion for compassionate release pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A)(i) or, alternatively, for a judicial recommendation for home confinement. We have reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court’s e xercise of its discretion to deny relief. See United States v. Bethea , 54 F.4th 826, 831 (4th Cir. 2022) (standard of review )

. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order. United States v. Potarazu , No. 1:16

- cr - 00261

- AJT

- 1 (E.D. Va. filed Nov. 29, 2021 & entered Nov. 30, 2021). We deny Potarazu’s motions for appointment of counsel and to compel. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED USCA4 Appeal: 21-7721 Doc: 15 Filed: 07/10/2023 Pg: 2 of 2
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<CIK>                         0001012131
<NAME>                        Novoste Corporation
       
<S>                                           <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                          YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                                  JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                    DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                           35,993,933
<SECURITIES>                                     12,408,785
<RECEIVABLES>                                             0
<ALLOWANCES>                                              0
<INVENTORY>                                               0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 48,490,817
<PP&E>                                            1,947,407
<DEPRECIATION>                                     (885,881)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   49,795,956
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                             2,426,954
<BONDS>                                                   0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                     0
<PREFERRED>                                               0
<COMMON>                                            103,320
<OTHER-SE>                                       47,265,682
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     49,795,956
<SALES>                                                   0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     29,313
<CGS>                                                     0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   (15,631,190)
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                          0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                          0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                1,388,482
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 (14,213,395)
<INCOME-TAX>                                              0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             (14,213,395)
<DISCONTINUED>                                            0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                           0
<CHANGES>                                                 0
<NET-INCOME>                                    (14,213,395)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                         (1.64)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                         (1.64)
        


</TABLE>
<PAGE>

                                                                   Exhibit 10.17

                 PRENTISS PROPERTIES ACQUISITION PARTNERS, L.P.

  Second Amendment to the Third Amended and Restated Agreement (as amended, the
"Agreement") of Limited Partnership of Prentiss Properties Acquisition Partners,
                            L.P. (the "Partnership")

                                    RECITALS

     A. Belair Real Estate Corporation ("Belair") has agreed to sell to the
Partnership 600,000 9.45% Series C Preferred Units of the Partnership pursuant
to that certain Preferred Unit Repurchase Agreement (the "Repurchase Agreement")
dated as of January 3, 2002 among the Partnership, Belair and Belcrest Realty
Corporation ("Belcrest").

     B. Belcrest has agreed to sell to the Partnership 1,400,000 9.45% Series C
Preferred Units of the Partnership pursuant to the Repurchase Agreement.

     Prentiss Properties I, Inc. as the sole general partner of the Partnership
(the General Partner") and Belair and Belcrest desire to amend the Agreement as
herein set forth; terms being used herein as defined in the Agreement.

     NOW, THEREFORE, the General Partner hereby adopts the following amendment
     to the Agreement.

     1. Upon the closing (as defined in the Repurchase Agreement), Section
4.02(e) of the Agreement and all references in the Agreement to the Series C
Preferred Units and Series C Preferred Shares are deemed deleted therefrom.

                            [Signature Page Follows]

<PAGE>

     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the General Partner, Belair and Belcrest have executed
     this Second Amendment as of January 3, 2002.

                                      PRENTISS PROPERTIES I, INC.


                                      By: /s/ Michael A. Ernst
                                         ---------------------------------------
                                        Name:   Michael A. Ernst
                                        Title:  Senior Vice President and CFO

                                      BELAIR REAL ESTATE CORPORATION


                                      By: /s/ William R. Cross
                                         ---------------------------------------
                                        Name:   William R. Cross
                                        Title:  Vice President

                                      BELCREST REALTY CORPORATION


                                      By: /s/ William R. Cross
                                         ---------------------------------------
                                        Name:   William R. Cross
                                        Title:  Vice President
Exhibit 3.73
  
 Phone: (503) 986-2200Fax: (503) 378-4381
    
    Articles of Organization  Limited Liability CompanySecretary of StateCorporation Division255 Capitol St. NE, Suite 151Salem, OR 97310-1327FilinglnOregon.com
   Registry number: 238928-96
    
    (STAMP)
 In accordance with Oregon Revised Statute 192.410-192.490, the information on this application is public record.We must release this information to all parties upon request and it will be posted on our website.
    
    For office use only
  1)
    
    Name(Must contain the words Limited Liability Company or the abbreviations LLC or L.L.C.)LSI Title Company of Oregon, LLC
 
  2)
    
    Duration(Please check one.)o Latest date upon which the Limited Liability Company is     to dissolve isþ Duration shall be perpetual.3)
    
    Name of the Initial Registered AgentC T Corporation System4)
    
    Address of the Initial Registered Agent
(Must be an OREGON Street Address, which is identical to the registered agents business office.)388 State Street, Suite 420Salem, Oregon 973015)
    
    Address Where the Division May Mail Notices17911 Von Karman AvenueIrvine CA 92614
 6)
    
    Name and Address of Each OrganizerEileen W. Van Roeyen171 N. Clark StreetChicago IL 60601-32947)
    
    If This Limited Liability Company is Not Member Managed, Check One Box
Below.oThis limited liability company is managed by a single manager.o This limited liability company is managed by multiple manager(s).8)
    
    If rendering a professional service or services, describe the service(s) being rendered.9)
    
    Optional Provisions(Attach a separate sheet if necessary.)
  
 10)
    
    Execution(The title for each signer must be Organizer.)
 Signature
    
    Printed Name
    
    TitleEileen W. Van Roeyen
    
    Eileen W. Van Roeyen
    
    OrganizerOrganizerOrganizer
 
  11)
    
    Contact Name (To resolve questions with this filing.)Eileen W. Van RoeyenDaytime Phone Number(Include area code.)312-223-2581
 FEESRequired Processing Fee $50 - Confirmation Copy (Optional) $5Processing Fees are nonrefundable.Please make check payable to Corporation Division.NOTE:Fees may be paid with VISA or MasterCard. The card number and expiration date
should be submitted on a separate sheet for your protection.
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1


                    CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS

As independent public accountants, we hereby consent to the inclusion of our
report dated January 30, 2002 in this Form 10-K and to the incorporation by
reference of such report in the company's previously filed (i) Registration
Statement on Form S-3 (File No. 333-24281), (ii) Registration Statement on Form
S-8 (File No. 333-24269), (iii) Registration Statement on Form S-8 (File No.
333-42016) and (iv) Registration Statement on Form S-8 (File No. 333-71976).




                                        /s/ ARTHUR ANDERSEN LLP



Boston, Massachusetts
March 19, 2002
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1690 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

104th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 1690

  To provide a grace period for the prohibition on Consolidated Farm 
Service Agency lending to delinquent borrowers, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             April 22, 1996

   Mr. Conrad (for himself, Mr. Grassley, Mr. Harkin, Mr. Pryor, Mr. 
   Bumpers, Mr. Heflin, Mr. Kerrey, Mr. Dorgan, Mr. Daschle, and Mr. 
   Pressler) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
   referred to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To provide a grace period for the prohibition on Consolidated Farm 
Service Agency lending to delinquent borrowers, 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. APPLICATION OF LOAN AND LOAN SERVICING LIMITATIONS.

    Section 373 of the Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act (7 
U.S.C. 2008h) shall apply beginning July 5, 1996.
                                 <all>
```
II

104TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. 1882

To amend chapter 89 of title 5, United States Code, to include medical

foods as a specific item for which coverage may be provided under

the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

JUNE 18, 1996

Mr. DEWINE introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred

to the Committee on Government Affairs

A BILL

To amend chapter 89 of title 5, United States Code, to

include medical foods as a specific item for which coverage may be provided under the Federal Employees

Health Benefits Program.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. MEDICAL FOODS.

4 Section 8904(a) of title 5, United States Code, is

5 amended—

6 (1) in paragraph (1)(E) by striking the period

7 at the end and inserting ‘‘, including with respect to
2

•S 1882 IS

1 medical foods (as defined by section 5(b)(3) of the

2 Orphan Drug Act (21 U.S.C. 360ee(b)(3))).’’; and

3 (2) in paragraph (2)(F) by striking the period

4 at the end and inserting ‘‘, including medical foods

5 (as defined by section 5(b)(3) of the Orphan Drug

6 Act (21 U.S.C. 360ee(b)(3))).’’.

Æ
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Richard LACEY, Defendant-Appellant.

Nos. 91-3255, 91-3256.

United States Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit.

April 16, 1993.

Before MOORE, ENGEL† and KELLY, Circuit Judges.

†

 The Honorable Albert J. Engel, Senior United States Circuit Judge for the United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit, sitting by designation.

PAUL KELLY, Jr., Circuit Judge.

Defendant-appellant Richard Lacey appealed his convictions for various drug-related offenses as well as for failure to appear. Mr. Lacey had been tried *in ab-sentia*and convicted of six counts including conspiracy to distribute cocaine, distribution of approximately 500 grams of cocaine, possession with intent to distribute cocaine, and possession with intent to distribute marijuana, violations of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1) & 846.

On appeal, we noted that certain of Mr. Lacey’s arguments including his objection to being tried *in absentia,*had been rejected in the appeal of a coconspirator. *United States v. Edmonson,*962 F.2d 1535 (10th Cir.1992). Therefore, that particular argument was not discussed in our disposition. *United States v. Lacey,*969 F.2d 926 (10th Cir.1992).

After Mr. Lacey had filed a petition for certiorari in the United States Supreme Court, *Crosby v. United States,*— U.S. -, 113 S.Ct. 748, 122 L.Ed.2d 25 (1993) was decided. The Court discussed the propriety of trial *in absentia*and concluded that “the language, history, and logic of Rule 43 support a straightforward interpretation that prohibits the trial *in absentia*of a defendant who is not present at the beginning of trial.” *Crosby,*— U.S. at , 113 S.Ct. at 753.

The Court vacated our judgment and remanded Mr. Lacey’s case for further consideration in light of *Crosby. Lacey v. United States,*— U.S. -, 113 S.Ct. 1233, 122 L.Ed.2d 640 (1993). We, in turn, remand the case to the district court with instructions to vacate its judgment with respect to the narcotics charges and proceed in accordance with *Crosby.*However, its judgment relating to Mr. Lacey’s failure to appear is affirmed. That sentence and the underlying conviction stand alone now and the double jeopardy issue which troubled us earlier does not exist at the present time.
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION 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 Executive Officer and Chairman of the Board of Gladstone Capital Corporation (the Company), hereby certifies on the
date hereof, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350(a), as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2015 (Form 10-Q), filed concurrently
herewith by the Company, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and that the information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

Dated: July 29, 2015



|                                                              
|--------------------------------------------------------------
|/s/David Gladstone                                            
|David Gladstone                                               
|Chief Executive Officer and
Chairman of the Board of Directors
**Exhibit 12.2. Certification Pursuant to Sec Rule 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a) as Adopted Pursuant toSection 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**
     I, Stephen H. Willard, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of FlamelTechnologies S.A. (the “**Company**”), certify that:
1. I have reviewed this amended annual report on Form 20-F/A of the Company; 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statements of a material factor 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 Company as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;
Date: June 15, 2005   /s/ Stephen H. Willard  Stephen H. Willard