alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
July 30, 2015

Mr. Nathan Pool

102 Fairway Drive

Enterprise, AL 36330

Dear Mr. Pool:

This letter is to inform you that we are unable to process your request for an exemption from 

Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR). It explains why we can not process your 

request and what you should do in the next 30 days.

Why We Can Not Process Your Request

We entered your May 13, exemption request into the public docket (No. FAA-2015-1629), but 

we are unable to process your request any further. The information you sent does not comply

with the requirements of § 11.81 (copy enclosed). For us to consider the request any further, 

you must send us all of the following:

 The reasons why granting the request would be in the public interest; that is, how it would 

benefit the public as a whole.

 Any additional information, views, or arguments available to support your request.

What You Should Do

If you want us to process your request any further, you must send the information described 

earlier to reach us within 30 days. Please note that § 11.63(d) requires you to send your 

petition for exemption at least 120 days before the proposed effective date of the exemption.
2

If We Do Not Hear From You

If we do not hear from you within 30 days, we will close the docket without notifying you 

further. If you have any questions or require additional time, you may call (202) 267-9677.

Sincerely,

/s/

Brittany Newton

Program Analyst, Airmen and 

 Airspace Rules Division

Enclosure
RICHARD A. COOPER,

Appellant/Cross-Appellee,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee/Cross-Appellant.

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO 

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND 

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D16-690

_____________________________/

Opinion filed December 6, 2016.

An appeal from the Circuit Court for Columbia County.

Wesley R. Douglas, Judge.

Nancy A. Daniels, Public Defender, A. Victoria Wiggins, Assistant Public Defender, 

Tallahassee, for Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tayo Popoola, Assistant Attorney General, 

Tallahassee, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

MAKAR, KELSEY, and WINSOR, JJ., CONCUR.

CORRECTED PAGES: pg 1

CORRECTION IS UNDERLINED IN 

RED

MAILED: December 8, 2016

BY: KMS
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

GEORGE A. MOLINAR

,

Appellant,

v.

MOHD RAFAEL

,

Appellee

. §

§

§

§

§

§ No. 08

- 1 4

- 00 2 99

- C V

Appeal from the

County Court at Law No. 3

of El Paso C ounty, Texas

(TC# 20 1 3

- CCV02705)

O R D E R

Pending before the Court is Appellant’s motion to amend and supplement his brief in

order to provide a more finished and complete brief. He asserts that his brief is not in final form.

The Court has reviewed Appellant’s brief and finds that it substantia lly complies with the rules

applicable to the appellant’s brief. Further, the issues presented are supported with citations to

the record and authority as required by T EX .R.A PP .P. 38.1. Appellant’s motion to amend and

supplement his brief is DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED this 18 th day of November , 20 1 5

.

PER CURIAM

Before McClure , C.J., R odriguez and Hughes , JJ.
**Exhibit 31.1**
**CERTIFICATION**
I, Eric A. Danziger, President and Chief Executive Officer of ZipRealty, Inc., certify that:
 1.  I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of ZipRealty, Inc.;  2.  Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a materialfact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light ofthe circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect tothe period covered by this report;  3.  Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial informationincluded in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition,results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periodspresented in this report;  4.  The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e)and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:
 a)  Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosurecontrols and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, ismade known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period inwhich this report is being prepared;  b)  Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and proceduresand presented in this report our conclusion about the effectiveness of the disclosurecontrols and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based onsuch evaluation; and  c)  Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter(the registrant’s fourth quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting; and
 5.  The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our mostrecent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’sauditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or personsperforming the equivalent functions):
 a)  All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adverselyaffect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financialinformation; and  b)  Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees whohave a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.              Date: May 12, 2005 By:  /s/ Eric A. Danziger    Eric A. Danziger    President and Chief Executive Officer
#### Sandra L. BIRKENSHAW, Administratrix of the Estate of Arthur R. Birkenshaw, Deceased, Plaintiff-Appellant, Sandra L. Birkenshaw, in Her Own Right, Plaintiff, v. The UNION LIGHT, HEAT AND POWER COMPANY, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 92-5395.

United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.

May 19, 1993.

Before MERRITT, Chief Judge; KEITH, KENNEDY, MARTIN, JONES, MILBURN, GUY, NELSON, RYAN, BOGGS, NORRIS, SUHRHEINRICH, SILER, and BATCHELDER, Circuit Judges.

ORDER

A majority of the Judges of this Court in regular active service have voted for rehearing of this case en banc. Sixth Circuit Rule 14 provides as follows:

> The effect of the granting of a hearing en banc shall be to vacate the previous opinion and judgment of this court, to stay the mandate and to restore the case on the docket sheet as a pending appeal.

Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the previous decision and judgment of this court is vacated, the mandate is stayed and this case is restored to the docket as a pending appeal.

The Clerk will direct the parties to file supplemental briefs and will schedule this case for oral argument as soon as possible.
```

[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 211 (Wednesday, October 31, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 65928]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-26778]

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

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice 8079]

The Secretary of State's International Council on Women's 
Business Leadership; Notice of Open Meeting

    The Secretary of State's International Council on Women's Business 
Leadership (ICWBL) will meet from 3:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. on Tuesday, 
November 27, 2012, in the Harry S. Truman Building at the U.S. 
Department of State, 2201 C Street NW., Washington, DC. The meeting 
will be hosted by U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton. The 
ICWBL serves the U.S. Government in a solely advisory capacity, and 
provides advice and assistance in the formulation of U.S. policy, 
positions, proposals and strategies for multilateral and bilateral 
negotiations, business outreach, and commercial diplomacy, particularly 
pertaining to the economic empowerment of women for global economic 
prosperity, where the State Department has the lead negotiating 
authority. The meeting will focus on Women and the Economy. 
Subcommittee discussions will be led by the Access to Markets 
Subcommittee, the Access to Capital Subcommittee, the Capacity Building 
and Skills Training Subcommittee, and the Leadership Subcommittee.
    This meeting is open to public participation, via live webcast on 
the Internet at http://www.state.gov/e/eb/adcom/icwbl/. The public is 
invited to submit written statements to the Secretary of State's 
International Council on Women's Business Leadership by C.O.B. November 
20, 2012, by either of the following methods:
    Send electronic statements to the Secretary of State's 
International Council on Women's Business Leadership at SGWI_ICWBL@state.gov; send paper statements via facsimile to 202-632-9232, 
attention: Secretary of State's International Council on Women's 
Business Leadership (ICWBL).
    All statements will be posted on the Secretary of State's ICWBL Web 
site without change, including any business or personal information 
provided such as names, addresses, email addresses, or telephone 
numbers. All statements received, including attachments and other 
supporting materials, are part of the public record and subject to 
public disclosure. You should submit only information that you wish to 
make available publicly.
    Meeting summaries of the Council's discussion will be available 
within 90 days on the ICWBL Web site http://www.state.gov/e/eb/adcom/icwbl/.
    For additional information, contact Senior Coordinator Nancy Smith-
Nissley, Office of Economic Policy Analysis and Public Diplomacy, 
Bureau of Economic and Business Affairs, at (202) 647-1682 or Smith-NissleyN@state.gov.

    Dated: October 17, 2012.
Todd Schwartz,
Special Representative, Acting Office of Commercial and Business 
Affairs, U.S. Department of State.
[FR Doc. 2012-26778 Filed 10-30-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-07-P
```
SERVED: OCTOBER 8, 2015 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION OFFICE OF HEARINGS

WASHINGTON, DC
IN THE MATTER OF WORLD LOGISTICS SOLUTIONS, LLC DOCKETNO. FAA-2015-0207**(~ivil** ?enalty:;\ction)

. •·. ··<'I·'
ORDERREASSIGNING PROCEEDING On September 5, 2015, Administrative Law Judge Richard C. Goodwintransferred to the Food and Drug Administration. Accordingly, this proceeding is hereby reassigned from Judge Goodwin to Administrative Law Judge J.E. Sullivan. Any dates set for hearing or prehearing conference are suspended until further notice. All other orders remain in full force and effect absent further order. SO ORDERED.

. ..**~·.**

Ronnie'

## A.' Y 

# a ChiefAdministrative LawJudge Attachment-Service List

:**~-** ..SERVICE LIST -BY U.S. MAIL ORIGINAL & ONE COPY 

### Federal Aviation Administration 800 Independence Avenue, S.W. Washington, DC 20591 Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 Wilbur Wright Building-Suite2W1000 1 ONE COPY 

### David M. Hernandez, Respondent's Counsel Vedder, Price, P.C. 1401 I Street, N.W., Suite 1100 Washington, DC 20005 TEL: 202-312-3340 FleX: 202-312-3322 Kate Barber, Complainant's Counsel Federal AviationAdministration, AGL-7 2300 East Devon Avenue Des Plaines, IL 60018-4696 TEL: 847-294-7862 FAX: 847-294-7498 Judge J.E. Sullivan US. Administrative LawJudge Office ofHearings, M-20 U.S. Department ofTransportation 1200NewJersey Avenue, S.E. (E11-310) Washington, DC 20590 TEL: 202-366-6941 FAX: 202-366-7536 DocketNo. FAA-2015-0207 (Civil Penalty Action)

1 Service was by U.S. Mail. For service in person or by expedited courier, use the following address: Federal Aviation Administration, 600 Independence Avenue, S.W., Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2Wl000, Washington, DC 20591; Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430.

"\: 

### -2-
yumc-ex1022_1279.htm



 

Exhibit 10.22

 


	

	
 
	





 

February 6, 2017

Mr.Mark Chu

Dear Mark,

Strictly Private & Confidential

We are pleased to inform you that the Company has accepted your request for the reduction of your work schedule to 3 weeks per months, effective February 8, 2017. There is no change to your role as Senior Advisor, reporting to Micky Pant, CEO, Yum China. With same effect, the following terms apply:

 

Base Salary

Your base salary is adjusted to US$ 320,000 per annum, payable in arrears in 12 equalmonthly payments.

 

Yum China Leader's Bonus

You will continue to participate in the Company's Bonus Plan at the current target bonus rate of 60% of your base salary.

 

Long Term Incentive (LTI) Stock Appreciation Rights (SAR)

You will continue to be eligible to participate in the company's Annual Long Term Incentive - Stock Appreciation Right (SAR) Program. Grant size and value may change from year to year. Your 2017 LTI SAR grant is USD 1,000,000 (Face Value).

 

Other Terms and Conditions

There is no change to your other terms and conditions of employment, which will continue to be governed by established  policies  and  procedures,   including  but not limited  to  Code of Conduct,  Confidentiality  & Non-solicitation. The two-month written notice will continue to be applied by either party for terminating the employment.

 

You will continue to be eligible, in accordance  to the Company's Expatriate Guideline, to such benefits as Housing

& Utilities, Company Car & car running expenses, Medical & Life insurance, Tax Equalization, Vacation Leave &

Home Passage.

 

Kindly acknowledge your acceptance of the above terms and conditions by signing and returning the duplicate of this letter.

Yours sincerely,

For & on behalf of Yum China

 


		
	
/s/ Christabel Lo
	
 

	
Christabel Lo

	
Chief People Officer, Yum China




 

I, Mark Chu, confirm acceptance of the above terms and conditions.

 


	
Signature:
	
/s/ Mark Chu
	
 
	
Date:
	
February 6, 2017
RICHARD A. COOPER

,

Appellant/Cross

- Appellee,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA

,

Appellee /Cross

- Appellant. IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D 16

- 690

_____________________________/

Opinion filed December 6, 2016.

An appeal from the Circuit Court for Columbia County

. Wesley R. Douglas , Judge

.

Nancy A. Daniels, Public Defender, A. Victoria Wiggins

, Assistant Public Defender,

Tallahassee, for Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tayo Popoola

, Assistant Attorney General,

Tallahassee, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

MAKAR

, KELSEY

, and WINSOR

, J J

. , CONCUR. **CORRECTED PAGES: pg 1**

**CORRECTION IS UNDERLINED IN** 

**RED**

**MAILED: December 8, 2016**

**BY: KMS**
### Regular Totals (Holders)

Airport = EWR

Holder = 0001(Exclude)

Status Date = 01/01/2009 (Current & Future) 12/21/2010 07:50:56



### Query Parameters:

### 12/21/2010 07:50:56

Carrier 

### Regular Totals (Holders)

Excludes FAA Held Slots Held less than 5 days are Excluded PF7 Status Date = 01/01/2009 (Current & Future)

EWR

AAL AMERICAN AIRLINES 54

ABX ABX AIR 2

ACA AIR CANADA 24

AFR AIR FRANCE 2

AIC AIR INDIA 4

ASA ALASKA AIRLINES 4

AVI L'AVION/OPENSKIES 6

AZA ALITALIA 2

BAW BRITISH AIRWAYS 6

COA CONTINENTAL AIRLINES 882

CSQ CARGOJET 2

DAL DELTA AIR LINES 32

DLH DEUTSCHE LUFTHANSA 8

ELY EL AL ISRAEL AIRLINES 1

EVA EVA AIRLINES 2

FDX FED EX 9

JAI JET AIRWAYS 2

JBU JETBLUE AIRWAYS CORP. 27

MEP MIDWEST AIRLINES (MIDWEST EXPRESS 10

NWA NORTHWEST AIRLINES 32

POE PORTER AIRLINES 14

QTR QATAR AIRWAYS 2

SAS SCANDINAVIAN AIRLINES 4

SIA SINGAPORE AIRLINES LIMITED 2

SWR SWISS INTERNATIONAL AIRLINES (SWISSAIR 2

TAP TAP-AIR PORTUGAL 3

TRS AIRTRAN AIRWAYS (new 3ltr eff 03/22/03) 13

UAL UNITED AIRLINES 33

UPS UNITED PARCEL SERVICE 10

USA US AIRWAYS 31

VIR VIRGIN ATLANTIC AIR 3

WJA WESTJET 2

Page 2
32.1 SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATION
OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER





CERTIFICATION
OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER


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 Commonwealth Income & Growth Fund
IV, (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the three months ended March 31, 2008, as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
“Report”), I, Kimberly A. Springsteen, Chief Executive Officer of the general
partner of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted
pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my
knowledge:




(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
result of operations of the Company.




/s/ Kimberly A.
      SpringsteenKimberly
      A. SpringsteenChief
      Executive OfficerMay
      15, 2008
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 07-7374

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus WILLIE REYNOLDS, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Winston-Salem. N. Carlton Tilley, Jr., District Judge. (6:90-cr-00054; 6:93-cv-00357) Submitted: January 18, 2008 Decided: February 12, 2008 Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Willie Reynolds, Appellant Pro Se. Paul Alexander Weinman, Assistant United States Attorney, Winston-Salem, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.- 2 - PER CURIAM: Willie Reynolds seeks to appeal the district court’s order adopting the recommendation of the magistrate judge, treating his Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motions as successive 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motions, and dismissing them on that basis. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. See28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000); Reid v. Angelone , 369 F.3d 363, 369 (4th Cir. 2004). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that any assessment of the constitutional claims by the district court is debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by the district court is likewise debatable. See Miller-El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336- 38 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee , 252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Reynolds has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability, deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis, and dismiss the appeal. Additionally, we construe Reynolds’ notice of appeal and informal brief as an application to file a second or successive motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. See United States v. Winestock , 340- 3 - F.3d 200, 208 (4th Cir. 2003). In order to obtain authorization to file a successive § 2255 motion, a prisoner must assert claims based on either: (1) a new rule of constitutional law, previously unavailable, made retroactive by the Supreme Court to cases on collateral review; or (2) newly discovered evidence, not previously discoverable by due diligence, that would be sufficient to establish by clear and convincing evidence that, but for constitutional error, no reasonable factfinder would have found the movant guilty of the offense. See28 U.S.C. §§ 2244(b)(2), 2255 (2000). Reynolds’ claims do not satisfy either of these criteria. Therefore, we deny a uthorization to file a successive § 2255 motion. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
NO. 12-10-00010-CV

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT

TYLER, TEXAS

ANTHONY AND RENEE CULLER,

APPELLANTS ' APPEAL FROM THE 

V. ' COUNTY COURT AT LAW OF

LARRY CHOATE, ' NACOGDOCHES COUNTY, TEXAS

APPELLEE

MEMORANDUM OPINION

PER CURIAM

This appeal is being dismissed because Appellants have failed, after notice, to file 

a docketing statement. The judgment was signed on December 31, 2009. Appellant filed 

a notice of appeal on January 6, 2010. 

Appellants’ filing fee and docketing statement in this case were due to have been 

filed at the time the appeal was perfected, i.e., January 6, 2010. See TEX. R. APP. P. 5,

32.1. On January 13, 2010, this court requested that Appellants file a docketing statement 

if they had not already done so. On January 14, 2010, this court extended Appellants’ 

deadline for payment of the filing fee to January 25, 2010. However, Appellants did not 

pay the required fee or file a docketing statement. On January 27, 2010, Appellants were 

again notified that the filing fee had not been paid and the docketing statement had not 

been filed. Appellants were further informed that the filing fee must be paid and the 

docketing statement filed on or before February 8, 2010, or the appeal would be 

presented to the court for dismissal. 

Since issuing our January 27, 2010 letter, we have been informed that Appellants 

are indigent and are entitled to proceed without prepayment of costs. However, 

Appellants still have not filed the required docketing statement, and the February 8, 2010 

deadline for doing so has passed without any response from Appellants. Accordingly, 

this appeal is dismissed. See TEX. R. APP. P. 37.3(b), 42.3(c). 

Opinion delivered February 26, 2010.

Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Griffith, J., and Hoyle, J.

(PUBLISH)