alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
AFS-11-301-E May 16, 2011

Exemption No. 9914A Regulatory Docket No. FAA-2009-0545

Mr. Robert A. Anstatt Director of Operations Easton Aviation, LLC 29137 Newnam Road, Suite 5 Easton, MD 21601

Dear Mr. Anstatt:

This letter is to inform you that we have granted your petition to extend Exemption No. 9914. It explains the basis for our decision and describes its effect.

The Basis for Our Decision

By subm ission dated May 9, 2011, you petitioned the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) on behalf of Easton Aviation, LLC (Easton Aviation) for an extension of Exemption No. 9914. That exemption from part 120 of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations allows EastonAviation, which is operating under separate parts of the regulation, to cover its safetysensitive employees under one testing program.

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 because the requested extension of the exemption would not set a precedent, and any delay in acting on this petition would be detrimental to Easton Aviation.

Our Decision

The FAA has determ ined that the justification for the issuance of Exemption No. 9914 remains valid with respect to this exemption and is in the public interest. Therefore, under the2

authority provided by 49 U.S.C. 40113 and 44701, which the FAA Administrator has delegated to me, I grant your petition, subject to the conditions and limitations listed below.

Conditions and Limitations

1. Em ployees of Easton Aviation are subject to the drug and alcohol regulations at all times while conducting operations under part 135 or part 91.

2. The drug and alcohol testing program must be implemented under the auspices of the Easton Aviation part 135 operation, not under part 91.

The Effect of Our Decision

Our decision extends the term ination date of Exemption No. 9914 to August 31, 2013 unless sooner superseded or rescinded.

Sincerely,

/s/
James R. Fraser, M.D. Deputy Federal Air Surgeon
#### CENTRAL LUMBER COMPANY, Appellant, v. Everett WOOD et al., Appellees.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.

Dec. 2, 1955.

Richardson & Barrickman, Uhel O. Bar-rickman, Glasgow, for appellant.

Philip H. Wilson, Glasgow, for appellees.

PER CURIAM.

The judgment of the trial court affirmed an award by the Workmen’s Compensation Board which compensated Everett Wood for disability due to heat exhaustion induced by the natural heat of the day.

On two occasions this Court has stated that a heat stroke produced by the natural heat of the day was not a traumatic injury, but rather a disease and therefore not com-pensable under our statute. Smith v. Standard Sanitary Mfg. Co., 211 Ky. 454, 277 S.W. 806; Mellon v. Ashland Coca Cola Bottling Co., 302 Ky. 176, 194 S.W.2d 171. The Smith case, which was the sole authority relied upon in the Mellon case, expressly stated that heat strokes are due to *exposure*to excessive heat.

KRS 342.005(1) provides for recovery for a “personal injury by accident,” but defines that term to exclude any disease unless it is the natural and direct result of a traumatic injury by accident. In the recent case of Adams v. Bryant, Ky., 274 S.W.2d 791, this Court concluded that shock, overexertion and *exposure*were personal injuries within the scope of KRS 342.005(1). Since the case involved exposure unaccompanied by traumatic injury, the Court held, in effect, that exposure is not a disease. To that extent, the Court departed from its prior decisions in the Smith and Mellon cases.

On the authority of our decision in Adams v. Bryant, Ky., 274 S.W.2d 791, we are affirming the judgment of the trial court.

The motion for an appeal is overruled, and the judgment is affirmed. Judge SIMS dissenting for reasons stated in his dissent in the Adams case.
## Court of Appeals Sixth Appellate District of Texas

JUDGMENT

Michael Charles Hill, Appellant

No. 06

- 12

- 00094

- CR v.
The State of Texas, Appellee Appeal from the 196th District Court of Hunt County, Texas (Tr. Ct. No. 26,410 ). Memorandum Opinion delivered by C hief Justice Morriss, Justice Carter and Justice Moseley participating.

As stated in the Court’s opinion of this date, we find no error in the judgment of the court

below

. We affirm the judgment of the trial court

. W e note that the appellant, Michael Charles Hill, has adequately indicated his inability to
pay costs of appeal. Therefore, we waive payment of costs.

RENDERED JANUAR Y 8, 2013 BY ORDER OF THE COURT JOSH R. MORRISS, III CHIEF JUSTICE

ATTEST: Debra K. Autrey, Clerk
##### 



Exhibit 31.2
 CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO RULES 13A-14 AND 15D-14
OF THE SECURITIES ACT OF 1934
  1.
    
    I have reviewed this Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended
December 31, 2005 of Ready Mix, Inc. (the Report);2.
    
    Based on my knowledge, the Report does not contain any untrue statement of a
material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made,
in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading
with respect to the period covered by the Report;3.
    
    Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in the Report, fairly present in all material respects the
financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and
for, the periods presented in the Report;4.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange
Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and we have:
 a)
    
    Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused
such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision,
to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its
consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities,
particularly during the period in which the Report is being prepared;b)
    
    Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure
controls and procedures and presented in the Report our conclusions about the
effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the
period covered by the Report based on such evaluation; andc)
    
    Disclosed in the Report any change in the registrants internal
control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most
recent fiscal annual (the registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an
annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to
materially affect, the registrants internal control over financial reporting;
and
 5.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our
most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the
registrants auditors and the audit committee of the registrants board of directors
(or persons performing the equivalent functions):
 a)
    
    All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the
design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are
reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrants ability to record,
process, summarize and report financial information; andb)
    
    Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or
other employees who have a significant role in the registrants internal
control over financial reporting.
 Date: March 30, 2006
    
    /s/ Clint TryonClint TryonChief Financial Officer
 56
I 

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1827 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide a standard home 

office deduction. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 11, 2011 

Mr. SCHRADER (for himself and Mr. KIND) 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 provide 

a standard home office deduction. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Home Office Deduc5 tion Simplification Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. STANDARD DEDUCTION FOR BUSINESS USE OF 

7 HOME. 

8 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subsection (c) of section 280A of 

9 the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to disallow10 ance of certain expenses in connection with business use 


rfrederick on DSKD9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 1827 IH

1 of home, rental of vacation homes, etc.) is amended by 

2 adding at the end the following new paragraph: 

3 ‘‘(7) STANDARD HOME OFFICE DEDUCTION.— 

4 ‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—In the case of an indi5 vidual that is allowed a deduction for the use of 

6 a home office because of a use described in 

7 paragraphs (1), (2), or (4) of this subsection, 

8 notwithstanding the limitations of paragraph 

9 (5), if such individual elects the application of 

10 this paragraph for the taxable year, such indi11 vidual shall be allowed a deduction equal to the 

12 standard home office deduction for the taxable 

13 year in lieu of the deductions otherwise allow14 able under this chapter for such taxable year by 

15 reason of being attributed to such use. 

16 ‘‘(B) STANDARD HOME OFFICE DEDUC17 TION AMOUNT.—For purposes of this para18 graph, the standard home office deduction is 

19 the lesser of— 

20 ‘‘(i) $1,500, or 

21 ‘‘(ii) the gross income derived from 

22 the individual’s trade or business for which 

23 such use occurs. 

24 ‘‘(C) INFLATION ADJUSTMENT.—In the 

25 case of any taxable year beginning in a calendar 


rfrederick on DSKD9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 1827 IH

1 year after 2012, the dollar amount in subpara2 graph (B)(i) shall be increased by an amount 

3 equal to— 

4 ‘‘(i) such dollar amount, multiplied by 

5 ‘‘(ii) the cost-of-living adjustment de6 termined under section 1(f)(3) for the cal7 endar year in which the taxable year be8 gins, determined by substituting ‘2011’ for 

9 ‘1992’ in subparagraph (B) thereof. 

10 Any increase determined under the preceding 

11 sentence shall be rounded to the nearest mul12 tiple of $100.’’. 

13 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

14 this section shall apply to taxable years beginning after 

15 the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


rfrederick on DSKD9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
UNITED STATES


SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION


Washington, D.C. 20549


_____________________________


FORM 8-K


CURRENT REPORT


Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of The


Securities Exchange Act of 1934











Date of Report (Date of earliest event reported)


March 22, 2017








PVH CORP.


(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)





Delaware001-0757213-1166910(State or other jurisdiction of incorporation)(Commission File Number)(IRS Employer Identification No.)200 Madison Avenue, New York, New York10016(Address of principal executive offices)(Zip Code)





Registrant’s telephone number, including area code (212)-381-3500


Not Applicable


(Former name or former address, if changed since last report.)





Check the appropriate box below if the Form 8-K filing is intended to simultaneously satisfy the filing obligation of the registrant under any of the following provisions:





o Written communications pursuant to Rule 425 under the Securities Act (17 CFR 230.425)


o Soliciting material pursuant to Rule 14a-12 under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.14a-12)


o Pre-commencement communications pursuant to Rule 14d-2(b) under the Exchange Act


(17 CFR 240.14d-2(b))


o Pre-commencement communications pursuant to Rule 13e-4(c) under the Exchange Act


(17 CFR 240.13e-4(c))











---
















ITEM 2.02  RESULTS OF OPERATIONS AND FINANCIAL CONDITION


On March 22, 2017 , PVH Corp. (the “Company”) issued a press release to report the Company’s earnings for the fourth quarter 2016 , which is attached to this report as Exhibit 99.1.


The information in this Form 8-K and the Exhibit attached hereto shall not be deemed “filed” for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 or otherwise subject to the liabilities of that section, nor shall it be deemed incorporated by reference in any filing under the Securities Act of 1933, regardless of any general incorporation language in such filing.





ITEM 9.01  FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND EXHIBITS


(d) Exhibits .


ExhibitDescription99.1Press Release, dated March 22, 2017.
















































































---







SIGNATURES


Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned hereunto duly authorized.





PVH CORP.





By: /s/ James W. Holmes


James W. Holmes


Senior Vice President and Controller





Date: March 22, 2017








---













Exhibit Index





ExhibitDescription99.1Press Release, dated March 22, 2017.
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan

February 19, 2008 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice 135291 & (24) Michael F. Cavanagh Elizabeth A. Weaver Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan Robert P. Young, Jr. JOHNNY TIPPINS, Stephen J. Markman, Plaintiff, Justices

v SC: 135291 COA: 278887 Wayne CC: 02-001578-01 WAYNE CIRCUIT JUDGE, Defendant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the motion for immediate consideration is DENIED. The application for leave to appeal the August 30, 2007 order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we ar e not persuaded that the question presented should be reviewed by this Court.

d0211 I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

February 19, 2008

Clerk
EXHIBIT 99.1 - ANNUAL FUNDS APPLICATION STATEMENT




                              [LOGO] JPMORGAN


June 30, 2005

     Hartford Life Global Funding Trusts - Annual Funds Application Statement

I, Albert P. Mari, Jr., being a duly appointed officer of JPMorgan Chase Bank,
N.A. ("Indenture Trustee"), do hereby certify on behalf of the Indenture
Trustee, that, with respect to Hartford Life Global Funding Trust 2005-016:





         1. I have reviewed and examined the application by the Indenture
Trustee, during the fiscal year ending June 15, 2005; of trust money collected
by the Indenture Trustee pursuant to Section 5.02 of the Indenture, pursuant to
which the trust's notes (the "Notes") were issued; and

         2. Based upon my review and examination, to the best of my knowledge,
during such fiscal year, the trust money collected by the Indenture Trustee was
properly applied, pursuant to Section 5.02 of the Indenture.

         Nothing herein shall constitute a representation as to the proper
application by the registered holder of the Notes or the trust of the trust
monies received by it.



JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A., as Indenture Trustee
Worldwide Securities Services
4 New York Plaza, 15th Floor
New York, NY 10004


/s/ Albert P. Mari, Jr.


Name:  Albert P. Mari, Jr.
Title: Vice President


<TABLE>
<S><C>
JPMORGAN CHASE BANK o Institutional Trust Services o 4 New York Plaza, Floor 15, New York, NY 10004
</TABLE>
Filed by Automated Filing Services Inc. (604) 609-0244 - U.S. Geothermal Inc. - Exhibit 10.3




Amendment No. 2 to

  “Agreement

  by and between

  U.S. Geothermal Inc.

  And Vulcan Power Company

 

RECITALS

WHEREAS, Vulcan Power Company, a Colorado corporation (“Seller”),
  and U.S. Geothermal Inc., an Idaho corporation (“Buyer”), entered
  into that certain “Agreement” dated December 3, 2002 and amended
  November 15, 2003, concerning certain assets in Cassia County, Idaho, including
  specifically, the assets referred to by the Agreement in Exhibits A and B (the
  Seller’s Assets), and

WHEREAS, Seller and Buyer now desire to amend certain provisions of the Agreement;
  and

NOW THEREFORE, Buyer and Seller agree to the following:

 AGREEMENT TO AMEND

	1.0 	Buyer and Seller agree to this Amendment No. 2 to the Agreement effective
      on December 30, 2003.

        
	2.0 	The parties hereby agree that paragraph (ii) in Section 1 (b) of the
        Agreement be replaced in its entirety as follows:

      “(ii) In order to complete the purchase of the
        remaining 51% interest in Seller’s Assets, in addition to satisfying
        the terms set forth in Section 1(b)(i), above, Buyer shall pay to Seller
        $125,000 on or before December 31, 2003. Upon such payment, the deed for
        Seller’s remaining interest in Seller’s Assets will be released
        from Escrow to Buyer”



The parties have hereto executed this agreement effective the date provided
  in Section 1.0 above.

   

	U. S. Geothermal Inc. 	Vulcan Power Company
	 	 
	_____________________	_____________________
	By: Daniel Kunz 

      CEO 	By: Stephen Munson

      CEO & President
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 96-2194

GLENNIS MCCRAY,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

SHIRLEY S. CHATER, COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL

SECURITY,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Robert E. Payne, District Judge.

(CA-95-235-3)

Submitted: January 23, 1997 Decided: January 29, 1997

Before RUSSELL, WILKINS, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Glennis McCray, Appellant Pro Se. Debra Jean Prillaman, Assistant

United States Attorney, Richmond, Virginia; George Davidson, SOCIAL

SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals the district court's order dismissing the

action for lack of jurisdiction. We have reviewed the record and

the district court's opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. McCray v.

Chater, No. CA-95-235-3 (E.D. Va. July 2, 1996). We deny Appellant's motion to expedite the appeal. 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.

AFFIRMED
112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2005 

AN ACT 

To reauthorize the Combating Autism Act of 2006. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
2 

•HR 2005 EH

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

2 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Combating Autism Re3 authorization Act of 2011’’. 

4 SEC. 2. DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES SURVEILLANCE 

5 AND RESEARCH PROGRAM. 

6 Part R of title III of the Public Health Service Act 

7 (42 U.S.C. 280i et seq.) is amended— 

8 (1) in section 399AA(e), by striking ‘‘2011’’ 

9 and inserting ‘‘2014’’; 

10 (2) in section 399BB(g), by striking ‘‘2011’’ 

11 and inserting ‘‘2014’’; 

12 (3) in section 399CC(f), by striking ‘‘2011’’ 

13 and inserting ‘‘2014’’; and 

14 (4) in section 399DD— 

15 (A) in subsection (a), by striking ‘‘Not 

16 later than 4 years after the date of enactment 

17 of the Combating Autism Act of 2006’’ and in18 serting ‘‘Not later than 2 years after the date 

19 of enactment of the Combating Autism Reau20 thorization Act of 2011’’; and 

21 (B) in subsection (b), in paragraphs (4) 

22 and (5), by striking ‘‘the 4-year period begin23 ning on the date of enactment of this Act’’ and 

24 inserting ‘‘the 6-year period beginning on the 

25 date of enactment of the Combating Autism Act 

26 of 2006’’. 
3 

•HR 2005 EH

1 SEC. 3. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS. 

2 Section 399EE of the Public Health Service Act (42 

3 U.S.C. 280i–4) is amended to read as follows: 

4 ‘‘SEC. 399EE. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS. 

5 ‘‘(a) DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES SURVEILLANCE

6 AND RESEARCH PROGRAM.—To carry out section 399AA, 

7 there is authorized to be appropriated $22,000,000 for 

8 each of fiscal years 2012 through 2014. 

9 ‘‘(b) AUTISM EDUCATION, EARLY DETECTION, AND

10 INTERVENTION.—To carry out section 399BB, there is 

11 authorized to be appropriated $48,000,000 for each of fis12 cal years 2011 through 2014. 

13 ‘‘(c) INTERAGENCY AUTISM COORDINATING COM14 MITTEE; CERTAIN OTHER PROGRAMS.—To carry out sec15 tions 399CC, 404H, and 409C, there is authorized to be 

16 appropriated $161,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2011 

17 through 2014.’’. 

Passed the House of Representatives September 20, 

2011. 

Attest: 

Clerk. 
112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2005 

AN ACT 

To reauthorize the Combating Autism Act of 2006.
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








Edward J.
Geletka, President and Chief Executive Officer and L. Joseph Stella, III,
Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Colonial Bankshares,
Inc. (the “Company”) each certify in their capacity as officers of the Company
that they have reviewed the annual report of the Company on Form 10-KSB for the
fiscal year ended December 31, 2007 and that to the best of their
knowledge:





1.
            the
      report fully complies with the requirements of Sections 13(a) of the
      Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and2.
            the
      information contained in the report fairly presents, in all material
      respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
      Company.











March 31,
      2008
            /s/ Edward J.
      GeletkaDate
            Edward
      J. GeletkaPresident
      and Chief Executive OfficerMarch 31,
      2008
            /s/ L. Joseph Stella,
      IIIDate
            L.
      Joseph Stella, IIIExecutive
      Vice President and Chief Financial
Officer








The
purpose of this statement is solely to comply with Title 18, Chapter 63, Section
1350 of the United States Code, as amended by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002.





A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to
Colonial Bankshares, Inc. and will be retained by Colonial Bankshares, Inc. and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.
CERTIFICATION OF
                           CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND
                             CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
                       PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

In connection with the accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of Segway V
Corp. for the quarter ending September 30, 2003, I, Rick Plotnikoff, Chief
Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of Segway V Corp. hereby certify
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my knowledge and belief, that:

     1.   Such Quarterly Report of Form 10-QSB for the period ending September
          30, 2003, 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 such Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for
          the period ended September 30, 2003, fairly represents in all material
          respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Segway
          V Corp.

Dated:    December 8, 2003

Segway V Corp.


By:  /s/ Rick Plotnikoff
-----------------------------------------
Chief Executive Officer
Chief Financial Officer