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

David P. Ferrell 

dferrell@vanblk.com 

www.vanblk.com 

434 Fayetteville Street • Suite 2000 • Raleigh, NC 27601 • 0: 919.754.1171 • F: 9l,9.l54.1317 

September 15, 2015 

U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations 

West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE 

Washington, DC 20590 

Re: Petition to Amend FAA Exemption No. 11551 

Regulatory Docket No. FAA-2015-0435 

Dear Sir or Madam: 

The FAA recently granted the AgWorx, Inc. ("AgWorx") Exemption No. 11551 under 

Section 333 of the Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 to allow its use of Small Unmanned 

Aircraft Systems ("UASs") in commercial operations with its clients, such as precision agriculture 

and aerial imagery, including in the areas of agriculture, scientific studies, wildlife monitoring, 

and forestry. This petition is for an amendment to AgWorx's exemption, namely to operate an 

additional type of UAS. AgWorx would like to add the following UAS to our exemption: DJI 

Spreading Wings S900. 

The DJI Spreading Wings S900 ("S900") meets all ofthe criteria of AgWorx's Exemption 

No. 11551. The FAA previously determined the airworthiness ofthe S900 in Exemption No. 12044 

(Shore Aerial Aviation Services, LLC). 

AgWorx will comply with all of the conditions and limitations imposed by Exemption No. 

11551 and will update and maintain the technical manuals for the additional aircraft. 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. 

We are prepared to modify or amend any part of this request to satisfy the need for an 

equivalent level of safety. Should you have any questions or require any additional information 

please contact the undersigned. Thank you for your attention to this matter. 

Sincerely, 

VANDEVENTER BLACK LLP 

David P. Ferrell 

Counsel for AgWorx, Inc. 

4815-7420-1640, v. 1 

1 

Attorneys At Law Since 1883 VanBiacklaw.com
#### J. M. DICKSON et al., Appellants, v. ELLIS COUNTY LEVEE IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 10 et al., Appellees.

No. 2047.

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas. Waco.

Jan. 26, 1939.

Rehearing Denied Feb. 16, 1939.

A. R. Stout, J. L. Gammon, and G. Goodwin Sweatt, all of Waxahachie, and Herman Eastland, Jr., of Hillsboro, for appellants.

Felix Atwood, of Ennis, for appellees.

ALEXANDER, Justice.

This suit was brought by Ellis County Levee Improvement District No. 10, upon the relation of E. K. Atwood, an alleged bond holder of the District, against J. M. Dickson and others, to recover for certain taxes alleged to be due the District and to foreclose a lien on the land upon which the taxes accrued. Judgment was for plaintiff and the defendants appealed.

The facts and questions of law involved in this appeal are not materially different from those involved in the case of J. M. Dickson et al., Appellants, v. Navarro County Levee Improvement District No. 3, Appellee, Tex.Civ.App., 124 S.W.2d 943, this day affirmed. For the reasons stated therein, the judgment of the trial court herein is affirmed.
SAT Report

PMN Number: P-14-0564

SAT Date: 5/28/2014

Print Date: 9/30/2014

Related cases:

Concern levels:

Type of Concern: Health Eco Comments

Level of Concern: 1-2 3

 Persistence Bioaccum Toxicity Comments

1 11

Exposure Based Review:

Health:

Ecotox: No

Routes of exposure: Health: Dermal Drinking Water Inhalation 

Ecotox: All releases to water

Fate: ;

Keywords:

 Keywords: IRR- MM, E, L, S; SESNS-S; MUTA, NEURO, LIVER, DEVE, 

MALE REPRO (uncertain); AQUATOX

Summary of Assessment:

 Fate:

Fate Summary: P-14-0564

FATE: 

Liquid with MP < 20 C (E)

log Kow = 3.27 (E) 

S = 175 mg/L at 25 C (E)

VP = 4.4E-2 torr at 25 C (NOMO5)

H = 7.73E-7 (E)

log Koc = 2.25 (E)

log Fish BCF = 1.83 (E)
log Fish BAF = 2.21 (E) 

POTW removal (%) = 90 via biodeg

Time for complete ultimate aerobic biodeg = wk

Sorption to soils/sediments = moderate

Volatilization half-life from a standard river = 1000 hrs

Volatilization half-life from a standard lake = 460 da

Atmospheric Oxidation Half-life = 3.0 hr via OH radical

Atmospheric Oxidation Half-life = 82 hr via ozone

PBT Potential: P1B1

*CEB FATE: Migration to ground water = moderate

 Health:

 Health Summary: Absorbed all routes (analog). Concern for irritation to 

mucous membranes, eyes, lungs, and skin; dermal sensitization and; mutagenicity (positive in 

several assays) based on ; liver toxicity based on ; solvent 

neurotoxicity; developmental toxicity based on the mutagenicity concerns. Uncertain concern for 

male reproductive toxicity based on . 

 Test Data: NTP has concluded that there is no evidence of 

carcinogenic activity for based on the results of a 2-year feed study in rats 

 Ecotox:

Test Organism Test 

Type

Test End 

Point

Predicted Measured Comments

fish 96-h LC50 0.9-1.7

daphnid 48-h LC50 0.28-7.17

green algal 96-h EC50 1.2

fish _ chronic value 0.09-0.17

daphnid _ chronic 

value

0.014

algal _ chronic 

value

0.2

Sewage Sludge 3-h EC50 _

Sewage Sludge _ Chronic 

Value

_

Ecotox Values Comments: Predictions are based on SAR nearest analog approach for 

 SAR chemical class 

 MW 134; log Kow = 3.3 (EPI); pH7; effective concentrations based 

on 100% active ingredients and mean measured concentrations; hardness <180.0 mg/L as 

CaCO3; and TOC <2.0 mg/L;

Factors Values Comments

Assessment Factor 10
Concentration of Concern 

(ppb)

1

SARs

SAR Class

Ecotox Category None

Ecotox Factors Comments: 

 SAT Chair: Doritza Pagan-Rodriguez
Civil Service 

Retirement 

System 

Federal Employees’ 

Group Life 

Insurance Program 

Federal Employees 

Health Benefits 

Program 

Federal Employees 

Retirement 

System 

Federal 

Long Term 

Care Insurance 

Program 

United States 

Office of 

Personnel Management 

The Federal Government’s Human Resources Agency

Retirement and Insurance Service 

Benefits Administration Letter 

Number: 01-220 Date: November 15, 2001 

Subject: Federal Employees Health Benefits (FEHB) Program: Opportunity for 

Maxicare Health Plan Enrollees, Enrollment Code CM, to Change 

Enrollment

Maxicare previously advised us that they will not participate in the FEHB Program for 2002. We 

have just been informed that Maxicare Health Plan, Inc., enrollment code CM, must surrender its 

license to operate as an HMO on December 31, 2001. The plan will not be able to provide 

benefits after December 31, 2001. 

All enrollees in this plan must make an open enrollment change to another plan during open 

season, November 12 – December 10, 2001. Enrollees who do not choose another plan during 

open season will have no benefits after December 31, 2001. If you have employees in the area 

served by the plan, we ask that you notify them directly of the plan’s withdrawal. Even though 

enrollees will make a change during open season, this is not considered an open season change. 

Thus, the effective date of these enrollment changes will be no later than the pay period 

beginning on December 30, 2001. 

Thank you for your cooperation in this matter. 

 

 Abby L. Block 

 Assistant Director 

 for Insurance Programs
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 361 Introduced in House (IH)]

114th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 361

 To amend the Homeland Security Act of 2002 to codify authority under 
    existing grant guidance authorizing use of Urban Area Security 
   Initiative and State Homeland Security Grant Program funding for 
   enhancing medical preparedness, medical surge capacity, and mass 
                       prophylaxis capabilities.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 14, 2015

Mr. Bilirakis (for himself, Mrs. Brooks of Indiana, and Mr. King of New 
    York) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                     Committee on Homeland Security

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend the Homeland Security Act of 2002 to codify authority under 
    existing grant guidance authorizing use of Urban Area Security 
   Initiative and State Homeland Security Grant Program funding for 
   enhancing medical preparedness, medical surge capacity, and mass 
                       prophylaxis capabilities.

    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 ``Medical Preparedness Allowable Use 
Act''.

SEC. 2. USE OF CERTAIN HOMELAND SECURITY GRANT FUNDS FOR ENHANCING 
              MEDICAL PREPAREDNESS, MEDICAL SURGE CAPACITY, AND MASS 
              PROPHYLAXIS CAPABILITIES.

    Section 2008 of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 609) is 
amended--
            (1) in subsection (a), by redesignating paragraphs (10) 
        through (13) as paragraphs (11) through (14), respectively, and 
        by inserting after paragraph (9) the following:
            ``(10) enhancing medical preparedness, medical surge 
        capacity, and mass prophylaxis capabilities, including the 
        development and maintenance of an initial pharmaceutical 
        stockpile, including medical kits, and diagnostics sufficient 
        to protect first responders, their families, immediate victims, 
        and vulnerable populations from a chemical or biological 
        event;''; and
            (2) in subsection (b)(3)(B), by striking ``(a)(10)'' and 
        inserting ``(a)(11)''.
                                 <all>
```
### NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.



# United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

2009-8004 CYNTHIA WOODWARD, on behalf of herself and minor daughter MOLLY WOODWARD, ASHLEY MARTIN individually and BRANDON MARTIN individually, Petitioners,

v. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Respondent. Petition for review of the decision of the Bureau of Justice Assistance in

PSOB claim no 2004-13. ON MOTION Before NEWMAN, Circuit Judge. ORDER Cynthia Woodward et al. (Woodward) move to supplement the record to include various documents not before the Bureau of Justice Assistance. The Department of Justice opposes and moves to strike any portion of Woodard's brief referencing those documents. The Department also moves for an extension of time to file its opposition. Woodward replies. Upon consideration thereof, IT IS ORDERED THAT: (1) The motion to supplement the record is deferred for consideration by the merits panel that is assigned to hear the case.A copy of this order and the motions papers shall be transmitted to the

merits panel assigned to hear this case. The motion to strike is denied without prejudice to the Department moving to strike within its brief.

The Department's motion for an extension of time is granted. (4) The Department's brief is due within 40 days of the date of filing of this
order. FOR THE COURT



### MAY 19 2009 /s/ Jan Horbalv Jan Horbaly Clerk Date

PIL ED U.S. COUR!' OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT

MAY 1 9 2009 J HIV HU reunLi CLERK cc: Tara S. Emory, Esq. Tara K. Hogan, Esq. s19

2009-8004 2
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906
OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title
18 of the United States Code), John R. Schwab, Chief Financial Officer of NCO Group, Inc. (the Company) does hereby certify with respect to the Quarterly Report of the Company on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2008 (the
Report) that:



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



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



|                   |  |  |  |                        
|------------------ |  |  |  | -----------------------
|Date: May 15, 2008 |  |  |  | /s/ John R. Schwab     
|                   |  |  |  | John R. Schwab         
|                   |  |  |  | Chief Financial Officer

The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code) and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document.
**Highlands
      Acquisition Corp.**




**EXHIBIT
      32.1**




**CERTIFICATION
      OF PRINCIPAL 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 Highlands Acquisition Corp. (the
“Company”) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2008 as filed with
      the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I,
      Robert W. Pangia, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant
      to
      18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
      Act of 2002, that the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section
      13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information
      contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
      condition and results of operations of the Company.





Date: November 10, 2008
            
            *By: /s/ Robert W. Pangia*Name:
                Robert W. PangiaTitle:
                Chief Executive Officer(Principal
                Executive Officer)





A
      signed
      original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided
      to
      the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities
      and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
#### Theodore Lipin, Plaintiff, *v.*A. Loeb Salkin et al., Defendants.

Supreme Court, Special Term, New York County,

May 26, 1958.

*Golden, Wienshienk, Rosenthal <& Mandel*for plaintiff.

*John E. TLaigney*and *Peter R. Rado*for Mitchell Leventhal, defendant.

*Rein, Mound & Cotton*for Benjamin Sack, defendant.

*Goldwater & Flynn*for A, Loeb Salkin and others, defendants.

Edgar J. Nathan, J.

Motion to modify plaintiff’s notice of examination and the cross motion for an examination before trial of defendant as a party and a witness are disposed of as follows:

By cross-moving for an order directing the examination of defendant, plaintiff has abandoned his original notice of *878examination. Accordingly, the motion to modify that notice is academic and is dismissed. Since the objections to the notice are applicable to the cross motion for an examination before trial, those objections have been considered by the court in disposing of the cross motion.

Insofar as the cross motion seeks to examine defendant as a witness, the motion is denied without prejudice. While rule 121-a of the Rules of Civil Practice as amended authorizes an examination of a party ‘ ‘ with respect to the relevant and material allegations of fact put in issue by the pleadings in the action ’ ’, that rule is inapplicable to the examination of witnesses. Accordingly, plaintiff may, if so advised, move to examine the defendant as a witness upon a proper showing and upon specifically enumerated items. *(Wax*v. *Sacks,*280 App. Div. 900; *Augenblich*v. *Augenblich,*203 Misc. 360; *Shoreham Operating Corp.*v. *Peyser,*7 Misc 2d 100.)

Since all of the causes of action are not asserted against the defendant, it necessarily follows that the examination will be restricted to the issues raised in the counts directed against defendant. The relevancy and materiality of any inquiry, as limited by the pleadings cannot be determined at this time but must be passed upon by the Justice presiding at Special Term, Part II, at the time rulings are sought. It may not be presumed in advance of the examination that plaintiff will endeavor to go beyond the permissible limits of inquiry with respect to any partnership affairs. As defendant has not served a demand for a bill of particulars, he is not entitled to a deferment of the examination.

The cross motion is granted in accordance with the foregoing and the defendant is directed to submit to an examination within the scope of rule 121-a of the Rules of Civil Practice as a party at Special Term, Part II, of this court on June 10, 1958, at 10:30 o’clock in the forenoon of that day.

Relevant books shall be produced and used pursuant to section 296 of the Civil Practice Act.
Exhibit 35.3



|                     |                                 |                  
|-------------------- | ------------------------------- | -----------------
|LOGO                 |                                 | Martin L. Foster 
|                     | Senior Vice President          
|                     | Loan Servicing and Post Closing
|                     |                                
|1 Mortgage Way       |                                 | T: (856) 917-8222
|Mt. Laurel, NJ 08054 |                                 | F: (856) 917-8280

FORM 1123 CERTIFICATION

ANNUAL STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE

I, Martin L. Foster, the undersigned, an authorized officer of PHHMortgage Corporation (the Servicer), do certify the
following for the calendar year ended December 31, 2015:

1. A review of the Servicers activities during the reporting period and of
its performance under the servicing agreement[s] listed on Schedule 1 hereto (the Agreement(s)) has been made under such officers supervision.

2. To the best of such officers knowledge, based on such review, the Servicer has fulfilled all of its obligations under the
Agreement(s) in all material respects throughout the reporting period.

Certified by: PHHMortgage Corporation



|    |  |                     
|--- |  | --------------------
|By: |  | /s/ Martin L. Foster

|                             |  | 
|---------------------------- |  | 
|Name: Martin L. Foster      
|Title: Senior Vice President
|Date: February 26, 2016     



---

SCHEDULE 1

[List of applicable contracts]

Citibank As Securities Administrator



|                    |  |              |  |                          |  |  |  | 
|------------------- |  | ------------ |  | ------------------------ |  |  |  | 
|PHH Investor Number |  | PHH Category |  | Deal Name/Agreement Name |  |  |  | 
|R87                 |  | All          |  | SEMT 2012-1              |  |  |  | 
|S24                 |  | All          |  | SEMT 2012-3              |  |  |  | 
|S40                 |  | All          |  | SEMT 2012-4              |  |  |  | 
|S42                 |  | All          |  | SEMT 2012-5              |  |  |  | 
|S47                 |  | All          |  | SEMT 2012-6              |  |  |  | 
|S52                 |  | All          |  | SEMT 2013-1              |  |  |  | 
|S54                 |  | All          |  | SEMT 2013-2              |  |  |  | 
|S67                 |  | All          |  | SEMT 2013-7              |  |  |  | 
|R97                 |  | All          |  | SEMT 2012-2              |  |  |  |
##### 



Exhibit 21.1
 LIST OF SUBSIDIARIES
 Subsidiary
    
    Jurisdiction of OrganizationCDI Janus Holdings LLC
    
    DelawareCal Dive HR Services LLC
    
    DelawareCal Dive International Pte. Limited
    
    SingaporeCal Dive
International (Australia) Pty Limited
    
    AustraliaCDI Proteus LLC
    
    DelawareCDI Umbra LLC
    
    DelawareMarine Technology Solutions St. Lucia Limited  IBC
    
    St. LuciaOffshore
Technology Solutions Limited 1
    
    Trinidad and TobagoCDI Prometheus Holdings, Inc.
    
    DelawareCDI Vessel Holdings LLC
    
    DelawareCal Dive Acquisition LLC
    
    Delaware
 
 1
    
    40% owned by Marine Technology Solutions St. Lucia Limited  IBC.
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.2

                            Certification Pursuant to
                             18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
                             As Adopted Pursuant to
                  Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

In connection with the Annual Report of O.I. Corporation (the "Company") on Form
10-K for the period ended December 31, 2006, as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, J. Bruce Lancaster,
Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to
18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, that to 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 results of operations
          of the Company.

This certification is made solely pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, and not for any other purpose.

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to O.I. Corporation and will be retained by O.I. Corporation and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.


/s/ J. Bruce Lancaster
-------------------------------------
Name: J. Bruce Lancaster
Title: Vice President and
       Chief Financial Officer
Date: April 2, 2007
# U ni te d S ta te s Co ur t of A pp ea ls For the Eig hth Circu it

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _ No. 1 7- 16 00

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _ Mel is saJan e Lee ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Pla in ti

ff - App el la nt
v. So ut hwe st ernBel l Tel ep ho ne Co
. ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Defe nd

an t - Ap pe ll ee

__ __ __ __ __ __ App eal fro m

Uni te d S ta te s Di st ric t Co urt fo r th e Weste rnDis tri ctof M is so ur i - Sp rin gf ie ld

__ __ __ __ __ __ Subm it te d: Nov em

be r 27 , 20 17 Fil ed : Dec em

be r 1, 2 01 7 [Unpubl is he d]

__ __ __ __ __ __ Befo re WOL LMAN, LOKEN , COLLOTON, Circ ui t J ud ge s.

__ __ __ __ __ __ PER CURI AM. Mel is sa Lee ap pe al s th e di st ric t co urt’s adve rs e gr an t of su m m ary jud gm en t 1 in he r act io n cl ai m in g em pl oym en t di sc riminat io n an d ret al ia ti on . Hav in g rev ie wed
The Hon or ab le Bri an C. W im es , Uni te d St at es Dis tri ct Ju dg e fo r th e W es te rn 1 Dis tri ctof M is so ur i.th e reco rd an d th e pa rti es ’ arg um en ts on ap pe al , we co nc lu de th at su m m ary jud gm en t was pr op erl y gr an te d fo r th e reas on s st at ed in th e di st ric t co urt’s or de r, se e Pet ers on v. Kop p, 75 4 F.3 d 59 4, 59 8 (8 th Ci r. 20 14 ) (d e no vo rev ie w); an d th at th e di st ric t co urt di d no t err in no t recu si ng it se lf su a sp on te , se e Uni te d St at es v. Ruba sh ki n, 65 5 F.3 d 8 49 , 85 8 (8 th Cir . 20 11 ) (p la inerro r rev ie w). Acco rd in gl y , we affi rm . See 8 th Cir . R. 47 B.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __

-2
-