alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### STATE TO THE USE OF H. G. WOODFIN *vs.*FRANCIS McGEE AND OTHERS.

An action on a Sheriff’s bond, in the name of the State to the use of an injured party, may be brought in the Superior Court of the county, in which the relator resides, though all the defendants reside in a differ, ent county.

This was an appeal from the judgment of his Honor Judge Bailey, at the Spring Term, 1842, of Macon Superior Court of Law. The action was brought on the official bond of the sheriff of Cherokee county against him and his sureties. At the return term the defendants pleaded in abatement that they all resided in Cherokee county, where the bond was executed; that the bond being payable to the State, though H. G-. Wood fin, by whom it had been put in suit, did reside in this county, the suit should have been brought in the Superior Court of Cherokee county. To this plea there was a demurrer, and the demurrer being sustained by his Honor, an appeal was taken to the Supreme Court.

No counsel appeared for the plaintiff in this court,

*J. G. 'Bynum*for the defendant.

Daniel, J.

Where the action is riot local, and the parties live in different counties, the suit may be brought in the court of either county at the option of the plaintiff. Rev. *210stat. c. 31, s. 39. It is true that pleas of the State are com-! Prended in the list of local actions; but that is where the State is the real and substantial party in interest. In this actjon the State is but a nominal party. The act of Assembly declares, that, on a breach of the conditions in a sheriff’s bond, the party or parties injured may maintain an action on the same in the name of the State, provided the person or persons so injured and bringing suit shall state in the declaration, as they are authorized to do, matter of inducement sufficient to shew the court, at whose instance, and in whose behalf, the same is brought. Rev. Stat. c. 81, s. 1. 2. Then, the *relator*is to be considered the real plaintiff: he must state in his declaration that the suit is brought at his instance, and for his benefit. As the Legislature considers the relator to be the real plaintiff, we are of the opinion that this action was properly brought in the county of the relator, and that the decision in the Superior Court was right; which must be accordingly certified to that court.

Per Curiam, Ordered accordingly.
• rvARTi^BiT OF 

SERVED DECEMBER 9, 2011 '^' ^"^ '2 A iO 3b 

-*"""-'""• • " ^ 

^wmju^jwq 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS 

WASHINGTON, DC 

IN THE MATTER OF 

AMERICAN AIRLINES, INC. 

FAA DOCKET No. CPI0SW0006 

(Civil Penally Action) 

DMSFAA-20I0-0532 

ORDER OF DISMISSAL 

On April 30, 2010, the Federal Aviation Administration ("Complainant") filed a 

Complaint. On June 2, 2010. America Airlines, Inc. ("Respondent") filed its Answer. 

On December 8, 2011, Respondent filed a Withdrawal of Request for Hearing, citing its 

petition seeking bankruptcy protection under the U.S. Code. 

14 C.F.R. § 13.215 states: "At any time before or during a hearing, an agency 

attorney may withdraw a complaint or party may withdraw a request for a hearing 

without the consent of the administrative law judge. If an agency attorney 

withdraws the complaint or a party withdraws the request for a hearing and the 

answer, the administrative law judge shall dismiss the proceedings under this 

subpart with prejudice." 

WHEREFORE, Respondent's Withdrawal of Request for Hearing having been 

read and considered, it is ORDERED as follows: 

1. Respondent's Withdrawal of Request for Hearing be and is hereby 

granted; and 
2. This proceeding be and is hereby dismissed with prejudice. 

Richard C. Goodwin 

U.S. Adminislrative Law Judge 

Attachments - Service List 
FAA Docket No. CP09SW0006 

(Civil Penally Action) 

SERVICE LIST 

ORIGINAL & ONE COPY 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue, S.W. 

Washington, DC. 20591 

Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Wilbur Wright Building—Suite 2W1000' 

ONE COPY 

American Eagle Airlines, Inc., Respondenl 

ATTN; Peter Bowler, President 

1700 W. 20'^ Street, MD 1200 

P.O. Box 612527 

DFW Airport, TX 75261-2527 

Francis C. Heil, Respondent's Counsel 

American Airlines, Inc., Legal Department 

P.O. Box 619616, Mail Drop 5675 

DFW Airport, TX 75261-9616 

TEL: 202-496-5642 

FAX: 202-496-5660 

Rena M. Price, Complainant's Counsel 

Safety Enforcement Branch, Office of the Regional Counsel 

Soutliwest Region, ASW-7EI, RMP 

Federal Aviation Administration 

2601 Meacham Blvd., Room 663 

Fort Worth, TX 76137-0007 

TEL: 817-222-5068 

FAX: 817-222-5945/5092 

The Honorable Richard C. Goodwin, Administrative km' Judge 

Office of Hearings, M-20 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. 

Washington, DC 20590 

TEL: Attorney-Advisor 202-366-2139 

Legal Assistant 202-366-5121 

FAX: 202-366-7536 

' Ser\'ice was by U.S. Mail. For service in person or by expedited courier, use Uie following address: Federal 

Aviation Administration, 600 Independence Avenue, S.W.. Wilbur Wright Building—Suite 2W1000, Washington, 

DC 20591; Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk. AGC-430.
## In the

Court of Appeals

Second Appellate District of Texas

at Fort Worth

No. 02

- 19

- 00351

- CR

L EON W ILLIAMS

, Appellant

V

.

T HE S TATE OF T EXAS §

§

§

§

§

§ On Appeal from

County Criminal Court No. 3

of Denton Coun ty (CR

- 2 016

- 01537

- A)

March 26, 2020

Opinion by Justice Gabriel

(nfp)

JUDGMENT

This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that there

was no reversible error in the trial court’s judgment. It is ordered that the judgment

of the trial court is affirmed.

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS

By /s/ Lee G abriel

Justice Lee Gabriel
IB 

Union Calendar No. 67 

115TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1073 

[Report No. 115–113] 

To authorize the Secretary of the Interior to establish a structure for visitor 

services on the Arlington Ridge tract, in the area of the U.S. Marine 

Corps War Memorial, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 15, 2017 

Mr. BEYER (for himself and Mr. COOK) introduced the following bill; which 

was referred to the Committee on Natural Resources 

MAY 11, 2017 

Additional sponsor: Mr. GRAVES of Louisiana 

MAY 11, 2017 

Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union 

and ordered to be printed 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 1073 RH

A BILL 

To authorize the Secretary of the Interior to establish a 

structure for visitor services on the Arlington Ridge 

tract, in the area of the U.S. Marine Corps War Memorial, and for other purposes. 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 1073 RH

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

3 SECTION 1. DEFINITION. 

4 In this Act, the term ‘‘Arlington Ridge tract’’ means 

5 the parcel of Federal land located in Arlington County, 

6 Virginia, known as the Nevius Tract and transferred to 

7 the Department of the Interior in 1953, that is bounded 

8 generally by— 

9 (1) Arlington Boulevard (United States Route 

10 50) to the north; 

11 (2) Jefferson Davis Highway (Virginia Route 

12 110) to the east; 

13 (3) Marshall Drive to the south; and 

14 (4) North Meade Street to the west. 

15 SEC. 2. ESTABLISHMENT OF A VISITOR SERVICES FACILITY 

16 ON THE ARLINGTON RIDGE TRACT. 

17 Notwithstanding section 2863(g) of Public Law 107– 

18 107, the Secretary of the Interior is authorized to con19 struct a structure for visitor services to include a public 

20 restroom facility on the Arlington Ridge tract in the area 

21 of the U.S. Marine Corps War Memorial. 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with BILLS
Union Calendar No. 67 

115TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1073 

[Report No. 115–113] 

A BILL 

To authorize the Secretary of the Interior to estabCorps War Memorial, and for other purposes. ton Ridge tract, in the area of the U.S. Marine lish a structure for visitor services on the ArlingMAY 11, 2017 

Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the 

State of the Union and ordered to be printed 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with BILLS
### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 16

- 41243 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

–

Appellee ,

v ersus
IGNACIO RODRIGUEZ

- CEPEDA , Defendant

– Appellant

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas No. 1:16

- CR

- 17

- 1

ON PETITION FOR REHEARING

Before JOLLY, SMITH, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: *

Ignacio Rodriguez

- Cepeda appeal ed his sentence for i llegal reentry after deportation. He contend ed that the district court erred in increasing his

* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5 , the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED March 13, 2018 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 16-41243 Document: 00514384548 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/13/2018No. 16

- 41243

2 offense level under U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(1)(A)(ii) based on his Texas conviction s of b urg lary of a habitation under Texas Penal Code § 30.02. We granted the

govern ment’s unopposed motion for summary affirmance , agreeing that Rodriguez

- Cepeda ’s arguments were foreclosed by U nited States v. Uribe,
838 F.3d 667 (5th Cir. 2016), cert. denied , 137 S. Ct. 1359 ( 2017)

. In United States v. Herrold , No. 14

- 11317, 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 4068, at *19 (5th Cir. Feb. 20, 2018) (en banc), this court overruled Uribe . This panel requested letter briefs for the parties to state what action should be taken in light of Herrold . Both sides agree that the sentence cannot stand. The govern

ment carefully maintains its disagreement with Herrold for purposes of pre

serv ing the issue for further appellate review. The petition for rehearing is GRANTED . The opinion, 691 F. App’x 181 (5th Cir. 2017) (per curiam), is WITHDRAWN, and the judgment of sentence is VACATED and REMANDED for resentencing. The mandate shall issue immediately. Case: 16-41243 Document: 00514384548 Page: 2 Date Filed: 03/13/2018
Page 1 of 3

Benjamin Z. Smith

UAV Aviation Services Inc. (UAS,Inc.)

827 W. Trindle Rd.

Mechanicsburg, PA 17055

717.278.7502

benjamin.smith@uavaviationservices.com

04 September 2015

U.S. Department of Transportation

Docket Management System

1200 New Jersey Ave., SE

Washington, DC 20590

RE: Petition to Amend Exemption No. 12353 Issued to UAS, Inc.

(Docket No. FAA-205-1071)

Dear Sir or Madam:

UAS, Inc. was issued Exemption No. 12353 on August 5, 2015 (hereinafter “the Exemption”),

allowing operation of the Hawkeye Mk-III, Microdrones MD4-1000 and MD4-3000 models. 

Petitioner hereby requests an amendment to the Exemption to allow additional types of small

UAS under the same conditions and limitations of the Exemption.

UAS, Inc. seeks to add the DJI Phantom 3 Advanced, and the DJI Phantom 3 Professional (together, “DJI Phantom 3”), the SenseFly eBee, SenseFly eXom and SenseFly Ag. 

UAS, Inc. believes this to continue to be in the public interest as these models reduce hazards

and emissions associated with manned aircraft, and the vehicles are light weight and do not carry

passengers, crew, or any flammable fuel.
Page 2 of 3

The models to be considered for addition to the Exemption are all smaller aircraft than those currently approved for use by UAS, Inc., with similar safety and operating capabilities.

All models are considered Micro, and have been approved by the FAA in one or more prior exemptions (only one example listed for clarity):

Make: DJI

Model: Phantom 3 Advanced

Type: Rotocraft

Maximum weight including Payload: Approx. 2.8 (less than 5 pounds)

Exemption No: 12142

Make: DJI

Model: Phantom 3 Professional

Type: Rotocraft

Maximum weight including Payload: Approx. 2.8 pounds (less than 5 pounds)

Exemption No: 12142

Make: SenseFly 

Model: eBee

Type: Fixed Wing

Maximum weight including Payload: Approx. 3.9 pounds (less than 5 pounds)

Exemption No.: 11263A

Make: SenseFly 

Model: eXom

Type: Fixed Wing

Maximum weight including Payload: Approx. 3.9 pounds (less than 5 pounds)

Exemption No.: 11263A

Make: SenseFly 

Model: Ag

Type: Fixed Wing

Maximum weight including Payload: Approx. 3.9 pounds (less than 5 pounds)

Exemption No.: 11339
Page 3 of 3

UAS, Inc. respectfully submits that good cause exists for granting the requested amendments expeditiously. UAS, Inc. asks only to amend its existing Exemption to add additional micro UAS,

the DJI Phantom 3 and listed SenseFly “micro” unmanned aircraft, as that term is defined in the

Small UAS Proposed Rule. This request would not set any precedent, and any delay in acting on

the request would be detrimental to the petitioner, as they intend to conduct operations using the

listed types of micro UAS as soon as the requested amendment is approved.

Appropriate manuals have been submitted separately and with confidentialty.

Please do not hesitate to contact UAS, Inc. with any questions about this filing.

Sincerely,

Benjamin Z. Smith, President

827 W.Trindle Rd.

Mechanicsburg, PA 17055

Cell 717-278-7502

Office 717-691-8882

benjamin.smith@uavaviationservices.com
### SAT Report PMN Number: P-12-0143 SAT Date: 1/18/2012

Related cases : Health related cases: Ecotox related cases:

Concern levels : Type of Concern: Health Eco Comments Level of Concern: 1-2 1

Persistence Bioaccum Toxicity Comments 1 1 1 PMN 3 1 1 Hyd Pdt

Exposure Based Review : Health: Ecotox:
Routes of exposure : Health: Inhalation Ecotox: N o releases to water Fate: ; PMN negl; Hyd Pdt negl Keywords : Keywords: UNCERT-SENS-RESPIRATORY Summary of Assessment :
Fate : Fate Summary: P-12-0143 FATE: Liquid with MP < 25 C (E) S = Reacts Hydrolysis half-life = da VP < 1.0E-6 torr at 25 C (E) BP > 400 C (E) H < 1.00E-8 (E) POTW removal (%) = PMN 90-99 via hydrolysis and sorption, then Hyd Pdt 90 via sorption Time for complete ultimate aerobic biodeg = PMN mo; Hyd Pdt moSorption to soils/sediments = PMN v.strong; Hyd Pdt v.strong PBT Potential: PMN P1B1; Hyd Pdt P3B1 *CEB FATE: Migration to ground water = PMN negl; Hyd Pdt negl

Health : Health Summary: Absorption is nil all routes based on physical/chemical p roperties. There is uncertain concern for respiratory sensitization for the low molecular Low moderate concern.

Ecotox : Test Organism Test Type Test End Point Predicted Measured Comments

fish 96-h LC50 * daphnid 48-h LC50 * green algal 96-h EC50 * fish

_ chronic value * daphnid

_ chronic value *
algal

_ chronic value *
Sewage Sludge 3-h EC50 Sewage Sludge

_ Chronic Value _

Ecotox Values Comments: Predictions are based on SARs for liquid with mp unknown (P); S = reacts with water at 20 C (P); p H7; effective concentrations based on 100% active ingredients and mean measured concentrations; hardness <150.0 mg/L as CaCO3; and TOC <2.0 mg/L;

Factors Values Comments Assessment Factor 10 Concentration of Concern ( p pb) *

SARs SAR Class Ecotox Category
Ecotox Factors Comments:
SAT Chair: Becky Jones
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Postal Service

# AGENCY:

                        Postal ServiceTM.                    

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.

# DATES:

*Date of required notice:*                         November 14, 2024.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Sean C. Robinson, 202-268-8405.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    The United States Postal Service® hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on November 1, 2024, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a                     *USPS Request to Add Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail & USPS Ground Advantage® Contract 620 to Competitive Product List.*                     Documents are available at                     *www.prc.gov,*                     Docket Nos. MC2025-266, K2025-264.                

Sean C. Robinson,

Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.

[FR Doc. 2024-26380 Filed 11-13-24; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
ARMED SERVICES BOARD OF CONTRACT APPEALS 

Appeal of -- ) 

) 

Integrated Device Technology, Inc. ) 

) 

Under Contract No. Wl 5P7T-06-C-PO 18 ) 

APPEARANCE FOR THE APPELLANT: 

APPEARANCES FOR THE GOVERNMENT: 

ASBCA No. 58876 

William J. Kelley, III, Esq. 

Kelley & Kelley 

Irvine, CA 

E. Michael Chiaparas, Esq. 

DCMA Chief Trial Attorney 

Lawrence S. Rabyne, Esq. 

Senior Trial Attorney 

Defense Contract Management Agency 

Arlington Heights, IL 

ORDER OF DISMISSAL 

The dispute has been settled. The appeal is dismissed with prejudice. 

Dated: 5 November 2014 

~~#.~~ MARK N. STEMPLER 

Administrative Judge 

Vice Chairman 

Armed Services Board 

of Contract Appeals 

I certify that the foregoing is a true copy of the Order of Dismissal of the Armed 

Services Board of Contract Appeals in ASBCA No. 58876, Appeal of Integrated Device 

Technology, Inc., rendered in conformance with the Board's Charter. 

Dated: 

JEFFREY D. GARDIN 

Recorder, Armed Services 

Board of Contract Appeals
Exhibit 31.2 CERTIFICATION OF ACTING
CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER I, James L. Schaeffer, certify that: 1.I have reviewed
this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Polymer Group, Inc.; 2.Based on my
knowledge, this quarterly 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 this quarterly report; 3.Based on my
knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included
in this quarterly 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 this quarterly report; 4.The registrants
other certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing and
maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-14
and 15d-14) for the registrant and have: a)designed such
disclosure controls and procedures 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 this
quarterly report is being prepared; b)evaluated the
effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures as of a
date within 90 days prior to the filing date of this quarterly report (the
Evaluation Date); and c)presented in this
quarterly report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure
controls and procedures based on our evaluation as of the Evaluation Date; 5.The registrants
other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recent
evaluation, to the registrants auditors and the audit committee of registrants
board of directors: a)all significant
deficiencies in the design or operation of internal controls which could
adversely affect the registrants ability to record, process, summarize and
report financial data and have identified for the registrants auditors any
material weaknesses in internal controls; and b)any fraud, whether
or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a
significant role in the registrants internal controls; and 6.The
registrants other certifying officers and I have indicated in this quarterly
report whether there were significant changes in internal controls or in other
factors that could significantly affect internal controls subsequent to the
date of our most recent evaluation, including any corrective actions with
regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses. Date: August 12, 2003
  
  /s/ James L.
  SchaefferJames L. SchaefferActing Chief Financial Officer* 
 *James G.
Boyd, the Companys Chief Financial Officer, was involved in an automobile
accident on May 8, 2003 and has been recovering since such date.


---