alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 99.1


                           CERTIFICATIONS 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 Desert Mining, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-KSB for the period ended December 31, 2002 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Justine K. Noerring, 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 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/ Justine Noerring
-------------------------------------------
Justine K. Noerring Chief Executive Officer
March 26, 2003

         In connection with the Quarterly Report of Desert Mining, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-KSB for the period ended December 31, 2002 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Susan Johnson, 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 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/ Susan Johnson
--------------------------------------
Susan Johnson, Chief Financial Officer
March 26, 2003
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.                  

###### Small Business Administration

          - [Disaster Declaration #20732 and #20733; FLORIDA Disaster Number FL-20014]

# AGENCY:

U.S. Small Business Administration.

# ACTION:

Amendment 3.

# SUMMARY:

This is an amendment of the Presidential declaration of a major disaster for Public Assistance Only for the State of Florida (FEMA-4828-DR), dated October 5, 2024.

*Incident:*                         Hurricane Helene.                    

# DATES:

Issued on November 1, 2024.

*Incident Period:*                         September 23, 2024 through October 7, 2024.                    

*Physical Loan Application Deadline Date:*                         December 4, 2024.                    

*Economic Injury (EIDL) Loan Application Deadline Date:*                         July 7, 2025.                    

# ADDRESSES:

*Visit the MySBA Loan Portal at https://lending.sba.gov*                         to apply for a disaster assistance loan.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Vanessa Morgan, Office of Disaster Recovery & Resilience, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street SW, Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416, (202) 205-6734.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The notice of the President's major disaster declaration for Private Non-Profit organizations in the State of Florida, dated October 5, 2024, is hereby amended to update the incident period for this disaster as beginning September 23, 2024 and continuing through October 7, 2024.

All other information in the original declaration remains unchanged.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number 59008)

Alejandro Contreras,

Acting Deputy Associate Administrator, Office of Disaster Recovery & Resilience.

[FR Doc. 2024-27634 Filed 11-25-24; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8026-09-P
AFS

- 15

- 3544

- E October 5, 2015

Exemption No. 10882A

Regulatory Docket No. FAA

- 20 13

- 0078

Mr. Ronald Thomas

Managing Director, Flight Operations

American Airlines

4601 Highway 360 MD 843

Fort Worth, Texas 76155

Dear Mr. Thomas :

This letter is to inform you that we have granted your petition to extend Exemption

No. 10882 . It explains the basis for our decision , describes its effect, and lists the conditions

and limitations.

The Basis for Our Decision

By letter dated July 30, 2015 , you petitioned the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) on

behalf of American Airlines for an extension of Exemption No. 10882 . That exemption from

§ 121.915(d) of Title 14, Code of Federal Regula tions (14 CFR) provide s American Airlines

with relief from the requirement that an initial continuing qualification cycle approved for an

AQP must not exceed 24 calendar months in duration. This allow s for an initial continuing

qualification cycle of 36 c alendar months in duration

.

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 American Airlines

.2

Our Decision

The FA A has determined that the justification for the issuance of Exemption No. 10882

remains valid with respect to this exemption and is in the public interest. Therefore, under the

authority provided by 49 U.S.C. §§ 106( f ), 40113 and 44701, which the FAA Admi nistrator

has delegat ed to me, American Airlines is granted an extension to Exemption 10882 for

§ 121.915(d) allowing relief from the requirement that an initial continuing qualification cycle

approved for an AQP must not exceed 24 calendar months in durat ion , subject to the

following conditions and limitations.

Conditions and Limitations

1. The petitioner must continue to comply with all elements of their approved AQP.

The Effect of Our Decision

Our decision extends the termination date of Exemption No. 108 82 to October 31, 2017

unless sooner superseded or rescinded.

Sincerely,

/s/

John Barbagallo

Deputy Director, Flight Standards Service
The State of TexasAppellee/s



# Fourth Court of Appeals

**San Antonio, Texas**

Ap ril 4, 2014

N o. 04

- 13

- 00668

- CR

Javier GARZA

, Appellant

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

From the 144th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas
Trial Court No. 2011CR3388 The Honorable Angus K. McGinty, Judge Presiding



### ORDER

Appellant’s court

- appointed attorney has filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California

, 368 U.S. 738 (1967), in which s he asserts there are no meritorious issues to raise on appeal. Counsel has informed the appellant of his right to file his own brief. Nichols v. State , 954 S.W.2d 83, 85 (Tex. App.

— San Antonio 1997, no pet.); Bruns v. State , 924 S.W.2d 176, 177 n.1 (Tex. App.

— San Antonio 1996, no pet.). If the appellant desires to file a pro se brief, he must do so within thirty days from the date of this order. See Bruns , 924 S.W.2d at 177 n.1. If the appellant files a pro se brief, the State may file a responsive bri ef no later than thirty days after the date the appellant’s pro se brief is filed in this court. It is further ORDERED that the motion to withdraw, filed by appellant’s counsel, is HELD IN ABEYANCE pending further order of the

court.

_________________________________ Catherine Stone, Chief Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said
court on this 4th day of April, 2014

.

___________________________________ Keith E. Hottle
Clerk of Court
United States Court of Appeals

For the Eighth Circuit

___________________________

No. 19-2599

___________________________

Nicolas Escobar-Tejada

lllllllllllllllllllllPetitioner

v.

William P. Barr, Attorney General of the United States

lllllllllllllllllllllRespondent

 ____________

Petition for Review of an Order of the

 Board of Immigration Appeals

 ____________

 Submitted: March 17, 2020

Filed: March 20, 2020

[Unpublished]

____________

Before GRUENDER, BEAM, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges. 

____________

PER CURIAM.

Nicolas Escobar-Tejada, a citizen of El Salvador, petitions for review of an

order of the Board of Immigration Appeals upholding an immigration judge’s denial

of asylum and withholding of removal.
Upon careful consideration, we conclude that substantial evidence supports the

agency’s determination that Escobar-Tejada was not entitled to asylum because he did

not establish past persecution or a well-founded fear of persecution on account of a

protected ground. See Mayorga-Rosa v. Sessions, 888 F.3d 379, 382 (8th Cir. 2018)

(standard of review). Having failed to satisfy his burden of proof for his asylum

claim, Escobar-Tejada has necessarily failed to satisfy the more rigorous standard for

withholding of removal. See Al Tawm v. Ashcroft, 363 F.3d 740, 744 (8th Cir.

2004). We find no other basis for granting the petition. 

Accordingly, the petition for review is denied. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. 

______________________________

-2-
AMVESTORS FINANCIAL CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES              EXHIBIT 11
                CALCULATION OF EARNINGS PER SHARE
               (000's Omitted, except per share data)
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                         For the Year Ended December 31,
                             1995       1994        1993       1992       1991
<S>                         <C>         <C>        <C>       <C>      <C>
CALCULATION OF PRIMARY
EARNINGS PER SHARE
 Net earnings applicable
  to common shares:
 Net earnings..........    $ 16,599       13,693    17,978     16,818   10,119
 Less dividends accrued
  on preferred stock.....         -            -      (236)      (278)       - 
 Earnings for primary
  earnings per share...    $ 16,599       13,693    17,742     16,540   10,119
 Average number of common
  shares and common share
  equivalents outstanding:
 Average number of common
  shares outstanding......    10,106       10,140     6,595      5,618   5,508
 Dilutive effect of stock
  options and warrants after
  application of treasury
  stock method..........         248          201       265        152       -
                              10,354       10,341     6,860      5,770   5,508
 Primary earnings 
  per share.........         $  1.60         1.32      2.59       2.87    1.84
CALCULATION OF FULLY DILUTED
EARNINGS PER SHARE
 Net earnings applicable to
  common shares on a fully
  diluted basis:
 Earnings for fully diluted
  earnings per share...      $16,599       13,693    17,978     16,818  10,119
 Average number of common
  shares outstanding on
  a fully diluted basis:
 Shares used in calculating
  primary earnings per
  share....................  10,354         10,341     6,860     5,770   5,508
Shares resulting from
  assumed conversion of 
  preferred stock.........        -              -       455       562       2
 Additional dilutive effect
  of stock options and warrants
  after application of
  treasury stock method.......   50              -         -        235      -
                             10,404         10,341     7,315      6,567  5,510
    Fully diluted earnings
    per share..............  $ 1.60          1.32       2.46       2.56   1.84
 </TABLE>
75
**Exhibit32.2**

 

**CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

In connection with the Quarterly Report of T.J.T., Inc. (the “Company”)on Form 10-Q for the period ending December 31, 2003 as filed with theSecurities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, LarryB. Prescott, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18U.S.C. Code Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

(1) The Report fully complies with therequirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of1934; and

 

(2) The information contained in the Reportfairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and resultof operations of the Company.

 

 
| /s/Larry B. Prescott    |   |
|-------------------------|--------|
| Larry B. Prescott       |
| Chief Financial Officer |
| February 13, 2004  |

 

----
Aerial Inspection Resources,Inc.

4380 SW Macadam Ave.

Suite 515

Portland, OR 97239

Drew.p@aerialinspectionresources.com

U.S. Department of Transportation May 24, 2016

Docket ManagementSystem

1200 New Jersey Ave. S.E. 

Washington, D.C. 20590

Re: Amendment to Aerial Inspection Resources, Inc. ExemptionNo. 11467

Regulatory Docket No. FAA-2015-0261

Dear Sir or Madam:

Aerial Inspection Resources, Inc. (AIR) is requesting an amendment to our FAA Exemption No. 

11467, Docket No. FAA-2015-0261 for the purpose of conducting commercial UAS operations. AIR 

wishes to add the following aircraft to it’s section 333 exemption:

1. MMC Spider-E6x (exhibit 1)

2. MMC Phoenix-A6 (exhibit 2)

3. MMC Swift-F4 (exhibit 3)

For your ease in reviewing this request, please refer to the exhibit list which begins on page 2 and 

3.

If we can provide any additional information to assist your understanding or review of this 

document, please do not hesitate to contact us at 503-312-9804 or via email at Drew.P@air-uas.com.

Thank you,

Drew Pairamore

Director of Regulatory Compliance

Aerial Inspection Resources,Inc.
Table of Contents 

Exhibits

Exhibit 1:

MMC	Spider-E6x

Parameter Value

L-W-H(mm) 1315(L)*1190(W)*520(H)

Propeller(mm) 410(16	inches)

Weight 3.60kg (7.93	pounds)

Max.	take-off	weight 12kg (26.45	pounds)

Max.	flight time 25minutes

Fuselage & arm &	landing	gear Carbon	fiber	&	aviation	&	CNC	aluminum

Structure Foldable

Battery 1000/16000/22000mAh

Max.	wind	resistance 12m/s (23.3knots)

Operating	Temp, -10°	to	50°	C

																													
Exhibit 2:

MMC	Phoenix-A6

Parameter Value

L-W-H(mm) 2280-2070-620

Propeller(mm) 730	(28	inches)

Max.	take-off	weight 18kg	(39.7	pounds)

Max. Load payload 3kg (6.6	pounds)

Max.	flight time 75	minutes

Fuselage & arm &	landing	gear Carbon	fiber	&	aviation	&	CNC	aluminum

Battery 1000/16000/22000mAh

Max.	wind	resistance 9m/s (17.5	knots)

Operating	Temp. -10	°to	50°	C

Exhibit 3:

MMC	Swift-F4

Parameter Value

Propeller	L-W-H(mm) 2000-1200-400

Max.	take-off	weight 22.6	kg	(49.8	pounds)

Max. Load payload 10	kg	(22	pounds)

Max.	flight time 16	min

Fuselage & arm &	landing	gear Carbon	fiber	&	aviation	&	CNC	aluminum

Battery 16000mAh

Max.	wind	resistance 10m/s (19.4 knots)

Operating	Temp. -10	°to	50°	C
#### Patrick Parham, Appellant, v Congress Talcott Corporation, Respondent.

[631 NYS2d 671]

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Richard B. Lowe, III, J.), entered June 10, 1994, dismissing the complaint, and bringing up for review an order, same court and Justice, entered May 12, 1994, which denied plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment and granted defendant’s cross motion for summary judgment, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiff provided defendant factor with cash collateral to secure his guarantee of his corporation’s obligations to defendant. Seeking to recover the cost of vacating an attachment that another of defendant’s customers was able to obtain after it was informed by defendant of the closing of plaintiff’s company and the bank accounts into which plaintiff had deposited a partial return of the cash collateral, plaintiff alleges that defendant owed it a fiduciary duty to keep informa*523tion concerning its finances confidential. Assuming, as plaintiff argues, that such a duty of confidentiality is owed by a bank to its depositors *(cf., Boccardo v Citibank,*152 Misc 2d 1012, 1014-1015), the agency-like aspects of such a relationship are absent here, and we agree with the IAS Court that the parties’ relationship was more akin to that of guarantor and lender involving no such duty of confidentiality *(see, Bank Leumi Trust Co. v Block 3102 Corp.,*180 AD2d 588, 589, *lv denied*80 NY2d 754). Concur — Wallach, J. P., Kupferman, Ross, Nardelli and Tom, JJ.
An official website of the United States government         Here's how you know         
**Official websites use .mil**
A **.mil** website belongs to an official U.S. Department of Defense organization in the United States.
**Secure .mil websites use HTTPS**
 A **lock (lock )** or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .mil website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Skip to main content (Press Enter).

U.S. Indo-Pacific CommandUSINDOPACOM

U.S. Indo-Pacific Command

Search

Search
Search

-  Home		 
-  Leadership    -  Commander         
  -  Deputy Commander         
  -  Chief of Staff         
  -  Senior Enlisted Leader 
-  About USINDOPACOM    -  History         
  -  USPACOM Area of Responsibility         
  -  USPACOM Previous Commanders         
  -  Women, Peace and Security 
-  Organization    -  Organization Chart 
-  Media    -  News      -  Spotlight 
  -  Photos         
  -  Speeches / Testimony         
  -  Freedom of Information Act      -  FOIA - Reading Room         
    -  Submit FOIA Request         
    -  Request Status         
    -  FOIA FAQS 
-  Resources    -  Travel Requirements         
  -  Useful Theater Information         
  -  FAQ         
  -  Useful Links 
-  Newcomers		 
-  Contact    -  Directory         
  -  Media Inquiries         
  -  Industry Engagements 
-  JTF - Red Hill		 
-  JTF-Micronesia		 

Home : Media : News : News Article View

PHOTO INFORMATION

** Download

** Details

** Share

# 31st Marine Expeditionary Unit Sergeant Major Relinquishes Word of Office, Mota Assumes Duties

By Lance Cpl. Jonah Baase 31st Marine Expeditionary Unit  

**                    SHARE                

**                    PRINT                

More News
Page 1 of 2 

Occupational Safety And Health Review Commission

Commissioners’ Monthly Docket Report at Close of Business on May 31, 2021 

 DOCKET

NUMBER

RESPONDENT'S

NAME

DOCKETED TYPE* BRIEFING

NOTICE 

DATE

BRIEFING 

STATUS

COMMISSIONER 

NOT 

PARTICIPATING

1 18-0034

Armstrong Utilities, 

Inc. d/b/a Armstrong 

Cable Services

10/15/19 DFR 10/24/19 Closed

 2 17-0138 Home Rubber 

Company, LP 10/22/19 DFR 11/04/19 Closed

3 18-0758 RoadSafe Traffic 

Systems, Inc. 10/30/19 DFR 11/01/19 Closed

4 17-0737

UHS of Westwood 

Pembroke, Inc.

UHS of Delaware, Inc.

03/19/20 DFR 03/25/20 Closed

5 18-0068 Roy Rock, LLC 08/21/20 DFR 08/28/20 Closed

6 18-1451 Summit Contracting 

Group, Inc. 08/24/20 DFR 09/25/20 Closed

7 16-1713 United States Postal 

Service 08/31/20 DFR 09/25/20 Closed

8 16-1813 United States Postal 

Service 08/31/20 DFR 09/25/20 Closed

9 16-1872 United States Postal 

Service 08/31/20 DFR 09/25/20 Closed

10 17-0023 United States Postal 

Service 08/31/20 DFR 09/25/20 Closed

11 17-0279 United States Postal 

Service 08/31/20 DFR 09/25/20 Closed

12 16-1865 AJM Packaging 

Corporation 10/07/20 DFR 10/14/20 Closed

13 19-0723 Midwest Equipment 

Company 10/23/20 DFR 11/25/20 Closed

14 16-1587 TNT Crane & 

Rigging, Inc. 11/18/20 DFR 12/10/20 Closed

15 18-1864 Henkels & McCoy, 

Inc. 12/07/20 DFR 12/23/20 Closed

16 18-0242 Onekey, LLC 02/05/21 DFR 02/18/21 Open

17 18-0731

UHS of Delaware, 

Inc. and Premier 

Behavioral Health 

Solutions of Florida, 

Inc. d/b/a Suncoast 

Behavioral Health 

Center

05/19/21 DFR 05/21/21 Open
Page 2 of 2 

Occupational Safety And Health Review Commission

Commissioners’ Monthly Docket Report at Close of Business on May 31, 2021 

 DOCKET

NUMBER

RESPONDENT'S

NAME

DOCKETED TYPE* BRIEFING

NOTICE 

DATE

BRIEFING 

STATUS

COMMISSIONER 

NOT 

PARTICIPATING

18 18-1287 First Marine, LLC 05/19/21 DFR 05/27/21 Open

19 18-1288 First Marine, LLC 05/19/21 DFR 05/27/21 Open

*DFR – Direction For Review

 REM – Appellate Remand

 INT REV – Interlocutory Review
#### Bank of Prentice, Appellant, vs. Beyer, Respondent.

*January 15*

February *9, 1926.*

*Banks: Assessments by directors: Liability of stockholder failing to pay assessment.*

Sec. 220.07, Stats., relative to *pro rata*assessments by the board of directors upon all the stock of a state bank, imposes no personal liability upon the stockholders, but provides an exclusive remedy, *i. e.*the sale of the stock if the stockholder refuses to pay. *Finney v. Guy,*106 Wis. 256.

Appeal from an order of the circuit court for Price county: G. N. Risjord, Circuit Judge.

*Affirmed.*

*W. K. Parkinson*of Phillips, for the appellant.

/. *A. DeBardeleben oi*Phillips, for the respondent.

Rosenberry, J.

Plaintiff is a state bank organized under the laws of the state of Wisconsin. Prior to the 5th day of July, 1924, the capital^stock of the plaintiff had become impaired, and the board of directors, on said date, pursuant to the power conferred by sec. 220.07, Stats., made a *pro rala*assessment upon all of the stock of the bank in the amount of one hundred per cent, to make good such deficiency, and provided the time and manner of payment. Notice of the assessment was duly given, demand was made upon the defendant for the payment of $500, the amount of his. assessment. The defendant refused to pay, and this action was begun to recover the amount of the assessment. The defendant demurred on the ground that the complaint stated no cause of action for the reason that the statute imposes no personal liability but provides an exclusive remedy. The demurrer was sustained by the court, and the plaintiff appeals.

The material part of the statute under which the assessment was levied is as follows:

> “Section 220.07 ... In any case, where the capital of a bank shall have become impaired or reduced below the *254amount required by law or the articles of incorporation, the board of directors of such bank shall have the power to make a *pro rata*assessment upon all of the stock of said bank to make good such deficiency, and may provide that the 'amount of such deficiency shall be due and payable at a' time to be fixed by such board of directors, which time shall be not less than ten days after notice of said assessment; and if any stockholder shall fail or neglect to pay the amount of the assessment against his stock for. ten days after the same shall have become so due and payable, the directors of such bank may offer said stock for sale, and sell the same at public sale upon ten days’ notice to be given by posting copies of such notice of sale in five public places in the town, village, or city where such bank is located.”

The plaintiff contends that under the statute, upon the assessment being made and notice thereof given, the stockholder becomes personally liable.

The question involved here was thoroughly considered and exhaustively discussed in *Finney v. Guy,*106 Wis. 256, 82 N. W. 595, and it is not necessary to repeat here what was there said. Upon the,authority of that case the order is affirmed.

*By the Court.*— It is. so ordered.