alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK>               0001004540
<NAME>              AIRPLANES U.S. TRUST
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                               6
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        6
<ALLOWANCES>                                         3
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     9
<PP&E>                                             418
<DEPRECIATION>                                     125
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                     334
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                               21
<BONDS>                                            344
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                       (157)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                       334
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                    10
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        4
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     1
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  10
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    (5)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                (5)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       (5)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        


</TABLE>
STEAM ELECTRIC

CBI REPLACEMENT PAGE

EPA-HQ-OW-2009-0819

DCN: ________________________________________

THE FOLLOWING HAS BEEN REMOVED BECAUSE IT 

CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL BUSINESS INFORMATION 

(CBI) PER 40 CFR PART 2, SUBPART B.

SE04331A018
IN THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

Philadelphia District Attorney’s :

Office :

:

v. :

:

Craig Williams, : No. 1337 C.D. 2017

Appellant :

O R D E R

AND NOW, this 16th day of April, 2019 it is ORDERED that the 

above-captioned opinion filed February 8, 2019, shall be designated OPINION 

rather than MEMORANDUM OPINION, and it shall be reported.

___________________________

ANNE E. COVEY, Judge
411PSECRET0

AMP

1S)-NATIONAL RECONNAISSANCE OFFICE

WASHINGTON. D.C.

OFFICE OF WM DIRECTOR October 23, 1973

MEMORANDUM FOR GENERAL MEYER, SAC

SUBJECT: Production Facility for Satellite Photography

We have recently discussed the possibility of relocating

some of the functions of the Air Force Special Projects

Production Facility to the 544th ARTW at Offutt AFB. I have

decided to close the AFSPPF and move a portion of the satellite reconnaissance photographic duplication function to the

544th ARTW. Should the primary facility become unavailable,

this will provide a suitable backup capability for processing

satellite photography.

I recognize that this decision will require a significant

modification to the present facility occupied by the 544th

ARTW. Until these modifications are complete, I plan to

maintain a capability at Westover Air Force Base. I wish to

proceed quickly to develop implementing plans and ask that

you name a point of contact. The contact on my staff is

Brigadier General John E. Kulpa, Jr., SAFSS, who may be

reached at OX 7-8675 or Command Post drop 647.

cc: Chief of Staff

CLAIIIIIMINIMMOT NMI

saasisat meow e. 40p4Egia mama omen MI SHIPIPTIOM CATS.

C R I. OM MOW MO escummiv se a. MT.

coAlMillilb211173-

co.v.,,LAF_____CO.'"

PAGE..1_011.....L. PAGES
#### *Wadsworth*v. *Carroll,*

from Craven

Appeal of plaintiff -dismissed with leave to move for writ of *certiorari*on laying proper grounds therefor to bring up the case for review.
June 23, 2015 

Mr. Jacob Nigro 

1525 SW. Park Avenue 

Portland, OR 97201 

Dear Mr. Nigro: 

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

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

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

Why We Cannot Process Your Request 

We entered your exemption request into the public docket (No. FAA-2015-1441) on 

May 5, 2015, but we are unable to process your request any further. The information you sent 

does not comply with the requirements of § 11.81 (copy enclosed). For us to consider the 

request any further, you must send us all of the following: 

 The specific section or sections of 14 CFR from which you seek relief, the extent of the 

relief you seek, and the reason you seek relief. 

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

benefit the public as a whole. 

 The reasons why the exemption would not adversely affect safety or how the exemption 

would provide a level of safety at least equal to that provided by the rule from which you 

seek an exemption. 

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

What You Should Do 

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

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

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

If We Do Not Hear From You 

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

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

Sincerely, 

/s/ 

Brenda Robeson 

Program Analyst, Aircraft and 

 Airport Rules Division

Enclosure
### AliciaDankesreiter 

### 212 Airport Drive Lewis Run, P A 

### 16738

Mr. Kevin D. Schlemmer 

### ORR FORD REiiiDfiRL IRPDR"J:

Chief, EAS & Domestic Analysis Division United States Department of Transportation 1200 New Jersey Ave. , S.E. Washington, DC 20590 

### (814)'368-5928 x\0 Alicia£ Bradfordairport.net www.bradfordairport.net February 2, 2015

I RE : OST-2002-11446 (AOO EAS) ; OST-2003-14528 (BFD EAS) ; OST-2003-14950 (JHW EAS) ; 

### OST-1997-~523 (FKL EAS) '
Dear Mr. Schlemmer, In discussions with our current EAS carrier, Sun Air Express, the option of having service provided by Cessna Grand Caravan aircraft was proposed, and after careful evaluation , we have concluded that we would support such service as a replacement or in addition to the existing Piper Chieftain PA31-350 aircraft. We understand that the Caravan is a single engine turbo-prop , and as such does not meet the Department's twin-engine minimum service requirement. We believe there is sufficient value in use ofthat aircraft to our community that we are prepared to waive our right to twinengine service. We understand that use of single engine aircraft for Essential Air Service could eliminate the twin-engine minimum standard in future EAS bids. No change to the existing subsidy levels would be requested or required . Accordingly, we request that the Department allow Sun Air to operate either Cessna Caravan or Piper Chieftain aircraft for the remainder ofthe current EAS Order. Sincerely, Alicia Dankesreiter Interim Airport Manager



# --
PRIORITY

X

COMER, AFEM, ARDC, LOS ANGELES; CAL2FORNTA

COMM, AMC

ANDREilS APB, MARYLAND

SBORIU/RAICOM. PERSONAL TO SCHRIEV1M PROM RITLAND.

IT IS =CULLY AGREED BC 12.23D AND US THAT DISCOVERER III DID NOP

ACHIEVE ORBIT TODAY. TO GIVE YOU TIM DETAILS THE COMEDOWN, WHICH

STARTED AT 2AM PDT, PROCEEDED ON OR AHEAD OF SCHEWLE DM TO. THE

POINT OF START OF AUTOMATIC SEQUENCE ON TEE THOR.::' AT THIS POINT

TIME WAS 'A HOLD, FIRST FOR WEATHER ADD THEM WAIT FOR TRAINS TO

CLEAR THE Anit FOR A. TOTAL OF APPROIIMATELY 3 HOURS. WHEN THE

COURT WAS PXSUMED IT PROCEEDED EXAMLY AS FLAMED WITH NO TECHNICAL. •

muncumiss ON EITHER TBE THOR OR HE DISCO' Nq

LIFT OFF

OCCURRED AT 1309 PM AND THE NORMAL SEQUENCE OF EVENS ON BOTH

THOR AND DISCOVERER FOLLOWED %MOM DISCOVER 1M BURNOUT. HOWEVER

AFTER DISCOVERER Its.euriON RADAR DIM FROM BOTH PT. muctu ADD

MUM= TRACK BECOME ERRATIC ADD RADAR LOCK ON WAS LOST; THE

TRACK= STATIONS AND THE TELE/MraY SHIP STATIONED 1000 ACCESS DOWN

itakt3

Colonel, 45F4.

Ass! tow: CsItwoi.$

may, szbgb 50.7ab.

FS= S. BUZAR11, Major, USAF ,- irg e HAERY L. EVANS

2757 . l 2 Colonel, USAF

• • Assistant Deputy

SE Military Space SystenS

MTh

4 0316

JUDE 1959

FouRc' lloit;07_ce.; - ??

.1) 6 • a;
coma, man, Eq. ARDC, LOS ANG=S, CALVORNIA

RANGE . corm= TO RECEIVE TSB ACQUISMON BEACON AND TEE mEmErn

ZIA.DxasszoN tHITIL 13 102ruras Arm LAUNCH. BASED ON THIS TME4,

PREDICIIIM AN ORBIT WITH PERTGEN 78 STATUTE MILES, APOGEE 380

STATUTE =ZS AND PERIOD 93.3 YinIMS. MS INFORMATION WAS PROVED

WRONG 1MT NONE OF ODE TRACEDIG STATIONS EVER ACQUIRED THE

SATEILITE OR RECEIVED AN! OF ITS 72/ ,NSMISSIONS rag DETAILED ANALYSIS

OP THE TEM-1M= AND RADAR DATA IS PROCEEDING. THE ' KW RADAR

WEICIT IS &MEM= ROUGH . INDICA= MIT A lorjra ILIGEM PAM ANGLE

MAY H.A.VE OCCURED AT INJECTION. • FURVID2 STE= OF RADAR AND 1,1,D4 V.11,1"4.

DATA IS REQUIRED TO ESTABLISH 'THAT 13 DID HAVE A NEGATIVE MOLE AND

TO asuallIDE ITS. MUSE. LITL3/03 TEM DISOWN= I SITUATION WE DO

HAVE A LARGE MOON OP GOOD MEM! DATA TO REDUCE AND ANALYZE:

VA.:1=MMG TELTraTZ FROM MEM .TO PLUS 579 SEC. MUGU TIMIIMRY

FROM LAUNCH TO PLUS 515 SEC. %SMUTS!. SSW PROM PLUS 255 SEC TO

793 SEC. TEES CARRIES US WELL PAST TEE POINT ce ORBIT INJECTION

WHIM SHOULD RAVE OCCURRED AT 400 MCORDS AFTER LAUNCH. TELEZDMY

ANALYSIS AT TRW IS CONTINUING THBouatour TSB NIT. TEE DATA

GIVEN ABOVE IS BASED ON A 1730 PET REPORT N! LMSD. omen IMPORT

IS DUE AT 2130 PDT. DATA FROM ma ELM R! S. WILL NOT BE

AVArABLE tram TOMORROW. I WILL JOSEP YOU ADVISED OF DEVELOPMENTS

!Mir*

WDZWD

s..."-% I ..)' •

. .
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### A PPEAL 

### O F 

### T HE 

### S TATE 

### O F 

### F LORIDA

F OURTH D ISTRICT

PALM BEACH GARDENS TOWING CORP. d/b/a GARDENS TOWING

, Appellant,

v.

PLATINUM AR SERVICES, INC. d/b/a FOREIGN CAR ENGINEERING

, Appellee

.

No. 4D 21

- 1535

[ November 24, 2021 ]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm

Beach County ; Howard K. Coates, Jr. , Judge; L.T. Case No.

502019CA005688

.

Robert M. Klein and Andrew M. Feldman of Klein, Park & Lowe, P.L.,

Miami, for appellant.

Steven M. Weiss of L aw Offices of Steven M. Weiss, P.A., Palm Beach

Gardens, for appellee.

P ER C URIAM

.

Affirmed.

M AY

, K LINGENSMITH and A RTAU , JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
#### JAMES KYLE v. THE MAYOR AND COMMISSIONERS OF THE TOWN OF FAYETTEVILLE and others.

No distinction can be made between resident and non-resident shareholders of the stock of National Banks; and the Constitution and our Revenue Laws require the tax to be levied on all such shares, whether owned by residents or non-residents, and whether the latter be named or not.

(See the preceding case between the same parties.)

Motion for an *Injunction,*before his Honor Judge BuxtoN^ at Chambers, in the Town of Fayetteville, county of Cumberland, on the 13th day of November, 1875.

The pleadings and facts of this case are the same as those in the preceding case, between the same parties, with this exception: In this case, the tax complained of was levied under the Revenue Act of 1874, in which the shares of stock in the National banks in this State are not in express terms required to be listed. In all other respects the facts are the same.

His Honor, upon the hearing, granted the injunction upon the plaintiff’s giving the bond required by law. Prom this order the defendants appealed.

*450*Ray,*for appellants,

*McRae & Broadfo&t,*contra,

Rynum, J.

The only distinction between tbis1 case and the other between the same parties, decided at this Term is, that the tax here was levied for the year 1874, and the revenue act of that year does not in express terms tax the shares of non-residents in National Banks located in this State.

We have decided in the other case that no distinction can be made between resident and non-resident shareholders and that the Constitution and revenue laws require the tax to be levied upon all shares in National Banks, and that the laws equally apply to non-residents, whether named or not.

For the reasons stated in that opinion, the judgment below is-reversed, and the action is dismissed.

Pe® Curiam. Judgment reversed.
ConservaƟon PracƟce Standard Overview 

December 2012 

Wetland restoration is a way to return a 

former or degraded wetland to a condition that 

is a close approximation of its original 

condition. 

 

PracƟce InformaƟon

Wetlands are a valuable part of the natural 

landscape because they provide habitat for 

wildlife, reduce flooding, improve water 

quality, and increase groundwater recharge. 

There are three major characteristics of a 

wetland; hydric soils, hydrology, and 

hydrophytic (water-loving) vegetation. The 

most common reason that a wetland has 

been lost or degraded is that the hydrology of 

the site has been changed. This causes the 

hydrophytic vegetation to disappear. 

Restoration of the hydrology of the site 

usually causes a natural return of the 

hydrophytic plants. 

When a wetland restoration is planned, 

consider the effects on the adjacent surface 

and groundwater hydrology. Water 

temperature and flow volumes and direction 

may be affected. Also consider the effects on 

the aquatic species, including fish and 

amphibians. 

This practice has a minimum expected life of 

15 years. The operation and maintenance 

plan will include an inspection schedule, a list 

of items to inspect, recommended repairs, 

and procedures for documentation. A list of 

management and monitoring activities will 

also be included. One major component of 

this practice is maintenance of the vegetation 

once it is established. 

Common Associated PracƟces 

Wetland Restoration (657) is commonly 

applied with conservation practices such as 

Dike (356) and Structure for Water Control 

(587) to restore the wetland’s hydrology. 

Other practices such as Wetland Wildlife 

Habitat Management (644), Riparian 

Herbaceous Cover (390), and Riparian Forest 

Buffer (391) are used to provide additional 

habitat around the wetland. 

For further information, contact your local 

NRCS field office. 

Wetland RestoraƟon (657) 

Helping People Help the Land 

USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer.
EXHIBIT 32.1

CALIPER LIFE SCIENCES, INC.  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 Caliper Life Sciences, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-K for the year
ended December 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, E. Kevin Hrusovsky, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company
certify, pursuant to the requirement set forth in Rule 13a-14(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the "Exchange Act") and 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, that:



By:

/s/ E. KEVIN HRUSOVSKY E. Kevin Hrusovsky President and Chief Executive Officer


Date:
March 13, 2009

---



QuickLinks
# C_2005069EN.01000402.xml

| 19.3.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 69/4 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.3.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 69/4

---

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the College van Beroep voor het bedrijfsleven by order of that court of 15 December 2004 in Visserijbedrijf D.J. Koornstra Zn. V.o.f. v Productschap Vis

(Case C-517/04)

(2005/C 69/09)

Language of the case: Dutch

Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the European Communities by order of the College van Beroep voor het bedrijfsleven (Administrative Court for Trade and Industry) (Netherlands) of 15 December 2004 received at the Court Registry on 20 December 2004, for a preliminary ruling in the proceedings between Visserijbedrijf D.J. Koornstra Zn. V.o.f. and Productschap Vis (Fish Marketing Board) on the following questions:

| 1. | Is a charge, such as that in the present proceedings, levied on an operator in a Member State for landing shrimp with a fishing vessel registered in that Member State and used to finance shrimp sieves and peelers in that Member State consistent with Community law and, in particular, with Articles 25 and 90 EC, if the charge is also payable on shrimp landed by such an operator elsewhere in the Community? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Is a charge, such as that in the present proceedings, levied on an operator in a Member State for landing shrimp with a fishing vessel registered in that Member State and used to finance shrimp sieves and peelers in that Member State consistent with Community law and, in particular, with Articles 25 and 90 EC, if the charge is also payable on shrimp landed by such an operator elsewhere in the Community?

| 2. | Is the answer to this question affected by any of the following:






  a. | where the shrimps are caught; |
| --- | --- | --- |

2.

Is the answer to this question affected by any of the following:

a.

where the shrimps are caught;

| b. | whether, after being landed elsewhere in the Community, the shrimps are transported to the Member State in which the fishing vessel is registered; |
| --- | --- |

b.

whether, after being landed elsewhere in the Community, the shrimps are transported to the Member State in which the fishing vessel is registered;

| c. | whether, after the shrimps have been landed elsewhere in the Community, payment for sieving and peeling is made in that place also? |
| --- | --- |

c.

whether, after the shrimps have been landed elsewhere in the Community, payment for sieving and peeling is made in that place also?

---
THE NRO STAFF

•

•

•

MEMORANDUM FOR MR. L. C. DIRKS, D/ODSE

TIP-SECRET 111111111111P J.1111111

—IP-NATIONAL RECONNAISSANCE OFFICE

WASHINGTON. D.C.

1111111111111

14 January 1976

Attached is the position description for the R&D

. Staff Officer which has been revised per our telecon.

If you have any questions, please call me.

Attachment

411111ktrE OF allaviEnET__ IIIIIIIIIIIFa a FY N I O MOP On. CA"

CONTR 0-7:

COPY OPIES

PAGE a. OF 1 PAGES
-10P-SECRET--

RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT STAFF OFFICER

MR. FAGA

•

The R&D Staff Officer will assist the Senior R&D Staff

Officer in his responsibility for the overall program. He

will assume primary responsibility for major items in the program and community support activities as assigned. The R&D

Staff function will be evenly divided between the officers so

as to best use the talents of each, provide involvement of each

in the overall program, and assure that each is able to back up

the other as necessary. The R&D Officer will review the entire

annual R&D submission in detail and will examine those projects

within his areas of responsibility in depth for: •

Appropriateness under the NRP Support R&D guidelines

- Adequacy of justification and projected application

- Whether the submittedproject can reasonably be supported in the out-years and achieve the stated goals

Sufficient coordination with related projects within

and external to the NRP

Contribution to the overall balance of the NRP R&D

Program

He will work closely with the Senior R&D Staff Officer to develop

an aggregate recommended program responsive to the near-term and

long-term needs of the NRP. He will participate in the presentation of, the recommended program to the Director of the Staff and

the DNRO, and will have primary responsibility for justifying his

areas of assigned responsibility, including preparation of project

descriptions, projections, and status statements. 'He will monitor

the overall program and his specific areas of responsibility

throughout the year and, when appropriate, initiate program adjustments within the Staff.

The R&D Staff Officer will be responsible for actively seeking

out and following R&D projects by other agencies of interest to the

NRP. When appropriate, he will assure coordination between NRP and

external projects. He will support special efforts of the R&D and

Intelligence Community by serving on working, evaluation and study

groups, as assigned. In these cases he typically acts as the representative of the DNRO, presenting the NRO position, and acting as

focal point for NRP support of the effort.

He performs other duties as assigned.

-40P-SUREE 11111110•6 I 40104 UAW

111441110as 11111114•11014•114116 SONSIIkall Of li•KUftve Mere lysi bummer care

11111111Ciallium meow

CONTROL F., Pue

-76

copy_l_oF

PAGE 1 OF 1 PAGES
REPORT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS


     To the Board of Directors of
     Chevy Chase Bank, F.S.B.:

     We have examined management's assertion, included in the
     accompanying Management's Report on the Effectiveness of the
     Internal Control Structure Relative to the Servicing of
     Automobile Loan Receivables, that Chevy Chase Bank,
     F.S.B.(the "Bank") maintained an effective internal control
     structure over financial reporting relative to the servicing of
     automobile loan receivables owned by Chevy Chase Auto
     Receivables Trusts Series 1995-1, 1995-2 and 1996-1 (collectively
     referred to as the "Trusts" herein) as of September 30, 1997.

     Our examination was made in accordance with standards
     established by the American Institute of Certified Public
     Accountants and, accordingly, included obtaining an
     understanding of the internal control structure over financial
     reporting, testing, and evaluating the design and operating
     effectiveness of the internal control structure, and such other
     procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances.  We
     believe that our examination provides a reasonable basis for our
     opinion.

     Because of inherent limitations in any internal control structure,
     errors or irregularities may occur and not be detected.  Also,
     projections of any evaluation of the internal control structure over
     financial reporting to future periods are subject to the risk that the
     internal control structure may become inadequate because of
     changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the
     policies or procedures may deteriorate.

     In our opinion, management's assertion that the Bank maintained
     an effective internal control structure over financial reporting
     relative to the servicing of automobile receivables owned by the
     Bank's automobile loan Trusts as of September 30, 1997, is
     fairly stated, in all material respects, based upon criteria established
     in Internal Control - Integrated Framework issued by the Committee
     of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO).

     This report is intended solely for the information and use of
     the board of directors and management of the Bank, Norwest Bank
     Minnesota, N.A., Credit Suisse, MBIA Insurance Corporation and
     Financial Guaranty Insurance Company, and should not be
     used for any other purpose.





                 Washington, D.C.
                 November 18, 1997