alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Amendment	to	FAA	document FAA
- 2015
- 3509
- 0001

As	listed	in	the	document: Brian	Morris Morning	Star	Photography	LLC. DBA:	Morning	Star	Creative	Group 213	SW	41st.	Street Renton,	WA	98057 (425)	251
- 6763 (206)	914
- 8054 brian@mscgstudio.com www.mscgstudio.com UBI#	602	178	189 State	of	Washington,	January	2002 The	correct	address	should	read	as	follows: Brian	Morris Morning	Star	Photography	LLC. DBA:	Morning	Star	Creative	Group 4329	SE	3 rd Street Renton,	WA	98059 (425)	251
- 6763 (206)	914
- 8054 brian@mscgstudio.com www.mscgstudio.com UBI#	602	178	189 State	of	Washington,	January	2002 As	listed	in	the	document: Dear	Sir	or	Madam: Pursuant	to	Section	333	of	the	FAA	Modernization	and	Reform	Act	of	2012	(the Reform Act)	and	14	C.F.R.	Part	11,	Andersen	Ross Photography	Inc.,	hereby	applies	for	an exemption	from	the	listed	Federal	Aviation	Regulations	("FAR")	to	allow commercial	operation	of	its	UAVs,	so	long	as	such	operations	are	conducted	within and	under	the	conditions	outlined	herein	or	as	may	be	establi shed	by	the	FAA	as required	by	Section	333. The	correction	should	read: Dear	Sir	or	Madam:Pursuant	to	Section	333	of	the	FAA	Modernization	and	Reform	Act	of	2012	(the

Reform Act)	and	14	C.F.R.	Part	11,	Morning	Star	Photography	LLC,	hereby	applies	for an exemption	from	the	listed	Federal	Aviation	Regulations	("FAR")	to	allow commercial	operation	of	its	UAVs,	so	long	as	such	operations	are	conducted	within and	under	the	conditions	outlined	herein	or	as	may	be	established	by	the	FAA	as required	by	Section 333. As	listed	in	the	document: The	name	and	address	of	the	applicant	is: Morning	Star	Photography	LLC. DBA:	Morning	Star	Creative	Group 213	SW	41st.	Street Renton,	WA	98057 (425)	251
- 6763 (206)	914
- 8054 brian@mscgstudio.com www.mscgstudio.com UBI#	60 2	178	189 State	of	Washington,	January	2002 The	correction	should	read: The	name	and	address	of	the	applicant	is: Morning	Star	Photography	LLC. DBA:	Morning	Star	Creative	Group 4329	SE	3 rd Street Renton,	WA	98059 (425)	251
- 6763 (206)	914
- 8054 brian@ms cgstudio.com www.mscgstudio.com UBI#	602	178	189 State	of	Washington,	January	2002
EXHIBIT 11

BAIRNCO CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES

CALCULATION OF BASIC AND DILUTED EARNINGS PER SHARE

FOR THE QUARTERS ENDED MARCH 30, 2002 AND MARCH 31, 2001

(Unaudited)

			 
2002
2001
BASIC EARNINGS PER COMMON SHARE:     
Net income
$     681,000
$  1,017,000
Average common shares outstanding
7,329,000
7,311,000
Basic Earnings Per Common Share
$           0.09
$           0.14   
DILUTED EARNINGS PER COMMON SHARE:     
Net income
$      681,000
$  1,017,000
Average common shares outstanding
7,329,000
7,311,000
Common shares issuable in respect to options issued      to employees with a dilutive effect
5,000
126,000
Total diluted common shares outstanding
7,334,000
7,437,000
Diluted Earnings Per Common Share
$           0.09
$           0.14
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                             237
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    2,004
<ALLOWANCES>                                        11
<INVENTORY>                                      3,416
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 5,907
<PP&E>                                          10,784
<DEPRECIATION>                                   2,007
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  17,329
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            3,681
<BONDS>                                          5,246
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                      5,000
<COMMON>                                             9
<OTHER-SE>                                     (2,165)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    17,329
<SALES>                                          4,111
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 4,111
<CGS>                                            2,716
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    1,347
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   138
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 128
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  (218)
<INCOME-TAX>                                      (62)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              (156)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (156)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.03)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 31B**CERTIFICATIONS**I, Michael J. Rockenbach, certify that: 1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Emulex Corporation;  2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of amaterial 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 misleadingwith respect to the period covered by this report;  3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this report, fairly present in all material respects thefinancial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, andfor, the periods presented in this report.  4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in ExchangeAct Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (asdefined in Exchange Act Rules (3a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the registrant and have: a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, orcaused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under oursupervision, to ensure that material information relating to theregistrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us byothers within those entities, particularly during the period in which thisreport is being prepared;  b) Designed such internal control over financialreporting, or caused such internal control over financial reporting to bedesigned under our supervision, to provide reasonable assurance regardingthe reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financialstatements for external purposes in accordance with generally acceptedaccounting principles;  c) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’sdisclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report ourconclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based onsuch evaluation; and  d) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting that occurred during theregistrant’s most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or isreasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal controlover financial reporting; and 5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on ourmost recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to theregistrant’s auditors and the audit committee of registrant’s board of directors (orpersons performing the equivalent function): a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses inthe design or operation of internal control over financial reporting whichare reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability torecord, process, summarize and report financial information; and  b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involvesmanagement or other employees who have a significant role in theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting.Date: February 9, 2006       /s/ Michael J. Rockenbach     Michael J. Rockenbach    Chief Financial Officer  
43
S~1ID : A651i B 

• 

USCIB: 13.7/44 

Z June 1955 

SKC'im 

MEMORANDUM FOR THE MEMBERS OF USCIB: 

Subject: Categorization of COMINT. 

Reference: USCIB 13.7/41, 18 May 1955. 

.--, A 

c:..:. .;.~ 

1. At its 3oth meeting USCIBEC considered the referenced Air Force 

proposal that specified types of inf orma.tion be approved for immediate 

assignment to CATEnORY I. In its consideration of the proposal USCIBEC 

dealt separately with the problems of operational use of the information 

and use of it for non-operational, or training, purposes. 

a. Regarding operational use, USCIBEC agreed to recommend USCIB 

approval of the assignment to Category I of all of the types of inform.ation proposed in the reference which are considered to fall within the 

purview of paragraph 2, Annexure Bl, Appendix B, of the UKUSA Agreement. 

While all members were agreed that the types of information proposed for 

assignment, with two possible exceptions, actually fall within .Annexure 

Bl it was decided to ref er the entire list to the Committee established 

by the Director, NSA (to prepare and maintain lists of COM.INT material 

assigned to the various Categories) for a more definite listing of the 

material involved. USCIBEC expressed its willingness to accept the 

decision of this Committee, with the understanding that should any of the 

types of information proposed be considered not assignable by virtue of 

the criteria set forth in Annexure Bl the Air Force member may propose 

further action by USCIBEC. 

b. Regarding use of the information in question for nonoperational or training purposes USCIBEC agreed, in view of the need for 

an established policy, to recommend that the Army member prepare a study 

on this subject, presenting views which can be considered at a future 

meeting of USCIBEC. 

2. The above decisions of USCIBEC are forwarded for USCIB review. 

In the absence of objection by any member by the close of business 

Tuesday, 14 June 1955, they will be considered approved. 

USCIB 

USCIB: 13.7/44 ll\m>:Q VIA GOMM QllAHNm.s OHii! 

SECRET 

eclassified and a roved for release b NSA on 02-20-2014 ursuant to E. 0. 1352 

/ 

t/
<PAGE>

EXHIBIT 10.63                                             Dated: August 23, 1999



                            SECURED PROMISSORY NOTE
                            -----------------------


     FOR VALUE RECEIVED, the undersigned hereby promises to pay to Lifeline
Systems, Inc., a Massachusetts corporation with its principal offices in
Framingham, Massachusetts ("Lifeline"), or order, the principal sum of Three
Hundred Thousand ($300,000) Dollars in or within five (5) years from the date
hereof. The outstanding principal balance hereunder shall, commencing August 24,
1999, bear interest at the rate of 6.77% per annum, payable annually in arrears.
This Note may be paid prior to maturity in whole or in part at the discretion of
the Maker; provided that all principal and accrued interest hereunder shall be
due and payable in full within ninety (90) days of the Maker's termination of
employment with Lifeline for any reason. The obligation to pay the interest and
principal on account of this Note is secured by a pledge of 16,552 shares of
Common Stock of Lifeline, pursuant to a Security and Pledge Agreement of even
date hereof which Security and Pledge Agreement sets forth the rights and
obligations of the parties in the event of default as defined in said Pledge
Agreement.

     Payment of principal and interest hereunder shall be made in lawful money
of the United States at the offices of Lifeline, 111 Lawrence Street,
Framingham, Massachusetts.

     Maker of this Note hereby waives notice, presentation, and demand and shall
be liable for all reasonable expenses of collection in the event of default
including counsel fees of the Payee.

     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed the within Note under seal
as of the date first above-mentioned.


/s/ Sheryl Sigrist                           /s/ Ronald Feinstein
----------------------------              ------------------------------------
          Witness                                        Ronald Feinstein
,_ 

--==--=----

mR(ltARDJM 10ll TH~ CHID' OF STAIF 

IUBJ!CT1 Col!c>ro~1• or CodlNOrde 

SEP 8 1952 

l. On a 111.o Jrontlnc Sllp "2ted 20 lu...~t 19$21 )"OU all'ked tba tolJ.ar.d.ng 

que1t!one t •Doeo Ctr'~ avalnate codr..iW4 'V!olet1one1 It JlOt• 1'ho doea?" 

2. 'Ibo repl.7 w t.'aeae qu..-t1on1 la as toll.ovau 

1taa Qf'tice of' ~eat.ion S•cur.1.t7 evaluates c:wptoeraphlc *" tramrJ.aaton-~cur:l _. COlll'l"C*tects ~ mMJ'.lt codabto:rd•• npo:t't!Qg 

to tba 'OSCIB OoordS.ue.tor. other 'tl'POs ot co~ coq>ror.d.1111 

,. _. Mt ••~uated by the att1ce ot QmJldc~t1~ Saeuritf'. ta 

all cue~, Um UJClB Coordinator htts t1na1. aewrr.d.nat!on ot wh~r UJa repOrt-ed CClll'1"CllJ1ee .justlt1•s a~Witt11ton of the 

al.tin£ codr.rofd. I ;' ' I 

,. !be md:er or ~led coda".ior4 co;prar.deea.~n inr\sed *1and.rw· 

& mat.er ot ncent act1om:. ~- been cln1ped to ~if°YO tbe ·~ tuation. 

.. 'USCJB Dlnc:tiw 1,. 6 baa 'twirl ndeed to pf.wide tqt/ ltlCl're np14 

nportil!B '1 ~¥ e~~·· / / 

tt. USClfc Dlft~'V8 ~ • • ._ bean ap;lrowd in/ an ettori to prcrdde 

tldded p:f.rotion .. fol"' COU'.:3' Wol'Qat..1.on (the protaci1on of which 

ts ...-a .. tant1 ti+n Use protecU.on t4 t/be Cet!IN~ codeUard). 

•• U'SAO l2JO • hei~ ~sued t.o ~h pio~ tor 

reporiina ~ Cl7P~t."Phic or tralllPd.ead.on ~l'Ol!4ees or eodl• .... . r: r I i. I 

I I I I 

I I I I I .. 

4. h Ot1'1ee Ot C~eatlon Secur!t7 hu'preparo4'a1et\ar to t.ba 

S.mce ~tologlc agwnc!ea delligned t.o Ht toi-t.h 1n a bod7 ~bro~ pr1nr.t1r1ee ot CO:SEC tor appUeatJ.on to ,tm•INT eat'l-

*»d.eat.S.one. ' , / f. 

' I I I. I 

. ~ ·~ . r i "9 •• indicated lq p~h J. b. •'-lo•• a reaU11tlc ~roaeb ta tbe 

problem of a>Hlll.,. ~·· would be '° f.b ••rrt."1na posidble to ln&\U'G tm 

.:U1"ity ot COMM into~Uon., 'ftd.a do-:le mt nocesa!'11,' emnd to tm 

protection ot the codMf~ ·~ It• / · 

I 1 r- r ' s. tn W\1 ewlJ of. qaported. codnord •eoq>rcd.':i:a .Otblrig 1\81 been 

CCB!ft)tad,ae4 except t¥ilC~.)rd in ieol11tt!on1 in tt0ne a-, the •IDd.flC 

or u. at the wrd ~d not be derivable ewn b7 ifttenmce. ! l I j I I 

I • \ I I TO p \ s E c R ET -"IC~i~~-~1~99et~!¥MtrJ:mil~ BftHt18fH~~ifi I 

~ . _...._.__ . -

Declassified and approved for release by NSA on 02-06-2014 pursuantto E.O. 1352a 
--- REF ID:A59832 

... -Top SECRET · . 

-sce11R11v MF9RMAIH#N- SEP I 1952 

TOP sEeijEt
### Page 1 of 3 **Disposition Comments Docket No:**  

### FAA - 2012 - 0528 These comments are in **Directorate ID:** 

### 2011 - SW - 068 - AD response to an SNPRM Originating Office Tracking No.: **Next Step:** FRAN SNPRM 

### N o C omments/Only

Supportive Comments Received

– If this box is checked, no signatures are required. No 

### Has the reference d service information been revised since the NPRM was issued? I f ye s, lis t latest revision and attach a cop y. Note that changes beyond the scope of the previously published NPRM will require a new notice. Contact the Directorate focal point for guidance. Instructions: Summarize all comments **by issue** (not by commenter) and provide your recommended resolution of each issue. **All comments relating to the sam e issue should be discussed together.**  Do not list all of the issues from one commenter togeth er. If changes to the AD are required based on the comments received, explain why and describe in detail what change(s) you recommend. Reference FAA - IR- M - 8040.1C Chapter 9. **ISSUE 1:** Select one o

f the following : If other, explain : Commenter(s): What change to the AD action is requested? Why is the change requested or how is it justified? Do we agree? If **YES,** we agree because Make the following changes to the AD: If **PARTIALLY AGREE** , we agree with because We disagree with because

Make the following changes to the AD: If **NO** , we don’t agree because **ISSUE 2**  **:** Select one of the following :

If other, explain : Commenter(s): What change to the AD action is requested? Why is the change requested or how is it justified? Do we agree? If **YES,** we agree because Make the following changes to the AD: If **PARTIALLY AGREE** , we agree with because We disagree with because Make the following changes to the AD:

### Page 2 of 3

If **NO** , we don’t agree because **For additional issues, do uble**  **- click**  **here**

### Page 3 of 3 **S ignature Section**  Signature indicates concurrence with this action. Originating Office Tracking No.: **ASE** Printed Name **: Date** 

**Branch M anager**  **Date**
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

IN RE: J.W.B. AND R.D.B., MINORS

PETITION OF: L.B., FATHER

:

:

:

:

:

No. 566 MAL 2019

Petition for Allowance of Appeal 

from the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 26th day of November, 2019, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal 

is GRANTED. The issue, as stated by petitioner is:

Did the Trial Court and Superior Court err in application of 23 Pa. C.S.A. § 2711(c) 

by failing to consider the invalidity of consents for adoption under Colorado law, 

simply because the Colorado resident Father did not revoke consent within 30 

days in accordance with Pennsylvania law, where no such requirement exists in 

Colorado and where Colorado law permits revocation of consent up to and 

including the date of hearing?
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1525 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

114th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1525

 To block any action from being taken to finalize or give effect to a 
 certain proposed rule governing the Federal child support enforcement 
                                program.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              June 8, 2015

 Mr. Hatch (for himself and Mr. Cornyn) introduced the following bill; 
     which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To block any action from being taken to finalize or give effect to a 
 certain proposed rule governing the Federal child support enforcement 
                                program.

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

SECTION 1. PROHIBITION ON TAKING ANY ACTION TO FINALIZE OR GIVE EFFECT 
              TO CERTAIN PROPOSED RULE GOVERNING THE FEDERAL CHILD 
              SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM.

    Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the Secretary of Health 
and Human Services may not take any action to finalize, implement, 
enforce, or otherwise give effect to the proposed rule, entitled 
``Flexibility, Efficiency, and Modernization in Child Support 
Enforcement Programs'' (79 Fed. Reg. 68548-68587, November 17, 2014), 
or any proposal set forth in the proposed rule.
                                 <all>
```
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 37 (Wednesday, February 25, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Page 10050]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-03725]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service


Notice of Proposed New Fee Site; Federal Lands Recreation 
Enhancement Act

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice of proposed fee increase on Christmas tree permits.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Sawtooth National Forest is proposing to increase the fee 
for Christmas tree permits from $5.00 to $10.00 per tag. The fee is 
proposed and will be determined upon further analysis and public 
comment. Funds from fees would be used for the continued operation, 
visitor services, maps, and law enforcement while issuing and enforcing 
Christmas tree permits.

DATES: Comments will be accepted through May 30, 2015. Increased fees 
would begin November 2015 for Christmas tree permits.

ADDRESSES: Kit Mullen, Forest Supervisor, Sawtooth National Forest, 
2647 Kimberly Road East, Twin Falls, Idaho 83301.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jennifer Blake, Recreation Fee 
Coordinator, by phone at 208-737-3216 or via email at 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#345e515a5a5d5251465658555f517452471a5251501a4147"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="8be1eee5e5e2edeef9e9e7eae0eecbedf8a5edeeefa5fef8">[email protected]</span></a>. Information about proposed fee changes can 
also be found on the Sawtooth National Forest Web site: http://www.fs.usda.gov/sawtooth.
    Individuals who use telecommunication devices for the deaf (TDD) 
may call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1-800-877-8339 
between 8:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m., Eastern Standard Time, Monday through 
Friday.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Federal Recreation Lands Enhancement Act 
(Title VII, Pub. L. 108-447) directed the Secretary of Agriculture to 
publish a six month advance notice in the Federal Register whenever new 
recreation fee areas are established.
    Once public involvement is complete, the fee increases will be 
reviewed by a Recreation Resource Advisory Committee prior to a final 
decision and implementation.

    Dated: February 18, 2015.
Jennifer Blake,
Acting Forest Supervisor.
[FR Doc. 2015-03725 Filed 2-24-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
# CE2004078EN.01054501.xml

| 27.3.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 78/545 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 78/545

---

(2004/C 78 E/0573)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3425/03

by Mario Borghezio (NI) to the Commission

(18 November 2003)

Subject:   Eurostat scandal — unanswered questions

Subject:

What is the explanation for the fact that the Commission did not make any connection between the various signs regarding the Eurostat scandal, which dated back to 2000? As regards the Secretary-General's superior, who received confidential information from OLAF on the launch of investigations, can the Commission accept that neither itself nor the Commissioners responsible for personnel were informed of the matter? Was this perhaps justified by internal administrative procedures?

---