alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
AFS-12-429-E June 22, 2012

Exemption No. 10569 Regulatory Docket No. FAA-2012-0619

Mr. Steven Smith Parent of Avery Smith

113 North Street Tewksbury, MA 01876

Dear Mr. Smith:

This letter is to inform you that we have granted your request for exemption. It transmits our decision, explains its basis, and lists the conditions and limitations of the exemption, including the date it ends.

The Basis for Our Decision

By letter received June 5, 2012, you petitioned the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) on behalf of Avery Smith for an exemption fr om § 121.311(b)(2)(iii)(B) of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR). That exemption, if granted, would allow Avery to exceed the specified weight limit for an FAA-approved child restraint system (CAReS, manufactured by AmSafe Corporation) during use of that child restraint system (CRS) aboard a United States (U.S.) aircraft.

The FAA has determined that good cause exists for not publishing a summary of the petition

in the Federal Register because the requested exemption would not set a precedent and any delay in acting on this petition would be detrimental to Avery.

The FAA has issued grants of exemption in circumstances similar in all material respects to those presented in your petition. In Grant of Exemption No. 9834 (copy enclosed), the FAA found that numerous people with physical challenges had previously completed flights using2

restraint systems that addressed unique physical needs regarding safety, support, and security in the same manner of operations as described in this petition. The FAA further found that the petition, if granted, would not set any new precedents regarding the use of restraint systems by persons with disabilities.

Having reviewed your reasons for requesting an exemption, I find that—

 they do not differ materially from those presented by the petitioner in the enclosed grant.

 the reasons stated by the FAA for granting the enclosed exemption also apply to the situation you present; and

 a grant of exemption is in the public interest.

Our Decision

Under the authority contained in 49 U.S.C. 40113 and 44701, which the FAA Administrator has delegated to me, I hereby grant Avery Smith exemption from 14 CFR § 121.311(b)(2)(iii)(B). In addition, any air carrier or commercial operator operating under part 121 while Avery is aboard its aircraft is granted an exemption from 14 CFR § 121.311(b)(2)(iii)(B) to the extent necessary to allow Avery to exceed the specified weight limit for an FAA-approved CRS during use of that CRS aboard a U.S. aircraft.

All operations under this exemption must be conducted with at least one of Avery’s parents or a caregiver accompanying him. Avery Smith may only occupy a passenger seat with no passenger seated behind him. In addition, Avery’s parent or caregiver must carry a copy of this exemption and advise the air carrier about the contents of the exemption at least 48 hours before the date of each flight.

This exemption terminates on July 31, 2014, unless sooner superseded or rescinded.

Sincerely,

/S/

John S. Duncan Deputy Director, Flight Standards

Service

Enclosure
<partyblock><br><br><div align="center"><b><font size="+1">George Zouvelos, Appellant,<br><br>against<br><br>Annette Hamilton, Respondent.</font></b></div><br><br><p>Appeal from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Kings County (Harriet L. Thompson, J.), entered October 1, 2014. The order granted defendant's motion, pursuant to CPLR 5015 (a) (3), to vacate a judgment of the same court entered February 27, 2014 "to the extent of restoring the action back to the trial calendar before the undersigned judge" on a specified date, and stayed enforcement of the judgment in the interim.</p><p>ORDERED that the appeal is dismissed.</p><p>Plaintiff commenced this small claims action to recover damages based upon a breach of a bail bond contract. Following a nonjury trial, a judgment was entered on February 27, 2014 awarding plaintiff the sum of $2,301. Defendant subsequently moved to vacate the judgment pursuant to CPLR 5015 (a) (3). By order entered October 1, 2014, the Civil Court (Harriet L. Thompson, J.) granted defendant's motion "to the extent of restoring the action back to the trial calendar before the undersigned Judge" on a specified date, and stayed enforcement of the judgment in the interim. </p><p>While the Civil Court's order is ambiguous, under neither interpretation of the order does this appeal lie. To the extent that the order can be interpreted as not deciding defendant's motion, but rather only requiring the parties to appear in court for a hearing on the motion, no appeal lies from an order which does not decide a motion but merely directs a hearing to aid in the disposition of the motion (<a href="../2007/2007_08037.htm" target="_blank"><i>see Hochhauser v Electric Ins. Co.</i>, 46 AD3d 174</a>, 185 [2007]; <a href="../2010/2010_50603.htm" target="_blank"><i>Cach, LLC v Harris</i>, 27 Misc 3d 129</a>[A], 2010 NY Slip Op 50603[U] [App Term, 2d Dept, 2d, 11th &amp; 13th Jud Dists 2010]). On the other hand, if the order granted defendant's motion to the extent of ordering a new trial in this small claims action without vacating the judgment, the order does not constitute a denial of substantial justice, since the effect of the order is only to require the parties to proceed to trial and, therefore, the order is not appealable (<i>see</i> CCA 1807; <a href="../2012/2012_50162.htm" target="_blank"><i>Mi Kim v Sobelman</i>, 34 Misc 3d 146</a>[A], 2012 NY Slip Op 50162[U] [App Term, 2d Dept, 9th &amp; 10th Jud Dists 2012]; <a href="../2006/2006_50917.htm" target="_blank"><i>see also Feinstein v Lagios</i>, 12 Misc 3d 128</a>[A], 2006 NY Slip Op 50917[U] [App Term, 2d Dept, 2d &amp; 11th Jud Dists 2006]). Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.</p><p>Solomon, J.P., Weston and Elliot, JJ., concur.</p><br>Decision Date: November 17, 2016<br><br><div align="center"><form method="LINK" action="../../slipidx/at_2_idxtable.shtml"><input type="submit" value="Return to Decision List"></form></div></partyblock>
,Room · · 68g'/ REF U) : ~.S-Q l 1 

Paper No. 9 • Addres• onl11 ""·-.... 

"'l'lle Commissioner of Patent11, 

WuhinRton, D. C.," 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMEh.CE 

UNITED STATES PATENT OFFICE 

WASHINGTON 

All commuulaotlo118 l'ellpl!etlnl thfll 

application should gin the aerial number. 

date of filing, and name of the applkaut 

and not any oillclal by name 

Please find below a communication from the EXAMINER in 

charge of this application. Q _ ~ 

... ll--HG"·' ~Commissioner of Patents. Applicant: W1111w P. Pi-11 t n 

• 

Ser. No. 682.096 . . Filed Jul7 -5.- 19~ 

For Cr,ptogn.phlc S,-iJtm 

Responsive to a mandmnt t11e4 Dec. 5. 19'4-

Cla1ma 1-10. 12. 14-'4 are the ola!M 1n the ..... 

Ol.a.1me 11 and 13. having been canceled• cannot now be 

recona1d.-ed a a requested. 

Claim• 1-10. 12, 14-25 appear al.la.able. 

Cla1ma 26 to '1i. ccma14ered •• method ola1ma are rejeote4 

a• unpatantable undw In re Tallnads•. '7 App.D.c. 490. To eanllt1 tute a new and uaerul U't a proaeaa mnst be capable ot froduolng a benef'io1a1 resul.t 111.tb.aut the aj.d ot arq- pa~C'UliLr wbanimn tor wheN a proceaa la aimpl,- the t'unct1on or operation or 

a machine, it is not an invention, but at aoat the result or me. 

Cochrane et al. v. Deener et al •• 18T7 C.D. 2.ij,2. "!'he 

patentab111ty or a process is ent1re17 independent or the 1nat?'UJ!lental1t1es employed and it is immaterial whether or not the 

mach1nel"1 pointed out aa suitable to perform the proceaa be e1th9r 

new or I'.atentable". 

Sweetland• 1922 c.n. 6. The claims tor the alleged metbod 

:reviewed ttnd Held that they do not recite e. patentable method but - are tor the obviwa e.nd "intended :tunct1on or use ot the apparat;u 

covered by the claims ot the patent. 

'l'he pertineney or these decisions 1s thought obvious. 

These claims are !'urther rejected as ta111Jig to def'1ne 

clemrly as will appear ~ron detailed criticism ot claim 26. 

pproved for Release by NSA on 09-13-2013 pursuant to E.O. 

13526 
•,'£' 

REF ID:A272801 

Serial Jfo. 68a,096 

In line l, "ayatem" 1DA7 mean ''method" or appare.tua, ae• 

d.1ot1QD&J'7 und•r • llJ'.tem". ~re.tore, the claim down to "the 

method" 1n 11n• 4 may ~ oonaid.ered ae aettin,g forth apparatua. 

U ao. t:hl "method." of line 4 and following 1• improperly reo1 ted. 

aa a plU't or the 97•'-, 1••• apparstua. Ir, how•ver, "system" 

lD.U.na met.bod th• claim doea not make aonae a1noe it in ettect 

Peeitea "In a method o£ d.oin8 aaaethlng, the met.hod ot doing 

aometb1ng •l•e", aino. the ncryptographia ayatem" of line 26 

appear• to be the old aid wall known cryptography or Hebern, tor 

umnple, and the 'inethod 11 o!' line 4 and following is applicant' a 

method a.a pert'orldd by mea.-ris of the part 5. 

Exru'.:iner • 

•
##### 



Exhibit 31.1 Certification of the Chief Executive Officer Pursuant to
Securities Exchange Act Rules 13a-14(a) and 15d-14(a)
As Adopted Pursuant to
Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 I, John Adam Kanas, certify that:  1.
    
    I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of North Fork
Bancorporation, Inc.;2.
    
    Based on my knowledge, this 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
report;3.
    
    Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this 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 report;4.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as
defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant
and have:  a)
    
    Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such
disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision,
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
report is being prepared;b)
    
    Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls
and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the
effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end
of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; andc)
    
    Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal
control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrants
most recent fiscal quarter (the registrants fourth fiscal quarter in
the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is
reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal
control over financial reporting; and  5.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on
our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting,
to the registrants auditors and the audit committee of the registrants
board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):  a)
    
    All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or
operation of internal control over financial reporting which are
reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrants ability to
record, process, summarize and report financial information; andb)
    
    Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the registrants internal
control over financial reporting. Date: August 9, 2004 By:
    /s/ John Adam KanasJohn Adam KanasPresident and
Chief Executive Officer 41
99-1230.

#### State ex rel. Ledger v. Cuyahoga Cty. Court of Appeals.

In Mandamus. On motion to dismiss. Motion to dismiss sustained. Cause dismissed.

Moyer, C.J., Douglas, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer, Cook and Lundberg Stratton, JJ., concur.
COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 02-16-00036-CV

Estate of Julia Hope Gerald Hood, 

Deceased

§

§

§

§

From Probate Court No. 2

of Tarrant County (2012-PR02962-2-F)

November 17, 2106

Opinion by Justice Gabriel

JUDGMENT

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

there was error in the trial court’s order. It is ordered that the trial court’s order 

denying Appellant David Ringer and the Ringer Law Firm’s special appearance is 

reversed and we render a judgment dismissing Appellees James Hood; Sowers 

of Seed, a Charitable Corporation; John “Jackie” Hood, Patricia Hood Ritchie, 

Billy Ray Hood, Tim Hood; and Cheryl Hood Key claims for lack of personal 

jurisdiction.

It is further ordered that Appellees James Hood, Sowers of Seed, a 

Charitable Corporation; John “Jackie” Hood, Patricia Hood Ritchie, Billy Ray 

Hood, Tim Hood; and Cheryl Hood Key shall bear the costs of this appeal, for 

which let execution issue. 
SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS 

By /s/ Lee Gabriel

 Justice Lee Gabriel
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                         401,800
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                3,139,900
<ALLOWANCES>                                   586,900
<INVENTORY>                                    959,900
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             4,102,000
<PP&E>                                       2,795,300
<DEPRECIATION>                               2,275,300
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               5,194,700
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,590,300
<BONDS>                                        962,200
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       412,800
<OTHER-SE>                                   2,229,400
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 5,149,700
<SALES>                                      8,936,300
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             8,963,100
<CGS>                                        5,506,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                5,506,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                27,300
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              96,400
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                663,900
<INCOME-TAX>                                    66,500
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            597,400
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   597,400
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.18
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.15
        

</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                           26199
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    34287
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 60486
<PP&E>                                         2000000
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (26264)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 2034222
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            12722
<BONDS>                                         563001
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                    1466770
<COMMON>                                        289963
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   2034222
<SALES>                                          96825
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 96825
<CGS>                                            50998
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    50998
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 42327
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   3499
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                        26199
<NET-INCOME>                                      3499
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    0.000
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    0.000
        

</TABLE>
Exhibit24.3

POWER OF ATTORNEY

KNOWNALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, that the undersigned hereby constitutes andappoints each of Barry F. Schwartz, Robert K. Kretzman and Michael T.Sheehan or any of them, each acting alone, his true and lawfulattorney-in-fact and agent, with full power of substitution, for himand his name, place and stead, in any and all capacities, in connectionwith the REVLON CONSUMER PRODUCTS CORPORATION (the"Corporation") Annual Report on Form 10-K forthe year ended December 31, 2005 (the "Form10-K") under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, asamended, including, without limiting the generality of the foregoing,to sign the Form 10-K in the name and on behalf of the Corporation oron behalf of the undersigned as a director or officer of theCorporation, and any amendments to the Form 10-K and any instrument,contract, document or other writing, of or in connection with the Form10-K or amendments thereto, and to file the same, with all exhibitsthereto, and other documents in connection therewith, including thispower of attorney, with the Securities and Exchange Commission and anyapplicable securities exchange or securities self-regulatory body,granting unto said attorneys-in-fact and agents, each acting alone,full power and authority to do and perform each and every act and thingrequisite and necessary to be done in and about the premises, as fullyto all intents and purposes as he might or could do in person, herebyratifying and confirming all that said attorneys-in-fact and agents,each acting alone, or his substitute or substitutes, may lawfully do orcause to be done by virtue hereof.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, theundersigned has signed these presents this 1st day of March,2006.

|        |  |        |  |                  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
|--------|--|--------|--|------------------|--|--|--|--|--|--|
|   |  | /s/    |  | DONALDG. DRAPKIN |
|   |  |   |  | DONALD G.DRAPKIN |
|        |

----
-r_ .... 

~ ·.~-~-·- ~~--' =t 

·- ' 

''·~~~ ... --~~! ~£'!?:!!¥!! 

CSNFIOE~ 'TIAL 

SUBJrCT1 319torl.eal 1*kl:nh ?8J"t.a1n1nc to 0/"1..-20-0 

!01 Chlet S.v&l s.c=ur__itJ- Gt'oup 

,-. !'~~~ 580U:rrt.)r 3t.at.ion 

,: . 

%\ 1- ~·~ t.hat ae~OJJ.:1 0. ~~Gd to Hr. 1U llia P. t.ri~ CQQS\ll.i=t, w 10·~ nutorioal ..rch1'foiJ dW,1"£ v1 t.!l U. W/P"tolo~io aot,b:UJ.Q.s or 0P-2C-0 iifith t. V!.811 t.o •elec.t.J.:;& Cert.ain 

.at.o..-1.al W"i\l<Jh atq bo de.;o:-M tor~ •tud.r. ~uld such •wr.!al 

ba avall&ble, ~l.li:l'.rtitllt;a "N;f be -.:le lat.or t.o oDtain it en • ~.racy 

~ b&!>i.te 

Poa t:--tR DIREOT:-R 1 

,.. 

' 

... - - ~ ... _· .. "~ _ _....._ ... .,,_ - .-- .. ~ - . 

. . . 

1 

. --- Declassified and approved for release by NSA on 06-16-2014 pursuant to E .0. 1352a--~
... : ... " 

. : ·.~ 

I_ 

REF ID:A52146B 

• 

. . 4 .... 

~ . ' . 

1'.mo~uJ~(For Mr. wu1iam r, FJ:tedman, 017Ptanal.7st, . Sigrial Intelligence SecUOn; W.P. & 9 l>iY., 

· ottioa or 'the Oh1ef Sigllal .otticer, 1!m11 uona Jldft., .... · .: Waehlngtou~ : ·: · · 

hbJecta : lew p&,~, AppU.oa,ion, Orn'ographlo 87atem (ImproY811lent on · . Sedal lo. &88;3" ) 

.. l• '!'he do~n·h to~ 1our. prc>p~eed new application identified . . . a'bOte· .ba'fe ;.been'~complete4 .. and, ·arit< nlm1 tt'e·d. . hernl th tor. yoin- approval 

and· exeouUon prior to filing in the Patent Office. 

2. To :f'aoUite.te corrections as mRy be found necessary, the drawtnga ~va been prepared in pencil and .$j~· photostatic OO'Piea of the two 

1heets a.re included with the other ~·ra. 

3. In executing the applieation, please sign in three pla.ces and 

be eure in each instance to eign your tull first, middle initial and last 

names. The Oath mU.st be acknowledged before a Notary Public who must also 

eign and impreas his notarial seal. 

/ 

4. It you ba1'8 any changes or corrections to l!Uggeat, please indicate 

the same in the oa.rbon oopy whioh is also enclosed for that purpose. Upon the 

return or the executed documents together with the carbon cop7, the application 

will be promptly placed in order and filed in the Patent Office. 

Charles A. Rowe, 

Patents Section, Signal Corps, 

_-:._. 

:·_ · ... .. ·.:-.: -. - . -.··· 

Enoie•< 

{\ ·"'~ ii i r I t) r ~ I T ' 4 r . 6 b1' ) ,_ ' I 1 

J 1 J ' U l.. tv 1 i A L 

Peclassified and approved forrelease by NSA on 12-16-2013 pursuant to.E. 0; -1352ft 

···: ., ..
EXHIBIT 10.17




                       CENTURY BUSINESS CREDIT CORPORATION
                              119 West 40th Street,
                            New York, N.Y.  10018-2566
                  (212) 703-3500 - Fax (212) 703-3520/3590/3639



                                            April 8, 1997



         Mr. Joel Newman
         Tommy Hilfiger U.S.A., Inc.
         25 West 39th Street
         New York, NY  10018

                   RE:  FACTORING AGREEMENT

         Gentlemen:

         Reference is hereby made to the Factoring Agreement between us
         dated September 16, 1994, as amended.  This letter will confirm
         the terms of a further amendment of such Factoring Agreement as
         follows:

              A.   Paragraph 7 is amended to read in its entirety as
                   follows:  "For your services hereunder with respect
                   to our sales for each year beginning, April 1, 1997,
                   you shall receive a commission equal to thirty-five
                   one hundredths of one percent (.35%) of the net face
                   value amount of each credit approved Receivable less
                   selling discounts which shall be chargeable to our
                   account with you on the last day of each month.

              B.   Paragraph 13 is amended to substitute "2001" for
                   "2000".

              C.   Except as expressly specified provided herein, all of
                   the representations, warranties, terms, covenants and
                   conditions of the Factoring Agreement as previously
                   and hereby amended shall remain in full force and ef-
                   fect.  The amendments set forth herein shall be lim-
                   ited precisely as set forth herein and shall not be
                   deemed as amendment of, consent to or modification of
                   any other term of provision of the Factoring Agree-
                   ment.<PAGE>





         Please confirm you agreement to the foregoing, where indicated
         below.

                                  Very truly yours,

                                  CENTURY BUSINESS CREDIT CORPORATION


                                  /s/ David L. Finkelstein

                                  David L. Finkelstein
                                  Senior Executive Vice President

         Accepted and Agreed to:

         New York, NY
         April 8, 1997

         TOMMY HILFIGER U.S.A., INC.

         By: /s/ Joel H. Newman   
         Title:  Exec. VP Fin. & Oper.