alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Packing List:

1. DJI Inspire and Case

2. 2 black blades/2 gray blades and spares

3. Charged batteries

4. Charged controllers

5. Memory cards with plenty of space

6. 2x Camera filters (ND & Clear)

7. iPad & DJI Apps & iPad USB cord

8. AND Android & DJI Apps & mini USB cord

9. Camera

10. Micro USB cable and USB micro SD reader

11. Navigate to Planned Flight Area in DJI Pilot Apps to Cache Maps

Pre-flight:

1. Check overhead in ALL DIRECTIONS

2. If temperature below 5 °C/41°F add battery insulators (allow time for equipment to acclimate 

to outside temperature)

3. Check Camera filter and install ND/clear (best shutter speed: 30fps=1/60, 24fps=1/48, etc.)

4. Attach iPad or Nexus 9/Cable to Slave Controller

5. Attach Samsung S5 or Nexus 9/Cable to Master Controller

6. Enable airplane mode on phone

7. Verify flight mode P/A/F

8. Set landing gear switch down

9. Power on Master Controller

10. Load DJI app

11. Verify map loaded

12. Turn off Wi-Fi on iPad and Android Tablet

13. Adjust antennas vertically

14. Turn Inspire ON (press power button once + press and hold)

15. Exit travel mode

16. Turn Inspire OFF (press power button once + press and hold)

17. Attach Camera and check memory

18. Inspect props

19. Attach props snuggly

20. Lock props

21. Inspect camera mounts

22. Inspire ON

23. Calibrate compass away from phones and large metal/magnetic objects

24. Test Gimbal - calibrate if necessary

25. Set failsafe altitude

26. Set "Return To Home" location (A/C or TX)

27. IMU calibration (.99 - 1.01)

28. Wait at least one minute after full GPS lock before takeoff 

29. Power up rotors, allow one minute to warm up if below 5 °C/41°F

30. Select cleanest video channel

31. Take and view a picture
In-flight: 

1. Hover 20 seconds at 15-25 feet (re-obtain GPS lock)

2. Check that there is no drifting

3. Check all controls (up, down, rotate left, rotate right, left, right, forward, back)

4. Raise landing gear

5. Center/set camera follow mode, etc.

6. Check exposure

7. Start recording

Landing Checklist:

1. STOP recording

2. Turn Inspire Off

3. Detach camera

4. Detach props & locks

5. Turn Inspire On

6. Enter travel mode via app

7. Turn Inspire Off
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

WESTERN DIVISION

JOHN ANTHONY CASTRO : CASE NO. 3:18-CV-00081-WHR

Judge Walter H. Rice

Plaintiff, :

v. : MOTION OF DEFENDANTS TO 

VACATE AND RESCHEDULE THE 

THEODORE GUDORF, et al. : PRELIMINARY TELEPHONE 

PRETRIAL CONFERENCE

:

Defendants

:

This action was initially filed in the Northern District of Texas and transferred to this 

Court, but subsequent to that transfer no attorney qualified to practice before this Court per Local 

Rule 83.3 has appeared in this action on behalf of Plaintiff nor has the undersigned been 

contacted by any such attorney. Accordingly, Defendants have been unable to undertake either 

the mandatory disclosures required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(1) or the pre-preliminary pretrial 

conference between counsel required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(f). Therefore, Defendants 

respectfully request that the preliminary telephone conference currently scheduled for next 

Tuesday, June 19, 2018 be vacated and rescheduled once Plaintiffs obtain appropriate 

representation so that the requirements of Rule 26 can be fulfilled prior to the conference. 

Respectfully Submitted:

/s/ JARED A. WAGNER

Jane M. Lynch (0012180)

Jared A. Wagner (0076674)

Green & Green, Lawyers

800 Performance Place

109 North Main Street

Dayton, Ohio 45402-1290

Tel. 937.224.3333

Fax 937.224.4311

jmlynch@green-law.com

jawagner@green-law.com

Counsel for Defendants

Case: 3:18-cv-00081-WHR Doc #: 11 Filed: 06/12/18 Page: 1 of 2 PAGEID #: 59
2

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that a true and accurate copy of the foregoing has been served upon 

counsel for plaintiff, Joshua S. Milam, Castro & Co., LLC, 13155 Noel Road, Suite 900, Dallas, 

TX 75240 through the Court’s electronic filing system on this the 12th day of June 2018.

/s/ JARED A. WAGNER

Jared A. Wagner (0076674)

Case: 3:18-cv-00081-WHR Doc #: 11 Filed: 06/12/18 Page: 2 of 2 PAGEID #: 60
null

229.06406
```

[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 49 (Monday, March 14, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Page 13444]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-05530]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

[Policy Statement No. PS-ANM111-2001-99-01]

Improving Flightcrew Awareness During Autopilot Operation

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of cancellation of policy statement.

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

SUMMARY: The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) announces the 
cancellation of Policy Statement Number PS-ANM111-2001-99-01 (ANM-99-
01). The policy statement is cancelled because it was superseded by an 
advisory circular (AC) and is no longer necessary.

DATES: This policy statement is cancelled on March 14, 2016.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Marie Hogestad, Federal Aviation 
Administration, Transport Airplane Directorate, Transport Standards 
Staff, Airplane and Flight Crew Interface Branch, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., 
Renton, WA 98057-3356; telephone (425) 227-2674; fax (425) 227-1320; 
email: marie.hogestad@faa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background

    On February 22, 2001, the Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, 
Aircraft Certification Service, issued Policy Statement Number ANM-99-
01, Improving Flightcrew Awareness During Autopilot Operations. The 
policy statement advised the public that the FAA would be evaluating 
various items for improving the flightcrew's awareness during autopilot 
operations when certifying automatic pilot installations. The FAA 
intended that the policy statement would serve as interim guidance 
until the issuance of AC 25.1329-1B.
    The FAA issued AC 25.1329-1B, Approval of Flight Guidance Systems, 
on July 17, 2006, and more recently issued the updated AC 25.1329-1C on 
October 27, 2014. The AC incorporates the same guidance as the older 
policy statement. The FAA intended to cancel the policy when AC 
25.1329-1B was released but overlooked it.

Cancellation of Policy Statement

    As a result of the issuance of AC 25.1329-1B (now 25.1329-1C), 
Policy Statement Number ANM-99-01 is no longer in effect and is 
herewith cancelled.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on March 1, 2016.
Michael Kaszycki,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification 
Service.
[FR Doc. 2016-05530 Filed 3-11-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
```
EXHIBIT
      23.2




**CONSENT
      OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**




We
      consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement No.
      333-80505 on Form S-8 of our report dated March 8, 2005, relating to the
      statements of income, stockholders’ equity and other comprehensive income, and
      cash flows of P.A.M. Transportation Services, Inc. and Subsidiaries for the
      year
      ended December 31, 2004, appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of P.A.M.
      Transportation Services, Inc. and Subsidiaries for the year ended December
      31,
      2006.









DELOITTE
      & TOUCHE LLP


Little
      Rock, Arkansas


March
      13,
      2007
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1

                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS

        We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration
Statements on Forms S-3 (No. 333-53965, 333-51003 and 333-37013) and Forms S-8
(No. 333-92337, 333-85107, 333-80501 and 333-26015) of Eltrax Systems, Inc. of
our report dated February 28, 2000, except for Note 10, the date for which is
March 14, 2000, relating to the financial statements and financial statement
schedule, which appear in this Form 10-K.


PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

Detroit, Michigan
March 27, 2000
ex102.htm


    
    

    Exhibit 10.2

     

     

     

    
      	 	 
	 	
               

            


    

     

                                September 27,
2007

     

    Maclath
LTDA

    Mr. Curt
Platt

    Managing
Director

    Edificio
Colon, Paseo Colon Piso 8, Oficina 8-4

    San Jose,
Costa Rica

     

    Via DILL:
827 9020 691

     

    Re.:              
NOTICE OF
DEFAULT

     

    Subject              Limited
Technology License Agreement, dated June 29, 2007

    My
Client          Trillennium
Medical Imaging, Inc.

     

    Dear Mr.
Plan:

     

        This Notice
of Default is provided to you pursuant to Section 132 of the "Limited Technology
License Agreement" (the "Agreement") entered into between Maclath, Ltda and
Trillennium Medical Imaging, Inc. on June 29, 2007,

     

        Maclath, Ltda
is in default pursuant to the Agreement's "Events of Default" as that phrase is
defined in Section 13.1(b), (c), (d), and (e) (ii) of the
Agreement.

     

        Be advised
that Trillennium intends to exercise any and all rights to which it is
legally
entitled. Please govern yourself accordingly.

     

     

     

    
      
        
          
            
              
                
                  
                    
                      
                        
                          	Sincerely,	 	 	 	 
	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	 	 	 
	
                                  /s/ 
      Norman
      A. Abood

                                	 	 	
                                   

                                	 
	
                                  
                                    Norman
      A. Abood

                                  

                                	 	 	
                                   

                                	 
	
                                   

                                	 	 	
                                   

                                	 
	 	 	 	 	 
	Cc.:Seth
      Bogner 	 	 	 	 
	
                                  Via
      e-mail:  sbogner@uniontraderscorp.com

                                	 	 	 	 
	
                                   sbogner@utcglobal.net

                                	 	 	 	 
	
                                   sbgner@mycingular.blackberry.net
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

EASTERN DIVISION

CHRISTOPHER S. JONES, 

 Plaintiff, 

 

v. Case No.: 2:18-cv-455

JUDGE GEORGE C. SMITH

Magistrate Judge Deavers

COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, 

 

Defendant. 

 

ORDER

This case is before the Court to consider the Report and Recommendation issued by the

Magistrate Judge on July 31, 2019. The Magistrate Judge recommended that Plaintiff’s

Statement of Errors be overruled and that the Commissioner of Social Security’s decision be

affirmed. (Doc. 18). This matter is now before the Court on Plaintiff’s Objection to the

Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation. (Doc. 19). The Court will consider the matter

de novo. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3).

Plaintiff raises one primary objection to the Magistrate Judge’s Report and

Recommendation–that the ALJ’S Mental Residual Functional Capacity is not supported by

substantial evidence. Specifically, Plaintiff disagrees with the ALJ and Magistrate Judge’s

reliance on Dr. Buban’s testimony to classify the personality disorder as a non-medically

determinable impairment. 

This objection is the same argument presented to the Magistrate Judge in the Statement

of Errors. Plaintiff merely disagrees with the Magistrate Judge’s findings. The Magistrate Judge
correctly found that the ALJ did not err when relying on Dr. Buban’s testimony because she

gave a reasoned explanation for why the record did not support a finding that personality

disorder was a separate impairment. Further, the Magistrate Judge points out that Dr. Sansotta

never diagnosed a personality disorder while treating Plaintiff. 

The Magistrate Judge concluded that substantial evidence supports the ALJ’s conclusion

that Dr. Buban’s opinion was supported by the record, whereas Dr. Sansotta’s opinion was not. 

In considering both opinions, the Magistrate Judge correctly concluded that the ALJ’s RFC

finding is supported by substantial evidence. 

 Therefore, for the reasons stated in the well-reasoned Report and Recommendation, this

Court finds that Plaintiff’s objection is without merit.

Based on the aforementioned and the detailed Report and Recommendation, the Court

finds that Plaintiff’s objection has been thoroughly considered and is hereby OVERRULED. 

Accordingly, the Report and Recommendation, Document 18, is ADOPTED and AFFIRMED. 

The Clerk shall remove Documents 18 and 19 from the Court’s pending motions list and

enter final judgment in this case. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

 /s/ George C. Smith 

 GEORGE C. SMITH, JUDGE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

-2-
### Regulatory Evaluation

Docket No. FAA

- 

### 2016

- 4226 Directorate Identifier: 

### 2015

- NM

- 095

- AD

If you make changes to the values in the table below, you must ensure the totals update accordingly. If

they do not, click (or Tab) into a nd then out of the changed cell

.

Estimated Costs:

Action

(e.g., Inspection,

replacement)

Do not include on

condition costs here Costs per Product (e.g., aircraft, engine,

propeller, appliance)

Work

- hours

(include

access, testing,

and close

- up) Labor

c ost

(@$8 5 /h

our) Parts Cost Total Costs

(labor +

parts) Number of

U.S.

Registered

Products Total Cost

for U.S. Fleet



### Modification 3 .0 $ 255.00 $ 

### 0 $ 255.00 

### 940 $ 239,700.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0 .00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00



### The known number of products in compliance: 

### 0

Total Costs of compliance for U.S. fleet: $ 239,700



### Costs covered under warranty ( if known ) $ 

### 0

On

- Condition Costs:

Action

(e.g., Inspection,

replacement) Work

- hours

(include access,

testing, and close

up) Labor cost

(@$85/hou r) Parts Cost Cost per Product

$ 0.00 $0 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00



### Special considerations for Economic Analysis ( Use this fi eld to explain anything in the Estimated Costs table

that was assumed or might not be obvious. This field can also be used to explain warranty costs) 

### :

### Executive Order 12866:

Could the AD be considered a “significant regulatory action”?

YES * NO

* Explanation:

DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures:

Is the AD significant?

YES * NO

* Explanation:

Regulatory Flexibility Act:

Will the AD have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities? E xplain for

either a Yes or No answer.

YES NO

Explanation:

Intrastate Aviation in Alaska:

This AD could affect intrastate aviation in Alaska. Is it appropriate to include specific requirements for

aircraft operated in Alaska where aviation might be the only mode of transportation?

YES * NO



### * Explanation 

### :
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

WESTERN DIVISION AT DAYTON

PAMELA WATKINS, 

Plaintiff, Case No.: 3:18-cv-154

 

vs.

 

COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Magistrate Judge Michael J. Newman

(Consent Case)

Defendant.

ORDER: (1) APPROVING THE PARTIES’ JOINT STIPULATION FOR AN AWARD 

OF ATTORNEY’S FEES UNDER THE EQUAL ACCESS TO JUSTICE ACT (“EAJA”)

(DOC. 22); AND (2) AWARDING PLAINTIFF $3,300.00 IN EAJA FEES

This Social Security disability benefits appeal is before the Court on the parties’ joint 

stipulation in which they agree that Plaintiff should be awarded attorney’s fees under the Equal 

Access to Justice Act (“EAJA”), 28 U.S.C. § 2412, in the amount of $3,300.00. Doc. 22. Based 

upon the parties’ stipulation in which they present no dispute that all requirements are met for the 

reasonable award of EAJA fees, the Court: (1) APPROVES the parties’ joint stipulation (doc. 22); 

and (2) GRANTS Plaintiff EAJA fees in the amount of $3,300.00. As no further matters remain 

pending for review, this case remains TERMINATED upon the Court’s docket.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Date: 10/24/2019 s/ Michael J. Newman 

Michael J. Newman

United States Magistrate Judge
Opinion issued May 25 , 2023

In The 

## Court of Appeals For The 

## First District of Texas

———————————— NO. 01
- 23
- 00298
- CV

——————————— IN RE NANCY PRESSLER AND H. PAUL PRESSLER III , Relat or s

Original Proceeding on Petition for Writ of Mandamus

MEMORANDU M OPINION On April 19, 2023, r elators Nancy Pressler and H. Paul Pressler III filed a petition for writ of mandamus challenging the trial court’s April 17, 2023 order compelling net worth discovery

. 1 In conjunction with the petition, r elators filed a

1 The underlying case is Gareld Duan Rollins, Jr. v. H. Paul Pressler III, Nancy Pressler, Paige Patterson, Jared Woodfill, The Woodfill Law Firm, f/k/a Woodfill & Pressler, L.L.P., Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary, First Baptist Church of Houston, The Southern Baptist Convention, and The Executive Committee of the Southern Baptist Convention , cause number 2017

- 69277A , pending in the 127th District Court of Harris County, Texas, the Honoarble Ravi K. Sandill presiding.2

motion to stay the discovery order pending our decision on the mandamus petition. On April 20, 2023, our Court issued an order granting r elators’ stay motion and requested a response to the mandamus petition. On the same day, however, r elators informed our Court that the trial court issued an amended order mooting the issues raised in t heir mandamus petition and the related stay motion. 2 Accordingly, we dismiss this original proceeding as moot and withdraw our April 20, 2023 order. PER CURIAM Panel consists of Justices Goodman, Landau, and Rivas

- Molloy.

2 Relators subsequently filed a mandamus petition challenging the amended discovery order. Relators’ challenge to the amended discovery remains pending in In re Nancy Pressler and H. Paul P ressler III , Case No. 01

- 23

- 00304

- CV (Tex. App.

— Houston [1st Dist.]). Our Court granted a stay of the amended discovery order pending our determination on the mandamus petition.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

EASTERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA : Case No. 2:18-mj-402

: Magistrate Judge King

v. :

:

SEAN P. HEISER MULLINS :

JOINT MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME DURING WHICH

INDICTMENT/INFORMATION MUST BE FILED

Now come the parties, through their undersigned attorneys, 

and moves this Court for an order extending the time for the 

return of an Indictment or Information pursuant to 18 U.S.C.

§ 1361(b) for 30 days, from September 30, 2021 to October 30, 

2021. The parties believe this continuance would best serve the 

interests of justice and that the time would be excludable 

pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1361(h)(8).

Counsel continue to discuss a possible resolution to this 

case short of a trial. A continuance would best serve the 

interests of justice and the time would be excludable pursuant 

to 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(8). For this reason, the parties request 

an extension of the time within which an Indictment or 

Information may be filed in this case to October 30, 2021.

This is a joint request. This motion is filed by the 

government for the convenience of the parties. 

Case: 2:18-mj-00402-NMK Doc #: 16 Filed: 09/20/21 Page: 1 of 2 PAGEID #: 17
WHEREFORE, the government respectfully requests that the

Court grant this joint motion for an extension of time in which 

an Indictment or Information must be filed.

Respectfully submitted,

VIPAL J. PATEL

Acting United States Attorney

s/Timothy D. Prichard

TIMOTHY D. PRICHARD (0059455)

Assistant United States Attorney

303 Marconi Boulevard, Suite 200

Columbus, Ohio 43215

Tel: (614)469-5715

Fax: (614)469-5653

Tim.Prichard@usdoj.gov

s/Steven S. Nolder ______

STEVEN S. NOLDER, ESQ.

Counsel for Defendant

Sean P. Heiser Mullins

Snolder9@gmail.com

Case: 2:18-mj-00402-NMK Doc #: 16 Filed: 09/20/21 Page: 2 of 2 PAGEID #: 18
# Official Journal L 74/18 M

| | ISSN 1977-0677 |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | L 74 |
| | |
| English edition | Legislation | Volume 6018 March 2017 |

ISSN 1977-0677

Official Journal

of the European Union

L 74

English edition

Legislation

Volume 6018 March 2017

---

| Contents | | I   Legislative acts | page |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | REGULATIONS |
| | * | Regulation (EU) 2017/458 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 March 2017 amending Regulation (EU) 2016/399 as regards the reinforcement of checks against relevant databases at external borders | 1 |

Contents

I   Legislative acts

page

REGULATIONS

*

Regulation (EU) 2017/458 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 March 2017 amending Regulation (EU) 2016/399 as regards the reinforcement of checks against relevant databases at external borders

1

| EN | Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.
  The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk. |
| --- | --- |

EN

Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.

The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk.