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

[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 167 (Wednesday, August 28, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Page 53184]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-21002]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Land Release for Penn Yan Airport

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Notice, request for public comment.

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

SUMMARY: The Federal Aviation Administration is requesting public 
comment on the Penn Yan Airport (PEO), Penn Yan, New York, Notice of 
Proposed Release from Aeronautical Use of approximately 0.069 +/- acres 
of airport property, to allow for non-aeronautical development.
    The parcel is located on the northwest corner of the Penn Yan 
Airport. The tract currently consists of 0.069 +/- acres of land and it 
is currently vacant. The requested release is for the purpose of 
permitting the airport owner (Yates County) to grant an easement of 
0.069 +/-acres for ingress/egress to a boat storage and maintenance 
facility to be constructed by Land and Sea Properties on airports lands 
previously released. The proposed 50' +/- wide by 60.11' +/-easement is 
required to comply with the Town of Milo requirement to provide 
emergency equipment ingress/egress to the Land and Sea Properties boat 
storage and maintenance facility from the Penn Yan Airport access road.
    Documents reflecting the Sponsor's request are available, by 
appointment only, for inspection at the Office of the Yates County 
Legislature and the FAA New York Airport District Office.

DATES: Comments must be received by September 27, 2013.

ADDRESSES: Comments on this application may be mailed or delivered to 
the FAA at the following address: Steven M. Urlass, Manager, FAA New 
York Airports District Office, 600 Old Country Road, Suite 446, Garden 
City, New York 11530. In addition, a copy of any comments submitted to 
the FAA must be mailed or delivered to Mr. H. Taylor Fitch, Chairman, 
Yates County Legislature, at the following address: 417 Liberty Street, 
Penn Yan, NY. 14527.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Steven M. Urlass, Manager, New York 
Airports District Office, 600 Old Country Road, Suite 446, Garden City, 
New York 11530; telephone (516) 227-3803; FAX (516) 227-3813; email 
steve.urlass@faa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 125 of the Wendell H. Ford Aviation 
Investment and Reform Act for the 21st Century (AIR21) requires the FAA 
to provide an opportunity for public notice and comment before the 
Secretary may waive a Sponsor's Federal obligation to use certain 
airport land for aeronautical use.

    Issued in Garden City, New York on August 21, 2013.
Steven M. Urlass,
Manager, New York, Airports District Office, Eastern Region.
[FR Doc. 2013-21002 Filed 8-27-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
```
**Exhibit 31.2**

**CERTIFICATIONSPURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 302 OF THESARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

** **

**ChiefFinancial Officer Certification**

 

I, Richard J. Kaplan, certify that:

 

1.                                       Ihave reviewed this Amendment No. 1 to the Form 10-Q of DeCrane AircraftHoldings, Inc.;

 

2.                                       Basedon my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of amaterial fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statementsmade, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, notmisleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

 

3.                                       Basedon my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial informationincluded in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financialcondition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, andfor, the periods presented in this report;

 
| Date: October 9, 2003 |                                             |
|-----------------------|--------------------------------------------------|
|                  |                                             |
|                  |                                             |
|                  | /s/  RICHARD  J. KAPLAN                     |   |
|                  | Richard J. Kaplan                                |
|                  | Senior Vice President,  Chief Financial Officer, |
|                  | Secretary and Treasurer                          |

 

----
#### Jack WILLIAMS et al *v.*Jasper H. TULLOS et ux

73-306

507 S.W. 2d 516

Opinion delivered April 8, 1974

*Haley & Claycomb,*for appellants.

No brief for appellees.

Conley Byrd, Justice.

This is a boundary dispute involving the south 114 feet of an unfenced boundary in the City of Warren, Arkansas, between the lot owned by appellants Jack Williams and his sister Elizabeth Fullerton and the lot owned by the appellees Mr. and Mrs. Jasper H. Tullos. The boundary in dispute comprises the west boundary of appellants’ lot and the east boundary of appellees’ lot. By their pleadings appellants admit that the boundary does *383not come within the description contained in their deed but contend that they and their predecessors in title have been in “actual, open, visible, notorious, continuous, undisturbed and undisputed possession of the tract of land ...” for 25 years. The trial court generally fixed the boundary at a point 4.5 feet east of a garage and thence south to Bond Avenue. For reversal appellants contend:

> “POINT I. The Chancellor erred in entering a decree based on the findings of his predecessor rather than reopening the case for trial de novo.

> POINT II. The trial court erred in its finding that Tullos has claimed the land south of the garage either by deed or adverse possession for more than seven years.”

The record as abstracted clearly shows that the area here in controversy was never fenced. The appellees planted and maintained pine trees on the area after their acquisition in 1964. Appellees also maintained some flowers in the area. Appellant, Jack Williams, admits that appellees planted and maintained some of the flowers, although he says his mother planted most of them. The only surveyor who testified placed the actual survey line of the boundary either at the same location or slightly east of the point fixed by the trial court.

Since a great preponderance of the evidence shows that appellants have not been in adverse possession of the area here in controversy and that the boundary fixed by the court is within the area conveyed to appellees and their predecessors, we find no merit in either of the contentions raised by appellants.

Appellants had a survey made by occupancy of the different owners in the area and suggest that appellees’ eastern boundary should be fixed in relation to their western boundary. There are two answers to this suggestion. In the First place appellees’ neighbor to the west is not a party to the proceeding and consequently that boundary is not necessarily the same as that contained in appellees’ deed. In the second place appellants received their deeds by a metes and bounds description that referred to appellees’ boundary as a monument which, would take precedence over the distance set *384out in their deed. Furthermore, there is no showing that the property was conveyed by reference to apian or according to some definite proportion, *Hughes*v. *Yates,*228 Ark. 860, 311 S.W. 2d 179 (1958). Consequently, the rule of apportionment is not applicable.

Affirmed.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 96-6870

CLINTON MCDANIELS,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

LARRY V. STARCHER, and any other Judge having

the power to sign an order dismissing the

Nobles Case No. 83-C-349,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Elkins. Robert Earl Maxwell, Senior

District Judge. (CA-96-31-2)

Submitted: November 21, 1996 Decided: December 4, 1996

Before HALL, WILKINS, and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Clinton McDaniels, Appellant Pro Se. Mario Joseph Palumbo, Attorney General, Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Appellant, a West Virginia inmate, appeals the district

court's order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1994) complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d) (1994), amended by Prison Litigation Reform Act, Pub. L. No. 104-134, 110 Stat. 1321 (1996). We

have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find

that this appeal is frivolous. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal

on the reasoning of the district court. McDaniels v. Starcher,

No. CA-96-31-2 (N.D.W. Va. Apr. 24, 1996). We dispense with oral

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately

presented in the materials before the court and argument would not

aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
Exhibit 32.1
 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
(18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350)
  (1)
    
    The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934; and(2)
    
    The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
  /s/ RAYMOND P. WARRELL, JR., M.D.*

Name: Raymond P. Warrell, Jr., M.D.Title: Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
 
 *
    
    A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to
Genta Incorporated and will be retained by Genta Incorporated and furnished to the Securities and
Exchange Commission or its staff upon request. 57
```

[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 39 (Tuesday, February 28, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 12044]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-4629]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board, Nevada

AGENCY: Department of Energy.

ACTION: Notice of open meeting.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces a meeting of the Environmental 
Management Site-Specific Advisory Board (EM SSAB), Nevada. The Federal 
Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463, 86 Stat. 770) requires that 
public notice of this meeting be announced in the Federal Register.

DATES: Wednesday, March 21, 2012, 5 p.m.

ADDRESSES: West Career and Technical Academy, 11945 West Charleston 
Boulevard, Las Vegas, Nevada 89135.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Denise Rupp, Board Administrator, 232 
Energy Way, M/S 505, North Las Vegas, Nevada 89030. Phone: (702) 630-
0522; Fax (702) 295-5300 or Email: nssab@nv.doe.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Purpose of the Board: The purpose of the Board is to make 
recommendations to DOE-EM and site management in the areas of 
environmental restoration, waste management, and related activities.
    Tentative Agenda:
    1. U-233 Disposition Update.
    2. Soils Committee Update--Risk-Based Corrective Action Evaluation 
Process.
    Public Participation: The EM SSAB, Nevada, welcomes the attendance 
of the public at its advisory committee meetings and will make every 
effort to accommodate persons with physical disabilities or special 
needs. If you require special accommodations due to a disability, 
please contact Denise Rupp at least seven days in advance of the 
meeting at the phone number listed above. Written statements may be 
filed with the Board either before or after the meeting. Individuals 
who wish to make oral presentations pertaining to agenda items should 
contact Denise Rupp at the telephone number listed above. The request 
must be received five days prior to the meeting and reasonable 
provision will be made to include the presentation in the agenda. The 
Deputy Designated Federal Officer is empowered to conduct the meeting 
in a fashion that will facilitate the orderly conduct of business. 
Individuals wishing to make public comments will be provided a maximum 
of five minutes to present their comments.
    Minutes: Minutes will be available by writing to Denise Rupp at the 
address listed above or at the following Web site: http://nv.energy.gov/nssab/MeetingMinutes.aspx.

    Issued at Washington, DC, on February 23, 2012.
LaTanya R. Butler,
Acting Deputy Committee Management Officer.
[FR Doc. 2012-4629 Filed 2-27-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
```
From: "Frey, Nathan J." <Nathan_J._Frey@omb.eop.gov>

To: Kevin Culligan/DC/USEPA/US@EPA

Cc: Nicole Owens/DC/USEPA/US@EPA

Date: 03/12/2012 11:18 AM

Subject: Summary of Interagency Comments under EO 12866/13563 -- Standards of Performance for 

Greenhouse Gas Emissions for New Stationary Sources: Electric Utility Generating Units

Attached please find a summary of interagency comments under EO 12866/13563 

on the EPA draft RIA for the proposed rule entitled, Standards of Performance 

for Greenhouse Gas Emissions for New Stationary Sources: Electric Utility 

Generating Units RIN 2060-AQ91.

Thank you and please let me know if you have any questions.

EO 12866 13563 Interagency Comments1 EGU GHG NSPS RIA Combined.docx
Missouri Court of Appeals

Southern District 

APRIL 13, 2016 

THE FOLLOWING CASES WERE AFFIRMED PURSUANT TO RULE 30.25(b). 

1. Case No. SD33906 

 Re: STATE OF MISSOURI, 

 Plaintiff-Respondent, 

 vs. 

 AVERY T. FULTZ, 

 Defendant-Appellant.
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

GABRIEL MARIN,

 

 Appellant,

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

 State.

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

No. 08-19-00186-CR

Appeal from the

County Criminal Court No. 4

of El Paso County, Texas 

(TC# 20180C03247)

O R D E R

The Court GRANTS the Court Reporter’s third request for an extension of time within 

which to file the Reporter’s Record until November 30, 2019. NO FURTHER REQUESTS 

FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE THE REPORTER’S RECORD WIL BE CONSIDERED

BY THIS COURT.

It is further ORDERED that Anita D. Garza, Roving Court Reporter for the County

Criminal Court No. 4 for El Paso County, Texas, prepare the Reporter’s Record for the above

styled and numbered cause and forward the same to this Court on or before November 30, 2019.

IT IS SO ORDERED this 4

th day of November, 2019.

PER CURIAM

Before Alley, C.J., Rodriguez and Palafox, JJ.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THE SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE AUDITED
BALANCE SHEET AS OF DECEMBER 31, 1996 AND FROM THE STATEMENT OF INCOME FOR THE
YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1996 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO 
SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.  PERKINS FAMILY RESTAURANTS, L.P.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                           2,737
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    7,090
<ALLOWANCES>                                       440
<INVENTORY>                                      4,234
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                14,807
<PP&E>                                         206,371
<DEPRECIATION>                                  91,285
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 155,656
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           32,631
<BONDS>                                         56,817
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                      61,557
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   155,656
<SALES>                                        234,164
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               252,793
<CGS>                                           68,456
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  195,710
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                43,561
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   299<F1>
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               5,066
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 13,522
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             13,522
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    13,522
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.30
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.30
<FN>
<F1>THE PROVISION FOR DOUBTFUL ACCOUNTS AND NOTES IS PRESENTED WITHIN OPERATING
EXPENSES IN THE ACCOMPANYING FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND IS INCLUDED IN TOTAL
COSTS ABOVE.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
#### The Grand Rapids & Indiana Railroad Co. v. John Wright.

*Appeals from justice's courts: Payment of entry fee: Order nisi: Attorney fee: Dismissal.*Appellants in an appeal from a justice’s court have the whole of the day on which the return is filed in which to "make payment of the entry fee without being in default; and a dismissal grounded upon an order *nisi*made on the day the return was filed, requiring payment of the entry fee and of an attorney fee of five dollars, is unwarranted.

*Submitted on briefs and decided October 21.*

Error to Kent Circuit.

The justice’s return to an appeal was taken by the ap-pellee’s attorney and filed, and an *ex parte*motion at once *492made, upon the certificate of the clerk that the entry fee had not been paid, and an order *nisi*granted on the same day that the return was filed, requiring the appellant to pay the entry fee and an attorney fee of fire dollars to the opposite party within fifteen days, or in default thereof that the appeal be dismissed. The appellant afterwards paid the entry fee, but declined to pay the attorney fee; and the order *nisi*was subsequently made absolute and the appeal dismissed. The appellant thereupon brought error.

*Hughes, O'Brien & Smiley,*for plaintiff in error.

*Emil A. Dapper,*for defendant in error.

Per Curiam:

We think the court erred in grounding a dismissal upon non-compliance with an order *nisi*requiring payment of two dollars entry fee and five dollars attorney fee for Wright’s attorney, and made on the day the justice’s return was filed. The plaintiffs in error were entitled to the whole day to pay the entry fee in, and it was not competent to make their right of appeal depend on the payment of a fee to Wright’s attorney in addition to the" entry foe.

Order of dismissal reversed.
[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 15 (Monday, January 24, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 3501-3502]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-01265]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)


Information Collection Activities; Submission to the Office of 
Management and Budget (OMB) for Review and Approval; Comment Request; 
Baldrige Executive Fellows Program

    The Department of Commerce will submit the following information 
collection request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for 
review and clearance in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 
1995, on or after the date of publication of this notice. We invite the 
general public and other Federal agencies to comment on proposed, and 
continuing information collections, which helps us assess the impact of 
our information collection requirements and minimize the public's 
reporting burden. Public comments were previously requested via the 
Federal Register on November 16, 2021, during a 60-day comment period. 
This notice allows for an additional 30 days for public comments.
    Agency: National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), 
Commerce.
    Title: Baldrige Executive Fellows Program.
    OMB Control Number: 0693-0076.
    Form Number(s): None.
    Type of Request: Regular, extension of current information 
collection.
    Number of Respondents: 24 per year.
    Average Hours per Response: 1 hour to gather materials.

[[Page 3502]]

    Burden Hours: 24.
    Needs and Uses: Collection needed to obtain information to select 
applicants for the Baldrige Executive Fellows Program, a professional 
development fellowship offered by the Baldrige Performance Excellence 
Program.
    Affected Public: Business, health care, education, or other for-
profit organizations; health care, education, and other non-profit 
organizations; and individuals.
    Frequency: Annually.
    Respondent's Obligation: Voluntary.
    This information collection request may be viewed at 
www.reginfo.gov. Follow the instructions to view the Department of 
Commerce collections currently under review by OMB.
    Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information 
collection should be submitted within 30 days of the publication of 
this notice on the following website www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain. 
Find this particular information collection by selecting ``Currently 
under 30-day Review--Open for Public Comments'' or by using the search 
function and entering either the title of the collection or the OMB 
Control Number 0693-0076.

Sheleen Dumas,
Department PRA Clearance Officer, Office of the Chief Information 
Officer, Commerce Department.
[FR Doc. 2022-01265 Filed 1-21-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-13-P