alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Faulk. Scott (OST)" - ,;'!~"

;:; .

I, ..•

'"",!

. . ,: . :.~.1; .

'~faulk, Scott (OST)

"Monday, July 14, 2014 11:59 AM I

:;:~cifuente~@.ci.~isalia.ca.us'; 'thursto~f~rm.ayor@gmail.com';. 'ashu~li~n~ci[visa,lia.ca.us';

-Js~elsen@~l.vls~lla.ca.us'; 'wgubler@cl.vlsall~.c~.u~'; 'greg.~ol~lns@cl.v~salla.cla.us;

'Citycouncihipcityofrnerced.orq': molmos@cl.vlsalla.ca.us; Elliott, Ron .

Great Lakes, Chuck Howell (chowell@flygreatlakes.com); Great Lakes, Doug Voss

(DVoss@flygreatlakes.com);ShawnSimpson;Makani Kai, Richard SchumanI ; SeaPort

Airlines, EAs Mailbox (eas@seaportair.com); seaport/Wings of Alaska, Rob McKinney

(rob@seaportair.com); Tim Sieber; 'Mike Matthews'; 'Shannon Kane';

patkdashca@aol,com; shannon@dashca.com; 'Mickey Bowman'; Ron Hansen;

dave.berry@mokulelehawaii.com; Schlemmer, Kevin (OsT); Devany, Dennis (OsT)

Update on EAs at Merced and Visalia I

Great Lakes.pdf; Boutique.pdf; Makani Kai at Merced.pdf; Makani Kai at ViSrlia.Pdf;

seaPort.pdf; Mokulele.pdf

; \

From:

Sent:

To:

Cc:

Subject:

Attachments:

Greetings All:

I would like to update you on the Essential Air Service (EAS) situation at in Merced and Visalia, CA, as well as

give you an opportunity to offer any comments on the record before we submit a recommendation to the

Assistant Secretary for Aviation and International Affairs. We issued Order 2014-5-9, on May 21, 2014,

requesting proposals from airlines interested in providing EAS for a new term. In response to our.request, five

air carriers submitted proposals: Great Lakes Aviation, Boutique, Makani Kai Air, SeaPort, and Mokulele

Airlines.

I have attached each air carrier's proposal for your review and I expect them to be uploaded on

www.regulations.gov sometime this afternoon. I request that you review the proposals and submit any

comments you may have as soon as possible, but no later than August 15th. Please send your comments directly

to me via e-mail at scott.faulk@dot.gov. Also, please forward this to all relevant parties that I have not included

on the distribution list.

If you have any questions, feel free to contact me.

Regards,

Scott Faulk

Transportation Industry Analyst

U.S. Department of Transportation

Office of Aviation Analysis

EAS & Domestic Analysis Division

1200 New Jersey Ave., SE

Washington, DC 20590

202-366-9967

1
EXHIBIT 32.1



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 Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of
Gensym Corporation (the Company) for the period ended September 30, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the undersigned, Kim Mayyasi, Chief Executive Officer of the
Company, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:



(1) the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) 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.



|                         |  |                        
|------------------------ |  | -----------------------
|Dated: November 15, 2004 |  | /s/ Kim Mayyasi        
|                         |  | Kim Mayyasi            
|                         |  | Chief Executive Officer
### UNPUBLISHED



# UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT



#  U NITED S TATES OF A MERICA ,

Plaintiff-Appellee,
v. No. 01-5022



#  A NTHONY M AURICE L YNCH , a/k/a A NT , Defendant-Appellant. 

# 

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Elkins. Frederick P. Stamp, Jr., District Judge.

(CR-00-7) Submitted: July 18, 2002 Decided: August 21, 2002 Before WILKINS and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and

HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

COUNSEL Richard W. Shryock, Jr., R. MIKE MULLENS & ASSOCIATES, Elkins, West Virginia, for Appellant. Thomas E. Johnston, United States Attorney, Sherry L. Muncy, Assistant United States Attorney, Clarksburg, West Virginia, for Appellee.Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

OPINION
PER CURIAM: Anthony Maurice Lynch appeals his 210 month sentence pursuant to his guilty plea to aiding and abetting crack cocaine distribution, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2 (1994), and distribution of crack cocaine, in violation of 21 U.S.C.A. § 841(a) (West 1999 & Supp. 2002). Afterpleading guilty, while released on bond, Lynch committed two criminal offenses in Florida, driving under the influence and petit retail theft, pleading guilty to both crimes. The district court denied Lynch an adjustment for acceptance of responsibility, and sentenced him to 210 months incarceration and three years of supervised release. Lynch appeals. On appeal, Lynch asserts the district court erred in denying him an adjustment for acceptance of responsibility based on his unrelatedcriminal conduct. The district court’s determination regarding acceptance of responsibility is factual, and we review it with great deference for clear error. U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 3E1.1, comment. (n.5) (2000); United States v. Ruhe , 191 F.3d 376, 388 (4thCir. 1999). Lynch’s claim is meritless; his failure to voluntarily withdraw from criminal conduct establishes the district court did not err in denying him an adjustment for acceptance of responsibility. USSG § 3E1.1, comment. (n.1(b)). Accordingly, we affirm Lynch’s sentence. We dispense with oralargument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not significantly aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED 2 U NITED S TATES v. L YNCH
Souce ID Location type (U=UTM, L=lat/lon) X Y UTM zone Source type (P=point, A=area, V=volume) Length in x

direction - area sources (m) D10001A1 

### U 729445.0000000 4237797.0000000 

### 15 V D10001A2 

### U 729505.0000000 4237762.0000000 

### 15 V D10001B1 

### U 729505.0000000 4237797.0000000 

### 15 V D10001B2 

### U 729532.0000000 4238241.0000000 

### 15 V D20001B 

### U 729545.0000000 4238132.0000000 

### 15 V 

### D30001 U 729532 4237968 15P D40004 

### U 729573.0000000 4238097.0000000 

### 15P D40006 

### U 729563.0000000 4238097.0000000 

### 15 V D50007 

### U 729567.0000000 4238008.0000000 

### 15P D50008 

### U 729602.0000000 4238043.0000000 

### 15P D50011 

### U 729564.0000000 4237999.0000000 

### 15P D20003 U 729535.0000000 4237762.0000000 15 V D20006 U 729531.0000000 4238116.0000000 15 VLength in y

direction - area sources (m) Angle -

area sources (degrees) Horizontal

dimension - volume sources (m) Vertical dimension - volume sources (m) Release height -

area or volume sources (m) [use vertical center for volume sources] Stack height -

point sources (m) Stack

diameter - point sources (m) Exit velocity - point sources (m/sec) Exit

temperature - point sources (K) 1 1 0.61 1 1 4.27 1 1 4.27 2.33 10.6 6.4 2.33 10.6 6.4 

### 100.75 10.31 5.81 346.67 21.3 0.76 0.69 391.5 15.12 7.09 7.62 45.7 2.59 7.13 285.56 45.7 3.05 34.57 276.11 18.8 0.61 5.96 989.3 1 1 4.27 1 18 20Elevation

(m) Hill Height (in

meters) Source name
[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 47 (Thursday, March 10, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 13757-13758]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-05112]


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

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Antitrust Division


Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and 
Production Act of 1993--Undersea Technology Innovation Consortium

    Notice is hereby given that, on February 2, 2022, pursuant to 
Section 6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 
1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301 et seq. (``the Act''), Undersea Technology 
Innovation Consortium (``UTIC'') has filed written notifications 
simultaneously with the Attorney General and the Federal Trade 
Commission disclosing changes in its membership. The notifications were 
filed for the purpose of extending the Act's provisions limiting the 
recovery of antitrust plaintiffs to actual damages under specified 
circumstances. Specifically, Production System Automation LLC, Duryea, 
PA; L3 Technologies, Inc., Millersville, MD; Scale AI, Inc., San 
Francisco, CA; Inertial Labs, Inc., Paeonian Springs, VA; Aviation & 
Missile Solutions LLC, Huntsville, AL; Sonatech LLC, Santa Barbara, CA; 
Platform Systems, Inc., Hollywood, MD; and Sertainty Corporation, 
Nashville, TN, have been added as parties to this venture.
    Also, Argon St. Inc. a Boeing Company, Fairfax, VA; BioSonics, 
Inc., Seattle, WA; Compass Systems, Inc., Lexington Park, MD; DeepWater 
Buoyancy, Inc., Biddeford, ME; Dragonfly Pictures, Inc., Essington, PA; 
Edward Buiel Consulting dba Coulometrics LLC, Chattanooga, TN; GenOne 
Technologies LLC, Cambridge, MA; Moire, Inc., Issaquah, WA; Pandata 
Tech, Inc., Houston, TX; Peraton, Inc., Herndon, VA; Perspecta Labs, 
Inc., Basking Ridge, NJ; Sidus Solutions LLC, San Diego, CA; Technical 
Systems Integration, Inc., Norfolk, VA; and Truston Technologies, Inc., 
Annapolis, MD, have withdrawn as parties to this venture.
    No other changes have been made in either the membership or planned 
activity of the group research project. Membership in this group 
research project remains open, and UTIC intends to file additional 
written notifications disclosing all changes in membership.
    On October 9, 2018, UTIC filed its original notification pursuant 
to Section 6(a) of the Act. The Department of Justice published a 
notice in the Federal Register pursuant to Section 6(b) of the Act on 
November 2, 2018 (83 FR 55203).
    The last notification was filed with the Department on November 10, 
2021. A notice was published in the Federal

[[Page 13758]]

Register pursuant to Section 6(b) of the Act on December 22, 2021 (86 
FR 72628).

Suzanne Morris,
Chief, Premerger and Division Statistics. Antitrust Division.
[FR Doc. 2022-05112 Filed 3-9-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
#### John Franklin MEREDITH, IV, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Justin ANDREWS, Respondent-Appellee.

No. 13-7306

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: October 24, 2017

Decided: November 7, 2017

John Franklin Meredith, IV, Appellant Pro Se.

*284Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

John Franklin Meredith, IV, appeals the district court’s order dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2012) petition. Meredith relies on the savings clause in 28 U.S.C. § 2255(e) (2012) to challenge his career offender designation, but we have “not extended the reach of the savings clause to those petitioners challenging only their sentence.” *United States v. Poole,*531 F.3d 263, 267 n.7 (4th Cir. 2008). The district court, however, lacked jurisdiction over Meredith’s petition. *Rice v. Rivera,*617 F.3d 802, 807 (4th Cir. 2010) (per curiam). We therefore modify its order to reflect a dismissal without prejudice for lack of jurisdiction and affirm the dismissal as modified. We grant Meredith leave to proceed in forma pauperis. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED*
# EUR-Lex - 32002R1780 - EN

Avis juridique important

*|*

# 32002R1780

**Commission Regulation (EC) No 1780/2002 of 7 October 2002 establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables **

*
Official Journal L 270 , 08/10/2002 P. 0001 - 0002 *

Commission Regulation (EC) No 1780/2002

of 7 October 2002

establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 3223/94 of 21 December 1994 on detailed rules for the application of the import arrangements for fruit and vegetables(1), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1498/98(2), and in particular Article 4(1) thereof,

Whereas:

(1) Regulation (EC) No 3223/94 lays down, pursuant to the outcome of the Uruguay Round multilateral trade negotiations, the criteria whereby the Commission fixes the standard values for imports from third countries, in respect of the products and periods stipulated in the Annex thereto.

(2) In compliance with the above criteria, the standard import values must be fixed at the levels set out in the Annex to this Regulation,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

The standard import values referred to in Article 4 of Regulation (EC) No 3223/94 shall be fixed as indicated in the Annex hereto.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on 8 October 2002.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 7 October 2002.

For the Commission

J. M. Silva Rodríguez

Agriculture Director-General

(1) OJ L 337, 24.12.1994, p. 66.

(2) OJ L 198, 15.7.1998, p. 4.

ANNEX

to the Commission Regulation of 7 October 2002 establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables

>TABLE>
#### IN RE: OPENINGS, DBA Total Door, Appellant

2016-2307

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.

October 11, 2017

Daniel I. Konieczny, Tabet DiVito & Rothstein, LLC, Chicago, IL, argued for appellant.' Also represented by Meredith Martin Addy.

Thomas L. Casagrande, Office of the Solicitor, United States Patent and Trademark Office, Alexandria, VA, argued for' appellee Joseph Matal. Also represented by Nathan K. Kelley, Christina Hieber, Mary Beth Walker.

(Dyk, O’Malley, and Wallach, Circuit Judges).

JUDGMENT

Per Curiam

This Cause having been heard and considered, it is Ordered and Adjudged:

AFFIRMED. *See*Fed. Cir. R. 36.
Exhibit
32.2





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 GCA I Acquisition Corp. (the “Company”) on
Form 10-K for the period ending May 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Michael M. Membrado,
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:





(1)           The
Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) 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/ Michael M. MembradoMichael
      M. Membrado
                Principal
      Financial Officer
                August
      31, 2009
Exhibit 32.1


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 Barings BDC, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2018 , as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Eric Lloyd, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:


(1) the Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) 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/ ERIC LLOYDEric LloydChief Executive OfficerFebruary 27, 2019
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Elizabeth A. Weaver

Maura D. Corrigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

 _________________________________________ 

 Clerk

December 21, 2009 

p1214 

Order 

 

December 21, 2009 

139453 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 139453 

 COA: 291196 

Washtenaw CC: 07-001056-FH 

GREGORY NATHANIEL MATTHEWS, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the June 18, 2009 order 

of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded 

that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
Exhibit
32.1
 
 CERTIFICATION
OF CEO 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 on Form 10-K of Targa Resources Partners LP
(the “Partnership”) for the year ended December 31, 2008 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), Rene R.
Joyce, as Chief Executive Officer of Targa Resources GP LLC, the general partner
of the Partnership, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to his
knowledge:
 
 (1) The
Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) 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
Partnership.
 
 By:/s/Rene
R. Joyce.
 Name:
Rene R. Joyce
 Title:
Chief Executive Officer of Targa Resources GP LLC,
 the
general partner of Targa Resources Partners LP
 
 Date:February 25,
2009
 
 A
signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other
document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that
appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement
required by Section 906, has been provided to the Partnership and will be
retained by the Partnership and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.
Exhibit 33.2**Management’s Assertion of Compliance**     Management of the Agency and Trust division of Citibank, N.A. (the “Company”) isresponsible for providing this platform-level assessment of compliance with the servicing criteriaspecified in Item 1122(d) of Regulation AB promulgated by the Securities and Exchange Commission.     Management has determined that the following servicing criteria are applicable in regards tothe platform for the following period:     Platform: publicly-issued (*i*.*e*., transaction-level reporting initiallyrequired under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended) residential mortgage-backedsecurities, automobile loan or lease-backed securities and student loan-backed securitiesissued on or after January 1, 2006, for which the Company provides the following servicingfunctions (the “Platform”): **•** paying agent, securities administration and trustee; or  **•** securities administration and paying agent; or  **•** paying agent and trustee; or  **•** paying agent.     Applicable Servicing Criteria: All servicing criteria set forth in Item1122(d), to the extent required by the Item 1122(d) servicing criteria in regards to theactivities performed by the Company with respect to the Platform as to any transaction,excluding the following servicing criteria: 1122(d)(1)(i), 1122(d)(1)(iii), 1122(d)(1)(iv),1122(d)(2)(iii), 1122(d)(4)(i), 1122(d)(4)(ii) and 1122(d)(4)(iv) through 1122(d)(4)(xiv),(the “Applicable Servicing Criteria”).Period: Twelve months ended December 31, 2006 (the “Period”).     With respect to the Platform, the Company’s management provides the following assessment ofcompliance with respect to the Applicable Servicing Criteria: **•** The Company’s management is responsible for assessing the Company’s compliance withthe Applicable Servicing Criteria as of and for the Period.  **•** The Company’s management has assessed compliance with the Applicable ServicingCriteria as of and for the Period. In making this assessment, management used thecriteria set forth by the Securities and Exchange Commission in paragraph (d) of Item1122 of Regulation AB.  **•** Based on such assessment, as of and for the Period, the Company has complied, in allmaterial respects, with the Applicable Servicing Criteria.
 

 
     KPMG LLP, a registered public accounting firm, has issued an attestation report with respectto management’s assertion of compliance with the Applicable Servicing Criteria as of and for thePeriod.         **CITIBANK, N.A.**           By: /s/ JEFFREY VOLK Jeffrey Volk           Its: Managing Director           Dated: February 28, 2007
#### James Bernard TRUMAN, Plaintiff-Appellant v. James LEBLANC; Nathan Cain; Robbie Berube; Lieutenant Colonel Villamarette; Timothy F. Averill; Wayne Millus; Doug Welborn; Nicole Robinson; Debra A. Rutledge; Janice G. Clark, Defendants-Appellees

No. 16-30488 Summary Calendar

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Filed June 19, 2017

*879James Bernard Truman, Pro Se

Before REAVLEY, OWEN, and ELROD, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

James Bernard Truman, Louisiana prisoner # 291926, appeals the dismissal with prejudice of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claims relating to the Avoyelles Parish Correctional Center for failure to state a claim pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A and the dismissal without prejudice of his claims relating to the Louisiana State Penitentiary at Angola and the 19th Judicial District Court based on improper venue. Truman’s claims regarding retaliation, denial of due process during his prison disciplinary proceeding, denial of his right of access to the courts, and the district court’s venue determination were either not briefed at all or not adequately briefed. Thus, they are deemed abandoned. *See Yohey v. Collins,*985 F.2d 222, 224-25 (5th Cir. 1993); *Brinkmann v. Dallas Cty. Deputy Sheriff Abner,*813 F.2d 744, 748 (5th Cir. 1987).

Truman has failed to show that his appeal involves “legal points arguable on their merits (and therefore not frivolous).” *Howard v. King,*707 F.2d 215, 220 (5th Cir. 1983) (internal quotation marks and citations omitted). His appeal is therefore dismissed as frivolous. *See*5th Cir. R. 42.2. The dismissal of this appeal counts as a strike under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). *Adepegba v. Hammons,*103 F.3d 383, 387-88 (5th Cir. 1996).

APPEAL DISMISSED.

*

 Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
11TH COURT OF APPEALS

EASTLAND, TEXAS

JUDGMENT

Two thousand nine hundred eleven * From the 142nd District Court

dollars and twenty-five cents U.S. of Midland County,

Currency and Jerry Dewitt Smith, Trial Court No. CV45980.

Vs. No. 11-15-00015-CV * January 20, 2017

The State of Texas, * Memorandum Opinion by Wright, C.J.

 (Panel consists of: Wright, C.J.,

 Willson, J., and Bailey, J.)

This court has inspected the record in this cause and concludes that there is 

no error in the judgment below. Therefore, in accordance with this court’s 

opinion, the judgment of the trial court is in all things affirmed.