alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
MICHAEL P. HUERTA, Administrator, Federal Aviation Administration, Complainant,

vs. IN THE MATTEROF CERTIFIED AVIATION SERVICES, LLC DOCKETNO. FAA2014-0408 (Civil PenaltyAction)

Certified Aviation Services, LLC Respondent FAA Case No. 20147WP910075

Respondent, Certified Aviation Services, LLC, wishes to withdraw its request for an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) hearing beforethe U.S. Department ofTransportation, Office ofHearings, that was made on July 10, 2014. Certified Aviation Services, LLC does not intend to further proceed with the appeal. We understand that bywithdrawing our requestfor an ALJ hearing, our appeal will be dismissed by the ALJ under 14 C.F.R. ] I3.2 I 5 With prejudice. Certified AviatiOn Services, LLC Wishes to Withdraw our request for ALI hearing because the parties, Respondent, Certified Aviation Services, LLC and Complainant, the Federal Aviation Administration, have agreed to settle the above reference FAA case.

Vice President ofAdministration Certified Aviation Services, LLC

Attachment- Service List 

# RECEIVED
AUG 14 2n14 

## HEARING DOCKETSERVICE LIST- BY U.S. MAIL ORIGINAL

Federal Aviation Administration 800 Independence Avenue, S.W. Washington, DC 20591 Attention: Hearing docket Clerk, AGC-430 Wilbur Wright Building- Suite 2W1000

ONE COPY

The I!mwrable Riehard C. Gcedvvin, US. AdministJ**ati~e** Law Judge Office ofHearings, M-20 U.S. Department ofTransportation 1200 New JerseyAvenue, S.E. (Ell-310) Washington, DC 20590 Attn: Patricia Matthews TEL: 202-366-5121 StaffAssistant FAX: 202-366-7536

J.M. Harper, Complainant's Counsel FederalAviation Administration Northwest Mountain Region (ANM-7) 1601 Lind Avenue Southwest Renton, WA 98057 TEL: 425-227-2161 FAX: 425-277-1007 DocketNo. FAA-20014-0408 (Civil PenaltyAction)
Exhibit 32-10
**CERTIFICATION OF PERIODIC REPORT**
I, David E. Meador, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer ofMichigan Consolidated Gas Company (the “Company”), certify, pursuant to Section906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that to the bestof my knowledge and belief:
(1) the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarterly periodended June 30, 2004 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements ofSection 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C.78m or 78o(d)); and (2) the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all materialrespects, the financial condition and results of operations of theCompany.   Dated: August 4, 2004                /s/ DAVID E. MEADOR               David E. MeadorExecutive Vice President andChief Financial Officer ofMichigan Consolidated Gas Company
A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has beenprovided to Michigan Consolidated Gas Company and will be retained by theCompany and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staffupon request.
**Exhibit
      32**








**SECTION
      906 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. §1350**





I,
      Dennis
      W. Doll, hereby certify that, to the best of my knowledge, the periodic report
      being filed herewith containing financial statements fully complies with the
      requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
      (15 U.S.C. 78m(a) or 78o(d)) and that information contained in said periodic
      report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
      results of operations of Middlesex Water Company for the period covered by
      said
      periodic report.








/s/
                Dennis W. DollDennis
                W. DollChief
                Executive Officer








Date:  May
      8, 2007








A
      signed
      original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided
      to
      Middlesex Water Company and will be retained by Middlesex Water Company and
      furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
      request.
Exhibit
15.6



CONSENT



We
hereby consent to the reference to our valuation of certain trading property of Plaza Centers N.V., as of December 31, 2016, 2015
and 2014, appearing in this Annual Report on Form 20-F of Elbit Imaging Ltd., and to the incorporation by reference of this Annual
Report in the Registration Statement on Form F-1 (Registration No. 333-194519) and in the Registration Statement on Form F-3 (Registration
No. 333-172122) and in the Registration Statement on Form S-8 (Registration No. 333-117509, No. 333-130852, No. 333-136684 and
No. 333-152820) of Elbit Imaging Ltd.



This
consent is not to be construed as an admission that we are an expert or that we are a person whose consent is required to be filed
under the provisions of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended.



|/s/
    Cushman & Wakefield | 
|--------------------------- | 
|Cushman
    & Wakefield     | 
|                            | 
|Budapest,
    Hungary       | 
|November
    9, 2017        |
Exhibit 32(a)











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 accompanying Quarterly Report of Alltel Corporation (the
Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2008 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I,
Scott T. Ford, Chief Executive Officer and President of the Company, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my knowledge, 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/ Scott T. Ford


Scott T.
Ford


Chief
Executive Officer and President


August
13, 2008



































A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to
Alltel Corporation and will be retained by Alltel Corporation and furnished to
the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.
**MEMORANDUM**

DATE: July 29 , 2015 TO: Clean Power Plan for Existing Power Plants; Docket Id: OAR– 2013 - 0602 FROM: Lora Strine , EPA SUBJECT: July 28 , 2015 Phone Call Regarding Proposed Clean Power Plan for Existing

Power Plants

**SUMMARY** A phone call was held between EPA and Gabe Pacyniak , GCC on July 28 , 2015 to discuss the proposed Clean Power Plan for Existing Power Plants . The Clean Power Plan for Existing Power Plants was proposed on June 2, 2014. **ATTENDEES Georgetown Climat**  **e Center** Gabe Pacyniak **US EPA** Lora Strine Jeremy Tarr
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2005 Referred in House (RFH)]

103d CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 2005

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 12, 1994

                Referred to the Committee on Agriculture

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
     To make certain technical corrections, and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. TECHNICAL AMENDMENTS.

    (a) Sections 101B(c)(1)(D)(v)(II) and 103B(c)(1)(D)(v)(II) of the 
Agricultural Act of 1949 (7 U.S.C. 1441-2(c)(1)(D)(v)(II) and 1444-
2(c)(1)(D)(v)(II)) are each amended by inserting ``without regard to 
clause (ii)'' after ``clause (iii)''.
    (b) Section 105B(c)(1)(B)(iii)(IV)(bb) of such Act (7 U.S.C. 
1444f(c)(1)(B)(iii)(IV)(bb)) is amended by striking ``clause (i)(I)'' 
and inserting ``clauses (i) and (ii)''.
    (c) Section 204(g) of such Act (7 U.S.C. 1446e(g)) is amended--
            (1) in paragraph (1), by inserting after ``purchase'' the 
        following: ``(less sales under section 407 for unrestricted 
        use)''; and
            (2) in paragraph (2), by inserting after ``purchases'' each 
        place it appears the following: ``(less sales under section 407 
        for unrestricted use)''.

            Passed the Senate March 25 (legislative day, February 22), 
      1994.

            Attest:

                                             WALTER J. STEWART,

                                                             Secretary.
```
DLA Aviation participates in virtual AMCOM 101
 
  By Natalie Skelton, DLA Aviation Public Affairs
  The U.S. Army Aviation and Missile Command’s 101 conference pressed on Nov. 4 – 5, 2020, despite the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. A notable difference from attendees gathering at Redstone Arsenal’s Sparkman Center in Huntsville, Alabama, was 90% of the participants connected virtually to illustrate how AMCOM supports Army leadership across the aviation enterprise from around the world. Ron Mailhiot, deputy, Army Customer Facing Division, Forward Presence, Customer Operations Directorate, Defense Logistics Agency Aviation, participated in a virtual panel discussion on the second day of the event, providing a snapshot of Weapon Systems Readiness Drivers of their main platforms: AH-64 Apache, UH-60 Blackhawk and CH-47 Chinook helicopters.
“[DLA Aviation’s] material availability  for September 2020 was 90% for UH-60, 91% for AH-64, and 94% for CH-47,” said Mailhiot, “An all -time high for DLA Aviation supporting AMCOM and the U.S. Army warfighter.” DLA Aviation not only briefed at the panel, they also presented briefs during breakout sessions. DLA Aviation Army personnel also conducted an overview briefing during a breakout session on day two. Participants included personnel from DLA Aviation’s Army Customer Facing Division in Richmond, Virginia, and Army Customer Facing Division forward presence on Redstone Arsenal in Huntsville, Alabama. The DLA Aviation Army Customer Facing Division provides worldwide Aviation Demand Chain support to Aviation operational customers and retail-level support to Aviation industrial customers. The division also integrates all Supply Chain support for rotary wing platforms in support of DoD, and Foreign Military Sales customers.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 09-7426

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

NATHAN MESSICK,
Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Martinsburg. John Preston Bailey, Chief District Judge. (3:06-cr-00058-JPB-1)

Submitted: November 17, 2009 Decided: November 24, 2009

Before WILKINSON, MICHAEL, and KING, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Nathan Messick, Appellant Pro Se. Paul Thomas Camilletti, Assistant United States Attorney, Martinsburg, West Virginia; Michael Stein, Assistant United States Attorney, Wheeling, West Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM:
Nathan Messick appeals the district court’s order
denying his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2006) motion for a sentence

reduction. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible
error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the

district court. United States v. Messick , No.
3:06-cr-00058-JBP-1 (N.D. W. Va. July 21, 2009). We also deny
Messick’s motion for transcripts at government expense and
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.

AFFIRMED
|                                                                                                     
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                                     
|View History:  Monthly  Annual Download Data (XLS File)                                             
|View History:  Monthly  Annual                                                                       
|View History:  Monthly  Annual                                                                       
|View History:                                                                                        
|                                                                                                     
|Price of Corpus Christi, TX Liquefied Natural Gas Exports to Mexico (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet)
|                                                                                                     
|                                                                                                     
|Price of Corpus Christi, TX Liquefied Natural Gas Exports to Mexico (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet)
|                                                                                                     

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|2010's                                                                                                                            |        |        |        |        |        |        |        | --     | --     | 3.81  
|2020's                                                                                                                            | --     | W      | --     | 5.85   |        |        |        |        |        |       
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 7/31/2024                                                                                                          
|Next Release Date: 8/30/2024
#### In the Matter of Giulio D. and Another, Infants. Sylvia L., Appellant; Edwin Gould Services for Children and Families, Respondent.

[56 NYS3d 49]

Order, Family Court, New York County (Clark V. Richardson, J.), entered on or about October 21, 2015, which, to the extent appealed from as limited by the briefs, determined, after a hearing, that respondent mother had permanently neglected the subject children, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Clear and convincing evidence supports the determination that the mother permanently neglected the subject children by failing to plan for their future, despite petitioner agency’s diligent efforts to encourage and strengthen the parental relationship *(see*Social Services Law § 384-b [7] [a]; *Matter of Star Leslie W.,*63 NY2d 136 [1984]; *Matter of Sheila G.,*61 NY2d 368, 384-386 [1984]). The agency exercised diligent efforts by *581scheduling regular visitation, and by referring the mother to alcohol and drug treatment, and parenting skills and mental health services *(see Matter of Marissa Tiffany C-W. [Faith W.],*125 AD3d 512, 512 [1st Dept 2015]). Although the mother did complete many aspects of her service plan, she failed to gain insight into her parental deficiencies or benefit from the services *(see e.g. Matter of Jaileen X.M. [Annette M.],*111 AD3d 502, 502 [1st Dept 2013], *lv denied*22 NY3d 859 [2014]). Among other things, the mother continued to display poor parenting skills at visits to the point where both children requested that visits be stopped. The mother’s therapist reported that the mother had gained little insight since engaging in therapy, and the case planner observed that the mother continually failed to take responsibility for her role in the circumstances that led to the children’s placement.

Concur—Friedman, J.P., Moskowitz, Feinman, Gische and Kahn, JJ.
Exhibit 13(a).2



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



Pursuant to the requirements of Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. Sections 1350(a) and (b)), the undersigned hereby certifies
as follows:



| | 1. |  | I, Armando R. Yañes, am the Chief Financial Officer of Compañía Anónima Nacional Teléfonos de Venezuela (CANTV) (the Company);
| | -- |  | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 2. |  | The Companys Annual Report on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2005, accompanying this Certification, in the form filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (the Report), fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the Exchange Act), as amended; and
| | -- |  | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 3. |  | The information in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| | -- |  | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Date: June 29, 2006



/s/    ARMANDO R. YAÑESName: Armando R. YañesTitle: Chief Financial Officer
Agency rallies to support Navy’s critical part need
 
  By Tim Hoyle, DLA Disposition Services & Dawn Bonsell, DLA Distribution
  Two major subordinate commands of the Defense Logistics Agency worked together quickly when the Navy called for help acquiring critical aviation parts. It was DLA Disposition Services Chief of Staff Pete Foreman who got the call from Donald Larocco, with the Naval Air Systems Command, asking for help getting radar transponders that the Navy needed. The Navy knew that 48 such systems were being turned in by the Air Force to DLA Distribution’s site at Warner Robins, Georgia. A telephone conference between Air Force leaders and staff members at DLA Disposition Services and DLA Distribution helped gather facts and verify that the Air Force had delivered the transponders to DLA Distribution who was preparing them for turn them over to the DLA Disposition Services site at Warner Robins. Paul Haynes Jr., DLA Disposition Services’ area manager, said quick action by the DLA Distribution and DLA Disposition Services team expedited the movement of the 48 transponders units into the DLA Disposition Services inventory on March 21, making them available for reutilization by the Navy. “We got them in on Thursday and had the paperwork done in 24 hours,” Haynes said. “That is not the norm, but we expedited the transaction because of the need.” Three working days later the items arrived at the base Traffic Management Office. Haynes said the items will be shipped to the customer as quickly as possible. Each unit is valued at $60,000 for a total acquisition value of $2.8 million dollars. Kathy Atkins-Nunez, DLA Disposition Services’ South-East Region director, referred to the effort as “a great partnership between Distribution and Disposition to locate mission critical parts.” “It is always a great feeling for our DLA Distribution and Disposition team when you get the call on an emergent requirement, coordinate the items through all of our processes and can turn it around to the customer as quickly as the team did,” said Kent Wheeler, director for DLA Distribution at Warner Robins.  “You cannot ask for a better relationship than the one we have with our DLA Disposition partners.” Haynes said the relationship helps as the two organizations continue to watch for critical parts being turned in that could be used by someone else.
* Pursuant to Local Rule 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 Local Rule 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

__________________ No. 95-40897 (Summary Calendar)

__________________ LARRY D. BONEY, Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus JAMES A. COLLINS, WAYNE SCOTT, LESLIE WOODS, Defendants-Appellees.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas

(USDC No. CA-C-95-28)

- - - - - - - - - - April 2, 1996 Before GARWOOD, WIENER and PARKER, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM * Larry D. Boney appeals the dismissal of his civil rights suit as frivolous. Boney argues that he has been subject to numerous lockdowns without cause and in violation of a previous remedial
court order. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible

error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by thedistrict court. S ee Boney v. Collins , No. CA-C-95-28 (S.D. Tex.

Oct. 12, 1995). AFFIRMED.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Melvin Livingston, Appellant.

[55 NYS3d 7]

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Robert M. Stolz, J.), rendered May 4, 2011, convicting defendant, after a nonjury trial, of attempted petit larceny and attempted possession of stolen property in the fifth degree, and sentencing him to concurrent terms of 45 days, unanimously affirmed.

*449The accusatory instrument was not jurisdictionally defective. Giving the instrument “a fair and not overly restrictive or technical reading” *(People v Casey,*95 NY2d 354, 360 [2000]), we find that the instrument contained nonconclusory factual allegations establishing every element of the offenses *(People v Kalin,*12 NY3d 225, 228-229 [2009]), including intent to steal.

First, the allegation that defendant “attempt [ed] to leave the store in possession of the property and without paying for it” did not, as defendant suggests, require any further explanation, because it was not an allegation that “involves a conclusion . . . that involves the exercise of professional skill or experience” *(People v Jackson,*18 NY3d 738, 746 [2012]). Furthermore, the allegation that defendant concealed store merchandise inside his jacket was similarly nonconclusory. Taken together, these allegations were facially sufficient to support the charged offenses *(see People v Gaye,*54 Misc 3d 141[A], 2017 NY Slip Op 50187[U] [App Term, 1st Dept 2017]).

Contrary to defendant’s argument, the allegation that defendant “concealed” store merchandise was not vitiated by the fact that the store security employee who completed the supporting deposition selected the word “concealed” from a preprinted supported deposition form. The employee made that word part of his own statement by choosing it. In any event, even without the word “concealed,” an allegation that a person placed store merchandise inside his or her jacket makes out a prima facie case, “as a matter of common sense and reasonable pleading” *(People v Davis,*13 NY3d 17, 31 [2009]), that the person exercised dominion and control over the merchandise inconsistent with the continued rights of the owner *(see People v Olivo,*52 NY2d 309, 317-319 [1981]).

Concur—Acosta, J.P., Renwick, Mazzarelli, Gische and Gesmer, JJ.