alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Joseph D. Barbera 

14706 NE Erickson Dr. 

La Center, WA 98629 

Tel: 360 263 5359 

United States Department of Transportation 

Office of Hearings 

Washington, DC 

In the Matter of: Joseph D. Barbera 

FAA Case No. 2013NM090056 

FDMS No. FAA 2013-1083 

Judge Richard Goodwin 

Response to Order to Show Cause (dated 9 September 2014) 

In response to paragraph 1 of the Order 

a) Answer to FAA's complaint -document accompanies this Response 

b) Response to all FAA's motions- documents accompany this Response 

c) All discovery requests received to date have been addressed. Additionally, on 

two separate occasions I asked the Complainant if there was any additional 

information required or if he had any concerns. On neither occasion did he 

request anything additional. 

In response to paragraph 2 of the Order 

It is true that initially I did not respond in a timely manner. This was a layman's error, 

and does not address the heart of the matter. The Complainant goes to great lengths to 

document how I was late in responding, but it should also be noted that it took the 

Complainant 73 days to answer (partially, never fully) my Discovery requests. 

There are issues concerning facts and quality of evidence. These are what are relevant. 

In reality, there is no reason why the Complainant and the Respondent should not be 

able to come to some mutually agreeable solution, avoiding the time and expense of a 

formal hearing. In fact, we, the two parties, were very close to an agreement when I 

1 
offered to meet the Complainant half way. There really is no reason why a settlement 

could not be reached by October l 5

t. A solution is likely only a phone call away. 

If that is not obtainable, then I believe the case should be decided based upon the 

known facts and not because of a procedural issue by a non-professional. 

This has been lingering over my families head for over a full year now. If an 

administrative solution cannot be reached, it is my desire is to proceed to a hearing as 

soon as possible. 

2 
Service List 

Federal Aviation Administration 

Attn: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Wilbur Wright Building - Suite 2W1000 

800 Independence Ave. SW 

Washington D.C. 20591 

David Shayne, Complainant's Counsel 

Northwest Mountain Region, ANM-7 

Federal Aviation Administration 

1601 Lind Ave., SW 

Renton, WA 98057 

The Honorable Richard C. Goodwin, Administrative Law Judge 

Office of Hearings, M-20 

US Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE (Ell-310) 

Washington, DC 20590 

3
EXHIBIT 32.01








CERTIFICATION OF PRESIDENT 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 of Morgan Stanley Smith Barney Charter Graham L.P. (the “Partnership”) on Form   10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Walter Davis, President of Demeter Management LLC, the general partner of the Partnership, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of 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 Partnership.































By:
/s/Walter DavisName:
Walter DavisTitle:
President ofDemeter Management LLC,General Partner of the registrantDate:
August 12, 2010
<PAGE>

                                                                      Exhibit 18

                     [LETTERHEAD OF DANNIBLE & MACKEE, LLP]


                                                          September 10, 2002

                                                          Private & Confidential

Coyne International Enterprises Corp.
140 Cortland Avenue
Syracuse, New York 13221

Gentlemen:

         We are providing this letter to you for inclusion as an exhibit to your
Item 601 of Regulation S-K.

         We have read management's justification for the change in accounting
for capitalizing certain costs related to rental merchandise in-service
contained in the Company's Form 10-Q for the quarter ended July 31, 2002. Based
on our reading of the data and discussions with Company officials about the
business judgment and business planning factors relating to the change, we
believe management's justification to be reasonable. Accordingly (in reliance on
management's determination as regards elements of business judgment and business
planning), we concur that the newly adopted accounting principle described above
is preferable in the Company's circumstances to the method previously applied.

         We have not audited any financial statements of Coyne International
Enterprises Corp. and subsidiaries subsequent to October 31, 2001, nor have we
audited the application of the change in accounting principle disclosed in Form
10-Q of Coyne International Enterprises Corp. and subsidiaries for the three
months ended July 31, 2002; accordingly, our comments are subject to revision on
completion of an audit of the financial statements that include the accounting
change.

                                                          Dannible & McKee, LLP
(1) Adjusting Price $22.88 CWT

(2) Base Price $24.51 CWT

(3) Change from Base Price per CWT (1.63)

(4) Price change per gallon ($0.14)

(Line (3) divide by 11.63 gallons/cwt)

(5) Price change per half gallon ($0.07)

Price change per quart ($0.04) 

Price change per pint ($0.02)

Price change per 14-oz pg. ($0.02)

Price change per 12-oz pg. ($0.01)

Price change per 1/3 qt. (10-oz) ($0.01)

Price change per half pint ($0.01)

(6) Price adjustment per gallon ($0.14)

Price adjustment per half gallon ($0.07)

Price adjustment per quart ($0.04)

Price adjustment per pint ($0.02)

Price change per 14-oz pg. ($0.02)

Price change per 12-oz pg. ($0.01)

Price adjustment per 1/3 qt. (10-oz) ($0.01)

Price adjustment per half pint ($0.01)

NOTE: Numbers in brackets are negative or decreases, all others are positive or increases.

Monthly EPA Calculation for Class I Milk (Clause 52.216-9032 Alt. I)

Based on California Marketing Area Federal Milk Order #51

 Effective Date: Feb. 5th, 2023
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent *

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision **

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

IL/RESEARCH

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

RALPH HOWARD BLAKELY,

 Plaintiff - Appellant,

 v.

HERB SNIVELY, C.U.S.; et al.,

 Defendants - Appellees.

No. 08-35889

D.C. No. 2:07-cv-01803-RAJ

MEMORANDUM *

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Washington

Richard A. Jones, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted December 15, 2009** 

Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, AND CLIFTON, Circuit Judges.

Ralph Howard Blakely, a Washington state prisoner, appeals pro se from the

district court’s summary judgment for defendants in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action

FILED

JAN 12 2010

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
IL/RESEARCH 2

alleging deliberate indifference to his serious medical needs. We have jurisdiction

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo an order granting summary

judgment, Toguchi v. Chung, 391 F.3d 1051, 1056 (9th Cir. 2004), for an abuse of

discretion an order denying discovery under Rule 56(f) of the Federal Rules of

Civil Procedure, Margolis v. Ryan, 140 F.3d 850, 853 (9th Cir. 1998), and for the

proper application of legal principles the denial of a motion for a preliminary

injunction, Earth Island Inst. v. U.S. Forest Serv., 351 F.3d 1291, 1298 (9th Cir.

2003). We affirm.

The district court properly granted summary judgment to defendants because

the evidence showed at most a difference of medical opinion which is insufficient

to show deliberate indifference. See Sanchez v. Vild, 891 F.2d 240, 241-42 (9th

Cir. 1989) (holding that a difference of opinion regarding the best course of

medical treatment does not amount to deliberate indifference). The district court

did not abuse its discretion by denying Blakely’s untimely request for additional

discovery, or a continuance to permit him to conduct discovery, because Blakely

did not show how allowing him additional discovery would have precluded

summary judgment. See Margolis, 140 F.3d at 854 (upholding denial of Rule 56(f)

discovery motion where “appellants failed to identify facts, either discovered or

likely to be discovered, that would support their § 1983 claim”).
IL/RESEARCH 3

Further, the district court did not err when it denied Blakely’s motion for a

preliminary injunction compelling his transport to an outside practitioner. See

Earth Island Inst., 351 F.3d at 1298.

Blakely’s remaining contentions are unpersuasive.

AFFIRMED.
(1) Adjusting Price

Base Skim Milk Price for Class I $16.57 CWT 0.965 $15.9901

Advanced Butterfat Pricing Factor $1.7225 LB 3.5 $6.0288

Class I Price $22.0188

(2) Base Price

Base Skim Milk Price for Class I $15.81 CWT 0.965 $15.2567

Advanced Butterfat Pricing Factor $1.7791 LB 3.5 $6.2269

Class I Price $21.4835

(3) Change from Base Price per CWT $0.5353

(4) Price change per gallon $0.0460

(Line (3) divide by 11.63 gallons/cwt)

(5) Price change per half gallon $0.0230

Price change per quart $0.0115

Price change per pint $0.0058

Price change per 12-oz pg. $0.0041

Price change per 1/3 qt. (10-oz) $0.0035

Price change per half pint $0.0029

(6) Price adjustment per gallon $0.05

Price adjustment per half gallon $0.02

Price adjustment per quart $0.01

Price adjustment per pint $0.01

Price change per 12-oz pg. $0.00

Price adjustment per 1/3 qt. (10-oz) $0.00

Price adjustment per half pint $0.00

Monthly EPA Calculation for Class I Milk (Clause 52.216-9032)

Based on USDA Announcement of Advanced Prices and Pricing Factors

Effective Date: February 2, 2014
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3309 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 3309

 To direct the Secretary of Defense to report on vulnerabilities from 
 sea level rise to certain military installations located outside the 
                       continental United States.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             June 18, 2019

Mr. Brown of Maryland introduced the following bill; which was referred 
                   to the Committee on Armed Services

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To direct the Secretary of Defense to report on vulnerabilities from 
 sea level rise to certain military installations located outside the 
                       continental United States.

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

SECTION 1. REPORT ON VULNERABILITIES FROM SEA LEVEL RISE TO CERTAIN 
              MILITARY INSTALLATIONS LOCATED OUTSIDE THE CONTINENTAL 
              UNITED STATES.

    (a) Report Required.--Not later than one year after the date of the 
enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the 
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of 
Representatives a report on vulnerabilities from sea level rise to 
covered installations located outside of the continental United States.
    (b) Contents.--For each covered installation, the report required 
by subsection (a) shall include the following:
            (1) An analysis of the impacts to the operations, 
        contingency plans, and readiness of such installation from a 
        sea level rise.
            (2) A discussion of mitigation efforts, including dredging, 
        reclaiming land, and island building, that may be necessary due 
        to a sea level rise--
                    (A) to ensure the continued operational viability 
                of such installation; and
                    (B) to increase the resiliency of such 
                installation.
            (3) The estimated costs of the efforts discussed under 
        paragraph (2).
            (4) An identification of alternative locations for the 
        continuance of operations of such installation if such 
        installation is rendered inoperable.
    (c) Form.--The report required under subsection (a) shall be 
submitted in unclassified form, but may contain a classified annex.
    (d) Covered Installation Defined.--In this section, the term 
``covered installation'' means the following military installations:
            (1) Naval Support Facility Diego Garcia.
            (2) Ronald Reagan Ballistic Missile Defense Test Site.
                                 <all>
```
EXHIBIT 23.1

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-157169) pertaining to the Farmer Bros. Co. 2007 Omnibus
Plan of our reports dated September 13, 2010, with respect to the consolidated financial statements of Farmer Bros. Co. and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting of Farmer Bros. Co., included in its Annual Report (Form
10-K) for the year ended June 30, 2010.



|                       
|-----------------------
|/s/ ERNST & YOUNG LLP  
|                       
|Los Angeles, California
|                       
|September 13, 2010
<PAGE>

                                                                EXHIBIT 23.2
                                                                ------------

            INFORMATION REGARDING CONSENT OF ARTHUR ANDERSEN LLP
            ----------------------------------------------------


Section 11(a) of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the "Securities
Act"), provides that if part of a registration statement at the time it
becomes effective contains an untrue statement of a material fact, or omits
a material fact required to be stated therein or necessary to make the
statements therein not misleading, any person acquiring a security pursuant
to such registration statement (unless it is proved that at the time of such
acquisition such person knew of such untruth or omission) may assert a claim
against, among others, an accountant who has consented to be named as having
certified any part of the registration statement or as having prepared any
report for use in connection with the registration statement.


Falcon Products, Inc. ("Falcon") dismissed Arthur Andersen LLP ("Andersen")
as its independent auditors, effective July 24, 2002. For additional
information, see Falcon's Report on Form 8-K dated July 24, 2002. After
reasonable efforts, Falcon has been unable to obtain Andersen's written
consent to the incorporation by reference into Falcon's registration
statements (Nos. 2-98469, 33-15698, 33-38041, 33-46997, 33-46998, 33-58159,
333-18671, 333-60735, 333-83207 and 333-57988) (collectively the
"Registration Statements") of Andersen's audit report with respect to
Falcon's consolidated financial statements as of November 3, 2001 and for
the two years in the period then ended. Under these circumstances, Rule 437a
under the Securities Act permits Falcon to file this Annual Report on Form
10-K, which is incorporated by reference into the Registration Statements,
without a written consent from Andersen. As a result, with respect to
transactions in Falcon securities pursuant to the Registration Statements
that occur subsequent to the date this Annual Report on Form 10-K is filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission, Andersen will not have any
liability under Section 11(a) of the Securities Act for any untrue
statements of a material fact contained in the financial statements audited
by Andersen or any omissions of a material fact required to be stated
therein. Accordingly, you would be unable to assert a claim against Andersen
under Section 11(a) of the Securities Act.
ex10a.htm














Exhibit 10(a)

















Consent of Ernst & Young LLP, Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm












We consent to the reference to our firm under the caption “Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm” in Post-Effective Amendment No. 48 to the Registration Statement (Form N-4 No. 333-61554) pertaining to Lincoln Life Variable Annuity Account N, which is incorporated by reference into Post-Effective Amendment No. 51, and to the use therein of our reports dated (a) March 30, 2012, with respect to the consolidated financial statements of The Lincoln National Life Insurance Company and (b) March 30, 2012, with respect to the financial statements of Lincoln Life Variable Annuity Account N.







/s/ Ernst & Young LLP






Philadelphia, Pennsylvania


March 30, 2012
Exhibit 10.9


 


Amendment No. 5 To Employment Agreement


Amendment No. 5, dated
as of December 2, 2011, by and between The Berkshire Bank, a New York banking corporation ("Employer"), and David Lukens
("Employee"), to the Agreement, dated as of January 1, 2001, between Employer and Employee (the "Employment Agreement").


 


WITNESSETH:


 


WHEREAS, Employer and
Employee entered into the Employment Agreement; and


 


WHEREAS, Employer and
Employee wish the amend the terms of the Employment Agreement with respect to the term thereof.


 


NOW, THEREFORE, in
consideration of the covenants herein contained, the parties hereto hereby agree as follows:


 


1.           Paragraph 3 of the Employment
Agreement shall be amended to read in its entirety as follows:


 


		"3.	Term of Employment. The employment by Employer of
Employee pursuant hereto shall commence as of the date hereof and, subject to the provisions of paragraph 4 hereof, shall terminate
on June 30, 2013; provided, however, that Employee's employment hereunder shall be automatically renewed for up to three additional
periods of one year each unless Employee or Employer notifies the other, not less than 60 days nor more than 90 days prior to
the expiration of Employee's then current employment period, that he or it elects not to extend Employee's employment hereunder
beyond the expiration date of the then current employment period."



  


2.           Except as otherwise
amended hereby, the Employment Agreement shall continue in full force and effect unamended from and after the date hereof.


 


IN WITNESS WHEREOF,
this Amendment No. 5 has been executed and delivered by the parties hereto as of the date first above written.


 


	 	THE BERKSHIRE BANK
	 	 
	 	By:	/s/ Moses Krausz
	 	 	President and CEO
	 	 	 
	 	 	/s/ David Lukens
No. 11-6078.

#### Lena Michelle Miniard, Petitioner v. Supreme Court of Ohio, et al.

565 U.S. 984, 132 S. Ct. 509,

181 L. Ed. 2d 359,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 7744.

October 31, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit denied.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A. 

SUCCESSOR BY MERGER TO 

WACHOVIA BANK, N.A.

v.

PATRICK F. COSTANTINO, A/K/A 

PASQUALE F. COSTANTINO, A/KA/ 

PATRICK COSTANTINO, KAREN E. 

COSTANTINO, A/K/A KAREN ANN 

KARBOSKI AND THE UNITED STATES 

OF AMERICA

PETITION OF: PATRICK F. 

COSTANTINO, A/K/A PASQUALE F. 

COSTANTINO, A/KA/ PATRICK 

COSTANTINO

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 296 MAL 2017

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from 

the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 15th day of September, 2017, the Petition for Allowance of 

Appeal is DENIED.
No. 10-10713.

#### Charles Sanchez, Petitioner v. Lupe Aldrich, et al.

565 U.S. 845, 132 S. Ct. 162,

181 L. Ed. 2d 76,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 6110,

October 3, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeals of Colorado denied.
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 148 (Monday, August 3, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Page 41271]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-20537]



[[Page 41271]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration


Notice of Meeting

    Pursuant to Public Law 92-463, notice is hereby given of the 
following meeting of the SAMHSA Special Emphasis Panel II in August 
1998.
    A summary of the meeting may be obtained from: Ms. Dee Herman, 
Committee Management Liaison, SAMHSA, Office of Program Planning and 
Coordination (OPPC), Division of Extramural Activities, Policy, and 
Review, 5600 Fishers Lane, Room 17-89, Rockville, Maryland 20857. 
Telephone: (301) 443-7390.
    Substantive program information may be obtained from the individual 
named as Contact for the meeting listed below.
    The meeting will include the review, discussion and evaluation of 
individual contract proposals. These discussions could reveal personal 
information concerning individuals associated with the proposals and 
confidential and financial information about an individual's proposal. 
The discussion may also reveal information about procurement activities 
exempt from disclosure by statute and trade secrets and commercial or 
financial information obtained from a person and privileged and 
confidential. Accordingly, the meeting is concerned with matters exempt 
from mandatory disclosure in Title 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(3), (4), and (6) 
and 5 U.S.C. App. 2, Sec. 10(d).

    Committee Name: SAMHSA Special Emphasis Panel II.
    Meeting Date: August 10, 1998.
    Place: Holiday Inn--Chevy Chase 5520 Wisconsin Avenue, Chevy 
Chase, MD 20815.
    Closed: August 10, 1998 9:00 a.m.-adjournment.
    Contact: Constance M. Burtoff, Room 17-89, Parklawn Building, 
Telephone: (301) 443-8682 and FAX: (301) 443-3437.

    This notice is being published less than 15 days prior to the 
meeting due to the urgent need to meet timing limitations imposed by 
the review and funding cycle.

    Dated: July 28, 1998.
Jeri Lipov,
Committee Management Officer, Substance Abuse and Mental Health 
Services Administration.
[FR Doc. 98-20537 Filed 7-31-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4162-20-P
<page> EXHIBIT 32.01

CERTIFICATION OF PRESIDENT 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 of Morgan Stanley Charter
WCM L.P. (the "Partnership") on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended
March 31, 2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Walter Davis,
President of Demeter Management Corporation, the general partner
of the Partnership, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that, to the best of 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 Partnership.









By:   /s/ Walter Davis

Name:		Walter Davis
Title:	President of Demeter Management Corporation,
			the general partner of the Partnership

Date:		May 15, 2008