alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
August 8, 2016

Mr. Michael Mendez Flight Operations Director

Area

- I Incorporated
1590 North Roberts Road
Suite 102

Kennesaw

, GA 30144

Re: FAA

– 2015

– 3039

Dear Mr. Mendez :

This letter is to provide notification that we have reviewed your petition for exemption, and have determined that we will continue to process your petition.

As referenced in the June 22, 2016, letter posted to your docket at www.regulations.gov

, we are reviewing pending Section 333 petitions to determine if the recently

- issued regulation, Operation and Certification of Small Unmanned Aircraft Systems, Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 107 ( www.faa.gov/uas ) will satisfy your request

. We have determined that

y our request requires further regulatory relief (Tier 3), and we will continue working on your petition for exemption

.

We have found that your petition, if granted, would set a precedent. Therefore, we will publish a summary of your petition in the Federal Register for public comments , if we have not done so already.

We will advise you of the agency’s final decision on your petition as soon as possible. If you have any questions regarding your petition, please contact me at 333exemptions@faa.gov

.

Sincerely,
/s/
Brenda Robeson Program A nalyst
No. 09-680.

#### Arkansas, Petitioner v. Kenneth Ray Osburn.

559 U.S. 938, 130 S. Ct. 1522,

176 L. Ed. 2d 113,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 1101.

February 22, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Arkansas denied.

Same case below, 2009 Ark. 390, 326 S.W.3d 771.
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 149 (Tuesday, August 4, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Page 41609]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-20947]


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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION


Sunshine Act Meeting

FEDERAl REGISTER CITATION OF PREVIOUS ANNOUNCEMENT: [63 FR 39916, July 
24, 1998]

STATUS: Closed Meeting.

PLACE: 450 Fifth Street, N.W., Washington, D.C.

DATE PREVIOUSLY ANNOUNCED: July 24, 1998.

CHANGE IN THE MEETING: Cancellation of Meeting.
    The closed meeting scheduled for Friday, July 31, 1998, at 10:00 
a.m., has been cancelled.
    At times, changes in Commission priorities require alterations in 
the scheduling of meeting items. For further information and to 
ascertain what, if any, matters have been added, deleted or postponed, 
please contact: The Office of the Secretary (202) 942-7070.

    Dated: July 31, 1998.
Margaret H. McFarland,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 98-20947 Filed 7-31-98; 3:47 pm]
BILLING CODE 8010-01-M
<PAGE>   1



                                                                      EXHIBIT 13

   INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS' REPORT


   To the Board of Directors and Shareholders of
   Anthony & Sylvan Pools Corporation and Subsidiary
   Mayfield Village, Ohio


   We have reviewed the accompanying condensed consolidated balance sheet of
   Anthony & Sylvan Pools Corporation and Subsidiary (the "Company") as of
   September 30, 1999, and the related condensed consolidated statements of
   operations for the three-month and nine-month periods ended September 30,
   1999 and 1998, and it's cash flows for the nine-month periods ended September
   30, 1999 and 1998. These financial statements are the responsibility of the
   Company's management.

   We conducted our reviews in accordance with standards established by the
   American Institute of Certified Public Accountants. A review of interim
   financial information consists principally of applying analytical procedures
   to financial data and making inquiries of persons responsible for financial
   and accounting matters. It is substantially less in scope than an audit
   conducted in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards, the
   objective of which is the expression of an opinion regarding the financial
   statements taken as a whole. Accordingly, we do not express such an opinion.

   Based on our reviews, we are not aware of any material modifications that
   should be made to such condensed consolidated financial statements for them
   to be in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles.

   We have previously audited, in accordance with generally accepted auditing
   standards, the balance sheet of the Company as of December 31, 1998, and the
   related statements of operations, shareholders' equity, and cash flows for
   the year then ended (not presented herein) and in our report dated February
   19, 1999, we expressed an unqualified opinion on those financial statements.
   In our opinion, the information set forth in the accompanying condensed
   consolidated balance sheet as of December 31, 1998 is fairly stated, in all
   material respects, in relation to the balance sheet from which it has been
   derived.


   DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP

   Cleveland, Ohio
   November 11, 1999





                                      15
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING

MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

OF FLORIDA

SECOND DISTRICT

DAVID A. CANADY, )

)

Appellant, )

)

v. ) Case No. 2D18-1088

)

STATE OF FLORIDA, )

)

Appellee. )

___________________________________)

Opinion filed September 26, 2018.

Appeal pursuant to Fla. R. App. P.

9.141(b)(2) from the Circuit Court 

for Hillsborough County; Barbara Twine 

Thomas, Judge.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. See Carbajal v. State, 75 So. 3d 258 (Fla. 2011); State v. King, 

426 So. 2d 12 (Fla. 1982); McDonald v. State, 133 So. 3d 530 (Fla. 2d DCA 2013); 

McKenzie v. State, 31 So. 3d 275 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010); Hughes v. State, 22 So. 3d 132 

(Fla. 2d DCA 2009); Shortridge v. State, 884 So. 2d 321 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004); Brown v. 

State, 827 So. 2d 1054 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002); Desmond v. State, 576 So. 2d 743 (Fla. 2d 

DCA 1991); Budd v. State, 477 So. 2d 52 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985); McMillan v. State, 832 

So. 2d 946 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002); Hart v. State, 761 So. 2d 334 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998).

SILBERMAN, BADALAMENTI, and ROTHSTEIN-YOUAKIM, JJ., Concur.
# C_2016338EN.01000801.xml

| 15.9.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 338/8 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.9.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 338/8

---

CALL FOR THE SUBMISSION OF CLAIMS — DEADLINES

(2016/C 338/10)

By means of a judgment issued at 11.14 a.m. on 15 June 2016 by Ghent Commercial Court (Ghent Division, Belgium), bankruptcy was declared in respect of:

NV OPTIMA BANK: registered office at 9000 Ghent (Belgium), Keizer Karelstraat 75; business registration number 0445.21 0.006 (bank/credit institution).

Bankruptcy judges: Mr Hugo VAN HOECKE and Ms Ann DE CAUSMAECKER.

Bankruptcy judges

Date on which payments suspended: 14 June 2016.

14 June 2016

Claims to be submitted to: Registry of the Ghent Commercial Court (Ghent Division), Opgeëistenlaan 401/E, 9000 Ghent (Belgium).

The right to have a claim accepted expires one year after the date on which the judgment declaring bankruptcy was issued, except in the case of a claim established in an intervention or indemnification procedure pursued or instigated during liquidation. The right to have a claim accepted during liquidation ordered by a court other than the court that declared the bankruptcy expires six months after the date on which the final judgment acquires the force of res judicata.

res judicata.

(see Article 72 of the Bankruptcy Act)

First report examining the claims submitted to be lodged at the Registry on: 6 September 2016.

6 September 2016

Persons who have personally stood surety free of charge for the bankrupt entity (such as persons acting as guarantors) may notify the Registry of this fact (Article 72a and Article 72b of the Bankruptcy Act).

Liquidators: Mr Geert DEFREYNE (lawyer; address: 9000 Ghent (Belgium), Kortrijksesteenweg 361), Mr Matthias GESQUIERE (lawyer; address: 9000 Ghent (Belgium), Rijsenbergstraat 148) and Mr Hans DE MEYER (lawyer; address: 9000 Ghent (Belgium), Coupure 373).

Liquidators

Internet: www.faillissementoptimabank.eu

---
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<MULTIPLIER>                  1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                     SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                                12,531
<SECURITIES>                                               0
<RECEIVABLES>                                          7,332
<ALLOWANCES>                                           1,012
<INVENTORY>                                                0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                           0
<PP&E>                                             3,427,710
<DEPRECIATION>                                       156,867
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                     3,424,899
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                      0
<BONDS>                                            1,406,039
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                      0
<PREFERRED>                                                0
<COMMON>                                                   0
<OTHER-SE>                                         1,912,051
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                       3,424,899
<SALES>                                                    0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     358,758
<CGS>                                                      0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        164,797
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                           0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                           0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                    64,146
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      111,107
<INCOME-TAX>                                               0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  111,107
<DISCONTINUED>                                             0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                        2,670
<CHANGES>                                                  0
<NET-INCOME>                                         108,437
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                           1.54
<EPS-DILUTED>                                           1.53
                                                 


</TABLE>
# Safety **Protocols and Checklists** 

**The primary objective of these protocols are to ensure the safety of any individual, structure, or craft on the ground, or anywhere in National Air Space. All FAA rules and guidelines must be strictly**  **adhered to ,**  **as well as all of the operational recommendations of the manufacturer.** 
A.) Pre

- Flight Scene Size up:

Date:_________________________________________________________________ Location:______________________________________________________________ Weather:_______________

_______________________________________________ Proximity to Airport:_____________________________________________________ Airport Contacted □ Yes □ No Date:_____________ Time:______________ Contact Name:_________________________ Conta ct Telephone:_____________________ Nearest Congested Area:__________________________________________________

Approximate Takeoff Time Approximate Landing Time Estimated Elevation Safety Concerns at location

Additional Comments

Pilot in Command:_____________________________________________________ Visual Observer:_______________________

________________________________B.) Checklists : 

### Pre **- Flight Hardware Check:**  **Batteries** Okay Problem Securely inserted Inspire 1 battery (Above 80%) Ground Station battery Remote Control battery **Inspire 1 Platform** All screws and bolts tight Center of gravity

- Correct All wires

- connected and secure Landing gear

- secure and tight

**Propellers** Aligned and Balanced Secured in correct position No Frost or Ice No Damage **Gimbal and Camera** Lens cap removed Proper filter applied Horizontal calibration **Complete Compass Calibration** Additional Comments

**Pre -**  **Flight Setup Ground Station**  Okay Problem Latest Firmware Installed No Fly Zones Loaded Maps loaded Video and Data Links Altitude verified (AGL) **Inspire 1 Platform** GPS lock (6 satellites or more) GPS mode active IMU calibration Home point set

**Location** At least 5 miles from airport If less, was airport contacted? Area inspected for hazards Additional Comments**Post -**  **Flight Checklist**

**Inspire 1 Platform** Okay Problem All screws and bolts tight Center of gravity

- Correct All wires

- connected and secure Landing gear

- secure and tight

**Propellers** Aligned and Balanced Disconnected No Damage **Gimbal and Camera** Camera lens okay Lens Cap reapplied Gimbal/ camera disconnected **Additional Comments**
No. 11-7067.

#### Harry Edmond Reaves, Petitioner v. Executive New York State Office of Family and Children Services, et al.

565 U.S. 1122, 132 S. Ct. 1024,

181 L. Ed. 2d 755,

2012 U.S. LEXIS 68.

January 9, 2012.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit denied.
EXHIBIT 10.39

 

TITAN MACHINERY INC.

COMPENSATION ARRANGEMENTS FOR EXECUTIVE OFFICERS

FOR FISCAL YEAR 2013

 

The Titan Machinery Inc. Board of Directors approved the 2013 fiscal year base salaries for the executive officers as set forth below.

 

	
 
    	
 
    	
2013 Annual
    	
 
    
	
Executive Officer and Title
    	
 
    	
Base Salary
    	
 
    
	
David J. Meyer
    	
 
    	
$
    	
400,000
    	
 
    
	
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
    	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    
	
Peter J. Christianson
    	
 
    	
$
    	
400,000
    	
 
    
	
President and Chief Operating Officer
    	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    
	
Mark P. Kalvoda
    	
 
    	
$
    	
225,000
    	
 
    
	
Chief Financial Officer
No. 09-7961.

#### In re Theodore Wagner, Petitioner.

559 U.S. 969, 130 S. Ct. 1731,

176 L. Ed. 2d 178,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 2083.

March 1, 2010.

Motion of petitioner for reconsideration of order denying leave to proceed in forma pauperis denied.
No. 11-7024.

#### Rickie A. Martinez, Jr., Petitioner v. Anthony Hedgpeth, Warden.

565 U.S. 1121, 132 S. Ct. 1020,

181 L. Ed. 2d 753,

2012 U.S. LEXIS 337.

January 9, 2012.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

RUNXIAO ZHANG,

Petitioner,

v.

WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General,

Respondent. No. 15

- 70267

Agency No. A089

- 976

- 758

MEMORANDUM *

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted July 20 , 2020 * *

Before: THOMAS, Chief Judge, HAWKINS and McKEOWN, Circuit Judges.

Runxiao Zhang, a native and citizen of China

, petitions pro se for review of

the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing h er appeal from an

immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying h er application s for asylum

,

withholding of removal

, and protection under the Convention Against Torture

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

exce pt as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36

- 3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). 

# FILED

JUL 20 2020

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS2 15

- 70267

(“CAT”) . We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial

evidence the agency’s factual findings, applying the standards governing adverse

credibility determinations under the REAL ID Act. Shrestha v. Holder , 590 F.3d

1034, 1039

- 40 (9th Cir. 2010). We deny the petition for review.

Substantial evidence supports the agency’s adverse credibility determination

based on inconsistencies in Zhang’s testimony regarding her husband’s

employment. Id. at 104 4 ( adverse credibility finding must be based on the totality

of t he circumstances ) ; Jiang v. Holder , 754 F.3d 733, 738

- 40 (9th Cir. 2014)

(s ubstantial evidence review is a highly deferential standard that requires

upholding the adverse credibility finding so long as even one basis is supported by

substantial evidence ). Zhang’s explanations do not compel a contrary conclusion.

See Zamanov v. Holder , 649 F.3d 969, 974 (9th Cir. 2011) ( agency not required to

accept explanations for inconsistencies). Further, she failed to produce reliable

corroborating evidence of the DV D that was central to her claim. I n the absence of

credible testimony, Zhang’s asylum and withholding of removal claims fail. 1 See

Farah v. Ashcroft , 348 F.3d 1153, 1156 (9th Cir. 2003).

S ubstantial evidence also supports the agency’s denial of Zhang’s CAT

claim because it was based on the same evidence found not credible, and Zhang

1 Additionally, the two witnesses, who could not remember t he name of the church they allegedly attended with Zhang

, f ailed to corroborate and bolster Zhang’s

claims for relief.3 15

- 70267

does not point to any other evidence in the record that compels the conclusion that

it is more likely than not she would be tortured by or with the consent or

acquiescence of the government if returned to China

. See Shrestha , 590 F.3d at

1048

- 49.

PETITION DENIED.
No. 09-8687.

#### Elias Sandoval-Rojas, Petitioner v. United States.

559 U.S. 984, 130 S. Ct. 1717,

176 L. Ed. 2d 200,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 1967.

March 1, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.

Same case below, 349 Fed. Appx. 937.
**Exhibit 31.1**
**CERTIFICATIONS***
I, Michael D. Lohner, certify that:
1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Home Interiors &Gifts, Inc. (the “Registrant”); 2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untruestatement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary tomake the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which suchstatements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered bythis quarterly report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this quarterly report, fairly present in allmaterial respects the financial condition, results of operations and cashflows of the Registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisquarterly report; 4. The Registrant’s other certifying officers and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (asdefined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15e and 15d-15e) for the Registrant andhave:
a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused suchdisclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision,to ensure that material information relating to the Registrant,including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by otherswithin those entities, particularly during the period in which thisquarterly report is being prepared; b) evaluated the effectiveness of the Registrant’s disclosure controlsand procedures and presented in this quarterly report our conclusionsabout the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as ofthe end of the period covered by this quarterly report based on suchevaluation; c) disclosed in this quarterly report any change in the Registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting that occurred during theRegistrant’s most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, oris reasonably likely to affect, the Registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting; and
5. The Registrant’s other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based onour most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting,to the Registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the Registrant’sboard of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):
a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design oroperation of internal control over financial reporting which arereasonably likely to adversely affect the Registrant’s ability torecord, process, summarize and report financial information; and b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or otheremployees who have a significant role in the Registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting.
Date: November 15, 2004     /s/ MICHAEL D. LOHNER  Michael D. Lohner President and Chief Executive Officer
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Commerce

###### International Trade Administration

Pursuant to Section 6(c) of the Educational, Scientific and Cultural Materials Importation Act of 1966 (Pub. L. 89-651, as amended by Pub. L. 106-36; 80 Stat. 897; 15 CFR part 301), we invite comments on the question of whether instruments of equivalent scientific value, for the purposes for which the instruments shown below are intended to be used, are being manufactured in the United States.

Comments must comply with 15 CFR 301.5(a)(3) and (4) of the regulations and be postmarked on or before March 23, 2009. Address written comments to Statutory Import Programs Staff, Room 3720, U.S. Department of Commerce, Washington, D.C. 20230. Applications may be examined between 8:30 A.M. and 5:00 P.M. at the U.S. Department of Commerce in Room 3720.

*Docket Number: 08-061.*                     Applicant: California Association for Research in Astronomy dba W.M. Keck Observatory, 65-1120 Mamalahoa Highway, Kamuela, HI 96743. Instrument: Laser Launch Telescope Assembly (LTA). Manufacturer: Galileo Avionica, Italy. Intended Use: The LTA will be used as part of a Laser Guide Star Adaptive Optics System, which will measure and correct for the turbulence in the earth's atmosphere that causes a blurring of images or the “twinkling” of stars as viewed at nighttime. The LTA will act as a projection system to launch a laser beam onto a layer of sodium atoms in the mesosphere, around 90 km above the earth's surface, to provide a high quality “artificial star” in the atmosphere that will be used as a reference in measuring and correcting for the blurring effect. Justification for Duty-Free Entry: No US-manufactured instruments in the same general category as the foreign instrument for the intended use. Application accepted by Commissioner of Customs: January 6, 2009.                

February 25, 2009.

Chris Cassel,

Acting Director, IA Subsidies Enforcement Office.

[FR Doc. E9-4468 Filed 3-2-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S
No. 09-909.

#### Kevin Davis, et al., Petitioners v. United States.

559 U.S. 1008, 130 S. Ct. 1906,

176 L. Ed. 2d 367,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 2617.

March 22, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.

Same case below, 597 F.3d 646.
No. 09-6078.

#### GwanJun Kim, Petitioner v. Progressive Express Insurance Company, et al.

559 U.S. 964, 130 S. Ct. 1572,

176 L. Ed. 2d 155,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 1058.

February 22, 2010.

Petition for rehearing denied.

Former decision, 558 U.S. 1078, 130 S. Ct. 796, 175 L. Ed. 2d 562, 2009 U.S. LEXIS 8933.