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

Dentons US LLP

1676 International Drive • Penthouse

McLean, VA 22102-4832

United States

email: mark.mckinnon@dentons.com

T 703.336.8808

F 703.336.8750

Salans FMC SNR 

Denton

McKenna Long

dentons.com

March 10, 2017

U.S. Department of Transportation

Docket Management System

1200 New Jersey Ave., SE

Washington, D.C. 20590

Re: Petition for Seventh Amendment to Exemption 11241 granted to Phoenix Air 

UNMANNED, LLC, (Docket No. FAA–2014–0692)

To Whom it May Concern:

This office represents Phoenix Air UNMANNED, LLC (Phoenix Air) regarding the 

above-referenced Petition for Exemption, which was granted on March 26, 2015. Phoenix Air 

hereby requests an amendment to its Exemption to extend its expiration date from March 31, 

2017 to March 31, 2019 for the reasons set forth below. Phoenix Air does not request any other 

changes to the operational limitations set forth in the Exemption. 

14 C.F.R. Part 107 does not permit the operation of unmanned aircraft weighing in excess 

of 55 pounds. In February of this year, Phoenix Air submitted its Sixth Petition for Amendment 

to Exemption 11241, seeking permission to operate the Vapor 65, which weighs in excess of 55 

pounds. Accordingly, Phoenix Air requests that the amendment be granted to extend the 

duration of the Exemption while the Petition for Sixth Amendment is pending. 

In addition, while Phoenix Air currently performs many of its other operations pursuant 

to 14 C.F.R. Part 107, the Exemption is still necessary to perform certain work. In particular, 

Phoenix Air provides aerial services to motion picture and television production companies. 

Certain portions of the work cannot be performed under Part 107, but can be performed pursuant 

to the Exemption. This is particularly true since, to date, the FAA has only granted one, very 

limited waiver for UAS operations over persons, which requires the use of a tethered aircraft at 

very low altitude. Accordingly, Phoenix Air requests an extension of its Exemption to permit it 

to continue to conduct closed set motion picture and television production.

The requested amendment is in the public interest as UAS offer substantial safety 

benefits for aerial data collection over conventional operations using helicopters or fixed wing 

aircraft. In addition, the extension will permit Phoenix Air to continue to provide services that it 

is currently authorized to perform, providing continued economic benefit to the community with 

no change in the level of safety.
March 10, 2017

Page 2

Salans FMC SNR Denton

McKenna Long

dentons.com

If you have any questions regarding this amendment, or require any additional 

information to process this Petition, please do not hesitate to contact us. 

Very truly yours, 

Mark E. McKinnon

Counsel for Phoenix Air UNMANNED, LLC
UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

In re:

Ana Maria Johnson Case No.: 21-11868-RAM

Chapter 13

Debtor(s).

 / 

NOTICE TO DEBTOR OF DUE DATE FOR FIRST

AND SUBSEQUENT PAYMENTS UNDER FIRST MODIFIED CHAPTER 13 PLAN

COMES NOW, Nowack & Olson, PLLC, Attorneys for the Debtor(s), and gives this 

additional Notice to the Debtor of the Due Date for the first and subsequent payments under the

Modified Chapter 13 Plan as follows:

AMOUNT OF MONTHLY PAYMENTS:

$5,476.50 per month for 1 MONTHS and $653.88 for 51 MONTHS

1st PAYMENT DUE DATE:

The 1st payment UNDER THE MODIFIED PLAN in the amount of $5,476.50 is due to the

Chapter 13 Trustee, NANCY NEIDICH at:

Nancy Neidich, Trustee

POB 2099

Memphis, TN 38101

on 11/26/2021 which is the date of the hearing to modify your plan. 

THE HEARING TO MODIFY YOUR PLAN IS: 

YOU MUST BE CURRENT WITH YOUR PAYMENT BY THIS

DATE OR THE MOTION TO MODIFY WILL BE DENIED, AND

YOUR CASE WILL BE DISMISSED. YOU WILL BE

PREVENTED FROM REFILING ANOTHER BANKRUPTCY

CASE FOR THE NEXT SIX (6) MONTHS AND YOUR

CREDITORS WILL BE ALLOWED TO RESUME ANY

COLLECTION ACTIVITY

Case 21-11868-RAM Doc 67 Filed 10/22/21 Page 1 of 2
IMPORTANT WARNING: REGARDING MODIFIED CHAPTER 13 PLANS

IF THIS NOTICE IS BEING PROVIDED TO YOU AS A RESULT OF A MODIFIED PLAN,

ALL PAYMENTS THAT ARE REQUIRED UNDER THE NEW MODIFIED PLAN MUST BE

CURRENT BEFORE THE HEARING DATE OF THE MOTION TO MODIFY, OR YOUR

CASE WILL BE DISMISSED BY THE BANKRUPTCY COURT. CONTACT OUR OFFICE

IMMEDIATELY UPON RECEIPT OF THIS NOTICE IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.

SUCH PAYMENTS MUST BE MADE BY CASHIERS CHECK OR MONEY ORDER. DO

NOT SEND A PERSONAL CHECK. YOU MUST INCLUDE YOUR CASE NUMBER ON

YOUR PAYMENT. Subsequent payments in the same amount will be due on the same day for

each subsequent month WITHOUT FURTHER NOTICE FROM THE COURT, CHAPTER 13

TRUSTEE, OR COUNSEL.

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing was sent by U.S. Mail or via

CM/ECF to Nancy Neidich, Trustee at POB 279806, Miramar, FL 33027, Office of the U.S. Trustee,

at 51 SW 1st Ave., Miami, FL 33130, and Ana Maria Johnson, Debtor(s), at 7212 SW 149th Ct

Miami, FL 33193 , , 

on October 22, 2021 .

Law Offices of

NOWACK & OLSON, PLLC

Attorney for Debtor(s)

8551 Sunrise Blvd., Suite 208 

Plantation, FL 33322

(305) 698-2265

/s/ Mitchell J. Nowack 

MITCHELL J. NOWACK, ESQ.

Florida Bar Number: 099661

/s/ Christian J. Olson 

CHRISTIAN J. OLSON, ESQ.

Florida Bar Number: 121436

Case 21-11868-RAM Doc 67 Filed 10/22/21 Page 2 of 2
Karluss Thomas 

Senior Director 

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460 

APR Z 6 2015 

Silicones Environmental, Health, and Safety Center 

American Chemistry Cow1cil 

700 2nd Street NE 

Washington, DC 20002 

OFFICE OF CHEMICAL SAFETY 

ANO POLLUTION PREVENTION 

Re: Testing Consent Order for Octamethylcyclotetrasiloxane (D4) (CASRN: 556-67-2) 

Dear Mr. Thomas: 

This letter follows the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's April 2, 2015, letter providing 

comments on and notification that the Study Plan and Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) 

that the Silicones Environmental, Health and Safety Center (SEHSC) submitted on February 2, 

2015, do not fulfill the requirements of the Enforceable Consent Agreement (ECA) for 

Environmental Testing for Octamethylcyclotetrasiloxane (D4 ). EPA' s letter requested that 

SEHSC submit a revised Study Plan and QAPP, a response to EPA's comments, and a plan for 

complying with the terms of the ECA. 

EPA emphasizes that the Signatory Companies have not complied with the terms of the ECA. 

Specifically, with respect to the proposed selection of indirect discharge sites, the ECA specifies 

that all wastewater treatment sites selected for monitoring must be currently processing 

wastewater from one or more industrial sites known to be a D4 processor or formulator as 

documented through industrial user surveys or by other readily available information. As 

previously stated during the April 15, 2015, conference call, EPA is concerned that the indirect 

discharge surveys will not provide definitive documentation that the processing of D4 or the 

formulation of 04 containing products is occurring at the industrial sites. Additional areas of 

non-compliance are described in EPA 's April 2, 2015, letter. 

EPA received SEHSC's updated response-to-comments package on April 20, 2015. While the 

response provides a framework for how SEHSC may address EPA's concerns, EPA will need to 

review the revised Study Plan and QAPP in order to determine whether all comments have been 

adequately addressed. In recognition of the need to resolve outstanding issues in a timely manner 

so that the testing program can commence in accordance with the ECA, EPA requests that 

SEHSC submit a redline version of the Study Plan and QAPP by May 4, 2015. 

EPA looks forward to the scheduled conference call with SEHSC on April 30, 2015, and 

SEHSC's plan for complying with the ECA with respect to the full number of test sites. 

Internet Address (URL) • http.//www epa gov 

Recycled/Recyclable ·Printed with Vegetable Oil Based Inks on 100% Postconsumer. Process Chlorine Free Recycled Paper 
If you have any questions, please contact Heather Njo of my staff at 202-564-2574 or at 

njo.heather@epa.gov. 

Sincerely, 

hlVu<f P:&--

Maria J. Doa, Ph.D. 

Director 

Chemical Control Division
Comment Info: =================

General Comment:FAA-2011-0719; Dir ID 2010-NM-087-AD Service document
Freddie O. FELDER, III, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 5D18-308

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Decision filed June 19, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                                          <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                               3-MOS                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000             DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000             MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                               0                       0
<SECURITIES>                                         0                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0                       0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0                       0
<INVENTORY>                                          0                       0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0                       0
<PP&E>                                               0                       0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                       0                       0
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            1,570                       4
<BONDS>                                              0                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0                       0
<PREFERRED>                                          0                       0
<COMMON>                                           682                     682
<OTHER-SE>                                     (2,252)                   (686)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                         0                       0
<SALES>                                              0                       0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0                       0
<CGS>                                                0                       0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                      477                     462
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0                       0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0                       0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  (477)                   (462)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0                       0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              (477)                   (462)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0                       0
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (477)                   (462)
<EPS-BASIC>                                   (.001)                  (.001)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (.001)                  (.001)





</TABLE>
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-6445

DONALD M. KINCH, Petitioner - Appellant, versus SHERWOOD R. MCCABE, Respondent - Appellee. No. 04-6772

DONALD M. KINCH, Petitioner - Appellant, versus SHERWOOD R. MCCABE, Respondent - Appellee. Appeals from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle, Chief District Judge. (CA-03-600) Submitted: August 26, 2004 Decided: September 1, 2004 Before WIDENER and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.- 2 - Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Donald M. Kinch, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).- 3 - PER CURIAM: Donald M. Kinch seeks to appeal the district court’s orders dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition as untimely and denying a certificate of appealability. We dismiss the appeal in No. 04-6445 for lack of jurisdiction because the notice of appeal was not timely filed and dismiss the appeal in 04-6772 because Kinch does not meet the certificate of appealability requirements. Parties are accorded thirty days after the entry of the district court’s final judgment or order to note an appeal, Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(A), unless the district court extends the appeal period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(5) or reopens the appeal period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(6). This appeal period is “mandatory and jurisdictional.” Browder v. Director, Dep’t of Corr. , 434 U.S. 257, 264 (1978) (quoting United States v. Robinson , 361 U.S. 220, 229 (1960)). The district court’s order was entered on the docket on September 8, 2003. The notice of appeal was signed on February 23, 2004, and filed on February 26, 2004. Because Kinch failed to file a timely notice of appeal or to obtain an extension or reopening of the appeal period, we dismiss the appeal. An appeal may not be taken from the final order in a habeas corpus proceeding unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C.- 4 - § 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that his constitutional claims are debatable and that any dispositive procedural rulings by the district court are also debatable or wrong. SeeMiller-El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336 (2003). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Kinch has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal of the district court’s order denying a certificate of appealability. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
<page>  EXHIBIT 32.02



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 of Morgan Stanley Spectrum
Currency L.P. (the ?Partnership?) on Form 10-Q for the period
ended March 31, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the ?Report?), I, Kevin Perry,
Chief Financial Officer, 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/ Kevin Perry

Name:		Kevin Perry
Title:	Chief Financial Officer

Date:		May 15, 2006
## Breadcrumb

-  Publications 
-  Articles 

#           Review of paleomagnetism      

      July 7, 1960    

This review is an attempt to bring together and discuss relevant information concerning the magnetization of rocks, especially that having paleomagnetic significance. All paleomagnetic measurements available to the authors are here compiled and evaluated, with a key to the summary table and illustrations in English and Russian. The principles upon which the evaluation of paleomagnetic measurements is based are summarized, with special emphasis on statistical methods and on the evidence and tests for magnetic stability and paleomagnetic applicability.

Evaluation of the data summarized leads to the following general conclusions:
                            -  (1) The earth's average magnetic field, throughout Oligocene to Recent time, has very closely approximated that due to a dipole at the center of the earth oriented parallel to the present axis of rotation. 
                            -  (2) Paleomagnetic results for the Mesozoic and early Tertiary might be explained more plausibly by a relatively rapidly changing magnetic field, with or without wandering of the rotational pole, than by large-scale continental drift. 
                            -  (3) The Carboniferous and especially the Permian magnetic fields were relatively very “steady” and were vastly different from the present configuration of the field. 
                            -  (4) The Precambrian magnetic field was different from the present field configuration and, considering the time spanned, was remarkably consistent for all continents. 

## Citation Information
Case 20-13363-PGH    Doc 10-3    Filed 03/19/20    Page 1 of 2

Case 20-13363-PGH    Doc 10-3    Filed 03/19/20    Page 2 of 2
## Breadcrumb

-  Publications 
-  Reports 

#           Thresholds for protecting Pacific Northwest ecosystems from atmospheric deposition of nitrogen: state of knowledge report      

      July 1, 2014    

The National Park Service and U.S. Forest Service manage areas in the states of Idaho, Oregon, and Washington – collectively referred to in this report as the Pacific Northwest - that contain significant natural resources and provide many recreational opportunities.  The agencies are mandated to protect the air quality and air pollution-sensitive resources on these federal lands.  Human activity has greatly increased the amount of nitrogen emitted to the atmosphere, resulting in elevated amounts of nitrogen being deposited in park and forest ecosystems.  There is limited information in the Pacific Northwest about the levels of nitrogen that negatively affect natural systems, i.e., the critical loads.  The National Park Service and U.S. Forest Service, with scientific input from the U.S. Geological Survey, have developed an approach for accumulating additional nitrogen critical loads information in the Pacific Northwest and using the data in planning and regulatory arenas.  As a first step in that process, this report summarizes the current state of knowledge about nitrogen deposition, effects, and critical loads in the region. It also describes ongoing research efforts and identifies and prioritizes additional data needs.

## Citation Information

### Study Area

### Contact

####               Forest and Rangeland Ecosystem Science Center (FRESC) Headquarters          

777 NW 9th StSuite 400Corvallis, OR97330United States

fresc_outreach@usgs.gov

541-750-1030

541-750-1069

### Explore Search

                  - United States
                  - Idaho;Oregon;Washington
                  - Idaho
                  - Oregon
                  - Washington

View All **
<PAGE>


                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.1


                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
                       PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

I, Ronald A. Waldorf, Chief Executive Officer of AcuNetx, Inc. (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 Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of the Company for the quarterly period
ended March 31, 2008 (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 as of
March 31, 2008.

DATE: MAY 15, 2008

                                          /s/ RONALD A. WALDORF
                                          ---------------------
                                              RONALD A. WALDORF
                                              CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
Exhibit 10.2 Change Order to Seismic Services Agreement


Exhibit 10.2









Document Number: TS-MA-GRE-034-01




6 February 2012




Paul Heath

Chief Operations Officer

Great South Land Minerals Limited

Level 3

65 Murray Street

Hobart  TAS  7000







RE: Terrex Change Order Proposal







Dear Paul,




Further to discussions between Malcolm Bendall and Joe Dwyer of our office, this letter is to set out a Change Order Proposal pursuant to Clause 4 of the Seismic Services Agreement dated 20 January 2012.




Following on from your request regarding Terrex’s crew standing down, our proposal is as follows:




·

Terrex will safely store its plant and equipment in Tasmania whilst GSLM finalise permitting.

·

Terrex’s Seismic personnel will be demobilised back to Brisbane – once off fee of $5,000

·

Terrex Spatial surveyors will be demobilised – once off fee of $1,000

·

Status will be reviewed at least weekly – GSLM to provide regular updates of permitting progress.

·

Terrex’s crew will be on stand-down awaiting permitting at a reduced fee of the working rate @. $4,100 per day

·

If requested, Terrex can assist GSLM in their attempt to gain prompt permitting so that the seismic program can commence ASAP.  Terrex would provide the services of an experienced Operations Manager to assist GSLM ($1,200 per day plus expenses).

·

When permits are received Terrex Spatial will remobilise (once off fee of $1,000) followed by Terrex Seismic (once off fee of $5,000)




Please note that all of the points above are in additional to those items listed in Schedule B of the Agreement, and are exclusive of GST.




If this Proposal is acceptable to you, can you please acknowledge by arranging signing below and returning a copy to me at your earliest convenience.




Kind regards,







/s/ Matthew Wright

Matthew Wright

CFO & Company Secretary

Terrex Pty Ltd













A: LEVEL 4, 76 KINGS PARK ROAD, WEST PERTH WA 6005 P: PO BOX 1975, WEST PERTH WA 6872

T: 08 9235 4600 F: 08 9324 3640 E: info@terrexseismi c.com W: www.terrexsei smi c.com

ABN: 41 090 147 274. TERREX PTY. LTD TRADING AS “TERREX SEISMIC”











We accept the Change Order Proposal as detailed above and agree that this document constitutes an amendment to the Seismic Services Agreement between Terrex Pty Ltd and Great South Land Minerals Limited dated 20 January 2012 pursuant to Clause 4 of that Agreement. 




			
	


Hereto signed for and on behalf of Great South Land Minerals Limited ABN 64 088 650 385

	





	 

	 
	 
	 

	 
	 
	 

	 
	 
	 

	 
	 
	 

	Malcolm Bendall, Director

	 
	 

	Signature of Authorised representative

	 
	 

	 
	 
	 

	 
	 
	 

	 
	 
	 

	 
	 
	 

	 
	 
	 

	Malcolm R Bendall

	 
	 

	Name (please print)

	 
	 

	 
	 
	 

	 
	 
	 

	31/01/2012

	 
	 

	Date (please print)

	 
	 














2