alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**EXHIBIT 32.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANTTO RULE 13(a)-14(b) AND 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350**

 

In connection with the Annual Report of Pacific Vegas GlobalStrategies, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-KSB for the fiscal year endedDecember 31, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on thedate hereof (the “Report”), I, Kwan Sin Yee, Chief Executive Officer of theCompany, certify, pursuant to Rule 13a-14(b) and 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:

 

(1)           The Report fullycomplies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934; and

 

(2)           The informationcontained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 
| Date: March 21, 2008 |   |   |   | /s/ KWAN SIN YEE        |
|----------------------|--------|--------|--------|-------------------------|
|                 |   |   |   | Kwan Sin Yee            |
|                 |   |   |   | Chief Executive Officer |

 

----
SAUL EWING ARNSTEIN & LEHR LLP, etc., et al., Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s), v. Gabriel Castillo BOZO, Appellee(s)/Respondent(s),

CASE NO.: 3D18-0353 3D18-0382

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

JULY 27, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Dismissed.
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5465 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

114th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5465

To repeal section 1075 of the Consumer Financial Protection Act of 2010 
    relating to rules for payment card transactions, and for other 
                               purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             June 14, 2016

Mr. Neugebauer introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                    Committee on Financial Services

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To repeal section 1075 of the Consumer Financial Protection Act of 2010 
    relating to rules for payment card transactions, 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. REPEAL OF RULES FOR PAYMENT CARD TRANSACTIONS.

    (a) In General.--Section 1075 of the Consumer Financial Protection 
Act of 2010 is hereby repealed and the provisions of law amended by 
such section are revived or restored as if such section had not been 
enacted.
    (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of contents under section 1(a) 
of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act is 
amended by striking the item relating to section 1075.
                                 <all>
```
Niesha Trearha FITZPATRICK, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 5D17-3024

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Decision filed August 21, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
## Breadcrumb

-  Home 

# Explore Search: Communications Plans

Filters

              - science_education(1)
              - science_science(16)
              - products_data(1)
              - products_publications(15)
              - products_web_tools(1)
              - multimedia_audio(20)
              - multimedia_audio-141766(18)
              - multimedia_audio-141767(2)
              - multimedia_image(2)
              - multimedia_image-141771(2)
              - multimedia_video(135)
              - multimedia_video-149194(103)
              - multimedia_video-149195(14)
              - multimedia_video-149197(8)
              - multimedia_video-149198(1)
              - multimedia_video-149225(1)
              - (-)news_news-149245(1)
              - news_news-149250(1)
              - news_other_news(1)
              - connect_staff_profiles(13)
              - other_basic-42(1)
              - other_basic-43(1)
              - other_basic-45(1)

## By Location

              - alaska(1)

## By Year

State News Release        February 24, 2015        Alaska Climate Science Center Designer to Receive International Vizzie Award
Jennifer DEVENNE, Appellant, v. Walter DEVENNE, Appellee.

Case No. 2D17-1367

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed June 8, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
Sharonda RIVERS, Appellant, v. BRITE HOUSES LLC, Patricia Getford, Appellees.

No. 1D18-2649

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

October 3, 2018

Sharonda Rivers, pro se, Appellant.

Robert W. Bauer and Maria Perez Youngblood of The Law Office of Robert W. Bauer, P.A., Gainesville, for Appellees.

Per Curiam.

*781Upon consideration of Appellant's response to the Court's order of July 3, 2018, the Court has determined that it lacks jurisdiction over this appeal. Appellant seeks review of an order titled Final Order Granting Defendants' Motion for Directed Verdict. The order is neither a final order, nor an appealable non-final order. Although it concludes that Appellant has failed to state a cause of action on claims of breach of contract and fraud, the order directs that the jury be instructed to return a verdict in favor of the defendants on those causes of action. It does not enter judgment or otherwise dispose of the pending action.

Appellees' motion to dismiss, filed on June 27, 2018, is denied.

Wolf, Kelsey, and Jay, JJ., concur.
## Breadcrumb

-  Home 

# Explore Search: Declination

Filters

              - science_science(4)
              - products_publications(91)
              - multimedia_audio(1)
              - multimedia_audio-141766(1)
              - (-)multimedia_video(4)
              - multimedia_video-149194(3)
              - multimedia_video-149225(1)
              - news_news-149245(1)
              - news_news-149246(1)
              - news_news-149248(3)
              - connect_staff_profiles(1)

## By Location

              - alaska(8)
              - arizona(6)
              - arkansas(1)
              - california(26)
              - florida(7)
              - hawaii(11)
              - idaho(2)
              - indiana(1)
              - iowa(1)
              - kansas(1)
              - maine(1)
              - maryland(3)
              - massachusetts(1)
              - michigan(1)
              - minnesota(1)
              - mississippi(2)
              - montana(1)
              - nebraska(1)
              - nevada(2)
              - new mexico(1)
              - north carolina(1)
              - north dakota(1)
              - oklahoma(1)
              - (-)oregon(4)
              - puerto rico(2)
              - south dakota(3)
              - texas(1)
              - utah(2)
              - virginia(3)
              - washington(3)
              - wisconsin(4)
              - wyoming(3)

## By Year

Podcasts        August 16, 2011        A Study in Stream Ecology

Presentations and Events        September 22, 2016        Framework for Evaluating Multi-Species Climate Change Vulnerability

Presentations and Events        March 9, 2015        Climate Vulnerability Assessment for Threatened Bull Trout

Presentations and Events        June 11, 2019        Tribal Resources for Climate Change Vulnerability Assessments
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 13**  **- 6338** 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

– Appellee ,
v. BROOKS THOMAS LACKEY BROWN , Defendant

- Appellant
.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina , at Statesville
. Richard L. Voorhees , District Judge. ( 5:05

- cr - 00237

- RLV

- DCK

- 5; 5:09

- cv 00048

- RLV )

Submitted : July 29, 2013 Decided: August 9, 2013

Before GREGORY, SHEDD, and DUNCAN , Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by un published per curiam opinion
.
Clifford James Barnard, CLIFFORD J. BARNARD, ATTORNEY AT LAW, Boulder, Colorado, for Appellant. Amy Elizabeth Ray, Assistant United States Attorney, Jill Westmoreland Rose, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Asheville, North Carolina; Kevin Zolot, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Brooks Thomas Lackey Brown seeks to appeal the district court’s orde r denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. A. § 2255 ( West Supp. 2013 ) motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (B) (200 6 ). A certificate of appealability will not issue abs ent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (200 6 ). When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the distr ict court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); see Miller

- El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336

- 38 (2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable, and that the motion states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Slack , 529 U.S. at 484

- 85. We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Brown has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal3 contentions are adequately presented in the materials before th is court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
Cu2+

NH3

H3N

NH3

NH3

Cl2

Copper(2+), tetraammine-, dichloride

CASRN 10534-87-9

PMN Substance
D.C., Father of D.C., a Child, Appellant, v. DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILIES, Appellee.

Case No. 5D18-750

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Decision filed October 5, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
## Breadcrumb

-  Home 

# Explore Search: Declination

Filters

              - science_science(6)
              - products_data(1)
              - products_publications(114)
              - multimedia_image(7)
              - multimedia_image-141771(6)
              - (-)multimedia_image-141776(1)
              - multimedia_video(8)
              - multimedia_video-149194(4)
              - multimedia_video-149195(2)
              - multimedia_video-149198(2)
              - news_news-149245(2)
              - news_news-149248(2)
              - connect_staff_profiles(1)

## By Location

              - (-)alaska(1)
              - california(1)

## By Year

Illustrations        September 1, 2022        Role of Diet and Food Intake Affecting Polar Bear Population Dynamics in Southern Beaufort Sea
## Breadcrumb

-  Home 

# Explore Search: Australia

Filters

              - science_education(2)
              - science_science(12)
              - products_data(16)
              - products_maps(2)
              - products_publications(349)
              - products_web_tools(1)
              - multimedia_audio(16)
              - multimedia_audio-141766(14)
              - multimedia_audio-141767(2)
              - multimedia_before_after(4)
              - multimedia_image(115)
              - multimedia_image-141770(1)
              - multimedia_image-141771(92)
              - multimedia_image-141775(1)
              - multimedia_image-141776(1)
              - (-)multimedia_image-204460(20)
              - multimedia_video(47)
              - multimedia_video-149194(27)
              - multimedia_video-149195(16)
              - multimedia_video-149198(2)
              - documents_file(5)
              - documents_file-149220(2)
              - documents_file-149224(3)
              - news_news-149246(1)
              - news_news-149248(3)
              - news_news-149249(3)
              - news_news-149250(2)
              - news_newsletters(1)
              - news_other_news(8)
              - other_basic-42(3)

## By Location

## By Year

Satellite imagery        July 1, 2023        Landsat 9 image of Northeastern Queensland, Australia

Satellite imagery        August 22, 2018        Australia

Satellite imagery        December 12, 2010        Landsat 5 image of Gascoyne, Australia

Satellite imagery        April 8, 2024        Landsat 8 Image of Tiwi Islands

Satellite imagery        December 19, 2014        Australian Iron Ore

Satellite imagery        December 14, 2014        Melted Colors

Satellite imagery        November 18, 2023        Landsat 8 Image of Van Diemen Gulf

Satellite imagery        January 1, 1999        Shoemaker Crater

Satellite imagery        August 5, 2006        Lake Eyre

Satellite imagery        August 22, 2018        MacDonnell Ranges

Satellite imagery        January 5, 2016        Parallel Dunes

Satellite imagery        February 1, 2001        Great Sandy Desert

Satellite imagery        May 1, 1999        Lake Carnegie

Satellite imagery        April 25, 2018        Painting the Desert

Satellite imagery        August 1, 2000        Great Sandy Scars

Satellite imagery        August 22, 2018        Lake Disappointment

Satellite imagery        January 3, 2003        Lake Amadeus

Satellite imagery        January 1, 1999        Europe

Satellite imagery        August 14, 2002        Gosses Bluff

Satellite imagery        August 8, 1999        Great Barrier Reef
Revision 1.16.2009

RECORD OF EX PARTE CONTACT

DOCKET NUMBER: Docket Number FAA-2011-1042

FAA EMPLOYEE CONTACTED: Thomas Thorson, ANM-106B

DATE AND TIME OF CONTACT: February 2, 2012 12:30-1:00 PST

TYPE OF CONTACT: Teleconference

NAMES OF ALL PERSONS INVOLVED IN CONTACT, INCLUDING TITLES AND AFFILIATION:

Thomas Thorson, FAA, Boeing Aviation Safety Oversight Office (BASOO), ANM-106B, Propulsion TPM

Ansel James, FAA, Seattle ACO, ANM-140S, Propulsion Specialist

Mike Dostert, FAA, Transport Standard Staff, ANM-112, Propulsion Specialist

John Ostic, The Boeing Company, Powerplant Installations Engineer

Tim Skilton, The Boeing Company, Powerplant Installations Engineer

Alyson Johnson, The Boeing Company, RA Certification Specialist

Debra Dean, The Boeing Company, RA Project Administrator

TOPIC(S) DISCUSSED: This meeting with Boeing Company personnel was requested by the FAA to discuss 

the Petition for Exemption submitted by the Boeing Company via Boeing Letter number RA-11-04847 on 

9/21/2011. The meeting was requested by the FAA to review the FAA response to the petition as documented 

in FAA Letter from Victor Wicklund, Manager, ANM-112, addressed to Tim Dowling, Boeing RA Program 

Manager, Fleet Support, dated January 20, 2012. The content of the letter was reviewed with the Boeing 

representatives and an opportunity was provided to the Boeing Company to ask any questions in regards to the 

FAA request for further information as documented in the referenced FAA letter. The FAA provided 

clarification of the additional safety concerns addressed in the letter. Details of the in-service event identified as 

COS event 2008-1396 were discussed.

COMMITMENTS MADE BY FAA/DOT PERSONNEL:

None.

Were any documents discussed? (X) YES (attach copies or reference) ( ) No

PREPARED BY: Thomas Thorson DATE: 2/17/2012

THIS FORM IS TO BE PLACED IN THE PUBLIC DOCKET

FOR THE SUBJECT RULEMAKING ACTION.
Kameron DAVIS, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 3D17-2133

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Opinion filed August 15, 2018.

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 196 (Friday, October 9, 1998)]
[Corrections]
[Page 54526]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: X98-31009]


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

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Immigration and Naturalization Service

8 CFR Part 286

[INS No. 1923-98]
RIN 1115-AF26


Technical Change for Submission for Immigration User Fee 
Requirements

Correction

    In rule document 98-25712, beginning on page 51271, in the issue of 
Friday September 25, 1998, in the third column, under Regulatory 
Flexibility Act, in the sixth line, ``not'' should be added after 
``will''.
BILLING CODE 1505-01-D
AAM-12-044-E 

October 31, 2011 

 Exemption No. 10383 

 Regulatory Docket No. FAA-2011-1177 

Mr. Leland T. Andrew 

Brainerd Helicopter Service, Inc. 

P.O. Box 482 

11869 Pepperidge Road 

Brainerd, MN 56401 

Dear Mr. Andrew: 

This letter is to inform you that we have granted your request for exemption. It transmits our 

decision, explains its basis, and gives you the conditions and limitations of the exemption, 

including the date it ends. 

The Basis for Our Decision 

By submission dated October 21, 2011, you petitioned the Federal Aviation Administration 

(FAA) on behalf of Brainerd Helicopter Service, Inc. (Brainerd) for an exemption from part 

120 to allow Brainerd, which is operating under separate parts of Title 14, Code of Federal 

Regulations (14 CFR), to cover its safety-sensitive employees under one testing program. 

The FAA has determined that good cause exists for not publishing a summary of the petition 

in the Federal Register because the requested exemption would not set a precedent, and any 

delay in acting on this petition would be detrimental to Brainerd. 

The FAA has issued a grant of exemption in circumstances similar in all material respects to 

those presented in your petition. In Grant of Exemption No. 9703 (copy enclosed), the FAA 

found that Solid Edge’s § 91.147 air tour operations were closely connected to its part 135 

operations. The FAA also found that combining the petitioner’s two testing programs into one 

would be in the public interest and would maintain an equivalent level of safety to that 

provided by the current regulations. Thus, the FAA concluded it was unnecessary to burden 

the petitioner by requiring it to conduct two separate testing programs. 

Having reviewed your reasons for requesting an exemption, I find that— 
2 

 they are similar in all material respects to relief previously requested in the enclosed Grant 

of Exemption No. 9703; 

 the reasons stated by the FAA for granting the enclosed Grant of Exemption No. 9703 

also apply to the situation you present; and 

 a grant of exemption is in the public interest. 

Our Decision 

Under the authority contained in 49 U.S.C. 40113 and 44701, which the FAA Administrator 

has delegated to me, I hereby grant Brainerd Helicopter Service, Inc. an exemption from part 

120 to the extent necessary to allow Brainerd, which is operating under separate parts of the 

regulations, to cover its safety-sensitive employees under one testing program, subject to the 

conditions and limitations described below. 

Conditions and Limitations 

1. Employees of Brainerd are subject to the drug and alcohol regulations at all times 

while conducting operations under part 135 or part 91. 

2. The drug and alcohol testing program must be implemented under the auspices of 

the Brainerd part 135 operation, not under part 91. 

This exemption terminates on October 31, 2013 unless sooner superseded or rescinded. 

Sincerely,

/s/ 

James R. Fraser, M.D. 

Deputy Federal Air Surgeon 

Enclosure
Karen BRICKNER, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. Randy BROWN, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D18-2652

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

August 13, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Dismissed.
# Petition for

**Exemption East Fountain Enterprises**  **LLC Regarding the Flight of a DJI Phantom**  **Vi sion +** 

**UAS**

**East Fountain Enterprises LLC 20205 Beaver** 

**Dam Rd Lewes, DE 19958** 

**www .EastFountain.com**  **Morgan East Owner/Partner**  **Morgan@EastFountain.com 302** 
**- 3**  **96**
**- 1590**  **Timothy Lafontaine Owner/Partner**  **Tim@EastFountain.com 302** 
**- 344** 
**- 4503** Wepropose to safely operate the DJI Phantom Vi sion + UAS, hereafter referred to

as the “Phantom”, to conduct aerial photography and videography under controlled circum stances f

or homeowners, realtors, home builders, home contractors, and/or home inspectors for real estate marketing and the inspection of home exteriors. Attached is a complete spec Sheet (Spec Sheet.PDF). The Phantom weighs less than 3 lbs, has a max speed of 15 m/ s (33.54 mph), uses GPS and compass navigation (with live readings of airspeed, elevation, and position) to a ground based remote mo nitoring system , and has an electronic power supply . It's operating frequency is 5.728 GHz

- 5.85 GHz with a communication distance of CE Compliance: 400m; FCC Com pliance: 800m

. Regarding safety and “lost

- link”, the Phantom has an automated pilot control system that will maintain its stability and return it to the original launch position safely with a predictable, precoord inated flight maneuver. The Phantom will be flown, in accordance with the AMA, at least 25 feet away from any person or established flight line. Also, only Mor

gan East and Ti mo thy Lafontain e (whom both have over 20 hours of flight time with the Phantom) wi ll be permitted to operate the Phantom. By using the Preflight Guidlines in the DJI Pilot Tr aining Guide http://goo.gl/JsnmEM and the attached AMA Safety Code (AMA

Safety Code.PDF) we are confident in our ability to fly safely during daylight hours with a limitation of no less than 400 ft distance to a cloud ceiling and not within 3 miles of an airport while being confined to our clients property (by permission obtained prior to flight) with a flight ceiling of 200 ft. Wewill also operate as a two man t eam . One spotter and one pilot while maintaining VLOS of the Phantom at all times. Right of way will always be yielded to any manned aircraft that enters shared space. Werequest an exemption to the necessity of a pilot certification due to the constrictio ns of the flight space in use (clients property boundary with a 200ft ceiling)
**Relief is requested from:** 14 CFR Part 21 ss H Airworthiness Certificates 14 CFR Part 36 Noise standards 14 CFR Part 61 Requirement for a Pilot Certificate 14 CFR Part 91.1 19 A ltitude Restrictions 14 CFR Part 91.121 Altimeter Settings 14 CFR Part 91.405 Maintenance Required 14 CFR Part 91.407 Operation After Maintenance 14 CFR Part 91.409 Inspections 14 CFR Part 91.417 Maintenance Records
Jose LOPEZ, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D18-2775

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

October 2, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Dismissed.
# C_2020108EN.01000301.xml

| 1.4.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 108/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

1.4.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 108/3

---

Information communicated by Member States regarding closure of fisheries

(2020/C 108/03)

In accordance with Article 35(3) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009 of 20 November 2009 establishing a Union control system for ensuring compliance with the rules of the common fisheries policy (1), a decision has been taken to close the fishery as set down in the following table:

| Date and time of closure | 1.1.2020 |
| --- | --- |
| Duration | 1.1.2020 – 31.12.2020 |
| Member State | Spain |
| Stock or Group of stocks | WHM/ATLANT |
| Species | White marlin (Tetrapturus albidus) |
| Zone | Atlantic Ocean |
| Type(s) of fishing vessels | — |
| Reference number | 02/TQ123 |

Date and time of closure

1.1.2020

Duration

1.1.2020 – 31.12.2020

Member State

Spain

Stock or Group of stocks

WHM/ATLANT

Species

White marlin (Tetrapturus albidus)

Zone

Atlantic Ocean

Type(s) of fishing vessels

—

Reference number

02/TQ123

---

(1)  OJ L 343, 22.12.2009, p. 1.

---