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

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5371 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 5371

 To authorize grantees of Department of Justice grants to set up task 
    forces on policing in local communities, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            December 9, 2019

  Ms. Norton introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                       Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To authorize grantees of Department of Justice grants to set up task 
    forces on policing in local communities, 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. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Local Task Forces on 21st Century 
Policing Act of 2019''.

SEC. 2. USE OF FUNDS TO ESTABLISH TASK FORCES.

    Section 501(a)(1) of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act 
of 1968 (34 U.S.C. 10152(a)(1)) is amended by adding at the end the 
following:
                    ``(I) The establishment of a task force, composed 
                of individuals with relevant experience or subject-
                matter expertise in law enforcement, civil rights, and 
                civil liberties, which shall identify the best ways to 
                create an effective partnership between law enforcement 
                officers of a unit of local government and the 
                community those officers serve that reduces crime and 
                increases trust.''.
                                 <all>
```
###### Editorial Note on Part 478

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 478 appear by T.D. ATF-411, 64 FR 17291, Apr. 9, 1999, T.D. ATF-487, 68 FR 3750, Jan. 24, 2003, and ATF-11F, 73 FR 57240, Oct. 2, 2008.

#### § 478.38 Transportation of firearms.

Notwithstanding any other provision of any law or any rule or regulation of a State or any political subdivision thereof, any person who is not otherwise prohibited by this chapter from transporting, shipping, or receiving a firearm shall be entitled to transport a firearm for any lawful purpose from any place where such person may lawfully possess and carry such firearm to any other place where such person may lawfully possess and carry such firearm if, during such transportation the firearm is unloaded, and neither the firearm nor any ammunition being transported is readily accessible or is directly accessible from the passenger compartment of such transporting vehicle: *Provided,* That in the case of a vehicle without a compartment separate from the driver's compartment the firearm or ammunition shall be contained in a locked container other than the glove compartment or console.

[T.D. ATF-270, 53 FR 10494, Mar. 31, 1988]
#### § 5.27 Presenting certificates of label approval (COLAs) to Government officials.

A certificate holder must present the original or a paper or electronic copy of the appropriate certificate of label approval (COLA) upon the request of any duly authorized representative of the United States Government.
##### 



EXHIBIT 32 CERTIFICATION OF PERIODIC FINANCIAL REPORT BY THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 Solely for the purposes of complying with 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, we, the undersigned Chief Executive Officer and
Chief Financial Officer of Save the World Air, Inc. (the Company), hereby certify, based on our
knowledge, that the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of the Company for the quarter ended September
30, 2004 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. Date: December 3, 2004
    /s/ EDWARD L. MASRYEdward L. MasryChief Executive OfficerDate: December 3, 2004
    /s/ EUGENE EICHLEREugene EichlerChief Financial Officer
EXHIBIT 32

McDATA Corporation

Certification

Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

(Subsections
(a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code)

Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code), each of the undersigned officers of McDATA Corporation, a Delaware corporation (the Company), does hereby certify, to such
officers knowledge, that:

The Companys Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended October 31, 2006 (the
Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition
and results of operations of the Company.



|                         |  |                                                                
|------------------------ |  | ---------------------------------------------------------------
|Dated: December 11, 2006 |  | /s/ JOHN A. KELLEY, JR.                                        
|                         |  | John A. Kelley, Jr.                                            
|                         |  | Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer                
|                         | 
|Dated: December 11, 2006 |  | /s/ SCOTT BERMAN                                               
|                         |  | Scott Berman                                                   
|                         |  | Executive Vice President of Finance and Chief
Financial Officer
-84 -82 -80 -78 -76 -74

36 38 40 

### ★
▲ ▲ ▲ ▲



### ★ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ 500 1000 1500 1000 18 12 06 00 06/01 

### NOAA HYSPLIT MODEL 

## Backward trajectory ending at 2300 UTC 01 Jun 06

EDAS Meteorological DataSource★at 38.86 N 77.06 WMeters AGL
###### Editorial Note on Part 46

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 46 appear by T.D. ATF-457, 66 FR 32220, 32221, June 14, 2001.

#### § 46.14 Termination of liability.

Bonds on TTB Form 5620.10 will be terminated by the appropriate TTB officer on receipt of satisfactory evidence that the person giving the bond has disposed of the articles covered by the bond and that he bore the ultimate burden of the amount claimed and that no understanding or agreement exists whereby he will be relieved of such burden or shift such burden to another person.

[T.D. 6395, 24 FR 599, Jan. 28, 1959. Redesignated at 40 FR 16835, Apr. 15, 1975, as amended by T.D. ATF-472, 67 FR 8880, Feb. 27, 2002]
#### McDowell’s Executors *vs.*Fisher and wife.

Bill to foreclose a mortgage given as security for money that might be advanced, dismissed; no money having been advanced under the arrangement from which it originated.

*94On final hearing on pleadings and proofs.

*Mr. 8. M. Schandk,*for complainants.

*Mr. James Wilson,*for defendants.

The *Chancellor.*

This is a suit to foreclose a mortgage given by the defendants to George McDowell, dated May 22d, 1868, on land in Middlesex, to secure the payment (according to its terms) of $3000, on or before the 1st of April, 1869, with interest.

McDowell died in 1872. The complainants, his executors, filed the bill in 1873, alleging that the mortgage was given to secure an indebtedness of $3000 due from Fisher to McDowell when the mortgage was executed. The answer, which, according to the requirement of the bill in that respect, is under oath, states that the mortgage was made merely as security for advances of money which Fisher and McDowell contemplated that the latter, who was Fisher’s father-in-law, might thereafter make to him, should it prove to be necessary, to aid him in extricating himself from certain pecuniary difficulties in which he was then involved, through making or endorsing notes for his brother-in-law’s accommodation. The proof is clear that such was the real character of the instrument, and that no money was ever advanced upon it under the arrangement from which it originated. The testator ought to have given it up to be canceled. Only a few months before his death, he bade the person who drew his will bear it in mind that the mortgage had been given merely to secure advances which had not been made, and in the conversation he spoke about having it canceled. The executors do not appear to have been cognizant of the circumstances under which the mortgage was made, and their action in filing the bill seems to have been entirely *bona fide.*

The bill must be dismissed, with costs, to be p>aid out of the estate.
April 2024

STORAGE COMPUTED* RELEASE - C.F.S. EVAP

ACRE-FEET INFLOW FOLSOM C. F. S.

DAY ELEV IN LAKE CHANGE C.F.S. SOUTH POWER SPILL HATCHERY (1)

8,003

1 123.44 7,998 -5 4,064 30 2,602 1,376 58 1

2 123.35 7,956 -42 4,031 15 3,333 643 58 3

3 123.52 8,035 79 4,076 4 3,971 0 58 3

4 123.19 7,880 -155 3,994 0 4,014 0 58 0

5 123.51 8,031 151 4,142 0 4,008 0 58 0

6 124.23 8,376 345 4,192 0 3,960 0 58 0

7 124.27 8,396 20 4,070 0 3,999 0 58 3

8 123.69 8,115 -281 3,841 0 3,925 0 58 0

9 122.80 7,701 -414 3,209 0 2,255 1,113 49 1

10 122.14 7,404 -297 3,797 0 3,886 0 58 3

11 122.05 7,364 -40 3,936 0 3,897 0 58 1

12 122.11 7,391 27 4,083 0 4,008 0 58 3

13 122.44 7,539 148 4,175 0 4,040 0 58 2

14 123.30 7,932 393 4,231 13 3,962 0 58 0

15 122.82 7,710 -222 4,006 35 3,354 670 58 1

16 122.79 7,697 -13 4,196 40 2,003 2,102 58 0

17 122.53 7,580 -117 4,137 36 2,003 2,098 58 1

18 122.73 7,670 90 4,161 30 2,150 1,877 58 1

19 122.96 7,773 103 4,088 30 2,301 1,643 58 4

20 122.94 7,764 -9 4,003 30 2,354 1,562 58 4

21 123.06 7,819 55 4,033 30 2,352 1,562 58 3

22 122.11 7,391 -428 4,356 30 2,990 1,491 58 3

23 122.47 7,553 162 5,126 30 4,954 0 58 2

24 122.08 7,377 -176 4,978 36 4,969 0 58 4

25 122.78 7,692 315 5,214 40 4,949 6 58 2

26 123.25 7,909 217 4,802 40 4,595 0 58 0

27 123.66 8,101 192 4,297 40 4,100 0 58 2

28 122.85 7,724 -377 3,783 40 3,872 0 58 3

29 123.49 8,021 297 4,107 40 3,856 0 58 3

30 123.13 7,852 -169 3,863 33 3,854 0 58 3

TOTALS -151 124,991 622 106,516 16,143 1,731 56

ACRE-FEET -151 247,920 1,234 211,274 32,020 3,433 111

*COMPUTED INFLOW IS SUM OF CHANGE IN STORAGE, RELEASES, AND EVAPORATION.

(1) EVAPORATION RECORDS TAKEN FROM FOLSOM PAN.

SUMMARY 

Release (ACRE-FEET)

Power 211,274 Folsom South Canal 1,234

Spill 32,020 Hatchery 3,433

Total = 247,961

Historical Archive and Report Database

Lake Natoma Daily Operations

Run Date: 5/10/2024
*Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the Court has determined that this

opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under

the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

For the Fifth Circuit

No. 01-60112

Summary Calendar

JUDITH WILLIAMS, ET AL.,

Plaintiffs,

JUDITH WILLIAMS,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

VERSUS

K MART CORPORATION,

Defendant-Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court

For the Southern District of Mississippi

(3:99-CV-597-WS)

August 21, 2001

Before DeMOSS, PARKER, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Judith Williams sued K-Mart in state district court in

Mississippi to recover for injuries sustained by Williams when a
2

storage box fell on her head and neck while she was shopping in a

K-Mart store. K-Mart removed to the federal district court on

diversity jurisdiction. The case was tried to a jury which awarded

a verdict in favor of Williams and found damages in the amount of

$110,000 consisting of $10,000 for permanent injuries and $100,000

for doctor bills, prescriptions and medications, both past and

future. The jury did not award any sum for past or future pain and

suffering. The testimony indicated that plaintiff had sustained

approximately $27,000 of past medical expenses and she testified

that there would be approximately $36,000 of future medical

expenses. Consequently, the award of $100,000 was substantially in

excess of the amount of the testimony for past and future medical

bills. The district court entered judgment on the jury verdict.

Williams moved for a new trial on damage issues only and the

district court denied that motion. Williams appealed.

We have carefully reviewed the briefs, the record excerpts,

and relevant portions of the record itself. We are unable to say

that the district court abused its discretion by denying the motion

for new trial. 

Accordingly, the judgment below is 

AFFIRMED.
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

DAY

 23,306

 23,031

 22,738

 22,438

 22,151

 21,914

 21,680

 21,432

 21,258

 21,066

 20,821

 20,551

 20,283

 20,072

 19,812

 19,650

 19,972

 19,918

 19,883

 19,999

 20,034

 19,936

 19,620

 18,851

 18,051

 17,680

 17,339

 16,588

 15,860

 15,122

 14,397

 33,979

 33,713

 33,453

 33,194

 32,954

 32,715

 32,496

 32,263

 32,088

 31,930

 31,716

 31,515

 31,288

 30,875

 30,490

 30,200

 30,342

 30,256

 30,047

 29,975

 29,990

 29,802

 29,759

 30,128

 30,490

 30,413

 30,332

 30,670

 31,015

 31,365

 31,726

STORAGE - A.F. 

 57,285

 56,744

 56,191

 55,632

 55,105

 54,629

 54,176

 53,695

 53,346

 52,996

 52,537

 52,066

 51,571

 50,947

 50,302

 49,850

 50,314

 50,174

 49,930

 49,974

 50,024

 49,738

 49,379

 48,979

 48,541

 48,093

 47,671

 47,258

 46,875

 46,487

 46,123

499

611

527

586

869

1,342

1,324

760

1,355

1,425

1,212

706

558

775

1,084

2,206

5,513

3,182

1,757

2,366

2,858

1,791

1,411

1,253

1,383

1,109

1,067

1,096

1,206

1,095

1,181

194

338

248

304

603

1,102

1,096

517

1,179

1,249

981

469

308

460

759

1,978

5,747

3,111

1,634

2,388

2,883

1,647

1,230

1,051

1,162

883

854

888

1,013

899

997

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

U.S. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION-CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT-CALIFORNIA

JANUARY 2019 FULL NATURAL FLOW AT NEW MELONES DAM RUN DATE: 02/05/2019

TOTALS -11,766 38,172

* October 1, 75,714

 73.8

 74.5

 75.0

 75.6

 76.8

 78.9

 81.1

 82.1

 84.5

 87.0

 88.9

 89.8

 90.4

 91.4

 92.9

 96.8

 108.2

 114.4

 117.6

 122.3

 128.1

 131.3

 133.8

 135.8

 138.2

 139.9

 141.6

 143.4

 145.4

 147.2

 149.1

DONNELLS

RES

BEARDSLEY

RES

2018 TO DATE

NEW

MELONES

INFLOW

C.F.S

NATURAL

RIVER

C.F.S

ACCUM *

FULL

NATURAL

1000 A.F.

RESERVOIR

TOTAL

-604

-541

-553

-559

-527

-476

-453

-481

-349

-350

-459

-471

-495

-624

-645

-452

+464

-140

-244

+44

+50

-286

-359

-400

-438

-448

-422

-413

-383

-388

-364

CHANGE

A.F. C.F.S.

-305

-273

-279

-282

-266

-240

-228

-243

-176

-176

-231

-237

-250

-315

-325

-228

+234

-71

-123

+22

+25

-144

-181

-202

-221

-226

-213

-208

-193

-196

-184
(No. 5995

#### Keuffel and Esser Company, A Corporation, Claimant, *vs.*State of Illinois, Respondent.

*Opinion filed March 29, 1974.*

Wolfe, Klein, Bonner and Berzark, Attorneys for Claimant.

William J. Scott, Attorney General; Martin A. Soll, Assistant Attorney General, for Respondent.

Wolfe, Klein, Bonner and Berzark, Attorney for Claimant.

*314Burks, J.

Claimant filed this action on December 10, 1970, seeking payment in the amount of $286.80 for materials allegedly furnished and delivered to the respondent on December 8, 1967, pursuant to respondent’s order for said materials.

The complaint alleges that, on the aforesaid date, on request of the respondent’s Department of Public Works and Buildings, Division of Highways, it delivered to the Division of Highways District No. 6 at 126 East Oak Street, Springfield, Illinois, 24M Band Chains. The unit price was $11.95, making a total price of $286.80.

Respondent’s Departmental Report shows that, from its records and investigations, it is unable to verify whether or not the respondent received the goods in question. Respondent’s letter recommended that the claim be set for a hearing in order that the claimant may submit proper proof. At the hearing Roger R. Doyle, supervisor of the order department of the claimant’s company, identified a copy of the invoice for the material in question. He testified that the M bands were tapes used in surveying and that they were shipped in two packages; that a delivery receipt would be in the possession of United Parcel Service, the delivery company; that the receipt was requested from the delivery company about a year ago but that it was not available because their records are destroyed after three years.

Respondent offered no rebuttal evidence. Respondent’s departmental report does not deny the probability *315that the merchandise was received as claimant alleges. The record shows that claimant has been supplying materials to the respondent for many years.

The Court feels that claimant did deliver the material in question to the respondent pursuant to respondent’s order, and that the claimant in this claim has sustained its burden of proof.

Claimant is hereby awarded the sum of $286.80, being the amount due the claimant under a valid contract.
#### § 76.2 Exceptions in program regulations to part 76.

###### Cross Reference

Link to an amendment published at 89 FR 70335, Aug. 29, 2024.

If a program has regulations that are not consistent with part 76, the implementing regulations for that program identify the sections of part 76 that do not apply.

(Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1221e-3, 3474, and 6511(a))

[45 FR 22517, Apr. 3, 1980. Redesignated at 45 FR 77368, Nov. 21, 1980, as amended at 54 FR 21776, May 19, 1989]
(No. 73—CC—103

#### National Cash Register Company, Claimant, *vs.*State of Illinois, Secretary of State, Respondent.

*Opinion filed June 25, 1973.*

National Cash Register Co., Claimant, pro se.

William J. Scott, Attorney General; William E. Webber, Assistant Attorney General, for Respondent.

Holderman, J.
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

DAY ELEV

 582.17

 581.78

 581.34

 581.22

 582.48

 581.86

 581.64

 581.42

 580.76

 582.83

 583.84

 583.26

 582.74

 581.82

 581.44

 583.08

 583.05

 581.49

 581.63

 581.01

 581.35

 582.36

 581.56

 580.59

 580.99

 581.98

 581.66

 582.45

 582.27

 20,787

 20,557

 20,299

 20,229

 20,973

 20,604

 20,475

 20,346

 19,962

 21,182

 21,793

 21,441

 21,128

 20,581

 20,358

 21,332

 21,313

 20,387

 20,469

 20,106

 20,305

 20,901

 20,428

 19,864

 20,094

 20,674

 20,487

 20,955

 20,847

STORAGE

-347

-230

-258

-70

+744

-369

-129

-129

-384

+1,220

+611

-352

-313

-547

-223

+974

-19

-926

+82

-363

+199

+596

-473

-564

+230

+580

-187

+468

-108

CHANGE

4,876

4,733

4,451

4,341

4,580

3,822

3,871

3,866

3,796

4,604

4,342

3,862

3,893

3,776

3,877

4,489

3,988

3,523

4,007

3,781

4,457

4,719

4,756

4,732

5,128

5,305

4,915

5,248

4,959

INFLOW

 5,050

 4,848

 4,580

 3,712

 2,843

 2,845

 2,855

 2,851

 2,924

 2,904

 3,280

 4,036

 4,048

 4,049

 3,988

 3,996

 3,996

 3,986

 3,961

 3,962

 4,355

 4,417

 4,993

 5,014

 5,008

 5,012

 5,006

 5,010

 5,011

POWER

 0

 0

 0

 662

 1,360

 1,161

 1,080

 1,078

 1,064

 1,083

 751

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

SPILL

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

FISHTRAP

 1

 1

 1

 2

 2

 2

 1

 2

 2

 2

 3

 3

 3

 3

 1

 2

 2

 4

 5

 2

 2

 2

 1

 2

 4

 1

 3

 2

 2

C.F.S.

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

U.S. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION-CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT-CALIFORNIA

FEBRUARY 2020 KESWICK RESERVOIR DAILY OPERATIONS RUN DATE: March 1, 2020

RES.

EVAP

C.F.S.

COMPUTED*

ACRE-FEET

RELEASE - C.F.S. 

TOTALS -287 126,697 118,540 8,239 0 63

ACRE-FEET -287 251,303 235,124 16,342 0 125

SUMMARY

RELEASE (ACRE-FEET)

POWER 235,124

SPILL 16,342

 21,134

FISH TRAP 0

SPRING

CR. P. P.

RELEASE (1)

 37

 102

 44

 49

 217

 39

 37

 37

 37

 37

 37

 37

 37

 105

 67

 37

 37

 37

 121

 315

 37

 37

 37

 15

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 1,592

 3,158

*COMPUTED INFLOW IS SUM OF CHANGE IN STORAGE, RELEASES, AND EVAPORATION.

SHASTA

RELEASE

C.F.S

 4,495

 4,256

 4,110

 4,068

 4,132

 3,527

 3,521

 3,455

 3,422

 4,272

 3,865

 3,472

 3,418

 3,243

 3,325

 3,996

 3,444

 3,197

 3,771

 3,376

 4,110

 4,422

 4,423

 4,369

 4,863

 5,014

 4,626

 4,853

 4,667

 115,712

 229,515
482 P.2d 241

#### STATE of New Mexico, Appellee, v. Mike ARCHULETA, Appellant.

No. 9209.

Supreme Court of New Mexico.

Feb. 22, 1971.

Original Proceeding in Certiorari

Ordered that petition for writ of certiorari be and the same is hereby denied.

Further ordered that the record in Court of Appeals Cause No. 511, 82 N.M. 378, 482 P.2d 242 be and the same is hereby returned to the Clerk of the Court of Appeals.
<partyblock><br><br><div align="center"><b><font size="+1"> Manhattan Mini Storage, LLC,<br><br>against<br><br>Ebrain Consulting, LLC, Respondent-Appellant.</font></b></div><br><br><p>Respondent appeals from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, New York County (Debra R. Samuels, J.), entered February 20, 2018, after a hearing, which awarded petitioner counsel fees in the amount of $1,125 pursuant to Rule 130 (22 NYCRR 130-1.1[a]).</p><p>Per Curiam.</p><p>Appeal from order (Debra R. Samuels, J.), entered February 20, 2018, dismissed, without costs.</p><p>No appeal lies from an order or judgment entered on default of the appealing party (<i>see </i>CPLR 5511) and a default occurred in Civil Court when respondent, a limited liability company, failed to appear by an attorney (<i>see Matter of Pere v 1470-1488 U &amp; R</i>, 247 AD2d 477 [1998];<i> Lohmann v Castleton Gallery, </i>252 AD2d 482 [1988]), despite multiple warnings from Civil Court to retain counsel. Accordingly, we dismiss respondent-appellant's appeal for this reason, and on the further ground that respondent lacks standing to proceed pro se on this appeal (<i>see </i>CPLR 321<i>; Matter of Tenants Comm. of 36 Gramercy Park v New York State Div. of Hous. &amp; Community Renewal</i>, 108 AD3d 413 [2013]<i>, lv dismissed</i> 22 NY3d 990 [2013]; <i>Michael Reilly Design, Inc. v Houraney</i>, 40 AD3d 592 [2007]). The purported appearance by respondent's principal was a nullity (<i>see Evans v Conley</i>, 124 AD2d 981 [1986], <i>appeal dismissed</i> 69 NY2d 822 [1987]).  </p><br>THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT.<br>I concurI concurI concur<p>Decision Date: March 13, 2019</p><br><br><div align="center"><form method="LINK" action="../../slipidx/at_1_idxtable.shtml"><input type="submit" value="Return to Decision List"></form></div></partyblock>