alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Mid-Pacific Region

Sacramento, CA

MP-12-208

Media Contacts: 

U.S. Bureau of Reclamation: Pete Lucero, 916-978-5100, plucero@usbr.gov

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service: Scott Flaherty, 916-978-6156, Scott_Flaherty@fws.gov

 

For Release on: Dec. 11, 2012 

Public Meeting Rescheduled on Central Valley Project 

Improvement Act Annual Work Plans for Fiscal Year 2013 

SACRAMENTO, Calif. – The Bureau of Reclamation and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service have rescheduled 

their public meeting to present the Central Valley Project Improvement Act Annual Work Plans for Fiscal Year 

2013 (Oct. 1, 2012 to Sept. 30, 2013). The meeting, which had been set for Thursday, Dec. 6, 2012 in Sacramento, 

was postponed due to a scheduling conflict and has now been set for Jan. 17, 2013.

Details on the rescheduled meeting follow:

Sacramento

Jan. 17, 2013, 1 p.m. to 4 p.m.

Red Lion Hotel Woodlake Conference Center 500 Leisure Lane, Sacramento CA 95815

At the meeting, presentations will be made on the following: 

• Introductions and opening remarks: 1:00 – 1:20 PM

Dan Castleberry, USFWS; Dave Gore, Reclamation 

• CVPIA fisheries revisioning 1:20 – 1:40 PM

• Anadromous Fish Screen Program – Section 3406(b)(21) 1:40 – 2:00 PM

• Anadromous Fish Restoration Program – Section 3406(b)(1) 2:00 – 2:40 PM

• Clear Creek Restoration Program – Section 3406(b)(12) 2:40 – 3:00 PM

• Comprehensive Assessment and Monitoring – Section 3406(b)(16) 3:00 – 3:20 PM

• Refuge Water Supply, Conveyance, and Construction Program 3:20 – 4:00 PM

Sections 3406(b)(3), (d)(1, 2, & 5), and (g)

The CVPIA Annual Work Plans for FY 2013 will be available in hard copy at the meeting and online after January 

2013 at: http://www.usbr.gov/mp/cvpia/docs_reports/index.html. Under the heading, “Draft CVPIA Annual Work 

Plans,” please click on “FY 2013.” 

For additional information please contact Cesar Blanco, USFWS, CVPIA Implementation Division, at 916-978-

6190 or email cesar blanco@fws.gov; or Richard Woodley, Reclamation, Division of Resources Management, at 

916-978-5201 or email rwoodley@usbr.gov. 

# # # 
The mission of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is working with others to conserve, protect, and enhance fish, 

wildlife, plants, and their habitats for the continuing benefit of the American people. Visit our website at 

http://www.fws.gov.

Reclamation is the largest wholesale water supplier and the second largest producer of hydroelectric power in the 

United States, with operations and facilities in the 17 Western States. Its facilities also provide substantial flood 

control, recreation, and fish and wildlife benefits. Visit our website at http://www.usbr.gov.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

CASE NO. 20-80786-DIMITROULEAS/MATTHEWMAN

LORI ANNE IACOVETTA,

Plaintiff,

vs.

ANDREW M. SAUL,

Commissioner of Social Security,

Defendant.

_____________________________________/

ORDER OF REMAND; ADOPTING REPORT OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE

THIS CAUSE is before the Court upon the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate 

Judge Matthewman (the “Report”) [DE 27], entered herein on July 6, 2021. The Court notes 

that no objections to the Report [DE 27] have been filed, and the time for filing such objections 

has passed. As no timely objections were filed, the Magistrate Judge’s factual findings in the 

Report [DE 27] are hereby adopted and deemed incorporated into this opinion. LoConte v. 

Dugger, 847 F.2d 745, 749-50 (11th Cir. 1988), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 958 (1988); RTC v. 

Hallmark Builders, Inc., 996 F.2d 1144, 1149 (11th Cir. 1993). 

 Although no timely objections were filed, the Court has conducted a de novo review of 

the Report [DE 27] and record and is otherwise fully advised in the premises. The Court agrees 

with the Magistrate Judge’s analysis and conclusions. 

Accordingly, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows:

1. The Report [DE 27] is hereby ADOPTED AND APPROVED;

2. Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment [21] is GRANTED;

3. Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment [24] is DENIED;

Case 9:20-cv-80786-WPD Document 28 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/29/2021 Page 1 of 2
4. The decision of the Commissioner is hereby REVERSED AND REMANDED

pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) for further proceedings consistent with 

Magistrate Judge Matthewman’s Report and Recommendation [DE 27]. 

5. The Court will enter a separate judgment. 

DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at Fort Lauderdale, Broward County, Florida, 

this 29th day of July, 2021.

Copies furnished to:

Counsel of record

Magistrate Judge Matthewman

Case 9:20-cv-80786-WPD Document 28 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/29/2021 Page 2 of 2
#### In the Matter of the Claim of Francis Withers, Respondent, against E. I. du Pont de Nemours & Company, Inc., Appellant. State Industrial Board, Respondent.

All concur.
### PART III—CORPORATE ORGANIZATIONS AND REORGANIZATIONS

Subpart
A.
Corporate organizations.
B.
Effects on shareholders and security holders.
C.
Effects on corporations.
D.
Special rule; definitions.
#### § 3712.2-7 Service of copies; failure to comply.

If the department or agency requesting publication under these regulations shall fail to comply with the requirements of section 5(a) of the Act as to the personal delivery or mailing of a copy of the published notice to any person, the publication of such notice shall be deemed wholly ineffectual as to that person or as to the rights asserted by that person and the failure of that person to file a verified statement, as provided in such notice shall in no manner affect, diminish, prejudice or bar any rights of that person.
# Trafi Finnish Transport SafetyAgency 

## CERTIFICAITON OF RECIPROCITY

Date 12 September 2014 

### Mr. Paul Gretch Director Ind.No TRAFI 21782/03.02.00.00/2014 Office of International Aviation U.S. Department ofTransportation Washington, D.C. 20509 Facsimile +1 202 267 5364 brian.morris@faa.gov



### CERTIFICATION OF RECIPROCITY Dear Mr.Gretch, Ref OST-2006-24269

The Finnish Transport Safety Agency hereby confirms that it will grant, on the basis of reciprocity, to any air carrier designated by the United States ofAmerica, the right to conduct third, fourth and fifth freedom traffic rights on scheduled or nonscheduled basis, which are in conformity with the Air Transport Agreement between the European Union and its Member States and the United States of America, signed on 25 and 30 April 2007 as amended by the provisionally applicable Protocol to Amend the Air Transport Agreement between the United States of America and the European Community and Its Member States, signed on 24 June 2010.

Finnish Transport Safety Agency • P.O. Box 320, Fl-00101 Helsinki , Finland Tel. +358 29 534 5000, fax +358 29 534 5095 • Business ID 1031715-9 www.trafi.fi
```

[108th Congress Public Law 470]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office]

<DOC>
[DOCID: f:publ470.108]

[[Page 118 STAT. 3894]]

Public Law 108-470
108th Congress

                                 An Act

 
  To confirm the authority of the Secretary of Agriculture to collect 
  approved State commodity assessments on behalf of the State from the 
 proceeds of marketing assistance loans. <<NOTE: Dec. 21, 2004 -  [H.R. 
                                4620]>> 

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

SECTION 1. <<NOTE: 7 USC 7416a.>> CONFIRMATION OF AUTHORITY OF SECRETARY 
            OF AGRICULTURE TO COLLECT STATE COMMODITY ASSESSMENTS.

    (a) Collection From Marketing Assistance Loans.--The Secretary of 
Agriculture may collect commodity assessments from the proceeds of a 
marketing assistance loan for a producer if the assessment is required 
to be paid by the producer or the first purchaser of a commodity 
pursuant to a State law or pursuant to an authority administered by the 
Secretary. This collection authority does not extend to a State tax or 
other revenue collection activity by a State.
    (b) Collection Pursuant to Agreement.--The collection of an 
assessment under subsection (a) shall be made as specified in an 
agreement between the Secretary of Agriculture and the State requesting 
the collection.

    Approved December 21, 2004.

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY--H.R. 4620 (S. 2866):
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 150 (2004):
            Oct. 5, considered and passed House.
            Dec. 7, considered and passed Senate.

                                  <all>
```
#### Carl Weil, Respondent, v. F. I. A. T., Appellant.

Judgement and order unanimously affirmed, "with, costs. Mo opinion. Present — Jenks, P. J., Thomas, Carr, Stapleton and Putnam, JJ.
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. 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 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5.4.

### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 07-40803 Summary Calendar

PURVIS RAY CARTWRIGHT Petitioner-Appellant

v. T C OUTLAW, Warden Respondent-Appellee

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas USDC No. 1:05-CV-797
Before WIENER, GARZA, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Purvis Ray Cartwright, federal inmate# 59478-079, appeals the dismissal without prejudice of his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition for failure to exhaust administrative remedies. Cartwright challenged a prison disciplinary hearing and the resulting loss of good time credit. This court reviews a district court’s dismissal ofa § 2241 petition for failure to exhaust administrative remedies for an abuse of discretion. Fuller v. Rich, 11 F.3d 61, 62 (5th Cir. 1994). United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit 

### F I L E D September 19, 2008 Charles R. Fulbruge III ClerkNo. 07-40803

2 Cartwright first argues that he did exhaust his administrative remedies. However, Cartwright’s appeal to National Inmate Appeals Administrator, despite the Regional Director’s order for a rehearing, did not exhaust his administrative remedies. If an “agency has offered to reexamine its decision it should be permitted to do so.” S mith v. Thompson, 937 F.2d 217, 219 (5th Cir. 1991). Cartwright’s administrative appeals following the rehearing also do not showexhaustion because the rehearing and subsequent administrative appeals all occurred after he had filed his § 2241 petition. See Fuller, 11 F.3d at 62. Cartwright also argues that exhaustion should be excused bec ause the extensive delay in scheduling the rehearing suggests that exhaustion would be futile and because the administrative process was biased against him. Exceptions to the exhaustion requirement arise when “available administrative remedies either are unavailable or wholly inappropriate to the reliefsought, or where the attempt to exhaust such remedies would itself be a patently futile
course of action.” Fuller, 11 F.3d at 62 (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). These exceptions “apply only in extraordinary circumstances,” and the petitioner bears the burden ofestablishing that administrative reviewwould be futile. I d. The fact that Cartwright did successfully appeal to the Regional Director following hisfirst hearing demonstrates that the review process was not “unavailable,” “inappropriate,” or “patently futile.” See id. The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
### §3133. Special rule related to tax on employers

#### (a) In general

The credit allowed by section 3131 and the credit allowed by section 3132 shall each be increased by the amount of the taxes imposed by subsections (a) and (b) of section 3111 and section 3221(a) on qualified sick leave wages, or qualified family leave wages, for which credit is allowed under such section 3131 or 3132 (respectively).

#### (b) Denial of double benefit

For denial of double benefit with respect to the credit increase under subsection (a), see sections 3131(f)(3) and 3132(f)(3).

(Added Pub. L. 117–2, title IX, §9641(a), Mar. 11, 2021, 135 Stat. 171.)

#### **Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries**

#### Effective Date

Section applicable to amounts paid with respect to calendar quarters beginning after Mar. 31, 2021, see section 9641(d) of Pub. L. 117–2, set out as a note under secton 3131 of this title.
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 99.1

                            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 Annual Report of The Macreport.net, Inc. (the "Company")
on Form 10-KSB for the fiscal year ended November 30, 2002 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, V.
William Lucchetti, Jr., Chairman, Chief Executive Officer and President
(Principal Executive Officer and Principal Accounting and Financial Officer) of
the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss.
906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

(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 result of operations of the Company.


         /s/
---------------------
V. William Lucchetti, Jr.
Chief Executive Officer
March 17, 2003
118 STAT. 3898 PUBLIC LAW 108–474—DEC. 21, 2004

Public Law 108–474

108th Congress

An Act

To authorize grants to establish academies for teachers and students of American

history and civics, 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 ‘‘American History and Civics

Education Act of 2004’’.

SEC. 2. PRESIDENTIAL ACADEMIES FOR TEACHING OF AMERICAN HISTORY AND CIVICS; CONGRESSIONAL ACADEMIES FOR

STUDENTS OF AMERICAN HISTORY AND CIVICS.

(a) ESTABLISHMENT.—The Secretary of Education (referred to

in this Act as the ‘‘Secretary’’) may award not more than 12 grants,

on a competitive basis—

(1) to entities to establish Presidential Academies for

Teaching of American History and Civics that may offer workshops for both veteran and new teachers of American history

and civics; and

(2) to entities to establish Congressional Academies for

Students of American History and Civics.

(b) APPLICATION.—An entity that desires to receive a grant

under subsection (a) shall submit an application to the Secretary

at such time, in such manner, and containing such information

as the Secretary may require.

(c) DEMONSTRATED EXPERTISE.—The Secretary shall require

that each entity, to be eligible to receive a grant under this section,

demonstrate expertise in historical methodology or the teaching

of history.

(d) AVAILABLE FUNDS.—To carry out this section, the Secretary

may use any funds appropriated for fiscal year 2005 or any subsequent fiscal year to carry out part D of title V of the Elementary

and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 7241 et seq.).

20 USC 6713

note.

American History

and Civics

Education Act of

2004.

20 USC 6713

note.

Dec. 21, 2004

[H.R. 5360]

PUBLIC LAW 108–474—DEC. 21, 2004 118 STAT. 3899

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY—H.R. 5360:

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 150 (2004):

Nov. 19, considered and passed House.

Dec. 7, considered and passed Senate.

Æ

SEC. 3. NATIONAL HISTORY DAY PROGRAM.

The Secretary may award grants to the National History Day

Program for the purpose of continuing and expanding its activities

to promote the study of history and improve instruction.

Approved December 21, 2004.

20 USC 6713

note.
_______________________________________ __ _____________ _______________ ____________ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order
Lansing, Michigan

June 8, 2007 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice 133939 Michael F. Cavanagh Elizabeth A. Weaver Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan IN RE JESSE JAMES LUCKING, Minor. Robert P. Young, Jr.

_____________ _______________ ____________ Stephen J. Markman, Justices DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES, Petitioner-Appellee,

v SC: 133939 COA: 273705 Oakland CC Family Division: 05-704707-NA HOLLY MARIE WALTERS, Respondent-Appellant,

and

JAMES MICHAEL LUCKING, Respondent.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the April 24, 2007 judgment of the Court of Appeals is consid ered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the questions presented s hould be reviewed by this Court.

s0605 I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

June 8, 2007
Clerk
### §3701. Findings

The Congress finds and declares that—

(1) the United States and Indian tribes have a government to government relationship;

(2) the United States has a trust responsibility to protect, conserve, utilize, and manage Indian agricultural lands consistent with its fiduciary obligation and its unique relationship with Indian tribes;

(3) Indian agricultural lands are renewable and manageable natural resources which are vital to the economic, social, and cultural welfare of many Indian tribes and their members; and

(4) development and management of Indian agricultural lands in accordance with integrated resource management plans will ensure proper management of Indian agricultural lands and will produce increased economic returns, enhance Indian self-determination, promote employment opportunities, and improve the social and economic well-being of Indian and surrounding communities.

(Pub. L. 103–177, §2, Dec. 3, 1993, 107 Stat. 2011.)

#### **Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries**

#### Short Title

Pub. L. 103–177, §1, Dec. 3, 1993, 107 Stat. 2011, provided that: "This Act [enacting this chapter] may be cited as the 'American Indian Agricultural Resource Management Act'."
### **CHAPTER 37—REPURCHASE OF CORPORATE STOCK**

Sec.
4501.
Repurchase of corporate stock.

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Prior Provisions

A prior chapter 37, comprised of former sections 4501 et seq. of this title, related to excise tax on sugar and coconut oil, prior to repeal by Pub. L. 101–508, title XI, §11801(a)(48), Nov. 5, 1990, 104 Stat. 1388–522 and Pub. L. 87–456, title III, §302(d), May 24, 1962, 76 Stat. 77.
#### § 3923.10 Minimum bid.

The BLM will not accept any bid that is less than the FMV as determined under § 3924.10(d). In no case may the minimum bid be less than $1,000 per acre.
§ 4.1387 Petition for discretionary review of initial decisions. ( a ) Any party may file a petition for discretionary review of an initial decision of an administrative law judge issued under § 4.1385 with the Board within 30 days of receipt of the decision. An untimely petition shall be dismissed.
( b ) The petition for discretionary review shall set forth specifically the alleged errors in the initial decision, with supporting argument, and shall attach a copy of the decision.
( c ) Any party may file a response to the petition for discretionary review within 30 days of its service.
( d ) The Board shall issue a decision denying the petition or granting the petition and deciding the merits within 60 days of the deadline for filing responses.
### PART X—TERMINAL RAILROAD CORPORATIONS AND THEIR SHAREHOLDERS

Sec.
281.
Terminal railroad corporations and their shareholders.

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

**1962**—Pub. L. 87–870, §1(a), Oct. 23, 1962, 76 Stat. 1158, added part X and item 281.
§ 3809.605 What are prohibited acts under this subpart? Prohibited acts include, but are not limited to, the following: ( a ) Causing any unnecessary or undue degradation;
( b ) Beginning any operations, other than casual use, before you file a notice as required by § 3809.21 or receive an approved plan of operations as required by § 3809.412;
( c ) Conducting any operations outside the scope of your notice or approved plan of operations;
( d ) Beginning operations prior to providing a financial guarantee that meets the requirements of this subpart;
( e ) Failing to meet the requirements of this subpart when you stop conducting operations under a notice (§ 3809.334), when your notice expires (§ 3809.335), or when you stop conducting operations under an approved plan of operations (§ 3809.424);
( f ) Failing to comply with any applicable performance standards in § 3809.420;
( g ) Failing to comply with any enforcement actions provided for in § 3809.601; or
( h ) Abandoning any operation prior to complying with any reclamation required by this subpart or any order provided for in § 3809.601.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

FORT LAUDERDALE DIVISION

CASE NO.: 0:20-cv-60885-PMH

BRANDON THOMPSON,

Plaintiff, 

v.

FORT LAUDERDALE LAW GROUP

SOUTH, PLLC, 

Defendants.

_________________________________/

PLAINTIFF’S NOTICE OF DEFENDANT’S FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH COURT 

ORDER AND TO RESPOND TO MOTION TO ENFORCE SETTLEMENT, FOR 

SANCTIONS AND ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND COSTS AGAINST DEFENDANT

Plaintiff, BRANDON THOMPSON, (“Plaintiff”), by and through his undersigned counsel,

hereby notifies this Court that Defendant, FORT LAUDERDALE LAW GROUP SOUTH, 

PLLC’s (“Defendant”) Response to Plaintiff’s Motion to Enforce Settlement, for Sanctions and 

Attorneys’ Fees and Costs against Defendant was due March 22, 2023, but that Defendant failed 

to respond. 

Plaintiff filed his Notice of Defendant’s Failure to Respond to Motion to Enforce 

Settlement, for Sanctions and Attorneys’ Fees and Costs Against Defendant on March 23, 2023. 

See ECF No. 72.

On March 27, 2023, this Court issued the Paperless Order requiring Defendant to Respond 

to Plaintiff’s Motion to Enforce Settlement, for Sanctions and Attorneys’ Fees and Costs on or 

before March 30, 2023. See ECF No. 73. 

Case 0:20-cv-60885-PMH Document 74 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/12/2023 Page 1 of 2
2

March 30, 2023 has come and gone without any response from Defendant. As such, not 

only has Defendant failed to response to Plaintiff’s Motion to Enforce Settlement, for Sanctions 

and Attorneys’ Fees and Costs, Defendant has violated this Court’s Order.

As such, Plaintiff requests that the Motion to Enforce Settlement, for Sanctions and 

Attorneys’ Fees and Costs against Defendant be treated as unopposed and that same be granted, 

along with any other relief this Court deems just and proper.

DATED this 12th day of April, 2023. 

Respectfully submitted,

/s/ Noah E. Storch___

Noah E. Storch, Esq.

Florida Bar No.: 0085476 

RICHARD CELLER LEGAL, P.A.

10368 W. SR. 84, Suite 103

Davie, Florida 33314

Tel: (866) 344-9243

Fax: 954-337-2771

E-mail: noah@floridaovertimelawyer.com

Attorneys for Plaintiff 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I HEREBY CERTIFY that on this 12th day of April, 2023, I electronically filed the 

foregoing with the Clerk of the Court by using the CM/ECF system which will send a notice of 

electronic filing to all Counsel of Record.

/s/ Noah E. Storch___

Noah E. Storch, Esq. 

Case 0:20-cv-60885-PMH Document 74 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/12/2023 Page 2 of 2
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING

MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

OF FLORIDA

SECOND DISTRICT

JOSHUA P. MOORE, DOC #R65935, )

)

Appellant, )

)

v. ) Case No. 2D18-2361

)

STATE OF FLORIDA, )

)

Appellee. )

________________________________ )

Opinion filed April 10, 2019.

Appeal pursuant to Fla. R. App. P. 

9.141(b)(2) from the Circuit Court for 

Pasco County; Mary M. Handsel, Judge. 

Joshua P. Moore, pro se.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. 

CASANUEVA, VILLANTI, and SMITH, JJ., Concur.