alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 4.351 Commencement of the determination process. ( a ) Unless an heirship determination which is recognized by the Act already exists, the Project Director shall commence the determination of the heirs of those persons who died entitled to receive compensation by filing with the administrative judge all data, identifying the purpose for which they are being submitted, shown in the records relative to the family of the decedent.
( b ) The data shall include but are not limited to: ( 1 ) A copy of the death certificate if one exists. If there is no death certificate, then another form of official written evidence of the death such as a burial or transportation of remains permit, coroner's report, or church registry of death. Secondary forms of evidence of death such as an affidavit from someone with personal knowledge concerning the fact of death or an obituary or death notice from a newspaper may be used only in the absence of any official proof or evidence of death.
( 2 ) Data for heirship finding and family history, certified by the Project Director. Such data shall contain: ( i ) The facts and alleged facts of the decedent's marriages, separations and divorces, with copies of necessary supporting documents;
( ii ) The names and last known addresses of probable heirs at law and other known parties in interest;
( iii ) Information on whether the relationships of the probable heirs at law to the decedent arose by marriage, blood, or adoption.
( 3 ) Known heirship determinations, including those recognized by the Act determining the heirs of relatives of the decedent, and including those rendered by courts from Minnesota or other states, by tribal courts, or by tribunals authorized by the laws of other countries.
( 4 ) A report of the compensation due the decedent, including interest calculated to the date of death of the decedent, and an outline of the derivation of such compensation, including its real property origins and the succession of the compensation to the deceased, citing all of the intervening heirs at law, their fractional shares, and the amount of compensation attributed to each of them.
( 5 ) A certification by the Project Director or his designee that the addresses provided for the parties in interest were furnished after having made a due and diligent search.
[56 FR 61383, Dec. 3, 1991; 56 FR 65782, Dec. 18, 1991]
§ 3594.1 Ultimate maximum recovery. ( a ) Mining operations shall be conducted in a manner to yield the ultimate maximum recovery of the mineral deposits, consistent with the protection and use of other natural resources and the protection and preservation of the environment—land, water and air. All shafts, main exits and passageways, as well as overlying beds or mineral deposits that at a future date may be of economic importance, shall be protected by adequate pillars in the deposit being worked or by such other means as approved by the authorized officer.
( b ) New geologic information obtained during mining regarding any mineral deposits on the lease shall be fully recorded and a copy of the record furnished to the authorized officer, if requested.
§ 3137.89 How does production allocation occur from wells that do not meet the productivity criteria? ( a ) If a well that does not meet the productivity criteria was drilled before the unit was formed, the production is allocated on a lease or other federally-approved oil and gas agreement basis. You must pay and report the royalties from any such well either as specified in the underlying lease or other federally-approved oil and gas agreements.
( b ) If you drilled a well after the unit was formed and the well is completed within an existing participating area, the production becomes a part of that participating area production even if it does not meet the productivity criteria. BLM may require the participating area to be revised under § 3137.84 of this subpart.
( c ) If a well not meeting the productivity criteria is outside a participating area, the production is allocated as provided in paragraph (a) of this section.
#### Vanguard Military Equipment Corporation, Appellant, v. Albert Schulein, Respondent, and Abe Gershen et al., Impleaded Defendants, Appellants.

*Per Curiam.*

The challenged counterclaim and cross complaint alleges an oral agreement between defendant-respondent, plaintiff and the impleaded defendants, which is vague, indefinite and uncertain. From the facts set forth the full intention of the parties to the alleged contract cannot be ascertained with a reasonable degree of certainty. Such an agreement is unenforcible. *(Varney*v. *Ditmars,*217 N. Y. 223, 228.) The essential terms of a contract and the facts showing damage upon which the action is based must be pleaded. *(King*v. *Krischer Mfg. Co., Inc.,*220 App. Div. 584, 585; *Janvier, Inc.,*v. *Baker,*229 App. Div. 679; *Garcin*v. *Granville Iron Corp.,*137 Misc. 648, 650.) This, the pleading attacked fails to do.

The order should be reversed, with twenty dollars costs and disbursements, and the motion to dismiss the counterclaim granted, with leave to the defendant-respondent to plead over within ten days upon payment of costs.

Present — Martin, P. J., Townley, Untermyer, Dore and Cohn, JJ.

Order unanimously reversed, with twenty dollars costs and disbursements, and motion to dismiss the counterclaim granted, with leave to the defendant-respondent to plead over within ten days after service of order, on payment of said costs.
#### § 3162.7-3 Measurement of gas.

All gas removed or sold from a lease, communitized area, or unit participating area must be measured under subpart 3175 of this chapter. All measurement must be on the lease, communitized area, or unit from which the gas originated and must not be commingled with gas originating from other sources unless approved by the authorized officer under subpart 3173 of this chapter.

[81 FR 81609, Nov. 17, 2016]
EXHIBIT 21.1



|                                     |                      |                                    |         |                            
|------------------------------------ | -------------------- | ---------------------------------- | ------- | ---------------------------
|PARENT                               |                      | SUBSIDIARIES                       |         | JURISDICTION OFORGANIZATION
|Max Re Capital Ltd. (the Registrant) |                      | Max Re Ltd.                        |         | Bermuda                    
|                                     | Max Re Managers Ltd. |                                    | Bermuda
|                                     |                      |                                   
|                                     |                      | Max USA Holdings Ltd.              |         | Delaware, USA              
|                                     |                      |                                   
|Max Re Ltd.                          |                      | Max Re Diversified Strategies Ltd. |         | Bermuda                    
|                                     |                      |                                   
|                                     |                      | Max Europe Holdings Limited        |         | Ireland                    
|                                     |                      |                                   
|Max Europe Holdings Limited          |                      | Max Re Europe Limited              |         | Ireland                    
|                                     |                      |                                   
|                                     |                      | Max Insurance Europe Limited       |         | Ireland
SERVED: August 13, 2013 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS 

WASHINGTON, DC 

IN THE MATTER OF 

BELT MAKERS, INC. 

FAA DOCKET No. [To be assigned] 

(Civil Penalty Action) 

FDMS NO. FAA-2013-0049 

ORDER OF DISMISSAL 

On April 3, 2013, the Federal Aviation Administration ("Complainant") filed a 

Complaint. Respondent Belt Makers, Inc. ("Respondent") had on April1, 2013 filed a Request 

for Hearing. 

On August 12, 2013, Respondent moved to withdraw its Request for Hearing, citing 

settlement. 

14 C.P.R. § 13.215 states: 

At any time before or during a hearing, an agency attorney may withdraw a 

complaint or party may withdraw a request for a hearing without the 

consent of the administrative law judge. If an agency attorney withdraws 

the complaint or a party withdraws the request for a hearing and the 

answer, the administrative law judge shall dismiss the proceedings under 

this subpart with prejudice. 

WHEREFORE, the within filed Withdrawal of Request for Hearing having been read and 

considered, it is ORDERED as follows: 
2 

1. Respondent's Withdrawal of Request for Hearing is hereby granted; and 

2. This proceeding be and is hereby dismissed with prejudice. 

Attachment- Service List 

ft·~C'.~ Richard C. Goodwin 

Administrative Law Judge 
3 

SERVICE LIST 

ORIGINAL & ONE COPY 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue, S.W. 

Washington, DC 20591 

Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2Wl0001 

ONE COPY 

Michael L. Dworkin, Respondent's Counsel 

Michael L. Dworkin and Associates 

465 California Street, Suite 210 

San Francisco, CA 94104 

TEL: 415-421-2500 

FAX: 415-421-2560 

Lisa J. Toscano, Complainant's Counsel 

Office of the Regional Counsel, Western-Pacific Region 

Federal Aviation Administration 

P.O. Box 92007 

Los Angeles, CA 90009-2007 

TEL: 310-725-7110 

FAX: 310-725-6816 

The Honorable Richard C. Goodwin, Administrative Law Judge 

Office ofHearings, M-20 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. (E11-310) 

Washington, DC 20590 

TEL: 202-366-2139 Attorney-Advisor 

202-366-5121 Staff Assistant 

FAX: 202-366-7536 

FDMS No. FAA-2013-0049 

(Civil Penalty Action) 

1 Service was by U.S. Mail. For service in person or by expedited courier, use the following address: Federal 

Aviation Administration, 600 Independence Avenue, S.W., Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2WIOOO, Washington, 

DC 20591, Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430.
§ 4.1140 Production of documents and things and entry upon land for inspection and other purposes. ( a ) Any party may serve on any other party a request to— ( 1 ) Produce and permit the party making the request, or a person acting on his behalf, to inspect and copy any designated documents, or to inspect and copy, test, or sample any tangible things within the scope of § 4.1132 and which are in the possession, custody, or control of the party upon whom the request is served; or
( 2 ) Permit entry upon designated land or other property in the possession or control of the party upon whom the request is served for the purpose of inspection and measuring, surveying, photographing, testing, or sampling the property (including the air, water, and soil) or any designated object or operation thereon, within the scope of § 4.1132.
( b ) The request may be served on any party without leave of the administrative law judge.
( c ) The request shall— ( 1 ) Set forth the items to be inspected either by individual item or by category;
( 2 ) Describe each item or category with reasonable particularity; and
( 3 ) Specify a reasonable time, place, and manner of making the inspection and performing the related acts.
( d ) The party upon whom the request is served shall serve on the party submitting the request a written response within 30 days after service of the request.
( e ) The response shall state, with respect to each item or category— ( 1 ) That inspection and related activities will be permitted as requested; or
( 2 ) That objection is made in whole or in part, in which case the reasons for objection shall be stated.
#### § 3502.34 What must I submit if there are other parties in interest?

If you are not the sole party in interest in an application for a permit or lease, include with your application the names of all other parties who hold or will hold any interest in the application or in the permit or lease when BLM issues it. All interested parties must show they are qualified to hold permit or lease interests.
#### William Ennor *v.*Galena and Southern Wisconsin Railroad Company, use, etc.

*At Ottawa, September Term, 1882.*

Appeal *boot}—liability thereon—sufficiency as to amownt.*A judgment 'was rendered in the trial court for $5i568. On an appeal to the Appellate 'Court an appeal bond was given in the sum of $7000. The judgment was affirmed on that appeal, and on a further appeal to the Supreme Court an appeal boAd in the sum of only $500 was given. On the question whether the latter bond was for a sufficient amount, it was considered that in case of ' an affirmance by this court of the judgment of the Appellate Court, the • appeal bond givbn on the appeal fi;om the trial court would stand as security for the judgment rendered in that court, and as the appeal bond given on the appeal to the Supreme Court was sufficient in amount to cover the costs in this court, that-was all that was required.

•Appeal from the Appellate Court for the Second District; —heard in that court on appeal from the Circuit Court of Jo Daviess county.

The judgment in this case, as rendered in the circuit court, was for the sum of $5668, .which, with interest and costs, amounted to nearly $7000. On granting the appeal from the circuit court to the Appellate Court the appeal bond was required to be given in the penalty of this latter sum, and the bond was so executed. The judgment rendered in the circuit court, on the appeal to the Appellate Court, was affirmed. Then, upon the appeal from the Appellate Court to this court, the appeal bond was required to be given in the penal sum of only $500. The appellee now moves the court to dismiss the appeal,, on the ground of the alleged insufficiency of the appeal bond in respect to the amount of the penalty, it being contended the bond should have been given in a penal sum large enough to -secure to him the amount of his claim—some $7000.

*104Sheldon, J.:

This motion seems to be made on a misapprehension as to the effect of the appeal bond given on the appeal from the circuit court to the Appellate Court, standing as a security for the amount of the judgment appealed from. The adequacy of that bond, as respects the amount of the penalty in which it is given, does not seem to be called in question, or its sufficiency in any other respect. The bond given on the appeal to this court is in a sum sufficient to cover the costs in this court, and in case of an affirmance of the judgment of the Appellate Court, the bond given in the circuit court will stand as security for the payment of the judgment. So the appellee has ample security for his judgment, and the costs, in the event of his having to resort to such security, and that is all he can require. A similar question was before us in *McCall*v. *Moss,*100 Ill. 461. The motion will he denied.

*Motion denied.*
<TABLE> <S> <C>
			
<ARTICLE>                                 5				
<PERIOD-TYPE>                         3-MOS	
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>               JUL-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                    OCT-31-1997
<CASH>                              157,732 
<SECURITIES>                      1,903,130 
<RECEIVABLES>                        13,298 
<ALLOWANCES>                          6,500
<INVENTORY>                               0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                  2,229,813 
<PP&E>                              571,105 
<DEPRECIATION>                      321,786 
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                    2,876,702 
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>               355,816 
<BONDS>                                   0 
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                     0 
<PREFERRED>                               0 
<COMMON>                             77,279 
<OTHER-SE>                        2,443,607 
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>      2,876,702 
<SALES>                               3,150 
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                      3,150 
<CGS>                                 2,308 
<TOTAL-COSTS>                         2,308 
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                    504,152 
<LOSS-PROVISION>                          0 
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                      253 
<INCOME-PRETAX>                   (461,676)
<INCOME-TAX>                              0 
<INCOME-CONTINUING>               (461,676)
<DISCONTINUED>                            0 
<EXTRAORDINARY>                           0 
<CHANGES>                                 0 
<NET-INCOME>                      (461,676)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                        (0.09)
<EPS-DILUTED>                        (0.09)

</TABLE>
# Diario Oficial C 232A/21 d

| | ISSN 1725-244X |
| --- | --- |
| Diario Oficial
  de la Unión Europea | C 232A |
| | |
| Edición en lengua española | Comunicaciones e informaciones | 48o año21 de septiembre de 2005 |

ISSN 1725-244X

Diario Oficial

de la Unión Europea

C 232A

Edición en lengua española

Comunicaciones e informaciones

48o año21 de septiembre de 2005

---

| Número de información | Sumario | Página |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | III   Informaciones |
| | Comisión |
| 2005/C 232A/1 | Publicación de un puesto vacante de Director ejecutivo de la Agencia Comunitaria de Control de la Pesca (Grado A*14) — COM/2005/10004 | 1 |

Número de información

Sumario

Página

III   Informaciones

Comisión

2005/C 232A/1

Publicación de un puesto vacante de Director ejecutivo de la Agencia Comunitaria de Control de la Pesca (Grado A*14) — COM/2005/10004

1

| ES | |
| --- | --- |

ES

---

III Informaciones

Comisión

| 21.9.2005 | ES | Diario Oficial de la Unión Europea | CA 232/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

21.9.2005

ES

Diario Oficial de la Unión Europea

CA 232/1

---

PUBLICACIÓN DE UN PUESTO VACANTE DE DIRECTOR EJECUTIVO DE LA AGENCIA COMUNITARIA DE CONTROL DE LA PESCA

(Grado A*14)

COM/2005/10004

(2005/C 232 A/01)

La Agencia Comunitaria de Control de la Pesca desea nombrar a su Director.

Los solicitantes deben tener la ciudadanía de uno de los Estados miembros de la Unión Europea.

El Director será nombrado por el Consejo de administración de la Agencia a partir de una lista de candidatos seleccionados y propuestos por la Comisión Europea. La persona elegida será nombrada agente temporal de grado A*14, de conformidad con el artículo 2 bis del régimen aplicable a otros agentes de las Comunidades Europeas, durante un período de cinco años renovable una sola vez por otros cinco años. La Agencia y la Comisión aplican una política de igualdad de oportunidades.

La descripción del puesto, el impreso de solicitud y las instrucciones para el envío de las solicitudes pueden descargarse en la siguiente dirección de Internet:

http://europa.eu.int/comm/dgs/personnel_administration/working_senior_mgt_en.htm

o

http://europa.eu.int/comm/fisheries

El plazo para la recepción de las solicitudes expira el 21 de octubre de 2005 (el matasellos de correos dará fe de la fecha de envío).

---
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

CASE NO. 1:20-CV-21887-DPG

COMMODITIES FUTURES TRADING

COMMISSION, 

Plaintiff, 

v.

DANIEL FINGERHUT, 

DIGITAL PLATINUM, INC., DIGITAL 

PLATINUM, LTD., HUF MEDIYA 

(A/K/A HOOF MEDIA), TAL

VALARIOLA, and ITAY BARAK

Defendants,

AICEL CARBONERO, 

Relief Defendant. 

____________________________________/

ORDER GRANTING RECEIVER’S THIRD INTERIM APPLICATION FOR AN 

ORDER APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING PAYMENT OF FEES AND 

EXPENSES OF RECEIVER AND HER PROFESSIONALS

THIS CAUSE came before the Court upon the Receiver’s Third Interim Application for an 

Order Approving and Authorizing Payment of Fees and Expenses of Receiver and Her

Professionals (the “Application”) [ECF No. ____]. The Court, having reviewed the Application, 

noting that the fees and costs requested therein are reasonable, necessary and commensurate with 

the skills and experience required for the activities performed and described therein, and that no 

objection to the Application has been filed, and otherwise being fully advised in the matter, finds 

good cause to approve the Application and grant the relief requested therein.

Accordingly, it is -

Case 1:20-cv-21887-DPG Document 250-4 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/22/2021 Page 1 of 2
ORDERED as follows:

1. The Application is APPROVED.

2. The total amount of fees and costs that the Receiver1 and her Lead Counsel, 

Damian & Valori LLP, incurred regarding work performed fulfilling the Receiver’s duties 

during the Application Period in the amount of $45,020.10 is hereby APPROVED.

3. The Receiver is AUTHORIZED to pay the Receiver and her Lead Counsel, 

Damian & Valori LLP, the amount of $45,020.10 (which total includes $44,991.00 in fees 

and $29.10 in costs) work performed fulfilling the Receiver’s duties.

4. The total amount of fees and costs that the Forensic Accountants, Kapila 

Mukamal, LLP, incurred regarding work performed fulfilling the Receiver’s duties during 

the Application Period in the amount of $923.50 is hereby APPROVED. 

5. The Receiver is AUTHORIZED to pay to her Forensic Accountants, 

Kapila Mukamal, LLP, the amount of $923.50 (which total includes $909.50 in fees and 

$14.00 in costs) for work performed fulfilling the Receiver’s duties.

6. The Court reserves final approval of all fees approved herein until such time 

as the Receiver is discharged of her duties in this matter and/or final disbursement of funds 

held by the Estate. 

DONE AND ORDERED in the Southern District of Florida on this ____ day of 

___________, 2021.

_______________________________________

HONORABLE DARRIN P. GAYLES

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE

Copies to: All Counsel of Record

1 Capitalized terms not defined herein shall have the same ascribed meaning as in the Application. 

Case 1:20-cv-21887-DPG Document 250-4 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/22/2021 Page 2 of 2
§ 3730.0-9 Information collection. ( a ) The collections of information contained in subpart 3730 have been approved by the Office of Management and Budget under 44 U.S.C. 3501 *et seq.* and assigned clearance number 1004-0110 and subsequently consolidated with 1004-0114. The information will enable the authorized officer to determine whether a mining claimant is qualified to hold a mining claim or site for the exploration, development, and utilization of minerals on all public lands that are withdrawn for power development. A response is required to obtain a benefit in accordance with the Act of August 11, 1955 (30 U.S.C. 621-625), Section 314 of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976, as amended (43 U.S.C. 1744), and 30 U.S.C. 28f-28k, as amended by the Act of November 5, 2001 (115 Stat. 414).
( b ) Public reporting burden for this information is estimated to average 8 minutes per response, including time for reviewing instructions, searching existing records, gathering and maintaining the data collected, and completing and reviewing the information collected. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing the burden; to the Information Collection Clearance Officer (783), Bureau of Land Management, 1849 C St., NW, Washington, DC 20240; and the Office of Management and Budget, Paperwork Reduction Project, 1004-0114, Washington, DC 20503.
[58 FR 38196, July 15, 1993, as amended at 59 FR 44856, Aug. 30, 1994; 64 FR 47021, Aug. 27, 1999; 67 FR 38205, June 3, 2002]