alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 418.37 Disincentives for lower efficiency. ( a ) If the District fails to meet the efficiencies established by this part, then, in effect, the District has borrowed from a subsequent year. The amount borrowed will be accounted for in the form of a deficit in Lahontan Reservoir storage. This deficit amount will be added to the actual Lahontan Reservoir storage quantity for the purpose of determining the Truckee River diversions to meet storage objectives as well as all other operating decisions.
( b ) The amount of the deficit will be cumulative from year to year but will not be allowed to exceed 26,000 acre-feet (the expected variance between the MAD and actual water use). This limit is expected to avoid increasing the severity of drought and yet still allow for variations in efficiency over time due to weather and other factors. This approach should allow the District to plan its operation to correct for any deficiencies.
( c ) The deficit can be reduced by crediting incentive water earned by the District or reducing the percentage of headgate entitlement delivered either through a natural drought or by the District and its water users administratively limiting deliveries while maintaining an efficiency greater than or equal to the target efficiency.
( d ) If there is a natural drought and the shortage to the headgates is equal to or greater than the deficit, then the deficit is reduced to zero. If the shortage to headgates is less than the deficit then the deficit is reduced by an amount equal to the headgate shortage. During a natural drought, if the percentage of maximum headgate entitlement delivered is 75 percent or more then the District will be subject to the target efficiencies and resultant deficits or credits.
( e ) If the District has a deficit in Lahontan Reservoir and earns incentive water, the incentive water must be used to eliminate the deficit before it can be used for any other purpose. The deficit must be credited on a 1 to 1 basis (i.e., actual efficiency savings rather than 1 ⁄ 3- 2 ⁄ 3 for incentive water).
( f ) An example of the penalty concept is:
Example: Penalty—In 1996 the District delivers 90 percent of the maximum headgate entitlement or 194,703 acre-feet 216,337 × .90) but actually diverts 308,000 acre-feet. The efficiency of the Project is 63.2 percent (194,703 divided by 308,000). Since the established efficiency of 65.1 percent would have required a diversion of only 299,083 acre-feet (194,703 divided by .651) the District has operated the system with 8,917 acre-feet of excess losses. Therefore, 8,917 acre-feet was borrowed and must be added to the actual storage quantities of Lahontan Reservoir for calculating target storage levels and Truckee River diversions.
#### Mascha Posin, Appellant, v. Williamsburgh Savings Bank, Defendant, and Frank V. Kelly, Public Administrator, etc., Respondent.

Order affirmed, without costs. Ho opinion. Jenks, P. J., Burr, Carr, Stapleton and Putnam, JJ., concurred.
### PART III—PROVISIONS WHICH APPLY TO BOTH REGULATED INVESTMENT COMPANIES AND REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT TRUSTS

Sec.
860.
Deduction for deficiency dividends.
#### Elizabeth Speicher, as Executrix of Frank E. Speicher, Deceased, Appellant, v. Chevrolet Motor Company et al., Defendants, and General Motors Corporation et al., Respondents.

*678No opinion. Nolan, P. J., Carswell, Adel, Sneed and Wenzel, JJ., concur.
Case 0:20-cv-61007-AHS   Document 30   Entered on FLSD Docket 08/14/2020   Page 1 of 4

Case 0:20-cv-61007-AHS   Document 30   Entered on FLSD Docket 08/14/2020   Page 2 of 4

Case 0:20-cv-61007-AHS   Document 30   Entered on FLSD Docket 08/14/2020   Page 3 of 4

Case 0:20-cv-61007-AHS   Document 30   Entered on FLSD Docket 08/14/2020   Page 4 of 4
#### § 5.9 How long will it take to process my request?

We will process applications for commercial filming and still photography permits in a timely manner. Processing times will vary depending on the complexity of the proposed activity. A pre-application meeting with agency personnel is encouraged and may assist us in processing your request for a permit more quickly. For information on application procedures contact the appropriate agency field office.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
      THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
BALANCE SHEET (UNAUDITED) AND THE OPERATIONS FOR THE THREE MONTHS ENDED JANUARY
31, 1997 (UNAUDITED) AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              JUL-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                   JAN-31-1997
<CASH>                                         101,930
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   16,811
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               269,965
<PP&E>                                         501,005
<DEPRECIATION>                                 245,557
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,094,500
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          428,542
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        60,549
<OTHER-SE>                                     600,090
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,094,500
<SALES>                                         16,723
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                16,723
<CGS>                                           26,172
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   26,172
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             1,112,730
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 946
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             (1,101,579)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                         (1,101,579)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                (1,101,579)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (0.31)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (0.31)
        



</TABLE>
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan

October 13, 2005 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice
128183 Michael F. Cavanagh Elizabeth A. Weaver Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee, Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markman, Justices

v SC: 128183 COA: 249494 Wayne CC: 03-002377 JAMES SISTRUNK, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the January 27, 2005 judgment of the Court of Appeals is cons idered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.

t1006 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.

October 13, 2005

Clerk
#### Walter H. Sloane, as Executor and Trustee, etc., Respondent, v. Emma F. Mulvany, as General Guardian of Claire N. Mulvany, and Claire N. Mulvany, Appellant.

Judgement affirmed, with costs. No opinion. Present—Ingraham, P. J., McLaughlin, Laughlin, Clarke and Scott, JJ.
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA SECOND DISTRICT

JASON EUGENE DANIELS, ) ) Appellant, ) ) v. ) Case No. 2D16-5088 ) STATE OF FLORIDA, ) ) Appellee. ) ) Opinion filed August 31, 2018. Appeal from the Circuit Court for Polk County; Wayne M. Durden, Judge. Howard L. Dimmig, II, Public Defender, and Kevin E. Leisure, Special Assistant Public Defender, Bartow, for Appellant. Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Michael Schaub, Assistant Attorney General, Tampa, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

CASANUEVA, BLACK, and BADALAMENTI, JJ., Concur.
**Exhibit99.1**

 

May 14,2003

 

VIA EDGAR

Securitiesand Exchange Commission

450 FifthStreet, N.W.

Washington,D.C. 20549

 

**Re:**                          **Segue Software, Inc.Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as Adopted Pursuantto Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**

 

Ladies andGentlemen:

 

In connection with the quarterly report of Segue Software, Inc. (the“Company”) on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period endingMarch 31, 2003, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission onthe date hereof (the “Report”), I, Samuel J. Gallo, Acting Co- Chief ExecutiveOfficer of the Company hereby certify that:

 

1. the Company’s Report fully complies with the requirements ofSection 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and

 

2. the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in allmaterial respects, the financial condition and results of operations of theCompany.

 

This certification is provided solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C.Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-OxleyAct of 2002, and shall not be deemed a part of the Report.

 

 
|   | Sincerely,                           |
|--------|--------------------------------------|
|   |                                 |
|   | /s/ Samuel J. Gallo                  |   |
|   | Samuel J. Gallo                      |
|   | *Acting Co-Chief  Executive Officer* |

 

----
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5, the Court has determined th a t

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. UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

For the Fifth Circuit

No. 97-41086

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

VERSUS

JASON BAICE,

Defendant-Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Texas

(1:97-CR-16-1)

April 20, 1999

Before GARWOOD, DAVIS and BARKSDALE, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

The only issue presented in this case is whether the district

court committed reversible error in failing to advise the defendant

that the firearm count to which he pled guilty carried a mandatory

minimum sentence of sixty months. The district court informed the

defendant that this count carried a possible sentence of sixty

months and that the related, more serious, carjacking count2

carried a maximum sentence of 240 months. The district court

informed the defendant that on both counts he faced a maximum

possible sentence of imprisonment of 300 months plus an additional

sixty months supervised release. The district court then imposed

a total sentence of 211 months, 151 months on the carjacking count

and sixty months on the weapons offense plus a sixty-month

supervised release term.

We conclude from our review of the record as a whole that the

court’s failure to advise of the mandatory minimum sentence of

s ixty months on the weapons offense did not influen ce the

defendant’s decision to enter his guilty plea. Because the court

did not commit reversible error, the sentence is affirmed.

AFFIRMED.
II 

117TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 4853 

To require a study of the programs, acquisitions, and budget of the 

Department of Defense. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

SEPTEMBER 14, 2022 

Mr. CORNYN (for himself and Mr. KING) introduced the following bill; which 

was read twice and referred to the Committee on Armed Services 

A BILL 

To require a study of the programs, acquisitions, and budget 

of the Department of Defense. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘American Defense Pro5 grams, Logistics, and Acquisitions for our Nation’s Secu6 rity Act of 2022’’ or the ‘‘American Defense PLANS Act 

7 of 2022’’. 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•S 4853 IS

1 SEC. 2. STUDY OF THE PROGRAMS, ACQUISITIONS, AND 

2 BUDGET OF THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE. 

3 (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of Defense shall 

4 seek to enter into an arrangement with a federally funded 

5 research and development center under which the center 

6 will— 

7 (1) conduct a study of the programs, acquisi8 tions, and budget of the Department of Defense; and 

9 (2) make recommendations with respect to how 

10 the Department can ensure that program develop11 ment cycles and acquisition of new technologies 

12 within the Department can best keep pace with the 

13 increasing rate at which technologies acquired for 

14 programs of the Department become outdated or are 

15 replaced by new technologies. 

16 (b) REPORT REQUIRED.—Not later than one year 

17 after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary 

18 shall submit to Congress a report on the study required 

19 by subsection (a). 

Æ 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
- Skip to global NPS navigation
    - Skip to the main content
    - Skip to the footer section

National Park Service**Search

# **OpenMenu**CloseMenu

## Explore This Park

## Explore the National Park Service

## Exiting nps.gov

Spanish–American War
polid stid cyid year sector adjacee

NH3 39 151 2007 MOVES 163.5203533 Sector Ammonia 

NH3 39 151 2007 area 131.384047 Point 20.48

NH3 39 151 2007 marairrail 0.160333507 Area 1,600.52

NH3 39 151 2007 nh3 1469.137196 Non-road 2.69

NH3 39 151 2007 nonegu_pt 20.47879821 On-road 163.52

NH3 39 151 2007 nonroad 2.530298504 1,787.21 Total 1,787.21

ROG 39 151 2007 area 5046.105458

ROG 39 151 2007 marairrail 18.38528292

ROG 39 151 2007 nonegu_pt 863.9113816

ROG 39 151 2007 nonroad 3008.090617

TOG 39 151 2007 MOVES 4186.19832 13,122.69

Emissions in tons per year
 VOC 

 863.91

 5,046.11

 3,026.48

 4,186.20

13,122.69
§ 4180.1 Fundamentals of rangeland health. Standards and guidelines developed or revised by a Bureau of Land Management State Director under § 4180.2(b) must be consistent with the following fundamentals of rangeland health: ( a ) Watersheds are in, or are making significant progress toward, properly functioning physical condition, including their upland, riparian-wetland, and aquatic components; soil and plant conditions support infiltration, soil moisture storage, and the release of water that are in balance with climate and landform and maintain or improve water quality, water quantity, and timing and duration of flow.
( b ) Ecological processes, including the hydrologic cycle, nutrient cycle, and energy flow, are maintained, or there is significant progress toward their attainment, in order to support healthy biotic populations and communities.
( c ) Water quality complies with State water quality standards and achieves, or is making significant progress toward achieving, established BLM management objectives such as meeting wildlife needs.
( d ) Habitats are, or are making significant progress toward being, restored or maintained for Federal threatened and endangered species, Federal proposed or candidate threatened and endangered species, and other special status species.
[60 FR 9969, Feb. 22, 1995, as amended at 71 FR 39508, July 12, 2006]
§ 41.525 Fringe benefits. ( a ) *“Fringe benefits” defined.* For purposes of these Title IX regulations, *fringe benefits* means: Any medical, hospital, accident, life insurance, or retirement benefit, service, policy or plan, any profit-sharing or bonus plan, leave, and any other benefit or service of employment not subject to the provision of § 41.515.
( b ) *Prohibitions.* A recipient shall not: ( 1 ) Discriminate on the basis of sex with regard to making fringe benefits available to employees or make fringe benefits available to spouses, families, or dependents of employees differently upon the basis of the employee's sex;
( 2 ) Administer, operate, offer, or participate in a fringe benefit plan that does not provide for equal periodic benefits for members of each sex and for equal contributions to the plan by such recipient for members of each sex; or
( 3 ) Administer, operate, offer, or participate in a pension or retirement plan that establishes different optional or compulsory retirement ages based on sex or that otherwise discriminates in benefits on the basis of sex.
### §5849. Citation of chapter

This chapter may be cited as the "National Firearms Act" and any reference in any other provision of law to the "National Firearms Act" shall be held to refer to the provisions of this chapter.

(Added Pub. L. 90–618, title II, §201, Oct. 22, 1968, 82 Stat. 1232.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Prior Provisions

A prior section 5849, Pub. L. 85–859, title II, §203(g)(1), Sept. 2, 1958, 72 Stat. 1427, consisted of provisions similar to those comprising this section, prior to the general revision of this chapter by Pub. L. 90–618.

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

#### Short Title

Pub. L. 90–618, title II, §202, Oct. 22, 1968, 82 Stat. 1235, provided that: "The amendments made by section 201 of this title [enacting this chapter] shall be cited as the 'National Firearms Act Amendments of 1968'."
#### § 3815.2 Prospecting and mining.

All prospecting and mining operations shall be conducted in such manner as to cause no interference with the use of the surface of the land for stock driveway purposes, except such as may actually be necessary.
AO 440 (Rev. 06/12) Summons in a Civil Action

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

for the

 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Plaintiff(s)

v. Civil Action No.

Defendant(s)

SUMMONS IN A CIVIL ACTION

To: (Defendant’s name and address)

A lawsuit has been filed against you.

Within 21 days after service of this summons on you (not counting the day you received it) — or 60 days if you

are the United States or a United States agency, or an officer or employee of the United States described in Fed. R. Civ.

P. 12 (a)(2) or (3) — you must serve on the plaintiff an answer to the attached complaint or a motion under Rule 12 of

the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The answer or motion must be served on the plaintiff or plaintiff’s attorney,

whose name and address are:

If you fail to respond, judgment by default will be entered against you for the relief demanded in the complaint. 

You also must file your answer or motion with the court.

 

Date:

 

 Southern District of Florida

SISVEL INTERNATIONAL S.A., and 

SISVEL S.p.A.

20-cv-22050-FAM

BLU PRODUCTS INC.

BLU PRODUCTS INC. 

c/o its Registered Agent 

Bernard L. Egozi 

2999 NE 191st Street, Number 407 

Aventura, Florida 33180

Jorge Espinosa, Esq., 

GRAY | ROBINSON, P.A., 

333 S.E. 2nd Ave., Suite 300, 

Miami, FL 33131 

05/18/2020 s/ Johanna Borges

Case 1:20-cv-22050-FAM Document 4 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/18/2020 Page 1 of 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

CASE NO. 20-22316-CIV-SINGHAL

JULIE GOLD,

on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated,

Plaintiff,

v.

UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI,

Defendant.

____________________________________________/

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE AND

SETTING STATUS CONFERENCE

THIS CAUSE is before the Court upon the Notice of Pending, Refiled, Related or 

Similar Actions (DE [9]) filed by Defendant, University of Miami. The Court has carefully 

reviewed the record and is otherwise fully advised in the record. 

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 42(a) authorizes the district court to consolidate 

cases when the cases involve common questions of law or fact. “This rule is a codification 

of a trial court's inherent managerial power ‘to control the disposition of the causes on its 

docket with the economy of time and effort for itself, for counsel and for litigants.’” Hendrix 

v. Raybestos-Manhattan, Inc., 776 F.2d 1492, 1495 (11th Cir. 1985) (citations omitted). 

It appears that the following actions, now all pending before the undersigned, are 

appropriate for consolidation according to the considerations set forth by the Eleventh 

Circuit in Hendrix:

1. Dimitryuk v. University of Miami, Case No. 20-60851-CIV-SINGHAL

2. Weiss v. University of Miami, Case No. 20-22207-CIV-SINGHAL

3. Gold v. University of Miami, Case No. 20-22316-CIV-SINGHAL

4. Dixon v. University of Miami, Case No. 20-22549-CIV-SINGHAL

Case 1:20-cv-22316-AHS Document 16 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/13/2020 Page 1 of 2
2

Accordingly, it is hereby

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Plaintiff shall show cause by July 24, 2020 why 

these actions should not be consolidated. Additionally, a joint status conference will be 

held via Zoom on July 29, 2020 at 11:00 a.m. Parties can access the Zoom conference

with Meeting ID: 161 436 9153; Password: 4343.

DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers, Fort Lauderdale, Florida, this 10th day of 

July 2020.

Copies furnished counsel via CM/ECF

Case 1:20-cv-22316-AHS Document 16 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/13/2020 Page 2 of 2
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. George M. Browne, Appellant.

Motion for reargument denied. Present — Lewis, P. J., Carswell, Johnston, Sneed and Wenzel, JJ. [See 272 App. Div. 1061.]
### **CHAPTER 74—CLOSING AGREEMENTS AND COMPROMISES**

Sec.
7121.
Closing agreements.
7122.
Compromises.
7123.
Appeals dispute resolution procedures.
7124.
Cross references.

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

#### Amendments

**1998**—Pub. L. 105–206, title III, §3465(a)(2), July 22, 1998, 112 Stat. 768, added items 7123 and 7124 and struck out former item 7123 "Cross references".