alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

CASE NO. 20-80469-CIV-MARRA

NELSON FERNANDEZ,

Plaintiff,

vs.

THE WALKING COMPANY, a foreign

for profit corporation,

Defendants.

_____________________________________/

ORDER REQUIRING COUNSEL TO CONFER, FILE JOINT SCHEDULING REPORT 

AND FILE JOINT DISCOVERY REPORT

THIS ORDER has been entered upon the filing of the complaint. Plaintiff=s counsel is 

hereby ORDERED to forward to all defendants, upon receipt of either an answer or a motion 

pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b), a copy of this order.

It is further ORDERED:

1. Pursuant to Rule 4(m) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, defendants must be 

served within 90 days after the complaint is filed.

2. Every motion when filed shall be accompanied by a proposed order, except for 

motions to dismiss and motions for summary judgment. Courtesy copies of proposed orders 

should be sent to marra@flsd.uscourts.gov in Word format. The case number along with the 

words, "proposed order," should be in the subject heading.

3. Pretrial discovery in this case shall be conducted in accord with Local Rules 16.1 and 

26.1, and the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

4. Pursuant to Rule 26(f) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, unless this action is 

excluded under Rule 26(a)(B), the parties must confer at least twenty-one (21) days before the 

Case 9:20-cv-80469-KAM Document 4 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/24/2020 Page 1 of 2
2

earlier of 90 days after any defendant has been served with the complaint or 60 days after any 

defendant has appeared, to consider the nature and basis of their claims and defenses and the 

possibilities for a prompt settlement or resolution of the case; to make or arrange for the 

disclosures required by Rule 26(a)(1); to develop a proposed discovery plan that indicates the 

parties= views and proposals concerning the matters listed in Rule 26(f); and to discuss a joint 

proposed scheduling order.

5. The parties are jointly responsible for submitting a written report of this conference 

outlining the proposed discovery plan and joint proposed scheduling order within 14 days after 

the conference. This report shall address all items set forth in Local Rule 16.1(a)-(b) and shall

indicate the proposed month and year for the trial plus the estimated number of trial days 

required, as well as an indication of whether the trial is to be a Jury trial or Bench trial.

6. Failure of counsel or unrepresented parties to file a discovery plan report or joint 

scheduling report may result in dismissal, default, and the imposition of other sanctions 

including attorney=s fees and costs.

DONE AND SIGNED in Chambers at West Palm Beach, Palm Beach County, Florida, 

this 24th day of March, 2020.

KENNETH A. MARRA

United States District Judge

Copies furnished to:

All counsel

Case 9:20-cv-80469-KAM Document 4 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/24/2020 Page 2 of 2
San Mateo, CA
                                                                   June 30, 2000
                                                                   $200,000

                             SECURED PROMISSORY NOTE

For  value  received,  the  undersigned,  Hypermedia  Communications,   Inc.,  a
California  corporation  ("Borrower") promises to pay MK GVD Fund ("Lender") the
principal sum of two hundred thousand dollars ($200,000), with interest from the
date  hereof at a rate of ten percent  (10%) per annum,  which  amount  shall be
secured  by all of the  assets  of  Borrower.  Said  principal  shall be due and
payable on demand by  Lender,  which  demand may be made at any time,  but in no
event shall the principal be paid later than one hundred eighty (180) days after
the date of this Note. This Note may be prepaid at any time without penalty.

In the event of liquidation,  merger, sale, or winding up of the company, Lender
shall be entitled to receive,  prior and in  preference  to any other holders of
debt or equity securities,  (except as provided in item 1. below), the principal
value of this Note plus accrued interest.

The  following is a statement of the rights of the Borrower of this Note and the
conditions to which this Note is subject,  to which the Borrower and Lender,  by
the acceptance of this Note agree:

         1.  Security  Interest  - Borrower  hereby  grants to Lender a security
interest  in all assets of  Borrower  to secure  repayment  of the  indebtedness
represented  by this Note.  Borrower  hereby  represents and agrees that it will
take all actions  contemplated above including the execution of a UCC1 financing
statement,  which for the purposes of such  execution,  Borrower hereby appoints
Lender as its attorney-in-fact to execute such UCC1 financing statement.

         2. Attorneys' Fees - If any action or proceeding  shall be commenced to
enforce  this Note or any right  arising  in  connection  with  this  Note,  the
prevailing  party in such action or proceeding shall be entitled to recover from
the other party the reasonable  attorneys' fees, costs, and expenses incurred by
such  prevailing   party  in  connection  with  such  action  or  proceeding  or
negotiation to avoid such action or proceeding.  In the event that any provision
of this Note should be deemed unlawful or unenforceable, such provision shall be
struck and the remainder  hereof shall be enforced to the fullest  extent of the
law.

         3.  Governing  Law - This Note is  issued  in and shall be  interpreted
under the laws of the State of California.

Issued this 30 day of June, 2000.

                                           Hypermedia Communications, Inc.

                                           By: __________________

                                           Title: ________________
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER

PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Wayne Lipschitz, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly Report of Grill Concepts, Inc. on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended
September 28, 2008 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Form 10-Q fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and
results of operations of Grill Concepts, Inc.



By:

/s/ Wayne LipschitzName:

Wayne LipschitzTitle:

CFO and Principal Financial and Accounting OfficerNovember 12, 2008
HomeAbout NRCRadiation ProtectionHow the NRC Protects YouHealth Physics Positions Based on 10 CFR Part 20

# Health Physics Questions and Answers - Question 121

**Question 121:** 10 CFR 20.1204 (g) provides that when a mixture of radionuclides in air exists, licensees may disregard certain radionuclides in the mixture if the licensee uses the total activity of the mixture in demonstrating compliance with the dose limits in section 20.1201 and if certain other conditions are met. How can a licensee both disregard certain radionuclides and use the total activity?

**Answer:** The term "total activity" in this section refers to "gross activity" measurements that are correlated with other measurements of individual radionuclides. For example, "gross beta" measurements of air samples might be used for determining intakes of a mixture of beta-emitting radionuclides when (a) gamma-ray spectrometry of representative air samples has identified radionuclides that account for more than 70% of the activity in the air samples (i.e., the percentage of radionuclides disregarded does not exceed 30%) and (b) the concentration of any radionuclide disregarded is less than 10% of its DAC.

(Reference: 10 CFR 20.1204)

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Tuesday, October 31, 2017
SOUTHWEST AIRLINES CO.

Leslie C. Abbott

Senior Attorney

1901 L Street, N.W.

– Suite 640

Washington, D.C. 20036

(202) 263

- 628 5

(202) 263

- 6291 Fax

Leslie.abbott @wnco.com

_______________________________________________________________________________

May 31 , 2012

Via email and regulations.gov

Esta Rosenberg

Chief, U.S. Air Carrier Licensing Division

Department of Transportation

1200 New Jersey Ave, SE

Washington, DC 20590

Re: Application of AirTran Airways for Renewal of Exemption

Authority ( Dominican Republic) ; Dock et OST

- 20 10

- 0158

Dear Ms. Rosenberg:

This letter is to confirm that AirTran Airways (“AirTran”) has polled all carriers on

the service list attached to the above

- referenced Application

, and all carriers responded

that they have no objections. Accordingly, AirTran requests that the exemption authority

renewal specified in the A pplication be granted as soon as possible.

Respectfully submitted,

____________________ Leslie C. Abbott

cc: Susan Kurland, DOT

Paul Gretch, DOT

Brian Hedberg, DOT

Brett Kruger, DOT

A ll parties on the Service List
Exhibit 32.1

                                  CERTIFICATION



In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of Integrated Surgical
Systems, Inc. (the "Company") for the period ended March 31, 2005, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Ramesh C. Trivedi, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to
18 U.S.C. 1350, 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 results of operations
          of the Company.



/s/ Ramesh C. Trivedi
--------------------------------------------------
Ramesh C. Trivedi, Chief Executive Officer

April 13, 2007












                                       16
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

CASE NO. 20-CV-60987-RAR

LISA JENSEN,

Plaintiff, 

v. 

KILOLO KIJAKAZI,

Acting Commissioner of Social Security, 

Defendant. 

__________________________________________________/ 

ORDER AFFIRMING AND ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

THIS CAUSE comes before the Court on Magistrate Judge Jared M. Strauss’s Report and 

Recommendation (“Report”) [ECF No. 30]. The Report recommends that Plaintiff’s Motion for 

Summary Judgment (“Plaintiff’s MSJ”) [ECF No. 26] be denied and that Defendant’s competing 

Motion for Summary Judgment (“Defendant’s MSJ”) [ECF No. 27] be granted. See Report at 1, 

36. On July 26, 2021, Plaintiff timely filed Objections to the Report (“Objection”) [ECF No. 31]. 

The Court being fully advised in the premises, it is hereby

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the Report [ECF No. 30] is AFFIRMED AND 

ADOPTED as explained herein.

LEGAL STANDARD

This Court reviews de novo the determination of any disputed portions of the Magistrate 

Judge’s Report. United States v. Powell, 628 F.3d 1254, 1256 (11th Cir. 2010). Any portions of 

the Report to which no specific objection is made are reviewed only for clear error. Macort v. 

Prem, Inc., 208 F. App’x 781, 784 (11th Cir. 2006). A proper objection “identifie[s] specific 

findings set forth in the [Report] and articulate[s] a legal ground for objection.” Leatherwood v. 

Case 0:20-cv-60987-RAR Document 32 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/29/2021 Page 1 of 2
Page 2 of 2

Anna’s Linens Co., 384 F. App’x 853, 857 (11th Cir. 2010) (alterations and emphasis added; 

citations omitted). 

ANALYSIS

Upon due consideration of the record, including Judge Strauss’s Report and Plaintiff’s

Objection thereto, the Court overrules the Objection and adopts the Report. The Court agrees with 

Judge Strauss’s detailed and well-reasoned findings of fact and conclusions of law. The Report 

thoughtfully addresses all of the issues presented, and the Objection does not provide a basis for 

rejecting the Report.

CONCLUSION

For the foregoing reasons, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows:

1. Plaintiff’s MSJ [ECF No. 26] is DENIED. 

2. Defendant’s MSJ [ECF No. 27] is GRANTED.

3. The Report [ECF No. 30] is AFFIRMED AND ADOPTED.

4. Plaintiff’s Objection [ECF No. 31] is OVERRULED.

5. The ruling of the Commissioner is AFFIRMED.

6. Pursuant to Rule 58 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, final judgment will be 

entered by separate order. 

DONE AND ORDERED in Fort Lauderdale, Florida, this 29th day of July, 2021.

 _________________________________

 RODOLFO A. RUIZ II

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 0:20-cv-60987-RAR Document 32 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/29/2021 Page 2 of 2
Exhibit 21.1



Subsidiaries of Paperweight Development
Corp.



|Entity                                  |  | Jurisdiction of Incorporation
|--------------------------------------- |  | -----------------------------
|Appleton Papers Inc.                    |  | Delaware                     
|Appleton Papers Canada Ltd.             |  | Canada                       
|Appleton Recycled Fibers, Inc.          |  | Delaware                     
|WTA Inc.                                |  | Delaware                     
|Appleton Papers de Mexico S.A. de C.V.  |  | Mexico                       
|PDC Capital Corp.                       |  | Delaware                     
|Arjo Wiggins Appleton (Bermuda) Limited |  | Bermuda                      
|Appleton Steam Inc.                     |  | Wisconsin
Exhibit 13.1(a)

Certification

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

(Subsection (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 (subsection (a) and (b) of section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code),
the undersigned officer of Kookmin Bank, a corporation organized under the laws of the Republic of Korea (the Company), does hereby certify, to such officers knowledge, that:

The annual report on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2006 (the Form 20-F) fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a)
or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in the Form 20-F fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operation of the Company.



|                     |  |  |  |                                      
|-------------------- |  |  |  | -------------------------------------
|                     |  | 
|Dated: June 28, 2007 |  |  |  | /s/ Chung Won Kang                   
|                     |  |  |  | Chung Won Kang                       
|                     |  |  |  | President and Chief Executive Officer

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002 has been provided to Kookmin Bank and will be retained by Kookmin Bank and furnished to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.



---

Exhibit 13.1(b)

Certification

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

(Subsection (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 (subsection (a) and (b) of section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code),
the undersigned officer of Kookmin Bank, a corporation organized under the laws of the Republic of Korea (the Company), does hereby certify, to such officers knowledge, that:

The annual report on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2006 (the Form 20-F) fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a)
or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in the Form 20-F fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operation of the Company.



|                     |  |  |  |                   
|-------------------- |  |  |  | ------------------
|                     |  | 
|Dated: June 28, 2007 |  |  |  | /s/ Kap Shin      
|                     |  |  |  | Kap Shin          
|                     |  |  |  | CFO / Senior EVP  
|                     |  |  |  | Executive Director

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002 has been provided to Kookmin Bank and will be retained by Kookmin Bank and furnished to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
### Subpart J—Foreign Currency Transactions

Sec.
985.
Functional currency.
986.
Determination of foreign taxes and foreign corporation's earnings and profits.
987.
Branch transactions.
988.
Treatment of certain foreign currency transactions.
989.
Other definitions and special rules.

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

**1988**—Pub. L. 100–647, title I, §1012(v)(1)(C), Nov. 10, 1988, 102 Stat. 3529, added item 986 and struck out former item 986 "Determination of foreign corporation's earnings and profits and foreign taxes".
### **CHAPTER 125—PENDING ACTIONS AND JUDGMENTS**

Sec.
1961.
Interest.
1962.
Lien.
1963.
Registration of judgments for enforcement in other districts.
[1963A.
Repealed.]
1964.
Constructive notice of pending actions.

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

**1996**—Pub. L. 104–317, title II, §203(b), Oct. 19, 1996, 110 Stat. 3850, substituted "for enforcement in other districts" for "of the district courts and the Court of International Trade" in item 1963.

**1988**—Pub. L. 100–702, title X, §1002(b)(3), Nov. 19, 1988, 102 Stat. 4664, substituted "Registration of judgments of the district courts and the Court of International Trade" for "Registration in other districts" in item 1963 and repealed item 1963A "Registration of judgments of the Court of International Trade".

**1980**—Pub. L. 96–417, title V, §511(b), Oct. 10, 1980, 94 Stat. 1743, added item 1963A.

**1958**—Pub. L. 85–689, §1(b), (c), Aug. 20, 1958, 72 Stat. 683, substituted "CHAPTER 125—PENDING ACTIONS AND JUDGMENTS" for "CHAPTER 125—JUDGMENTS" in chapter heading and added item 1964.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

Miami Division

Case Number: 20-22483-CIV-MORENO

JEANETTE MOODY and WILLIAM 

MOODY, 

Plaintiffs,

vs.

HOLIDAY CVS, L.L.C., a Florida limited 

liability company,

Defendant.

_________________________________________/

ORDER GRANTING IN PART PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER 

AND MOTION TO COMPEL

THIS CAUSE came before the Court upon Plaintiffs’ Expedited Motion for Protective 

Order and Motion to Compel (D.E. 16), filed on August 19, 2020. 

THE COURT has considered the motion, the pertinent portions of the record, and being 

otherwise fully advised in the premises, it is

ADJUDGED that the motion is GRANTED IN PART. This is a premises liability action 

brought by Plaintiff Jeanette Moody after suffering a slip and fall. Plaintiff files the instant motion 

seeking a protective order “specifying that Plaintiff shall not be deposed on September 3, 2020, 

until Defendant produces video depicting the subject incident.” Alternatively, she requests that 

the Court compel the Defendant to produce the video before her deposition. Plaintiff writes that

“Defendant has video from its store camera that captured the subject incident.” Plaintiff cites to 

Cabezudo-Vazquez v. Ross Dress for Less, Inc., No. 18-80469, 2018 WL 4908101 (S.D. Fla. July 

27, 2018), which holds that there would be little if any prejudice in allowing a plaintiff to watch 

video of a slip and fall accident before being deposed about the incident. Id. at *2.

Case 1:20-cv-22483-FAM Document 19 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/25/2020 Page 1 of 2
2

While the Court agrees that the Plaintiff should see video of the subject incident, it elects

instead to require the Defendant to show the video during the Plaintiff’s deposition on September 

3, 2020. In this way, Plaintiff’s counsel will not be able to coach the Plaintiff witness ahead of 

time, but there will still be ample opportunity for Plaintiff to explain or elaborate about the subject 

incident after describing it initially. Counsel for both parties shall have the opportunity to ask the 

Plaintiff questions about the video and incident during the deposition.

DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at Miami, Florida, this 25th of August 2020.

_____________________________________

FEDERICO A. MORENO

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Copies furnished to:

Counsel of Record

Case 1:20-cv-22483-FAM Document 19 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/25/2020 Page 2 of 2
#### § 101.102 Where is SBA's Headquarters located?

The Headquarters of SBA is at 409 3rd Street, SW., Washington, DC 20416.
§ 41.115 Assurance required. ( a ) *General.* Either at the application stage or the award stage, Federal agencies must ensure that applications for Federal financial assistance or awards of Federal financial assistance contain, be accompanied by, or be covered by a specifically identified assurance from the applicant or recipient, satisfactory to the designated agency official, that each education program or activity operated by the applicant or recipient and to which these Title IX regulations apply will be operated in compliance with these Title IX regulations. An assurance of compliance with these Title IX regulations shall not be satisfactory to the designated agency official if the applicant or recipient to whom such assurance applies fails to commit itself to take whatever remedial action is necessary in accordance with § 41.110(a) to eliminate existing discrimination on the basis of sex or to eliminate the effects of past discrimination whether occurring prior to or subsequent to the submission to the designated agency official of such assurance.
( b ) *Duration of obligation.* ( 1 ) In the case of Federal financial assistance extended to provide real property or structures thereon, such assurance shall obligate the recipient or, in the case of a subsequent transfer, the transferee, for the period during which the real property or structures are used to provide an education program or activity.
( 2 ) In the case of Federal financial assistance extended to provide personal property, such assurance shall obligate the recipient for the period during which it retains ownership or possession of the property.
( 3 ) In all other cases such assurance shall obligate the recipient for the period during which Federal financial assistance is extended.
( c ) *Form.* ( 1 ) The assurances required by paragraph (a) of this section, which may be included as part of a document that addresses other assurances or obligations, shall include that the applicant or recipient will comply with all applicable Federal statutes relating to nondiscrimination. These include but are not limited to: Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, as amended (20 U.S.C. 1681-1683, 1685-1688).
( 2 ) The designated agency official will specify the extent to which such assurances will be required of the applicant's or recipient's subgrantees, contractors, subcontractors, transferees, or successors in interest.
#### In the Matter of Thomas R. Kearney, Appellant, against Frank C. Moore, as New York State Comptroller, Respondent.

Present — Foster, P. J., Brewster, Deyo, Santry and Bergan, JJ. [See *post,*p. 865.]
Sacramento

River

T31N R5W T31N R4W

SSHHAASSTTAA CC OO

0.18 S

240.8 L

242.16 L

0

7 8

6 5

17

18

19 20

1

12

13

Enterprise

Contract No. 14-06-200-8286A-R-1

Exhibit B

Riverview Golf and Country Club

725-202-118

Note: The Public Land Survey depicted here

was digitized from USGS topographic maps.

0 0.5 1

Miles

Date: November 18, 2004

File Name: N:\districts\contracts\riverview_golf_and_country_club\riverview_golf_and_country_club.mxd

Contractor's Service Area

Point of Diversion