alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

CASE NO. 20-CIV-61229-RAR

JOEL ALIDES RODRIGUEZ

Plaintiff,

v.

SONIA QUINONES, in her official

Capacity as Chief of the Hallandale Police

Department, et al.,

Defendants.

____________________________________/

ORDER TO PERFECT SERVICE

THIS CAUSE comes before the Court sua sponte. On June 23, 2020, Plaintiff filed his

Complaint [ECF No. 1]. A review of the record indicates that Defendant Officer Epson has not 

been served with the Complaint. Rule 4(m) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure requires 

service of the summons and complaint to be perfected upon defendants within 90 days after the 

filing of the complaint. It is therefore

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that on or before September 21, 2020, Plaintiff shall 

perfect service upon Defendant Officer Epson or show good cause as to why his Complaint should 

not be dismissed as to Defendant Officer Epson for failure to perfect service of process. Failure 

to file proof of service or show good cause by September 21, 2020 will result in a dismissal of 

Plaintiff’s claims against Defendant Officer Epson without prejudice and without further notice.

DONE AND ORDERED in Fort Lauderdale, Florida, this 20th of August, 2020.

_________________________________

RODOLFO A. RUIZ II

Case 0:20-cv-61229-RAR Document 10 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/21/2020 Page 1 of 2
Page 2 of 2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 0:20-cv-61229-RAR Document 10 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/21/2020 Page 2 of 2
### §2007. Imprisonment for debt

(a) A person shall not be imprisoned for debt on a writ of execution or other process issued from a court of the United States in any State wherein imprisonment for debt has been abolished. All modifications, conditions, and restrictions upon such imprisonment provided by State law shall apply to any writ of execution or process issued from a court of the United States in accordance with the procedure applicable in such State.

(b) Any person arrested or imprisoned in any State on a writ of execution or other process issued from any court of the United States in a civil action shall have the same jail privileges and be governed by the same regulations as persons confined in like cases on process issued from the courts of such State. The same requirements governing discharge as are applicable in such State shall apply. Any proceedings for discharge shall be conducted before a United States magistrate judge for the judicial district wherein the defendant is held.

(June 25, 1948, ch. 646, 62 Stat. 960; Pub. L. 90–578, title IV, §402(b)(2), Oct. 17, 1968, 82 Stat. 1118; Pub. L. 101–650, title III, §321, Dec. 1, 1990, 104 Stat. 5117.)

#### Historical and Revision Notes

Based on title 28, U.S.C., 1940 ed., §§843, 844, and 845 (R.S. §§990, 991, 992; May 28, 1896, ch. 252, §19, 29 Stat. 184; Mar. 2, 1901, ch. 814, 31 Stat. 956; Mar. 3, 1911, ch. 231, §291, 36 Stat. 1167).

Changes were made in phraseology.

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

#### Change of Name

"United States magistrate judge" substituted for "United States magistrate" in subsec. (b) pursuant to section 321 of Pub. L. 101–650, set out as a note under section 631 of this title. Previously, "United States magistrate" substituted for "United States commissioner" pursuant to Pub. L. 90–578. See chapter 43 (§631 et seq.) of this title.
#### John C. Moninger Company, Appellee, v. Richard F. Gloede, Appellant.

Gen. No. 17,773.

Appeals and *errors—judgment.*Where on trial before a court the record shows appellant is entitled to a credit, the judgment may be reversed and, after making the deduction, judgment entered for the balance, each party to pay his own costs.

Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook county; the Hon. William B. Soholfield, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the October term, 1911.

Reversed and judgment here.

Opinion filed January 14, 1913.

Byron W. Wright, for appellant.

Dillard B. Baker, for appellee.

Mr. Justice Barnes

delivered the opinion of the court.'

Appellant was indebted to appellee for building material. He claimed that the amount sued for was excessive; that some of the material was defective and some broken; that it was to be delivered at his place of business; that he was entitled to credit for thirty-one dollars paid for freight charges and teaming in making deliveries, and that he had demanded but had not received itemized statements of the account. The court’s finding and judgment were for $466.55.

The record sufficiently shows that statements of the account were not only mailed to appellant and that he afterwards promised payment, but that he was told the amount of the balance and promised to pay it. The evidence, however,. supports his claim for the credit of thirty-one dollars. There was no proof of the amount of loss, if any, from broken or defective material. The finding of the court was justified except so far as it failed to give appellant credit for thirty-one dollars. As such credit should have been given, and as no errors were committed that would justify us in remanding the case for a new trial, the judgment will be reversed and judgment entered here for $435.55, each party to pay his own costs

*Reversed and judgment here.*
WITH A

PARK RANGER

DRAW 

3 4 

Let’s draw this 1

California 

red-legged 

frog! 

Start out with simple shapes. 

Try to draw lightly for now. We’re 

going to draw over this at the end! 

2 5 

Draw a circle for the frog’s eye 

and a line for the frog’s mouth. 

6 

Draw curved lines for the 

back of the frog’s legs. 

7 

Draw the rest of the frog’s legs. 

8 

Give your frog a nose, and 

draw a line through the eye and 

down the body. 

Draw lines for the frog’s other Add another circle inside Give your frog some toes! Draw over your light lines. 

eye, its cheek, and its chin. the frog’s eye. Give your frog some spots and 

stripes. Color it in if you’d like! 

9 

Yosemite National Park 2020
#### § 113.540 Advertising.

A recipient shall not in any advertising related to employment indicate preference, limitation, specification, or discrimination based on sex unless sex is a bona fide occupational qualification for the particular job in question.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Defense

###### Office of the Secretary

# AGENCY:

National Defense University, DOD.

      ( print page 61224)    

# ACTION:

Notice of meeting. 

# SUMMARY:

Pursuant to Public Law 92-463, notice is hereby given of a forthcoming meeting of the National Security Education Board. The purpose of the meeting is to review and make recommendations to the Secretary concerning requirements established by the David L. Boren National Security Education Act, Title VIII of Public Law 102-183, as amended.

# DATES:

October 29, 2004.

# ADDRESSES:

The Crystal City Marriott Hotel, 1999 Jefferson Davis Highway, Arlington, Virginia 22202.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        Dr. Edmond J. Collier, Deputy Director for Programs, National Security Education Program, 1101 Wilson Boulevard, Suite 1210, Rosslyn P.O. Box 20010, Arlington, Virginia 22209-2248; (703) 696-1991. Electronic mail address:                         *colliere@ndu.edu*

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The Board meeting is open to the public.

Dated: October 8, 2004.

L.M. Bynum,

Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.

[FR Doc. 04-23115 Filed 10-14-04; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 5001-06-M
0-cr-06216-LSS Document 9 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/17/2000 Pa
0-cr-06216-LSS Document 9 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/17/2000 Pa
0-cr-06216-LSS Document 9 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/17/2000 Pa
HomeAbout NRCRadiation ProtectionHow the NRC Protects YouHealth Physics Positions Based on 10 CFR Part 20

# Disposal of Byproduct Material Used for Certain In Vitro Clinical or Laboratory Testing

## HPPOS-169 PDR-9111220186

See the memorandum from J. D. Kinneman to Materials Inspectors dated December 15, 1980.

Most waste generated from use of in vitro test kits under the general license of 10 CFR 31.11 can be disposed in non-radioactive trash. However, mock iodine-125 sources listed in 31.11 (a) (7) must be disposed of as required by 10 CFR 20.301. This health physics position also applies to "new" 10 CFR 20.2001.

Licensees performing certain in vitro tests that contain byproduct materials are authorized to dispose of the waste in non-radioactive trash. Under the provisions of 10 CFR 31.11, a general license may be issued to any physician, veterinarian, clinical laboratory or hospital to receive, acquire, possess, transfer or use certain byproduct materials in prepackaged form for in vitro clinical or laboratory testing.

The provisions of this paragraph exempt most byproduct materials used pursuant to the general license from the requirements of 10 CFR Parts 19, 20, and 21. Because of the exemption from the provisions of 10 CFR 20, most radioactive wastes generated in the use of these in vitro tests may be disposed of as ordinary waste (i.e., non-radioactive trash). Before these materials can be discarded in the trash, all radiation labels should be removed and destroyed. [Note: Mock iodine-125 sources listed in 10 CFR 31.11 (a) (7) must be disposed of as required by 10 CFR 20.301 and 10 CFR 20.2001.]

**Regulatory references:** 10 CFR 20.301, 10 CFR 20.2001, 10 CFR 31.11

**Subject codes:** 9.0, 9.7

**Applicability:**Byproduct material

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Monday, October 16, 2017
[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 199 (Friday, October 15, 2004)]
[Notices]
[Page 61202]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-23208]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

BROADCASTING BOARD OF GOVERNORS


Sunshine Act Meeting

Date and Time: October 19, 2004 2 p.m.-4:30 p.m.

Place: RFE/RL Broadcast Center, Room 546, Prague, Czech Republic.

Closed Meeting: The members of the Broadcasting Board of Governors 
(BBG) will meet in closed session to review and discuss a number of 
issues relating to U.S. Government-funded non-military international 
broadcasting. They will address internal procedural, budgetary, and 
personnel issues, as well as sensitive foreign policy issues relating 
to potential options in the U.S. international broadcasting field. This 
meeting is closed because if open it likely would either disclose 
matters that would be properly classified to be kept secret in the 
interest of foreign policy under the appropriate executive order (5 
U.S.C. 552b.(c)(1)) or would disclose information the premature 
disclosure of which would be likely to significantly frustrate 
implementation of a proposed agency action. (5 U.S.C. 552b.(c)(9)(B)). 
In addition, part of the discussion will relate solely to the internal 
personnel and organizational issues of the BBG or the International 
Broadcasting Bureau. (5 U.S.C. 552b.(c)(2) and (6)).

Contact Person for More Information: Persons interested in obtaining 
more information should contact either Brenda Hardnett or Carol Booker 
at (202) 203-4545.

    Dated: October 12, 2004.
Carol Booker,
Legal Counsel.
[FR Doc. 04-23208 Filed 10-13-04; 9:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8230-01-M
§ 4.26 Subpoena power and witness provisions generally. ( a ) *Compulsory attendance of witnesses.* The administrative law judge, on his own motion, or on written application of a party, is authorized to issue subpoenas requiring the attendance of witnesses at hearings to be held before him or at the taking of depositions to be held before himself or other officers. Subpoenas will be issued on a form approved by the Director. A subpoena may be served by any person who is not a party and is not less than 18 years of age, and the original subpoena bearing a certificate of service shall be filed with the administrative law judge. A witness may be required to attend a deposition or hearing at a place not more than 100 miles from the place of service.
( b ) *Application for subpoena.* Where the file has not yet been transmitted to the administrative law judge, the application for a subpoena may be filed in the office of the officer who made the decision appealed from, or in the office of the Bureau of Land Management in which the complaint was filed, in which cases such offices will forward the application to the administrative law judge.
( c ) *Fees payable to witnesses.* ( 1 ) Witnesses subpoenaed by any party shall be paid the same fees and mileage as are paid for like service in the District Courts of the United States. The witness fees and mileage shall be paid by the party at whose instance the witness appears.
( 2 ) Any witness who attends any hearing or the taking of any deposition at the request of any party to the controversy without having been subpoenaed to do so shall be entitled to the same mileage and attendance fees, to be paid by such party, to which he would have been entitled if he had been first duly subpoenaed as a witness on behalf of such party. This paragraph does not apply to Government employees who are called as witnesses by the Government.
[36 FR 7186, Apr. 15, 1971, as amended at 88 FR 5792, Jan. 30, 2023]
CIVIL PROCEDURAL RULES COMMITTEE

ADOPTION REPORT

Amendment of Pa.R.Civ.P. 1311.1

On May 19 , 2022, the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania adopted an amendment to
Rule of Civil Procedure 1311.1

. The Civil Procedural Rules Committee has prepared this Adoption Report describing the rulemaking process. An Adoption Report should not be
confused with Comments to the rules. See Pa.R.J.A. 103, Comment. The statements
contained herein are those of the Committee, not the Court.

Pursuant to a request, the Civil Procedural Rules Committee consider ed an
amendment to Pa.R.C iv.P. 1311.1 governing the limit a party may elect as the maximum amount of damages recoverable upon the trial of an appeal from the aw ard of arbitrators.

Section 7361 of the Judicial Code, 42 Pa.C.S. § 7361(b) sets the maximum jurisdictional limit for compulsory arbitration: “No matter shall be referred [to compulsory arbitration]...where the amount in controversy, exclusive of intere sts and costs, exceeds $50,000.” Id. Pa.R.Civ.P. 1311.1 waives the necessity of testimony by a witness as a prerequisite to the admission of documentary evidence in an arbitration proceeding under
Pa.R.Civ.P. 1305(b). Prior to the instant amendment, t he rule applie d to arbitration appeals in which the “plaintiff elects a limit of $25,000.00 as the maximum amount of damages recoverable upon the trial of an appeal from the award of arbitrators.”

Most judicial districts have adopted a jurisdictional limi t for compulsory arbitration between $25,000 and $50,000. For those judicial districts that have a jurisdictional limit that exceeds $25,000, the prior rule created a disconnect between the jurisdictional limit for arbitration, e.g. , $50,000

, and the max imum amount of damages available, $25,000

. This disconnect appear ed to create an unfair advantage to a defendant who appeals an

arbitration award to the trial court when the defendant knows that the award on appeal
will be lower than the award of the arbi trators.

To resolve this issue, the Committee proposed amending subdivision (a) to replace the $25,000 limit with “an amount equal to the jurisdictional limit for compulsory arbitration of the judicial district in which the action was filed...” The proposed language was intended to eliminate the disconnect between the amount of damages that may be higher in an arbitration award than what can be elected pursuant to Rule 1311.1. In addition,
the language recognizes that each judicial district se ts its jurisdictional limit for compulsory arbitration and that not all judicial districts choose to set it to the maximum amount permitted by Section 7361.2

C ross refer ences were also proposed to be added to Section 7361(b) of the Judicial Code providing for the maximum jurisdictional limit for compulsory arbitration and

to Pa.R.Civ.P. 1301 to indicate that the limit for a judicial district is set by local rule. In addition, stylistic revisions were also made

.

T he Committee published the proposal for com ment. See 51 Pa.B. 4265 (August 7, 2021). The Committee received no comments to the proposal

. Accordingly, the Committee made no further revisions to the proposal.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Marilyn Kelly

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

 _________________________________________ 

 Clerk

November 21, 2011 

t1114 

Order 

 

November 21, 2011 

143879 

WESTERN LAND SERVICES, INC., REDSKY 

LAND, L.L.C., and SILVER LAKE ENERGY, 

L.L.C., 

 Plaintiffs, 

v SC: 143879 

13TH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT COURT, 28TH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT COURT, 33RD JUDICIAL 

CIRCUIT COURT, 46TH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT 

COURT, 53RD JUDICIAL CIRCUIT COURT, 

57TH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT COURT, and 90TH

DISTRICT COURT, 

Defendants. 

_________________________________________/ 

 On order of the Court, the complaint for superintending control is considered, and 

relief is DENIED, because the Court is not persuaded that it should grant the requested 

relief.
## E.O. 12866 Meeting on EPA's Greenhouse Gas New Source **Performance Standard for Electric Generating Units Rule Mon 02/13/2012**  1:00 PM - 1:30 PM Attendance is for RobertJ Wayland Chair: **Mabel_E._Echols@omb.eop.gov** Location: Room 10103 NEOB (202 - 395 - 6392; code 3862485)
This entry has an alarm. The alarm will go off b efore the entry starts.

Required: Kevin_F._Neyland@omb.eop.gov, Dominic_J._Mancini@omb.eop.gov, Nathan_J._Frey@omb.eop.gov,

Manisha_D_Patel@ceq.eop.gov, Michael_C._Clark@omb.eop.gov, John_S._MacNeil@omb.eop.gov, Kevin Culligan/DC/USEPA/US, Peter Tsirigotis/RTP/USEPA/US, Sarah Rees/DC/USEPA/US, Jeffrey_G_Weiss@omb.eop.gov, Cortney_Higgins@omb.eop.gov, Darian_E_Ghorbi@omb.eop.gov, Glenn_D_Sheriff@ceq.eop.gov, Andrew_J_McConville@ceq.eop.gov, Monisha_R_Shah@ceq.eop.gov, Jesse_M_McCormick@ceq.eop.gov, Nathaniel_O_Keohane@who.eop.gov, Bruce_D_Rodan@ostp.eop.gov, Robert_C_Johansson@cea.eop.gov, Jason_E._Bordoff@ceq.eop.gov, wayland.robertj@epa.gov, RobertJ Wayland/RTP/USEPA/US, Cyrus_N._Wadia@ostp.eop.gov 

### This meeting was requested by Wi lliam W ehrum , Hunton & Wi lliam s, LLP on behalf of the Utility Air Regulatory Group. Call - in number: 2 02 - 395 - 6392; code 3862485.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                         708,296
<SECURITIES>                                 1,072,080
<RECEIVABLES>                                7,480,641
<ALLOWANCES>                                  (493,624)
<INVENTORY>                                  2,756,567
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             9,127,274
<PP&E>                                      17,051,410
<DEPRECIATION>                              (5,772,027)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              31,930,617
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       11,947,627
<BONDS>                                      3,820,494
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        63,761
<OTHER-SE>                                  16,098,732
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                31,930,614
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            34,921,486
<CGS>                                       11,205,426
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               11,205,426
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            24,330,151
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             227,221
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             (1,315,911)
<INCOME-TAX>                                  (638,540)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (674,009)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (674,009)
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.01
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.01



</TABLE>