alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Henry R. Teepe, as Assignee of Henry F. Sanville, Appellant, v. John Milnes and John Milnes Company, Respondents.

Order affirmed by default, with ten dollars costs and disbursements. Jenks, P. J., Thomas Carr, Rich and Putnam, JJ., concurred.
**Exhibit 32.1**

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO**

**18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**

**AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

In connection with the Annual Report of Shore Financial Corporation (the “Company”) onForm 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Scott C. Harvard, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my knowledge, that: 

(1) TheReport fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and 

(2) The informationcontained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company. 

 

Date: March 10, 2008 

This certificate accompanies this Annual Report on Form 10-K pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and will not be deemed “filed” by the Company for purposes of Section 18 ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. 

 

107
### The Honorable Ha rold D. Vietor, United States District Judge 1 

### for the Southern District of Iowa.



# United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 96-3687

___________ United States of America, * * Appellee, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * Southern District of Iowa. Terry Michael Bainter, * * [UNPUBLISHED] Appellant. *

___________ Submitted: April 14, 1997 Filed: April 28, 1997

___________ Before, HANSEN, MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM. Terry M. Bainter appeals the 72-month sentence imposed by th e district court following his guilty plea to conspiring to distribut e 1 methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846. We affirm.
We reject Bainter's contention that the district court erred i n denying his request for sentencing under U.S. Sentencing

### Bainter also argued the district court erred in concludin g 2 

### that application of U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 2D1. 1(b)(1) (1995) precludes a defendant, as a matter of law, from eligibility under the safety-valve provision. Our decision makes i t unnecessary to reach this issue. -2- Guidelin es Manual § 5C1.2 (1995) (safety-valve provision). Under th e 2 safety -valve provision, a drug defendant may be sentenced within th e otherwi se applicable Guidelines range without regard to any statutor y min imumsentence if, among other things, "the defendant did not . . . possess a firearm or other dangerous weapon (or induce another participant to do so) in connection with the offense." U.S. Sentencing Guideline s Manual § 5C1.2(2) (1995). Bainter testified at sentencing that he stored both firearms and the drugs in the same room of his house. Further, he stipulated as part of hi s plea agreement that during the conspiracy, he "possessed a firearm and sai d firearmwas used to protect the drugs and money." These admissions were sufficient to establish that Bainter possessed a firearm in connection wit h the offe nse. See United States v. Burke , 91 F.3d 1052, 1053 (8th Cir . 1996)(per curiam). Accordingly, we affirm. A true copy.
Attest: CLERK, U. S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
#### Abe Simon, Appellant, v. James J. Johnston et al., Respondents.

No opinion. Present — Martin, P. J., Glennon, Untermyer, Dore and Cohn, JJ.
United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission

Office of Public Affairs, Region I

475 Allendale Road King of Prussia, PA 19406

Fax: 610/337-5241

Internet: dps@nrc.gov or nas@nrc.gov

I-99-59 July 8, 1999

Contact: Diane Screnci (610/337-5330) FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Neil A. Sheehan (610/337-5331)

NRC STAFF TO HOLD PERFORMANCE EVALUATION MEETING AT SUSQUEHANNA;

REGIONAL ADMINISTRATOR TO HOLD MEDIA BRIEFING

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff will hold a meeting with representatives of the

Susquehanna Steam Electric Station on Wednesday, July 14, to discuss the results of the

agency’s latest Plant Performance Review for the facility. PP&L, Inc., operates the two-unit site

in Berwick, Pa. The meeting is open to the public for observation.

Results of the review are contained in NRC news release I-99-46 which was issued on

April 15. That press release and review can be found on the agency’s web site at:

www.nrc.gov/OPA/ppr.

The meeting will begin at 1:30 p.m. at the Susquehanna Energy Information Center on

Route 11.

At the conclusion of the meeting with the utility, NRC Region I Administrator Hubert J.

Miller will meet with the media to discuss performance at Susquehanna, and the NRC’s new

reactor inspection and oversight program.

#
#### Morris Berkowitz, Appellant, v. Abe Bruder and Others, Respondents.

Order affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements. Ho opinion. Present — Ingraham, P. J., McLaughlin, Laughlin, Clarke and Scott, JJ.
HomeAbout NRCRadiation ProtectionHow the NRC Protects YouHealth Physics Positions Based on 10 CFR Part 20

# Health Physics Questions and Answers - Question 113

**Question 113:** If an NRC licensee employs an individual formerly employed at a DOE lab and that individual's DOE lab dose record shows a CEDE of more than 5 rems (but within DOE limits) must the NRC licensee consider this an overexposure and reduce this individual's planned special exposure allowance accordingly?

**Answer:** No. The "limits" referenced in 20.2104 (a) (2) and 20.1206 (e) are the limits in effect and applicable to the individual at the time of the exposure. It should be noted that if the 5 rem CEDE was received during the current year, this individual would not be allowed any further exposure for the balance of the year. 

(References: 10 CFR 20.2104 and 20.1206 (e))

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Tuesday, October 31, 2017
###### Editorial Note on Part 134

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 134 appear at 72 FR 50042, Aug. 30, 2007.

#### § 134.917 Equal Access to Justice Act.

A prevailing Petitioner is not entitled to recover attorney's fees. Size Standard Petitions are not proceedings that are required to be conducted by an Administrative Law Judge under § 134.603.
HomeAbout NRCRadiation ProtectionHow the NRC Protects YouHealth Physics Positions Based on 10 CFR Part 20

# Health Physics Questions and Answers - Question 217

**Question 217:** How will licensees handle cases where occupationally exposed workers inform the licensee that they are concurrently being exposed (and/or monitored) at another facility, but refuse to name the other facility? (Note that if the worker is under contract, the other facilities may be competitors of the licensee).

**Answer:** Without knowing the occupational dose received by the worker at the other facility, the licensee cannot demonstrate compliance with the occupational dose limits for the worker if it permits the worker to receive concurrently an occupational dose. The licensee cannot allow the worker to receive any occupational exposure after the licensee becomes aware the worker is also receiving an occupational exposure at another facility which the worker refuses to name. See 56 FR 23383, third column, and Question 41 for additional information concerning concurrent employment.

(Reference: 10 CFR 20.1201, 10 CFR 20.2106)

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Friday, November 24, 2017
HomeAbout NRCRadiation ProtectionHow the NRC Protects YouHealth Physics Positions Based on 10 CFR Part 20

# Packing Greater Than Type A Quantities of LSA Radioactive Material for Transport

## HPPOS-080 PDR-9111210216

See IE Circular No. 78.03 entitled as above and dated May 12, 1978. 

This circular describes a situation at nuclear power facilities that could occur wherever greater than Type A quantities of low specific activity (LSA radioactive materials are packaged for transport. Shipment of greater than Type A quantities of LSA material may be done only in packages certified by NRC under 10 CFR Part 71. 

Department of Transportation (DOT) regulations require "strong, tight packages" for LSA material and make no mention of total activity that may be shipped. Some licensees subject to the requirements of 10 CFR Part 71 have shipped packages containing greater than Type A quantities of LSA material in packages which are not authorized by NRC. These unauthorized shipments have resulted from an inadequate understanding of Part 71 regarding LSA material. Differences between Part 71 and DOT requirements in 49 CFR Parts 170 to 189 have apparently contributed to these misunderstandings.

Specifically, 49 CFR 173.392 authorizes the shipment of LSA material in "strong, tight packages" when transported in vehicles assigned for the sole use of the consignor. DOT regulations make no mention of the total activity that may be shipped in this manner. On the other hand, NRC regulations (10 CFR 71.3) require that no licensee shall (a) deliver any licensed materials to a carrier for transport or (b) transport licensed material except as authorized in a general or specific license issued by the NRC, or as exempted in Part 71. The general license of 10 CFR 71.12 has requirements for the type of container when more than a Type A quantity of radioactive material is to be transported. LSA material in excess of a Type A quantity is not exempt from the general license requirements. 

Several Licensees have failed to recognize the difference between the DOT and NRC requirements and have packaged greater than Type A quantities of LSA material for transport in containers other than those authorized by the general license of 10 CFR 71.12. Compliance with Part 71 is the responsibility of the NRC licensee who delivers licensed material to a carrier for transport or who transports such materials outside the confines of its plant or other place of use.

**Regulatory references:** 10 CFR 71.2, 49 CFR 173

**Subject codes:** 12.17

**Applicability:**All

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Friday, October 13, 2017
Editorial Note on Part 120
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 120 appear at 72 FR 50039, Aug. 30, 2007.

§ 120.941 Certificates. ( a ) The face value of a Certificate must be at least $25,000. Certificates are issued in registered form and transferred only by entry on the central registry maintained by the Trustee. SBA guarantees the timely payment of principal and interest on the Certificates.
( b ) Before the sale of a Certificate, the seller, or the broker or dealer acting as the seller's agent, must disclose to the purchaser the terms, conditions, yield, and premium and other characteristics not guaranteed by SBA.
EXHIBIT 99.1: CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C.
1350

      In connection with the accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of
Magna-Lab, Inc. for the quarter ended August 31, 2002, the undersigned hereby
certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my knowledge and belief, that:

      (1)   such Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended August
            31, 2002 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 such Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB
            for the quarter ended August 31, 2002 fairly presents, in all
            material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
            of Magna-Lab, Inc.

October 15, 2002                 /s/ John R. Geisel
                                 ------------------
                                 Name:  John Geisel
                                 Title: Chief Executive Officer
EXHIBIT 32.1: CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C.
  1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

            In connection with the accompanying Quarterly report on Form 10-QSB
of Magna-Lab, Inc. for the quarter and six months ended August 31, 2005, the
undersigned hereby certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my
knowledge and belief, that:

            (1)   such Quarterly report on Form 10-QSB for the quarter and six
                  months ended August 31, 2005 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 such Quarterly report on Form
                  10-QSB for the quarter and six months ended August 31, 2005
                  fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
                  condition and results of operations of Magna-Lab, Inc.

      October 24, 2005            /s/ Lawrence A. Minkoff
                                  ----------------------------------------------
                                  Name: Lawrence A. Minkoff
                                  Title: President (principal executive officer)
#### State of Missouri, Respondent, *v.*Cadmus M. Slaughter, Appellant.

March 23, 1885.

The selling of intoxicating liquor by a dramshop keeper to a minor without the consent of his parent, guardian, or master, is not an indictable offense. The only penalty prescribed by law is a *143forfeiture of fifty dollars, to be recovered by civil action against the offender on his bond. — Wag. Stat., p. 552, sect. 20 ; Rev. Stat., 1879, sect 5454; following *The State*v. *Amor, 77*Mo. 568.

Appeal from Holt Circuit Court, Hon. H. S. Kelley, Judge.

Reversed, *and indictment dismissed.*

T. H. Parrish, for the appellant; citing *State*v. *Amor (77*Mo. 568).

B. G. Boone, Attorney General, for respondent. No brief on file for respondent.

Opinion by

Philips, P. J.

The defendant, at the January term, 1880, of the Holt circuit court, was indicted for selling intoxicating liquor, as a dramshop keeper, to minors under the age of twenty-one years. Some question was made at the trial as to whether the defendant was a dramshop keeper ; but there is no question made as to the parties being minors to whom the liquor was sold. The defendant was found guilty, and assessed a fine of fifty dollars.

The only question necessary to be decided on this record is, whether the defendant is indictable for the offence charged?

This question is directly answered in the case of the *State*v. *Amor (77*Mo. 568), where it is held that the imputed offence is not indictable.

That case is conclusive. It follows that the judgment of the circuit court is reversed, and the indictment is ■dismissed.

All concur.
§ 123.502 Under what circumstances is your business ineligible to be considered for a Military Reservist Economic Injury Disaster Loan? Your business is ineligible for a Military Reservist EIDL if it, together with its affiliates, is subject to any of the following conditions: ( a ) Any of your business' principal owners has been convicted, during the past year, of a felony during and in connection with a riot or civil disorder;
( b ) You have assumed the risk associated with employing the military reservist, as determined by SBA (for example, hiring the “essential employee” after the employee has received call-up orders or been notified that they are imminent);
( c ) Any of your business' principal owners is currently incarcerated, serving a sentence of imprisonment imposed upon adjudication of guilty;
( d ) Your business is an agricultural enterprise. Agricultural enterprise means a business primarily engaged in the production of food and fiber, ranching and raising of livestock, aquaculture and all other farming and agriculture-related industries. (See 13 CFR 121.107, “How does SBA determine a concern's primary industry?”) Sometimes a business is engaged in both agricultural and non-agricultural business activities. If the primary business activity of the business is not an agricultural enterprise, it may apply for a Military Reservist EIDL, but loan proceeds may not be used, directly or indirectly, for the benefit of the agricultural enterprises;
( e ) Your business is engaged in any illegal activity;
( f ) Your business is a government owned entity (except for a business owned or controlled by a Native American tribe);
( g ) Your business presents live performances of a prurient sexual nature or derives directly or indirectly more than an insignificant gross revenue through the sale of products or services, or through the presentation of any depictions or displays, of a prurient sexual nature;
( h ) Your business is engaged in lending, multi-level sales distribution, speculation, or investment (except for real estate investment with property held for commercial rental);
( i ) Your business is a non-profit or charitable concern;
( j ) [Reserved]
( k ) Your business is not a small business concern;
( l ) Your business derives more than one-third of its gross annual revenue from legal gambling activities;
( m ) Your business is a loan packager which earns more than one-third of its gross annual revenue from packaging SBA loans;
( n ) Your business' principal activity is teaching, instructing, counseling, or indoctrinating religion or religious beliefs, whether in a religious or secular setting; or
( o ) Your business' principal activity is political or lobbying activities.
[66 FR 38530, July 25, 2001, as amended at 88 FR 39341, June 16, 2023; 89 FR 34102, Apr. 30, 2024]
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

MIAMI DIVISION

CASE NO. 20-22746-CIV-CANNON/Reid

CARLOS FERNANDEZ and

TECHNOLOGICAL CONCEPTS, INC.,

Plaintiffs,

v.

CHECKALT ERAS, INC. and

SHAI STERN,

Defendants.

________________________________/

ORDER APPROVING FLSA SETTLEMENT

AND DISMISSING CASE WITH PREJUDICE

THIS CAUSE comes before the Court upon the parties’ Joint Motion for Approval of

Settlement Agreement and for Dismissal with Prejudice (“Joint Motion”) and Incorporated 

Settlement Agreement (the “Agreement”) [ECF No. 81], filed on July 2, 2021. The parties have 

settled this case, filed under the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”), 29 U.S.C. § 201 et seq., and 

seek the Court’s approval of their Settlement Agreement [ECF No. 81 pp. 5-9]. After carefully 

considering the Joint Motion, the Settlement Agreement, the record, and applicable law, the Court 

finds that the proposed settlement of this case is a fair and reasonable resolution of a bona fide 

dispute over the FLSA’s provisions, and that the requested fees are fair, reasonable and not grossly 

excessive. Accordingly, it is

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows:

1. The Joint Motion [ECF No. 81] is GRANTED.

2. The Settlement Agreement and Mutual Release Agreement entered into between Plaintiffs, 

Carlos Fernandez and Technological Concepts, Inc., and Defendants, Checkalt Eras, Inc. 

Case 1:20-cv-22746-AMC Document 82 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/07/2021 Page 1 of 2
CASE NO. 20-22746-CIV-CANNON/Reid

2

and Shai Stern, which has been duly filed with the Court [ECF No. 81 pp. 5-9], is 

APPROVED. 

3. This case is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE, with each party to bear its own attorneys’ 

fees and costs, except as otherwise agreed to by the parties.

4. The Court retains jurisdiction to enforce the terms of the settlement agreement.

5. All pending motions are DENIED AS MOOT.

DONE AND ORDERED in Fort Pierce, Florida this 7th day of July 2021.

 _________________________________

 AILEEN M. CANNON

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

cc: counsel of record

Case 1:20-cv-22746-AMC Document 82 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/07/2021 Page 2 of 2
No: 23-052 August 23, 2023 

CONTACT: Office of Public Affairs, 301-415-8200 

Brooke Poole Clark Named New NRC General Counsel

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission announced today the 

selection of Brooke Poole Clark as the new General Counsel. Clark has 

been serving as Secretary of the Commission since April 2022. She will 

succeed Marian L. Zobler, who will be retiring this fall after 33 years of 

service at the NRC. The appointment is effective October 15. 

In her new role, Clark will oversee the Office of the General 

Counsel and direct matters of law and legal policy; provide legal 

opinions, advice, and assistance to the agency; monitor adjudicatory 

proceedings; provide legal interpretations; and represent and protect the 

interests of the NRC in legal matters.

“Brooke has 25 years of legal and leadership experience,” said NRC Chair Christopher T. 

Hanson. “Her wealth of expertise on policy and regulatory issues from her experience in both the 

government and private sector makes her exceptionally qualified for this position. She will play 

an instrumental role in the challenges ahead.” 

Clark started her legal career at the NRC in 1998 through the Honor Law Graduate 

program. From 2001 to 2004, she was an associate attorney at Winston & Strawn LLP before 

rejoining the NRC’s Office of the General Counsel. She held positions in the Office of Nuclear 

Reactor Regulation, the Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, and the Office of the 

Chief Human Capital Officer. She also served as legal counsel to former NRC chairmen Nils 

Diaz and Dale Klein, and she headed the Office of Commission Appellate Adjudication for 

10 years. Later, Clark held a leadership position as Deputy General Counsel for Licensing, 

Hearings, and Enforcement and was a key member of the agency’s COVID-19 task force, which 

guided the agency through the pandemic. 

Clark earned a bachelor’s degree in political science from the University of California at 

Berkeley and a law degree from the George Washington University Law School. She is a 

graduate of the NRC’s Leadership Potential and Senior Executive Service Candidate 

Development programs.
#### § 19.210 Military and merchant marine educational institutions.

These Title IX regulations do not apply to an educational institution whose primary purpose is the training of individuals for a military service of the United States or for the merchant marine.
HomeAbout NRCGrant OpportunitiesGrant Awards

# Grant Awards - 2014

        - FY14 Curriculum Development Grant Program Awards
        - FY14 Faculty Development Grant Program Awards
        - FY14 Fellowship Grant Program Awards
        - FY14 Minority Servicing Institution Grant Program
        - FY14 Scholarship Grant Program Awards
        - FY14 Trade School and Community College Scholarship Grant Program Awards

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Friday, March 20, 2020

Section Navigation

#### Navigation

          - 2024 FOA Awards
          - 2023 FOA Awards
          - 2022 FOA Awards
          - 2021 FOA Awards
          - 2020 FOA Awards
          - 2019
          - 2018
          - 2017
          - 2016
          - 2009
          - 2010
          - 2011
          - 2012
          - 2013
          - 2014
          - 2015
          - Success Stories

#### Spotlight

#### Choose a Section

                - The Commission
                - License Renewal Generic Environmental Review
                - Job Openings
                - Palisades Restart
                - Environmental Justice 
                - Pilgrim Water Releases
                - Monticello Tritium Issue
                - International Strategy 2021-2025
                - Tribal Liaison Program
                - MAP-X
                - Transformation at the NRC - Updated
                - OIG Hotline
                - Rulemaking Activity
                - Commission Documents
                - Advanced Reactors
                - Nuclear Security
                - Strategic Plan

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Friday, March 20, 2020