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

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

Miami Division

Case No.: 1:20-cv-22603-GOODMAN

[CONSENT]

Erik Chavez, individually, and on behalf of 

others similarly situated,

Plaintiff,

vs.

Grill Enterprises, LLC, a Florida limited 

liability company, d/b/a “Los Parrilleros” and 

“Parrilleros Tavern”, and; 

Ruben Sierra, individually, 

Defendants.

PLAINTIFFS’ [PROPOSED] SPECIAL VERDICT FORM

PAYMENT OF MINIMUM HOURLY WAGE

Do you find from a preponderance of the evidence: 

1. That Plaintiffs were engaged in commerce, or employed by an enterprise engaged 

in commerce?

Answer Yes or No _____________ 

2. That Defendants required or facilitated the Plaintiffs’ participation in an invalid “tip 

pool”? 

Answer Yes or No _____________ 

3. That Defendants kept any portion of Plaintiffs’ tips? 

Answer Yes or No _____________ 

Case 1:20-cv-22603-JG Document 164-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/04/2023 Page 1 of 3
2

4. That Defendants failed to fully pay Erik Chavez the minimum hourly wage due on 

any regularly scheduled pay day, as required by law?

Answer Yes or No _____________

5. That Defendants failed to fully pay Leonel Diaz the minimum hourly wage due on 

any regularly scheduled pay day, as required by law?

Answer Yes or No _____________

6. If you answered “Yes” to either question 4 or question 5, above, do you find that 

the Defendants acted willfully?

 Answer Yes or No _____________

7. If your answer is YES to question 4, above, how much is Erik Chavez due on 

account of unpaid minimum wages?

$_____________

8. If your answer is YES to question 5, above, how much is Leonel Diaz due on 

account of unpaid minimum wages?

$_____________

9. If you answered “Yes” to either question 4 or question 5, above, do you find 

Defendant Ruben Sierra should be individually liable for the corresponding damages as an owner 

or officer with operational control over the restaurant?

Answer Yes or No _____________

Case 1:20-cv-22603-JG Document 164-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/04/2023 Page 2 of 3
3

SO SAY WE ALL.

___________________________

Foreperson’s Signature

DATE: ___________________

Case 1:20-cv-22603-JG Document 164-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/04/2023 Page 3 of 3
### §2072. Rules of procedure and evidence; power to prescribe

(a) The Supreme Court shall have the power to prescribe general rules of practice and procedure and rules of evidence for cases in the United States district courts (including proceedings before magistrate judges thereof) and courts of appeals.

(b) Such rules shall not abridge, enlarge or modify any substantive right. All laws in conflict with such rules shall be of no further force or effect after such rules have taken effect.

(c) Such rules may define when a ruling of a district court is final for the purposes of appeal under section 1291 of this title.

(Added Pub. L. 100–702, title IV, §401(a), Nov. 19, 1988, 102 Stat. 4648; amended Pub. L. 101–650, title III, §§315, 321, Dec. 1, 1990, 104 Stat. 5115, 5117.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Prior Provisions

A prior section 2072, acts June 25, 1948, ch. 646, 62 Stat. 961; May 24, 1949, ch. 139, §103, 63 Stat. 104; July 18, 1949, ch. 343, §2, 63 Stat. 446; May 10, 1950, ch. 174, §2, 64 Stat. 158; July 7, 1958, Pub. L. 85–508, §12(m), 72 Stat. 348; Nov. 6, 1966, Pub. L. 89–773, §1, 80 Stat. 1323, authorized the Supreme Court to prescribe rules of civil procedure, prior to repeal by Pub. L. 100–702, §§401(a), 407, effective Dec. 1, 1988.

#### Amendments

1990—Subsec. (c). Pub. L. 101–650 added subsec. (c).

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

#### Change of Name

Words "magistrate judges" substituted for "magistrates" in subsec. (a) pursuant to section 321 of Pub. L. 101–650, set out as a note under section 631 of this title.

#### Effective Date

Section effective Dec. 1, 1988, see section 407 of Pub. L. 100–702, set out as an Effective Date of 1988 Amendment note under section 2071 of this title.

#### Applicability to Virgin Islands

Rules of civil procedure promulgated under this section as applicable to the District Court of the Virgin Islands, see section 1615 of Title 48, Territories and Insular Possessions.

#### **Court Rules**

#### Admiralty Rules

The Rules of Practice in Admiralty and Maritime Cases, promulgated by the Supreme Court on Dec. 20, 1920, effective Mar. 7, 1921, as revised, amended, and supplemented, were rescinded, effective July 1, 1966, in accordance with the general unification of civil and admiralty procedure which became effective July 1, 1966. Provision for certain distinctly maritime remedies were preserved however, in the Supplemental Rules for Certain Admiralty and Maritime Claims, Rules A to F, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Appendix to this title. The Supplemental Rules for Certain Admiralty and Maritime Claims were subsequently renamed the Supplemental Rules for Admiralty or Maritime Claims and Asset Forfeiture Actions.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA 

CASE NO.: 20-61312-CIV-DIMITROULEAS

RANDY CONSTANCE,

Plaintiff, 

v. 

HOLLYBROOK GOLF AND TENNIS CLUB 

CONDOMINIUM, INC., a Florida corporation, 

Defendant.

____________________________________/

MEDIATION REPORT

The undersigned court-appointed mediator reports to the court as follows:

A. A mediation conference was conducted on August 26, 2020

B. The mediation conference resulted in the following:

 X The matter was settled in full.

______ The matter did not settle - the parties reached an impasse.

______ The conference was adjourned and an additional mediation 

Attendance: All required parties were in attendance.

Dated: September 1, 2020

By:/s/ Lori Adelson, Esq.

Signature of Mediator (FBN: 0196428)

HR Law PRO / HR Law ADR

401 East Las Blvd., Suite 1400

Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301

Phone: (954) 302-8960

Email: Mediator@HRLawADR.com

Secondary Email: Lori@HRLawPRO.com

Copies to: [all ECF parties}

Case 0:20-cv-61312-WPD Document 14 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/01/2020 Page 1 of 1
# Combine-MetersPSFs
### §504. Deputy Attorney General

The President may appoint, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, a Deputy Attorney General.

(Added Pub. L. 89–554, §4(c), Sept. 6, 1966, 80 Stat. 612; amended Pub. L. 107–77, title VI, §612(c), Nov. 28, 2001, 115 Stat. 800; Pub. L. 107–273, div. B, title IV, §4004(f), Nov. 2, 2002, 116 Stat. 1812.)

| Derivation | U.S. Code | Revised Statutes and Statutes at Large |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | 5 U.S.C. 294. | Mar. 3, 1903, ch. 1006, §1 (so much of 2d par. under "Department of Justice" as provides for appointment, pay, and duties of an assistant to the Attorney General), 32 Stat. 1062. |
| | [Uncodified]. | 1950 Reorg. Plan No. 2, §3, eff. May 24, 1950, 64 Stat. 1261. |

Statutes at Large

The words "may appoint" are substituted for "is authorized to appoint". So much of the Act of Mar. 3, 1903, as relates to pay is omitted as superseded by §303(c) of the Act of Aug. 14, 1964, Pub. L. 88–426, 78 Stat. 416, which is codified in section 5314 of title 5, United States Code.

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Prior Provisions

A prior section 504, acts June 25, 1948, ch. 646, 62 Stat. 909; Mar. 18, 1959, Pub. L. 86–3, §11(b), 73 Stat. 9, related to tenure and oath of office of United States attorneys, prior to repeal by Pub. L. 89–554, §8(a), and reenactment in sections 541 and 544 of this title by section 4(c) of Pub. L. 89–554.

#### Amendments

2002—Pub. L. 107–273 repealed Pub. L. 107–77, §612(c). See 2001 Amendment note below.

2001—Pub. L. 107–77, §612(c), which directed amendment of section catchline by substituting "Attorneys" for "Attorney" and amendment of text by inserting "and a Deputy Attorney General for Combating Domestic Terrorism" after "General", was repealed by Pub. L. 107–273.

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

#### Position Relating to Combating Domestic Terrorism

Pub. L. 107–77, title VI, §612, Nov. 28, 2001, 115 Stat. 800, which had authorized appointment of a Deputy Attorney General for Combating Domestic Terrorism, if by June 30, 2002, the President had not submitted a proposal to restructure the Department of Justice to include a coordinator of Department of Justice activities relating to combating domestic terrorism, or if Congress had failed to enact legislation establishing such a new position, was repealed by Pub. L. 107–273, div. B, title IV, §4004(f), Nov. 2, 2002, 116 Stat. 1812.
No: 23-002 January 9, 2023

CONTACT: Scott Burnell, 301-415-8200

*News Release Updated with new date/time/format*

NRC Announces Hearing Opportunity for Comanche Peak License Renewal;

Public Meeting in January 2023 to Discuss Environmental Review

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has announced the opportunity to request a hearing 

regarding an application to renew the operating licenses of the Comanche Peak Nuclear 

Generating Station near Glen Rose, Texas. The agency also has begun work on an environmental 

impact statement for the license renewal, and announced public meetings to be held Jan. 17, 

2023.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Generating Station, Units 1 and 2, are pressurized-water 

reactors located approximately 40 miles southwest of Fort Worth, Texas. Unit 1 is currently 

licensed to operate through Feb. 8, 2030, for Unit 2 through Feb. 2, 2033.

The operator, Vistra Operations Company, submitted the application Oct. 3 to extend the 

licenses for an additional 20 years. The NRC staff has determined the application contains 

sufficient information for the agency to formally docket the application and begin its safety and 

environmental reviews. Docketing the application does not preclude requesting additional 

information as the reviews proceed, and it does not indicate whether the NRC will renew the 

license.

The hearing opportunity was announced today in the Federal Register, and includes 

instructions for filing petitions to intervene. The deadline for filing hearing petitions is January 

30.

NRC staff members will conduct a virtual public meeting Jan. 17 from 1-3 p.m. Central 

Time, to describe the environmental review process and accept comments from the public about 

the potential scope of that review. The scoping meeting, announced in a separate Federal 

Register notice, is one method for filing comments on the environmental review before the Jan.

30 deadline. Comments can also be submitted via regulations.gov under Docket ID NRC-2022-

0183, via email to ComanchePeakEIS@nrc.gov , or via U.S. mail to Office of Administration, 

Mail Stop TWFN-7-A60M, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-

0001.

The Comanche Peak license renewal application is available on the NRC website, and at 

the Somervell County Library, 108 Allen Drive in Glen Rose; and Hood County Library, 

222 N. Travis St. in Granbury, Texas.
###### Editorial Note on Part 121

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 121 appear at 72 FR 50039 and 50040, Aug. 30, 2007.

#### § 121.1002 Who makes a formal size determination?

The responsible Government Contracting Area Director or designee makes all formal size determinations in response to either a size protest or a request for a formal size determination, with the exception of size determinations for purposes of the Disaster Loan Program, which will be made by the Disaster Area Office Director or designee responsible for the area in which the disaster occurred.
Case 0:20-cv-61356-PMH   Document 35-2   Entered on FLSD Docket 10/28/2020   Page 1 of 7

Case 0:20-cv-61356-PMH   Document 35-2   Entered on FLSD Docket 10/28/2020   Page 2 of 7

Case 0:20-cv-61356-PMH   Document 35-2   Entered on FLSD Docket 10/28/2020   Page 3 of 7

Case 0:20-cv-61356-PMH   Document 35-2   Entered on FLSD Docket 10/28/2020   Page 4 of 7

Case 0:20-cv-61356-PMH   Document 35-2   Entered on FLSD Docket 10/28/2020   Page 5 of 7

Case 0:20-cv-61356-PMH   Document 35-2   Entered on FLSD Docket 10/28/2020   Page 6 of 7

Case 0:20-cv-61356-PMH   Document 35-2   Entered on FLSD Docket 10/28/2020   Page 7 of 7
§ 206.112 Registration period. ( a ) *Initial period.* The standard FEMA registration period is 60 days following the date that the President declares an incident a major disaster or an emergency.
( b ) *Extension of the registration period.* FEMA may extend the registration period when the State requests more time to collect registrations from the affected population. FEMA may also extend the standard registration period when necessary to establish the same registration deadline for contiguous counties or States.
( c ) *Reopening of the registration period.* After the registration period for the major disaster or emergency has expired, FEMA may reopen the registration period for 60 days only when the President's declaration is amended to include additional counties and only for the additional counties.
( d ) *Late registrations.* After the standard or extended registration period ends, FEMA will accept late registrations for an additional 60 days. We will process late registrations for those registrants who explain the reason for the delay in their registration.
[67 FR 61452, Sept. 30, 2002; 67 FR 62896, Oct. 9, 2002, as amended at 89 FR 4120, Jan. 22, 2024]
#### The People of the State of New York v. Julius L. Schiff and William Manning.

— Motion to dismiss appeal granted. Present — Ingraham, P. J., McLaughlin, Laughlin, Clarke and Scott, JJ.
United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission

Office of Public Affairs

Washington, DC 20555

Phone 301-415-8200 Fax 301-415-2234

Internet:opa@nrc.gov

No. 99-177 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

(Friday, August 13, 1999)

NOTE TO EDITORS: MEETING TIME CHANGE

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards has

changed the time of its subcommittee meeting on planning and procedures on August 31 in

Rockville, Maryland. The meeting will now begin at 9:00 a.m. in room T-2B1 of the agency’s

Two White Flint North Building at 11545 Rockville Pike.

Other aspects of the meeting were published in the Federal Register on August 10.

Those wishing additional information should contact Dr. John Larkins, at 301-415-7360.

###
EXHIBIT 31.1



RULE 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a) CERTIFICATION

BY CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER



I, Richard E. Stoddard, certify that:



1. I have reviewed this Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of Kaiser Ventures LLC;



2. Based on my knowledge, this annual report does not contain any untrue
statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this amended annual
report;



3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements,
and other financial information included in this annual report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this amended annual
report;



4. The registrants other certifying officers and
I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and we have:



a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under
our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this amended annual report is
being prepared;



b) evaluated the effectiveness of the
registrants disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this amended report based on such evaluation;
and



c) disclosed in this report any change in the
registrants internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected or is reasonably likely to materially affect the registrants internal control over
financial reporting; and



5. The registrants other
certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the audit committee of registrants board of directors (or persons performing the
equivalent functions):



a) all significant deficiencies and
material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal controls over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and



b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves
management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrants internal controls over financial reporting.



|                     |  |                                       
|-------------------- |  | --------------------------------------
|Date: April 14, 2005 |  | /s/ Richard E. Stoddard               
|                     |  | Richard E. Stoddard                   
|                     |  | Chairman of the Board, President & CEO
### [§§370 to 372. Repealed. Pub. L. 101–508, title XI, §11801(a)(19), Nov. 5, 1990, 104 Stat. 1388–521]

Section 370, added Pub. L. 96–589, §4(f), Dec. 24, 1980, 94 Stat. 3404, related to termination of part.

Section 371, acts Aug. 16, 1954, ch. 736, 68A Stat. 121; Oct. 4, 1976, Pub. L. 94–455, title XIX, §1901(a)(50), 90 Stat. 1773, related to reorganization in certain receivership and bankruptcy proceedings.

Section 372, acts Aug. 16, 1954, ch. 736, 68A Stat. 122; Sept. 2, 1958, Pub. L. 85–866, title I, §95(a), 72 Stat. 1671; Oct. 4, 1976, Pub. L. 94–455, title XIX, §§1901(a)(51), (b)(14)(A), 1906(b)(13)(A), 90 Stat. 1773, 1795, 1834, related to basis in connection with certain receivership and bankruptcy proceedings.

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

#### Savings Provision

For provisions that nothing in repeal by Pub. L. 101–508 be construed to affect treatment of certain transactions occurring, property acquired, or items of income, loss, deduction, or credit taken into account prior to Nov. 5, 1990, for purposes of determining liability for tax for periods ending after Nov. 5, 1990, see section 11821(b) of Pub. L. 101–508, set out as a note under section 45K of this title.
###### Editorial Note on Part 134

#### Editorial Note:

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

#### § 134.312 Evidence.

To the extent the rules in this subpart permit the submission of evidence, the provisions of § 134.223 (a) and (b) apply.
HomeAbout NRCRadiation ProtectionHow the NRC Protects YouHealth Physics Positions Based on 10 CFR Part 20

# Health Physics Questions and Answers - Question 136

**Question 136:** 10 CFR 20.1206 states that workers who will receive a planned special exposure (PSE) must be informed regarding the risk from the radiation exposure that is expected to be received. Radiation risk coefficients presently available are applicable to large populations and are not recommended for risk assessment for a small number of people. The coefficients are not applicable to individual doses as small as PSEs. How are nuclear power plant licensees expected to comply with this rule?

**Answer:** The requirement in 10 CFR 20.1206 (c) (2) to inform the individual, who is to receive the PSE, of the estimated doses and associated potential risks is not a requirement to inform that worker of a precise probability that the worker may suffer some particular deleterious effect (s) from the estimated radiation dose (s). This requirement consists of a brief refresher of the instruction required by 10 CFR 19.12 with respect to instruction concerning the risks associated with radiation exposures. Regulatory Guide 8.29, which is being updated, provides guidance on this subject that is acceptable for meeting the requirement of 10 CFR 20.1206 (c) (2) as well as 10 CFR 19.12. That guide includes information concerning the differences between the risk to a particular individual and the risk coefficients applicable to large populations of exposed individuals. 

(Reference: 10 CFR 20.1206)

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Wednesday, November 01, 2017
#### § 301.8 Application evaluation criteria.

EDA will screen all applications for the feasibility of the budget presented and conformance with EDA's statutory and regulatory requirements. EDA will assess the economic development needs of the affected Region in which the proposed Project will be located (or will service), as well as the capability of the Eligible Applicant to implement the proposed Project. EDA will also review applications for conformance with program-specific evaluation criteria set out in the applicable FFO.

[82 FR 57053, Dec. 1, 2017]
Exhibit 23


                          INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT

The Board of Directors
YP.Net, Inc.:

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statements of
YP.Net, Inc. on Form S-8 (File No. 333-107721) filed as of August 7, 2003, of
our report dated December 5, 2003, on the consolidated balance sheets of YP.Net,
Inc. as of September 30, 2003 and 2002 and the related consolidated statements
of operations, stockholders' equity and comprehensive income (loss) and cash
flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended September 30, 2003,
which report appears in the September 30, 2003 annual report on Form 10-KSB of
YP.Net, Inc.

/s/ Epstein, Weber & Conover P.L.C.

Scottsdale, Arizona
December 30, 2003




<PAGE>
United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission

Office of Public Affairs, Region II

61 Forsyth Street, Suite 23T85, Atlanta, GA 30303

Tel. 404-562-4416 or 4417 Fax 404-562-4980

Internet: kmc2@nrc.gov or rdh1@nrc.gov

No:II-99-53 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Contact: Ken Clark or Roger Hannah (Wednesday, October 27, 1999)

NRC STAFF SCHEDULES ENFORCEMENT CONFERENCE IN PONCE, PUERTO RICO

TO DISCUSS NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFETY CONCERNS WITH LOCAL COMPANY

Meeting Is Open To Observation By The Public

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff has scheduled a predecisional enforcement

conference in Ponce, Puerto Rico, at 10:00 A.M. on November 9 with Victor E. Rivera

Associates, Geotechnical Engineers, to discuss regulatory safety concerns associated with the

company’s use of licensed radioactive material.

An NRC inspection conducted September 29 at the company’s Ponce facility resulted in

identification of five apparent violations for which NRC officials say they are considering

escalated enforcement action.

The apparent violations involve failure to secure licensed materials from unauthorized removal

or access; failure to limit the radiation dose rate in an unrestricted area to levels within

regulatory limits; failure to post (with a required warning sign) a radiation area; failure to label

containers of licensed materials; and failure to check packages for physical condition prior to

shipment. NRC officials said that, although the dose rate in an unrestricted area was higher

than allowable, there were no indications of excessive exposure to personnel.

The decision to hold a predecisional enforcement conference does not mean that a

determination has been made that a violation has occurred or that enforcement action will be

taken. The purpose is to discuss apparent violations, their causes and safety significance; to

provide the licensee with an opportunity to point out errors that may have been made in NRC

inspection reports, and to enable the company to outline its proposed corrective actions.

No decision on the apparent violations or any contemplated enforcement action, such as a

civil penalty, will be made at the conference. Those decisions will be made by NRC officials at

a later date.

#