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

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA CASE NO. 20-80048-CR-DIMITROULEAS

Plaintiff 

vs.

Justin Smith

 Defendant 

 

ORDER GRANTING CONTINUANCE

This matter having come before the Court on Joint Motion for Continuance. After due 

consideration, it is

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that this case is hereby continued to the two-week trial calendar 

commencing May 24, 2021 at 10:00 A.M. o=clock, or as soon thereafter as the case may be called. 

COUNSEL AND DFENDANT(S) shall report to a Calendar Call/Change of Plea to be held on MONDAY,

May 17, 2021, at 10:00 a.m. o=clock. It being further

ORDERED that the period from the date of this order to the time of trial shall be deemed excludable 

in computing the time within which the trial of this case must commence pursuant to Title 18, U.S.C., Section 

3161(h)(8)(A), this Court finds that the ends of justice served by continuing the trial outweigh the best interest 

of the public and the defendant(s) in a speedy trial.

DONE AND ORDERED this 31st day of March, 2021.

CC:Alistair Reader, DOJ

 Stephen J. Gripkey, DOJ

 Brian H. Bieber, Esq. 

 Thomas J. Spina, Esq.

 

Case 9:20-cr-80048-WPD Document 29 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/31/2021 Page 1 of 1
Editorial Note on Part 134
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 134 appear at 72 FR 50042, Aug. 30, 2007.

§ 134.228 Review of initial decisions. ( a ) *Request for review.* Within 30 days after the service of an initial decision or a reconsidered initial decision of a Judge, any party, or SBA's Office of General Counsel, may file and serve a request for review by the Administrator. A request for review must set forth the filing party's specific objections to the initial decision, and any alleged support for those objections in the record, or in case law, statute, regulation, or SBA policy. A party must serve its request for review upon all other parties and upon SBA's Office of General Counsel.
( b ) *Response.* Within 20 days after the service of a request for review, any party, or SBA's Office of General Counsel, may file and serve a response. A party must serve its response upon all other parties and upon SBA's Office of General Counsel.
( c ) *Transfer of the record.* Upon receipt of all responses, or 30 days after the filing of a request for review, whichever is earlier, OHA will transfer the record of the case to the Administrator. The Administrator, or his or her designee, will then review the record.
( d ) *Standard of review.* Upon review, the Administrator, or his or her designee, will sustain the initial decision unless it is based on an erroneous finding of fact or an erroneous interpretation or application of case law, statute, regulation, or SBA policy.
( e ) *Order.* The Administrator, or his or her designee, will: ( 1 ) Affirm, reverse, or modify the initial decision, which determination will become the final decision of the SBA upon issuance; or
( 2 ) Remand the initial decision to the Judge for appropriate further proceedings.
[61 FR 2683, Jan. 29, 1996, as amended at 67 FR 47249, July 18, 2002]
### §2703. Definitions

As used in this chapter:

#### (1) Advanced workplace practices

The term "advanced workplace practices" means innovations in work organization and performance, including high-performance workplace systems, flexible production techniques, quality programs, continuous improvement, concurrent engineering, close relationships between suppliers and customers, widely diffused decisionmaking and work teams, and effective integration of production technology, worker skills and training, and workplace organization, and such other characteristics as determined appropriate by the Secretary of Labor, in consultation with the Secretary of Commerce.

#### (2) Advanced workplace technologies

The term "advanced workplace technologies" includes—

(A) numerically controlled machine tools, robots, automated process control equipment, computerized flexible manufacturing systems, associated computer software, and other technology for improving the manufacturing and industrial production of goods and commercial services, which advance the state-of-the-art; or

(B) novel industrial and commercial techniques and processes not previously generally available that improve quality, productivity, and practices, including engineering design, quality assurance, concurrent engineering, continuous process production technology, inventory management, upgraded worker skills, communications with customers and suppliers, and promotion of sustainable economic growth.

#### (3) Department

The term "Department" means the Department of Labor.

#### (4) Nonprofit organization

The term "nonprofit organization" means a tax-exempt organization, as described in paragraph (3), (4), or (5) of section 501(c) of title 26.

#### (5) Secretary

The term "Secretary" means the Secretary of Labor.

#### (6) Worker organization

The term "worker organization" means a labor organization within the meaning of section 501(c)(5) of title 26.

(Pub. L. 103–382, title V, §544, Oct. 20, 1994, 108 Stat. 4053.)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

CASE NO.: 20-81129-CIV-MIDDLEBROOKS/Snow

(05-CR-80063-MIDDLEBROOKS)

QUINTON BANNISTER,

Movant,

v.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Respondent.

_________________________________________/

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

THIS CAUSE comes before the Court on Magistrate Judge Lurana S. Snow’s Report and 

Recommendation (“Report”), issued December 29, 2020. (DE 13). After obtaining leave from the 

Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals to file a successive habeas motion, Quinton Bannister filed this 

Motion to Vacate pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §2255. (DE 6). The Report recommends granting the 

motion in part and reserving ruling on the motion in part. (DE 13). No party has objected to the 

Report, and the time within which to do so has expired. 

I have reviewed Judge Snow’s Report and the record in this case. The Report is thorough 

and accurate and I agree with its recommendations. Accordingly, it is ORDERED AND 

ADJUDGED that:

(1) The Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation (DE 13) is ADOPTED. 

(2) Movant Quinton Bannister’s Motion to Vacate pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (DE 6) is 

GRANTED IN PART and Movant’s conviction and sentence as to Counts 7 and 10 

in the underlying criminal case (Case No. 05-CR-80063-MIDDLEBROOKS) SHALL 

BE VACATED by separate Order.

Case 9:20-cv-81129-DMM Document 14 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/22/2021 Page 1 of 2
2

(3) As it relates to Count 4, I will RESERVE RULING on the Motion to Vacate until 

such time as the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals resolves the following pending

cases: Cannon v. United States, 11th Cir Case No. 16-16194, Carlos Granada v. United 

States, 11th Cir. Case No. 19-14771, and Foster v. United States, 11th Cir. Case No. 19-

14771 (collectively, “the Pending Appeals”). 

(4) Until the Eleventh Circuit’s mandates issue in the Pending Appeals, this case shall be 

STAYED. The Parties are directed to immediately advise this Court when all of the 

aforementioned Pending Appeals are resolved. 

(5) The Clerk of Court is directed to ADMINISTRATIVELY CLOSE THIS CASE. This 

court shall retain jurisdiction and the case shall be restored to the active docket upon 

motion of either party once the Eleventh Circuit renders opinions in the Pending 

Appeals.

(6) Certificate of Appealability: Because I am granting Movant’s requested habeas relief

in part (by agreement of the Parties), and I am reserving ruling in part, it does not appear 

necessary to make any determination about whether to issue a certificate of 

appealability at this time. 

SIGNED in Chambers at West Palm Beach, Florida, this 22nd day of January, 2021.

Donald M. Middlebrooks

United States District Judge

cc: Magistrate Judge Lurana S. Snow 

Counsel of Record

Case 9:20-cv-81129-DMM Document 14 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/22/2021 Page 2 of 2
#### In the Matter of the Transfer Tax upon the Estate of Arthur Challis Kennard, Deceased. The Comptroller of the State of New York, Appellant; Arthur Molloy Kennard, as Executor, etc., Respondent.

Order affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements. No opinion. Present — Ingraham, P. J., McLaughlin, Laughlin, Dowling and Hotchkiss, 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

PR No. 99-208 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

(Tuesday, September 28, 1999)

NRC ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON NUCLEAR WASTE

TO MEET IN LAS VEGAS

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s Advisory Committee on Nuclear Waste has

scheduled a public meeting October 12-13 in Las Vegas, Nevada. The meeting, which is open

to the general public, will be held at the Alexis Park Resort, at 375 East Harmon Avenue.

On October 12, from 8:30 a.m. until 5:30 p.m., participants will engage in a roundtable

discussion on aspects of safety assessment (risk assessment) and the most effective means to

communicate these methods to the public. At the meeting, public comments will be sought on

the role of risk assessment in licensing and regulating the proposed waste repository at Yucca

Mountain. Representatives from local government will participate in the discussions, along with

those from state government officials, various Indian Nations, the U.S. Department of Energy,

the Environmental Protection Agency, and other outside experts.

From 7:00 until 9:00 p.m. that evening, the Committee will meet with stakeholders to

discuss their concerns regarding the Yucca Mountain site.

The next day, from 8:30 a.m. until 5:00 p.m., local government officials will discuss the

status of scientific investigations and spent fuel and high-level waste transportation at the site.

County representatives will also present their views on various technical issues, and federal

officials will discuss the status of their repository design and site characterization projects.

On October 14, the Committee will visit the proposed Yucca Mountain site and the

Department of Energy’s Losee Road facility. Several state and local representatives have been

invited to attend, but attendance at this session will be limited.

Those wishing to make oral statements should notify Dr. Richard Savio, 301-415-7363,

in advance. Other aspects of the meeting, including opportunities for public comment, will be

described in a forthcoming edition of the Federal Register. The entire meeting agenda, and

other committee meeting notices, transcripts, and letter reports are available on the internet, at

http://www.nrc.gov/ACRSACNW.

###
#### J. & T. Swallow, Respondents, *v. M.*Y. Duncan et al., Appellants.

April 13, 1885.

The appellants having hied neither assignment of errors, nor brief in this case as by statute required, the judgment is affirmed.

*337Appeal from Audrain Circuit Court, Hon. Elijah Robinson, Judge.

*Affirmed.*

McFarland & Trimble, for respondents.

Opinion by

Philips, P. J.

The appellants have filed neither assignment of errors' nor brief in this case, as by statute required. The judgment of the circuit court is, therefore, affirmed.

All concur.
PUBLIC LAW 110–239—JUNE 3, 2008 122 STAT. 1559 

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY—H.R. 2356: 

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD: 

Vol. 153 (2007): June 11, considered and passed House. 

Vol. 154 (2008): May 15, considered and passed Senate. 

Æ 

Public Law 110–239 

110th Congress 

An Act 

To amend title 4, United States Code, to encourage the display of the flag of 

the United States on Father’s Day. 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 

the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

SECTION 1. ADDITIONAL OCCASION FOR DISPLAY OF THE FLAG OF 

THE UNITED STATES. 

Section 6(d) of title 4, United States Code, is amended by 

inserting after ‘‘Flag Day, June 14;’’ the following: ‘‘Father’s Day, 

third Sunday in June;’’. 

Approved June 3, 2008. 

June 3, 2008 

[H.R. 2356] 


dkrause on GSDDPC29 with PUBLIC LAWS
#### George Moore v. State of Nebraska.

Filed July 3, 1903.

No. 13,119.

Gaming' at Public House: Information. An information under section 217 of the criminal code must set out the names of the parties allowed to play the games complained of, if known to the prosecutor, or allege that they are unknown if such is the fact.

Error to the district court for Custer county: Homer M. Sullivan, District Judge.

*Reversed.*

*Alpha Morgan, Adolphus R. Talbot, Thomas S. Allen, Nathan T. Gadd*and *Oharles ti. Holcomb,*for plaintiff in error.

*Frank N. Prout, Attorney Generad, Norris Brown*and *J. R. Dean,*for the state. .

Duffie, C.

The plaintiff in error Avas informed against under section 217 of the criminal code for alloAving games to he played at a saloon of Avhich he Avas the proprietor. The information does not name the parties Avho were allowed to play, nor does it allege that such parties are unknoAvn. He was convicted and fined, and uoav prosecutes error. Sections 216 and 217 of our crimihal code Avere copied from an Ohio statute, approved March 12, 1831,. At an early day the supreme court of Ohio held-that an “indictment for permitting gambling must recite the parties, or allege that they are unknown,” *Davis v. State,*7 Ohio, *654205. It is true that the indictment in that case was brought under the section corresponding to section 216 of our criminal code, but it is apparent that the same necessity existed for naming the parties, if known, in a charge brought under section 217 as when brought under the preceding section. • The highest court of the state from which the statute was adopted having passed upon the cpiestion, the presumption obtains that the legislature of this state in adopting, the statute did so in the light of the construction given it by the supreme court of Ohio from which it was borrowed.

The information was defective in the respect named, and we recommend a reversal of the judgment.

Pound and Kirkpatrick, CO., concur.

By the Court: For the reasons stated in the foregoing opinion,vthe judgment of the district court is

Reversed.
United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission

Office of Public Affairs, Region I

475 Allendale Road King of Prussia, PA 19401

Phone: 610/337-5330 Fax: 610/337-5241

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

I-97-17 March 3, 1997

Contact: Diane Screnci FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Neil A. Sheehan

NRC STAFF SCHEDULES PREDECISIONAL ENFORCEMENT CONFERENCE

REGARDING APPARENT VIOLATIONS AT BEAVER VALLEY NUCLEAR PLANT

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff will meet with officials of the Beaver Valley nuclear

power plant on Friday, March 7, to discuss apparent violations at the Duquense Light Companyoperated facility in Shippingport, Pa. Scheduled to begin at 10 a.m. in the Region I public meeting

room, the predicisional enforcement conference will be open to the public for observation only.

The apparent violations stem from mispositioned valves and other components. Specifically,

last July 14, plant operators reported that a service water cross-connect valve, located between

the containment recirculation spray heat exchangers, was closed and therefore out of its normal

alignment.

Since July 15, other examples of safety- and nonsafety-related valves and breakers not in their

intended position or not properly secured were identified by Duquense Light. The utility has taken

steps aimed at avoiding any recurrences.

An NRC decision to hold a pre-decisional enforcement conference does not mean the agency

has determined a violation has occurred or that enforcement action will be taken. Rather, the

purpose is to discuss apparent violations, their causes and safety significance; to provide the

licensee an opportunity to point out any errors that may have been made in the NRC inspection

report; and to enable the licensee to outline its proposed corrective actions.

No decision on the apparent violations will be made at this conference. Those decisions will

be made by senior NRC officials at a later time.

#
HomeAbout NRCRadiation ProtectionHow the NRC Protects YouHealth Physics Positions Based on 10 CFR Part 20

# Health Physics Questions and Answers - Question 117

**Question 117:** Does the requirement of 10 CFR 20.2101 (a) to use the unit curie (for activity) mean that it will not be permissible to record the results of contamination surveys in units of disintegrations per minute (dpm) or mrad smearable?

**Answer:** No. The 10 CFR 20.2101 (a) requirement as it applies to units of activity (curies) is intended to apply to records of quantities of material directly related to the explicit requirements of Part 20 (e.g., storage and control, posting and labeling, waste disposal, concentrations in air, and individual intakes of radioactive material). It is not intended to apply to surveys for contamination. Note: There are requirements in 10 CFR 35.70 (h) which apply to medical licensees to record the results of surveys for removable contamination as disintegrations per minute per 100 square centimeters.

(Reference: 10 CFR 20.2101)

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Tuesday, October 31, 2017
Bureau of Labor Statistics

Series Id:

Series title:

Labor force status:

Type of data:

Age:

Years:

Year Qtr1 Qtr2 Qtr3 Qtr4 Annual

2011 453

Unemployed

Number in thousands

65 years and over

2011 to 2011

Labor Force Statistics from the Current Population Survey

Original Data Value

LNU03000097Q

Not Seasonally Adjusted

(Unadj) Unemployment Level - 65 yrs. & over

Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics Generated on: May 16, 2011 (02:09:58 PM)
#### George Burgess, Appellant, v. New York Central and Hudson River Railroad Company, Respondent.

Judgment and order affirmed, with costs. All concurred.
1

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

SUPREME COURT CAUSE NO. DA 19-0307

GORDON WILLIAMS, GALE MADLER, 

TIMOTHY RUSSELL, JOYCE KELLEY,

and SAM BLAYLOCK,

Plaintiffs/Appellants,

vs.

STILLWATER BOARD OF COUNTY 

COMMISSIONERS,

Defendant/Appellee.

ORDER

Plaintiffs/Appellants filed a Fifth Unopposed Motion to Suspend the 

Deadlines in this case. Pursuant to the Motion, and for good cause being shown,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the schedule and deadlines in this matter, 

including for mediation and briefing, is suspended for an additional ninety (90) days 

from this date.

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

March 23 2020

03/23/2020

Case Number: DA 19-0307
Exhibit 31.2



SHOE CARNIVAL, INC.
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO RULE 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a) OF THE SECURITIES
EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, W. Kerry Jackson, certify that:

|1. | I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q/A of Shoe Carnival, Inc.; and                                                                                                                                                                                                                          
|-- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|2. | Based on my knowledge, this 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 report.



|Date:  June 22, 2018 | By:  /s/ W. Kerry JacksonW. Kerry JacksonSenior Executive Vice President,Chief Operating and Financial Officer and Treasurer
|-------------------- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No: 23-049 August 17, 2023 

CONTACT: Scott Burnell, 301-415-8200 

NRC Issues Final Environmental Impact Statement

for Kairos Test Reactor Construction Permit

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff has completed its final environmental impact 

statement on Kairos Power’s application for a permit to build a test version of the company’s Hermes 

advanced reactor design in Oak Ridge, Tennessee. The staff has weighed the facility’s environmental, 

economic, technical and other benefits against environmental and other impacts, and recommends that the 

permit should be issued. 

The staff will provide the EIS and the safety evaluation report, which was completed in June, to 

the Commission for the mandatory hearing phase of the licensing process. Following the hearing, 

expected to take place later this year, the Commission will vote whether to authorize the staff to issue the 

permit.

Kairos filed the application in September 2021, seeking a permit to build a 35-megawatt thermal

reactor that would use molten salt to cool the reactor core. The test reactor, which will not generate

electricity, is intended to provide operational data to support the development of a larger version for 

commercial power. 

A copy of the EIS will be available for public inspection at the Oak Ridge Public Library, 1401 

Oak Ridge Turnpike, in Oak Ridge. 

The company will have to submit a separate application for an operating license and obtain 

approval from the NRC before operating the Hermes reactor.
#### § 209.1 Purpose.

This part provides guidance on the administration of a program to provide supplemental property acquisition and elevation assistance made available by Congress to provide funds for the acquisition or elevation, for hazard mitigation purposes, of properties that have been made uninhabitable by floods in areas that were declared major disasters in federal fiscal years 1999 and 2000.
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.2

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

      In connection with the quarterly report of Willbros Group, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2004 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Warren
L. Williams, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certify pursuant to
18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, 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.

Date: August 9, 2004                            /s/ Warren L. Williams
                                                --------------------------------
                                                Warren L. Williams
                                                Chief Financial Officer