alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
United States District Court

for the

Southern District of Florida

Maria Dolores Canto Marti, 

Plaintiff,

v.

Iberostar Hoteles y Apartamentos 

S.L., Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Civil Action No. 20-20078-Civ-Scola

Order Granting Iberostar’s Motion to Stay

Iberostar Hoteles y Apartamentos S.L. requests that this Court stay the 

case until it can comply with the European Commission’s requirement for 

companies from the European Union to obtain authorization before filing a 

response to any lawsuit under the Helms Burton Act. 

This requirement comes from a European Union blocking statute enacted 

to counteract the effects of the Helms-Burton Act, and Iberostar faces EUR 

600,000 in sanctions for failure to first obtain authorization. (ECF No. 16 at ¶ 3.) 

Iberostar’s request for authorization has already been filed and is currently 

pending before the European Commission. (Id. at ¶ 18.) In the interest of 

international comity, this Court has determined that it is appropriate to stay this 

case pending the Iberostar’s request for authorization from the European 

Commission.

The Court grants Iberostar’s motion for a stay (ECF No. 16), and the case 

is stayed until the European Union grants Iberostar’s request for authorization. 

Iberostar shall submit status reports on its request for authorization every 30 

days. In the interim, the Court directs the Clerk to administratively close this 

case.

Done and ordered at Miami, Florida, on April 24, 2020.

________________________________

Robert N. Scola, Jr.

United States District Judge

Case 1:20-cv-23287-DPG Document 14-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/28/2020 Page 1 of 1 Case 1:20-cv-20078-RNS Document 17 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/24/2020 Page 1 of 1
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.2


                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 on Form 10-Q for the period ended
September 30, 2002, of Synagro Technologies, Inc. (the "Company"), as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, J.
Paul Withrow, certify that, to the best of my knowledge, the Report fairly
presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of the Company and that the Report fully complies with the
requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.


                                             /s/ J. Paul Withrow
                                             -----------------------------------
                                             J. Paul Withrow
                                             November 14, 2002
Exhibit 32.1


CERTIFICATION OF THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER


PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


In connection with Spectrum Group International, Inc.'s (the “Company”) Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended December 31, 2008 , as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), the undersigned Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 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 result of operations of the Company.




Date:June 25, 2012/s/ Gregory N. RobertsName:Gregory N. RobertsTitle:President & Chief Executive Officer





The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350 and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document.
[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 203 (Thursday, October 21, 2004)]
[Notices]
[Page 61871]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-23506]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Antitrust Division


Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and 
Production Act of 1993--Semiconductor Research Corporation

    Notice is hereby given that, on September 14, 2004, pursuant to 
section 6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 
1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301 et seq. (``the Act''), Semiconductor Research 
Corporation has filed written notifications simultaneously with the 
Attorney General and the Federal Trade Commission disclosing changes in 
its membership status. The notifications were filed for the purpose of 
extending the Act's provisions limiting the recovery of antitrust 
plaintiffs to actual damages under specified circumstances. 
Specifically, Chartered Semiconductor Mfg., Singapore, SINGAPORE has 
been added to this venture as Member; and Rohm and Haas Electronic 
Materials, Marlborough, MA has been added as Science Area Member. Also, 
Compaq Computer Corporation, Shrewsbury, MA; Conexant Systems, Newport 
Beach, CA; CVC, Inc., Rochester, NY; Eastman Kodak Company, Rochester, 
NY; FLIPCHIP Technologies L.L.C., Phoenix, AZ; Genus, Inc., Sunnyvale, 
CA; Microcosm Technologies, Inc., Irvine, CA; Mission Research 
Corporation, Albuquerque, NM; Neo Linear, Inc., Pittsburgh, PA; 
Numerical Technologies, Inc., San Jose, CA; Physical Electronics Inc., 
Eden Prairie, NM; Shipley Company, Marlborough, MA; SILVACO Data 
Systems, Santa Clara, CA; Synopsys, Inc., Mountain View, CA; TestChip 
Technologies, Inc., Austin, TX; Tessera, Inc., San Jose, CA; Torrex 
Equipment Corporation, Livermore, CA; and Ziptronix, Inc., Research 
Triangle, NC have been dropped as parties to this venture.
    No other changes have been made in either the membership or planned 
activity of the group research project. Membership in this group 
research project remains open, and SRC intends to file additional 
written notification disclosing all changes in membership.
    On January 7, 1985, SRC filed its original notification pursuant to 
section 6(a) of the Act. The Department of Justice published a notice 
in the Federal Register pursuant to section 6(b) of the Act on January 
30, 1985 (50 FR 4281).
    The last notification was filed with the Department on January 6, 
2001. A notice was published in the Federal Register pursuant to 
section 6(b) of the Act on March 8, 2001 (66 FR 13972).

Dorothy B. Fountain,
Deputy Director of Operations, Antitrust Division.
[FR Doc. 04-23506 Filed 10-20-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-11-M
#### Art Tex Adhesive Products, Inc., v. Manhattan Life Insurance Company.

Motion for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals denied, with $10 costs. Present — Glennon, J. P., Dore, Cohn, Callahan and Van Voorhis, JJ. [See *ante,*p. 755.]
NUMBER 13-10-00523-CR

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

____________________________________________________________

GEORGE BRADFORD COLEMAN, Appellant,

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee.

____________________________________________________________

On appeal from the 24th District Court

of DeWitt County, Texas.

____________________________________________________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Chief Justice Valdez and Justices Garza and Benavides 

Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam

Appellant, George Bradford Coleman, by and through his attorney, has filed a 

motion to dismiss his appeal because he no longer desires to prosecute it. See TEX. R.

APP. P. 42.2(a). Without passing on the merits of the case, we grant the motion to 

dismiss pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 42.2(a) and dismiss the appeal. 

Having dismissed the appeal at appellant's request, no motion for rehearing will be 
2

entertained, and our mandate will issue forthwith.

PER CURIAM

Do not publish. 

TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b). 

Delivered and filed the

9th day of December, 2010.
Editorial Note on Part 141
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 141 appear by CBP Dec. No. 16-26, 81 FR 93019, Dec. 20, 2016.

§ 141.53 Procedure for separate entries. When separate entries for one consignment are made in accordance with § 141.52 (b) through (i), the following procedures shall apply: ( a ) The entries shall be presented simultaneously when practicable.
( b ) A separate consignee's declaration shall be filed for each entry.
( c ) Each entry shall cover whole packages or not less than 1 ton of bulk merchandise, except when a portion of the merchandise is entered under a temporary importation bond in accordance with Chapter 98, Subchapter XIII, Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (19 U.S.C. 1202).
( d ) When separate entries are made for merchandise covered by a single bill of lading or air waybill, the provisions of § 141.54 shall be complied with, except that the endorsement on the bill of lading or air waybill required by § 141.54(b) shall read as follows:
As portions of the within-described merchandise will be covered by separate entries, the undersigned consignee expressly waives the right granted by section 484(j), Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, to have this bill of lading or air waybill returned.
[T.D. 73-175, 38 FR 17447, July 2, 1973, as amended by T.D. 78-394, 43 FR 49788, Oct. 25, 1978; T.D. 89-1, 53 FR 51256, Dec. 21, 1988]
Editorial Note on Part 10
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 10 appear by CBP Dec. 16-26, 81 FR 93010, Dec. 20, 2016.

§ 10.744 Issuance of negative origin determinations. If, as a result of an origin verification initiated under this subpart, CBP determines that a claim for preferential tariff treatment made under § 10.723(a) of this subpart should be denied, it will issue a determination in writing or via an authorized electronic data interchange system to the importer that sets forth the following: ( a ) A description of the good that was the subject of the verification together with the identifying numbers and dates of the import documents pertaining to the good;
( b ) A statement setting forth the findings of fact made in connection with the verification and upon which the determination is based; and
( c ) With specific reference to the rules applicable to originating goods as set forth in General Note 28, HTSUS, and in §§ 10.729 through 10.741 of this subpart, the legal basis for the determination.
EXHIBIT AN 

February 20, 2022 Carnival Letter 

Dkt. 95-2 

Case 1:20-cv-22945-RNS Document 284-40 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/25/2022 Page 1 of 4
Case 1:20-cv-22945-RNS Document 284-40 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/25/2022 Page 2 of 4
Case 1:20-cv-22945-RNS Document 284-40 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/25/2022 Page 3 of 4
Case 1:20-cv-22945-RNS Document 284-40 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/25/2022 Page 4 of 4
#### § 151.01 Purpose.

Section 11 of the Federal Fire Prevention and Control Act of 1974, provides that “each fire service that engages in the fighting of a fire on property which is under the jurisdiction of the United States may file a claim with the Administrator of the Federal Emergency Management Agency for the amount of direct expenses and direct losses incurred by such fire service as a result of fighting such fire.” This part, implements section 11 of the Act and governs the submission, determination, and appeal of claims under section 11.
Case 0:20-cv-61469-RS Document 207-65 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/05/2023 Page 1 of 1
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 Commerce

The Department of Commerce (DOC) has submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for clearance the following proposal for collection of information under provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35). 

*Agency:*                     Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS).                 

*Title:*                     Assessment of Foreign Defense Procurement Practices.                 

*Agency Form Number:*                     N/A.                 

*OMB Approval Number:*                     None.                 

*Type of Request:*                     New collection.                 

*Burden:*                     450 hours.                 

*Average Time Per Response:*                     3 hours per response.                 

*Number of Respondents:*                     150 respondents.                 

*Needs and Uses:*                     This survey of U.S. defense contractors is needed to obtain information on foreign defense procurement practices abroad.                 

*Affected Public:*                     Individuals, businesses or other for-profit institutions.                 

*Respondent's Obligation:*                     Mandatory.                 

*OMB Desk Officer:*                     David Rostker.                 

Copies of the above information collection proposal can be obtained by calling or writing Diana Hynek, Departmental Paperwork Clearance Officer, Office of the Chief Information Officer, 202-482-0266, Department of Commerce, Room 6625, 14th and Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230. 

                    Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information collection should be sent within 30 days of publication of this notice to David Rostker, OMB Desk Officer, e-mail address,                     *David_Rostker@omb.eop.gov,*                     or fax number, (202) 395-7285.                 

Dated: October 18, 2004. 

Madeleine Clayton, 

Management Analyst, Office of the Chief Information Officer. 

[FR Doc. 04-23643 Filed 10-21-04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510-33-P
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

Office of Public Affairs, Region IV

611 Ryan Plaza Drive - Suite 400

Arlington, Texas 76011-8064

Region IV: 97-20 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

CONTACT: Breck Henderson March 25, 1997

OFFICE: 817/860-8128

NRC TO HOLD OPEN ENFORCEMENT CONFERENCE

MARCH 28 WITH ENTERGY

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff will hold a predecisional

enforcement conference Friday, March 28, with officials of Entergy

Operations, Inc., the operator of Arkansas Nuclear One, a nuclear power

plant near Russellville, Ark. The parties will discuss two apparent

violations of NRC requirements.

The conference will begin at 10:30 a.m. at NRC Region IV offices in

Arlington, Texas. The meeting will be open to public observation; NRC

officials will be available afterwards for questions.

The apparent violations were identified during inspections completed

October 22-29 and November 21-25, 1996. NRC inspectors found that an

adequate lube oil leakage collection system had not been installed

following a modification to Reactor Coolant Pump B at ANO Unit 1. This is

in apparent violation of NRC fire protection requirements.

The inadequate lube oil leakage collection system allowed lube oil to

leak from one of the plant's Reactor Coolant Pumps onto insulation around a

steam generator. A fire broke out when oil ignited during plant startup on

October 17, 1996. The fire was put out quickly without injury to workers

or damage to plant equipment.

The second apparent violation involves three prior instances when ANO

personnel failed to identify symptoms of oil leakage and take action that

could have prevented the fire. These included opportunities to address

reactor coolant pump design inadequacies, evidence of oil-soaked insulation

and smoke coming from insulation during plant startup.
The decision to hold a predecisional enforcement conference does not

mean that NRC has made a final determination that violations did occur or

that enforcement action, such as a monetary fine, will be taken. The

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

significance, and to provide Entergy officials an opportunity to point out

any errors that may have been made in the NRC inspection report and present

corrective actions that have been taken.

No decision on the apparent violations or any contemplated enforcement

action, such as a civil penalty, will be made at this conference. Those

decisions will be made by senior NRC officials at a later time.

#
#### Condur Affiliates, Respondent, v. Ronnie, Inc., Appellant.

No opinion. Present — Glennon, J. P., Dore, Cohn, Callahan and Shientag, JJ. [See *post,*pp. 768, 937.]
NRC NEWS

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

OFFICE OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS, REGION III

801 Warrenville Road

Lisle IL 60532

Web Site: http://www.nrc.gov/OPA

No. III-00-38 July 10, 2000

CONTACT: Jan Strasma (630)829-9663/e-mail: rjs2@nrc.gov

Pam Alloway-Mueller (630)829-9662/e-mail: pla@nrc.gov

NRC ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING TEAM, MOBILE LABORATORY

TO VISIT BIG ROCK POINT NUCLEAR PLANT SITE IN MID-JULY

** Open for Public Visits on the Afternoons of July 18 - 20 **

A Nuclear Regulatory Commission environmental monitoring team and its mobile laboratory

will be at the Big Rock Point Nuclear Power Plant site near Charlevoix, Michigan, during the week of

July 17 to collect and analyze environmental samples at the facility which is being decommissioned.

The plant, owned by Consumers Energy Co., was shut down in 1997.

The NRC team will be checking, on a preliminary basis, portions of the plant site which are

believed to be free of any radioactivity resulting from plant operations. Further surveys will be

performed later as part of a more thorough review by the NRC before the site is released for

unrestricted uses.

The team will also perform radiological surveys of the area where a concrete pad will be

constructed for the placement of storage casks for the plant’s spent reactor fuel. The surveys will

determine the radiological conditions of the storage area before any construction and use of the site

begins. The fuel assemblies are currently in a spent fuel storage pool at the plant, but will be

transferred into storage casks which will be placed on the concrete pad.

The mobile laboratory will be open to visitors from 3:30 to 4:30 p.m. on July 18-20, and the

team members will be available to answer questions on the NRC’s inspection program for

decommissioning activities at the Big Rock Point site. At 5 p.m. on July 20, the team will meet with

the Big Rock Point Citizen’s Advisory Board as part of the board’s regulatory scheduled meeting.

The mobile laboratory will be parked in the East Parking lot, which is located on the North side

of the plant access road. The Big Rock Point plant site is on Highway 31 east of Charlevoix.

# # # ##
### §31b–4. Transferred

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section 31b–4 was editorially reclassified as former section 5127 of this title.
###### Editorial Note on Part 141

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 141 appear by CBP Dec. No. 16-26, 81 FR 93019, Dec. 20, 2016.

#### § 141.36 Nonresident principals in general.

A power of attorney executed by a nonresident principal shall not be accepted unless the agent designated thereby is a resident and is authorized to accept service of process against such nonresident.

[T.D. 73-175, 38 FR 17447, July 2, 1973, as amended by T.D. 84-93, 49 FR 17754, Apr. 25, 1984]
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

RUDOLPH DECAMBRA, AKA Anthony 

Decambra, AKA Rudolph Anthony 

Decambra, AKA Rudy Decambra, AKA 

Roland James, AKA Andrew Lyon, AKA 

Ray Wilson,

 Petitioner,

 v.

LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General,

 Respondent.

No. 13-73573

Agency No. A027-251-462

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted December 9, 2015**

Before: WALLACE, RAWLINSON, and IKUTA, Circuit Judges.

Rudolph Decambra, a native and citizen of Guyana, petitions for review of 

the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal from an 

immigration judge’s decision denying his application for protection under the 

 

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent 

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision 

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

FILED

DEC 14 2015

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 13-73573

Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under 

8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence the agency’s factual 

findings. Arbid v. Holder, 700 F.3d 379, 385-86 (9th Cir. 2012). We deny the 

petition for review.

Substantial evidence supports the agency’s denial of Decambra’s CAT claim 

because Decambra failed to establish it is more likely than not he would be 

tortured by or with the consent or acquiescence of the government if returned to

Guyana. See Alphonsus v. Holder, 705 F.3d 1031, 1049-50 (9th Cir. 2013). We 

reject Decambra’s contention that the BIA did not consider Decambra’s news 

article or all of the country report. 

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
Filed by Avantafile.com - The Parking REIT, Inc. - Exhibit 10.14






EX-10.14 - First Amendment to Loan Agreement, dated July
9,2020, by and among certain subsidiaries of Parking REIT, Inc. as borrowers party thereto and LoanCore Capital Credit
REIT LLC as lender

Please see PDF for document reference
### §38a. Transferred

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section 38a was editorially reclassified as section 5305 of this title.