alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Editorial Note on Part 142
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 142 appear by CBP Dec. No. 16-26, 81 FR 93019, Dec. 20, 2016.

§ 142.13 When entry summary must be filed at time of entry. ( a ) *Authority of CBP.* The CBP may require that the entry summary documentation be filed and that estimated duties, if any, be deposited at the time of entry before the merchandise is released if the importer: ( 1 ) Has failed repeatedly to file timely entry summary documentation without justification,
( 2 ) Has not taken prompt action to settle a claim for liquidated damages issued under § 142.15 for failure to file entry summary documentation timely, or a claim for liquidated damages issued under the basic importation and entry bond for failure to deposit estimated duties, taxes and charges timely, as provided in such bond. “Prompt action” means that the importer, within the time specified in a claim for liquidated damages, shall petition for relief or pay the amount claimed and, in appropriate cases, file the entry summary documentation and deposit estimated duties, if any, or
( 3 ) Has repeatedly delivered entry summary documentation, which is incomplete or which contains erroneous information.
( 4 ) Is substantially or habitually delinquent in the payment of Customs bills. See § 142.14.
( b ) *Special classes of merchandise* — ( 1 ) *Quota-class merchandise.* Quota-class merchandise shall not be released upon delivery of entry documentation before presentation of: ( i ) An entry summary for consumption with estimated duties attached; or
( ii ) A withdrawal for consumption with estimated duties attached; or
( iii ) An entry summary for consumption, without the estimated duties attached, if the entry/entry summary information and a valid scheduled statement date have been successfully received by Customs via the Automated Broker Interface. (See part 132 and § 24.25 of this chapter.)
( 2 ) *Other classes of merchandise.* Entry summary documentation, with estimated duties attached, or a withdrawal for consumption with estimated duties attached, or an entry summary for consumption, without the estimated duties attached if the entry/entry summary information and a valid scheduled statement date have previously been transmitted to Customs via the Automated Broker Interface (see § 24.25 of this chapter) shall be filed at the time of entry before release of any other merchandise of a class designated by Customs Headquarters.
( c ) [Reserved]
( d ) *Brokers; restriction.* A broker shall not circumvent an action taken under this section by applying for release of the importer's merchandise in the broker's name and under the broker's bond.
[T.D. 79-221, 44 FR 46821, Aug. 9, 1979, as amended by T.D. 89-104, 54 FR 50498, Dec. 7, 1989; T.D. 93-37, 58 FR 30984, May 28, 1993; T.D. 95-77, 60 FR 50020, Sept. 27, 1995; CBP
Dec. No. 16-26, 81 FR 93020, Dec. 20, 2016]
<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 period ended June 30, 2003 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Warren L. Williams,
Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350,
as adopted pursuant to ss. 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.



/s/ Warren L. Williams
----------------------------

Warren L. Williams
Chief Financial Officer
August 13, 2003
(April 19, 1948.)

#### Sam Birnbaum, Respondent-Appellant, v. Jamestown Mutual Insurance Company, Appellant-Respondent.

Motion for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals denied. Present — Lewis, P. J., Carswell, Johnston, Adel and Sneed, JJ. [See *ante,*p. 903.]
### §117a. Omitted

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section, acts July 1, 1941, ch. 268, 55 Stat. 454; June 8, 1942, ch. 396, 56 Stat. 338; June 28, 1943, ch. 173, title I, 57 Stat. 228; June 26, 1944, ch. 277, title I, 58 Stat. 343; June 13, 1945, ch. 189, 59 Stat. 248; July 1, 1946, ch. 530, 60 Stat. 397, related to depositing in Treasury sums received from sale of transcripts of House committee hearings, and applied only to fiscal years covered by such acts. Permanent provisions were enacted by act July 17, 1947, ch. 262, 61 Stat. 365, and classified to section 84b of this title.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

CASE NO. 20-23216-CIV-UNGARO/O’SULLIVAN

CARLOS TOLEDO,

Plaintiff,

v.

C4 PLANNING SOLUTIONS, LLC,

Defendant.

 /

ORDER APPROVING SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND 

RECOMMENDING THAT THE CASE BE DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE

THIS MATTER came before the Court following a settlement conference before

the undersigned and the Court having conducted a hearing concerning the settlement. 

THE COURT has heard from counsel and considered the terms of the settlement

agreement, the pertinent portions of the record, and is otherwise fully advised in the

premises.

This case involves a claim for unpaid overtime compensation under the Fair

Labor Standards Act, 29 U.S.C. §201, et seq. (“FLSA”). In reviewing a settlement of an

FLSA private claim, a court must “scrutiniz[e] the settlement for fairness,” and determine

that the settlement is a “fair and reasonable resolution of a bona fide dispute over FLSA

provisions.” Lynn Food Stores v. United States, 679 F.2d 1350, 1352-53 (11th Cir.

1982). A settlement entered into in an adversarial context where both sides are

represented by counsel throughout litigation "is more likely to reflect a reasonable

compromise of disputed issues." Id. The district court may approve the settlement in

order to promote the policy of encouraging settlement of litigation. Id. at 1354.

Case 1:20-cv-23216-UU Document 23 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/22/2020 Page 1 of 2
In this case, there is a bona fide factual and legal dispute over whether the

plaintiff was an exempt employee and a factual dispute over whether the plaintiff would

succeed on his retaliation claim. The terms of the settlement were announced on the

record in open Court. The Court has reviewed the terms of the settlement agreement

including the amount to be received by the plaintiff and the attorney’s fees and costs to

be received by counsel and finds that the compromise reached by the parties is a fair

and reasonable resolution of the parties' bona fide disputes. Accordingly, it is

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the parties' settlement agreement (including

attorney’s fees and costs) is hereby APPROVED. It is further

RECOMMENDED that this case be dismissed with prejudice and that the Court

retain jurisdiction until December 4, 2020 to enforce the terms of the settlement. 

DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at Miami, Florida, this 22nd day of

October, 2020. 

 

 

JOHN J. O'SULLIVAN

CHIEF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 

2

Case 1:20-cv-23216-UU Document 23 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/22/2020 Page 2 of 2
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA 

MIAMI DIVISION 

CASE NO.: 1:20-cv-23151-BLOOM/LOUIS 

KAREEM PICKERING and AARON ) 

MUHAMMED, ) 

) 

Plaintiffs, ) 

) 

v. ) 

) 

AKAL SECURITY, INC., ) 

) 

Defendant. ) 

__________________________________________) 

JOINT NOTICE OF SETTLEMENT

Plaintiffs, KAREEM PICKERING and AARON MUHAMMAD, and Defendant,

AKAL SECURITY, INC., by and through their respective undersigned counsel, hereby file 

this Joint Notice of Settlement to notify this Court that Plaintiffs and Defendant have reached 

a settlement in this matter. The Parties are in the process of finalizing settlement documents 

and request 45 days to submit documents related to the closure of this case. 

Respectfully submitted this 4th day of May 2021 

 s/Sara Saba s/Edwin Cruz 

Sara Saba, Esq. 

Florida Bar No. 911011 

Email: sara@lawofficeofsajsaba.com 

Law Office of Sara J. Saba, P.A. 

2750 Northeast 185th Street, Ste 302 

Aventura, Florida 33180 

Telephone: 305-450-8009 

Attorney for Plaintiff 

Paul Penichet, Esq. 

Florida Bar No. 899380 

E-mail: pail.penichet@jacksonlewis.com

Edwin Cruz, Esq. 

Florida Bar No. 55579 

Email: edwin.cruz@jacksonlewis.com

JACKSON LEWIS P.C. 

One Biscayne Tower, Suite 3500 

2 South Biscayne Boulevard 

Miami, Florida 33131 

Telephone: 305-577-7600 

Attorneys for Defendant

Case 1:20-cv-23151-BB Document 30 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/04/2021 Page 1 of 2
CASE NO.: 1:20-cv-23151-BLOOM/LOUIS

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on May 4, 2021, I electronically filed the foregoing document with 

the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being 

served this day on all counsel of record via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing 

generated by CM/ECF. 

 s/Edwin Cruz

Edwin Cruz 

Case 1:20-cv-23151-BB Document 30 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/04/2021 Page 2 of 2
Exhibit 32.1
 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
   (i)
    
    The Form 10-Q fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m(a) or 78o(d)); and(ii)
    
    The information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Issuer.
  /s/ Michael J. RossMichael J. RossPresident and Chief Executive Officer,Dearborn Bancorp, Inc.
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-98-50 May 1, 1998

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

Neil A. Sheehan (610/337-5331)

NRC, UTILITY TO DISCUSS APPARENT VIOLATIONS AT INDIAN POINT 2

Several apparent violations of Nuclear Regulatory

Commission requirements at the Indian Point 2 nuclear power plant

will be the subject of a meeting on Wednesday, May 6, between

agency staff and the operators of the facility. Consolidated

Edison Company of New York owns and operates the pressurizedwater reactor, located on the Hudson River in Buchanan, N.Y.

The predecisional enforcement conference will begin at

9:30 a.m. in the Public Meeting Room at the NRC Region 1 office

in King of Prussia, Pa. It will be open to the public for

observation.

One of the apparent violations involves a failure by

Consolidated Edison to take prompt and effective action to

correct problems with certain electrical circuit breakers despite

recurring instances over time in which they failed to properly

operate. The breakers are used to supply electric power to

safety-related and non-safety-related equipment. Eventually, the

company decided to shut down the unit voluntarily and, following

a breaker failure last October, focused adequate attention on

finding a permanent resolution for the problems.

Another apparent violation pertains to a failure to

address in a timely manner degraded conditions affecting the

hydrogen recombiner and post-accident containment venting

systems. Hydrogen recombiners are the primary means of reducing

concentrations of hydrogen in the containment building, the

protective concrete structure surrounding the reactor, following

an accident; the devices heat the air to the point where hydrogen

and oxygen recombine to form water. In the event the hydrogen

recombiners are unavailable, the post-accident containment

venting system would be used to remove hydrogen from the

containment building.
A third apparent violation that will be discussed deals

with an inadequate procedure for the operation of the postaccident containment venting system.

The decision to hold a predecisional enforcement

conference does not mean that the NRC 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 with 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 action.

No decision on the apparent violations will be made at

this conference. That decision will be made by NRC officials at

a later time.

#
###### Editorial Note on Part 10

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 10 appear by CBP Dec. 16-26, 81 FR 93010, Dec. 20, 2016.

#### § 10.581 Scope.

This subpart implements the duty preference and related customs provisions applicable to imported and exported goods under the Dominican Republic—Central America—United States Free Trade Agreement (the CAFTA-DR) signed on August 5, 2004, and under the Dominican Republic—Central America—United States Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act (the Act; Pub. L. 109-53, 119 Stat. 462 (19 U.S.C. 4001 *et seq.*), as amended by section 1634 of the Pension Protection Act of 2006 (Pub. L. 109-280, 120 Stat. 1167). Except as otherwise specified in this subpart, the procedures and other requirements set forth in this subpart are in addition to the customs procedures and requirements of general application contained elsewhere in this chapter. Additional provisions implementing certain aspects of the CAFTA-DR and the Act are contained in parts 24, 162, and 163 of this chapter.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

Office of Public Affairs, Region IV

611 Ryan Plaza Drive - Suite 400

Arlington, Texas 76011-8064

RIV: 97-26 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

CONTACT: Breck Henderson April 10, 1997

OFFICE: 817/860-8128

PAGER: (800) 443-7243 (065477)

NRC STAFF PROPOSES $50,000 FINE

FOR VIOLATIONS AT ARKANSAS NUCLEAR ONE

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff has proposed a civil penalty of $50,000 against

Entergy Operations, Inc., operator of Arkansas Nuclear One, a nuclear power plant near

Russellville, Arkansas, for violation of NRC fire safety and quality assurance requirements.

The violations, discussed during a predecisional enforcement conference held March 28,

were identified during inspections conducted October 22-29 and November 21-25 last year after a

fire inside the Unit 1 plant containment structure on October 17. The fire broke out in oil-soaked

insulation around a steam generator. The oil was leaking from a a cracked weld on a line in the

reactor coolant pump lubrication system. NRC inspectors found that required oil leak collection

systems were not adequate and cited two examples of "inadequate response to plant conditions

which indicated the potential for a fire."

In a letter to Entergy, NRC Regional Administrator Ellis Merschoff said, "The October 17,

1996, fire was quickly extinguished and did not affect the safety of the plant. Nonetheless, the

NRC finds the fire protection inadequacies, coupled with the plant staff's inadequate response to

indications of a fire, i.e., oil-soaked insulation which was reported to be smoking excessively

during plant heat-up, unacceptable performance."

Mr. Merschoff acknowledged that Entergy has taken or planned a number of corrective

actions, including better training and procedures to heighten sensitivity to smoke, oil leaks, lube oil

collection system requirements and the potential for reduced auto-ignition temperatures of oilsoaked insulation, and plant modifications and administrative measures to address the various

inadequacies in reactor coolant pump lube oil collection systems.

The NRC has categorized the violations as Severity Level III. The agency's enforcement

system uses four Severity Levels, with Level I being the most serious. Entergy has 30 days to

respond in writing to the NRC's Notice of Violation. The response must document specific actions

taken to prevent recurrence of the violations. During this time the company may pay the fine or

file a protest.

-30-
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AND THE CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS 
FILED AS PART OF THE QUARTERLY REPORT ON FORM 10-Q AND IS QUALIFIED IN 
ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH QUARTERLY REPORT ON FORM 10-Q.
</LEGEND>
<CURRENCY>  U.S. DOLLARS
       
<S>                               <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                     3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                           DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                SEP-30-1998
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                       1
<CASH>                                        5,328,000
<SECURITIES>                                          0
<RECEIVABLES>                                24,885,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                  4,734,000
<INVENTORY>                                   9,098,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             37,449,000
<PP&E>                                       17,077,000
<DEPRECIATION>                               12,985,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               47,542,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        21,610,000
<BONDS>                                               0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                 0
<PREFERRED>                                           0
<COMMON>                                         87,000
<OTHER-SE>                                   25,845,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 47,542,000
<SALES>                                      22,789,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             22,798,000
<CGS>                                        19,221,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                19,221,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                              5,752,000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                630,000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               89,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (2,015,000)
<INCOME-TAX>                                          0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (2,015,000)
<DISCONTINUED>                                        0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                       0
<CHANGES>                                             0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (2,015,000)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     (0.23)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     (0.23)

        


</TABLE>
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. 98-07 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

(Tuesday, January 13, 1998)

NOTE TO EDITORS:

A subcommittee of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's

Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards (ACRS) has scheduled a

meeting February 3-4 in Rockville, Maryland.

The meeting, which will be open to public observation, will

begin at 1:00 p.m. in Room T-2B3, of the NRC's One White Flint

North Building at 11545 Rockville Pike on Tuesday, February 3,

and at 8:30 a.m. Wednesday, February 4. The Subcommittee on

Advanced Reactor Designs will hear presentations by and hold

discussions with representatives of the NRC staff and

Westinghouse Electric Corp. on the A600 test and analysis

program. Some portions of the meeting dealing with proprietary

information may be closed.

Other aspects of the meeting, including an opportunity for

public comment, will be described in a Notice of Meeting

published in a forthcoming edition of the Federal Register.

#
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent

except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R.

47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 01-40845

Conference Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

JOSE FRANCISCO ESTRADA, also known as Juan Sergio Ponce,

also known as Miguel Zavala Zavala, also known as Juan

Sergio Mendez-Ponce, also known as Juan Antonio

Mendez-Ponce, also known as Jose Francisco Anthony Estrada,

also known as Miguel Rubio Escobar,

Defendant-Appellant.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. B-01-CR-106-1

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

June 19, 2002

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, DAVIS, and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Jose

Francisco Estrada has requested leave to withdraw and has filed a

brief as required by Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). 

Estrada has not responded to the motion. Our independent review

of counsel’s brief and the record discloses no nonfrivolous issue
No. 01-40845

-2-

for appeal. Counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED,

counsel is excused from further responsibilities, and the appeal

is DISMISSED. See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.

MOTION GRANTED; APPEAL DISMISSED.
§ 144.42 Combined entry for rewarehouse and withdrawal for consumption. ( a ) *Applicability.* If the consignee of merchandise withdrawn for transportation wishes to pay duty and obtain possession of the merchandise immediately upon arrival at destination, he may make a combined entry for rewarehouse and withdrawal for consumption.
( b ) *Procedure for entry.* The procedures set forth in § 144.41 are applicable to this type of entry, with the following exceptions: ( 1 ) *Form of entry.* A combined entry for rewarehouse and withdrawal for consumption shall be made on Customs Form 7501, or its electronic equivalent, (Consumption Entry), in 4 copies, and shall contain all of the statistical information as provided in § 141.61(e) of this chapter, one copy to be used as the permit. No declaration is required on the entry;
( 2 ) *Extra copy for Internal Revenue.* An additional copy of Customs Form 7501, or its electronic equivalent marked or stamped “For Internal Revenue Purposes,” shall be presented for each entry of cigars, cigarettes, or cigarette papers or tubes, when the release from Customs custody of those articles is subject to part 275 of the regulations of the Internal Revenue Service (26 CFR part 275) and tax is payable to Customs; and
( 3 ) *Deposit of duties.* Estimated Customs duties, taxes, and other charges, as set forth in subpart G of part 141 of this chapter, shall be deposited upon presentation of the combined entry. The port director shall then issue a permit for release on Customs Form 7501, or its electronic equivalent.
[T.D. 73-175, 38 FR 17464, July 2, 1973, as amended by T.D. 73-312, 38 FR 30884, Nov. 8, 1973; T.D. 87-75, 52 FR 20068, May 29, 1987; CBP Dec. 15-14, 80 FR 61290, Oct. 13, 2015]