alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
FIGUEROA MOUNTAIN

GUIDE

Santa Lucia Ranger District

Los Padres National Forest

Forest 

Service

Pacific Southwest 

Region

March 

2020

Unites States Department of Agriculture

Wall Flower Sticky Monkey Flower California Poppies

PINK, RED 

& BROWN

Wild Canyon Peas Shooting Stars Punch Bowl Clarkias

Four Spot Clarkia Wild Rose Owls Clover Elegant Clarkia Wine Cup Clarkia Prickley Phlox Hummingbird Sage

Stinging Lupine Scarlett Buglar Indian Paintbrush Fuchsia Flowering Gooseberry Chocolate Lilies

BLUE & 

VIOLET

Baby Blue Eyes Blue-eyed Grass

Blue Globe Gilia Blue Dick Purple Nightshade Bush Lupine Chinese Houses Royal Lupine Common Phacelia

Nuttles Larkspur Sky Lupine Fiesta Flowers Chia Vetch Wooly Blue Curls Foothill Penstamen
Figueroa 

Mountain

Wildflower 

Guide

Beautiful wildflowers can 

be found on Figueroa 

Mountain at various times 

during wildflower season 

as well as throughout Los 

Padres National Forest. 

Normally, the wildflowers 

start blooming in late 

February to early March 

and continue to April or 

May. Weather plays a big 

role when flowers bloom 

and how long they last. 

Let’s see how many of these 

lovely blooms we can find. 

Ready...let’s go! 

View PDF Version at:

https://go.usa.gov/xdwqX 

Carter One font for brochure title, by 

Vernon Adams; 1001fonts.com

All photos by Forest Service, Helen Tarbet

USDA is an equal opportunity provider, 

employer, and lender.

Scan code 

with smart 

device to 

download 

and view 

brochure.

Identifying Wildflowers

Primary Color

White & Green Yellow & Orange Pink, Red & Brown Blue & Violet

Shape

Asymmetrical or irregular Two–Three petals Four–Six petals

Seven or more petals Multiple thin petals Fused, bell or trumpet 

petals 

Arrangement

Individual flowers 

(no clusters)

Elongated clusters Rounded or flat clusters

WHITE & 

GREEN

Catalina Mariposa Lily

Our Lord’s 

Candle Yucca

Milk Maids aka Toothwort Miners Lettuce

Ceanothus Fairy Lanterns

Clematis aka Virgin’s Bower 

(seed form)

Clematis aka Virgin’s Bower 

(flower form)

Manzanita in bloom Death Camas Cream Cup

YELLOW & 

ORANGE

Tidy Tip

Lomatium Johnny Jump Up Bush Poppies Cactus Flower Buttercup

Seep Spring Monkey Flower Golden Yarrow Fiddleneck Goldfields Golden Stars
§ 4.472 Action on an appeal and petition for a stay. ( a ) BLM must transmit any documents received under §§ 4.470 and 4.471, within 10 days after receipt, to the Hearings Division, Office of Hearings and Appeals. If a petition for a stay has been filed, the transmittal must also include any response BLM wishes to file to a petition for a stay and the following documents from the case file: the application, permit, lease, or notice of unauthorized use underlying the final BLM grazing decision; the proposed BLM grazing decision; any protest filed by the appellant under § 4160.2; the final BLM grazing decision; and any other documents that BLM wishes the administrative law judge to consider in deciding the petition for a stay. BLM must serve a copy of any such response on the appellant and any other person named in the decision from which the appeal is taken.
( b ) Any person named in the decision from which an appeal is taken (other than the appellant) who wishes to file a response to the petition for a stay may file with the Hearings Division a motion to intervene in the appeal, together with the response, within 10 days after receiving the petition. Within 15 days after filing the motion to intervene and response, the person must serve copies on the appellant, the appropriate office of the Office of the Solicitor in accordance with § 4.413(a) and (c), and any other person named in the decision.
( c ) If a petition for a stay has not been filed, BLM must promptly transmit the following documents from the case file to the administrative law judge assigned to the appeal, once the appeal has been docketed by the Hearings Division: the application, permit, lease, or notice of unauthorized use underlying the final BLM grazing decision; the proposed BLM grazing decision; any protest filed by the appellant under § 4160.2; and the final BLM grazing decision.
( d ) Within 45 days after the expiration of the time for filing a notice of appeal, an administrative law judge must grant or deny— ( 1 ) A petition for a stay filed under § 4.471(a), in whole or in part; and
( 2 ) A motion to intervene filed with a response to the petition under paragraph (b) of this section.
( e ) Any final BLM grazing decision that is not already in effect and for which a stay is not granted will become effective immediately after the administrative law judge denies a petition for a stay or fails to act on the petition within the time set forth in paragraph (d) of this section.
( f ) At any appropriate time, any party may file with the Hearings Division a motion to dismiss the appeal or other appropriate motion. The appellant and any other party may file a response to the motion within 30 days after receiving a copy.
( g ) Within 15 days after filing a motion or response under paragraph (f) of this section, any moving or responding party must serve a copy on every other party. Service on BLM must be made on the appropriate office of the Office of the Solicitor in accordance with § 4.413(a) and (c).
[68 FR 68770, Dec. 10, 2003, as amended at 88 FR 5794, Jan. 30, 2023]
Exhibit 10.11
**NOTE**
Date:                          June 10, 2004
Maker:                **Claimsnet.com, Inc.**   Payee: **National Financial Corporation**   Place for Payment: 14860 Montfort Dr., Suite 250, Dallas, TX 75254   Principal Amount: Twenty thousand U.S. dollars (USD$20,000,00)
Annual Interest Rate on Unpaid Principal from Date of Funding: Nine and one-half percent (9.5%)
Terms of Payment: Principal and interest shall be due and payable on demand, interest beingcalculated on the unpaid principal balance to the date of each installment paid, and the paymentmade credited first to the discharge of interest accrued and the balance to the reduction of theprincipal. Accrued and unpaid interest shall be computed on the basis of the actual days elapsedin a year consisting of 365 days on the principal.
Annual Interest Rate on Demanded, Unpaid Amounts: The highest rate allowed by law.
Security for Payment: None
     Maker promises to pay to the order of Payee at the place for payment and according to theterms of payment the principal amount plus interest at the rates stated above. All unpaid amountsshall be due upon demand.
     On default in the payment of this note or in the performance of any obligation in anyinstrument securing or collateral to it, this note and all obligations in all instruments securingor collateral to it shall become immediately due at the election of Payee. Maker and each surety,endorser, and guarantor waive all demands for payment, presentations for payment, notices ofintention to accelerate maturity, notices of acceleration of maturity, protest, and notices ofprotest.
     If this note or any instrument securing or collateral to it is given to an attorney forcollection or enforcement, or if suit is brought for collection or enforcement, or if it iscollected or enforced through probate, bankruptcy, or other judicial proceeding, then Maker shallpay Payee reasonable attorney’s fees in addition to other amounts due. Reasonable attorney’s feesshall be 10.0% of all amounts due unless either party pleads otherwise.
     Nothing in this note shall authorize the collection of interest in excess of the highest rateallowed by law.
     Maker reserves the right to prepay the outstanding principal balance of this Note, in whole orin part, at any time and from time to time, without premium or penalty. Any such pre-payment shallbe made together with payment of interest accrued on the amount of principal being prepaid throughthe date of such prepayment, and shall be applied to the installments of principal due hereunder inthe inverse order of maturity.
     Each Maker is responsible for the entire amount of this note.
     The terms Maker and Payee and other nouns and pronouns include the plural if more than one.
-96-

 

     Maker shall not be deemed to be in default of this note unless and until Maker shall have beengiven seven (7) days written notice and opportunity to cure such default, via certified mail returnreceipt requested.           **Claimsnet.com, 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-98-55 May 13, 1998

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

Neil A. Sheehan (610/337-5331)

NOTE TO EDITORS:

MILLSTONE COMMISSION MEETING RESCHEDULED

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff, representatives of

Northeast Utilities and Sargent & Lundy, and various public

interest groups will brief the Commission on Tuesday, June 2, on

selected issues related to the proposed restart of Millstone Unit

3. The meeting, which will be held in the Commissioners’

Conference Room at the One White Flint building at NRC

headquarters in Rockville, Md., will be open to the public for

observation. It will begin at 8 a.m.

Both the NRC staff and NU will discuss corrective actions,

operational readiness and the results of the Independent

Corrective Action Verification Program (ICAVP) conducted at Unit

3 by Sargent & Lundy. Sargent & Lundy will also discuss the

ICAVP.

The Millstone units, which are located in Waterford, Conn.,

and are owned and operated by NU, require Commission

authorization to restart.

#
Case 0:20-cv-61469-RS Document 207-202 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/05/2023 Page 1 of 8
	


Case 0:20-cv-61469-RS Document 207-202 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/05/2023 Page 2 of 8
	


Case 0:20-cv-61469-RS Document 207-202 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/05/2023 Page 3 of 8
	


Case 0:20-cv-61469-RS Document 207-202 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/05/2023 Page 4 of 8
	

Case 0:20-cv-61469-RS Document 207-202 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/05/2023 Page 5 of 8
	


Case 0:20-cv-61469-RS Document 207-202 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/05/2023 Page 6 of 8
	


Case 0:20-cv-61469-RS Document 207-202 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/05/2023 Page 7 of 8
	


Case 0:20-cv-61469-RS Document 207-202 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/05/2023 Page 8 of 8
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                      39,841,221
<SECURITIES>                               147,362,020
<RECEIVABLES>                               33,363,687
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                           226,784,923
<PP&E>                                      70,726,775
<DEPRECIATION>                              13,235,681
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             313,592,227
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       17,069,220
<BONDS>                                    166,509,459
<COMMON>                                       235,280
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                 121,497,509
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               313,592,227
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            58,377,042
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               42,542,565
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            24,392,947
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           4,375,814
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (1,008,379)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (1,008,379)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (1,008,379)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.04)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.04)
        

</TABLE>
-cr-06218-NCR Document 14 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/14/2000 P
WADSWORTH, MARGREY & DIXON, LLP

261 NE 1st Street, 5th Floor, Miami, FL  33132 Telephone (305) 777‐1000 Facsimile (305) 777‐1001

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

For the Southern District of Florida 

CASE NO.: 1:20-cv-23242-BLOOM/LOUIS 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

ex.el. SEDONA PARTNERS, LLC. 

Plaintiffs 

v. 

ABLE MOVING & STORAGE, INC., 

ET. AL. 

Defendants, 

___________________________________/ 

 

NOTICE OF APPEARANCE WITHOUT WAIVING SERVICE 

 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that Christopher W. Wadsworth and the law firm of 

Wadsworth, Margrey & Dixon, LLP, hereby enter their appearance as counsel for Defendant, 

ABLE MOVING & STORAGE, INC., ET. AL., without waiving service. 

Copies of all future pleadings and correspondence should be sent to the undersigned 

counsel at the address written below. 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

WE HEREBY CERTIFY that, on June 29, 2021, a copy of the Notice of Appearance 

Without Waiving Service was filed to all parties in the attached service List 

WADSWORTH, MARGREY & DIXON, LLP 

 Attorneys for Defendant 

261 NE 1st Street, 5th Floor 

 Miami, FL 33132 

 (305) 777-1000 Telephone 

 (305) 777-1001 Facsimile 

 

 Christopher W. Wadsworth, Esq. 

 Florida Bar No.: 78026 

E-mail: cw@wmd-law.org 

Secondary: pleadings@wmd-law.org 

Case 1:20-cv-23242-BB Document 40 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/29/2021 Page 1 of 2
WADSWORTH, MARGREY & DIXON, LLP

261 NE 1st Street, 5th Floor, Miami, FL  33132 Telephone (305) 777‐1000 Facsimile (305) 777‐1001

SERVICE LIST 

United States of America, ex rel. Sedona Partners, LLC 

Case No. 1:20-cv-23242 BLOOM/LOUIS 

United States District Court, Southern District of Florida 

James A. Weinkle 

Assistant United States Attorney 

Southern District of Florida 

99 NE 4th Street, Third Floor 

Miami, FL 33132 

Email: james.weinkle@usdoj.gov 

Counsel for United States of America 

Justin T. Berger (to be admitted pro hac vice) 

Sarvenaz J. Fahimi (to be admitted pro hac vice) 

Crotchet, Pitre & Mc Carthy LLP 

San Francisco Airport Office Center 

840 Malcolm Road 

Burlingame, CA 94010 

Email: jberger@cpmlegal.com 

sfahimi@cpmlegal.com 

Counsel for Realtor

Paul E. Pelletier (to be admitted pro hac vice) 

Law Offices of Paul Pelletier 

3500 Morningside Drive 

Fairfax, VA 22031 

Email: pepelletier3@gmail.com 

Counsel for Realtor 

Ryon McCabe, Esq. 

Robert C. Glass 

McCabe Rabin PA 

1601 Forum Pl #201 

West Palm Beach, FL 33401 

Email: rmaccabe@mcaberabin.com 

rglass@mcaberabin.com 

 

Case 1:20-cv-23242-BB Document 40 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/29/2021 Page 2 of 2
Editorial Note on Part 4
Editorial Note: For additional information, see related documents published at 47 FR 57369, Dec. 23, 1982; 48 FR 17101, Apr. 21, 1983; and 48 FR 29096, June 24, 1983.

§ 4.11 What are the Administrator's obligations in interstate situations? ( a ) The Administrator is responsible for: ( 1 ) Identifying proposed Federal financial assistance and direct Federal development that have an impact on interstate areas;
( 2 ) Notifying appropriate officials and entities in states which have adopted a process and which select FEMA's program or activity;
( 3 ) Making efforts to identify and notify the affected State, areawide, regional, and local officials and entities in those States that have not adopted a process under the Order or do not select FEMA's program or activity;
( 4 ) Responding pursuant to § 4.10 of this part if the Administrator receives a recommendation from a designated areawide agency transmitted by a single point of contact, in cases in which the review, coordination, and communication with FEMA have been delegated.
( b ) The Administrator uses the procedures in § 4.10 if a state process provides a state process recommendation to FEMA through a single point of contact.
Case 1:20-cv-23171-CMA Document 1-3 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/30/2020 Page 1 of 8
Case 1:20-cv-23171-CMA Document 1-3 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/30/2020 Page 2 of 8
Case 1:20-cv-23171-CMA Document 1-3 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/30/2020 Page 3 of 8
Case 1:20-cv-23171-CMA Document 1-3 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/30/2020 Page 4 of 8
Case 1:20-cv-23171-CMA Document 1-3 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/30/2020 Page 5 of 8
Case 1:20-cv-23171-CMA Document 1-3 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/30/2020 Page 6 of 8
Case 1:20-cv-23171-CMA Document 1-3 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/30/2020 Page 7 of 8
Case 1:20-cv-23171-CMA Document 1-3 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/30/2020 Page 8 of 8
#### Ruben COTA, Petitioner—Appellant, v. Steve CAMBRA, Respondent—Appellee.

No. 01-55479.

D.C. No. CV-97-03156-CAS.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

*563Submitted May 8, 2002.*

Decided May 21, 2002.

Before KLEINFELD, and GRABER, Circuit Judges, and BOLTON,** District Judge.

*

 This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

**

 The Honorable Susan R. Bolton, United States District Judge for the District of Arizona, sitting by designation.

MEMORANDUM ***

Ruben Cota appeals the district court’s denial of his petition for writ of habeas corpus which challenged Ms first degree murder conviction. We review de novo the district court’s decision to deny the 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas petition, accepting its factual findings uMess they are clearly erroneous. *Alvarado v. Hill,*252 F.3d 1066, 1068 (9th Cir.2001). We find no such error in this case. Testimony does not constitute perjury merely because it is contradicted by the testimony of another witness.

The Petitioner’s argument that the testimony which convicted him should have been known by the prosecutor to have been perjured because of alleged inconsistencies between the physical evidence and the testimonial evidence cannot be considered. The record reflects that this argument was never presented to the state court but was raised for the first time in Petitioner’s January 14, 1999 Traverse, filed in the district court.

AFFIRMED.

***

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as may be provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

CASE NO. 20-81237-CIV-SMITH

PATRICK MCFADDEN,

Plaintiff,

vs.

CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH,

et al., 

Defendants.

 /

FINAL JUDGMENT

Pursuant to the Court’s Order Granting Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment, it is

ORDERED that judgment is entered in favor of Defendants, Mark Sohn and City of 

Boynton Beach and against Plaintiff, Patrick McFadden. Plaintiff’s claims are dismissed with 

prejudice.

DONE and ORDERED in Fort Lauderdale, Florida, this 30th day of March 2022.

cc: Counsel of Record 

Case 9:20-cv-81237-RS Document 90 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/31/2022 Page 1 of 1
# e Memorandu m

ULS. Departmen t o f IVansportatio n Offic e o f th e Secretar

y o f Transportatio n Subject : Notic e of

C o icatio n in Docket :

1 Date : 

### IIA R S2f) « io n fo r Waive r o f th e Term s o

f th e Orde r Schedule dOperation s a t

LaGuardi aAirpor tRepl yt o Attn , of :

I n accordanc e wit h Departmen t rule s (1 4 CF

RPar t 300) , I a mreportin g th e followin g communication . O n Februar y 24 , 2010 , durin g aphon e conversatio n wit h Representativ e Josep h Crowle y o f

Ne w York , th e Congressma n expresse dhi s suppor t for th e join t reques t submitte db y Delt aAi r

line s an dU S Airway s for awaive r fro mth e prohibitio n o n purchasin g operatin g authorization s a t LaGuardi a Airport . Th e Congressma n cite dth e potentia l impac t tha t th e transactio n migh t hav e o n preservin g jobs . I responde dthat , whil e I appreciate dhi s interes t i n thi s proceeding , I coul dno t commen t

o n it s merit s becaus e th e matte r wa s unde r

activ e consideration . Pleas e plac e thi s memorandu mi n th e appropriat e fil e an di n th e Docket .
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. 98-76 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

(Wednesday, May 20, 1998)

NRC STAFF REACHES SIGNIFICANT MILESTONE

IN REVIEW OF WESTINGHOUSE AP600 ADVANCED REACTOR DESIGN

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff has issued its advance final safety

evaluation for the Westinghouse AP600 advanced reactor design, a significant

milestone but not the final step in the design’s approval process. Some issues remain

to be resolved.

NRC expects to reach a decision in September on the final design approval. If it

is approved, a rulemaking process is expected to ensue in order to certify the design in

NRC’s licensing regulations. This certification process includes an opportunity for

public comment and for an informal public hearing before a final rule is adopted by the

Commission.

Once a reactor design has final design approval, it can be referenced in an

application for a nuclear power plant license. But the design would still be subject to

litigation in a contested licensing proceeding in the United States. Once the design is

certified by rulemaking, however, it is not subject to litigation.

The 2400-page advance final safety evaluation report contains the agency staff’s

technical evaluation for the AP600 application. It includes some issues remaining to be

resolved. It will be used during NRC’s continuing discussions with Westinghouse during

the summer, as well as in the design assessment by the NRC Advisory Committee on

Reactor Safeguards.

A copy of the report will be placed in the NRC Public Document Room in

Washington, D.C., in early June once Westinghouse has reviewed the document for

proprietary data.

NRC received the Westinghouse AP600 design application in June 1992.

###
#### Leland Wine & Liquor Store, Inc., Respondent, v. Midtown Warehouse, Inc., Appellant, et al., Defendants. Lexington Liquor Shop, Inc., Respondent, and Albert Edelman, Doing Business as Chelsea Wine & Liquor Company, Respondent, et al., Plaintiffs; Pioneer Real Estate Co., Inc., Impleaded Defendant.

Mo opinion. Present Martin, P. J., Glennon, Untermyer, Dore and Cohn, JJ.