alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

Region III Office of Public Affairs

801 Warrenville Road, Lisle, IL 60532-4351

NEWS ANNOUNCEMENT: RIII-98-06 January 16, 1998

CONTACT: Jan Strasma 630/829-9663

Angela Greenman 630/829-9662

E-mail: opa3@nrc.gov

NRC SPECIAL INSPECTION TEAM TO PRESENT FINDINGS

AT MALLINCKRODT MEDICAL, INC.

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff will meet January 23

with Mallinckrodt Medical, Inc., officials to discuss the

findings of a special inspection at the facility. Mallinckrodt

is located in Maryland Heights, Missouri.

The meeting, which is open to public observation, will begin

at 10:00 a.m. (CST). It will take place in the Maryland Heights

Fire District House #1, 2600 Schuetz Road, Maryland Heights,

Missouri.

The six-member inspection team was at the Mallinckrodt

facility the week of January 12 and evaluated the company’s

radiation protection, transportation, and distribution programs.

Mallinckrodt is a major supplier of radioactive drugs used

in research and routine medical diagnosis and therapy.

NRC staff scheduled the special inspection at the company as

a result of an employee overexposure last year and several

transportation incidents over the last two years.

In May of last year an employee received an exposure of 290

rems to his thumb. NRC’s annual exposure limit to the hand of an

occupational worker is 50 rems.

(For comparison, the average person in the United States receives

about 300 millirems per year from natural background radiation.)

Two devices shipped from Mallinckrodt’s manufacturing plant

in Missouri in July of last year arrived at its nuclear

pharmacies in New Jersey and Pennsylvania with radiation levels

on the outer surfaces of the packages of 250 millirem per hour

and 240 millirem per hour, respectively. The federal limit is

200 millirem per hour. These shipping violations were considered

repetitive since a similar shipping violation occurred in

December of 1996.
Mallinckrodt was fined $55,000 in December of last year for

the personnel overexposure and the two July transportation

incidents and $13,750 in May of last year for the December 1996

transportation incident.

The team will issue a written report in several weeks.

####
Order entered December 5 , 2016

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05
- 16
- 00739
- CR No. 05
- 16
- 007 9 3
- CR MIGUEL GONZALES, Appellant

V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appea l from the Criminal District Court No. 3

Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No s . F15
- 59527 & F15
- 59528



### O RDER The Court has before it appellant’s November 30, 2016 second motion to extend time to file his brief in which he asserts the reporter’s recor d must be corrected before he is able to present his issues on appeal

. Specifically, appellant states, and our review confirms, that pages 41

- 88 contained in volume 4 (voir dire) are duplications of pages 41

- 88 of volume 5 (jury trial). When contacted, c ourt reporter Karren Jones informed appellant that she would need thirty days in which to correct the record. We GRANT appellant’s motion. We ORDER court reporter Karren Jones to file a corrected volume 4 of voir dire no later than December 29, 2016 . App ellant’s brief is due thirty days after the corrected volume 4 of the reporter’s record is filed or January 30, 2017 , whichever is earlier

. /s/ LANA MYERS JUSTICE
#### § 352.27 Federal role in the emergency response.

In addition to the Federal component of the licensee offsite emergency response plan described in subpart B (§ 352.26), and after complying with E.O. 12657, Section 2(b)(2), which states that FEMA:

(2) Shall take care not to supplant State and local resources and that FEMA shall substitute its own resources for those of State and local governments only to the extent necessary to compensate for the nonparticipation or inadequate participation of those governments, and only as a last resort after appropriate consultation with the Governors and responsible local officials in the affected area regarding State and local participation;

FEMA shall provide for initial Federal response activities, including command and control of the offsite response, as may be needed. Any Federal response role, undertaken pursuant to this section, shall be transferred to State and local governments as soon as feasible after the onset of an actual emergency.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

CASE NO. 20-cv-81275-DMM

NELSON FERNANDEZ,

Plaintiff, 

-vsDIAMONDS BY RAYMOND LEE, LLC, a

Florida limited liability company. 

Defendants. 

_________________________________________________/

RE-NOTICE OF MEDIATION

DATE AND TIME: Thursday, January 14, 2021

At 1:00 P.M.

LOCATION: VIA ZOOM (Invite to Follow)

Telephone: (954) 761-3454

MEDIATOR: Joseph J. Huss, Esq.

*_4 HOURS HAVE BEEN RESERVED FOR THE MEDIATION. 

IF YOU THINK YOU WILL NEED MORE TIME, 

PLEASE CALL US IMMEDIATELY.

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing has been furnished via E-Service 

and U.S. Mail this 17th day of November, 2020, to: See Service List.

KRINZMAN, HUSS, LUBETSKY

FELDMAN & HOTTE

110 S.E. 6th Street, Suite 1430

Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301

Telephone: (954) 761-3454

Facsimile: (954) 761-3484

E-Mail: jjh@khllaw.com

E-Service: eservicefll@khllaw.com

By: _/s/ Joseph J. Huss ______

JOSEPH J. HUSS

Certified Court Mediator

 Fla. Bar No. 0328480

Case 9:20-cv-81275-DMM Document 19 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/17/2020 Page 1 of 2
CASE NO.: 20-cv-81275-DMM

SERVICE LIST

Roderick V. Hannah, Esq.

4800 N. Hiatus Road,

Sunrise, Florida 33351

E-Service: Rhannah@rhannahlaw.com

Pelayo M. Duran, Esq.

4640 N.W. 7th Street,

Miami, Florida 33126

E-Service: Pduran@pelayoduran.com

Kenneth L. Minerely, Esq.

Meghan Miller, Esq.

1200 North Federal Highway, Suite 420,

Boca Raton, Florida 33432

E-Service: Ken@minerleyfein.com

Meghan@minerleyfein.com

fileclerk@minerleyfein.com

litigation@minerleyfein.com

Case 9:20-cv-81275-DMM Document 19 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/17/2020 Page 2 of 2
#### State of Missouri, Respondent, *v.*W. A. Morehead, Appellant.

April 7, 1885.

Criminal Law — Separate Information Against Co-Princtpals. — That another person had been tried for the same offense, under another information, is no defence to an action for an attempt to commit ’ an abortion.

Appeal from the St. Louis Court of Criminal Correction, Noonan, J.

*Affirmed.*

J. F. Merryman, for the appellant.

*329J. R. Claiborne, for the respondent.

Rombauer, J.,

delivered the opinion of the court. •

This is a proceeding by information against the defendant under section 1268, Revised Statutes of 1879. He was found guilty, and sentenced to the payment of a fine of five hundred dollars, and to imprisonment in the •city jail for a term of six months.

The offense is the same for which John L. Fitzporter was convicted October 15, 1884. The record in this case is almost identical with the record in the Fitzporter case. In the opinion delivered in that case at the present term, *ante,*p. 271, we have passed in detail upon all objections made to the validity of the judgment of the trial court. We therefore simply refer to that opinion for our rulings, without reiterating them.

There is only one point arising upon this record which was wanting in the Fitzporter case.

The defendant upon the trial below, without objection on part of the state, gave in evidence the record of the Fitzporter case, by which it appeared that Fitzporter and others had been convicted for this same offense. No notice was taken of this matter by the court in its instructions to the jury. The defendant in his motion for a new trial, assigns among other grounds the following:

9. “Because two persons had been separately from •this defendant, and jointly with another, charged and convicted of this same offense, viz: committing an attempted abortion on Katie Fiedler on August 27, 1884, and Dr. Morehead could not be legally convicted of the same identical offense on an independant and separate information.”

10. “Because Hr. Morehead was not charged as an accessory before or after the fact with Fitzporter and Burke, but was charged as a principal.”

Defendant has filed no brief in the case and has referred us to nothing in support of this objection. We have examined it, however, carefully and find it without merit. The defendant, Morehead, was not joined in the *330information against Fitzporter and Burke, and is not in a position to avail himself of that information either in bar or abatement. This point was decided by analogy and adversely to defendant’s claim in *State*v. *Steptoe*(1 Mo. App. 19), affirmed on appeal (65 Mo. 642).

There being no merit in this appeal,

the judgment of the

trial court is with concurrence of all the judges affirmed.
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-01-032 July 3, 2001

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

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

NRC TO MEET WITH NUCLEAR MANAGEMENT COMPANY TO DISCUSS SAFETY

PERFORMANCE AT THE KEWAUNEE NUCLEAR PLANT

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission will meet with Nuclear Management Company officials

July 10 to discuss the NRCís annual assessment of safety performance at the Kewaunee Nuclear Plant

in Kewaunee, Wisconsin.

The meeting will begin at 1 p.m. CDT and will be held at the Carlton Town Hall, two miles

north and two miles west of the plant at the intersection of County Highway G and Townhall Road. 

The public is invited to observe the session. NRC officials will be available afterwards to answer

questions.

The annual assessment, referred to as the End-of-Cycle assessment, evaluates safety

performance at the Kewaunee plant from April 2000 through March 2001, and informs plant officials

of the NRCís plans for future inspections at the facility.

The Kewaunee assessment letter and inspection report are available at

http://www.nrc.gov/OPA/ppr or from the Region III Public Affairs Office. Current performance

information for the plant is available at http://www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/index.html.

# # #
<PAGE>

EXHIBIT 10.4

                                 PROMISSORY NOTE

$400,000.00                                                   October 15th, 2002
                                                                Portland, Oregon

         FOR VALUE RECEIVED, the undersigned Yamhill Valley Vineyards, Inc.
("Maker") promises to pay to the order of James W. Shires and Scott Crawford
(together, "Holder"), at 1955 Hall Street, West Linn, Oregon 97068 or to such
other person and at such other place as the Holder may designate, the principal
sum of Four Hundred Thousand and no/100 Dollars ($400,000.00), together with
interest thereon, payable in the manner and on the terms set forth in this Note:

         1.       Interest Rate. This Note shall bear interest at a fixed
interest rate per annum equal to 12%.

         2.       Payments. The entire principal balance of this Note, plus all
accrued but unpaid interest, shall be paid in full on the earlier to occur of:
(a) the closing and funding of Maker's initial public offering; or (b) September
30, 2003. Maker shall not be required to make any interim payments.

         3.       Prepayments. Maker shall have the right to prepay this Note,
in whole or in part, at any time with no prepayment penalties.

         4.       Security. This Note is secured by a Security Agreement
(Equipment and Inventory) and by a Trust Deed, Assignment of Rents, Security
Agreement, and Fixture Filing (together, the "Security Documents").

         5.       Default and Acceleration. Time is of the essence of this Note.
In the event Maker defaults in the performance of, or compliance with, any of
the terms and provisions of this Note or the Security Documents, the Holder may
declare the principal of this Note, together with interest thereon, to be due
and payable. Any forbearance or failure to exercise this right shall not
constitute a waiver of the Holder's right to exercise the right with respect to
such default and any subsequent default.

         6.       Stock Warrant. As additional consideration for this Note,
Maker is simultaneously granting to Holder a Common Stock Purchase Warrant.

         7.       Attorneys' Fees; Costs. If any litigation is instituted to
enforce payment of this Note, the prevailing party shall recover from the other
party, in addition to costs and disbursements allowed by law, such sums as the
court may allow as attorney fees in the litigation, including any appeals
therefrom.

         8.       Governing Law. This Note shall be governed and construed in
accordance with the laws of the State of Oregon.


                           PAGE 1 -- PROMISSORY NOTE

<PAGE>

         IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned caused this Note to be duly
executed on the day and year first written above.

                                            YAMHILL VALLEY VINEYARDS, INC.

                                            By:
                                               ---------------------------------
                                               Denis Burger, President


                           PAGE 2 -- PROMISSORY NOTE
Exhibit 13.2

TAIWAN SEMICONDUCTOR MANUFACTURING COMPANY LIMITED

Certification

Pursuant to 18
U.S.C. § 1350, the undersigned, C.C. Wei, President and Co-Chief Executive Officer of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Limited (the Company), hereby certifies, to his knowledge, that the Companys annual report on
Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2016 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and that the information contained in the Report
fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



|                     |  |  |  |     |  |                                                                 
|-------------------- |  |  |  | --- |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------
|Date: April 13, 2017 |  |  |  |     |  |                                                                 
|                     |  |  |  | By: |  | /s/ C.C. Wei                                                    
|                     |  |  |  |     |  | Name: C.C. Wei Title:   President and
Co-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.
EXHIBIT 32.2: CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C.
1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

            In connection with the accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB
of Magna-Lab, Inc. for the quarter and six months ended August 31, 2003, the
undersigned hereby certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my
knowledge and belief, that:

            (3)   such Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for the quarter and six
                  months ended August 31, 2003 fully complies with the
                  requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
                  Exchange Act of 1934; and

            (4)   the information contained in such Quarterly Report on Form
                  10-QSB for the quarter and six months ended August 31, 2003
                  fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
                  condition and results of operations of Magna-Lab, Inc.


      October 13, 2003                            /s/ Kenneth C. Riscica
                                                  ----------------------
                                                  Name: Kenneth C. Riscica
                                                  Title: Chief Financial Officer


                                       18
§ 191.62 Penalties. ( a ) *Criminal penalty.* Any person who knowingly and willfully files any false or fraudulent entry or claim for the payment of drawback upon the exportation of merchandise or knowingly or willfully makes or files any false document for the purpose of securing the payment to himself or others of any drawback on the exportation of merchandise greater than that legally due, shall be subject to the criminal provisions of 18 U.S.C. 550, 1001 or any other appropriate criminal sanctions.
( b ) *Civil penalty.* Any person who seeks, induces or affects the payment of drawback, by fraud or negligence, or attempts to do so, is subject to civil penalties, as provided under 19 U.S.C. 1593a. A fraudulent violation is subject to a maximum administrative penalty of 3 times the total actual or potential loss of revenue. Repetitive negligent violations are subject to a maximum penalty equal to the actual or potential loss of revenue.
No. 3808

#### Eva E. Guinto, Claimant, *vs.*State of Illinois, Respondent.

*Opinion filed November 9, 1943.*

Claimant, pro se.

George F. Barrett, Attorney General; C. Arthur Nebel, Assistant Attorney General, for respondent.

Eckert, J.

Claimant, Eva E. Guinto, is the widow of Philip Guinto, deceased, a former Sergeant of the Illinois State Police. On August 5, 1943, while riding a motorcycle on Illinois Highway No. 120 near the Village of Hainesville, Lake County, Illinois, to supervise a State Police traffic detail in the City of Waukegan, the deceased apparently lost control of his motorcycle and was thrown to the pavement. He died immediately thereafter. A coroner’s jury returned a verdict of accidental death while on active duty. Claimant, as widow of the deceased officer, seeks an award under the provisions of the Workmen’s Compensation Act in the amount of $4,700.00.

At the time of the accident which resulted in' the death of Philip Guinto, the employer and employee were *69operating under the provisions of the Workmen’s Compensation Act of this State, and notice of the accident and claim for compensation were made within the time provided by the Act. Although the evidence is circumstantial, the court is of the opinion that the accident arose out of and in the course of decedent’s employment.

Decedent had been employed by the respondent continuously for more than one year prior to his death at a salary of $195.00 per month. Under Section 10 (a) of the Workmen’s Compensation Act, compensation must be computed on the basis of an annual wage of $2,340.00, making decedent’s average weekly wage $45.00, and his compensation rate the maximum of $15.00 per week. The record does not show that the decedent had any children under sixteen years of age dependent upon him for support at the time of his death.

■ Claimant is therefore entitled to an award under Section 7 (a) of the Workmen’s Compensation Act in the amount of $4,000.00. The death having occurred as a result of an injury sustained after July 1, 1943, this amount must be increased seventeen and one-half per cent, or $700.00.

Award is therefore made in favor of the claimant, Eva E. Gfuinto, in the amount of $4,700.00 to be paid to her as follows:

$205.72 which has accrued and is payable forthwith;

$4,494.28 is payable in weekly installments of $15.00 per week beginning November 9th, 1943, for a period of 299 weeks with an additional final payment of $9.28.

All future payments being subject to the terms and conditions of the Workmen’s Compensation Act of Illinois, jurisdiction of this cause is specifically reserved for the entry of such further orders as may from time to time be necessary.
NRC NEWS

 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 

 Office of Public Affairs Telephone: 301/415-8200

 Washington, DC 20555-0001 E-mail: opa@nrc.gov 

 Web Site: www.nrc.gov

No. 02-098 August 26, 2002

NRC SEEKS PUBLIC COMMENT ON PROPOSED RULE REGARDING 

VERY LOW LEVELS OF CERTAIN RADIOACTIVE MATERIAL

The NRC is seeking public comment on proposed amendments to its regulations regarding the

transfer of very low levels of “source material” from organizations or persons licensed to handle this

material to those not licensed. Source material is uranium and thorium, both radioactive materials, that

exist naturally in soil and appear in trace quantities in many chemical mixtures and compounds.

The proposed rule would ensure the protection of public health and safety from transfers of very

low concentrations of radioactive material. 

Currently, NRC regulations exempt persons from licensing requirements for source material if

they possess or use only materials that contain less than 0.05 percent by weight of uranium and thorium. 

A report issued in June 2001, “Systematic Radiological Assessment of Exemptions for Source

and Byproduct Materials,” NUREG-1717, indicates that, in certain situations, quantities of source

material in concentrations below the 0.05 limit could potentially result in exposures to radiation that

exceed NRC’s public radiation dose limits. 

The proposed rulemaking would ensure that transfers of source material at very low

concentration levels from specific licensees to persons exempt from licensing do not cause undue risk to

the public. A licensee seeking to transfer such low levels of source material would have to submit

information to NRC on the type and quantity of the material, location of the transfer, end use of the

transfer, individual public dose estimates, and assumptions used in estimating the dose. The NRC

would independently analyze the request before approving the transfer.

Copies of the proposed rule will be available from the agency’s web site, at

http://ruleforum.llnl.gov/ . Interested persons may submit comments electronically within 75 days after

publication in the Federal Register, expected shortly. Comments may also be mailed to the Secretary,

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC, 20555-0001, Attention: Rulemakings and

Adjudications staff.
The proposed rule will also be accessible from the Publicly Available Records component of

NRC’s Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS). ADAMS may be

accessed from the NRC website at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html (the Public Electronic

Reading Room). Copies of NUREG-1717 will also be available on ADAMS. Help in using ADAMS

is available by calling the NRC Public Document Room at 301/415-4737 or 1/800/397-4209, or by

sending an e-mail message to pdr@nrc.gov.

###
#### § 172.33 Acceptance of offers in compromise.

An offer in compromise will be considered accepted only when the offeror is so notified in writing. As a condition to accepting an offer in compromise, the offeror may be required to enter into any collateral agreement or to post any security which is deemed necessary for the protection of the interest of the United States.
#### James B. Blossom, Appellant, v. Mary R. Chisholm and Another, Individually and as Executors, etc., Respondents.

Judgment affirmed, with costs. No opinion. Present—Ingraham, P. J., Laughlin, Clarke, Dowling and Hotchkiss, JJ.
#### § 127.33 Chargeable duties.

The duties chargeable on any merchandise within the purview of this subpart shall be assessed on the appraised dutiable value at the rate of duty chargeable at the time the merchandise became subject to sale. Household and personal effects of the character provided for in Chapter 98, Subchapter IV, Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (19 U.S.C. 1202), which belong to persons who have not arrived in this country before the effects become subject to sale, are dutiable at the rates in effect when the effects become subject to sale, even though such persons arrive and make entry for the effects before they are sold.

[T.D. 74-114, 39 FR 12092, Apr. 3, 1974, as amended by T.D. 89-1, 53 FR 51255, Dec. 21, 1988; T.D. 97-82, 62 FR 51770, Oct. 3, 1997]