alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United 

States District 

Court 

For the Northern District of California 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

AYISHA BENHAM, 

 Plaintiff, 

 v. 

AURORA LOAN SERVICES; BNC 

MORTGAGE, INC.; MORTGAGE 

ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION 

SYSTEMS, INC.; ROBERT E. WEISS 

INCORPORATED; AJMAL AKBAR aka 

JAMAL AKBAR dba COMMUNITY ONE 

FINANCIAL and REAL ESTATE 

SERVICES; AJMAL AKBAR aka JAMAL 

AKBAR; KEITH HOUSTEAD and DOES 

1-20 inclusive, 

Defendants. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No. 09-2059 SC 

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE; 

VACATING STATUS CONFERENCE

Plaintiff submitted the Second Amended Complaint in this 

matter on October 30, 2009. As far as this Court is aware, 

Defendants Keith Houstead and Ajmal Akbar have not been served 

within the 120-day time limit required by Rule 4(m) of the Federal 

Rules of Civil Procedure. Plaintiff is therefore ORDERED to show 

that these Defendants have been timely served, or to show good 

cause as to why these Defendants have not been served. A failure 

to do so will result in dismissal of these Defendants from this 

suit. 

 Plaintiff must show cause in writing, filed no later than 

Tuesday, March 16, 2010. The Show-Cause Hearing is scheduled for 

Case 3:09-cv-02059-SC Document 61 Filed 03/04/10 Page 1 of 2
2 

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United 

States District 

Court

For the Northern District of California 

Friday, March 19, 2010, at 10:00 a.m. in Courtroom 1, on the 17th 

floor, U.S. Courthouse, 450 Golden Gate Avenue, San Francisco, CA 

94102. 

 In addition, the case management conference scheduled for 

Friday, March 5, 2010 is hereby VACATED. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: March 4, 2010 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:09-cv-02059-SC Document 61 Filed 03/04/10 Page 2 of 2
### §9817. Department of Agriculture; Rural Development Administration programs

The Secretary of Agriculture or, where appropriate, the Administrator of the Farmers Home Administration, or of the Rural Development Administration, after consultation with the Secretary of Health and Human Services, shall take all necessary steps to ensure that community development corporations and local cooperative associations shall qualify for and shall receive—

(1) such assistance in connection with housing development under the Housing Act of 1949, as amended [42 U.S.C. 1441 et seq.];

(2) such assistance in connection with housing, business, industrial, and community development under the Consolidated Farmers Home Administration Act of 1961 [7 U.S.C. 1921 et seq.] and the Rural Development Act of 1972; and

(3) such further assistance under all such programs of the United States Department of Agriculture; as shall further the purposes of this subchapter.

(Pub. L. 97–35, title VI, §628, Aug. 13, 1981, 95 Stat. 497; Pub. L. 101–624, title XXIII, §2303(f)(2), Nov. 28, 1990, 104 Stat. 3981.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

The Housing Act of 1949, referred to in par. (1), is act July 15, 1949, ch. 338, 63 Stat. 413, which is classified principally to chapter 8A (§1441 et seq.) of this title. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 1441 of this title and Tables.

The Consolidated Farmers Home Administration Act of 1961, referred to in par. (2), is title III of Pub. L. 87–128, Aug. 8, 1961, 75 Stat. 307, which was redesignated the Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act by Pub. L. 92–419, §101, Aug. 30, 1972, 86 Stat. 657, and is classified principally to chapter 50 (§1921 et seq.) of Title 7, Agriculture. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 1921 of Title 7 and Tables.

The Rural Development Act of 1972, referred to in par. (2), is Pub. L. 92–419, Aug. 30, 1972, 86 Stat. 657. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title of 1972 Amendment note set out under section 1921 of Title 7.

#### Amendments

1990—Pub. L. 101–624 substituted "Department of Agriculture; Rural Development Administration programs" for "Department of Agriculture and Farmers Home Administration programs" in section catchline and inserted ", or of the Rural Development Administration" after "of the Farmers Home Administration" in text.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Kasiem Allah, Also Known as Curtis Jones, Appellant.

Judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County, rendered February 22, 1977, affirmed. No opinion. This case is remitted to the Supreme Court, Queens County, for further proceedings pursuant to CPL 460.50 (subí 5). Latham, J. P., Damiani, Hawkins and O’Connor, JJ., concur.
### §390h–22. Omitted

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section, Pub. L. 102–575, title XVI, §16——, as added Pub. L. 110–161, div. C, title II, §210, Dec. 26, 2007, 121 Stat. 1955, which related to the Cucamonga Valley water recycling project, was omitted pursuant to subsec. (e) of section, which provided that the authority of the Secretary of the Interior to carry out any provisions of this section terminated 10 years after Dec. 26, 2007.

Section was based on section "16——" of Pub. L. 102–575. Two other sections "16——" of Pub. L. 102–575 have been enacted and are classified to sections 390h–21 and 390h–23 of this title.
## In the Court of Appeals Second Appellate District of Texas at Fort Worth

___________________________ No. 02

- 20

- 00063

- CV

___________________________

On Appeal from the 324th District Court Tarrant County, Texas Trial Court No. 324

- 509040

- 12
Before Birdwell, Bassel, and Womack, JJ. Per Curiam Memorandum Opinion 

### I N THE 

### I NTEREST OF 

### C.F., A 

### C HILD2 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND JUDGMENT On July 8, 2020, we notified appellant that her brief had not been filed as the appellate rules require. See Tex. R. App. P. 38.6(a). We stated that we could dismiss the appeal for want of prose cution unless , within ten days, appellant filed with the

court a n appellant ’ s brief and a n accompanying motion reasonably explaining the brief’s untimely filing and why an extension was needed. See Tex. R. App. P. 10.5(b), 38.8(a)(1), 42.3(b). We have re ceived no response. Because appellant has failed to file a brief even after we afforded an opportunity to explain the initial failure, we dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution. See Tex. R. App. P. 38.8(a)(1), 42.3(b), 43.2(f).
Per Curiam
Delivered : A ugust 20, 2020
| Name of Subsidiary                      | State      or other jurisdiction of incorporation or organization | Names      under which such subsidiaries do business               |
|-----------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                                    |                                                              |                                                               |
| Rand      Finance Corp.                 | Delaware                                                          | Rand      Finance Corp.                                            |
| Rand      LL Holdings Corp.             | Delaware                                                          | Rand      LL Holdings Corp.                                        |
| Lower      Lakes Towing Ltd.            | Canada                                                            | Lower      Lakes Towing Ltd.                                       |
| Lower      Lakes Transportation Company | Delaware                                                          | Lower      Lakes Transportation Company                            |
| Grand      River Navigation Ltd.        | Delaware                                                          | Grand      River Navigation Ltd.; GR Nav. (Name used in  Michigan) |
### Microbe concentrations, laser particle counts, and stable hydrogen and oxygen isotope ratios in samples from a riverbank filtration study, Platte River, Nebraska, 2002 to 2004

By: J. R. VogelS.I. HarrisT. B. CoplenE.W. RiceIngrid M. Verstraeten

                            https://doi.org/10.3133/ds133

#### Links

- More information:  **USGS Index Page**                            (html)
- Download citation as:  RIS                         |                         Dublin                            Core

#### Abstract

No abstract available.

#### Study Area
#### § 245.210 Availability of information.

A mortgagor subject to the requirements of this subpart shall make available to tenants any information concerning rent subsidies or other public assistance that is prepared and distributed by HUD to the project for the purpose of distribution to tenants.

[48 FR 28437, June 22, 1983. Redesignated at 50 FR 32403, Aug. 12, 1985]
LINE
OF CREDIT PROMISSORY NOTE

     

    
      
        	
                LINE
      OF CREDIT $350,000

              	
                    Date:
      September 15, 2010    

              


      

    

     

    FOR VALUE RECEIVED, Iveda Solutions, ("Borrower")
promises to pay to the order of Gregory Omi ("Lender"), the principal sum of up
to Three Hundred Fifty Thousand Dollars ($350,000), or so much thereof as may be
disbursed to, or for the benefit of the Borrower by Lender. It is the intent of
the Borrower and Lender hereunder to create a line of credit agreement between
Borrower and Lender whereby Borrower may borrow up to $350,000 from Lender. The
Borrower agrees that available line of credit is for the sole purpose of
purchasing equipment, software, and other infrastructure-related items to
fulfill commitment to SAT Mexico (“Customer’).

     

    SECURITY: This Note shall be
secured by receivables from the Customer.

     

    INTEREST & PRINCIPAL: The
unpaid principal of this line of credit shall bear simple interest at the rate
of 1.5 % per month or 18% per annum. Interest shall be calculated based on
the principal balance as may be adjusted from time to time to reflect additional
advances made hereunder. Interest on the unpaid balance of this Note shall
accrue monthly but shall not be due and payable until such time as when the
principal balance of this Note becomes due and payable, predicated by payment
from Customer, but no later than six months after each disbursement. There shall
be no penalty for early repayment of all or any part of the
principal.

     

    DEFAULT: The Borrower shall be
in default of this Note on the occurrence of any of the following events: (i)
the Borrower shall fail to meet its obligation to make the required principal or
interest payments hereunder. (ii) the Borrower shall be dissolved or liquidated;
(iii) the Borrower shall make an assignment for the benefit of creditors or
shall be unable to, or shall admit in writing their inability to pay their debts
as they become due; (iv) the Borrower shall commence any case, proceeding, or
other action under any existing or future law of any jurisdiction relating to
bankruptcy, insolvency, reorganization or relief of debtors, or any such action
shall be commenced against the undersigned; (v) the Borrower shall suffer a
receiver to be appointed for it or for any of its property or shall suffer a
garnishment, attachment, levy or execution.

     

    REMEDIES:
Upon default of this Note,
Lender may declare the entire amount due and owing hereunder to be immediately
due and payable. Lender may also use all remedies in law and in equity to
enforce and collect the amount owed under this Note. This Note shall be
governed by the laws of Arizona, USA.

     

    Borrower
hereby waives demand, presentment, notice of dishonor, diligence in collecting,
grace and notice of protest.

     

    
      
        
          
            	
                    BORROWER:

                  	 	
                    LENDER:

                  
	 
      	 	 
      
	
                    David
      Ly

                  	 	
                    Gregory
      Omi
§ 320.8 Excess Yield Securities. ( a ) *Definition.* Excess Yield Securities are securities backed by the excess servicing income relating to mortgages underlying previously issued Ginnie Mae mortgage-backed securities.
( b ) *GNMA guaranty.* The Association guarantees the timely payment of interest as provided by the terms of the security.
[71 FR 32389, June 5, 2006]
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 Annual Report of Solo Cup Company (the Company) on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
Report), I, Ronald L. Whaley, as Chief Operating Officer of the Company, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge:



| | (1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13 (a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (2) | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                       
|-----------------------
|/s/ Ronald L. Whaley   
|Ronald L. Whaley       
|Chief Operating Officer
|March 11, 2005         



5
§ 3.500 Employment. ( a ) *General.* ( 1 ) No person shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination in employment, or recruitment, consideration, or selection therefor, whether full-time or part-time, under any education program or activity operated by a recipient that receives Federal financial assistance.
( 2 ) A recipient shall make all employment decisions in any education program or activity operated by such recipient in a nondiscriminatory manner and shall not limit, segregate, or classify applicants or employees in any way that could adversely affect any applicant's or employee's employment opportunities or status because of sex.
( 3 ) A recipient shall not enter into any contractual or other relationship which directly or indirectly has the effect of subjecting employees or students to discrimination prohibited by §§ 3.500 through 3.550, including relationships with employment and referral agencies, with labor unions, and with organizations providing or administering fringe benefits to employees of the recipient.
( 4 ) A recipient shall not grant preferences to applicants for employment on the basis of attendance at any educational institution or entity that admits as students only or predominantly members of one sex, if the giving of such preferences has the effect of discriminating on the basis of sex in violation of these Title IX regulations.
( b ) *Application.* The provisions of §§ 3.500 through 3.550 apply to: ( 1 ) Recruitment, advertising, and the process of application for employment;
( 2 ) Hiring, upgrading, promotion, consideration for and award of tenure, demotion, transfer, layoff, termination, application of nepotism policies, right of return from layoff, and rehiring;
( 3 ) Rates of pay or any other form of compensation, and changes in compensation;
( 4 ) Job assignments, classifications, and structure, including position descriptions, lines of progression, and seniority lists;
( 5 ) The terms of any collective bargaining agreement;
( 6 ) Granting and return from leaves of absence, leave for pregnancy, childbirth, false pregnancy, termination of pregnancy, leave for persons of either sex to care for children or dependents, or any other leave;
( 7 ) Fringe benefits available by virtue of employment, whether or not administered by the recipient;
( 8 ) Selection and financial support for training, including apprenticeship, professional meetings, conferences, and other related activities, selection for tuition assistance, selection for sabbaticals and leaves of absence to pursue training;
( 9 ) Employer-sponsored activities, including social or recreational programs; and
( 10 ) Any other term, condition, or privilege of employment.
Exhibit 99.1


                           ANNUAL COMPLIANCE REPORT

I, Janet P. O'Hara, being an officer of U.S. Bank Trust National Association,
the Trustee in respect of the STRATS(SM) Trust For IBM Corporation Securities,
Series 2004-7 (the "Trust"), certify that:

         1.       I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K in respect
                  of the Trust, and all reports on Form 8-K filed by the
                  Trustee in respect of the Trust and all distribution or
                  servicing reports filed in respect of the Trust during the
                  2007 calendar year;

         2.       Based on my knowledge, the information in these reports,
                  taken as a whole, does not contain any untrue statement of a
                  material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to
                  make the statements made, in light of the circumstances
                  under which such statements were made, not misleading as of
                  the last day of the period covered by this annual report;

         3.       Based on my knowledge, the distribution information required
                  to be provided to the certificateholders by the Trustee
                  under the trust agreement for inclusion in these reports is
                  included in these reports;

         4.       I am responsible for reviewing the activities performed by
                  the Trustee, under the trust agreement and based on my
                  knowledge, except as disclosed in this annual report, the
                  Trustee has fulfilled its obligations under that agreement;
                  and

         5.       The reports disclose all significant deficiencies relating
                  to the Trustee's compliance with the minimum servicing or
                  similar standards based upon the report provided by an
                  independent public accountant, after conducting a review in
                  compliance with the Uniform Single Attestation Program for
                  Mortgage Bankers or similar procedure, as set forth in the
                  trust agreement, that is included in these reports.

Date: March 28, 2008

By:    /s/ Janet P. O'Hara
     ------------------------------------
Janet P. O'Hara, Assistant Vice President
### §47. Repealed. Aug. 7, 1946, ch. 770, §1(11), 60 Stat. 867

Section, act May 10, 1926, ch. 277, 44 Stat. 487, required annual statements and reports of expenditures for the benefit of Indians relating to the operation of oil and gas leases, and the mining of other minerals, on Indian lands.
§ 401.600 Will a section 8 contract be extended if it would expire while an owner's request for a Restructuring Plan is pending? ( a ) If a section 8 contract for an eligible project would expire before a Restructuring Plan is implemented, the contract may be extended at rents not exceeding current rents: ( 1 ) For up to the earlier of one year or closing on the Restructuring Plan under § 401.407; or
( 2 ) For such period of time beyond one year as HUD may approve, up to the closing of the Restructuring Plan.
( b ) Any extension of the contract beyond one year for a pending Restructuring Plan, other than an extension approved under this section, must be at comparable market rents or exception rents. An extension at comparable market rents will not affect a project's eligibility for the Mark-to-Market program once it has been established under this part.
( c ) HUD may terminate the contract earlier if the PAE or HUD determines that an owner is not cooperative under § 401.402 or if the owner's request is rejected under § 401.403 or § 401.405.
[71 FR 2121, Jan. 12, 2006]
COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA 

Present: Judges Baker, Annunziata, and Overton 

Argued at Alexandria, Virginia 

ADVANCED LOCK AND SAFE, INC. and 

NATIONWIDE MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY 

v. Record No. 2467-94-4 MEMORANDUM OPINION* BY 

 JUDGE NELSON T. OVERTON 

ROBERT S. HEIDORN JANUARY 11, 1996 

 FROM THE VIRGINIA WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION 

 Edward H. Grove, III (Brault, Palmer, Grove, 

Zimmerman, White & Mims, on brief), for 

appellants. 

 Peter M. Sweeny (Peter M. Sweeny & Associates, on 

brief), for appellee. 

 

 *Pursuant to Code § 17-116.010 this opinion is not 

designated for publication. 

 Advanced Lock and Safe, employer, and Nationwide Mutual 

Insurance Company, insurer, appeal the decision of the commission 

to award Robert Heidorn benefits for a work-related injury by 

accident. Employer contends that the injury did not arise out of 

Heidorn's employment. We affirm the commission's award. 

 Robert Heidorn was employed as a locksmith, replacing the 

locks on interior office doors. Because of his height, he "got 

down on his knees" on the floor beside each door instead of 

bending over to work on it. On the sixth or seventh door, 

Heidorn "bent down [and] had a pressure on my right knee and 

turned just a little bit." He felt a pain shoot through it just 

before his knees touched the ground. His treating physician 
- 2 - 

later opined that the cartilage in his knee had been torn. 

 An accident arises out of the employment when a causal 

connection exists between the injury and the conditions under 

which the employer requires the work to be performed. County of 

Chesterfield v. Johnson, 237 Va. 180, 183, 376 S.E.2d 73, 75 

(1989). An employee's need to work in a bent over position and 

to extract himself from that position presents a hazard to which 

the employee would not otherwise be exposed. Richard E. Brown, 

Inc. v. Caporaletti, 12 Va. App. 242, 245, 402 S.E.2d 709, 711 

(1991). A contortion of the body necessitated by the employee's 

work is risk created by the workplace. First Fed. Sav. & Loan v. 

Gryder, 9 Va. App. 60, 65, 383 S.E.2d 755, 759 (1989). The 

injury need not be caused by an extraordinary occurrence in or 

about the work performed, nor must the precipitating movement be 

unusual or require exertion. Grove v. Allied Signal, Inc., 15 

Va. App. 17, 22, 421 S.E.2d 32, 35 (1992). 

 The commission found that Heidorn's injury was caused by 

kneeling down. It further found that his job required him to 

make that specific movement. We find credible evidence in the 

record to support this finding, and affirm the award of the 

commission. 

 Affirmed.
COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 02-18-00218-CR

Larry Craig Madore

v.

The State of Texas

§

§

§

§

§

From the 371st District Court

of Tarrant County (1527527R)

July 19, 2018

Opinion by Justice Birdwell

(nfp)

JUDGMENT

This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that 

the appeal should be dismissed. It is ordered that the appeal is dismissed for 

want of jurisdiction.

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS 

By __/s/ Wade Birdwell_________________

 Justice Wade Birdwell
#### § 1005.112 How do eligible lenders and eligible borrowers demonstrate compliance with applicable tribal laws?

The lender and the borrower will each certify that they acknowledge and agree to comply with all applicable tribal laws. An Indian tribe with jurisdiction over the dwelling unit does not have to be notified of individual section 184 loans unless required by applicable tribal law.

[63 FR 12373 Mar. 12, 1998, as amended at 63 FR 48991, Sept. 11, 1998]