alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

EASTERN DIVISION

MARSHA A. TYLER, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. ) No. 11 C 9262

)

COMPREHENSIVE HEALTH MANAGEMENT )

INC., )

)

Defendant. )

MEMORANDUM ORDER

Pro se plaintiff Marsha Tyler (“Tyler”) has paid the filing

fee in her employment discrimination action against her former

employer Comprehensive Health Management Inc. (“Comprehensive”),

and she has also confirmed her willingness to pay the fee needed

to obtain service on Comprehensive, which her Complaint lists as

located in Tampa, Florida. In that respect Tyler seeks a

directive from this Court that service of process be handled by

the United States Marshal.

That request reflects a misunderstanding on Tyler’s part as

to the service of process in federal cases. Fed. R. Civ. P.

(“Rule”) 4(c)(3) does require courts to order service by the

United States Marshal or a deputy marshal if a plaintiff is

proceeding in forma pauperis, while it permits but does not

require the issuance of such an order in other cases. But the

limited staffing in the Marshal’s office, coupled with the many

mandatory responsibilities imposed on federal marshals, has

essentially taken them out of the business of service of process

Case: 1:11-cv-09262 Document #: 8 Filed: 01/17/12 Page 1 of 2 PageID #:28
except in the in forma pauperis situation.

Instead Rule 4(c)(2) permits anyone “who is at least 18

years old and not a party” to serve the summons and Complaint. 

Moreover, the fact that Tyler was employed by Comprehensive at

200 West Adams Street in Chicago (Complaint ¶4) would appear to

indicate that Comprehensive must be registered to do business

here, in which event service on its registered agent (or perhaps

someone at its Chicago location who is authorized to accept

service) would pose a far less burdensome alternative for

obtaining service.

Finally, this District Court maintains a Help Desk to assist

pro se litigants. If Tyler wishes assistance on the subject of

service of process, she would do well to consult that Help Desk

service (312-435-5691).

In sum, Tyler’s request is denied. But as this Court has

sought to make clear here, that denial should pose no problems

for her.

________________________________________

Milton I. Shadur

Senior United States District Judge

Date: January 17, 2012

2

Case: 1:11-cv-09262 Document #: 8 Filed: 01/17/12 Page 2 of 2 PageID #:29
### §2285. Budget prohibitions

No advisory committee may expend funds in excess of its estimated annual operating costs by more than 10 per centum or $500, whichever is greater, until it provides the Secretary with an explanation of the need for the additional expenditure and the Secretary approves such additional expenditure.

(Pub. L. 95–113, title XVIII, §1805, Sept. 29, 1977, 91 Stat. 1042; Pub. L. 97–98, title XI, §1116(a), Dec. 22, 1981, 95 Stat. 1271.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

1981—Pub. L. 97–98 substituted provision relating to budget prohibitions for provision relating to membership on advisory committees. See section 2283 of this title.

#### **Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries**

#### Effective Date of 1981 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 97–98 effective Dec. 22, 1981, see section 1801 of Pub. L. 97–98, set out as an Effective Date note under section 4301 of this title.

#### Effective Date

Section effective Oct. 1, 1977, see section 1901 of Pub. L. 95–113, set out as an Effective Date of 1977 Amendment note under section 1307 of this title.
EXHIBIT 3





Amendment to the Restated Articles of Incorporation of Ethyl Corporation





An additional paragraph shall be added after the first paragraph of Article III of the Restated Articles of
Incorporation as follows:





Every five of the issued and outstanding shares of the
Corporations Common Stock, par value $ 1 per share, as of 12:01 eastern daylight time on July 1, 2002, are hereby changed into one share of Common Stock, par value $ 1 per share. No fractional shares shall be issued upon such change, and the
number of shares of Common Stock to be issued shall be rounded down to the nearest whole share. If a fractional interest in a share of Common Stock would be deliverable upon such change, the Corporation shall pay an amount in cash equal to the fair
market value of such fractional interest, as determined by the Corporations Board of Directors, to each holder of shares of Common Stock to whom such fractional interest would have been deliverable.





The first sentence of the first paragraph of Article III of the Restated Articles of Incorporation shall be deleted and the following
sentence shall be substituted therefor:





The Corporation shall have authority to issue
80,000,000 shares of Common Stock, $1 par value, and 10,000,000 shares of Cumulative Preferred Stock, with a par value, if any, to be set forth hereinafter with respect to each series.




27
#### KENNEDY, Respondent, v. EXCELSIOR BUILDING & LOAN ASS’N, Appellant.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department.

November 13, 1903.)

Action by Katie-A. Kennedy against the Excelsior Building & Loan Association.

No opinion. Order affirmed on argument, with $10 costs and disbursements.
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO 1 NOREEN N. DOWS and 2 GREGORY V. DOWS, 3 Plaintiffs-Appellants, 4

v. NO. 29,245 5 JAMES and FAYE TAYLOR, 6 Individually, and as Trustees of 7 the Taylor Living Trust, SERVIGAS 8 IKARD NEWSOM, and DARNOLD 9 PLUMBING, LLC, 10 Defendants-Appellees. 11 APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF OTERO COUNTY 12 James Waylon Counts, District Judge 13
Noreen N. Dows 14 Gregory F. Dows 15 Cloudcroft, NM 16 Pro Se Appellants 17 Robert M. Doughty II, PC 18 Robert M. Doughty II 19 Alamogordo, NM 20 for Appellees James and Faye Taylor 21

MEMORANDUM OPINION 22 VIGIL, Judge. 23 Plaintiffs Gregory and Noreen Dows app eal from orders of the district court 242 entering judgment in favor of Defendants James and Faye Taylor following a jury 1 trial. [RP 1956-62] Our notice proposed to a ffirm in part and dismiss in part for lack 2 of jurisdiction. Both Plaintiffs and Defe ndants filed a response to the calendar notice 3 accepting the proposed summary disposition. We affirm in part and dismiss in part. 4 Plaintiffs appeal from a district court order striking an order for partial summary 5 judgment entered in their favor at a pre-trial conference. [RP 2103] Plaintiffs also 6 appeal the district court’s handling of th e pre-trial conference and the final order 7 directing a verdict in favor of Defendants. [RP 2103] In our first calendar notice, we 8 proposed to affirm the order of the district court striking its order granting partial 9 summary judgment and dismiss the remainder of the appeal due to the untimely filing 10 of the notice of appeal. Because both partie s to this appeal agree with the proposed 11 disposition, we rely on our analysis containe d in the calendar notice to affirm in part 12 and dismiss in part. 13 IT IS SO ORDERED. 14

15 MICHAEL E. VIGIL, Judge 163 WE CONCUR: 1

2 JAMES J. WECHSLER, Judge 3

4 LINDA M. VANZI, Judge 5
### §1. "Maritime transactions" and "commerce" defined; exceptions to operation of title

"Maritime transactions", as herein defined, means charter parties, bills of lading of water carriers, agreements relating to wharfage, supplies furnished vessels or repairs to vessels, collisions, or any other matters in foreign commerce which, if the subject of controversy, would be embraced within admiralty jurisdiction; "commerce", as herein defined, means commerce among the several States or with foreign nations, or in any Territory of the United States or in the District of Columbia, or between any such Territory and another, or between any such Territory and any State or foreign nation, or between the District of Columbia and any State or Territory or foreign nation, but nothing herein contained shall apply to contracts of employment of seamen, railroad employees, or any other class of workers engaged in foreign or interstate commerce.

(July 30, 1947, ch. 392, 61 Stat. 670.)

#### Derivation

Act Feb. 12, 1925, ch. 213, §1, 43 Stat. 883.

#### **Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries**

#### Short Title of 2022 Amendment

Pub. L. 117–90, §1, Mar. 3, 2022, 136 Stat. 26, provided that: "This Act [enacting chapter 4 of this title, amending sections 2, 208, and 307 of this title, and enacting provisions set out as a note under section 401 of this title] may be cited as the 'Ending Forced Arbitration of Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment Act of 2021'."
## SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK 

## Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

955 CAF 10-01944 PRESENT: SCUDDER, P.J., PERADOTTO, CARNI, GORSKI, AND MARTOCHE, JJ.

IN THE MATTER OF DAVID J. CICCOTTI, PETITIONER-APPELLANT,

V ORDER
STEPHANIE A. THOMPSON, RESPONDENT-RESPONDENT. (APPEAL NO. 2.)

BOSMAN LAW FIRM, LLC, ROME (A.J. BOSMAN OF COUNSEL), FOR PETITIONER-APPELLANT.
SCOTT GODKIN, UTICA, FOR RESPONDENT-RESPONDENT.
GREGORY J. AMOROSO, ATTORNEY FOR THE CHILD, UTICA, FOR ANTHONY C.

Appeal from an order of the Family Court, Oneida County (Brian M. Miga, J.H.O.), entered August 26, 2010 in a proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 6. The order dismissed the petition for custody. Now, upon reading and filing the stipulation of discontinuance signed by the attorneys for the parties on April 27 and May 7, 2011 and by the Attorney for the Child on May 9, 2011, It is hereby ORDERED that said appeal is unanimously dismissed without costs upon stipulation.

Entered: September 30, 2011 Patricia L. Morgan Clerk of the Court
#### 1432.610 Compromising debts.

The CO may recommend compromise of contractor actions pursuant to FAR 32.610, but shall consult 344 DM and SOL for further action.
#### The People of the State of New York v. Anthony Pugh.

Enlargement of time granted. Concur — Breitel, J. P., Rabin, Stevens, Eager and Steuer, JJ.
### §414a. Transferred

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section 414a was editorially reclassified as section 1436a of this title.
REGULATORY EVALUATION

Directorate Identifier: ___2013_______-NM-_____238_____-AD

Executive Order 12866:

Could the AD be considered a “significant regulatory action”?

YES ( ) explain NO (X)

DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures:

Is the AD significant?

YES ( ) explain NO (X)

Regulatory Flexibility Act:

Will the AD have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities?

YES ( ) explain NO (X)

Intrastate Aviation in Alaska:

This AD could affect intrastate aviation in Alaska. Is it appropriate to include specific 

requirements for aircraft operated in Alaska, where aviation might be the only mode of 

transportation?

YES ( ) explain NO (X)
#### Joan Gough, as Limited Administratrix of the Estate of Darlene L. Gough, Deceased, Respondent, v. Anson’s Dairy et al., Appellants.

Appeal from a judgment entered upon the verdict of a jury rendered after trial in Supreme Court, Essex County. The decedent, a child 22 months old, was killed by a truck operated by defendant Raymond C. Anson; and plaintiff as her administratrix has had recovery of $12,725. The main argument on appeal is that there is “no evidence to sustain” the jury’s verdict. Defendant Anson was delivering milk to a remote country farm house in Warren County occupied by two families. For this purpose he drove into the yard and parked the truck alongside the porch. At this time, the jury could find that there were seven children playing outside the house, including decedent, who was on a tricycle. Defendant Anson testified: “I saw some children out playing there. I guess that’s all.” When the milk was delivered all of the children went into the house except decedent, who continued to play on her tricycle. Anson seems to have thought all of the children had gone in. He looked in his rear mirror and began backing the truck away from the porch. He ran into the tricycle and killed decedent. Whether he was careless was on this record a question of fact; the jury might well say that having seen a number of children playing close to the house reasonable care required the truck driver to take commensurate precautions to see the way was clear before he began backing up a truck in the same area where children had been playing when he drove in. This is not a case of “no evidence” of negligence; it is a case where reasonable *860inferences from circumstantial evidence would sustain a finding of negligence. The verdict is not so excessive as to warrant interference on appeal. Judgment unanimously affirmed, with costs. Present — Bergan, P. J., Coon, Gibson, Herlihy and Reynolds, JJ.
#### 1403.804 Policy.

The BPC shall receive copies of contractor disclosures and forward them to the Director, PAM, for submission to Congress.
Editorial Note on Part 724
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 724 appear at 65 FR 62616, Oct. 19, 2000.

§ 724.307 Functions of the Commander, Naval Reserve Force. In the case of Navy, the COMNAVRESFOR shall discharge the responsibilities of the CNO— ( a ) Upon request and within available resources, provide qualified inactive duty reservists to serve as members of the NDRB.
( b ) Upon request, provide appropriate accommodations to the NDRB Traveling Panels for purposes of conducting reviews at Naval and Marine Corps Reserve Centers and aviation facilities.
[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 3 (Wednesday, January 6, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 553-554]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-29291]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4447-DR; [Docket ID FEMA-2020-0001]


Ohio; Amendment No. 3 to Notice of a Major Disaster Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration 
for the State of Ohio (FEMA-4447-DR), dated June 18, 2019, and related 
determinations.

DATES: This change occurred on December 28, 2020.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dean Webster, Office of Response and

[[Page 554]]

Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW, 
Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-2833.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Federal Emergency Management Agency 
(FEMA) hereby gives notice that pursuant to the authority vested in the 
Administrator, under Executive Order 12148, as amended, Joseph Cirone, 
of FEMA is appointed to act as the Federal Coordinating Officer for 
this disaster.
    This action terminates the appointment of Steven W. Johnson as 
Federal Coordinating Officer for this disaster.

The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) 
are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community 
Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling; 
97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment 
Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048, 
Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households In 
Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially 
Declared Disaster Assistance--Disaster Housing Operations for 
Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially Declared Disaster 
Assistance to Individuals and Households--Other Needs; 97.036, 
Disaster Grants--Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared 
Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.

Pete Gaynor,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2020-29291 Filed 1-5-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-23-P
#### 1327.305-2 Administration by the Government.

The contracting officer shall promptly furnish all invention disclosures, reports, confirmatory instruments, notices, requests, and other documents and information relating to patent rights clauses to the DOC Patent Attorney.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> OPUR1
<CIK> 0000318819
<NAME> W. TIMOTHY POHL
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<BOOK-VALUE>                                  PER-BOOK
<TOTAL-NET-UTILITY-PLANT>                    3,453,950
<OTHER-PROPERTY-AND-INVEST>                    106,148
<TOTAL-CURRENT-ASSETS>                         167,264
<TOTAL-DEFERRED-CHARGES>                       267,203
<OTHER-ASSETS>                                  37,591
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               4,032,156
<COMMON>                                        98,027
<CAPITAL-SURPLUS-PAID-IN>                      297,664
<RETAINED-EARNINGS>                            662,183
<TOTAL-COMMON-STOCKHOLDERS-EQ>               1,057,874
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                           81,060
<PREFERRED>                                     17,952
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-NET>                         1,716,394
<SHORT-TERM-NOTES>                             147,390
<LONG-TERM-NOTES-PAYABLE>                            0
<COMMERCIAL-PAPER-OBLIGATIONS>                       0
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-CURRENT-PORT>                   57,144
<PREFERRED-STOCK-CURRENT>                            0
<CAPITAL-LEASE-OBLIGATIONS>                          0
<LEASES-CURRENT>                                     0
<OTHER-ITEMS-CAPITAL-AND-LIAB>                 954,342
<TOT-CAPITALIZATION-AND-LIAB>                4,032,156
<GROSS-OPERATING-REVENUE>                      894,646
<INCOME-TAX-EXPENSE>                            63,828
<OTHER-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                     600,600
<TOTAL-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                     664,428
<OPERATING-INCOME-LOSS>                        230,218
<OTHER-INCOME-NET>                               8,216
<INCOME-BEFORE-INTEREST-EXPEN>                 238,434
<TOTAL-INTEREST-EXPENSE>                       136,760
<NET-INCOME>                                   101,674
<PREFERRED-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                      3,984
<EARNINGS-AVAILABLE-FOR-COMM>                   97,690
<COMMON-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                        51,299
<TOTAL-INTEREST-ON-BONDS>                      125,498
<CASH-FLOW-OPERATIONS>                         208,517
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.31
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION1350,

|   | 1. | 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 Periodic Report fairly presents, in all      material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of      the Issuer. |
|--------|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|                                                                                    |   |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
|                                                                                    |   |
| /s/      Jay Gottlieb                                                                   |   |
| Jay      GottliebChief      Executive and Principal OfficerMay 13,      2009  |   |
03/03/201 0 15:2 G FA X 202493514 2 FA A * DM S @l001/00 2

UNITE D STATE S DEPARTMEN T O FTRANSPORTATIO N

_- OFFIC E O FHEARING S *-ns «



### WASHINGTON , D.C . f ? I--S ^ P !\/ C T ^ ^ . •.-«, „ '•w ' a.

_I V -C . J L I N TFF E MATTE RO F' ^ 

### DARB Y AVIATION H EAR3 N G DOCKE T FA A Docke t

No . CP08SO002 6 FA A Cas e No . 2008SO090020 DMSNO.FAA-2008-119

2 Administrativ e Law Judg e Isaa c D . Benki n AGENCY' S CHANG E O FADDRES S COME S NO W th e Agenc y an dsubmit s thi s chang e o f addres s fo

r it s counse l a s follows : Th e addres s for

servic e for

th e Agenc y is : Raymon dVeatc h Offic e o f th e Regiona l Counsel , ASO- 7 FAA , Southern Regio n P O Bo x 2063 6 Atlanta , G

A 3032 0 Th e addres s fo

r overnigh t

delivery is : Raymon dVeatc h Offic e o f th e Regiona l Counsel , ASO- 7 FAA , Southern Regio n 170 1 Columbi aAve . Colleg e Park . GA 3033 7

• •','. : Th e facsimil e numbe r

fo r servic e i s (404 ) 305-5223 . M y telephon e numbe r

i s (202 ) 267-9676 . M y secretary' s (Ms . Rckit aEdwards ) phon e numbe r i s (404 ) 305-523 4 M y e-mai l addres s i s raymond.veatch@faa.go v03/03/201 0 15:2 G FAX 202493514 2 FA A* DM S @1002/00 2

Respectliull y submitted ,

January 13 , 2010 . rA>:MOND VEATC H tiome y Offic e o f th e Regional Counse l CERTIIFTCAT E O FSERVIC E T hereb y certif

y tha t acop y o f

thi s Agenc y Chang e o f

Addres s ha s bee n maile dthi s dat e b y facsimile , e-mai l an dregular mail : Th e Honorabl e Isaa c D . Benki n Administrativ e Law Judg e Offic e o f Hearings , M-2 0 U.S . Departmen t

o f Transportatio n 120 0 New Jerse y Avenue , S.E . Kast Buildin g Groun dFloor , Roo mE12-320 Washington , D.C . 2059 0 TEL : Attorne y (202 ) 366-213 9 Legal Assistant : (202 ) 366-512 1 ' • • • FAX : (202 ) 366-753 6 e-mail : David.Benkin@dot.go v Deann aWeidncr , Esq . Davi dAnderso n Esq . 59 5 N . 20' ^ Street , Suit e 145 0 Birmingham , A L 3520 3 Fax : 205-322-389 0 dIweidner@davidbandersonlaw.co m Hearing Docke

t (interna l disrribuiion only) Federa l Aviation Administraiion 80 0 Independenc e Avenue , S.W , Washington , D

C 2059 1 Attn : Hearin

g Docke i Clerk,AGC-43 0 Wilbu r WrighjJJuilding - .^o m20 j dat e