alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Prepared by MERRILL CORPORATION www.edgaradvantage.com






[SUTHERLAND ASBILL & BRENNAN LETTERHEAD]






April 14, 2000






Board of Directors

Protective Life Insurance Company

2801 Highway 201 South

Birmingham, Alabama 35223






Directors:






    We hereby consent to the reference to our name under the caption "Legal Matters" in the statement of additional information filed as part of post-effective amendment number 1 to the
registration statement on Form N-4 (File No. 333-81553) filed by Protective Life Insurance Company and Protective Variable Annuity Separate Account with the Securities and Exchange Commission. In
giving this consent, we do not admit that we are in the category of persons whose consent is required under Section 7 of the Securities Act of 1933.







	 	Sincerely,
	 

 	 

SUTHERLAND ASBILL & BRENNAN LLP
	 

 	 

By: /s/ DAVID S. GOLDSTEIN

	 	David S. Goldstein
1427.303 Contract clauses. ( a ) The HCA is authorized to make the determination to sublicense foreign governments or international organizations, as prescribed in FAR 27.303(b)(3).
( b ) If one of the exceptions in FAR 27.303(e)(1) is used, then insert clause 1452.227-70, Appeals of Use of Exceptions. The exception in FAR 27.303(e)(1)(ii) to use alternative provisions restricting or eliminating a contractor's right to retain title to any subject invention shall be made by the HCA, after consultation with the Assistant Solicitor for Acquisitions and Intellectual Property.
( c ) Within 30 days after contract award the CO shall forward copies of determinations to use exceptions under FAR 27.303(e)(1) shall be forwarded to the Assistant Solicitor for Acquisitions and Intellectual Property for submission to the Secretary of Commerce and, if required, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration. The determinations shall include all supporting documentation.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

EASTERN DIVISION

ARMANDO RAMIREZ,

Plaintiff,

v.

T&H LEMONT, INC., 

Defendant.

No. 12 C 1279 

Judge James B. Zagel

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

This is a national origin discrimination and retaliation case. Earlier in this litigation, 

Plaintiff’s counsel sought to withdraw from representing Plaintiff. Around this time, three 

witnesses who previously could not be located—Santiago Villagrana, Francisco Hernandez, and 

Miguel Velazquez—suddenly surfaced, eager to testify. During their depositions, each of these 

three witnesses testified that they heard Joe Balogh, an employee of Defendant, call Plaintiff a 

burro or donkey at work on one occasion. 

Following the depositions of these three witnesses, Defendant discovered evidence that 

they had been offered, and/or were seeking, financial compensation in exchange for their 

testimony. An evidentiary hearing was held on September 2, 2015. At this time, Oberlin Luis, an 

employee of Defendant, submitted an affidavit that attested that one of the three witnesses, 

Villagrana, told him that he and the other two witnesses were no longer on Plaintiff’s side and 

wanted to help Defendant. 

During the evidentiary hearing, Hernandez testified that Plaintiff met him, Villagrana, 

and Velazquez at a restaurant twice before they were deposed. According to Hernandez, Plaintiff 

asked them whether they would testify for him during the first meeting and discussed what their 

1 
testimony would be during both meetings. Although Hernandez denied that anyone had offered 

him money for his testimony, there were several instances during the evidentiary hearing where I 

found his credibility to be questionable. 

After the initial hearing, non-party witness Santiago Villagrana testified during a video 

deposition that Plaintiff Armando Ramirez offered to pay Villagrana money in exchange for his 

testimony. Villagrana, who was in a difficult personal and financial situation at the time, agreed. 

Throughout the evidentiary hearing, counsel for Plaintiff has been forthcoming and 

cooperative—I am convinced that he played no role in Plaintiff’s misconduct. Because I have 

found clear and convincing evidence of witness tampering, I am dismissing this case with 

prejudice to sanction Plaintiff. 

ENTER:

James B. Zagel

United States District Judge

DATE: January 19, 2016 

2
#### In the Matter of John A. Di Lascia, an Attorney, Respondent.

During the pendency of disciplinary proceedings, respondent submitted his resignation as an attorney and counselor at law. Resignation accepted and respondent’s name ordered to be struck from the roll of attorneys. Nolan, P. J., Beldoek, Ughetta and Kleinfeld, JJ., concur.
###### Editorial Note on Part 724

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 724 appear at 65 FR 62616, Oct. 19, 2000.

#### § 724.118 Documentary discharge review.

A formal session of the NDRB convened for the purpose of reviewing, on the basis of documentary data, an applicant's discharge. The Documentary data shall include the application together with all information accompanying that application, available service records, and any other information considered relevant by the NDRB.

[50 FR 10943, Mar. 19, 1985, as amended at 75 FR 747, Jan. 6, 2010]
<PAGE>

Exhibit 11
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                              Fiscal Year Ended
                                                                        ----------------------------  
                                                                          March 29,       March 30,
                                                                            1997            1996
                                                                        ------------    ------------
<S>                                                                     <C>             <C>
Primary Loss Per Share Data:

    Net Loss for Year                                                   $(2,761,000)    $(1,101,000)
                                                                        -----------     -----------
    Weighted Average Number of Common and
       Common Equivalent Shares:
          Weighted Average Common Shares Outstanding
              During the Year                                            31,018,000      30,041,652
          Common Equivalents: (1)
              Convertible Preferred Stock                                    ---             ---
              Incremental Shares Issuable on Exercise
                of Warrants                                                  ---             ---
              Incremental Shares Issuable on Exercise
               of Options                                                    ---             ---
                                                                        -----------     -----------
                Total Shares                                             31,018,000      30,041,652
                                                                        -----------     -----------
Primary Per Share Data                                                       ($0.09)         $(0.04)
                                                                             ======          ======
</TABLE>

(1) In loss years common stock equivalents are not included in the calculations
    of the loss per share.
#### 1602.170-10 Letter of credit.

*Letter of credit* means the method by which certain carriers, and their underwriters if authorized, receive recurring premium payments and contingency reserve payments by drawing against a commitment (certified by a responsible OPM official) which specifies a dollar amount available. For each carrier participating in the letter of credit arrangement for payment under this part, the terms “carrier reserves,” and “special reserves” include any balance in the carrier's letter of credit account.

[53 FR 51783, Dec. 23, 1988, as amended at 57 FR 14359, Apr. 20, 1992. Redesignated at 62 FR 47574, Sept. 10, 1997]
#### 1825.003 Definitions.
#### 1422.805 Procedures.

Copies of the poster “Equal Employment Opportunity is the Law” (National Stock No. 7690-00-926-8988) may be ordered from the GSA supply depot.
EXHIBIT 32.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT

TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY
ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2008 of Robert Half
International Inc. (the Form 10-K), I, M. Keith Waddell, Chief Financial Officer of Robert Half International Inc., certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that:

1.    The Form 10-K 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 Form 10-K fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
results of operations of Robert Half International Inc.

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other
document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to Robert Half International Inc. and will
be retained by Robert Half International Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.



|                  |  |                                                                        
|----------------- |  | -----------------------------------------------------------------------
|February 19, 2009 |  | /s/ M. Keith Waddell                                                   
|                  |  | M. Keith Waddell Chief Financial Officer Robert Half International Inc.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 02-6734

MICHAEL U. REED,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

RONALD J. ANGELONE, Director, Virginia

Department of Corrections,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of Virginia, at Richmond. James R. Spencer, District

Judge. (CA-01-478)

Submitted: July 25, 2002 Decided: August 2, 2002

Before WILKINS, MOTZ, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Michael U. Reed, Appellant Pro Se. Hazel Elizabeth Shaffer,

Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Michael U. Reed seeks to appeal the district court’s order

denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West

1994 & Supp. 2002). We have reviewed the record and the district

court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny

a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the

reasoning of the district court. Reed v. Angelone, No. CA-01-478

(E.D. Va. Apr. 5, 2002). We dispense with oral argument because

the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the

materials before the court and argument would not aid the

decisional process.

DISMISSED
14.408-1 General. ( a ) The contracting officer shall make a contract award ( 1 ) by written or electronic notice,
( 2 ) within the time for acceptance specified in the bid or an extension (see 14.404-1(d)), and
( 3 ) to that responsible bidder whose bid, conforming to the invitation, will be most advantageous to the Government, considering only price and the price-related factors (see 14.201-8) included in the invitation. Award shall not be made until all required approvals have been obtained and the award otherwise conforms with 14.103-2.
( b ) If less than three bids have been received, the contracting officer shall examine the situation to ascertain the reasons for the small number of responses. Award shall be made notwithstanding the limited number of bids. However, the contracting officer shall initiate, if appropriate, corrective action to increase competition in future solicitations for the same or similar items, and include a notation of such action in the records of the invitation for bids (see 14.204).
( c ) ( 1 ) Award shall be made by mailing or otherwise furnishing a properly executed award document to the successful bidder.
( 2 ) When a notice of award is issued, it shall be followed as soon as possible by the formal award.
( 3 ) When more than one award results from any single invitation for bids, separate award documents shall be suitably numbered and executed.
( 4 ) When an award is made to a bidder for less than all of the items that may be awarded to that bidder and additional items are being withheld for subsequent award, the award shall state that the Government may make subsequent awards on those additional items within the bid acceptance period.
( 5 ) All provisions of the invitation for bids, including any acceptable additions or changes made by a bidder in the bid, shall be clearly and accurately set forth (either expressly or by reference) in the award document. The award is an acceptance of the bid, and the bid and the award constitute the contract.
( d ) ( 1 ) Award is generally made by using the Award portion of Standard Form (SF) 33, Solicitation, Offer, and Award, or SF 1447, Solicitation/Contract (see 53.214). If an offer on an SF 33 leads to further changes, the resulting contract shall be prepared as a bilateral document on SF 26, Award/Contract.
( 2 ) Use of the Award portion of SF 33, SF 26, or SF 1447, does not preclude the additional use of informal documents, including electronic communications, as notices of awards.
[48 FR 42171, Sept. 19, 1983, as amended at 50 FR 1739, Jan. 11, 1985; 50 FR 52429, Dec. 23, 1985; 54 FR 48984, Nov. 28, 1989; 55 FR 3881, Feb. 5, 1990. Redesignated at 60 FR 34738, July 3, 1995; 60 FR 42654, Aug. 16, 1995; 81 FR 83099, Nov. 18, 2016]
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

August 3, 2020

No. 04-19-00541-CV

Richard LARES,

Appellant

v.

Karina GUEVARA,

Appellee

From the 37th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2016-CI-12518

Honorable Michael E. Mery, Judge Presiding

O R D E R

Sitting: Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice

Beth Watkins, Justice

Liza A. Rodriguez, Justice

This is an appeal from an order dismissing appellant’s suit for want of prosecution. 

Appellant, a pro se inmate, has represented in a sworn statement to this court that he sent a 

response to the trial court’s dismissal notice, and has provided a copy of what he swears is a true 

and correct copy of his response. The response is not in the appellate record, and the trial court 

clerk has represented to this court that appellant’s response was never received by the clerk for 

filing. 

Under the “prison mailbox rule,” a pro se inmate is deemed to have “filed” a document at 

the time the document is duly received by prison officials. Enriquez v. Livingston, 400 S.W.3d 

610 (Tex. App.—Austin 2013, pet. denied). A certificate of service can constitute some measure 

of proof of filing under the prison mailbox rule. Id. However, the certificate is not conclusive 

proof. TEX. R. APP. P. 9.2(b)(2). 

We therefore abate this appeal and remand to the trial court for an evidentiary hearing for 

the trial court to determine whether, and when, appellant handed his response to prison officials 

for mailing and filing in this case. We remand with instructions for the trial court to make 

specific findings on the following two questions:
1. Did appellant give the attached filing to prison officials?

2. If so, on what date did appellant give the attached filing to prison officials?

We ORDER the trial court to make findings on these questions, and file a copy of a written 

findings of fact with the district court clerk within 30 days of this order. We further ORDER the 

district court clerk to file a supplemental clerk’s record containing the trial court’s written 

findings within 10 days of the date the trial court files the written findings. 

PER CURIAM

ATTESTED TO:
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS 

EASTERN DIVISION 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ) 

 ) No. 11 CR 821 - 2 

 vs. ) 

 ) Hon. Amy J. St. Eve 

 ) 

TYRITA MYERS ) 

AGREED HIPAA QUALIFIED PROTECTIVE ORDER 

 Upon the parties’ agreed motion for a protective discovery order 

compliant with the terms of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability 

Act of 1996 (HIPAA), 45 C.F.R. 164.512(e)(1)(v)(A) and (B), it is hereby ordered as 

follows: 

1. That the Bureau of Prisons and any psychiatrist, psychotherapist, 

forensic psychologist, physician, nurse, nurse’s assistant, counselor, and any 

other person employed by the Bureau of Prisons (B.O.P.), shall produce the 

entire record of TYRITA MYERS, registration number: 44045-424, to Dr. Michael 

Rabin, 1950 Farnsworth Lane, #302, Northbrook, Il 60062. The materials shall 

include raw psychological test data and the psychiatric notes and diagnostic 

assessments underlying Tyrita Myers’ medication regime and evaluation. 

2. The materials provided pursuant to this order may be used by the 

parties to this litigation, their attorneys, and their employed experts, solely in 

connection with the litigation or proceeding for which such information was 

requested and for no other purpose and in connection with no other proceedings. 
3. At the end of the litigation or proceeding, or the discharge of the 

defendant from any sentence imposed by the court, whichever is later, the 

materials provided pursuant to this order (including all copies made) shall be 

returned to the producing entity or destroyed by the receiving party or parties. 

4. That the parties to this litigation shall attach a copy of this Order to 

any Subpoena pursuant to Illinois law directed to The Bureau of Prisons, and its 

agents, and intended to require the production of the records of TYRITA MYERS 

as referenced above. 

5. That the Clerk of the United States District Court is commanded to 

certify this order at no charge to the Defendant as this Court has found TYRITA 

MYERS to be indigent and entitled to subpoenas under Federal Rule of Criminal 

Procedure 17. 

Dated: September 3, 2013 ENTER:_________________________ 

 Hon. Amy J. St. Eve, 

 U.S. District Court Judge
•

RCRA REVISION CHECKLIST 33

Listing of EBDC

51 FR 37725-37729

October 24, ,1986

(HSWA Cluster I)

STATE ANALOG IS: '

FEDERAL

REQUIREMENT

FEDERAL'

RCRA

CITATION

ANALOGOUS

STATE

CITATION

EQUIVALENT

MORE BROADSTRIN- ER IN

GENT SCOPE

PART 261 - IDENTIFICATION AND LISTING OF HAZARDOUS WASTES

SUBPART D - LISTS OF HAZARDOUS WASTES

HAZARDOUS WASTES FROM SPECIFIC SOURCES WAC 173-303

list of "K" wastes 261;32 -9904 x

261.32 Hazardous wastes from specific sources

Industry and EPA

Hazardous Waste No. Hazardous Waste

•

Pesticides:

K123

K124

K125 "

K126

Hazard Code

Process wastewater (including supernates, filtrates and

washwaters) from ,the production of ethy1enebisdithiocarbamic acid and its salt. (T)

Reactor vent scrubber water from the production of

ethy1enebisdithiocarbamicacid and its salts. (C,T)

Filtration, evaporation, and centrifugation solids from

the production of ethy1enebisdithiocarbamic acid and its

salts. (T)

Baghouse dust and floor sweepings in milling and

packaging operations from the production or formulation

of ethy1enebisdithiocarbamic acid and its salts, (T)

APPENDIX III TO PART 261

CHEMICAL ANALYSIS TEST METHODS

add constituents to

Table 1 Appendix III

Compound

WAC 173-303

-110(3)(f)

Method'No.

•

Ethylene thiourea

October 24,1986 - Page 1 of 2

8250, 8330
RCRA REVISION CHECKLIST 33: Listing of

EBDC (cont'd)

•

FEDERAL

REQUIREMENT

FEDERAL

RCRA

CITATION

ANALOGOUS

STATE

CITATION

STATE ANALOG IS;

MORE BROADEQUIV- STRIN- ER IN

ALENT GENT SCOPE

APPENDIX VII TO PART 261

BASIS FOR LISTING HAZARDOUS WASTE

add

constituents Appendix VII

WAC 173-303

-082(5) X

•

•

EPA Hazardous

Waste No,

K123

K124

K125

K126

Hazardous constituents for

which listed

Ethylene thiourea

Ethylene thiourea

Ethylene thiourea

Ethylene thiourea

October 24, 1986 - Page 2 of 2
#### 1532.805 Procedure.
| (a) | A      certificate(s) issued to MDI by Sellers evidencing the FAS Shares to be      purchased by MDI; |
|-----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| (b) | All      resolutions, certificates and documents MDI may request relating to (i)      the organization, existence, good standing and foreign qualification of      Sellers and FAS, (ii) the corporate authority for the execution and      delivery of this Agreement and the other agreements executed and delivered      in connection therewith, (iii) the stock ownership of FAS, and (iv) such      other matters relevant to the foregoing as MDI shall reasonably request,      all of which shall be in form and substance satisfactory to MDI;      and |
|-----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| (c) | Such      other documents, instruments and agreements as MDI shall reasonably      request. |
|-----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| (a) | Evidence      that it has instructed its transfer agent, Mellon Investor Services, to      issue to each Seller a certificate evidencing the MDI Shares to be      purchased by such Seller; |
|-----|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| (b) | All      resolutions, certificates and documents Sellers may request relating to      (i) the organization, existence and good standing of MDI, (ii) the      corporate authority for the execution and delivery of this Agreement and      the other agreements executed and delivered in connection therewith, and      (iii) such other matters relevant to the foregoing as Sellers shall      reasonably request, all of which shall be in form and substance      satisfactory to Sellers; and |
|-----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

----