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

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS, EASTERN DIVISION 

Jeff Foster, ) 

) 

Plaintiff, ) 

) Case No. 2012 cv 3130 

v. ) 

) Honorable Judge: Mary M. Rowland 

PNC Bank, National Association, ) 

) 

Defendant. ) 

STATUS REPORT

Pursuant to the Docket Entry dated March 30, 2021, Jeff Foster (“Foster”) and PNC Bank, 

National Association (“PNC”) (Foster and PNC are collectively the “Parties”), submit the 

following Status Report: 

1. The appeal styled as Jeff Foster v. PNC Bank, National Association, Case No. 20-

1667 (the “Appeal”) remains pending. Pursuant to Rule 33 of the Federal Rules of 

Appellate Procedure and Seventh Circuit Rule 33, the parties remain engaged in 

mediation with the Court’s mediator. All briefing deadlines have been stayed by 

the Court as a result of the parties’ participation in the mediation. Neither party has 

submitted any briefs in the Appeal. 

2. PNC wishes to pursue its motion for attorneys’ fees filed with this Court on 

September 25, 2021. PNC’s motion for attorneys’ fees is fully briefed and is 

decisional. 

Case: 1:12-cv-03130 Document #: 217 Filed: 04/08/21 Page 1 of 2 PageID #:4568
{00810382 }

Respectfully submitted, 

/s/ Lauren E. Dreifus /s/ Lindsay Doss Spillman 

Max A. Stein (ARDC 6275993) 

Lauren E. Dreifus (ARDC 6317983) 

Boodell & Domanskis, LLC 

1 North Franklin Street, Suite 1200 

Chicago, Illinois 60606 

(312) 938-4070 (tel.) 

(312) 540-1162 (fax) 

mstein@boodlaw.com 

ldreifus@boodlaw.com

Attorneys for Plaintiff Jeff Foster

 James M. Crowley (ARDC 6182597) 

John F. Sullivan (ARDC 6205900) 

Plunkett Cooney, PC 

221 N. LaSalle Street, Suite 1550 

Chicago, IL 60601 

(312) 670-6900 

jcrowley@plunkettcooney.com

jsullivan@plunkettcooney.com

Marcel C. Duhamel (OH Bar No. 0062171 pro 

hac vice) 

Lindsay Doss Spillman (OH Bar No. 0086849 

pro hac vice) 

Vorys Sater, Seymour and Pease LLP 

200 Public Square, Suite 1400 

Cleveland, OH 44114 

(216) 479-6100 

mcduhamel@vorys.com 

ldspillman@vorys.com

Attorneys for PNC Bank, National Association 

4/08/2021 38824844 

Case: 1:12-cv-03130 Document #: 217 Filed: 04/08/21 Page 2 of 2 PageID #:4569
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation

# TIME & DATE: 

1:00 p.m., Friday, January 29, 2021.

# PLACE: 

Via Conference Call.

# STATUS: 

Open (with the exception of Executive Session).

# MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED:

The General Counsel of the Corporation has certified that in his opinion, one or more of the exemptions set forth in 5 U.S.C. 552 (b)(2) and (4) permit closure of the following portion(s) of this meeting:

    - Executive Session

## Agenda

I. CALL TO ORDER

II. Executive Session: NeighborWorks Compass Update

III. Action Item FY2021 Appropriation—Only Budget

IV. Action Item Authority for Monthly Health Insurance Invoices 2021

V. Adjournment

# CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION:

                         Lakeyia Thompson, Special Assistant, (202) 524-9940;                         *Lthompson@nw.org.*

Lakeyia Thompson,

Special Assistant.

[FR Doc. 2021-01378 Filed 1-15-21; 4:15 pm]

BILLING CODE 7570-02-P
#### 2052.214-72 Bid evaluation.

As prescribed at 2014.201-670(c), the contracting officer shall insert the following provision in applicable invitations for bids (paragraph “(f)” of this provision is optional):

# Bid Evaluation (JAN 1993)

(a) Award will be made to that responsive, responsible bidder within the meaning of FAR Subpart 9.1 whose total bid amount, as set forth by the bidder in Section B of this Invitation for Bid (IFB), constitutes the lowest overall evaluated final contract price to the Government based upon the requirements for the schedule. Bids will be evaluated for purposes of award by first ascertaining the sum of the total amount for each of the items specified in Section B of this solicitation. This will constitute the bidder's “Total Bid Amount.”

(b) Bidders shall insert a definite price or indicate “no charge” in the blank space provided for each item and/or sub-item listed in Section B. Unless expressly provided for in the bid, no additional charge will be allowed for work performed under the contract other than the unit prices stipulated for each item and/or sub-item.

(c) Any bid which is materially unbalanced as to price for the separate items specified in Section B of this IFB may be rejected as nonresponsive. An unbalanced bid is defined as one which is based on prices which, in the opinion of the NRC, are significantly less than cost for some work and/or prices that may be significantly overstated for other work.

(d) Separation charges, in any form, are not solicited. Bids containing charges for discontinuance, termination, failure to exercise an option, or for any other purpose will cause the bid to be rejected as nonresponsive.

(e) A preaward on-site survey of the bidder's facilities, equipment, etc., in accordance with FAR 9.105 and 9.106, may be made by representatives of the Commission for the purpose of determining whether the bidder is responsible within the meaning of FAR 9.1, and whether the bidder possesses qualifications that are conducive to the production of work that will meet the requirements, specifications, and provisions of this contract. If requested by the Commission, the prospective contractor may also be required to submit statements within * hours after receiving the request:

(1) Concerning their ability to meet any of the minimum standards set forth in FAR 9.104,

(2) Samples of work, and

(3) Names and addresses of additional clients, Government agencies, and/or commercial firms which the bidder is now doing or had done business with.

(f) Notwithstanding paragraph (b) of this section, the award of any contract resulting from this solicitation will be made on an “all or none” basis. Thus, bids submitted on fewer than the items listed in Section B of this IFB, or on fewer than the estimated quantity, will cause the bid to be rejected as nonresponsive.

*To be inserted into solicitation.

(End of provision)
#### DAVIS, Respondent, v. SUPREME COUNCIL, AMERICAN LEGION OF HONOR, Appellant. WARREN v. SAME. SELIG v. SAME. McGARRY v. SAME.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department.

November 13, 1903.)

Actions by Mary A. Davis and by the other parties above named against the Supreme Council of the American Legion of Honor.

No opinion. Motions withdrawn.
NO. 07-07-0437-CR

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

AT AMARILLO

PANEL D

FEBRUARY 15, 2008

______________________________

RICHARD W. DEMPS, APPELLANT

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, APPELLEE

_________________________________

FROM THE 137TH DISTRICT COURT OF LUBBOCK COUNTY;

NO. 2005-410,574; HONORABLE CECIL G. PURYEAR, JUDGE

_______________________________

Before QUINN, C.J., and CAMPBELL and PIRTLE, JJ.

ABATEMENT AND REMAND

Following a plea of not guilty, Appellant, Richard W. Demps, was convicted by a jury

of sexual assault and sentenced to life imprisonment. Appellant timely filed a notice of

appeal challenging his conviction. The clerk’s record filed on February 11, 2008, contains

the Trial Court’s Certification of Defendant’s Right of Appeal. The form, however, is not
Rule 25.2(d) was amended to require that a defendant sign the certification and 1

receive a copy. The amendment became effective September 1, 2007.

2

signed by Appellant as required by Rule 25.2(d) of the Texas Rules of Appellate

Procedure.

1

Consequently, we abate this appeal and remand the cause to the trial court for

further proceedings. Upon remand, the trial court shall utilize whatever means necessary

to secure a Certification of Defendant’s Right of Appeal in compliance with Rule 25.2(d).

Once properly executed, the certification shall be included in a supplemental clerk’s record

and filed with this Court on or before March 4, 2008.

It is so ordered.

Per Curiam

Do not publish.
#### Joseph Peritore, Appellant, v. Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation, Defendant-Respondent and Third-Party Plaintiff. Arute Brothers, Inc., Third-Party Defendant.

Order unanimously affirmed, without costs of this appeal to any party. (Appeal from order of Monroe Special Term granting motion by defendant Power Corporation for leave to serve an amended answer.) Present — Williams, P. J., Bastow, Goldman, McClusky and Henry, JJ.
**Exhibit 32**

 

**CERTIFICATIONOF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER**

**AND CHIEFFINANCIAL OFFICER**

**PURSUANTTO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350**

 

In connectionwith the quarterly report of Cascade Corporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-Qfor the period ended October 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities andExchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), the undersigned certify,pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350, as adopted pursuant to section 906of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

(1)                                  TheReport fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) ofthe Securities and Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

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

 
| /s/ Robert C. Warren, Jr. |   |
|--------------------------------|--------|
|                           |
| Robert C. Warren, Jr.     |
| *Chief Executive Officer*      |
| December 9, 2005          |
|                           |
|                           |
| /s/ Richard S. Anderson        |   |
|                           |
| Richard S. Anderson            |
| *Chief Financial Officer*      |
| December 9, 2005          |

 

----
#### 233.215-70 Additional contract clause.

Use the clause at 252.233-7001, Choice of Law (Overseas), in solicitations and contracts when contract performance will be outside the United States and its outlying areas, unless otherwise provided for in a government-to-government agreement.

[70 FR 35545, June 21, 2005]
208.7305 Contract clause. ( a ) Use the clause at 252.208-7000, Intent to Furnish Precious Metals as Government-Furnished Material, in all solicitations and contracts except— ( 1 ) When the contracting officer has determined that the required precious metals are not available from DSCP;
( 2 ) When the contracting officer knows that the items being acquired do not require precious metals in their manufacture; or
( 3 ) For acquisitions at or below the simplified acquisition threshold.
( b ) To make the determination in paragraph (a)(1) of this section, the contracting officer shall consult with the end item inventory manager and comply with the procedures in Chapter 11, DoD 4160.21-M, Defense Materiel Disposition Manual.
[56 FR 36306, July 31, 1991, as amended at 64 FR 2596, Jan. 15, 1999; 65 FR 14398, Mar. 16, 2000; 65 FR 52952, Aug. 31, 2000]
#### 2144.204 Contract clause.

The clause set forth at 2152.244-70 shall be inserted in all FEGLI Program contracts.
<PAGE>

                                EXHIBIT (10)(a)


                        CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS
<PAGE>

                        Consent of Independent Auditors



We consent to the reference to our firm under the caption "Independent Auditors"
in the Statements of Additional Information and to the use of our reports
(1) dated February 18, 2000 with respect to the statutory-basis financial
statements and schedules of PFL Life Insurance Company, (2) dated
January 28, 2000 with respect to the financial statements of certain subaccounts
of PFL Retirement Builder Variable Annuity Account, which are available for
investment by contract owners of the Retirement Income Builder Variable Annuity,
(3) dated January 28, 2000 with respect to the financial statements of the
subaccounts of PFL Retirement Builder Variable Annuity Account, which are
available for investment by contract owners of the Retirement Income Builder II
Variable Annuity, and (4) dated January 28, 2000 with respect to the financial
statements of certain subaccounts of PFL Retirement Builder Variable Annuity
Account, which are available for investment by contract owners of Portfolio
Select Variable Annuity, included in Post-Effective Amendment No. 9 to the
Registration Statement (Form N-4 No. 333-7509) and related Prospectuses of
Retirement Income Builder Variable Annuity, Retirement Income Builder II
Variable Annuity and Portfolio Select Variable Annuity.

                                     /s/ Ernst & Young

Des Moines, Iowa
April 24, 2000
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE Northern District of Illinois − CM/ECF LIVE, Ver 5.0.3

Eastern Division

Innovatio IP Ventures, LLC

Plaintiff,

v. Case No.: 1:12−cv−03858

Honorable Robert W. Gettleman

Delta Air Lines, Inc.

Defendant.

NOTIFICATION OF DOCKET ENTRY

This docket entry was made by the Clerk on Wednesday, May 23, 2012:

 MINUTE entry before Honorable Robert W. Gettleman: The Clerk is to arrange

for this case to be transferred to the Patent Case Pilot Program. Mailed notice (gds)

ATTENTION: This notice is being sent pursuant to Rule 77(d) of the Federal Rules of

Civil Procedure or Rule 49(c) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. It was

generated by CM/ECF, the automated docketing system used to maintain the civil and

criminal dockets of this District. If a minute order or other document is enclosed, please

refer to it for additional information.

For scheduled events, motion practices, recent opinions and other information, visit our

web site at www.ilnd.uscourts.gov.

Case: 1:12-cv-03858 Document #: 7 Filed: 05/23/12 Page 1 of 1 PageID #:650
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS 

EASTERN DIVISION 

IN RE: H&R BLOCK REFUND ) 

ANTICIPATION LOAN LITIGATION ) MDL No. 2373 

 ) 

This Document Relates to: ) Case No. 12 CV 2973 

All Cases ) 

 ) Judge Joan B. Gottschall 

)

ORDER

Enter Memorandum Opinion and Order. Defendants’ motion to compel arbitration and 

stay proceedings [22] is granted. These cases are stayed pending arbitration in accordance with 9 

U.S.C. § 3. The clerk is respectfully directed to close this case and all member cases associated 

with MDL No. 2373.

ENTER: 

/s/ 

JOAN B. GOTTSCHALL 

United States District Judge 

DATED: July 23, 2014 

$7
233.215 Contract clauses. Use Alternate I of the clause at FAR 52.233-1, Disputes, when— ( 1 ) The acquisition is for— ( i ) Aircraft
( ii ) Spacecraft and launch vehicles
( iii ) Naval vessels
( iv ) Missile systems
( v ) Tracked combat vehicles
( vi ) Related electronic systems;
( 2 ) The contracting officer determines that continued performance is— ( i ) Vital to the national security, or
( ii ) Vital to the public health and welfare; or
( 3 ) The head of the contracting activity determines that continued performance is necessary pending resolution of any claim that might arise under or be related to the contract.
[56 FR 36416, July 31, 1991. Redesignated at 62 FR 34126, June 24, 1997]
<PAGE>




                                                                      EXHIBIT 23



                         CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement (Form
S-8 No. 333-39408) pertaining to the Information Resources, Inc. 2000 Employee
Stock Purchase Plan, the Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-31182)
pertaining to the Information Resources, Inc. 1999 Restricted Stock Plan and
1999 Nonqualified Defined Contribution Plan, the Registration Statement (Form
S-8 No. 333-31416) pertaining to the Information Resources, Inc. Restricted
Stock Plan - Joseph P. Durrett, the Registration Statement (Form S-8 No.
33-48289) pertaining to the Information Resources, Inc. Employee Nonqualified
Stock Option Plan, the Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 33-48290) pertaining
to the Information Resources, Inc. Amended and Restated 1992 Stock Option Plan,
the Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 33-48291) pertaining to the Information
Resources, Inc. 1992 Executive Stock Option Plan, the Registration Statement
(Form S-8 No. 33-52719) pertaining to the Information Resources, Inc. Employee
Nonqualified Stock Option Plan, the Registration Statement (Form S-8 No.
33-52721) pertaining to the Information Resources, Inc. Employee Nonqualified
Stock Option Plan, the Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 33-54649) pertaining
to the Information Resources, Inc. 1992 Executive Stock Option Plan and the
Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-24041) pertaining to the Information
Resources, Inc. 401(k) Retirement Savings Plan and Trust of our report dated
February 5, 2003 with respect to the consolidated financial statements and
schedule of Information Resources, Inc. included in the Annual Report (Form
10-K) for the year ended December 31, 2002.


ERNST & YOUNG LLP
Chicago, Illinois
March 27, 2003
212.7001 Definition. As used in this subpart— *Innovative* means— ( 1 ) Any technology, process, or method, including research and development, that is new as of the date of submission of a proposal; or
( 2 ) Any application that is new as of the date of submission of a proposal of a technology, process, or method existing as of such date.
#### 1832.705-2 Clauses for limitation of cost or funds.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Joseph Anderson, Appellant.

In a *coram nobis*proceeding, defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated June 12, 1963, which denied without a hearing his application to vacate a judgment of the former County Court, Kings County, rendered June 12, 1946 on his plea of guilty, convicting him of murder in the second degree, and imposing sentence upon him as a second felony offender. Order reversed on the law and the facts, and proceeding remitted to the Criminal Term, Supreme Court, Kings County, for the purpose of: (a) holding a hearing limited to the question of whether the defendant’s failure to serve and file a timely notice of appeal was attributable to any breach of .promise on the part of his court-assigned trial counsel; and (b) making a determination *de novo*on the basis of the proof adduced upon such hearing. In view of defendant’s present allegations, a hearing is required to determine whether he is entitled to relief by reason of any such promise and the breach thereof *(People*v. *Barsey,*21 A D 2d 828; *People*v. *Coe,*16 A D 2d 876; cf. *People*v. *Adams,*12 N Y 2d 417). Beldock, P. J., Ughetta, Christ, Brennan and Hopkins, JJ., concur.
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1





                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS


We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement
(Form S-8 No.333-16325) pertaining to the 1996 Stock Option Plan of ACR Group,
Inc., of our report dated June 10, 1997, with respect to the consolidated
financial statements and schedule of ACR Group, Inc. included in the Annual
Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended February 28, 1997, filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission.



                                          ERNST & YOUNG LLP

Houston, Texas
June 10, 1997
');
	document.write('

|Date       | DOA Number | Title of Delegation                                                                                                        | Redelegation
|---------- | ---------- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------------
|8/25/2021  | EA/EJ/44   | Personal Delegation to Rachel Niebling for A/S (PDF, 127KB)                                                                |             
|1/19/2017  | EA/EJ/41   | Responsibility for Congressional Relations Functions of the Department (MS Word, 18KB)                                     |             
|7/22/1998  | EA/EJ/33   | Authority to Assert Deliberative Process Privilege as a Basis for Withholding Documents or Testimony Requested (PDF, 85KB) |             
|7/31/1996  | EA/EJ/28   | Authority to File Written Objections to OPM Under 5 USC, Sec. 3595(b)(3) (B) (PDF, 75KB)                                   |             
|11/07/1995 | EA/EJ/27   | Authority to Accept Gift of Travel Provided by ED Employees (PDF, 85KB)                                                    |             
|9/04/1992  | EA/EJ/22   | Authority Under 34 CFR Part 8 Regarding Demands for Records or Testimony in Legal Proceedings (PDF, 113KB)                 |             
|5/01/1986  | EA/EJ/1    | Responsibility for Congressional Relations Functions of the Department (MS Word, 25KB)                                     |             

|Date      | DOA Number | Title of Delegation                                                                                                                                                                                                     | Redelegation
|--------- | ---------- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------------
|11/4/2009 | EJ/EJ/39   | Authority to approve travel within the continental United States and non-foreign travel areas; to certify travel authorizations and travel vouchers, and to approve direct flights as indicated by the FTR (PDF, 113KB) |             
|11/4/2009 | EJ/EJ/40   | Authority to certify funds available for administering the functions and responsibilities of OLCA (PDF, 363KB)                                                                                                          |             

Top
#### 2403.101 Standards of conduct.

Detailed rules which apply to the conduct of HUD employees are set forth in 5 CFR part 2635 and 5 CFR part 7501.

[64 FR 46095, Aug. 23, 1999]
#### 225.873-2 Procedures.

When an offeror or a contractor identifies a levy included in an offered or contract price, follow the procedures at PGI 225.873-2.

[70 FR 73155, Dec. 9, 2005]
#### Maddox *vs.*Heard *et al.*

The condition prescribed by the 8533d section of the Code in the bond of plaintiff in garnishment proceedings at common law after judgment, is “to pay said defendant all costs and damages that he may sustain in consequence of suing out said garnishment in the event it should appear that the amount sworn to be due on such judgment was not due.” The condition of the bond given in this case is as follows: “Now,if there is no such judgment as aforesaid, this bond is to be good and valid against the said J. Maddox and his security, in favor of the said Lewis Morrison, the defendant in said judgment; otherwise to be of no force and effect.”

*jHeld,*that the variance is fatal, and the garnishment was properly dismissed at plaintiff’s cost.

Jackson, Justice.