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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

)

INDEPENDENT PARTY OF )

FLORIDA and PARTY FOR )

SOCIALISM AND LIBERATION, )

)

Plaintiffs, )

)

v. ) Case No. 4:20-cv-00110-MW-CAS

)

LAUREL M. LEE, Florida )

Secretary of State, in her official )

capacity, )

)

Defendant. )

)

NOTICE OF APPEAL

The Independent Party of Florida and the Party for Socialism and 

Liberation, the Plaintiffs in this matter, hereby appeal the Order dated 

June 8, 2020 denying the Plaintiffs’ Motion for Preliminary Injunction. 

(Doc. 39.) This appeal is made to the United States Court of Appeals for 

the Eleventh Circuit.

Case 4:20-cv-00110-MW-MAF Document 40 Filed 06/08/20 Page 1 of 3
2

Dated this 8th day of June, 2020.

Respectfully submitted,

THE BERNHOFT LAW FIRM, S.C.

Attorneys for Plaintiffs

By: /s/ Daniel J. Treuden

Daniel J. Treuden

Admitted pro hac vice

1402 E. Cesar Chavez Street

Austin, Texas 78702

telephone: (512) 582-2100

facsimile: (512) 373-3159

djtreuden@bernhoftlaw.com

Case 4:20-cv-00110-MW-MAF Document 40 Filed 06/08/20 Page 2 of 3
3

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

The foregoing document was served on the Defendant by the ECF 

system at the time of filing:

ashley.davis@dos.myflorida.com

Deputy General Counsel Ashley E. Davis

brad.mcvay@dos.myflorida.com

General Counsel Brad R. McVay

Attorneys for:

Laurel M. Lee, Florida Secretary of State

R.A. Gray Building, Suite 100

500 S. Bronough Street

Tallahassee, Florida 32399

Signed this 8th of June, 2020.

 /s/ Daniel J. Treuden

Daniel J. Treuden

Case 4:20-cv-00110-MW-MAF Document 40 Filed 06/08/20 Page 3 of 3
May4, 2012 

Mr. Dennis DeVany 

Chief, Essential Air Service Division 

Office of Aviation Analysis 

Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Avenue SE 

Washington, D.C. 20590 

PHIL BRYANT 

GOVERNOR 

Reference: DOT-OST-2008-0209, 2001-10685, 2009-0305, 

Greenville, MS, laurel/Hattiesburg, MS, and Tupelo, MS 

Dear Mr. DeVany, 

1 wish to lend my support to the proposal of Silver Airways to provide essential air service in the State of 

Mississippi as replacement for current Delta Air lines service. 

local air service that provides an effective connection to the national and international air 

transportation system is critical to the economic well being of the citizens of Mississippi. Many people in 

Greenville, laurel, Hattiesburg, Tupelo and the surrounding areas rely on local air service for both 

business and leisure travel. 

The Silver Airways proposals offer us a modern 34-seat turboprop aircraft and flights to Atlanta, which is 

not only the largest hub airport in the world but also a popular business and leisure travel destination 

for Mississippians in its own right. I believe the Silver air service proposals represent the best option for 

retaining our local air service long term and building up traffic so that government subsidies can 

eventually be reduced or eliminated. 

I urge the Department of Transportation to award Silver Airways the designation to provide Mississippi 

airports essential air service. 

Governor 

STATE OF MISSISSIPPI • OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR 

POST OFFICE BOX 139 • JACKSON, MISSISSIPPI 39205 • TELEPHONE: (601) 359-3150 • FAX: (601) 359-3741 • www.govemorbryant.com
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                    12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1995
<CASH>                                            3596
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                       87
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                  3776
<PP&E>                                           54426
<DEPRECIATION>                                   12658
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   45544
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                              872
<BONDS>                                              0
<COMMON>                                             0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                       44672
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     45544
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                  8967
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                     2758
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                  1940
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   4269
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               4269
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                      4269
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    16.45
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    16.45
        

</TABLE>
#### Town of North Hempstead, Respondent, v. Salvatore De Feo et al., Appellants.

Judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated July 1, 1965, modified, on the law and the facts, by striking out the injunctive provision in subdivision “ 4 ” of the third decretal paragraph thereof, which enjoins defendants “4. From storing and displaying motorcycles in front of and adjacent to the subject premises”. As so modified, judgment affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs and without prejudice to such action which plaintiff may be advised to take, as hereinbelow mentioned. Findings of fact contained in the trial court’s decision relating to the storage and display of motorcycles so far as they are inconsistent herewith are hereby reversed and new findings are made as indicated herein. On June 17, 1959 the Town Board of plaintiff town granted defendants’ application for a variance on condition, among others, that the building in question be closed and all activity on the premises cease at 9:30 p.m. By failing to institute an article 78 proceeding to attack this condition, defendants lost the right to argue the efficacy thereof. Desistance from storing and displaying motorcycles in front of and adjacent to the premises was not one of the conditions upon which the variance was granted. However, the deletion of the prohibition as to motorcycles from the judgment should be without prejudice to such action by the town as it may be advised to take by reason of its claim that such storage and display is barred by former sections 82.1, 82.2, 82.3, 82.4 and 136.59' (presently sections 16.24, 16.25, 16.26, 16.27, and 23.69) of the Building Zone Ordinance. No claim of prohibition under the enumerated sections of this ordinance was made *861in the pleadings. Beldock, P. J., TJghetta, Rabin, Benjamin and Munder, JJ., concur.
Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

GAINESVILLE DIVISION

EDDIE MARCELLE WHEELER,

Plaintiff,

v. CASE NO. 1:03-cv-00140-MP-AK

SIVETHA COLLINS,

DARBY D MARSHALL,

RAJ PURUSH TERKONDA,

UNITED STATES,

JOHN G WESTINE,

Defendants.

___________________________/

O R D E R 

This matter is before the Court on Doc. 31, Report and Recommendation of Magistrate

Judge Kornblum, recommending that Defendants' Motion to Dismiss, or in the alternative, for

Summary Judgment, Doc. 20, be denied and that the case be remanded to the Magistrate for entry

of a scheduling order so that discovery can proceed and this matter can be set for trial. The

parties have been furnished a copy of the Report and Recommendation and have been afforded

an opportunity to file objections. Pursuant to Title 28, United States Code, Section 636(b)(1),

this Court must make a de novo review of those portions to which an objection has been made. 

Neither party has filed an objection. Having considered the Report and Recommendation and

lack of objections thereto timely filed, I have determined that the Report and Recommendation

should be ADOPTED.

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED:

1. The Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation is adopted and incorporated

by reference in this order.

Case 1:03-cv-00140-MP-GRJ Document 35 Filed 07/12/05 Page 1 of 2
Page 2 of 2

Case No: 1:03-cv-00140-MP-AK

2. Defendants' Motion to Dismiss, or in the alternative, for Summary Judgment,

Doc. 20, is DENIED.

3. This case is remanded to Magistrate Judge Kornblum for entry of a scheduling

order so that discovery can proceed and this matter can be set for trial.

DONE AND ORDERED this 12th day of July, 2005.

 s/Maurice M. Paul 

 Maurice M. Paul, Senior District Judge 

Case 1:03-cv-00140-MP-GRJ Document 35 Filed 07/12/05 Page 2 of 2
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2383 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

        H.R.2383

                     One Hundred Thirteenth Congress

                                 of the

                        United States of America

                          AT THE FIRST SESSION

          Begun and held at the City of Washington on Thursday,
           the third day of January, two thousand and thirteen

                                 An Act

 
  To designate the new Interstate Route 70 bridge over the Mississippi 
 River connecting St. Louis, Missouri, and southwestern Illinois as the 
                ``Stan Musial Veterans Memorial Bridge''.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. STAN MUSIAL VETERANS MEMORIAL BRIDGE.
    (a) Designation.--The new Interstate Route 70 bridge over the 
Mississippi River that connects St. Louis, Missouri, to southwestern 
Illinois shall be known and designated as the ``Stan Musial Veterans 
Memorial Bridge''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the bridge referred to 
in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Stan 
Musial Veterans Memorial Bridge''.

                               Speaker of the House of Representatives.

                            Vice President of the United States and    
                                               President of the Senate.
```
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent

except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

February 18, 2004

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 03-10619

Conference Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

PAUL Z. LOWDER,

Defendant-Appellant.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 3:96-CR-70-1-G

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

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, EMILIO M. GARZA, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Paul Z. Lowder, federal prisoner # 29028-077, appeals the

district court’s denial of his petition invoking 28 U.S.C.

§ 2241. Because Lowder’s 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition challenged

the legality of his conviction, Lowder had to show that 28 U.S.C.

§ 2255 provided him with an inadequate or ineffective remedy. 

See Pack v. Yusuff, 218 F.3d 448, 452 (5th Cir. 2000).

 Lowder fails to identify any authority demonstrating that he

was convicted of a non-existent offense for purposes of
No. 03-10619

-2-

satisfying the savings clause provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 2255. 

See Reyes-Requena v. United States, 243 F.3d 893, 904 (5th Cir.

2001). Rather, Lowder’s claim of “actual innocence” is based on

the argument that his conviction was obtained pursuant to a

faulty indictment. Because Lowder fails to demonstrate that

relief pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 is inadequate or ineffective,

the district court’s judgment is AFFIRMED.
Page 1 of 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

vs. Case Nos.: 3:99cr46/RV 

 3:11cv458/RV/EMT

WILLIE JAMES GRIFFIN, JR.,

____________________________/

O R D E R

This cause comes on for consideration upon the magistrate judge’s Report and

Recommendation dated April 30, 2012 (doc. 447). The parties have been furnished a copy of the

Report and Recommendation and have been afforded an opportunity to file objections pursuant to

Title 28, United States Code, Section 636(b)(1). I have made a de novo determination of all timely

filed objections.

Having considered the Report and Recommendation, and the timely filed objection thereto

(doc. 448), I have determined that the Report and Recommendation should be adopted.

Accordingly, it is now ORDERED as follows:

1. The magistrate judge’s Report and Recommendation is adopted and incorporated by

reference in this order.

2. Defendant’s motion to vacate pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (doc. 434), is DENIED 

and DISMISSED, as this court lacks jurisdiction to consider a successive motion absent permission

from the Eleventh Circuit.

3. No certificate of appealability shall issue.

DONE AND ORDERED this 25th day of May, 2012.

/s/ Roger Vinson 

ROGER VINSON

SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:99-cr-00046-RV-EMT Document 450 Filed 05/25/12 Page 1 of 1
##### 



EXHIBIT 12.1 RULE 13A-14(A) CERTIFICATION IN ACCORDANCE WITH
SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES OXLEY ACT OF 2002 I, Edward Dolejsi, President and CEO of International Gemini Technology Inc. (the Company),
certify that: 
 1. I have reviewed this
annual report on Form 20-F/A of the Company; 
 2. Based on my knowledge, this report 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 with respect to the period covered by this
report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in
this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations
and cash flows of the Company as of, and for, the periods presented in this report; 4. The Companys other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining
disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for
the Company and have: a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and
procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to
the Company, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those
entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared; b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the Companys disclosure controls and procedures and presented in
this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as
of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and c) Disclosed in this report any change in the Companys internal control over financial reporting
that occurred during the period covered by the annual report that has materially affected, or is
reasonably likely to materially affect, the Companys internal control over financial reporting;
and 5. The Companys other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation
of internal control over financial reporting, to the Companys auditors and the audit committee of
the Companys board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions): a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal
control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the Companys
ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a
significant role in the Companys internal control over financial reporting. 
 Date: September 22, 2005 
 /s/ Edward DolejsiEdward DolejsiPresident and CEO
Exhibit 10.6

                        ADDENDUM TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT
                        --------------------------------

         This Addendum to Employment Agreement (hereinafter "AGREEMENT") is made
by and between John C. Kleinert, 48 South Franklin Turnpike, Ramsey, NJ 07446
(hereinafter "EMPLOYEE"), and Velocity Asset Management, Inc. on behalf of
itself, its subsidiaries, affiliates, predecessors, successors, assigns; and
their directors, officers, employees and agents (hereinafter collectively
referred to as "VAMI"), with its principal place of business, 3100 Route 138
West, STE A, Wall, NJ 07719.

         WHEREAS, VAMI and EMPLOYEE have entered into an Employment Agreement,
dated as of January 1, 2004 (the "Employment Agreement") and

         WHEREAS, VAMI and the EMPLOYEE desire to amend certain provisions of
the Employment Agreement,

         NOW THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the mutual and respective
covenants and agreements contained herein, VAMI and EMPLOYEE agree as follows:

                  1.       The Employee hereby confirms that no salary has been
paid to him or accrued during the period between January 1, 2004 and August 31,
2004, and EMPLOYEE hereby waives any right to the payment of such salary.
Payment of salary at the rate stated in the Employment Agreement shall begin on
September 1, 2004 and shall be paid bi-monthly less mandatory and authorized
deductions.

                  2.       Except as provided above, the Employment Agreement
shall remain in full force and effect.

         IN WITNESS WHREOF, the parties have executed this ADDENDUM as of the
date first above written.

VELOCITY ASSET MANAGEMENT, INC.                EMPLOYEE;

By: /s/ JAMES J. MASTRIANI                     /s/ JOHN C. KLEINERT
    -----------------------------------        ---------------------------------
    James J. Mastriani, Esq.                   John C. Kleinert
    CFO & CLO

Dated:  September 1, 2004                      Dated:   September 1, 2004
THIS AGREEMENT is dated for reference the 10th day of August, A.D. 2009.
 
 
 BETWEEN:
 
 Cascade Technologies Corp., a company incorporated in the State of Wyoming and having its offices at 1530-9th Avenue S.E., Calgary, Alberta T2G 0T7
 
 (hereinafter referred to as the “Company”)
 
 OF THE FIRST PART
 
 AND:
 
 Dwayne Flett, an individual with an address at 766 Kuipers Cr., Kelowna, B.C.
 V1V9N8
 
 (hereinafter referred to as the “Creditor”)
 
 OF THE SECOND PART
 
 WHEREAS the Company is indebted to the Creditor and the Creditor is willing to accept certain assets of the Company,  as detailed on Schedule A appended hereto,  in full and final settlement  of the indebtedness between the Company and the Creditor , subject to the terms and conditions hereinafter set forth in settlement of the Company’s indebtedness to the Creditor.
 
 NOW THEREFORE THIS AGREEMENT WITNESSETH that in consideration of the premises and of the mutual covenants hereinafter contained, the parties hereto agree as follows:
 
 1.                      The Company confirms and acknowledges its indebtedness to the Creditor in an amount of $3,970.93 as of August 10, 2009 (the “Indebtedness”).
 
 2.                      The Creditor agrees to accept the assets as set forth on Schedule A appended hereto in full and final  in full and final settlement of the Indebtedness.
 
 3.                      Each of the parties hereto agrees to execute such further and other deeds, documents and assurances and do such further and other acts as may be necessary to carry out the true intent and meaning of this Agreement fully and effectually.
 
 4.                      Time shall be of the essence of this Agreement.
 
 5.                      This Agreement shall enure to the benefit of and be binding upon the parties hereto, their heirs, executors, administrators, successors and assigns.
  1
 IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties hereto have executed this Agreement as of the day and year first above written.
 
 CASCADE TECHNOLOGIES CORP.
  By: /s/ Jacqueline Danforth
 
  Witnessed by:
 /s/ Dwayne Flett
 DWAYNE FLETT /s/Cindy Schalm
 
 766 Kuipers
 Address
  2
  SCHEDULE A
 
 1.           All of the issued and outstanding shares of Cascade Renewable Energy Inc., a company incorporated pursuant to the laws of the Province of Alberta.
§ 201.56-7 Lily family, Liliaceae. Kinds of seed: Asparagus, chives, leek, onion, and Welsh onion. ( a ) Asparagus. ( 1 ) General description. ( i ) Germination habit: Hypogeal monocot.
( ii ) Food reserves: Endosperm which is hard, semi- transparent, and non-starchy; minor reserves in the cotyledon. The endosperm surrounds the entire embryo.
( iii ) Cotyledon: A single cylindrical cotyledon; following germination, all but the basal end remains embedded in the endosperm to absorb nutrients.
( iv ) Shoot system: The epicotyl elongates and carries the terminal bud above the soil surface. The epicotyl may bear several small scale leaves. A short hypocotyl is barely distinguishable, joining the root to the basal end of the cotyledon. More than one shoot may arise simultaneously, and the seedling may be considered normal if at least one shoot is well- developed and has a terminal growing point, provided other essential structures are normal.
( v ) Root system: A long slender primary root.
( 2 ) Abnormal seedling description. ( i ) Cotyledon: ( A ) Detached from seedling.
( B ) Deep open cracks at basal end.
( ii ) Epicotyl: ( A ) Missing.
( B ) Terminal bud missing or damaged.
( C ) Deep open cracks.
( D ) Malformed, such as markedly shortened, curled, or thickened.
( E ) Spindly.
( F ) Watery.
( iii ) Hypocotyl: ( A ) Deep open cracks.
( B ) [Reserved]
( iv ) Root: ( A ) No primary root.
( B ) Stubby primary root with weak secondary roots.
( v ) Seedling: ( A ) One or more essential structures impaired as a result of decay from primary infection.
( B ) Albino.
( b ) Chives, leek, onion, Welsh onion. ( 1 ) General description. ( i ) Germination habit: Epigeal monocot.
( ii ) Food reserves: Endosperm which is hard, semi-transparent, and non-starchy; minor reserves in the cotyledon.
( iii ) Cotyledon: A single cylindrical cotyledon. The cotyledon emerges with the seed coat and endosperm attached to the tip. A sharp bend known as the “knee” forms; continued elongation of the cotyledon on each side of this knee pushes it above the soil surface. The cotyledon tip is pulled from the soil and straightens except for a slight kink which remains at the site of the knee.
( iv ) Shoot system: The first foliage leaf emerges through a slit near the base of the cotyledon, but this does not usually occur during the test period. The hypocotyl is a very short transitional zone between the primary root and the cotyledon, and is not distinguishable for purposes of seedling evaluation.
( v ) Root system: A long slender primary root with adventitious roots developing from the hypocotyl. The primary root does not develop secondary roots.
( 2 ) Abnormal seedling description. ( i ) Cotyledon: ( A ) Short and thick.
( B ) Without a definite bend or “knee”.
( C ) Spindly or watery.
( ii ) Epicotyl: ( A ) Not observed during the test period.
( B ) [Reserved]
( iii ) Hypocotyl: ( A ) Not evaluated.
( B ) [Reserved]
( iv ) Root: ( A ) No primary root.
( B ) Short, weak, or stubby primary root.
( v ) Seedling: ( A ) One or more essential structures impaired as a result of decay from primary infection.
( B ) Albino.
[59 FR 64504, Dec. 14, 1994]