alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 3202.10 Oversight and monitoring. ( a ) *General.* USDA will conduct oversight and monitoring of manufacturers, vendors, designated representatives, and other entities involved with the voluntary product labeling program to ensure compliance with this part. This oversight will include, but not be limited to, conducting facility visits of manufacturers and vendors who have certified biobased products, and of their designated representatives. Manufacturers, vendors, and their designated representatives are required to cooperate fully with all USDA audit efforts for the enforcement of the voluntary labeling program.
( b ) *Biobased content testing.* USDA will conduct biobased content testing of certified biobased products, as described in § 3202.8(b)(1) to ensure compliance with this part.
( c ) *Inspection of records.* Manufacturers, vendors, and their designated representatives must allow Federal representatives access to the records required under § 3202.9 for inspection and copying during normal Federal business hours.
( d ) *Audits.* USDA expects to conduct audits of the voluntary labeling program on an ongoing basis with audit activities conducted every other calendar year (bi-annually). Audit activities will include three stages and will be conducted in sequential order as follows: ( 1 ) Stage 1 auditing includes contacting all participants via email and requesting that they complete a “Declaration of Conformance Form.” Program participants are asked to confirm that they still manufacture the product and that the formulation and manufacturing processes remain the same. Participants are also asked to list all active products and advise the USDA of any complaints regarding the claim of the biobased content. The first Stage 1 auditing activity was completed in 2012 and the second Stage 1 audit will be conducted in 2018.
( 2 ) Stage 2 auditing consists of a random sampling of certified products to confirm the accuracy of biobased content percentages claimed. The participants whose products are selected will be required to submit product samples to be tested by independent testing labs at USDA expense. The first Stage 2 auditing activity began in 2014 and is scheduled to be completed during 2015 and the second Stage 2 audit will be conducted in 2020.
( 3 ) Stage 3 auditing requires manufacturers of products that have been certified for 5 years or more to have their products re-tested at their expense to confirm that the biobased content remains at or above the level at which the product was originally certified. The first Stage 3 auditing activity is scheduled to be completed during 2016 and the second Stage 3 audit will be conducted in 2022.
[76 FR 3806, Jan. 20, 2011. Redesignated and amended at 76 FR 53632, Aug. 29, 2011; 80 FR 34039, June 15, 2015]
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

 vs. Case No. 4:03cv223/RH/WCS

MARY L. WATKINS; CHANCAY, INC.; 

GADSDEN COUNTY, FLORIDA; and

JOHN YOUMANS,

Defendants.

 

ORDER CONFIRMING SALE AND 

FOR THE DISBURSEMENT OF FUNDS

This cause came before the court on motion of the United States of America

for confirmation of the foreclosure sale of the real property which is the subject

matter of this action and for the disbursement of the sale proceeds.

It appearing that the United States Marshal has carried out his duties in

accordance with Title 28, United States Code, Sections 2001-2002; that Waldorf

Enterprises of Gadsden County, 2195 W. Tennessee Street, Tallahassee, Florida,

32304, was the highest bidder at the sale, bidding the amount of $65,000.00; that

Case 4:03-cv-00223-RH-WCS Document 46 Filed 07/26/05 Page 1 of 3
1

 The government’s verification of costs lists the total as $524.50, but the listed

components actually add to $525.00. The latter figure has been used in this order.

the subject property was sold to it for that amount; that the sales price has been

paid to the Marshal for disbursement in accordance with the order of this Court;

and that the Court having been fully advised in the premises, it is, therefore,

ORDERED that the sale of the subject real property reported in the

Marshal’s Report of Sale dated July 8, 2005, and previously filed herein, be and

the same is hereby confirmed; and it is

FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk tax plaintiff's pre-judgment and postjudgment costs in the amount of $ 525.00,1

 and the Marshal's pre-judgment and

post-judgment costs in the amount of $1,202.32, and it is

FURTHER ORDERED that the Marshal disburse the sale proceeds as

follows:

(1) To the U.S. Marshal: $1,202.32;

(2) To the U.S. Attorney: $525.00;

(3) To Chancay, Inc.: $29,390.52; and

(3) To the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Rural Development:

$33,882.16; and it is

FURTHER ORDERED that the Marshal execute and deliver a deed to the

subject real property in accordance with the Report of Sale to Waldorf Enterprises

Case 4:03-cv-00223-RH-WCS Document 46 Filed 07/26/05 Page 2 of 3
of Gadsden County, 2195 W. Tennessee Street, Tallahassee, Florida, 32304.

DONE and ORDERED this 26th day of July, 2005.

s/Robert L. Hinkle 

Chief United States District Judge 

Case 4:03-cv-00223-RH-WCS Document 46 Filed 07/26/05 Page 3 of 3
EXHIBIT 32.2

November 7, 2006

Securities and Exchange Commission

100 F Street, NE

Washington, DC 20549

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, the undersigned officer of Lazard Group LLC (the Registrant) hereby certifies that the Registrants quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2006 (the
Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
condition and results of operations of the Registrant.



|                            
|----------------------------
|                            
|/s/    Michael J. Castellano
|Michael J. Castellano       
|Chief Financial Officer     

The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350 and is not
being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document.
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2371 Introduced in House (IH)]

113th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2371

 To amend title 18, United States Code, with respect to the good time 
          credit toward service of sentences of imprisonment.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             June 13, 2013

Mr. Scott of Virginia introduced the following bill; which was referred 
                   to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend title 18, United States Code, with respect to the good time 
          credit toward service of sentences of imprisonment.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Prisoner Incentive Act of 2013''.

SEC. 2. GOOD TIME CREDIT.

    (a) In General.--Section 3624(b)(1) of title 18, United States 
Code, is amended by striking ``, beyond the time served, of up to 54 
days at the end of each year of the prisoner's term of imprisonment, 
beginning at the end of the first year of the term,'' and inserting 
``of up to 54 days for each year of the prisoner's sentence imposed by 
the court,''.
    (b) Restoration of Credit.--Section 3624(b)(1) is amended by 
striking the sentence beginning ``Credit that has not been earned'' and 
inserting ``The Bureau may subsequently restore any or all credit 
previously denied, based on the prisoner's maintaining good behavior as 
determined by the Bureau.''.
    (c) Applicability.--The amendments made by this section apply with 
respect to each prison sentence that has not been completed before the 
date of the enactment of this Act, except any sentence imposed before 
November 1, 1987.
                                 <all>
```
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.                  

###### Department of Defense

###### Office of the Secretary

# AGENCY:

Department of Defense.

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

                        In accordance with the requirements of Section 1308 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal year 2004 (Pub. L. 108-136) as amended by Section 1305 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal year 2008 (Pub. L. 110-181), the Secretary of Defense has determined that the obligation and expenditure of Cooperative Threat Reduction (CTR) funds for the implementation of CTR programs in Pakistan and Afghanistan will permit the United States to take                               ( print page 71080)                            advantage of an opportunity to achieve long-standing nonproliferation goals. The Secretary of Defense further determined that these cooperative threat reduction activities will be completed within a short period of time, and that the Department of Defense is the entity of the Federal Government that is most capable of carrying out such projects or activities. The Deputy Secretary of State concurred with the determination of the Secretary of Defense.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        Jed Royal at (703) 693-4428,                         *jed.royal@osd.mil.*

Dated: November 16, 2010.

Morgan F. Park,

Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.

BILLING CODE 5001-06-P

BILLING CODE 5001-06-C

[FR Doc. 2010-29341 Filed 11-19-10; 8:45 am]
#### Richard T. Bowen, Respondent, v Ames Co., a Division of McDonough Company, Appellant.

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, defendant appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, entered June 19, 1979, which was in favor of the plaintiff in the principal sum of $185,000, upon a jury verdict. Judgment affirmed, with costs. The verdict was supported by the evidence. Mollen, P. J., Gibbons, Martuscello and Weinstein, JJ., concur.
#### § 29.6054 Width.

The relative breadth of a tobacco leaf expressed in relation to its length. (See chart.)
98-592,

#### United Auto Workers Local Union 1112 v. Philomena.

Franklin App. Nos. 97APE01-100 and 97APE01-69. This cause came on for further consideration upon appellants’ motion for leave to file supplemental authority in support of motion for reconsideration. Upon consideration thereof,

IT IS ORDERED by the court that the motion to file supplemental authority be, and hereby is, granted.
null

547.26685
Page 1 of 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

vs. CASE NO.: 3:99cr46/RV

3:09cv175/RV/MD

WILLIE JAMES GRIFFIN, JR.

_____________________________________________________________________

O R D E R

This cause comes on for consideration upon the magistrate judge's report and

recommendation dated July 27, 2009. The defendant previously has been furnished

a copy of the report and recommendation and has been afforded an opportunity to

file objections pursuant to Title 28, United States Code, Section 636(b)(1), and I have

made a de novo determination of those portions to which an objection has been

made.

Having considered the report and recommendation and all objections thereto

timely filed by the parties, 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. The motion to vacate, set aside or correct sentence pursuant to 28

U.S.C. § 2255 (doc. 352) is DISMISSED without prejudice as successive.

DONE AND ORDERED this 27th day of August, 2009.

/s/ Roger Vinson 

ROGER VINSON

SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

IN RE: 3M COMBAT ARMS

EARPLUG PRODUCTS

LIABILITY LITIGATION

Case No. 3:19-md-2885

This document relates to:

Rashaan G. Canady

Judge M. Casey Rodgers

Magistrate Judge Gary R. Jones

Case No. 8:20-cv-05409

NOTICE OF APPEARANCE

Comes now R. SCOTT VINCENT, with the law firm of WILLIAMS MCDANIEL, 

PLLC, and gives notice that he will appear as counsel of record for Rashaan J. Canady in the 

Master Docket pursuant to Pretrial Order No. 3 [ECF No. 4]. Mr. Vincent has completed the 

administrative requirements outlined in Pretrial Order No. 3, and has been granted admission 

pro hac vice pursuant to paragraph IV.A of Pretrial Order No. 3. Counsel respectfully requests 

that all notices, correspondence, filings and other papers in the Master Docket of MDL 2885 

be served upon him at the address listed below.

This the 23rd day of January, 2023.

Respectfully submitted, 

WILLIAMS McDANIEL, PLLC

By: /s/ R. Scott Vincent

R. Scott Vincent (#021055)

717 S. White Station Road, Suite 1

Memphis, Tennessee 38117

(901) 766-0887 (Phone)

(901) 766-0915 (Facsimile)

svincent@williamsmcdaniel.com

Attorney for Plaintiff

Case 3:19-md-02885-MCR-HTC Document 3641 Filed 01/23/23 Page 1 of 2
2

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on this 23rd day of January, 2023, a true and correct copy of the 

foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of Court and served using the CM/ECF 

system.

/s/ R. Scott Vincent

R. Scott Vincent

Case 3:19-md-02885-MCR-HTC Document 3641 Filed 01/23/23 Page 2 of 2
EXHIBIT 32.2








SECTION
1350, CHAPTER 63 OF TITLE 18, UNTIED STATES CODE,


as
adopted pursuant to


SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002




In
connection with the annual report of Theragenics Corporation (the “Company”) on
Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2009, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Francis
J. Tarallo, 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
Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and


(2)          
the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company as of
the dates and for the periods referred to in the Report.




Date:
March 15, 2010




/s/
      Francis J. TaralloFrancis
      J. TaralloChief
      Financial Officer
#### §§ 319.8-19-319.8-20 [Reserved]
Exhibit 99.1



                         Section 906 Certification
                         -------------------------

        The following statement is provided by the undersigned to accompany
the Form 10-K/A for The Willowbridge Fund L.P. pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. 1350).

        The undersigned certifies in his capacity as an officer of Ruvane
Investment Corporation, the general partner of The Willowbridge Fund. L.P.,
that the foregoing Report on Form 10-K/A fully complies with the requirements
of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m) and
that the information contained in the Form 10-K/A fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of The
Willowbridge Fund L.P. for the period in question.



/s/ Robert L. Lerner
----------------------
Robert L. Lerner
President
Ruvane Investment Corporation, the general
partner of The Willowbridge Fund, L.P.
**Exhibit 32**

 

**CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

In connection with the Annual Report of Trans WorldEntertainment Corporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the period endingJanuary 28, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission onthe date hereof (the “Report”), we, Robert J. Higgins, Chairman and ChiefExecutive Officer of the Company and John J. Sullivan, Executive Vice Presidentand Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,that, to the best of our knowledge:

 

(1)          The Report fully complieswith the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

(2)          The information containedin the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financialcondition and results of operations of the Company.

 

 
| s/ Robert J. Higgins                 |                         | s/ John J. Sullivan |   |
|--------------------------------------|------------------------------|---------------------|--------|
| Chairman and Chief Executive Officer | Executive Vice President and |
|                                 | Chief Financial Officer      |
|                                 |                         |
| April 13, 2006                  | April 13, 2006          |

 

----
Docket Number FAA-2013-1029

Contacts. With whom outside the FAA has this proposal been discussed?

Organization Person Contacted Date Response

Transport Canada Robert Farinas

(613) 952-4428

08/28/13 No Objections

Bombardier

Aerospace

Nolan Coelho

Bombardier

08/28/13 No Objections
2006-0239.

#### Davis v. Ohio Adult Parole Auth.

In Prohibition. On answer of respondent. On S.CtPrac.R. X(5) determination, cause dismissed.

*1403Moyer, C.J., Resnick, Pfeifer, Lundberg Stratton, O’Connor, O’Donnell and Lanzinger, JJ., concur.
Summary Description of Long Term Executive Compensation Plan



 EXHIBIT 10.33 
  
 SunGard Data Systems Inc. 
 Summary Description
of the Company’s 
 Long-Term Executive Incentive Compensation Plan 
  
 SunGard Data Systems Inc. has a long-term incentive compensation plan for its executive officers and other key management employees. The
principal purposes of this plan are to further align the interests of the executives and key employees with those of the Company’s stockholders and to further reward successful performance. 
  
 The plan currently involves the grant of performance accelerated stock options
(“PASOs”) to purchase shares of the Company’s common stock. PASOs are nonqualified options (i.e., will not qualify as incentive stock options for tax purposes) that are granted annually. Each PASO has a term of ten years beginning on
the date of grant. Shares vest under PASOs nine and one-half years after the date of grant, except vesting may be accelerated in part or in full at the end of the third year after the date of grant depending upon the extent of achievement of the
stated performance goals. 
  
 The number of option shares granted to each
participant under a PASO is determined on the basis of an analysis of competitive equity compensation programs and is subject to subjective adjustments based upon individual factors. The financial performance goals for each PASO are based upon the
cumulative growth, during the performance period covered by the PASO, in the operating income of the businesses managed by the participant, with the growth targets for all PASOs, taken together, being consistent with SunGard’s overall growth
objectives. 
  
 The Company currently plans, but will have no legal obligation or
commitment, to continue granting such PASOs (or comparable awards) on an annual basis, subject to approval by the Compensation Committee of the Company’s Board of Directors.
FILED

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

AUG 16, 2011

JOHN LEY

 CLERK

[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

________________________

No. 10-13787

Non-Argument Calendar

________________________

 D.C. Docket No. 1:10-cr-20140-MGC-1

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

DAVID MARTINEZ, 

Defendant-Appellant.

__________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court for the

Southern District of Florida

_________________________

(August 16, 2011)

Before TJOFLAT, CARNES and PRYOR, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

David Martinez appeals his sentence of 48 months of imprisonment for

conspiring to use unauthorized access devices, 18 U.S.C. § 1029(b)(2), possessing

device-making equipment, id. § 1029(a)(4), and aggravated identity theft, id.
§ 1028A(a)(1). Martinez argues that the district court could not enhance by two

points his base offense level for possessing device-making equipment, see United

States Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 2B1.1(b)(10)(A)(i) (2009), because that

misconduct was accounted for in his sentence for aggravated identity theft. We

affirm.

 The district court did not err by adding two points to Martinez’s base

offense level. A defendant convicted of aggravated identity theft cannot be

sentenced for that offense and a “specific offense characteristic for the transfer,

possession, or use of a means of identification,” id. § 2B1.6 cmt. n.2, which

includes any “telecommunication identifying information or access device (as

defined in section 1029(e)[(1) and (11)]),” 18 U.S.C. § 1028(d)(7). Martinez

possessed a piece of “device-making equipment” called a “scanning receiver,”

U.S.S.G. § 2B1.1(b)(10)(A)(i) & cmt. n.9(A). The aggravated identity theft statute

punishes the “transfer[], possess[ion], or use[], without lawful authority, [of] a

means of identification of another.” 18 U.S.C. § 1028A(a)(1). Because neither a

piece of “device-making equipment” nor a “scanning receiver” constitute a means

of identification, the district court could enhance Martinez’s sentence for

possessing a credit card skimming device. 

We AFFIRM Martinez’s sentence.

2
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

GAINESVILLE DIVISION

DERRICK L. WALKER,

Plaintiff,

v. Case No. 1:19-cv-190-AW-GRJ

CITY OF GAINESVILLE, et al.

Defendants.

___________________________________/

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

I have considered the magistrate judge’s April 15, 2020 Report and 

Recommendation, ECF No. 17, and I have reviewed de novo the Plaintiff’s 

objections, ECF No. 18. I have determined that the report and recommendation 

should be approved, and it is adopted as the court’s order. The case will be dismissed 

because there is not complete diversity of the parties, and there is no basis for arisingunder jurisdiction. The State of Florida’s limited waiver of sovereign immunity 

(ECF No. 18 at 6) does not affect this court’s lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. And 

to the extent Plaintiff now contends that there is a federal claim under 42 U.S.C. 

§ 1985, no such claim appears in his complaint—even read liberally. Nor would any 

of the facts he alleged support such a claim.

Case 1:19-cv-00190-AW-GRJ Document 19 Filed 05/07/20 Page 1 of 2
2

The clerk will enter a judgment that says, “This case is dismissed for lack of 

subject-matter jurisdiction.” The clerk will then close the file. 

 SO ORDERED on May 7, 2020.

s/ Allen Winsor

United States District Judge

Case 1:19-cv-00190-AW-GRJ Document 19 Filed 05/07/20 Page 2 of 2