alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### The People of the State of New York Respondent, v David E. Jeffrey, III, Appellant.

Judgment unanimously reversed, on the law and facts, and indictment dimissed. Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a *769judgment upon a jury verdict convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the second degree (Penal Law, § 220.41 [prior to Sept. 1, 1979 amdt]) and criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree (Penal Law, § 220.39 [prior to Sept. 1, 1979 amdt]). The only fair conclusion to be drawn from the evidence is that defendant acted as the agent for the confidential informant and for the buyer, who was an undercover police officer. There being reasonable doubt as a matter of law that the defendant was the agent of the buyer, the indictment must be dismissed *(People v Bethea,*73 AD2d 920; *People v Gonzales,*66 AD2d 828; *People v Munoz,*54 AD2d 844). (Appeal from judgment of Ontario County Court—criminal sale of controlled substance, second degree, and another charge.) Present—Dillon, P. J., Hancock, Jr., Schnepp, Doerr and Moule, JJ.
#### Charles Robinson v. Elizabeth Jordan.

*Error from Wyandotte County.*

The record ill this ease presenting the samo question as that in Robinson tf. Lois Kinney, the decision in that case *held*conclusive in this.

This case was submitted on the same briefs and arguments made in Robinson *v.*Lois ICinney.

*Cha/rles*Chadwick, for plaintiff in error.

*Cooper ds*Stockton, for defendant in error.

*By the*Court,

Bailey, J.

The record in this case presents the same question in law and substantially the same state of facts as the case of Charles Robinson *v.*Lois Kinney, and the same order will be made as in that case.

Kingman J., concurring:

Cobb C. J., having been counsel in the Court below, did not sit in the case.
Document No. 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

VS CASE NO. 3:94cr3028LAC

CRAIG FLEMING

REFERRAL AND ORDER

Referred to Judge Lacey Collier on FEBRUARY 14, 2006

Motion/Pleadings: MOTION TO AMEND PURSUANT TO 15(A) OF THE FRCvP,

MOVANT’S RULE 60(B) MOTION 

Filed byDEFENDANT PRO SE on1/30/06 Doc.# 314

RESPONSES:

on Doc.#

on Doc.#

Stipulated Joint Pldg.

Unopposed Consented

WILLIAM M. McCOOL, CLERK OF COURT

s/Mary Maloy

LC (1 OR 2) Deputy Clerk: Mary Maloy

ORDER

Upon consideration of the foregoing, it is ORDERED this 15th day of

February, 2006, that:

(a) The relief requested is DENIED.

(b) 

 s/L.A. Collier

LACEY A. COLLIER

Senior United States District Judge

Entered On Docket: By: 

Rules 58 & 79(a) FRCP or 32(d)(1) & 55 FRCRP

Copies sent to:

Case 3:94-cr-03028-LC-SMN Document 315 Filed 02/15/06 Page 1 of 1
#### § 3430.207 Duration of awards.

The term of a grant under this subpart shall not exceed 10 years.

[74 FR 45740, Sept. 4, 2009, as amended at 81 FR 6414, Feb. 8, 2016]
##### 



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: November 1, 2005 
 /s/ Edward DolejsiEdward DolejsiPresident and CEO
FAA @001/001 07/19/2012 18:22 FAX 2024935142 + OMS

Dircer f)ial: 435.634.35}0 Dircc.:r Fax: 4.35.634.350:5 ('-m:lil:**tcmcrson(fi's~y,y~:~l.com** 

# RECEIVE.D ··.JUL

- 2 

# 2012 

# HEARING DOCKET

VIA FEDERAL EXPRRSS Federal A

### viarion Administration ATTN: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 Wilbur Wright Building- Suite 2Wl000 800 Independence Avenue SW Washington, DC 20591 

### Rc: Case No. 2011NM0()0049 Dear Sir/Madam: June 29, 2012

The 

### Final 

### Notice of

### Proposed Civil 

### Pcn."'lty in the above-rcf(.)rcncc case was received in ol\r 

### oftke on June 

### 25, 2011. Pursuant to

### ~ 13.16 (c) (2) (ii) ofFedenil Air Regulations, Sky 

### West Airlines hereby 

### requests a hearing on this matter.

## ~J~cerely,

# l~t~. Director Government and Lf:lgal A1Tairs TCE/jb cc; Jeffrey 

### M. llarper <.n
# L_2021450EN.01014801.xml

| 16.12.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 450/148 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.12.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 450/148

---

COUNCIL DECISION (EU) 2021/2242

of 13 December 2021

amending Decision 2009/908/EU laying down measures for the implementation of the European Council Decision on the exercise of the Presidency of the Council, and on the chairmanship of preparatory bodies of the Council

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on European Union,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

Having regard to European Council Decision 2009/881/EU of 1 December 2009 on the exercise of the Presidency of the Council (1), and in particular Article 4 thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | By Decision 2009/908/EU (2), the Council laid down measures for the implementation of Decision 2009/881/EU. The preparatory bodies of the Council which are not chaired by the 6-monthly Presidency are listed in Annex III to Decision 2009/908/EU, as provided for in Article 2, third subparagraph, of Decision 2009/881/EU. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

By Decision 2009/908/EU (2), the Council laid down measures for the implementation of Decision 2009/881/EU. The preparatory bodies of the Council which are not chaired by the 6-monthly Presidency are listed in Annex III to Decision 2009/908/EU, as provided for in Article 2, third subparagraph, of Decision 2009/881/EU.

| (2) | In light of the advisory nature as well as of the experience and the type of tasks carried out by the European Research Area and Innovation Committee, that committee should be added to the list of preparatory bodies that are not chaired by the 6-monthly Presidency. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

In light of the advisory nature as well as of the experience and the type of tasks carried out by the European Research Area and Innovation Committee, that committee should be added to the list of preparatory bodies that are not chaired by the 6-monthly Presidency.

| (3) | Decision 2009/908/EU should therefore be amended accordingly, |
| --- | --- |

(3)

Decision 2009/908/EU should therefore be amended accordingly,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

In Annex III to Decision 2009/908/EU, the following preparatory body is added to the list entitled ‘Elected chairs’:

‘European Research Area and Innovation Committee’.

Article 2

This Decision shall enter into force on the date of its adoption.

It shall be published in the Official Journal of the European Union.

Done at Brussels, 13 December 2021.

For the Council

The President

J. BORRELL FONTELLES

---

(1)  
  OJ L 315, 2.12.2009, p. 50.

1

(2)  Council Decision 2009/908/EU of 1 December 2009 laying down measures for the implementation of the European Council Decision on the exercise of the Presidency of the Council, and on the chairmanship of preparatory bodies of the Council (OJ L 322, 9.12.2009, p. 28).

2

---
###### Editorial Note on Subchapter C of Chapter II

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to subchapter C appear by Amdt. 381, 65 FR 64586, Oct. 30, 2000.

#### § 285.1 General purpose and scope.

This part describes the general terms and conditions under which grant funds shall be provided by the Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) to the government of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico for the purpose of designing and conducting a nutrition assistance program for needy persons. The Commonwealth of Puerto Rico is authorized to establish eligibility and benefit levels for the nutrition assistance program. In addition, with FNS approval, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico may employ a small proportion of the grant funds to finance projects that the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico believes likely to improve or stimulate agriculture, food production, and food distribution.
EXHIBIT 32.2



CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY
ACT OF 2002



In connection with the Quarterly Report of Oakmont
Acquisition Corp. (the Company) on Form 10-QSB for the period ending June 30, 2005 (the Report), as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Patrick T. Flynn, Chief Financial Officer of the
Company, certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Sec. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



| | 3. | The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and
| | -- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 4. | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.
| | -- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Date: August 26, 2005/s/ Patrick T. FlynnPatrick T. FlynnChief Financial Officer (Principal Financial Officer)






15
```

[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 225 (Tuesday, November 23, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 71454-71455]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-29464]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Office of Justice Programs

[OJP (NIJ) Docket No. 1536]

NIJ Certification Programs Workshop

AGENCY: National Institute of Justice.

ACTION: Notice of Meeting of the NIJ Certification Programs Workshop.

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

SUMMARY: The National Institute of Justice (NIJ) is hosting a 
Certification Programs Workshop to introduce NIJ standards for law 
enforcement, corrections, and public safety equipment to organizations 
interested in testing, accreditation, and certification of such 
equipment to NIJ standards. The specific standards to be discussed 
address the following equipment:
     Bomb Suits.
     CBRN Protective Ensembles.
     Holsters.
     Metal Detectors.
     Offender Tracking Systems.
     Restraints.
     Vehicular Digital Multimedia Evidence Recording Systems.
    Manufacturers of these types of equipment and certification bodies 
are invited to participate in this workshop. All participants are 
strongly encouraged to come prepared to ask questions and to voice 
suggestions and concerns.
    The workshop will be held on Wednesday, December 8, 2010 from 8 
a.m. to 5 p.m. at the Hotel Monaco, 700 F Street, NW., Washington, DC 
20004. The meeting room is the Paris Ballroom. Space is limited at this 
workshop, and as a result, only 70 participants will be allowed to 
register. We request that each participating organization limit their 
representatives to no more than two. Exceptions to this limit may 
occur, should space allow. Participants planning to attend are 
responsible for their own travel arrangements.

[[Page 71455]]

    Please visit the Web site below for additional information and to 
submit your registration request: https://www.seeuthere.com/event/m1312d11-4OFJ4NPANEZX1.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Casandra Robinson, by telephone at 
202-305-2596 [Note: this is not a toll-free telephone number], or by e-
mail at [email protected].

    Dated: November 17, 2010.
John H. Laub,
Director, National Institute of Justice.
[FR Doc. 2010-29464 Filed 11-22-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-18-P
```
II 

109TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 2234 

To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to reduce cost-sharing 

under part D of such title for certain non-institutionalized full-benefit 

dual eligible individuals. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

FEBRUARY 1, 2006 

Mr. SMITH (for himself and Mr. BINGAMAN) introduced the following bill; 

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to reduce 

cost-sharing under part D of such title for certain noninstitutionalized full-benefit dual eligible individuals. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Home and Community 

5 Services Copayment Equity Act of 2006’’. 
2 

•S 2234 IS

1 SEC. 2. ELIMINATION OF PART D COST-SHARING FOR CER2 TAIN NON-INSTITUTIONALIZED FULL-BEN3 EFIT DUAL ELIGIBLE INDIVIDUALS. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 1860D–14(a)(1)(D)(i) of 

5 the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395w– 

6 114(a)(1)(D)(i)) is amended— 

7 (1) in the heading, by striking ‘‘INSTITU8 TIONALIZED INDIVIDUALS.—In’’ and inserting 

9 ‘‘ELIMINATION OF COST-SHARING FOR CERTAIN

10 FULL-BENEFIT DUAL ELIGIBLE INDIVIDUALS.— 

11 ‘‘(I) INSTITUTIONALIZED INDI12 VIDUALS.—In’’; and 

13 (2) by adding at the end the following new sub14 clauses: 

15 ‘‘(II) CERTAIN OTHER INDIVID16 UALS.—In the case of an individual 

17 who is a full-benefit dual eligible indi18 vidual and who is a resident of a facil19 ity described in subclause (III) or who 

20 is receiving home and community21 based services in a home setting pro22 vided under a home and community23 based waiver approved for the State 

24 under section 1915 or 1115, the elimi25 nation of any beneficiary coinsurance 

26 described in section 1860D–2(b)(2) 
3 

•S 2234 IS

1 (for all amounts through the total 

2 amount of expenditures at which ben3 efits are available under section 

4 1860D–2(b)(4)). 

5 ‘‘(III) FACILITY DESCRIBED.— 

6 For purposes of subclause (II), a fa7 cility described in this subclause is an 

8 assisted living facility or a resident 

9 care program facility (as such terms 

10 are defined by the Secretary), a board 

11 and care facility (as defined in section 

12 1903(q)(4)(B)), or any other licenced 

13 facility determined appropriate by the 

14 Secretary, including a psychiatric 

15 health facility, a mental health reha16 bilitation center, and a mental retar17 dation developmental disability facil18 ity.’’. 

19 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by 

20 subsection (a) shall apply to drugs dispensed on or after 

21 the date of enactment of this Act. 

Æ
United States Court of Appeals

For the Eighth Circuit

___________________________

No. 17-2757

___________________________

Michael Lavern Boyd,

lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellant,

v.

Doe, Health Services Administrator,

lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant,

Greg Rechcigl, AHSA, East Arkansas Regional Unit; Amanda Sackett, Nurse,

EARU (originally named as Sackett); Kenneth L. Holder,

lllllllllllllllllllllDefendants - Appellees.

____________

Appeal from United States District Court 

for the Eastern District of Arkansas - Helena

____________

Submitted: July 26, 2018

Filed: December 28, 2018

[Unpublished]

____________

Before WOLLMAN, LOKEN, and COLLOTON, Circuit Judges. 

____________
PER CURIAM.

Arkansas inmate Michael Boyd brought a civil rights action against state

corrections officials under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The district court granted summary

judgment for failure to exhaust administrative remedies, see 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(a), and

Boyd appeals. We review the decision de novo. King v. Iowa Dep’t of Corr., 598

F.3d 1051, 1052 (2010).

We conclude that a genuine dispute of material fact remains as to whether Boyd

exhausted administrative remedies that were available to him. A corrections official

rejected Boyd’s grievance appeal on the ground that he did not send all proper

attachments—namely, the unit level grievance form and two other attachments that

called for his name, his inmate number, and the date. But Boyd swore in his

complaint and in his objections to the magistrate judge’s recommendation that he had

submitted all necessary grievance attachments, and that corrections officials had not

returned the attachments to him. Further, the form that Boyd used to appeal the

grievance determination did not show that he was required to include his name,

Arkansas Department of Correction number, and date or include spaces for that

information. There is a material dispute, therefore, about whether Boyd complied

with the exhaustion requirement, either by submitting all of the required attachments

at the appeal stage or by submitting whatever attachments were available to him after

officials failed to return some forms to him with the decision on his grievance. A

record keeper’s declaration that a prisoner did not exhaust a grievance is insufficient

to establish non-exhaustion as a matter of law when the prisoner makes sworn

assertions that he took the necessary steps to exhaust. See Conner v. Doe, 285 F.

App’x 304, 304 (8th Cir. 2008).

Accordingly, the judgment is reversed, and the case is remanded to the district

court for further proceedings. Boyd’s motion for an evidentiary hearing in the court

of appeals is denied.

______________________________

-2-
Page 1 of 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

GAINESVILLE DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

v. CASE NO. 1:93-cr-01016-MP

TERETHA JONES,

Defendant.

___________________________/

O R D E R 

This matter is before the Court on Doc. 248, Motion for Early Termination of Supervised

Release, filed by Ms. Jones. Under 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e)(1), the Court, after considering the

statutory sentencing factors, may "terminate a term of supervised release and discharge the

defendant released at any time after the expiration of one year of supervised release" if the Court

"is satisfied that such action is warranted by the conduct of the defendant released and the

interest of justice." More than one year of defendant's supervised release has expired. The Court

has conferred with the probation office and the government does not object to the early

termination. The Court is satisfied that early termination is warranted by the conduct of the

defendant and not contrary to the interest of justice. Accordingly, the motion is granted and

defendant is discharged from supervised release.

DONE AND ORDERED this 24th day of May, 2007

 s/Maurice M. Paul 

 Maurice M. Paul, Senior District Judge

Case 1:93-cr-01016-MP Document 249 Filed 05/24/07 Page 1 of 1
§ 3.40 Scope. ( a ) This subpart specifies the procedures to be used by agencies in collecting debts by administrative offset.
( b ) This subpart does not apply to: ( 1 ) Debts arising under the Social Security Act, except as provided in 42 U.S.C. 404;
( 2 ) Payments made under the Social Security Act, except as provided for in 31 U.S.C. 3716(c) (see 31 CFR 285.4, Federal Benefit Offset);
( 3 ) Debts arising under, or payments made under, the Internal Revenue Code (except for offset of tax refunds) or the tariff laws of the United States;
( 4 ) Offsets against Federal salaries (such offsets are covered by subpart F of this part);
( 5 ) Offsets under 31 U.S.C. 3728 against a judgment obtained by a debtor against the United States;
( 6 ) Offsets or recoupments under common law, State law, or Federal laws specifically prohibiting offsets or recoupments of particular types of debts;
( 7 ) Offsets in the course of judicial proceedings, including bankruptcy;
( 8 ) Intracontractual offsets to satisfy contract debts taken by a contracting officer under the Contract Disputes Act, 41 U.S.C. 7101-7109; or
( 9 ) Foreign Debt.
( c ) Unless otherwise provided for by contract or law, debts or payments that are not subject to administrative offset under 31 U.S.C. 3716 may be collected by administrative offset under the common law or other applicable statutory authority.
( d ) In bankruptcy cases, agencies may request legal advice from OGC concerning the impact of the Bankruptcy Code, particularly 11 U.S.C. 106, 362, and 553 on pending or contemplated collections by offset.