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

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA 

BRANDON and SHELBY ROLLER,

Plaintiffs,

v.

JOSEPH HYCHE and DIEBOLD 

NIXDORF, INC.

Defendants.

CIVIL ACTION NO.:

1:20-CV-00140-AW-GRJ

JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

DEFENDANT DIEBOLD NIXDORF, INC.’S 

CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT

Defendant, Diebold Nixdorf, Inc., by and through its undersigned counsel, 

and pursuant to Rule 7.1 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Local Rules 

of Civil Procedure for United States District Court for the District of Florida, 

submits this Corporate Disclosure Statement, stating as follows: 

Diebold Nixdorf, Inc. is not a subsidiary or affiliate of a publicly owned 

corporation and no publicly held corporation owns 10% or more of its stock.

Respectfully submitted,

/s/Jon J. Hernan

Jon J. Hernan

Florida Bar No.: 658588

BOWMAN AND BROOKE LLP

1064 Greenwood Blvd., Suite 212

Lake Mary, FL 32746-5419

(407) 585-7600 – Telephone

(407) 585-7610 – Facsimile

Jon.hernan@bowmanandbrooke.com

Attorneys for Defendant Diebold Nixdorf, 

Inc.

Case 1:20-cv-00140-AW-GRJ Document 2 Filed 06/15/20 Page 1 of 2
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing has been 

served via email on this 15th day of June, 2020 to the following:

Christopher P. Janes, Esq. FBN: 100072

Clayton Taylor, Esq. FBN: 17771

MICHLES & BOOTH, P.A.

1502 South Ferdon Blvd.

Crestview, FL 32536

Ph.: (850) 683-4848

Fax: (850) 683-8885

E-Mail: courtdocs@michlesbooth.com

filing@michlesbooth.com

Respectfully submitted,

/s/ Jon J. Hernan

Jon J. Hernan

Florida Bar No.: 658588

BOWMAN AND BROOKE LLP

Case 1:20-cv-00140-AW-GRJ Document 2 Filed 06/15/20 Page 2 of 2
Page 1 of 2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

JERMAINE A. BULLARD,

Plaintiff,

v. CASE NO. 3:20cv5495/MCR/EMT

TRAVIS E. DYKES,

Defendant.

__________________________/

O R D E R

The chief magistrate judge issued a Report and Recommendation on March 

11, 2021. ECF No. 26. The Plaintiff was furnished a copy of the Report and 

Recommendation and 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 any timely filed 

objections thereto, I have determined the Report and Recommendation should be 

adopted.

Accordingly, it is now ORDERED as follows:

1. The chief magistrate judge’s Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 

26), is adopted and incorporated by reference in this Order.

Case 3:20-cv-05495-MCR-EMT Document 28 Filed 03/29/21 Page 1 of 2
Page 2 of 2

Case No. 3:20cv5591/MCR/EMT

2. Plaintiff’s claims are DISMISSED with prejudice for failure to state 

a claim upon which relief may be granted, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§1915€(2)(B)(ii), 

1915A(b)(1).

3. All pending motions are DENIED as moot.

4 The Clerk of Court is directed to enter judgment accordingly and close 

this case.

DONE AND ORDERED this 29th day of March 2021.

s/ M. Casey Rodgers

M. CASEY RODGERS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:20-cv-05495-MCR-EMT Document 28 Filed 03/29/21 Page 2 of 2
§ 3430.1001 Purpose. In carrying out the program, NIFA is authorized to make awards under section 7526 of the FCEA to eligible entities (as designated in section 7526(b)(1)(A)-(F) of the FCEA) to fund subgrants and activities that: ( a ) Enhance national energy security through the development, distribution, and implementation of biobased energy technologies;
( b ) Promote diversification in, and the environmental sustainability of, agricultural production in the United States through biobased energy and product technologies;
( c ) Promote economic diversification in rural areas of the United States through biobased energy and product technologies; and
( d ) Enhance the efficiency of bioenergy and biomass research and development programs through improved coordination and collaboration among the Department, other appropriate Federal agencies (as determined by the Secretary), and land-grant colleges and universities.
[75 FR 70580, Nov. 18, 2010, as amended at 81 FR 6418, Feb. 8, 2016]
#### Universal Utilities, Inc., et al., Appellants-Respondents, v Stanley Tankell et al., Respondents, and Irving Levine, as Coexecutor of Charles Hollinger, Respondent-Appellant.

In an action to recover the sum of $6,797.32 on an alleged partnership debt, plaintiffs and defendant Levine cross appeal from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated May 11, 1979, as (1) denied plaintiffs’ cross motion for leave to discontinue the action; and (2) denied defendant Levine’s cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. Order modified, on the law, by deleting therefrom the provision denying plaintiffs’ cross motion for leave to discontinue their action and substituting therefor provisions granting said motion and directing a severance of the counterclaim and cross claim asserted by defendant Levine. As so modified, order affirmed insofar as appealed from with one bill of $50 costs and disbursements payable to the plaintiffs by defendant Levine. We are of the opinion that the denial of plaintiffs’ cross motion to discontinue the action was an improvident exercise of discretion. Defendant Levine’s cross motion for summary judgment does not constitute a submission of the cause to the court or jury to determine the facts, so as to require the stipulation of all parties appearing in the action in order to grant a discontinuance (cf. *Piedmont Hotel Co. v Nettleton Co.,*241 App Div 562). The severance of the counterclaim and cross claim will adequately preserve any rights which defendant Levine may have. Damiani, J. P., Titone, Cohalan and O’Connor, JJ., concur.
§ 3565.504 Transfers. ( a ) Loans and/or mortgage servicing on loans backing Ginnie Mae guaranteed securities may only be transferred to a Ginnie Mae issuer and may only be transferred with prior Ginnie Mae approval.
( b ) Agency approval shall not be required for transfer of the servicing on the guaranteed mortgages to Ginnie Mae.
§ 3560.73 Subsequent loans. ( a ) *Applicability.* The Agency may make a subsequent loan to a borrower to complete, improve, repair, or make modifications to MFH initially financed by the Agency or for equity for preservation purposes. Loan requests to add units to comply with accessibility requirements may be processed as a subsequent loan; however, loan requests to add units to meet market demand will be processed as an initial loan request and must compete under the NOFA.
( b ) *Application requirements and processing.* Upon receipt of a subsequent loan request, the Agency will inform the applicant what information is required based on the nature and purpose of the loan request. Subsequent loan requests do not have to compete for funding against initial loan proposals.
( c ) *Amortization and payment period.* Subsequent loans will be amortized over a period not to exceed the lesser of the economic life of the housing being financed or 50 years and paid over a term not to exceed the lesser of the economic life of the housing or 30 years from the date of the loan.
( d ) *Equity contribution.* Applicants for subsequent loans must make contributions on the loans in the same proportion as outlined in § 3560.63(c). Loan applicants will not be given consideration for any increased equity value that the property may have since the initial loan. ( 1 ) Excess initial investment on an initial loan may be credited toward the required investment on a subsequent loan.
( 2 ) An initial operating capital contribution to the general operating account as described in § 3560.64 is required for a subsequent loan approved under the conditions set in § 3560.63(f) to complete housing construction but is not required for a subsequent loan to repair or improve existing housing.
( e ) *Environmental review requirements.* Actions taken under this part must comply with the environmental review requirements in accordance with 7 CFR part 1970.
( f ) *Design requirements.* All improvements, repairs, and modifications will be in accordance with 7 CFR part 1924, subparts A and C.
( g ) *Architectural services.* The applicant must obtain architectural services when any of the following conditions exist: ( 1 ) Enclosed space is being added,
( 2 ) When required by state law, and
( 3 ) When the Agency determines that the work being proposed requires architectural services.
( h ) *Restrictive-use requirements.* Subsequent loans are subject to restrictive-use provisions as outlined in § 3560.662(a) and borrowers must execute a restrictive-use contract in accordance with § 3560.72(a)(2).
( i ) *Designation changes from rural to nonrural.* If the designation of an area changes from rural to nonrural after the initial loan is made, a subsequent loan may be made only to make necessary improvements and repairs to the property or for equity when needed to avert prepayment.
( j ) *Agency's discretion.* The Administrator may approve a subsequent loan in a place that is not on the list of designated places as a servicing action, for example, to replace units destroyed by a natural disaster.
[69 FR 69106, Nov. 26, 2004, as amended at 81 FR 11049, Mar. 2, 2016]
§ 3430.18 Submission of an application. ( a ) *When to submit.* The RFA will provide deadlines for the submission of letters of intent, if requested and required, and applications. NIFA may issue separate RFAs and/or establish separate deadlines for different types of applications, different award instruments, or different topics or phases of the Federal assistance programs. If applications are not received by applicable deadlines, they will not be considered for funding. Exceptions will be considered only when extenuating circumstances exist, as determined by NIFA, and justification and supporting documentation are provided to NIFA.
( b ) *What to submit.* The contents of the applicable application package, as well as any other information, are to be submitted by the due date.
( c ) *Where to submit.* The RFA will provide addresses for submission of letters of intent, if requested or required, and applications. It also will indicate permissible methods of submission (*i.e.,* electronic, e-mail, hand-delivery, U.S. Postal Service, courier). Conformance with preparation and submission instructions is required and will be strictly enforced unless a deviation had been approved. NIFA may establish additional requirements. NIFA may return without review applications that are not consistent with the RFA instructions.
**EXHIBIT
      32.2**





**Certification
      Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 as Adopted Pursuant to
      Section**  **906**


**of
      the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**





The
      undersigned hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
      pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Annual
      Report on Form 10-K for the annual period ended December 31, 2007 of Naturade,
      Inc. (the “Company”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
      15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and that the
      information contained in such periodic report fairly presents, in all material
      respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company
      as
      of, and for, the periods presented in such report.





//s/
                Adam MichelinAdam
                Michelin*Chief
                Financial Officer*April
                15, 2008




**A
      signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has
      been**  **provided
      to the Company and it will be retained by the Company and furnished
      to**  **the
      Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff on request** .
#### §§ 3560.106-3560.149 [Reserved]
#### § 29.94 When appeal may be withdrawn.

An appeal may be withdrawn by the appellant at any time before an appeal certificate is issued or an appeal sample is prepared, upon the payment of any expenses incurred in connection with the appeal as provided in § 29.126.
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2289 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

109th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 2289

  To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to increase the per 
 resident payment floor for direct graduate medical education payments 
                      under the Medicare program.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           February 15, 2006

  Mr. Bunning 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 increase the per 
 resident payment floor for direct graduate medical education payments 
                      under the Medicare program.

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

SECTION 1. INCREASING TO 100 PERCENT OF THE LOCALITY ADJUSTED NATIONAL 
              AVERAGE PER RESIDENT AMOUNT THE PAYMENT FLOOR FOR DIRECT 
              GRADUATE MEDICAL EDUCATION PAYMENTS UNDER THE MEDICARE 
              PROGRAM.

    Section 1886(h)(2)(D)(iii) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 
1395ww(h)(2)(D)(iii)) is amended by striking ``and for the cost 
reporting period beginning during fiscal year 2002 shall not be less 
than 85 percent'' and inserting ``, for cost reporting periods 
beginning during or after fiscal year 2002 (and before fiscal year 
2006) shall not be less than 85 percent, and for cost reporting periods 
beginning during or after fiscal year 2006 shall not be less than 100 
percent''.
                                 <all>
```
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2600 Introduced in House (IH)]

113th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2600

 To amend the Interstate Land Sales Full Disclosure Act to clarify how 
                    the Act applies to condominiums.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             June 28, 2013

   Mrs. Carolyn B. Maloney of New York (for herself, Mr. Nadler, Mr. 
   Grimm, and Mr. McHenry) introduced the following bill; which was 
            referred to the Committee on Financial Services

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend the Interstate Land Sales Full Disclosure Act to clarify how 
                    the Act applies to condominiums.

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

SECTION 1. EXEMPTION FOR RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUM UNITS.

    (a) Exemption.--Section 1403 of the Interstate Land Sales Full 
Disclosure Act (15 U.S.C. 1702) is amended--
            (1) in subsection (b)--
                    (A) in paragraph (7)(C), by striking ``or'' at the 
                end;
                    (B) in paragraph (8)(G), by striking the period at 
                the end and inserting ``; or''; and
                    (C) by adding at the end the following:
            ``(9) the sale or lease of a condominium unit that is not 
        exempt under subsection (a).''; and
            (2) by adding at the end the following:
    ``(d) For purposes of subsection (b), the term `condominium unit' 
means a unit of residential or commercial property to be designated for 
separate ownership pursuant to a condominium plan or declaration 
provided that upon conveyance--
            ``(1) the owner of such unit will have sole ownership of 
        the unit and an undivided interest in the common elements 
        appurtenant to the unit; and
            ``(2) the unit will be an improved lot.''.

SEC. 2. EFFECTIVE DATE.

    The amendments made by this Act shall take effect 180 days after 
the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

GAINESVILLE DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

vs. CASE NO. 1:94cr01009-MP-AK

JOHN RICHARD KNOCK,

aka MICHAEL PHILLIP RYAN,

aka MICKEY RYAN,

aka JOHN RICHARD PHILLIPS

aka PATRICK OSBORNE

aka CHARLES MELIA and

ALBERT THOMAS MADRID,

Defendants.

____________________________________/

FINAL ORDER OF FORFEITURE OF SUBSTITUTE PROPERTY

THIS CAUSE CAME before the Court on the motion of the United States of America for

a Final Order of Forfeiture of Substitute Property. Being fully advised in the premises, the Court

finds as follows:

WHEREAS, on July 9, 2001, this Court entered a Final Order of Forfeiture against the

following property:

A. The sum of $438,000,000.00 as total proceeds obtained by John Richard

Knock from his illegal drug activity during and in furtherance of the

conspiracy.

B. The sum of $8,800,000.00 as total proceeds obtained by Albert Thomas

Madrid from his illegal drug activity and

WHEREAS, on February 11, 2005, the Court entered a Preliminary Order of Forfeiture of

Substitute Property against the following property:

(A) $3,122.53 in United States Currency

Case 1:94-cr-01009-MP-GRJ Document 1005 Filed 09/29/05 Page 1 of 2
Page 2 of 2

Case No: 1:94-cr-01009-MP-AK

(B) $9,620.00 in United States Currency

WHEREAS, pursuant to 21 U.S.C. § 853(p), the United States now seeks forfeiture of the

substitute property in partial satisfaction of the $438,000,000.00 money judgment; and

WHEREAS, on February 21, 2005, Notice of Forfeiture for Publication was published in

the Gainesville Sun, a newspaper of general circulation; and

WHEREAS, no persons or entities have filed a petition asserting an interest in the

property; and

WHEREAS, the following substitute property will be credited to the $438,000,000.00

money judgment of John Richard Knock:

(A) $3,122.53 in United States Currency

(B) $9,620.00 in United States Currency

ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED that the right, title and interest to the abovedescribed substitute property, is hereby condemned, forfeited and vested in the United States of

America, and shall be disposed of in accordance with the law. Furthermore, the United States of

America is hereby ordered to credit the net proceeds to the forfeiture judgment of the defendant,

John Richard Knock.

DONE AND ORDERED this 29th day of September, 2005

 s/Maurice M. Paul 

 Maurice M. Paul, Senior District Judge

Case 1:94-cr-01009-MP-GRJ Document 1005 Filed 09/29/05 Page 2 of 2
#### § 29.6045 Type.

A division of a class of tobacco having certain common characteristics and closely related grades. Tobacco which has the same characteristics and corresponding qualities, colors, and lengths is classified as one type, regardless of any factors of historical or geographical nature which cannot be determined by an examination of the tobacco.
j4910-13-P) DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTA nON Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR ParI 39 IDocket No. FAA-2009-0637; Directorate Identifier 2008-NM-183-AD; Amendme 

# ,,.;6:> 1
... rt\ 39-*****; AD 2009-**-**} RIN 2120-AA64 Airwor"thiness Directives; Construcciones Aeronauricas, 5.A. (CASA), Model CN~23 CN-235~ 100. CN-235-200. and CN-235-300 Airplanes AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Dcpanment ofTransportatioll (DOT). ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: We are superseding an existing airworthiness directive (AD) forthe products listed above. This AD results from mandatory continuing airworthiness infomlation (MeAl) originated byan aviation authority of another country to identify and correct an unsafe condition on an aviation product. condition as:



## * * '"[C]racks [were originally] detected on some CN-235 aircraft in flap fittings 

### PIN 35-15501-0101, -0I02, -0201 and -0202, attaching the structure of the outer flaps to their rear SUppOitsand, in the adjacent structure. DGAC Spain issued AD Nr. 0I197[.J 

## ** * Since AD l!97 Rev.I was published, similar cracks have been detected in naps longerons. 

## * * * "'''"'

# .. "-".•. 

## " ~(;S"'BOI 

### II [r 

### D·i2

# 1st 'TYR:;d

# ,A"

# tv S IlMI' 

## /0 z;jOq
,-""" "MlI(>l 

### 11(" 

## -i'. 8 

# rr • 1(. ~ 

# "~oI23/D~

"All



### * * 

## * * 

# , * Fatigue cracking ofthe rear internal support fittings and longerons of the outer Oap
Exhibit 32.1


                    CERTIFICATION 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 Annual Report of Epolin, Inc.  (the
"Company") on Form 10-KSB/A for the period ended February 29, 2004,
as  filed  with  the  Securities  and  Exchange  Commission  (the
"Report"),  the  undersigned certifies,  pursuant  to  18  U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-
Oxley  Act  of 2002, to the best of the undersigned's  knowledge,
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.



Dated: December 8, 2004             By:/s/Murray S. Cohen
                                    Murray S. Cohen,
                                    Chairman of the Board and
                                    Chief Executive Officer
                                    (Principal Executive Officer)



Dated: December 8, 2004             By:/s/James Ivchenko
                                    James Ivchenko,
                                    President (Principal Financial
                                    Officer)