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

Appeal from two orders of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated March 14, 1966 and March 28, 1966, respectively, dismissed. The order dated March 14, 1966 was superseded by the order dated March 28, 1966. The order dated March 28, 1966 granted defendant’s motion for reargument, but adhered to the determination in the order dated March 14, 1966, denying defendant’s motion to vacate an allegedly illegal sentence. An order denying a motion for resentence is not appealable *(People*v. *Kadin,*23 A D 2d 699, 700). If the motion for resentence is considered as a *coram nobis*application to vacate a judgment of conviction, that remedy does not lie for an alleged failure to comply with section 480 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. In any event, the record indicates that the section was complied with. Appellant’s other contentions, regarding (1) an alleged error by the sentencing court as to its power to impose a prison term less than the maximum set forth for robbery in the first degree in section 2125 of the Penal Law and (2) arrests not resulting in convictions being brought to the attention of the court when the pedigree was taken prior to sentencing, were matters of record to be asserted on the prior appeal from the judgment of conviction *(People*v. *Howard,*12 N Y 2d 65, 66). In short, we have examined the record and con-sidered appellant’s contentions; and, if we were not dismissing the appeal, we *549would affirm the order of March 28, 1966 in any event. Beldock, P. J., Ughetta, Christ, Rabin and Benjamin, JJ., concur.
#### § 29.6099 Rule 13.

Injury tolerance shall be expressed in percentages. The appraisal of injury shall be based upon the percentage of affected leaf surface or the degree of injury, and consideration shall be given to the kinds of injury normal to the group or grade.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<RESTATED> 
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-28-1997
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                          52,959
<SECURITIES>                                    29,513
<RECEIVABLES>                                (115,849)
<ALLOWANCES>                                     8,079
<INVENTORY>                                     53,908
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               262,603
<PP&E>                                         146,621
<DEPRECIATION>                                (77,998)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 367,846
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           95,614
<BONDS>                                         22,179
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           380
<OTHER-SE>                                     249,673
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   367,846
<SALES>                                        349,590
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               349,590
<CGS>                                          196,342
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  196,342
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 4,000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,098
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (27,621)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (8,017)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (19,604)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (19,604)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.52)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.52)
        

</TABLE>
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

VS CASE NO. 3:97cr78-02/RV

SUHAIL GEORGE MOUREY 

REFERRAL AND ORDER

Referred to Senior Judge Roger Vinson on February 19, 2009

Motion/Pleadings: Motion to Dismiss Indictment 

Filed by United States on 2/18/2009 Doc.# 118

RESPONSES:

 on Doc.# 

on Doc.#

Stipulated Joint Pldg.

Unopposed Consented

WILLIAM M. McCOOL, CLERK OF COURT

 s/Jerry Marbut

LC (1 OR 2) Deputy Clerk: Jerry Marbut

ORDER

Upon consideration of the foregoing, it is ORDERED this 19th day of

 February , 2009, that:

(a) The relief requested is GRANTED, without prejudice.

(b) 

/s/ Roger Vinson

ROGER VINSON

Senior United States District Judge

Case 3:97-cr-00078-RV-SMN Document 119 Filed 02/19/09 Page 1 of 1
#### § 372.9 Supplementing environmental impact statements.

Once a decision to supplement an environmental impact statement is made, a notice of intent will be published. The supplemental document will then be processed in the same fashion (exclusive of scoping) as a draft and a final statement (unless alternative procedures are approved by CEQ) and will become part of the record.

[60 FR 6002, Feb. 1, 1995. Redesignated and amended at 83 FR 24011, May 24, 2018]
#### § 4280.28 [Reserved]
#### § 29.32 Identification number.

A number or a combination of letters and numbers in a design or mark approved by the Director, stamped, printed, or stenciled on a lot of tobacco or attached thereto by an inspector, sampler, or weigher for the purpose of identifying the lot covered by a certificate issued under the Act.
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED MARCH 5, 2021

NO. 03-18-00790-CV

Glenn Hegar, Comptroller of Public Accounts of the State of Texas, and Ken Paxton, 

Attorney General of the State of Texas, Appellants

v.

El Paso Electric Company, Appellee

APPEAL FROM THE 353RD DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY

BEFORE CHIEF JUSTICE BYRNE, JUSTICES GOODWIN, BAKER,

TRIANA, KELLY, AND SMITH

AFFIRMED ON MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION EN BANC --

OPINION BY JUSTICE GOODWIN;

DISSENTING OPINION BY JUSTICE KELLY, JOINED BY JUSTICE SMITH

This is an appeal from the judgment signed by the trial court on November 5, 2018. The Court’s 

opinion, dissenting opinion, and judgment dated August 13, 2020 are withdrawn. Having 

reviewed the record and the parties’ arguments, the Court holds that there was no reversible error 

in the trial court’s judgment. Therefore, the Court affirms the trial court’s judgment. The 

appellants shall pay all costs relating to this appeal, both in this Court and in the court below.
Case 4:99-cv-00242-RH Document 124 Filed 12/18/02 Page 1 of 1
**Exhibit 32.2**

**BERNARD CHAUS, INC.**

**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 Bernard Chaus, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), the undersigned hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

| **•** | the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and |
|------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| **•** | the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. |
|------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

| September 28, 2007 |   |   |                    |
|-------------------------|--------|--------|-------------------------|
|                         |   |   | /s/ Barton Heminover    |
|                    |   |   | Barton Heminover        |
|                    |   |   | Chief Financial Officer |

 

 

----
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 227 (Friday, November 26, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Page 72801]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-29835]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

Foreign-Trade Zones Board

[Order No. 1723]


Reorganization of Foreign-Trade Zone 152 Under Alternative Site 
Framework Burns Harbor, IN

    Pursuant to its authority under the Foreign-Trade Zones Act of June 
18, 1934, as amended (19 U.S.C. 81a-81u), the Foreign-Trade Zones Board 
(the Board) adopts the following Order:
    Whereas, the Board adopted the alternative site framework (ASF) in 
December 2008 (74 FR 1170, 01/12/09; correction 74 FR 3987, 01/22/09) 
as an option for the establishment or reorganization of general-purpose 
zones;
    Whereas, the Ports of Indiana, grantee of Foreign-Trade Zone 152, 
submitted an application to the Board (FTZ Docket 32-2010, filed 5/4/
2010) for authority to reorganize under the ASF with a service area of 
Lake, Porter, La Porte, Newton, Jasper and Starke Counties, Indiana, 
adjacent to the Chicago Customs and Border Protection port of entry, 
and FTZ 152's existing Sites 1 through 6 would be categorized as magnet 
sites;
    Whereas, notice inviting public comment was given in the Federal 
Register (75 FR 26198, 5/11/2010) and the application has been 
processed pursuant to the FTZ Act and the Board's regulations; and,
    Whereas, the Board adopts the findings and recommendations of the 
examiner's report, and finds that the requirements of the FTZ Act and 
Board's regulations are satisfied, and that the proposal is in the 
public interest;
    Now, therefore, the Board hereby orders:
    The application to reorganize FTZ 152 under the alternative site 
framework is approved, subject to the FTZ Act and the Board's 
regulations, including Section 400.28, to the Board's standard 2,000-
acre activation limit for the overall general-purpose zone project, and 
to a five-year ASF sunset provision for magnet sites that would 
terminate authority for Sites 1 and 3 through 6 if not activated by 
November 30, 2015.

    Signed at Washington, DC, November 15, 2010.
Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, Alternate 
Chairman, Foreign-Trade Zones Board.
[FR Doc. 2010-29835 Filed 11-24-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
§ 4280.305 Nondiscrimination and compliance with other Federal laws. ( a ) Any entity receiving funds under this subpart must comply with other applicable Federal laws, including the Equal Employment Opportunities Act of 1972, the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, the Age Discrimination Act of 1975, and 7 CFR part 1901, subpart E.
( b ) The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or part of an individual's income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). Any applicant that believes it has been discriminated against as a result of applying for funds under this program should contact: USDA, Director, Office of Adjudication, 1400 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20250-9410, or call (866) 632-9992 (toll free) or (202) 401-0216 (TDD) for information and instructions regarding the filing of a Civil Rights complaint. USDA is an equal opportunity provider, employer, and lender.
( c ) A pre-award compliance review will take place at the time of application when the applicant completes or provides the Agency with sufficient demographic information to complete Form RD 400-8, “Compliance Review”. Post-award compliance reviews will take place once every three years after the beginning of participation in the program and until such time as a microlender leaves the program.
116 STAT. 1330 PUBLIC LAW 107–219—AUG. 21, 2002

Public Law 107–219

107th Congress

An Act

To rename Wolf Trap Farm Park as ‘‘Wolf Trap National Park for the Performing

Arts’’, and for other purposes.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of

the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. RENAMING OF WOLF TRAP FARM PARK.

(a) AMENDMENT.—The Wolf Trap Farm Park Act (Public Law

89–671; 16 U.S.C. 284 et seq.) is amended—

(1) by striking ‘‘Wolf Trap Farm Park’’ each place it appears

and inserting ‘‘Wolf Trap National Park for the Performing

Arts’’;

(2) in section 2, by inserting before the final period ‘‘,

except that laws, rules, or regulations that are applicable solely

to units of the National Park System that are designated as

a ‘National Park’ shall not apply to Wolf Trap National Park

for the Performing Arts’’; and

(3) by adding at the end the following new section:

‘‘SEC. 14. REFERENCES.

‘‘(a) BY FEDERAL EMPLOYEES.—The Secretary of the Interior,

any other Federal employee, and any employee of the Foundation,

with respect to any reference to the park in any map, publication,

sign, notice, or other official document or communication of the

Federal Government or Foundation shall refer to the park as ‘Wolf

Trap National Park for the Performing Arts’.

‘‘(b) OTHER SIGNS AND NOTICES.—Any directional or official

sign or notice pertaining to the park shall refer to the park as

‘Wolf Trap National Park for the Performing Arts’.

‘‘(c) FEDERAL LAWS AND DOCUMENTS.—Any reference in any

law (other than this Act), regulation, document, record, map, or

other paper of the United States to ‘Wolf Trap Farm Park’ shall

be considered to be a reference to ‘Wolf Trap National Park for

the Performing Arts’.’’.

(b) APPLICABILITY.—Section 14(c) of the Wolf Trap Farm Park

Act (as added by subsection (a) of this section) shall not apply

to this Act.

SEC. 2. TECHNICAL CORRECTIONS.

Section 4(c) of the Wolf Trap Farm Park Act (Public Law

89–671; 16 U.S.C. 284c(c)) is amended—

(1) by realigning the second sentence so as to appear flush

with the left margin; and

16 USC 284k

note.

16 USC 1e, 284c

note.

16 USC 284k.

16 USC 284a.

16 USC 284 and

note, 284j.

Aug. 21, 2002

[H.R. 2440]

PUBLIC LAW 107–219—AUG. 21, 2002 116 STAT. 1331

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY—H.R. 2440:

HOUSE REPORTS: No. 107–330 (Comm. on Resources).

SENATE REPORTS: No. 107–182 (Comm. on Energy and Natural Resources).

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD:

Vol. 147 (2001): Dec. 11, considered and passed House.

Vol. 148 (2002): Aug. 1, considered and passed Senate.

Æ

(2) by striking ‘‘Funds’’ and inserting ‘‘funds’’.

Approved August 21, 2002.
§ 400.682 Determination and notification. ( a ) The insurance provider must send a written notice of the debt to the person, including the time frame in which the debt must be paid, and provide the person with a meaningful opportunity to contest the amount or existence of the debt. Once a debtor has filed bankruptcy and the insurance provider is formally informed of such through the court or the debtor, no request for payment of the debt can be made, unless approved in writing by the Office of General Counsel. The debtor may be notified of the amount of debt and ineligibility for crop insurance. ( 1 ) The insurance provider shall evaluate the person's response, if any, and determine if the debt is owed and delinquent.
( 2 ) Upon request by FCIC, the insurance provider shall submit all documentation related to the debt to FCIC.
( b ) If an insurance provider or any other person has evidence that a person meets criteria set forth in § 400.679(a), (b), (c), (e) or (f), they must immediately notify FCIC.
( c ) After the insurance provider determines a person has met one or more of the criteria in § 400.679 and notifies FCIC, FCIC will issue and mail a Notice of Ineligibility to the person's last known address and to the insurance provider. Notices sent to such address will be conclusively presumed to have been received by that person.
( d ) The Notice of Ineligibility will state the criteria upon which the determination of ineligibility has been based, a brief statement of the facts to support the determination, the time period of ineligibility, and the right to appeal the determination to be placed on the ITS in accordance with paragraph (e) of this section.
( e ) Within 30 days of receiving the Notice of Ineligibility, the ineligible person may appeal FCIC's determination to be placed on ITS to the National Appeals Division in accordance with 7 CFR part 11. The existence and amount of the debt is determined by the insurance provider, not FCIC; therefore, those determinations are not appealable to the National Appeals Division.
( f ) If the person appeals FCIC's determination to be placed on ITS to the National Appeals Division, the insurance provider will be notified and provided with an opportunity to participate in the proceeding, if permitted by 7 CFR part 11.
( g ) No later than 60 days after the termination date, a missed payment date of a previously executed written payment agreement, or in the case of an overpaid indemnity or any amount that became due after the termination date, the due date specified in a notice to the person of an amount due, as applicable, such ineligible person may request consideration for reinstatement from the Administrator, Risk Management Agency, in accordance with section 2 of the Common Crop Insurance Policy Basic Provisions (7 CFR 457.8).
[79 FR 2079, Jan. 13, 2014, as amended at 79 FR 37161, July 1, 2014; 81 FR 42472, June 30, 2016]
Page 1 of 2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

ISHMAEL WHITAKER,

Plaintiff,

vs. Case No.: 3:20cv5641/LAC/EMT

B. OAKS, et al., 

Defendants.

______________________/

ORDER

The chief magistrate judge issued a Report and Recommendation on October

2, 2020 (ECF No. 5). The parties were 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). No objection has been filed.

Having considered the Report and Recommendation, I have determined it

should be adopted.

Accordingly, it is ORDERED:

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

5) is adopted and incorporated by reference in this order.

2. This case is DISMISSED without prejudice for Plaintiff’s failure to

comply with an order of the court.

3. The clerk of court is directed to enter judgment accordingly and close

Case No.: 3:20cv5641/LAC/EMT

Case 3:20-cv-05641-LC-EMT Document 6 Filed 11/06/20 Page 1 of 2
Page 2 of 2

this case.

DONE AND ORDERED this 6th day of November, 2020.

 s/L.A. Collier 

LACEY A. COLLIER

SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case No.: 3:20cv5641/LAC/EMT

Case 3:20-cv-05641-LC-EMT Document 6 Filed 11/06/20 Page 2 of 2
§ 4280.320 Grant administration. ( a ) *Oversight.* Any MDO receiving a grant under this program is subject to Agency oversight, with site visits and inspection of records occurring at the discretion of the Agency. In addition, MDOs receiving a grant under this subpart must submit reports, as specified in paragraphs (a)(1) through (3) of this section. ( 1 ) On a quarterly basis, within 30 days after the end of each Federal fiscal quarter, the microlender will provide to the Agency an Agency-approved quarterly report containing such information as the Agency may require to ensure that funds provided are being used for the purposes for which the grant was made, including: ( i ) Narrative reporting information as required by Office of Management and Budget (OMB) circulars and successor regulations. This narrative will include information on the MDO's TA, training, and/or enhancement activity, and grant expenses, milestones met, or unmet, explanation of difficulties, observations and other such information;
( ii ) If requesting grant funds at the time of reporting, an executed SF-270 form and a brief description of the proposed activity-based expenditures are required.
( 2 ) If a microlender has more than one grant from the Agency, a separate report must be made for each grant.
( 3 ) Other reports may be required by the Agency from time to time in the event of poor performance or other such occurrences that require more than the usual set of reporting information.
( b ) *Payments.* The Agency will make grant payments not more often than quarterly. The first grant payment may be made in advance and will equal no more than one fourth of the grant award. Other payment requests must be submitted on Standard Form 270 and will only be paid if the MDO's reports are up to date and approved.
Case 3:20-cv-04698-TKW-HTC   Document 37-1   Filed 06/08/20   Page 1 of 1
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2284 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

109th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 2284

 To extend the termination date for the exemption of returning workers 
         from the numerical limitations for temporary workers.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           February 14, 2006

   Ms. Mikulski (for herself, Mr. Warner, Mr. Dayton, Mr. Kerry, Mr. 
Jeffords, Mr. Sarbanes, Ms. Snowe, Mr. Allen, Mr. Levin, Mr. Gregg, Ms. 
   Collins, Mr. Johnson, Mr. Sununu, and Mr. Dorgan) introduced the 
 following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on 
                             the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To extend the termination date for the exemption of returning workers 
         from the numerical limitations for temporary workers.

    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 ``Save Our Small and Seasonal 
Businesses Act of 2006''.

SEC. 2. EXTENSION OF RETURNING WORKER EXEMPTION.

    Section 402(b)(1) of the Save Our Small and Seasonal Businesses Act 
of 2005 (title IV of division B of Public Law 109-13; 8 U.S.C. 1184 
note) is amended by striking ``2006'' and inserting ``2009''.
                                 <all>
```
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

DEMETRIUS LEE BATTLE,

Plaintiff,

vs. Case No.: 3:20cv5494/LAC/ZCB

SGT. HARRIS, et al.,

Defendants.

_____________________/

ORDER

The magistrate judge issued a Report and Recommendation on April 4,

2023. (Doc. 54). The Court furnished the parties 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). No objections have been filed.

Having considered the Report and Recommendation, I have determined it

should be adopted.

Accordingly, it is ORDERED:

1. The magistrate judge’s Report and Recommendation (Doc. 54) is

adopted and incorporated by reference in this order.

2. Defendant Speer’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 44) is

DENIED and Plaintiff’s request for declaratory relief is DISMISSED as moot.

1

Case 3:20-cv-05494-LC-ZCB Document 55 Filed 04/28/23 Page 1 of 2
3. This case is recommitted to the magistrate judge for further

proceedings. 

DONE AND ORDERED this 28th day of April, 2023.

 s/L.A. Collier 

LACEY A. COLLIER

SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2

Case 3:20-cv-05494-LC-ZCB Document 55 Filed 04/28/23 Page 2 of 2