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

Summary of Federal Land Manager Comments and District Responses

<Reserved for future document>
Case 3:20-cv-05602-MCR-HTC Document 12 Filed 03/03/21 Page 1 of 13
Case 3:20-cv-05602-MCR-HTC Document 12 Filed 03/03/21 Page 2 of 13
Case 3:20-cv-05602-MCR-HTC Document 12 Filed 03/03/21 Page 3 of 13
Case 3:20-cv-05602-MCR-HTC Document 12 Filed 03/03/21 Page 4 of 13
Case 3:20-cv-05602-MCR-HTC Document 12 Filed 03/03/21 Page 5 of 13
Case 3:20-cv-05602-MCR-HTC Document 12 Filed 03/03/21 Page 6 of 13
Case 3:20-cv-05602-MCR-HTC Document 12 Filed 03/03/21 Page 7 of 13
Case 3:20-cv-05602-MCR-HTC Document 12 Filed 03/03/21 Page 8 of 13
Case 3:20-cv-05602-MCR-HTC Document 12 Filed 03/03/21 Page 9 of 13
Case 3:20-cv-05602-MCR-HTC Document 12 Filed 03/03/21 Page 10 of 13
Case 3:20-cv-05602-MCR-HTC Document 12 Filed 03/03/21 Page 11 of 13
Case 3:20-cv-05602-MCR-HTC Document 12 Filed 03/03/21 Page 12 of 13
Case 3:20-cv-05602-MCR-HTC Document 12 Filed 03/03/21 Page 13 of 13
§ 4280.48 Post selection period. Rural Development will notify the Intermediary in writing if the application is selected. The documents to be executed by the Intermediary will include: ( a ) For a loan: ( 1 ) A Letter of Conditions with Project-specific terms and conditions;
( 2 ) A loan agreement with general terms and conditions;
( 3 ) A note covering the repayment terms of the loan; and
( 4 ) A legal opinion concerning the authority of the Intermediary to engage in the Project.
( b ) For a Grant: ( 1 ) A Letter of Conditions with Project-specific terms and conditions;
( 2 ) A Grant agreement with general terms and conditions; and
( 3 ) A legal opinion concerning the authority of the Intermediary to participate in the Revolving Loan Fund and to engage in the Project.
Exhibit 23. Business Sector Data

Business Sector Data for the years ended August 31:

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                     Interactive TV   Educational Video
                                      Entertainment      Distribution           Total
                                      -------------      ------------           -----
1997 (Canadian dollars):

<S>                                   <C>                <C>               <C>
Total revenues                        Cdn$7,535,537      Cdn$2,816,152     Cdn$10,351,689
Operating income                            863,750            162,712          1,026,462
Net earnings                                420,619            188,768            609,387

Total assets                         Cdn$11,332,154      Cdn$2,955,448     Cdn$14,287,602
Current liabilities                       1,883,690          1,335,325          3,219,015
Total liabilities                         2,491,657          2,307,297          4,798,954

1997 (United States dollars):

Total revenues                         US$5,427,106       US$2,028,197       US$7,455,303
Operating income                            622,074            117,185            739,259
Net earnings                                302,931            135,951            438,882

Total assets                           US$8,161,436       US$2,128,519      US$10,289,955
Current liabilities                       1,356,637            961,703          2,318,340
Total liabilities                         1,794,495          1,661,719          3,456,214

1996 (Canadian dollars):

Total revenues                        Cdn$6,318,251                 --      Cdn$6,318,251
Operating income                          1,004,059                 --          1,004,059
Net earnings                                541,059                 --            541,059

Total assets                          Cdn$9,883,093                 --      Cdn$9,883,093
Current liabilities                         975,659                 --            975,659
Total liabilities                         1,005,659                 --          1,005,659

1996 (United States dollars):

Total revenues                         US$4,616,917                 --       US$4,616,917
Operating income                            733,693                 --            733,693
Net earnings                                395,366                 --            395,366

Total assets                           US$7,221,844                 --       US$7,221,844
Current liabilities                         712,940                 --            712,940
Total liabilities                           734,862                 --            734,862
</TABLE>
# Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida Opinion filed November 23, 2022. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

________________ No. 3D21-2318 Lower Tribunal Nos. DOAH 21-0905, HSMV MS-21-024

________________ 

### Perotte Driving and Traffic School, Inc. ,

Appellant, vs. 

### Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles , Appellee. An Appeal from the State of Florida, Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles. Twig, Trade, & Tribunal, PLLC, and Morgan L. Weinstein (Fort Lauderdale), for appellant. Christie S. Utt, General Counsel, and Elana J. Jones, Assistant General Counsel (Tallahassee), for appellee. Before SCALES, HENDON, and GORDO, JJ. PER CURIAM.2

Affirmed.
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 226 (Wednesday, November 24, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 71712-71713]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-29620]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Institute on Drug Abuse; Notice of Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended (5 U.S.C. App), notice is hereby given of the following 
meeting.
    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the 
provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 
USC, as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could 
disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as 
patentable materials, and personal information concerning individuals 
associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would 
constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Institute on Drug Abuse Special 
Emphasis Panel; NIDA Cutting-Edge Basic Research Awards (CEBRA) 
(R21) Review.
    Date: December 2, 2010.
    Time: 9 a.m. to 5 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: National Institutes of Health, 6101 Executive Boulevard, 
Rockville, MD 20852, (Virtual Meeting).
    Contact Person: Scott A Chen, PhD, Scientific Review 
Administrator, Office of Extramural Affairs, National Institute on 
Drug Abuse, NIH, DHHS, Room 220, MSC 8401, 6101 Executive Blvd., 
Bethesda, MD 20892-8401, 301-443-9511, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#afccc7cac1dcccefc2cec6c381c1c6c781c8c0d9"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="b5d6ddd0dbc6d6f5d8d4dcd99bdbdcdd9bd2dac3">[email protected]</span></a>.

[[Page 71713]]

    This notice is being published less than 15 days prior to the 
meeting due to the timing limitations imposed by the review and 
funding cycle.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos.: 93.279, Drug 
Abuse and Addiction Research Programs, National Institutes of 
Health, HHS)

    Dated: November 18, 2010.
Jennifer Spaeth,
Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 2010-29620 Filed 11-23-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

KENT E. HOVIND,

PAUL A. HANSEN

VS CASE NO. 3:21-CV-5484-TKW-MJF

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ET AL

JUDGMENT

Pursuant to and at the direction of the Court, it is

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the Plaintiffs take nothing and that all claims in

the second amended complaint are DISMISSED with prejudice.

 June 1, 2021

JESSICA J. LYUBLANOVITS

CLERK OF COURT

/s/ A’Donna Bridges, Deputy Clerk

DATE Deputy Clerk: A’Donna Bridges

 

Case 3:20-cv-05484-TKW-MJF Document 32 Filed 06/01/21 Page 1 of 1
#### § 4280.62 Appeals.

An Intermediary may appeal any appealable adverse decision made by Rural Development that affects the Intermediary in accordance with 7 CFR part 11.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

v. CASE NO. 4:99cr19-RH

SYLVESTER SMITH,

Defendant.

________________________________/

ORDER DENYING MOTION TO REDUCE

SENTENCE UNDER AMENDMENT 706

The defendant Sylvester Smith moved to appoint counsel and to reduce his

sentence based on United States Sentencing Guidelines Amendment 706. I

appointed Federal Public Defender Randolph P. Murrell. Mr. Murrell moved to

withdraw, indicating he had reviewed the record and provided Mr. Smith with an

analysis but did not intend to take further action. I granted the motion to withdraw. 

This order now denied the motion to reduce sentence. Mr. Smith was sentenced as

a career offender, not based on the crack-cocaine guideline that was reduced by

Amendment 706. He is not eligible for a reduction. 

The Sentencing Guidelines establish a guideline range for each defendant. 

The range is based on the defendant’s “total offense level” and “criminal history

Case 4:99-cr-00019-RH Document 183 Filed 02/24/09 Page 1 of 3
category.” The total offense level is based on the defendant’s “base offense level”

with increases or decreases based on specific offense characteristics. For drug

offenses, the base offense level ordinarily turns on the type and quantity of drugs

properly attributed to the defendant. See U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual

§ 2D1.1 (2007) (hereafter cited as “Guidelines Manual”). For a defendant who is a

“career offender,” however, the base offense level is the greater of the drug offense

level or the career-offender level. See id. § 4B1.1(b).

Amendment 706 reduces the crack-cocaine base offense level. In most cases

the amount of the reduction is two levels. Amendment 706 does not, however,

affect the separate career-offender base offense level. The offense level of a career

offender is determined under a wholly separate guideline. A district court may

reduce the sentence of a defendant “who has been sentenced to a term of

imprisonment based on a sentencing range that has subsequently been lowered by

the Sentencing Commission.” 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (emphasis added). But a

district court must not reduce the sentence of a defendant whose range has not been

lowered. Because the career-offender guideline range has not been changed, Mr.

Smith is not eligible for a reduction. The Eleventh Circuit has squarely so held. 

See United States v. Moore, 541 F. 3d 1323, 1327 (11th Cir. 2008). 

For these reasons, 

IT IS ORDERED: 

1. The defendant Sylvester Smith’s motion to reduce sentence (document

Case 4:99-cr-00019-RH Document 183 Filed 02/24/09 Page 2 of 3
176) is DENIED.

2. The clerk must provide a copy of this order to Mr. Smith himself by mail

and to the attorney for the government and Federal Public Defender Randolph P.

Murrell through the electronic filing system.

SO ORDERED on February 24, 2009.

s/Robert L. Hinkle 

Chief United States District Judge

Case 4:99-cr-00019-RH Document 183 Filed 02/24/09 Page 3 of 3
Joseph D. Barbera 14706 NE Erickson Dr. La Center, WA 98629 Tel: 360 263 5359 United States Department ofTransportation Office of Hearings

Washington, DC In the Matter of: Joseph D. Barbera FAA Case No. 2013NM090056 FDMS No. FAA 2013-1083 Judge Richard Goodwin 

# RECEIVED OCT 022014 

### HEARING DOCKET

Response toComplaintant's Motionto Deem AllegationsAdmitted and to DismissAppeal (dated 18 April 2014)

Itis true that I had inadvertently missed the 30 daywindow to answer the complaint. This resulted from a mistake in interpreting the date required. As an explanation, not an excuse, this is what happened: a) Received the Procedural Order dated 25 March. b) From this, I read "

...respond within 30 days

..." c) I incorrectly tookthis to be 30 days from the Procedural Order date, March 251h d) I did respond on 21 April, within 30 days ofthe Procedural Order. This was the error ofa layman, not an intention disregard for procedure, and I apologize for any inconvenience.

•- ly ";;;;,' 25 

### Septem"", 2014 Joseph arbera, Respondent



### 1Service List Federal Aviation Administration Attn: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 Wilbur Wright Building - Suite 2W1000 

### BOO Independence Ave. SW Washington D.C. 20591 David Shayne, Complainant's Counsel Northwest Mountain Region, ANM-7 Federal Aviation Administration 1601 Lind Ave., SW Renton, WA 98057 The Honorable Richard C. Goodwin, Administrative LawJudge Office of Hearings, M-20 US Department ofTransportation 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE (Ell-310) Washington, DC 20590



### 2
§ 2500.052 Award appeals procedures. ( a ) *General.* OAO permits awardees to appeal certain adverse post-award administrative decisions made by OAO. Such adverse decisions include: Termination, in whole or in part, and determination that an award is void. An award may be terminated for failure of the awardee to carry out its approved project in accordance with the applicable law and the terms and conditions of award; or for failure of the awardee otherwise to comply with any law, regulation, assurance, term, or condition applicable to the award. Additionally, an award may be determined to be void if, for example, it was not authorized by statute or regulation or because it was fraudulently obtained. Appeals of determinations regarding the allowability of costs are subject to the procedures in § 2500.048.
( b ) *Appeal Procedures.* The formal notification of an adverse determination will contain a statement of the awardee's appeal rights. To appeal an adverse determination, the awardee must submit a request for review to the OAO official specified in the notification, detailing the nature of the disagreement with the adverse determination and providing supporting documents in accordance with the procedures contained in the notification. The awardee's request to OAO for review must be received within 60 days after receipt of the written notification of the adverse determination; however, an extension may be granted if the awardee can show good cause why an extension is warranted. OAO will carefully consider the merits of all requests for appeals and further reviews. However, at the conclusion of the OAO appeal review process, the OAO decision rendered on the appeal is considered final. The awardee will be notified in writing by OAO of final appeal review determinations.
EXHIBIT 10.104

                        Pellettieri, Rabstein and Altman
                                Counselors at Law

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

                            100 Nassau Park Boulevard
                                     CN 5301
                        Princeton, New Jersey 08543-5301
                                 (609) 520-0900
                               Fax (609) 452-8796
                              Email: PRA@pralaw.com

                                                               November 11, 2004
HiEnergy Technologies, Inc.
c/o Dr. Bogdan Maglich
1601 Alton Parkway, Suite B
Irvine, CA 92606

         Re: HiEnergy Technologies, Inc.

Dear Dr. Maglich:

         Thank you for contacting us for representation regarding the above
referenced matter. Under the rules governing the legal profession, we are
required to set forth in writing our fees. This will confirm that we have agreed
to represent your interests regarding this matter on an hourly fee basis plus
costs. With that duty in mind our billing rate is $325.00. We require an initial
retainer of $10,000.00, which shall also be our minimum fee. Against this
retainer you will be billed for fees and costs. You will be billed monthly.
Payment is due upon receipt of invoice. In the unlikely event that any bill
becomes past due more than 30 days, we will add interest on the unpaid balance
at the rate of one percent (1%) per month. You also hereby agree to be
responsible for attorney's fees and costs in the event that we need to take
steps to collect an unpaid balance from you.

         If this arrangement is acceptable to you, please sign, date and return
the original of this letter along with the retainer fee in the return envelope
provided. You may retain the enclosed copy of this letter for your records. We
look forward to assisting you and thank you for choosing Pellettieri, Rabstein
and Altman.

                                                Very truly yours,

                                                Pellettieri, Rabstein and Altman

                                                /s/ W. Barry Rank

         I hereby agree to the terms and conditions of this letter fee
agreement.


Dated:  November 17, 2004                       /s/ Bogdan C. Maglich
                                                ---------------------
                                                Dr. Bogdan Maglich
Special Notices on Political Ads and Solicitations

Published in August 1997****

Introduction
This brochure has been developed to help clarify the following typesof special notices:
 Disclaimer notices;  
-  Best Efforts notifications; and    IRS disclosure notices.
Each notice may be required (as appropriate) when persons finance politicalads and solicitations.1 A section-by-sectionexplanation of these rules is provided within.

Please be advised that this brochure is not intended to provide an exhaustivediscussion regarding this area of the election law.  The citations referto the Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA), Federal Election Commission(FEC) regulations (11 CFR) and Advisory Opinions (AOs).  If you have anyquestions after reading the brochure, please contact the FEC:
- 		Federal Election Commission   			Washington, DC  		(202) 219-3420 (local)  
- 		(800) 424-9530 (toll free)   		(202) 219-3336 (for the hearing impaired)   
Disclaimer Notices
What is a "Disclaimer" Notice?
For purposes of this brochure, a "disclaimer" notice is definedas a statement placed on a political ad or solicitation that identifiesthe person(s) who paid for the communication and, when appropriate, theperson(s) who authorized it. 
When to Include a Disclaimer Notice
**Basic Rule**
§ 305.4 Monitoring and certification of treatments. ( a ) All treatments approved under part 305 are subject to monitoring and verification by APHIS.
( b ) Any treatment performed outside the United States must be monitored and certified by an inspector or an official authorized by APHIS. During the entire interval between treatment and export, the consignment must be stored and handled in a manner that prevents any infestation by pests and noxious weeds.
<PAGE>
 
                       IKOS SYSTEMS INC.
        STATEMENT OF COMPUTATION OF EARNINGS PER SHARE
            (in thousands, except per share amounts)

<TABLE> 
<CAPTION> 
                                                               Three Months Ended               Six Months Ended     
                                                            -------------------------         ---------------------- 
                                                            March 29,       March 30,         March 29,    March 30, 
                                                              1997            1996              1997         1996    
                                                            ---------       ---------         ---------    --------- 
<S>                                                         <C>             <C>               <C>          <C>        
Net income                                                    $ 2,515         $ 2,410           $ 4,690      $ 3,785
                                                             =========       =========         =========    =========
Number of shares used in computing 
 per share amounts:
   Weighted average common shares outstanding                   8,378           7,154             8,310        7,020
   Common equivalent shares attributable to stock
    options (treasury stock method)                               606             689               610          661
                                                             ---------       ---------         ---------    --------- 
Total weighted average common shares outstanding                8,984           7,843             8,920        7,681
                                                             =========       =========         =========    =========

Net income per share                                            $0.28           $0.31             $0.53        $0.49
                                                             =========       =========         =========    =========
</TABLE>
7.107-4 Substantial bundling.

(a)

(1) Substantial bundling is any bundling that results in a contract or task or delivery order with an

estimated value of—

(i) $8 million or more for the Department of Defense;

(ii) $6 million or more for the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, the General Services

Administration, and the Department of Energy; or

(iii) $2.5 million or more for all other agencies.

(2) These thresholds apply to the cumulative estimated dollar value (including options) of–

(i) Multiple-award contracts;

(ii) Task orders or delivery orders issued against a GSA Schedule contract; or

(iii) Task orders or delivery orders issued against a task-order or delivery-order contract awarded by

another agency.

(b) In addition to addressing the requirements for bundling (see 7.107-3), when the proposed

acquisition strategy involves substantial bundling, the agency shall document in its strategy—

(1) The specific benefits anticipated to be derived from substantial bundling;

(2) An assessment of the specific impediments to participation by small business concerns as

contractors that result from substantial bundling;

(3) Actions designed to maximize small business participation as contractors, including provisions

that encourage small business teaming;

(4) Actions designed to maximize small business participation as subcontractors (including

suppliers) at any tier under the contract, or order, that may be awarded to meet the requirements;

(5) The determination that the anticipated benefits of the proposed bundled contract or order justify

its use; and

(6) Alternative strategies that would reduce or minimize the scope of the bundling, and the rationale

for not choosing those alternatives.

Parent topic: 7.107 Additional requirements for acquisitions involving consolidation, bundling, or

substantial bundling.
#### § 3565.7 Environmental review requirements.

The Agency will take into account potential environmental impacts of proposed projects by working with applicants, other federal agencies, Indian tribes, State and local governments, and interested citizens and organizations in order to formulate actions that advance the program goals in a manner that will protect, enhance, and restore environmental quality. Actions taken under this part must comply with the environmental review requirements in accordance with 7 CFR part 1970.

[81 FR 11050, Mar. 2, 2016]