alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

GAINESVILLE DIVISION

CHRISTOPHER JON PERGROSSI,

Plaintiff,

v. Case No. 1:20cv198-MW/GRJ

DRUG ENFORCEMENT

ADMINISTRATION,

Defendant.

_________________________/

ORDER ACCEPTING IN PART 

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

This Court has considered, without hearing, the Magistrate Judge's Omnibus 

Order to Show Cause and Report and Recommendation, ECF No. 4, and has also 

reviewed de novo Plaintiff’s objections to the Report and Recommendation.1 ECF 

No. 6.

Plaintiff filed 33 cases over a four-day period, from August 17 through August 

20, 2020. These cases were assigned to three U. S. District Judges in the Northern 

District of Florida. The cases are frivolous. Understandably, the Magistrate Judge 

1 Plaintiff filed a document in Case No. 1:20cv181-MW/GRJ, ECF No. 6, which this Court has 

construed as an omnibus response to the Order to Show Cause and as objections to the Report

and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Gary R. Jones, ECF No. 4.

Case 1:20-cv-00198-MW-GRJ Document 6 Filed 09/23/20 Page 1 of 2
2

found this extraordinary volume of frivolous cases merits the imposition of 

restrictions on future filings in order to preserve scarce judicial resources and protect 

the efficient administration of justice. While a close call, this Court will not restrict 

future filings unless Plaintiff continues to abuse the process. Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED:

The report and recommendation is accepted and adopted in part, over 

Plaintiff’s objections, as this Court’s opinion. The Clerk shall enter judgment stating, 

“This case is DISMISSED without leave to amend as frivolous and/or for failure to 

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

No restrictions are imposed on future filings unless Plaintiff continues to abuse the 

judicial process.” The Clerk shall also close the file. 

SO ORDERED on September 23, 2020.

s/Mark E. Walker 

Chief United States District Judge

Case 1:20-cv-00198-MW-GRJ Document 6 Filed 09/23/20 Page 2 of 2
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

vs. CASE NO. 4:99cr72-RH 

ANTWAN LENARD WEATHERSBEE, DOCKET NO. 4:06mj026-WCS 

Defendant.

_____________________________________/

O R D E R

The Defendant appeared before the undersigned on a first appearance today

to answer to the charges of violating his supervised release. 

Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the Defendant shall appear before Judge

Hinkle on March 17, 2006, beginning at 10:00 A.M., for a revocation hearing.

Until that appearance, Defendant will remain subject to the conditions of supervised

release. 

DONE AND ORDERED on February 16, 2006. 

 S/ William C. Sherrill, Jr. 

WILLIAM C. SHERRILL, JR.

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 4:99-cr-00072-RH Document 44 Filed 02/16/06 Page 1 of 1
§ 51.1431 U.S. Fancy. “U.S. Fancy” consists of pecan kernels which meet the following requirements: ( a ) For quality: ( 1 ) Well dried;
( 2 ) Moisture content shall not be more than 4.5 percent, unless otherwise specified;
( 3 ) Fairly well developed;
( 4 ) Uniform in color;
( 5 ) Not darker than “light amber,” unless specified to a lighter color classification;
( 6 ) Free from damage by any cause; and
( 7 ) Comply with tolerances for defects (see § 51.1437).
( b ) For size: ( 1 ) Uniform in size; and
( 2 ) Conform to size classification or count specified.
# 37.000 Scope of part.

This part prescribes policy and procedures that are specific to the *acquisition* and management of services by contract. This part applies to all contracts and orders for services regardless of the contract type or kind of service being acquired. This part requires the use of performance-based *acquisitions* for services to the maximum extent practicable and prescribes policies and procedures for use of *performance-based acquisition* methods (see subpart  37.6). Additional guidance for research and development services is in part  35; architect-engineering services is in part  36; *information technology* is in part  39; and transportation services is in part  47. parts  35,36,39, and 47 take precedence over this part in the event of inconsistencies. This part includes, but is not limited to, contracts for services to which 41 U.S.C. chapter 67, Service Contract Labor Standards, applies (see subpart  22.10).

**Parent topic:**Part 37 - Service Contracting
## APPENDIX C

Ambient Air Monitoring Network Plan

2011
42.1504 Contract clause.       Insert the clause at 52.242-5, Payments to Small Business Subcontractors, in all solicitations and contracts containing the clause at 52.219-9, Small Business Subcontracting Plan.    **Parent topic:** Subpart 42.15 - Contractor Performance Information
Page 1 of 2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

 

v. Case No. 3:20cr81/TKW

SAVANNA R. MCNEIL

_____________________________/

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

CONCERNING PLEA OF GUILTY

The Defendant, by consent, has appeared before me pursuant to Rule 11, Fed. 

R. Crim. P., and has entered a plea of guilty to Count One of the Indictment. After 

cautioning and examining the Defendant under oath concerning each of the subjects 

mentioned in Rule 11, I determined the guilty plea was knowing and voluntary and 

the offense charged is supported by an independent basis in fact containing each of 

the essential elements thereof. I therefore recommend the plea of guilty be 

accepted and the Defendant be adjudicated guilty and have sentence imposed 

accordingly.

Dated: March 16, 2021

/s/ Charles J. Kahn, Jr. 

CHARLES J. KAHN, JR.

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 3:20-cr-00081-TKW Document 27 Filed 03/16/21 Page 1 of 2
Page 2 of 2

Case No.: 3:20cr81/TKW

NOTICE TO THE PARTIES

Objections to these proposed findings and recommendations may be filed 

within twenty-four (24) hours after being served a copy thereof. Any different 

deadline that may appear on the electronic docket is for the court=s internal use 

only and does not control. A copy of objections shall be served upon the 

magistrate judge and all other parties. A party failing to object to a magistrate 

judge’s findings or recommendations contained in a report and 

recommendation in accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. ' 636(b)(1) 

waives the right to challenge on appeal the district court’s order based on 

unobjected-to factual and legal conclusions. See U.S. Ct. of App. 11th Cir. 

Rule 3-1; 28 U.S.C. ' 636.

Case 3:20-cr-00081-TKW Document 27 Filed 03/16/21 Page 2 of 2
APPENDIX	B

OFFTHEGROUND PRE

- FLIGHT INSPECTION CHECKLIST

***Visual	instructions	are	included	as	part	of	the	Phantom	2	Vision	+	Quick

Start	Guide***

1. Inspect	all	propellers	for	proper	tightness	and	that	they	are

free	of	cracks,	dings,	chips	and	excessive wear

2. Inspect	all	wiring	and	motors

3. Inspect	the	airframe	for	cracks	or	damage

4. Inspect	battery	voltage	of	UAS	on

- board	battery	and	Remote

Controller/Transmitter		battery	to	ensure	there	is	sufficient

energy	in	both	systems	for	safe	flight

5. Prepare	the	camer a	of	the	aircraft	by	removing	the	gimbal

clamp	and	lens	cap

6. Screw	the	propellers,	clockwise	for	grey	nuts	and	counter

clockwise	for	black	nuts,	onto	t he	four	motors.		Be	sure	to

mat c h the	black	propeller	nuts	with	the	black	do	motors

7. Ensure	the	Micro

- SD	ca rd	is	inserted	correctly

8. Prepare	the	Remote	Control

9. Power	on	Smart	Flight	Battery

10. Power	on	the	Range	Extender/Linking	Camera

11. Calibrate	Compass according	to	manufacturer’s	instructions

12. Ensure	that	a	link	between	Transmitter	and	UAS	is

established	and	that GPS	link	is		established

13. Engage	throttle,	lift	aircraf t	off	the	ground	and	verify	the

aircraft	responds	properly	to	all	inputs	and	hovers	accurately

Pre

- Flight	Aircraft	Hardware	Documentation:

Date:

Client:

Location:

Hardware	damages:
II 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 261 

To designate a portion of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge as wilderness. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

FEBRUARY 2, 2005 

Mr. LIEBERMAN (for himself, Mr. CHAFEE, Mr. KENNEDY, Mr. DAYTON, Mr. 

SALAZAR, Mr. REED, Mr. KERRY, Mr. KOHL, Ms. STABENOW, Mr. DURBIN, Ms. CANTWELL, Mr. DODD, Mr. BIDEN, Mr. FEINGOLD, Mr. 

LEAHY, Mr. CORZINE, Mr. LAUTENBERG, Mrs. MURRAY, Mr. HARKIN, 

Mr. SCHUMER, Mrs. CLINTON, Mr. SARBANES, Mrs. BOXER, and Mr. 

WYDEN) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred 

to the Committee on Environment and Public Works 

A BILL 

To designate a portion of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge 

as wilderness. 

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

3 SECTION 1. DESIGNATION OF PORTION OF ARCTIC NA4 TIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE AS WILDERNESS. 

5 Section 4 of the National Wildlife Refuge System Ad6 ministration Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 668dd) is amended 

7 by adding at the end the following: 
2 

•S 261 IS

1 ‘‘(p) DESIGNATION OF CERTAIN LAND AS WILDER2 NESS.—Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, 

3 a portion of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska 

4 comprising approximately 1,559,538 acres, as generally 

5 depicted on a map entitled ‘Arctic National Wildlife Ref6 uge—1002 Area. Alternative E—Wilderness Designation, 

7 October 28, 1991’ and available for inspection in the of8 fices of the Secretary, is designated as a component of 

9 the National Wilderness Preservation System under the 

10 Wilderness Act (16 U.S.C. 1131 et seq.).’’. 

Æ
§ 52.772 Grades. ( a ) “U.S. Grade A” (or “U.S. Fancy”) is the quality of canned red tart pitted cherries that have at least the following attributes: ( 1 ) At least a reasonably good color;
( 2 ) Practically free from pits;
( 3 ) Practically free from defects;
( 4 ) Good character;
( 5 ) Normal flavor and odor; and
( 6 ) Score not less than 90 points when scored in accordance with the scoring system outlined in this subpart. Canned red tart pitted cherries of this grade may contain not more than eight cherries per sample unit that are less than 9 ⁄ 16 inch (14 mm) in diameter.
( b ) “U.S. Grade B” (or “U.S. Choice”) is the quality of canned red tart pitted cherries that have at least the following attributes: ( 1 ) Reasonably good color;
( 2 ) Reasonably free from pits;
( 3 ) Reasonably free from defects;
( 4 ) Reasonably good character;
( 5 ) Normal flavor and odor; and
( 6 ) Score not less than 80 points when scored in accordance with the scoring system outlined in this subpart. Canned red tart pitted cherries of this grade may contain not more than 15 cherries per sample unit that are less than 9 ⁄ 16 inch (14 mm) in diameter.
( c ) “U.S. Grade C” (or “U.S. Standard”) is the quality of canned red tart pitted cherries that have at least the following attributes: ( 1 ) Fairly good color;
( 2 ) Fairly free from pits;
( 3 ) Fairly free from defects;
( 4 ) Fairly good character;
( 5 ) Normal flavor and odor; and
( 6 ) Score not less than 70 points when scored in accordance with the scoring system outlined in this subpart. There is no size requirement for canned red tart pitted cherries of this grade.
( d ) “Substandard” is the quality of canned red tart pitted cherries that fail to meet the requirements of “U.S. Grade C.”
EXHIBIT
      33.5


**ASSERTION
      OF COMPLIANCE WITH**


**APPLICABLE
      SERVICING CRITERIA**








The
      Bank
      of New York and The Bank of New York Trust Company, N. A. (collectively, the
      “Company”) provides this platform-level assessment of compliance with the
      servicing criteria specified in Item 1122(d) of Regulation AB promulgated by
      the
      Securities and Exchange Commission.





Management
      has determined that the following servicing criteria are applicable in regards
      to the following servicing platform for the following period:





Platform :
      Publicly-issued (i.e., transaction-level reporting initially required under
      the
      Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended) residential mortgage-backed
      securities and other mortgage-related asset-backed securities issued on or
      after
      January 1, 2006 (and like-kind transactions issued prior to January 1, 2006)
      for
      which the Company provides trustee, securities administration, or paying agent
      or custodial services.





Applicable
      Servicing Criteria :
      All
      servicing criteria set forth in Item 1122(d), to the extent required by the
      related transaction agreements as to any transaction, except for the following
      criteria: 1122(d)(1)(ii), 1122(d)(1)(iii), 1122(d)(1)(iv), 1122(d)(4)(iv),
      1122(d)(4)(v), 1122(d)(4)(vi), 1122(d)(4)(vii), 1122(d)(4)(viii),
      1122(d)(4)(ix), 1122(d)(4)(x), 1122(d)(4)(xi), 1122(d)(4)(xii), 1122(d)(4)(xiii)
      and 1122 (d)(4)(xiv).





Period :
      As of
      June 30, 2007 and for the period January 1, 2007 through June 30,
      2007.





With
      respect to the Platform and the Period, the Company provides the following
      assessment of compliance in respect of the Applicable Servicing
      Criteria:





•
The
      Company is responsible for assessing its compliance with the Applicable
      Servicing Criteria.





•
The
      Company has assessed compliance with the Applicable Servicing
      Criteria.





•
As
      of
      June 30, 2007 and for the Period, the Company was in material compliance with
      the Applicable Servicing Criteria.






1




KPMG
      LLP,
      an independent registered public accounting firm, has issued an attestation
      report with respect to the Company’s assessment of compliance with the
      Applicable Servicing Criteria as of and for the Period.








The
      Bank
      of New York


The
      Bank
      of New York Trust Company, N.A.




By:
              /s/ Patrick
                J.
                TadiePatrick J. Tadie
                Authorized Signer






The
      Bank
      of New York




By:
                /s/ Samir
                  PandiriSamir Pandiri
                  Authorized Signer





September
      18, 2007








2
[if !vml]>[endif]>

[if !vml]>[endif]>

You have reached the FederalDepository Library Program Electronic Collection (FDLP/EC) Archive. Thisarchive assures ongoing access to publications in the FDLP/EC. Access topublications in the archive is available through GPO's suite of cataloging andlocator services, including the Catalog of U.S. Government Publications(CGP).  Archived copies of publications are retrieved in the event thatpublications are no longer available from the original publishing agency site. 
**Title: Catalog**
 
1985-86 | 1986-87 | 1987-88 | 1988-89 | 1989-90
1990-91 | 1991-92 | 1992-93 | 1993-94 | 1995-96 | 1998-99 | 1999-00
2000-01 | 2001-02 | 2002-03 | 2003-04 | 2004-05 | 2005-06 | 2007-08 | 2008-09
 
SuDoc Number:D 208.109:
Item Number:0390-A (online)
CGP systemNumber:001080253
 
September 26, 2018
Amendment to Class B Warrant Agreement



 Exhibit 10.73 
 AMENDMENT 
 TO 
 CLASS B WARRANT AGREEMENT 
 This Amendment to the Class B Warrant Agreement dated December 13,
2006 (the “Agreement”) is made as of May      , 2009 by and between Middle Kingdom Alliance Corporation (the “Company”) and Continental Stock Transfer & Trust Company (“Warrant Agent”).

 WHEREAS, the Company and Warrant Agent are parties to the Agreement; 
 WHEREAS, the Company completed an offering of its securities on December 13, 2006 pursuant to which it issued, among other securities, Class B
warrants pursuant to the terms of the Agreement; 
 WHEREAS, the prospectus included in the registration statement pursuant to which the
Class B warrants were issued (the “Prospectus”) stated that if no registration statement is effective permitting the sale of the shares of common stock underlying the Class B warrants, that the Class B warrants may be exercised on a
cashless basis commencing one year after such warrants are initially exercisable; 
 WHEREAS, the parties inadvertently failed to include the
foregoing provision in the Agreement; and 
 WHEREAS, the Company and Warrant Agent desire to amend the terms and conditions contained in the
Agreement to reflect the terms in the Prospectus. 
 NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and agreements contained herein
and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the Company and Warrant Agent agree as follows. 
  

	1.	Section 3.3.1 of the Agreement is hereby amended to add the following sentence to the end of the current section: 

 “Notwithstanding the foregoing, at any time commencing one year after the commencement of the Exercise period, if no registration statement is
effective permitting the sale of the shares of Common Stock underlying the Warrants, the Warrants may be exercised on a “cashless” basis.” 
 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have duly executed this Amendment to the Class B Warrant Agreement as of the date first written above. 
  

			
	 CONTINENTAL STOCK TRANSFER & TRUST COMPANY,
 as Trustee

		
	By:	 	  

	Name:	 	Steven G. Nelson
	Title:	 	Chairman
	
	MIDDLE KINGDOM ALLIANCE CORPORATION
		
	By:	 	  

	Name:	 	Bernard J. Tanenbaum III
	Title:	 	Chief Executive Officer
23.000 Scope.

This part prescribes acquisition policies and procedures supporting the Government’s program for

ensuring a drug-free workplace, for protecting and improving the quality of the environment, and to

foster markets for sustainable technologies, materials, products, and services, and for encouraging

the safe operation of vehicles.

Parent topic: Part 23 - Environment, Energy and Water Efficiency, Renewable Energy

Technologies, Occupational Safety, and Drug-Free Workplace
# 46.315 Certificate of conformance.

The *contracting officer**shall* insert the clause at 52.246-15, Certificate of Conformance, in *solicitations* and contracts for *supplies* or services when the conditions in 46.504 apply.

**Parent topic:**Subpart 46.3 - Contract Clauses
Case 3:20-cr-00054-MCR Document 35 Filed 02/11/21 Page 1 of 7
Case 3:20-cr-00054-MCR Document 35 Filed 02/11/21 Page 2 of 7
Case 3:20-cr-00054-MCR Document 35 Filed 02/11/21 Page 3 of 7
Case 3:20-cr-00054-MCR Document 35 Filed 02/11/21 Page 4 of 7
Case 3:20-cr-00054-MCR Document 35 Filed 02/11/21 Page 5 of 7
Case 3:20-cr-00054-MCR Document 35 Filed 02/11/21 Page 6 of 7
Case 3:20-cr-00054-MCR Document 35 Filed 02/11/21 Page 7 of 7
Case 3:20-cv-05935-MCR-HTC Document 37 Filed 10/14/21 Page 1 of 5
Case 3:20-cv-05935-MCR-HTC Document 37 Filed 10/14/21 Page 2 of 5
Case 3:20-cv-05935-MCR-HTC Document 37 Filed 10/14/21 Page 3 of 5
Case 3:20-cv-05935-MCR-HTC Document 37 Filed 10/14/21 Page 4 of 5
Case 3:20-cv-05935-MCR-HTC Document 37 Filed 10/14/21 Page 5 of 5
#### § 400.161 Definitions.

In addition to the terms defined in the Standard Reinsurance Agreement, Livestock Price Reinsurance Agreement and any other Reinsurance Agreement, the following terms as used in this rule are defined to mean:

*Annual statutory financial statement* means the annual financial statement of a Company prepared in accordance with Statutory Accounting Principles and submitted to the state insurance department if required by any state in which the Company is licensed.

*Company* means the insurance company that currently has or is applying to FCIC for a Reinsurance Agreement.

*FCIC* means the Federal Crop Insurance Corporation as authorized in section 503 of the Federal Crop Insurance Act (7 U.S.C. 1503).

*MPUL* means the maximum possible underwriting loss that a Company can sustain on policies it intends to reinsure after adjusting for the effect of any Reinsurance Agreement and any private reinsurance, as evaluated by FCIC.

*Plan of Operations* means the documentation and information submitted by a Company to apply for or maintain a Reinsurance Agreement as required by FCIC.

*Quarterly Statutory Financial Statement* means the quarterly financial statement of a Company prepared in accordance with Statutory Accounting Principles and submitted to the state insurance department if required by any state in which the Company is licensed.

*Reinsurance Agreement* means the Standard Reinsurance Agreement, Livestock Price Reinsurance Agreement or any other Reinsurance Agreement between the Company and FCIC.
32.502-2 Contract finance office clearance.       The contracting officer shall obtain the approval of the contract finance office or other offices designated under agency procedures before taking any of the following actions:                                       (a) 						            Providing a progress payment rate higher than the customary rate (see 32.501-1).                                          (b) 						            Deviating from the progress payments terms prescribed in this part.                                          (c) 						            Providing progress payments to a contractor-                                                         (1) 								                Whose financial condition is in doubt;                                                            (2) 								                Who has had an advance payment request or loan guarantee denied for financial reasons (or approved but withdrawn or lapsed) within the previous 12 months; or                                                            (3) 								                Who is named in the consolidated list of contractors indebted to the United States (known commonly as the "Hold-up List").    **Parent topic:** 32.502 Preaward matters.
#### Ida Rothstein et al., Respondents, v Bernard N. Grayson, Appellant.

In a dental malpractice action, defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, entered April 25, 1980, which denied his motion pursuant to CPLR 3012 (subd [b]) to dismiss the action for failure to serve a complaint. Order reversed, on the law, with $50 costs and disbursements, and motion granted. The delay of more than one year in serving a complaint after demand was made was not adequately explained by counsel’s affirmation, which noted his clients’ residence in the State of New Jersey and their inability to recall the exact dates of treatment. Moreover, the merit of the claim was not established by mere submission of an unsworn dentist’s report describing plaintiff Ida Rothstein’s injuries without establishing their cause. Under the circumstances, dismissal was required (see *Barasch v Micucci,*49 NY2d 594). Lazer, J. P., Mangano, Gibbons and Cohalan, JJ., concur.