alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 301.38-2 Regulated articles. ( a ) *Rust-resistant regulated articles.* The Administrator has determined that certain *Berberis*, *Mahoberberis,* and *Mahonia*species and varieties are rust-resistant. A list of all such articles is located at *www.aphis.usda.gov/aphis/ourfocus/planthealth/plant-pest-and-disease-programs/pests-and-diseases/barberry/ct_barberry .*
( b ) *Berberis, Mahoberberis, and Mahonia.* All plants, seeds, fruits, and other plant parts capable of propagation from rust-susceptible species and varieties of the genera Berberis, Mahoberberis, and Mahonia, except Mahonia cuttings for decorative purposes, are regulated articles.
( c ) *Process for adding rust-resistant regulated articles* — ( 1 ) *Normal process.* ( i ) If the Administrator determines that an article not already listed at *www.aphis.usda.gov/aphis/ourfocus/planthealth/plant-pest-and-disease-programs/pests-and-diseases/barberry/ct_barberry* meets the definition of *rust-resistant plants* found in this subpart, APHIS will publish a notice in the Federal Register proposing to designate the article as a rust-resistant regulated article for black stem rust. The notice will provide the basis for this determination, and will request public comment.
( ii ) If no comments are received on the notice, or if the comments do not change the Administrator's determination, APHIS will publish a second notice in the Federal Register designating the article as a rust-resistant regulated article for black stem rust and listing it.
( 2 ) *Requested process.* A person may request that an additional rust-resistant variety be added to the list at *www.aphis.usda.gov/aphis/ourfocus/planthealth/plant-pest-and-disease-programs/pests-and-diseases/barberry/ct_barberry .* The person requesting that a rust-resistant variety be added to the list must provide APHIS with a description of the variety, including a written description and color pictures that can be used by an inspector to clearly identify the variety and distinguish it from other varieties. If APHIS determines the variety should be added to the list, APHIS will propose to add it to the list pursuant to paragraph (c)(1) of this section.
( d ) *Immediate designation of regulated articles.* Any other product or article not listed at *www.aphis.usda.gov/aphis/ourfocus/planthealth/plant-pest-and-disease-programs/pests-and-diseases/barberry/ct_barberry* is a regulated article if an inspector determines it presents a risk of spread of black stem rust. The inspector must notify the person in possession of the product or article that it is subject to the provisions of this subpart.
(Approved by the Office of Management and Budget under control number 0579-0186) [87 FR 80004, Dec. 29, 2022, as amended at 89 FR 23501, Apr. 4, 2024]
Page 1 of 2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

ZANE D. CROWDER,

Petitioner,

vs. Case No.: 3:20cv5934/LAC/EMT

SEC’Y DEP’T OF CORR.,

Respondent.

________________________/

ORDER

The chief magistrate judge issued a Report and Recommendation on July 15,

2021 (ECF No. 21). 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). I have made a de novo determination of

the timely filed objections.

Having considered the Report and Recommendation, and the objections 

thereto, I have determined the Report and Recommendation should be adopted.

Accordingly, it is ORDERED:

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

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

2. Respondent’s motion to dismiss (ECF No. 8) is GRANTED.

Case 3:20-cv-05934-LC-EMT Document 25 Filed 08/31/21 Page 1 of 2
Page 2 of 2

3. The amended petition for writ of habeas corpus (ECF No. 4) is

DISMISSED with prejudice as untimely.

4. A certificate of appealability is DENIED.

5. The clerk of court is directed to enter judgment in accordance with

this order and close the case.

DONE AND ORDERED this 31st day of August, 2021.

 s/L.A. Collier 

LACEY A. COLLIER

SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case No.: 3:20cv5934/LAC/EMT

Case 3:20-cv-05934-LC-EMT Document 25 Filed 08/31/21 Page 2 of 2
42.1302 Suspension of work.

A suspension of work under a construction or architect-engineer contract may be ordered by the

contracting officer for a reasonable period of time. If the suspension is unreasonable, the contractor

may submit a written claim for increases in the cost of performance, excluding profit.

Parent topic: Subpart 42.13 - Suspension of Work, Stop-Work Orders, and Government Delay of

Work
Page 1 of 3

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PANAMA CITY DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

vs. CASE NO. 5:98cr38-SPM/AK

SAMMIE RAY GILBERT,

Defendant.

_____________________________/

ORDER

THIS CAUSE comes before the Court on the magistrate judge’s report

and recommendation dated June 21, 2007 (doc. 116). Defendant has been

furnished a copy and filed objections (doc. 122) pursuant to Title 28, United

States Code, Section 636(b)(1). Having considered the report and

recommendation and objections, I have determined that the report and

recommendation should be adopted.

Defendant’s § 2255 motion seeks permission to file an untimely direct

appeal based upon his lawyer’s failure to file a notice of appeal. The problem is

that the § 2255 motion is itself untimely. Defendant was sentenced on May 11,

1999. Doc. 70. With the exercise of due diligence, Defendant should have

Case 5:98-cr-00038-RH-AK Document 123 Filed 08/24/07 Page 1 of 3
Page 2 of 3

1

 This date is one year before Defendant filed his “Motion for Assignment

of Counsel” (doc. 85) and has been chosen, for the sake of argument, based on

Defendant’s position that his motion should have been recharacterized as a §

2255 motion.

CASE NO. 5:98cr38-SPM/AK

known well before November 17, 19991, that his lawyer had not filed a notice of

appeal on his behalf. 

Instead of pursuing a direct appeal, Defendant’s statements show that he

counted on obtaining a Rule 35 sentencing reduction. Defendant became

interested in an appeal only upon learning that the Government was not filing a

Rule 35 motion on his behalf. See Doc. 122 at 2-7. The refusal of the

Government to file a Rule 35 motion on Defendant’s behalf does not excuse

Defendant’s lack of due diligence in pursuing his direct appeal. 

The time for filing a § 2255 motion can be adjusted by equitable tolling,

which is an extraordinary remedy that is available in limited circumstances. 

Jones v. United States, 304 F.3d 1035, 1038-39 (11th Cir. 2002). Defendant’s

pro se status and custody in different facilities are not circumstances that warrant

equitable tolling. See Akins v. United States, 204 F.3d 1086, 1090-91 (11th Cir.

2000). 

Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED as follows:

1. The magistrate judge’s report and recommendation (doc. 116) is

adopted and incorporated by reference in this order.

2. The motion to vacate, set aside, or correct sentence (doc. 97) is 

Case 5:98-cr-00038-RH-AK Document 123 Filed 08/24/07 Page 2 of 3
Page 3 of 3

CASE NO. 5:98cr38-SPM/AK

denied as untimely.

DONE AND ORDERED this 24th day of August, 2007.

 s/ Stephan P. Mickle 

Stephan P. Mickle

United States District Judge

Case 5:98-cr-00038-RH-AK Document 123 Filed 08/24/07 Page 3 of 3
#### § 51.1550 Similar varietal characteristics.

*Similar varietal characteristics* means that the potatoes in any lot have the same general shape, color and character of skin, and color of flesh.
IntroductionThe Source:           The MississippiThe Problem BeginsThe Problem GrowsEffects of a Course           ChangeA Corps SolutionCongress ActsThe 1973 Flood's TollRepairs & ModificationsThe Auxiliary StructureAtchafalaya BasinHydroelectric StationReturn to Home Page

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  
Top of Page
  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

 Introduction
Louisiana's Old River is a distinctive river with a remarkable history.  Fiftymiles northwest of Baton Rouge, it connects the Atchafalaya and Mississippi rivers.  It was once a part of the Mississippi and would have long ceased to exist had it not been for man.At one time, the Mississippi attempted to divert most of its flow through Old River and down the Atchafalaya.  Having flowed in both directions in the past, today Old River functions only as a navigation canal. 
**The Auxiliary (left) and Low Sill Control structuresstraddle the inflow channels from the Mississippi River. Beyond the structures to the west the channels merge and flow into the AtchafalayaRiver.  The Overbank Structure and Sidney A. Murray Jr. HydroelectricPower Station are located immediately above the Low Sill Structure. 
 
**Location of Old River
The Old River structure are located on the west bank of the Mississippi River between theriver miles 312 to 315. The structures may be reached from Baton Rouge, LA bydriving North on LA Hwy. 1, then turning right on HWY 15 in Lettsworth,LA andproceeding north 15 miles along the levee to the structures.
**The POC for this page:***Jim Addison, CEMVN-PAChief, Public Affairs Office New Orleans, LA 504-862-2201  James.D.Addison@MVN02.usace.army.mil*Page last updated: 30 July 1998
 ****
#### In the Matter of Camphill Village, U. S. A., Inc., Appellant, v. Workmen’s Compensation Board, Respondent.

Reynolds, J.

Appeal from a determination of the Workmen’s Compensation Board holding that appellant is subject to the provisions of the Disability Benefits Law (Workmen’s Compensation Law, §§ 200-242). Appellant, a nonprofit membership corporation licensed as a mental institution under the Mental Hygiene Law, provides rehabilitation for mentally handicapped children and adults, 16 years of age and older. In carrying out its endeavors groups of handicapped individuals live together with house parents, called “ co-workers ”, who direct and assist -them in carrying out various household and instructional activities. The issue here is the propriety of the board’s finding that these “co-workers” are employees of appellant and that therefore the appellant is subject to the Disability Benefits Law. Coneededly the co-workers receive no specific salary. They are, however, provided with Blue Cross, Blue Shield and Workmen’s Compensation coverage and each household is allocated $600 a month for food, heat, light, fuel, electricity, clothing, medical requirements and personal needs. While the co-workers are not subject to direct supervision and serve without a formal contract of hire, the board could properly find that receipt of the necessities of life and fringe benefits above alluded to are a *quid*pro_ *quo*for services rendered on behalf of the appellant and that such necessities as are here involved constitute wages within the meaning of the statute (Workmen’s Compensation Law, § 201, subd. 12; Disability Benefits Law, reg. 26, subds. [a], [b]; 12 NYCRR 357.1 [a], [b]). Furthermore, it is clear that while charitable motives presumably dictate the co-workers undertaking these endeavors they are neither unemployed nor independent contractors but rather they earn their livelihood, however meager it may be, by their activities on behalf of appellant. Nor do these co-workers fall within the exemption provided by subdivision 5 of section 201 of the Workmen’s Compensation Law. It is not even claimed that they are “engaged in a professional or teaching capacity ” and while appellant is undisputably a charitable or educational institution, the board could properly find that the co-workers despite their self characterization as volunteers, were not “ volunteers ” within the meaning of subdivision 5 of section 201. Decision affirmed, without costs. Gibson, P. J., Herlihy, Reynolds, Aulisi and Staley, Jr., JJ., concur in a memorandum decision by Reynolds, J.
#### § 51.911 Container.

*Container* as used in these standards shall, for the purposes of determining maturity and other factors of grade of grapes in packages containing 5 pounds or less, mean the master container in which the individual packages are packed for shipment.

[52 FR 22437, June 12, 1987. Redesignated at 56 FR 15802, Apr. 18, 1991]
#### Ralph Laiken et al., Respondents, v. American Bank & Trust Company et al., Appellants, et al., Defendant.

Order entered September 16, 1969, denying motion to dismiss four causes of action of the complaint pursuant to CPLR 3211 (subd. [a], par. 7), unanimously reversed on the law, with $50 costs and disbursements to the appellants, and the motion is granted to the following extent. The first and second causes of action are dismissed. The plaintiffs-respondents were employees at will. As such, the bank could terminate their employment at any time and for-any reason or for no reason. *{Town é Country House As Home Serv.*v. *Newberry,*3 N Y 2d 554, 561; *Watson*v. *Gugino,*204 N. Y. 535.) Moreover, these causes of action allege that plaintiffs-respondents resigned under protest on the threat of having their services terminated. Having resigned, the plaintiffs-respondents may not seek damages by reason of the termination of their services. *{Levitz*v. *Bobbins Music Corp.,*6 A D 2d 1027.) Since the discharge gave rise to no claim against the bank, there is no claim against the individual defendants, the bank’s employees, for causing the discharge. With reference to the third and fourth causes of action, there is no attempt to set forth the slanders *in haec verba.*The complaint in an action for slander is required to state *in haec verba*the words used. This requirement is strictly enforced and the exact words must be set forth. *{Gardner*v. *Alexander Bent-A-Car,*28 A D 2d 667.) Accordingly the third and fourth causes of action are dismissed without prejudice to an application made on proper papers at Special Term for leave to replead. (See *Cyg-Knit Mills*v. *Denton Sleeping Garment Mills,*26 A D 2d 800; *Andlou Props.*v. *Grayck,*24 A D 2d 716; *Cushman & Wakefield*v. *John David, Inc.,*23 A D 2d 827; 25 A D 2d 133; CPLR 3025, subd. [b]; 3211, subd. [e].) Concur — McGivern, J. P., Markewich, McNally and Tilzer, JJ.
#### § 51.1159 Smooth texture.

*Smooth texture* means that the skin is thin and smooth for the variety and size of the fruit.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JAN-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               APR-30-1998
<CASH>                                             367
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  602,263
<ALLOWANCES>                                    27,522
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                           4,724
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 582,886
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                        353,350
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                     133,551
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   582,886
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                27,888
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 6,094
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               8,113
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 13,681
<INCOME-TAX>                                     4,972
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              8,709
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     8,709
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PANAMA CITY DIVISION

DAVID POSCHMANN,

Plaintiff,

v. CASE NO.: 5:20cv289-MW/MJF

MANDALAY BEACH RESORT, LLC,

Defendant.

_______________________________/

ORDER FOR DISMISSAL

Defendant has filed a notice of settlement, ECF No. 6, indicating that this case 

has been settled. Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED:

1. The parties must comply with their settlement agreement.

2. All claims other than for enforcement of the settlement agreement are 

voluntarily dismissed with prejudice under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41.

3. Jurisdiction is retained to enforce the order to comply with the settlement 

agreement.

4. The Clerk must enter judgment stating, “The parties are ordered to comply 

with their settlement agreement. The court reserves jurisdiction to enforce the order 

to comply with the settlement agreement. All claims in this case are voluntarily 

dismissed with prejudice under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41.” 
2

5. The Clerk must close the file.

6. A party who objects to the terms of this order or the judgment to be entered 

based on this order must file a timely motion to alter or amend under Federal Rule 

of Civil Procedure 59(e).

SO ORDERED on December 17, 2020.

s/Mark E. Walker 

Chief United States District Judge
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

IN RE:

SKANSKA USA CIVIL SOUTHEAST INC 

AND SKANSKA USA INC Case No. 3:20-cv-5980-LAC-HTC

______________________________________/

LEAD CASE

NOTICE OF HEARING

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE a hearing has been scheduled in this case as reflected below:

Place: United States Courthouse

One North Palafox Street

Pensacola, Florida 32502

Location: Courtroom 3N (3rd Floor)

Date: June 22, 2021

Time: 3:30 p.m.

Proceeding: DISCOVERY HEARING – ESI MATTERS

before the Honorable Hope T. Cannon, United States Magistrate Judge

June 18, 2021

JESSICA J. LYUBLANOVITS,

CLERK OF COURT

/s/ Keri Igney 

DATE: Deputy Clerk

Copies furnished to:

Counsel of Record

Case 3:20-cv-05980-LC-HTC Document 1189 Filed 06/18/21 Page 1 of 1
#### § 58.723 Basis for selecting cheese for processing.

A representative sample shall have been examined to determine fat and moisture content. One sample unit from each vat of cheese shall have been examined to determine the suitability of the vat for use in process cheese products in accordance with the flavor, body and texture characteristics permitted in §§ 58.711 through 58.714 as applicable, and to determine the characteristics it will contribute to the finished product when blended with other cheese. The cheese included in each blend shall be selected on the basis of the desirable qualities which will result in the desired finished product. Recook from equivalent blends may be used in an amount that will not adversely affect the finished product. Hot cheese from the filler may be added to the cooker in amounts which will not adversely affect the finished product.
§ 52.1851 Sizes of raisins with seeds—layer or cluster. The size of Layer or Cluster Raisins with Seeds is incorporated in the grades of the finished product. The size designation and measurement as applicable to layer or cluster raisins with seeds are: ( a ) *3 Crown size or larger.* “3 Crown size or larger” in Layer or Cluster Raisins with Seeds means that the raisins, exclusive of stems and branches, are such a size that they will not pass through round perforations 34 ⁄ 64-inch in diameter.
52.203-1 [Reserved]

Parent topic: 52.203 [Reserved]
7.204 Responsibilities of contracting officers.       (a)                    						            Contracting officers are responsible for transmitting offeror responses to the solicitation provision at 52.207-4 to appropriate inventory management/requirements development activities in accordance with agency procedures. The economic purchase quantity data so obtained are intended to assist inventory managers in establishing and evaluating economic order quantities for supplies under their cognizance.                                          (b)                    						            In recognition of the fact that economic purchase quantity data furnished by offerors are only one of many data inputs required for determining the most economical order quantities, contracting officers should generally take no action to revise quantities to be acquired in connection with the instant procurement. However, if a significant price variation is evident from offeror responses, and the potential for significant savings is apparent, the contracting officer shall consult with the cognizant inventory manager or requirements development activity before proceeding with an award or negotiations. If this consultation discloses that the Government should be ordering an item of supply in different quantities and the inventory manager/requirements development activity concurs, the solicitation for the item should be amended or canceled and a new requisition should be obtained.    **Parent topic:** Subpart 7.2 - Planning for the Purchase of Supplies in Economic Quantities
§ 51.1236 U.S. Fancy Hand Picked. U.S. Fancy Hand Picked shall consist of cleaned Virginia type peanuts in the shell which are mature, dry, and free from loose peanut kernels, dirt or other foreign material, pops, paper ends, and from damage caused by cracked or broken shells, discoloration or other means. The kernels shall be free from damage from any cause. In addition, the peanuts shall not pass through a screen having 32 ⁄ 64 × 3 inch perforations. Unless otherwise specified, the unshelled peanuts in any lot shall not average more than 225 count per pound. ( a ) In order to allow for variations incident to proper grading and handling, the following tolerances, by weight, shall be permitted: ( 1 ) 11.0 percent total for pops, peanuts having paper ends or damaged shells, loose undamaged peanut kernels, and dirt or other foreign material, but not more than one twenty-second of this amount, or 0.5 percent, shall be allowed for dirt or other foreign material.
( 2 ) 5.0 percent for peanuts which will pass through the prescribed screen, but which are free from pops and from peanuts having paper ends or damaged shells.
( 3 ) 4.5 percent for peanuts with damaged kernels, and damaged loose kernels.
#### § 56.58 Advance information.

Upon request of an applicant, all or part of the contents of any grading certificate issued to such applicant may be telephoned or electronically transmitted to the applicant, or to the applicant's designee, at the applicant's expense.

[69 FR 76376, Dec. 21, 2004]