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

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA 

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

 Case No. 4:20-cv-00428-AW-MJF 

MICHAEL GRANT, 

Plaintiff, 

v 

FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, 

Defendant. 

JUDGMENT 

This case is dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute and failure to comply with a 

court order. 

JESSICA J. LYUBLANOVITS 

 CLERK OF COURT 

February 16, 2021 s/Ronnie Barker__________ 

DATE Deputy Clerk: Ronnie Barker 

Case 4:20-cv-00428-AW-MJF Document 26 Filed 02/16/21 Page 1 of 1
1 The Honorable Richard G. Kopf, United States District Judge for the District

of Nebraska. 

## United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ Nos. 98-2061/2074

___________ Tadeusz Radecki, * * Appellant/Cross-Appellee, * * v. * * Appeals from the United States Board of Regents, University of * District Court for the Nebraska; Roy F. Keller; John G. * District of Nebraska Peters; David A. Klarner; Joseph Y-T * Leung; William E. Splinter, * [UNPUBLISHED] * Appellees/Cross-Appellants. *

___________ Submitted: March 31, 1999 Filed: May 17, 1999

___________ Before McMILLIAN, LOKEN, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM. Tadeusz Radecki appeals from the final judgment entered in the District Court 1 for the District of Nebraska dismissing his employment discrimination action without prejudice under Fed. R. Civ. P. 41. For reversal Radecki argues the district court erred-2-

in dismissing the action rather than extending the deadlines and appointing substitute counsel, denying his motion for an independent mental evaluation, and sanctioning him for not appearing at his deposition. Defendants cross-appeal the “without prejudice” aspect of the dismissal. For the reasons discussed below, we affirm the judgment of the district court.
After the district court had appointed new counsel for Radecki several times, had appointed a guardian ad litem, and had extended case deadlines on several occasions, Radecki filed a motion to stay further proceedings until an indefinite time when he wouldbe able to resume his involvement in the action. The court construed the motion as one for voluntary dismissal and granted it, dismissing the case without prejudice. We hold the district

court did not err in so construing the motion, and thus affirm the dismissal without prejudice. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(2) (court may dismiss at plaintiff’s instance “upon such terms and conditions as [it] deems proper”). We also hold that the district court did not err in assessing to Radecki the cost of a missed deposition, see Hutchins v. A.G. Edwards & Sons, Inc. , 116 F.3d 1256, 1260 (8th Cir. 1997) (because district courts are more familiar with proceedings and counsel’s conduct, this court gives district court large measure of discretion in determining appropriate sanctions); in conditioning any refiling of the action upon Radecki’s pa yment of previously incurred attorney’s fees and costs, see Kern v. TXO Prod. Corp. , 738 F.2d 968, 971-72 (8th Cir. 1984) (payment of fees and costs may be proper condition for dismissal under Rule 41(a)); or in implicitly denying Radecki’s motion for an evaluation of his mental condition. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court.-3-

A true copy.
Attest: CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
#### § 54.1002 Terms defined.

*Act.* The Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946, as amended (7 U.S.C. 1621 *et seq.*).

*Administrator.* The Administrator of the Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS), United States Department of Agriculture, or the representative to whom authority has been delegated to act in the stead of the Administrator.

*Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS).* The Agricultural Marketing Service of the United States Department of Agriculture.

*Applicant.* Any person who applies for service under the regulations in this subpart.

*Branch.* The Dairy Grading Branch, Dairy Programs, Agricultural Marketing Service.

*Chief.* The Chief of the Dairy Grading Branch, Dairy Programs, Agricultural Marketing Service, or the representative to whom authority has been delegated to act in the stead of the Chief.

*Compliance.* Conformity of a processing system, piece of processing equipment, or a utensil to identified standards.

*Department.* The United States Department of Agriculture.

*Deputy Administrator.* The Deputy Administrator of the Dairy Programs of the Agricultural Marketing Service or any officer or employee of the Dairy Programs to whom authority has heretofore been delegated, or to whom authority may hereafter be delegated to act in the stead of the Deputy Administrator.

*Design Review Specialist.* An employee of the Branch who determines and certifies or otherwise evaluates the compliance of equipment or utensils under the regulations.

*Design Evaluation and Certification Service.* The service established and conducted under the regulations for the evaluation and certification or other identification of the compliance of equipment or utensils used for the slaughter, processing or packaging of livestock and poultry products (Referred to hereinafter as “equipment” or “utensils”) with sanitary specifications or standards.

*Fabricator.* Commercial entity engaged in the manufacture or assembly of equipment or utensils.

*Financially interested person.* Any person having a financial interest in the equipment or utensils involved, including but not limited to the designer, fabricator, or user of the equipment or utensils.

*Legal Holiday.* Those days designated as legal public holidays in Title 5, United States Code, section 6103(a).

*Person.* Any individual, partnership, corporation, or other legal entity, or Government agency.

*Processing.* Cooking, baking, curing, heating, drying, mixing, grinding, churning, separating, extracting, cutting, fermenting, eviscerating, preserving, dehydrating, freezing, or otherwise manufacturing, and includes the packaging, canning, jarring, or otherwise enclosing in a container.

*Program.* The Dairy Programs of the Agricultural Marketing Service.

*Standards.* The most recent version of standards for equipment and utensils formulated by the NSF/3-A Joint Committee on Food Processing Equipment (Referred to hereinafter as “NSF/3-A”).

*The regulations.* The regulations in this Subpart.
27.204 Patented technology under trade

agreements.

27.204-1 Use of patented technology under the United States-Mexico-Canada

Agreement.

27.204-2 Use of patented technology under the General Agreement on Tariffs and

Trade (GATT).

Parent topic: Subpart 27.2 - Patents and Copyrights
Case 5:20-cv-00029-TKW-MJF Document 1 Filed 01/23/20 Page 1 of 7
Case 5:20-cv-00029-TKW-MJF Document 1 Filed 01/23/20 Page 2 of 7
Case 5:20-cv-00029-TKW-MJF Document 1 Filed 01/23/20 Page 3 of 7
Case 5:20-cv-00029-TKW-MJF Document 1 Filed 01/23/20 Page 4 of 7
Case 5:20-cv-00029-TKW-MJF Document 1 Filed 01/23/20 Page 5 of 7
Case 5:20-cv-00029-TKW-MJF Document 1 Filed 01/23/20 Page 6 of 7
Case 5:20-cv-00029-TKW-MJF Document 1 Filed 01/23/20 Page 7 of 7
Page 1 of 2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

WILLIE GEORGE HARRIS,

Petitioner,

v. CASE NO. 3:20cv5890-MCR-MJF

MARK INCH,

Respondent.

____________________________/

O R D E R

This cause comes on for consideration upon the Magistrate Judge’s Report 

and Recommendation dated April 23, 2021. ECF No. 13. The parties were furnished 

a copy of the Report and Recommendation and were afforded an opportunity to file 

objections pursuant to Title 28, United States Code, Section 636(b)(1). The Court 

has made a de novo determination of those portions to which an objection was made.

Having considered the Report and Recommendation and all objections thereto 

timely filed, the Court concludes that the Report and Recommendation should be 

adopted.

Accordingly, it is ORDERED:

1. The Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation, ECF No. 13, is 

adopted and incorporated by reference in this Order.

Case 3:20-cv-05890-MCR-MJF Document 14 Filed 06/10/21 Page 1 of 2
Page 2 of 2

Case No. 3:20cv5890-MCR/MJF

2. Respondent’s Motion to Dismiss, ECF No. 10, is GRANTED.

3. The petition for writ of habeas corpus, ECF No. 1, challenging the 

judgment of conviction and sentence in State of Florida v. Willie George Harris, 

Escambia County Circuit Court Case No. 2014-CF-2715, is DISMISSED WITH 

PREJUDICE as time barred.

4. A certificate of appealability is DENIED.

5. The Clerk is directed to close the file.

DONE AND ORDERED this 10th day of June 2021.

 s/ M. Casey Rodgers

M. CASEY RODGERS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:20-cv-05890-MCR-MJF Document 14 Filed 06/10/21 Page 2 of 2
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

JOHN L. NORMAN,

Plaintiff,

v. Case No.: 4:20cv437-MW/MJF

DAVID MATTOX, et al.,

Defendants.

___________________________/ 

ORDER ACCEPTING AND ADOPTING 

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

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

Recommendation. ECF No. 87. This Court agrees that all Defendants are entitled to 

qualified immunity. While the officers who responded to Plaintiff’s cell on March 

28, 2020, may have acted negligently (at most) in failing to search Mr. Berg’s mouth 

for the blade that Mr. Berg used to cut himself, Plaintiff has failed to demonstrate 

that the unlawfulness of such conduct was clearly established at the time. Likewise, 

Plaintiff has failed to demonstrate that a reasonable officer would have concluded 

that Defendant Maddox’s and Hutchins’s conduct in response to Berg and Plaintiff’s 

grievances was unlawful in light of the circumstances. Upon consideration, no 

objections having been filed by the parties,

IT IS ORDERED:

Case 4:20-cv-00437-MW-MJF Document 88 Filed 06/28/22 Page 1 of 2
2

The report and recommendation, ECF No. 87, is accepted and adopted as 

this Court’s opinion. Defendants’ motion for summary judgment, ECF No. 71, is 

GRANTED based on qualified immunity. The Clerk shall enter judgment stating, 

“Plaintiff’s claims are DISMISSED with prejudice based on qualified immunity.”

The Clerk shall close the file.

SO ORDERED on June 28, 2022.

s/Mark E. Walker ____

Chief United States District Judge

Case 4:20-cv-00437-MW-MJF Document 88 Filed 06/28/22 Page 2 of 2
#### § 42.122 Applicability of other procedures.

Whenever appropriate, the procedures for classifying and recording defects in § 42.106 and for appeal inspections in § 42.108 also apply to skip lot sampling and inspection.
§ 5001.505 Collateral inspection and release. ( a ) *Inspection of collateral.* The lender must inspect the collateral as often as necessary to properly service the guaranteed Loan.
( b ) *Release of collateral.* The lender must provide written justification for the release and obtain Agency approval before releasing any collateral. The lender is not required to provide justification for the release of collateral when the loan is not in default or liquidation and the collateral being released is a working asset, such as accounts receivable, inventory, and work-in-progress, that are routinely depleted or sold and proceeds used for the normal course of business operations. ( 1 ) *Exceptions to prior approval.* Lenders are not required to obtain Agency approval prior to releasing collateral when the collateral sale proceeds are used to pay down debt in order of lien priority, pay down the guaranteed loan principal, or to acquire replacement collateral.
( 2 ) *Appraisals.* Current appraisals are required on all transactions pursuant to the requirements of § 5001.203 of this part.
( 3 ) *Sale or release transaction.* The sale or release of collateral must be based on an arm's length transaction, unless otherwise approved by the Agency in writing. There must be adequate consideration at market value for the release of collateral. Such consideration may include, but is not limited to: ( i ) Application of the net proceeds from the sale of collateral to the borrower's debts in order of their lien priority against the sold collateral;
( ii ) Use of the net proceeds from the sale of collateral to purchase other collateral of equal or greater value which the lender will obtain as security for the benefit of the guaranteed loan with a lien position equal or superior to the position previously held;
( iii ) Application of the net proceeds from the sale of collateral to the borrower's guaranteed loan or to its business operation in such a manner that a significant improvement to the borrower's debt service ability will be clearly demonstrated. The Lender's written request must detail how the borrower's debt service ability will be improved; and
( 4 ) *No adverse impact.* Any release of collateral must not materially cause an adverse effect to the project's operation or financial condition and the remaining collateral must be sufficient to provide for adequate collateral coverage. Such assurance must be supported by written documentation from the lender and be acceptable to the Agency. If the Agency determines that the project may be adversely affected by a release of collateral, the Agency may, at its discretion, require an appraisal on the remaining collateral in accordance with § 5001.203 of this part.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>              5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR NOONEY INCOME FUND LTD. II, L.P. AND IS QUALIFIED IN
ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<CIK>              0000757764
<NAME>             NOONEY INCOME FUND LTD. II, L.P.
       
<S>                                        <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                         6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                                  JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                    JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                            1,337,374
<SECURITIES>                                              0
<RECEIVABLES>                                       262,663
<ALLOWANCES>                                              0
<INVENTORY>                                               0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                  1,600,037
<PP&E>                                           16,047,059
<DEPRECIATION>                                   (4,022,025)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   16,285,880
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                               547,897
<BONDS>                                           7,143,266
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                     0
<PREFERRED>                                               0
<COMMON>                                                  0
<OTHER-SE>                                        8,457,209
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     16,285,880
<SALES>                                           1,771,994
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                  1,772,918
<CGS>                                                     0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                             0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                  1,365,752
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                          0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  294,740
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                     112,426
<INCOME-TAX>                                              0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                       0
<DISCONTINUED>                                            0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                           0
<CHANGES>                                                 0
<NET-INCOME>                                        112,426
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                          5.79
<EPS-DILUTED>                                             0
        

</TABLE>
Case 5:97-cv039-RH Document 16Filed 03/259 Page1of 0Case 5:97-cv039-RH Document 16Filed 03/259 Page2of 10Case 5:97-cv039-RH Document 16Filed 03/259 Page3of 10Case 5:97-cv039-RH Document 16Filed 03/259 Page4of 10Case 5:97-cv039-RH Document 16Filed 03/259 Pageof10Case 5:97-cv039-RH Document 16Filed 03/259 Page6of 10Case 5:97-cv039-RH Document 16Filed 03/259 Page7of 10Case 5:97-cv039-RH Document 16Filed 03/259 Page8of 10Case 5:97-cv039-RH Document 16Filed 03/259 Pageof10Case 5:97-cv039-RH Document 16Filed 03/259 Page10of
§ 51.21 Disposition of inspection certificates. ( a ) The original certificate, and not to exceed four copies (if requested by applicant prior to issuance), shall be delivered or mailed promptly to the applicant or to a person designated by him. One copy shall be delivered or mailed to the shipper of the inspected product. One copy shall be filed in the office of the inspector when the inspection is made by a Federal Government employee, otherwise, it shall be filed in the appropriate office of the cooperating Federal-State Inspection Agency. Unless otherwise directed by the Administrator, two copies of each official certificate issued on products received in destination markets shall be forwarded to the Administrator to be kept on file in Washington and no copies of official certificates issued at shipping point need be so forwarded. In the case of any product covered by a marketing agreement and/or order effective pursuant to the Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act of 1937, as amended (7 U.S.C. 601 *et seq.*), at least one copy of each certificate covering the inspection of such product shall, on request, be delivered to the administrative agency established thereunder, subject to such terms and conditions as the Administrator may prescribe. Copies may be furnished to other interested parties as outlined in § 51.41.
( b ) [Reserved]
[63 FR 15277, Mar. 31, 1998]
§ 400.686 Administration and maintenance. ( a ) Ineligible producer data will be maintained in a system of records established and maintained by the Risk Management Agency in accordance with the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. 552a). ( 1 ) The ITS contains identifying information of the ineligible person, including but not limited to, name, address, telephone number, SSN or EIN, reason for ineligibility, and time period of ineligibility.
( 2 ) Information in the ITS may be used by an authorized person. The information may be furnished to other users as may be appropriate or required by law or regulation, including but not limited to, FCIC contracted agencies, other government agencies, credit reporting agencies, and collection agencies, and in response to judicial orders in the course of litigation. The individual information may be made available in the form of various reports and notices.
( 3 ) Supporting documentation regarding the determination of ineligibility and reinstatement or regaining of eligibility will be maintained by FCIC, or its contractors, insurance providers, Federal agencies, and State agencies. This documentation will be maintained and retained consistent with the electronic information contained within the ITS.
( b ) Information may be entered into the ITS by FCIC employees or contractors, or insurance providers.
( c ) All persons applying for crop insurance policies or with an existing policy, issued or reinsured by FCIC, will be subject to validation of their eligibility status against the ITS. Applications, transfers, or benefits approved and accepted are considered approved or accepted subject to review of eligibility status in accordance with this subpart.
( d ) Insurance providers, partners, cooperators, and contractors must check to ensure that the persons with whom they are doing business are eligible to participate in the programs authorized under the Act. Insurance providers, partners, cooperators, and contractors must check the ITS but the ITS may not include all persons ineligible to receive government benefits, such as persons debarred, disqualified or suspended from receiving government benefits by an agency other than FCIC. Insurance providers, partners, cooperators, and contractors must check other sources that contain ineligible persons, including but not limited to EPLS, or successor list, provide data on persons ineligible to participate in programs authorized under the Act.
16.206-4 Contract clause.

The contracting officer shall, when contracting by negotiation, insert the clause at 52.216-6, Price

Redetermination-Retroactive, in solicitations and contracts when a fixed-price contract is

contemplated and the conditions in 16.206-2 and 16.206-3(a) through (d) apply.

Parent topic: 16.206 Fixed-ceiling-price contracts with retroactive price redetermination.
Case 4:20-cv-00514-MW-MAF Document 1 Filed 10/28/20 Page 1 of 15
Case 4:20-cv-00514-MW-MAF Document 1 Filed 10/28/20 Page 2 of 15
Case 4:20-cv-00514-MW-MAF Document 1 Filed 10/28/20 Page 3 of 15
Case 4:20-cv-00514-MW-MAF Document 1 Filed 10/28/20 Page 4 of 15
Case 4:20-cv-00514-MW-MAF Document 1 Filed 10/28/20 Page 5 of 15
Case 4:20-cv-00514-MW-MAF Document 1 Filed 10/28/20 Page 6 of 15
Case 4:20-cv-00514-MW-MAF Document 1 Filed 10/28/20 Page 7 of 15
Case 4:20-cv-00514-MW-MAF Document 1 Filed 10/28/20 Page 8 of 15
Case 4:20-cv-00514-MW-MAF Document 1 Filed 10/28/20 Page 9 of 15
Case 4:20-cv-00514-MW-MAF Document 1 Filed 10/28/20 Page 10 of 15
Case 4:20-cv-00514-MW-MAF Document 1 Filed 10/28/20 Page 11 of 15
Case 4:20-cv-00514-MW-MAF Document 1 Filed 10/28/20 Page 12 of 15
Case 4:20-cv-00514-MW-MAF Document 1 Filed 10/28/20 Page 13 of 15
Case 4:20-cv-00514-MW-MAF Document 1 Filed 10/28/20 Page 14 of 15
Case 4:20-cv-00514-MW-MAF Document 1 Filed 10/28/20 Page 15 of 15
# 36.505 Material and workmanship.

The *contracting officer**shall* insert the clause at 52.236-5, Material and Workmanship, in *solicitations* and contracts for *construction* contracts.

**Parent topic:**Subpart 36.5 - Contract Clauses
STAFF REPORT: INITIAL STATEMENT OF REASONS FOR

PROPOSED RULEMAKING

PROPOSED REGULATION FOR IN-USE ON-ROAD DIESEL VEHICLES

Mobile Source Control Division

Heavy-Duty Diesel In-Use Strategies Branch

October 2008
Table III-1: Vehicles Potentially Affected by the Proposed Regulation, by Fleet

Type - 2008

Fleet/Population Type Number of Vehicles Percent of

Vehicles

Instate Total 379,168 40%

Instate MHD 210,760 22%

Instate HHD 141,964 15%

Motor Coach & School buses 26,443 3%

Interstate Total 561,499 60%

Interstate MHD 8,896 1%

Interstate HHD (CA Registered) 60,263 6%

Interstate HHD (non-CA Registered) 492,340 52%

Total 940,667 100%