alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Case 3:20-cv-05708-RV-MJF Document 1 Filed 08/06/20 Page 1 of 19
Case 3:20-cv-05708-RV-MJF Document 1 Filed 08/06/20 Page 2 of 19
Case 3:20-cv-05708-RV-MJF Document 1 Filed 08/06/20 Page 3 of 19
Case 3:20-cv-05708-RV-MJF Document 1 Filed 08/06/20 Page 4 of 19
Case 3:20-cv-05708-RV-MJF Document 1 Filed 08/06/20 Page 5 of 19
Case 3:20-cv-05708-RV-MJF Document 1 Filed 08/06/20 Page 6 of 19
Case 3:20-cv-05708-RV-MJF Document 1 Filed 08/06/20 Page 7 of 19
Case 3:20-cv-05708-RV-MJF Document 1 Filed 08/06/20 Page 8 of 19
Case 3:20-cv-05708-RV-MJF Document 1 Filed 08/06/20 Page 9 of 19
Case 3:20-cv-05708-RV-MJF Document 1 Filed 08/06/20 Page 10 of 19
Case 3:20-cv-05708-RV-MJF Document 1 Filed 08/06/20 Page 11 of 19
Case 3:20-cv-05708-RV-MJF Document 1 Filed 08/06/20 Page 12 of 19
Case 3:20-cv-05708-RV-MJF Document 1 Filed 08/06/20 Page 13 of 19
Case 3:20-cv-05708-RV-MJF Document 1 Filed 08/06/20 Page 14 of 19
Case 3:20-cv-05708-RV-MJF Document 1 Filed 08/06/20 Page 15 of 19
Case 3:20-cv-05708-RV-MJF Document 1 Filed 08/06/20 Page 16 of 19
Case 3:20-cv-05708-RV-MJF Document 1 Filed 08/06/20 Page 17 of 19
Case 3:20-cv-05708-RV-MJF Document 1 Filed 08/06/20 Page 18 of 19
Case 3:20-cv-05708-RV-MJF Document 1 Filed 08/06/20 Page 19 of 19
Court of Appeals

Sixth Appellate District of Texas

J U D G M E N T

In the Matter of the Marriage of Amy 

Elizabeth Collins and Charles Vernon 

Collins and In the Interest of H.C. and C.C., 

Children

No. 06-18-00036-CV

Appeal from the 433rd District Court of 

Comal County, Texas (Tr. Ct. No. C2015-

1800D). Opinion delivered by Chief 

Justice Morriss, Justice Moseley and Justice 

Burgess participating.

As stated in the Court’s opinion of this date, we find that the motion of the appellant to 

dismiss the appeal should be granted. Therefore, we dismiss the appeal.

We further order that the appellant, Amy Elizabeth Collins, pay all costs of this appeal.

RENDERED JULY 31, 2018

BY ORDER OF THE COURT

JOSH R. MORRISS, III

CHIEF JUSTICE

ATTEST:

Debra K. Autrey, Clerk
52.212-2 Evaluation—Commercial Products

and Commercial Services.

As prescribed in 12.301(c), the Contracting Officer may insert a provision substantially as follows:

Evaluation—Commercial Products and Commercial Services (Nov 2021)

(a) The Government will award a contract resulting from this solicitation to the responsible offeror

whose offer conforming to the solicitation will be most advantageous to the Government, price and

other factors considered. The following factors shall be used to evaluate offers:

________________________________________________ ________________________________________________

________________________________________________[Contracting Officer shall insert the significant

evaluation factors, such as (i) technical capability of the item offered to meet the Government

requirement; (ii) price; (iii) past performance (see FAR 15.304); and include them in the relative

order of importance of the evaluation factors, such as in descending order of importance.]

Technical and past performance, when combined, are __________ [Contracting Officer state, in

accordance with FAR 15.304, the relative importance of all other evaluation factors, when combined,

when compared to price.]

(b) Options. The Government will evaluate offers for award purposes by adding the total price for all

options to the total price for the basic requirement. The Government may determine that an offer is

unacceptable if the option prices are significantly unbalanced. Evaluation of options shall not

obligate the Government to exercise the option(s).

(c) A written notice of award or acceptance of an offer, mailed or otherwise furnished to the

successful offeror within the time for acceptance specified in the offer, shall result in a binding

contract without further action by either party. Before the offer’s specified expiration time, the

Government may accept an offer (or part of an offer), whether or not there are negotiations after its

receipt, unless a written notice of withdrawal is received before award.

(End of provision)

Parent topic: 52.212 [Reserved]
#### § 54.1027 Application of other regulations to appeal service.

The regulations in this subpart shall apply to appeal service except insofar as they are inapplicable.
19.1306           HUBZone sole-source awards.       (a)                    A contracting officer shall consider a contract award to a HUBZone small business concern on a sole-source basis (see 6.302-5(b)(5)) before considering a small business set-aside (see 19.203 and subpart 19.5), provided none of the exclusions at 19.1304 apply; and-                                                         (1)                          The contracting officer does not have a reasonable expectation that offers would be received from two or more HUBZone small business concerns;                                                            (2)                          The anticipated price of the contract, including options, will not exceed-                                                                           (i)                                                              $7 million for a requirement within the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) codes for manufacturing; or                                                                              (ii)                                $4.5 million for a requirement within all other NAICS codes;                                                                                                           (3)                          The requirement is not currently being performed by an 8(a) participant under the provisions of subpart  19.8 or has been accepted as a requirement by SBA under subpart  19.8;                                                            (4) The HUBZone small business concern has been determined to be a responsible contractor with respect to performance; and                                                            (5)                          Award can be made at a fair and reasonable price.                                                                             (b) The SBA has the right to appeal the contracting officer’s decision not to make a HUBZone sole-source award (see 13 CFR 126.610).    **Parent topic:** Subpart 19.13 - Historically Underutilized Business Zone (HUBZone) Program
#### § 58.315 Continuous churns.

All product contact surfaces of the churn and related equipment shall be of noncorrosive material. All non-metallic product contact surfaces shall comply with 3-A Standards for Plastic, Rubber, and Rubber-Like Materials. All product contact surfaces of the churn and related equipment shall be readily accessible for cleaning and inspection. Construction shall follow the applicable principles of the 3-A Sanitary Standards.
#### § 51.2761 Unshelled.

*Unshelled* means a peanut kernel with part or all of the hull (shell) attached.
1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

MATTHEW J. THOMPSON,

Plaintiff,

v. Case No. 4:20cv285-MW/MAF

WARDEN R. POLK,

HAMILTON C.I. ANNEX,

Defendant.

_________________________/

ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

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

and Recommendation, ECF No. 8, and has also reviewed de novo Plaintiff’s 

objections to the report and recommendation, ECF No. 9. Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED:

The report and recommendation is accepted and adopted, over Plaintiff’s

objections, as this Court’s opinion. The fact that Plaintiff mailed his objections in 

“Legal Mail” envelope but not his amended complaint is, at best, perplexing. If 

Plaintiff mails his amended complaint in the next thirty days, then this Court will 

vacate this order and review the amended complaint. 

The Clerk shall enter judgment stating, “This case is DISMISSED without 

prejudice for failure to prosecute and failure to comply with a Court Order.” The 

Case 4:20-cv-00285-MW-MAF Document 10 Filed 10/13/20 Page 1 of 2
2

Clerk shall administratively close the file. The file will be reopened if Plaintiff 

mails an amended complaint on or before November 13, 2020. 

SO ORDERED on October 13, 2020.

s/Mark E. Walker 

Chief United States District Judge

Case 4:20-cv-00285-MW-MAF Document 10 Filed 10/13/20 Page 2 of 2
#### § 54.1001 Meaning of words.

For the purposes of the regulations in this subpart, words in the singular form shall be deemed to impart the plural and vice versa, as the case may demand.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA 

DAVID POSCHMANN, 

 Plaintiff,

v. Case No. 3:20-cv-05790-RV-HTC

EAST PASS INVESTORS, LLC,

 Defendants.

/

PROPOSED ORDER ON DEFENDANT’S UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR 

EXTENSION OF TIME TO RESPOND TO PLAINTIFF’S COMPLAINT

THIS MATTER is before the Court on the Defendant’s Unopposed Motion 

for Extension of Time to Respond to Plaintiff’s Complaint. The Court, having 

reviewed the file and being fully advised in the premises, finds that there is good 

cause to grant the relief requested in the Motion. It is therefore,

ORDERED that the Motion is granted. The following relief is hereby 

approved:

1. Defendant shall file its Response to Plaintiff’s Complaint by November 

4, 2020. 

[Remainder of Page Intentionally Blank]

Case 3:20-cv-05790-RV-HTC Document 6-1 Filed 10/06/20 Page 1 of 2
DONE AND ORDERED this ___ day of October, 2020, in Chambers of the 

United States District Court for the Northern District of Florida. 

United States District Judge

cc: Counsel of Record

Case 3:20-cv-05790-RV-HTC Document 6-1 Filed 10/06/20 Page 2 of 2
Exhibit 8.1

List of Subsidiaries



|                                                                                      |  |                              
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |  | -----------------------------
|Subsidiaries:                                                                         |  | Jurisdiction of Incorporation
|                                                                                      | 
|Beijing Decision Education & Consulting Company Limited                               |  | PRC                          
|Beijing Judgment Education & Consulting Company Limited                               |  | PRC                          
|Beijing Hewstone Technology Company                                                   |  | PRC                          
|Beijing Speed Technology Company Limited                                              |  | PRC                          
|New Oriental Education & Technology Group North America Branch                        |  | Canada                       
|Elite Concept Holdings Limited                                                        |  | Hong Kong                    
|Winner Park Limited                                                                   |  | Hong Kong                    
|Smart Shine International Limited                                                     |  | Hong Kong                    
|                                                                                      | 
|Variable Interest Entities:                                                           |  |                              
|                                                                                      | 
|Beijing New Oriental Education & Technology (Group) Co., Ltd. (New Oriental China)* |  | PRC                          



|* | New Oriental China is the immediate parent company of the following subsidiaries, all of which are incorporated in the PRC:
|- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| |  |  | 47 wholly-owned subsidiaries and one 60%-owned subsidiary that operate schools in China; and
| | - |  | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| |  |  | 30 wholly-owned subsidiaries that operate New Orientals educational content, software and other technology development and distributions
business, online education business and overseas studies consulting business in China.
| | - |  | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(October 6, 1980)

#### Bank of Smithtown, as Trustee under Agreement between Grace Baker and Bank of Smithtown, Appellant-Respondent, v Newbrook Building Corp., Defendant, and Ted S. Fishman, Respondent-Appellant.

In an action upon a mortgage note, the plaintiff bank and the defendant Ted S. Fishman each appeal from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, dated November 2, 1979, as denied that party’s motion for summary judgment. Order affirmed, without costs or disbursements. Questions of fact exist which require a plenary trial. Mollen, P. J., Damiani, Mangano and Cohalan, JJ., concur.
§ 3430.1006 Matching requirements. ( a ) *Matching provisions for the Centers and Subcenter.* The Centers and the Subcenter are not required to match Federal funds.
( b ) *Matching provisions for subawards.* For subawards made by the Centers or Subcenter through the competitive grants process, not less than 20 percent of the cost of an activity must be matched with funds, including in-kind contributions, from a non-Federal source, by the subawardee. ( 1 ) *Exception for fundamental research.* This matching requirement does not apply to fundamental research (as defined in § 3430.2).
( 2 ) *Special matching provisions for applied research.* With prior approval by the NIFA authorized departmental officer (ADO), the Center or Subcenter may reduce or eliminate the matching requirement for applied research (as defined in § 3430.2) if the Center or Subcenter determines that the reduction is necessary and appropriate pursuant to guidance issued by NIFA.
§ 504.4 Exemptions from user fee charges. ( a ) USDA laboratories and ARS cooperators designated by the Curator of the ARS Patent Culture Collection are exempt from fee assessments.
( b ) The Curator of the ARS Patent Culture Collection is delegated the authority to approve and revoke exemptions from fee assessments.
28.102-1 General.

(a) 40 U.S.C.chapter 31, subchapter III, Bonds (formerly known as the Miller Act), requires

performance and payment bonds for any construction contract exceeding $150,000, except that this

requirement may be waived-

(1) By the contracting officer for as much of the work as is to be performed in a foreign country upon

finding that it is impracticable for the contractor to furnish such bond; or

(2) As otherwise authorized by the Bonds statute or other law.

(b)

(1) Pursuant to 40 U.S.C. 3132, for construction contracts greater than $35,000, but not greater

than $150,000, the contracting officer shall select two or more of the following payment protections,

giving particular consideration to inclusion of an irrevocable letter of credit as one of the selected

alternatives:

(i) A payment bond.

(ii) An irrevocable letter of credit (ILC).

(iii) A tripartite escrow agreement. The prime contractor establishes an escrow account in a

federally insured financial institution and enters into a tripartite escrow agreement with the

financial institution, as escrow agent, and all of the suppliers of labor and material. The escrow

agreement shall establish the terms of payment under the contract and of resolution of disputes

among the parties. The Government makes payments to the contractor’s escrow account, and the

escrow agent distributes the payments in accordance with the agreement, or triggers the disputes

resolution procedures if required.

(iv) Certificates of deposit. The contractor deposits certificates of deposit from a federally insured

financial institution with the contracting officer, in an acceptable form, executable by the

contracting officer.

(v) A deposit of the types of security listed in 28.204-1 and 28.204-2.

(2) The contractor shall submit to the Government one of the payment protections selected by the

contracting officer.

(c) The contractor shall furnish all bonds or alternative payment protection, including any necessary

reinsurance agreements, before receiving a notice to proceed with the work or being allowed to

start work.

Parent topic: 28.102 Performance and payment bonds and alternative payment protections for

construction contracts.
#### § 51.701 Fairly smooth texture.

*Fairly smooth texture* means that the skin is not materially rough or coarse and that the skin is not thick for the variety.
#### Mona La Pommeray, Respondent-Appellant, v Luc La Pommeray, Appellant-Respondent.

— Motion by defendant to consolidate two appeals "which are ready to be filed” with eight appeals presently on the November, 1979 calendar and cross motion by plaintiff, *inter alia,*to "strike” defendant’s appeals from the judgment of divorce and from certain postjudgment *687orders. Motion and cross motion denied. Hopkins, J. P., Damiani, O’Connor and Rabin, JJ., concur.
§ 51.1520 U.S. Fancy. “U.S. Fancy” consists of plums or prunes of one variety which are well formed, clean, mature but not overripe or soft or shriveled; which are free from decay, sunscald, heat injury, sunburn, split pits and hail marks, and free from damage caused by broken skins, growth cracks, drought spots, gum spots, russeting, scars, other disease, insects or mechanical or other means. ( a ) Italian type prunes shall be well colored and, unless otherwise specified, shall be not less than 11 ⁄ 4 inches in diameter. (*See* § 51.1525.)
( b ) [Reserved]
41.103 Statutory and delegated authority.

(a) Statutory authority.

(1) The General Services Administration (GSA) is authorized by 40 U.S.C. 501 to prescribe policies

and methods governing the acquisition and supply of utility services for Federal agencies. This

authority includes related functions such as managing public utility services and representing

Federal agencies in proceedings before Federal and state regulatory bodies. GSA is authorized by 40

U.S.C.501 to contract for utility services for periods not exceeding tenyears.

(2) The Department of Defense (DoD) is authorized by 10 U.S.C. 3201(a) and 40 U.S.C.113(e)(3) to

acquire utility services for military facilities.

(3) The Department of Energy (DOE) is authorized by the Department of Energy Organization Act

(42 U.S.C.7251, etseq.) to acquire utility services. DOE is authorized by the Atomic Energy Act

of1954, as amended (42 U.S.C.2204), to enter into new contracts or modify existing contracts for

electric services for periods not exceeding 25 years for uranium enrichment installations.

(b) Delegated authority. GSA has delegated its authority to enter into utility service contracts for

periods not exceeding tenyears to DoD and DOE, and for connection charges only to the Department

of Veteran Affairs. Contracting pursuant to this delegated authority shall be consistent with the

requirements of this part. Other agencies requiring utility service contracts for periods over

oneyear, but not exceeding tenyears, may request a delegation of authority from GSA at the address

specified in 41.301(a). In keeping with its statutory authority, GSA will, as necessary, conduct

reviews of delegated agencies’ acquisitions of utility services to ensure compliance with the terms of

the delegation and applicable laws and regulations.

(c) Requests for delegations of contracting authority from GSA shall include a certification from the

acquiring agency’s Senior Procurement Executive that the agency has-

(1) An established acquisition program;

(2) Personnel technically qualified to deal with specialized utilities problems; and

(3) The ability to accomplish its own pre-award contract review.

Parent topic: Subpart 41.1 - General
47.207-2 Duration of contract and time of performance.       The contracting officer shall-                                       (a) 						            Establish a specific expiration date (month, day, and year) for the contract or state the length of time that the contract will remain in effect; *e.g.,*6 months commencing from the date of award; and                                          (b) 						            Include the following items as appropriate:                                                         (1) 								                A statement of the time period during which the service is required when the service is a one-time job; *e.g.,*a routine office relocation.                                                            (2) 								                A time schedule for the performance of segments of a major job; *e.g.,* an office relocation for which the work phases must be coordinated to meet other needs of the agency.                                                            (3) 								                Statements of performance times for particular services; *e.g.,* pickup and delivery services. Specify-                                                                           (i) 										                    On which days of the week and during which hours of the day pickup and delivery services may be required;                                                                              (ii) 										                    The maximum time allowable to the contractor for accomplishing delivery under regular or priority service; and                                                                              (iii) 										                    How much advance notice the contractor will be given for regular pickup services and, if applicable, priority pickup services.    **Parent topic:** 47.207 Solicitation provisions, contract clauses, and special requirements.
[No. 9303.

Department Two.

January 4, 1911.]

#### Z. T. Holden, *Respondent,*v. Livia Quaglitti Romano, *Appellant.*
      *1*

Appeal — Review—Findings—Pleadings—Amendment. In the absence of a statement of facts, the evidence is presumed to support ■the findings, and the pleadings will be deemed amended to conform thereto.

Appeal — Review—Findings. Findings not being essential in equity, judgment will not be reversed for insufficiency of the findings to support the decree, the findings not showing affirmatively that a different judgment should have been entered.

Appeal from a judgment of the superior court for King county, Sheeks, J., entered February 28, 1910, upon findings in favor of the plaintiff, -after a trial on the merits before the court without a jury, in an action to cancel a deed.

Affirmed.

*459
      *Eugene A. Childe,*for appellant.

*Edgar S. Hadley,*for respondent.

Reported in 112 Pac. 489.

Per Curiam.

This is an appeal from a decree cancelling a deed obtained through fraud. The case comes here on the judgment roll, without a statement of facts or bill of exceptions, and but two errors are assigned: First, that the findings of fact and conclusions of law are inconsistent with the cause of action set forth in the complaint; and second, that the findings of fact do not support the conclusions of law and decree. We find no merit in either of these assignments. The contention that the action was prosecuted solely on the theory that the deed was obtained from the respondent while intoxicated is not supported by the record. The complaint alleged other fraudulent acts, and alleged the intoxication of the respondent largely by way of inducement. Furthermore, in the absence of a statement of facts we must presume that the testimony supports the findings, and would deem the complaint amended if need be. We are further of opinion that the findings support the decree, but if they do not, that fact of itself affords no ground for reversal. This is an equity case and no findings were necessary. In such ■cases it is only where the findings are complete in themselves, and show affirmatively that a different judgment should have been rendered, that this court will interfere or reverse the judgment of the trial court. *Clambey v. Copland,*52 Wash. 580, 100 Pac. 1031, and cases there cited. There is no error in the record, and the judgment is affirmed.