alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
33.214 Alternative dispute resolution (ADR).

(a) The objective of using ADR procedures is to increase the opportunity for relatively inexpensive

and expeditious resolution of issues in controversy. Essential elements of ADR include-

(1) Existence of an issue in controversy;

(2) A voluntary election by both parties to participate in the ADR process;

(3) An agreement on alternative procedures and terms to be used in lieu of formal litigation; and

(4) Participation in the process by officials of both parties who have the authority to resolve the issue

in controversy.

(b) If the contracting officer rejects a contractor’s request for ADR proceedings, the contracting

officer shall provide the contractor a written explanation citing one or more of the conditions in 5

U.S.C.572(b) or such other specific reasons that ADR procedures are inappropriate for the resolution

of the dispute. In any case where a contractor rejects a request of an agency for ADR proceedings,

the contractor shall inform the agency in writing of the contractor’s specific reasons for rejecting the

request.

(c) ADR procedures may be used at any time that the contracting officer has authority to resolve the

issue in controversy. If a claim has been submitted, ADR procedures may be applied to all or a

portion of the claim. When ADR procedures are used subsequent to the issuance of a contracting

officer’s final decision, their use does not alter any of the time limitations or procedural

requirements for filing an appeal of the contracting officer’s final decision and does not constitute a

reconsideration of the final decision.

(d) When appropriate, a neutral person may be used to facilitate resolution of the issue in

controversy using the procedures chosen by the parties.

(e) The confidentiality of ADR proceedings shall be protected consistent with 5 U.S.C.574.

(f)

(1) A solicitation shall not require arbitration as a condition of award, unless arbitration is otherwise

required by law. Contracting officers should have flexibility to select the appropriate ADR procedure

to resolve the issues in controversy as they arise.

(2) An agreement to use arbitration shall be in writing and shall specify a maximum award that may

be issued by the arbitrator, as well as any other conditions limiting the range of possible outcomes.

(g) Binding arbitration, as an ADR procedure, may be agreed to only as specified in agency

guidelines. Such guidelines shall provide advice on the appropriate use of binding arbitration and

when an agency has authority to settle an issue in controversy through binding arbitration.

Parent topic: Subpart 33.2 - Disputes and Appeals
Case 4:20-cv-00592-AW-MAF Document 1 Filed 12/30/20 Page 1 of 33
Case 4:20-cv-00592-AW-MAF Document 1 Filed 12/30/20 Page 2 of 33
Case 4:20-cv-00592-AW-MAF Document 1 Filed 12/30/20 Page 3 of 33
Case 4:20-cv-00592-AW-MAF Document 1 Filed 12/30/20 Page 4 of 33
Case 4:20-cv-00592-AW-MAF Document 1 Filed 12/30/20 Page 5 of 33
Case 4:20-cv-00592-AW-MAF Document 1 Filed 12/30/20 Page 6 of 33
Case 4:20-cv-00592-AW-MAF Document 1 Filed 12/30/20 Page 7 of 33
Case 4:20-cv-00592-AW-MAF Document 1 Filed 12/30/20 Page 8 of 33
Case 4:20-cv-00592-AW-MAF Document 1 Filed 12/30/20 Page 9 of 33
Case 4:20-cv-00592-AW-MAF Document 1 Filed 12/30/20 Page 10 of 33
Case 4:20-cv-00592-AW-MAF Document 1 Filed 12/30/20 Page 11 of 33
Case 4:20-cv-00592-AW-MAF Document 1 Filed 12/30/20 Page 12 of 33
Case 4:20-cv-00592-AW-MAF Document 1 Filed 12/30/20 Page 13 of 33
Case 4:20-cv-00592-AW-MAF Document 1 Filed 12/30/20 Page 14 of 33
Case 4:20-cv-00592-AW-MAF Document 1 Filed 12/30/20 Page 15 of 33
Case 4:20-cv-00592-AW-MAF Document 1 Filed 12/30/20 Page 16 of 33
Case 4:20-cv-00592-AW-MAF Document 1 Filed 12/30/20 Page 17 of 33
Case 4:20-cv-00592-AW-MAF Document 1 Filed 12/30/20 Page 18 of 33
Case 4:20-cv-00592-AW-MAF Document 1 Filed 12/30/20 Page 19 of 33
Case 4:20-cv-00592-AW-MAF Document 1 Filed 12/30/20 Page 20 of 33
Case 4:20-cv-00592-AW-MAF Document 1 Filed 12/30/20 Page 21 of 33
Case 4:20-cv-00592-AW-MAF Document 1 Filed 12/30/20 Page 22 of 33
Case 4:20-cv-00592-AW-MAF Document 1 Filed 12/30/20 Page 23 of 33
Case 4:20-cv-00592-AW-MAF Document 1 Filed 12/30/20 Page 24 of 33
Case 4:20-cv-00592-AW-MAF Document 1 Filed 12/30/20 Page 25 of 33
Case 4:20-cv-00592-AW-MAF Document 1 Filed 12/30/20 Page 26 of 33
Case 4:20-cv-00592-AW-MAF Document 1 Filed 12/30/20 Page 27 of 33
Case 4:20-cv-00592-AW-MAF Document 1 Filed 12/30/20 Page 28 of 33
Case 4:20-cv-00592-AW-MAF Document 1 Filed 12/30/20 Page 29 of 33
Case 4:20-cv-00592-AW-MAF Document 1 Filed 12/30/20 Page 30 of 33
Case 4:20-cv-00592-AW-MAF Document 1 Filed 12/30/20 Page 31 of 33
Case 4:20-cv-00592-AW-MAF Document 1 Filed 12/30/20 Page 32 of 33
Case 4:20-cv-00592-AW-MAF Document 1 Filed 12/30/20 Page 33 of 33
#### Angel Maturino RESENDIZ, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Brad LIVINGSTON, Executive Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice; Douglas Dretke, Director, Correctional Institutions Division Texas Department of Criminal Justice; Charles O’Reilly, Senior Warden, Huntsville Unit; Unknown Executioners, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 06-70029.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

June 27, 2006.

Robert Charles Owen, Owen & Roun-tree, Austin, TX, for Resendiz.

Edward Larry Marshall, Austin, TX, for Defendants-Appellees.

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, BENAVIDES and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

This is an appeal from an order of the district court denying Appellant’s motion for an injunction, restraining order, or stay of execution. Appellant seeks relief in the form of a stay of an execution, which is scheduled for later today, June 27, 2006. We AFFIRM the district court’s denial of relief essentially for the reasons expressed by the district court in its memorandum and order signed June 26, 2006. *Resendiz v. Livingston,*No. H-06-CV-818. *See White v. Johnson,*429 F.3d 572 (5th Cir.2005); *Harris v. Johnson,*376 F.3d 414 (5th Cir.2004). The request for stay is DENIED.

AFFIRMED; DENIED.

DENNIS, Circuit Judge,

concurring in the judgement:

Under the circumstances, I concur and agree with the district court’s disposition of the case. I continue to be concerned, however, about the tendency in some of our own opinions towards mechanically denying stays according only to the length of delay between execution setting and the date of the petition, as noted in my dissent in *Harris v. Johnson,*376 F.3d 414, 419 (5th Cir.2004). In *Hill v. McDonough,*— U.S. -, 126 S.Ct. 2096, 165 L.Ed.2d 44*456(2006), the Supreme Court reiterated that “a stay of execution is an equitable remedy” and that there is “a strong equitable presumption” against granting a stay where the claim could have been raised “ ‘at such a time as to allow consideration of the merits without requiring entry of a stay.’ ” *(Hill,*126 S.Ct. 2096, citing, in the third quotation, *Nelson v. Campbell,*541 U.S. 637, 650, 124 S.Ct. 2117, 158 L.Ed.2d 924 (2004)). I do not read the Court’s opinion, however, as encouraging us to overlook all other considerations that are called for in equity, which, after all, should be a recourse to principles of justice and fairness to correct or supplement the law as applied to particular circumstances. Consequently, equity in cases of this nature requires courts to consider the particular circumstances of each case and to examine them for whether or not the challenge has been brought dilatorily or for improper purposes *(i.e.,*to delay the execution), and, if not, whether it should be allowed to proceed. I am satisfied that the district court has properly done so in this case and has reached a sound decision.
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES 

 FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA 

 NORTHERN DIVISION 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ) 

 ) 

 Plaintiff, ) 

 ) 

 v. ) Case No. 2:06-cr-0169-WKW 

 ) 

JAMES CALVIN TALLEY, ) 

 ) 

 Defendant. ) 

DEFENDANT’S CONSENT TO GOVERNMENT’S MOTION FOR FORFEITURE

COMES NOW, the defendant, James Calvin Talley, by and through counsel, and 

hereby consents to the Government’s Motion for Forfeiture. 

In support thereof, the following is stated: 

1. The Government seeks the forfeiture of $30,141.84 in United States currency 

seized from the Mutual Savings Credit Union account in the name of James 

C. Talley, Jr. 

2. The defendant makes no claim to the above-referenced currency as these 

funds belonged to his father, John Robbins. 

WHEREFORE, the defendant has no objection to the Court ordering a preliminary 

order of forfeiture as to the defendant’s interest in the subject property. 

Case 2:06-cr-00169-WKW-SRW Document 469 Filed 12/18/2007 Page 1 of 2
2

Respectfully submitted, this 18th day of December, 2007. 

s/ Richard K. Keith 

RICHARD K. KEITH (KEI003) 

Attorney for Defendant

KEITH & DUBIN, P.C.

22 Scott Street 

Montgomery, AL 36104-4012 

Telephone: (334) 264-6776 

Facsimile: (334) 265-5362 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on December 18, 2007, I electronically filed the foregoing with 

the Clerk of the Court using the CM/ECF system, which will send notification of such 

filing to the following: 

John T. Harmon, AUSA 

Post Office Box 197 

Montgomery, AL 36101-0197 

s/ Richard K. Keith 

OF COUNSEL

Case 2:06-cr-00169-WKW-SRW Document 469 Filed 12/18/2007 Page 2 of 2
§ 654.15 Operation and maintenance. Sponsor(s) are to operate and maintain completed project measures in: ( a ) Compliance with applicable Federal, State, and local laws, regulations, and ordinances.
( b ) Compliance with any applicable conditions set forth in the instruments by which the landrights were acquired for installing, operating, and maintaining the project measures.
( c ) A manner that will not significantly degrade the environment and will permit project measures to serve the purpose for which they were installed as set forth in the watershed or RC&D measure plan.
( d ) Compliance with the time frames and O&M work items established in the plan of O&M and inspection reports.
( e ) Accordance with agreements with NRCS on admission charges and user fees for public recreation and/or fish and wildlife facility. Admission or user fees shall be charged only as necessary to produce revenues required to amortize the sponsor(s)' share of installation costs and to provide adequate O&M for that portion of the project measures pertaining to public recreation and/or fish and wildlife facility. Sponsor(s)' admission or user fee charges require prior NRCS approval throughout the life of the O&M agreement.
( f ) Accordance with the schedule for withdrawal of water in water impounding structures as specified in the watershed or RC&D measure plan or other legal documents.
( g ) A manner consistent with the project objectives.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

KENNETH RICKERSON,

Plaintiff,

v. Case No.: 4:20cv387-MW/HTC

MARK INCH, SECRETARY OF 

THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF

CORRECTIONS, et al.,

Defendants.

___________________________/ 

ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

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

Recommendation, ECF No. 17, and has also reviewed de novo Plaintiff’s objections, 

ECF No. 27.

1 Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED:

The report and recommendation, ECF No. 17, is accepted and adopted, over 

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

1 Plaintiff’s objections provide this Court with a list of Plaintiff’s prior civl actions. 

However, this list is provided too late to change the outcome in this case as Plaintiff was 

forewarned that the failure to disclose all prior civil cases may result in the dismissal of this case. 

This Court finds the dismissal of this case without prejudice is an appropriate sanction for 

Plaintiff’s failure to previously disclose all prior civil cases.
2

stating, “Plaintiff’s amended complaint is dismissed without prejudice for 

maliciousness and abuse of the judicial process.” The Clerk shall close the file. 

SO ORDERED on June 3, 2021.

s/Mark E. Walker 

Chief United States District Judge
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 236 (Thursday, December 9, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Page 76732]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-30736]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION


Sunshine Act Notices

Date and Time: Thursday, December 2, 2010, at 10 a.m.

Place: 999 E Street, NW., Washington, DC (Ninth Floor).

Status: This meeting will be open to the public.
    The Following Items were Withdrawn from the Agenda:
    Proposed Final Audit Report on the Washington State Democratic 
Central Committee
    Proposed Final Audit Report on the Tennessee Republican Party 
Federal Election Account
    Individuals who plan to attend and require special assistance, such 
as sign language interpretation or other reasonable accommodations, 
should contact Shawn Woodhead Werth, Commission Secretary and Clerk, at 
(202) 694-1040, at least 72 hours prior to the hearing date.

PERSON TO CONTACT FOR INFORMATION: Judith Ingram, Press Officer, 
Telephone: (202) 694-1220.

Shawn Woodhead Werth,
Secretary and Clerk of the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2010-30736 Filed 12-8-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6715-01-M
|CERTIFICATIONS
|--------------

|I, Lawrence A. Heilbronner, certify that:                                                               
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Canandaigua National Corporation and Subsidiaries.
|                                                                                                        
|                                                                                                        
|                                                                                                        
|                                                                                                        
|                                                                                                        
|                                                                                                        
|                                                                                                        
|                                                                                                        
|                                                                                                        
|                                                                                                        
|                                                                                                        
|                                                                                                        
|                                                                                                        
|                                                                                                        
|                                                                                                        
|                                                                                                        
|                                                                                                        
|                                                                                                        
|                                                                                                        
|                                                                                                        
|                                                                                                        



|August 7, 2003 |  | /s/ Lawrence A. Heilbronner                     
|-------------- |  | ------------------------------------------------
|Date           |  | Lawrence A. Heilbronner, Principal Financial and
|               |  | Accounting Officer
NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.

United States Court of Appeals 

for the Federal Circuit ______________________

PARUS HOLDINGS, INC., 

Appellant

v.

GOOGLE LLC, 

Appellee

______________________

2024-1329

______________________

Appeal from the United States Patent and Trademark 

Office, Patent Trial and Appeal Board in No. IPR2022-

00805.

______________________

O R D E R

The parties having so agreed, it is ordered that:

(1) The proceeding is DISMISSED under Fed. R. App. 

P. 42 (b).

Case: 24-1329 Document: 16 Page: 1 Filed: 05/31/2024
2 PARUS HOLDINGS, INC. V. GOOGLE LLC

(2) Each side shall bear their own costs.

FOR THE COURT

May 31, 2024

Date

ISSUED AS A MANDATE: May 31, 2024

Case: 24-1329 Document: 16 Page: 2 Filed: 05/31/2024
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE BALANCE
SHEET AT SEPTEMBER 30, 1996, AND THE STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS FOR THE NINE
MONTHS ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 1996 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO
SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                       3,055,200
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   69,700
<ALLOWANCES>                                     4,600
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                       5,680,400
<DEPRECIATION>                               4,087,700
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               4,820,800
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          526,800
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 4,820,800
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             2,015,800
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,348,300
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                              (89,000)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                25,300
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,400
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                757,800
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            757,800
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   757,800
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    25.06
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
**Exhibit      32.2**

**CERTIFICATION      OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER**

**OF      BNL FINANCIAL CORPORATION**

**PURSUANT      TO 18 U.S.C. § 1350**

|   | 1. | The                Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13 (a) or                15 (d) of                the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and |
|--------|----|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | 2. | The                information contained in this Report fairly presents, in all material                respects the financial condition and results of operations of the                Company. |
|--------|----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
32.611 Contract clause.

(a) The contracting officer shall insert the clause at 52.232-17, Interest, in solicitations and contracts

unless it is contemplated that the contract will be in one or more of the following categories:

(1) Contracts at or below the simplified acquisition threshold.

(2) Contracts with Government agencies.

(3) Contracts with a State or local government or instrumentality.

(4) Contracts with a foreign government or instrumentality.

(5) Contracts without any provision for profit or fee with a nonprofit organization.

(6) Contracts described in subpart 5.5, Paid Advertisements.

(7) Any other exceptions authorized under agency procedures.

(b) The contracting officer may insert the FAR clause at 52.232-17, Interest, in solicitations and

contracts when it is contemplated that the contract will be in any of the categories specified in

32.611(a).

Parent topic: Subpart 32.6 - Contract Debts
Description of Executive Officer Cash Compensation for 2009



 Exhibit 10.1 
 ACE LIMITED 
 DESCRIPTION OF EXECUTIVE OFFICER CASH COMPENSATION FOR 2009 
 Set forth below are the 2009 annual base salaries of the Chief Executive Officer, the Chief Financial Officer and each of the three other most highly compensated
executive officers in 2008 who were executive officers as of December 31, 2008. 
 Evan G. Greenberg, President and Chief Executive Officer

 2009 salary 
 $1,200,000 
 Philip V. Bancroft, Chief Financial Officer 
 2009 salary

 $670,000 
 Robert Cusumano, General Counsel and
Secretary 
 2009 salary 
 $515,000 
 Brian E. Dowd, Chief Executive Officer Insurance-North American 
 2009 salary 
 $700,000 
 John Keogh, Chief
Executive Officer ACE Overseas General 
 2009 salary 
 $675,000 
 In addition to the above, these officers receive bonuses, perquisites and other personal benefits as described in our proxy statement
for our 2009 annual meeting.
Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly, Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanag h
Elizabeth A. Weave r

Maura D. Corriga n Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markma n Diane M. Hathaway,
J ustices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

_______________________________________ __ Clerk September 11, 2009

0831 

# Order

September 11, 2009

138930-1

BAGLEY ACQUISITION CORPORATION, Plaintiff-Appellant, SC: 138930 v COA: 279681 Wayne CC: 05-523726-CZ HOMRICH WRECKING, INC., d/b/a HOMRICH, INC., Defendant-Appellee, and

AUTO CLUB GROUP, CITY OF DETROIT, DETROIT ECONOM IC GROWTH CORPORATION, and STATE OF MICHIGAN, Defendants.

________________ _______________ __________/

BAGLEY ACQUISITION CORPORATION, Plaintiff-Appellant, SC: 138931 v COA: 281037 Wayne CC: 05-523726-CZ HOMRICH WRECKING, INC., d/b/a HOMRICH, INC., Defendant-Appellee, and

AUTO CLUB GROUP, CITY OF DETROIT, DETROIT ECONOM IC GROWTH CORPORATION, and STATE OF MICHIGAN, Defendants.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application fo r leave to appeal th e February 19, 2009 judgment of the Court of Appeals is consid ered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
#### § 56.47 Fees for appeal grading or review of a grader's decision.

The costs of an appeal grading or review of a grader's decision shall be borne by the appellant on an unscheduled basis at rates set forth in § 56.46, plus any travel and additional expenses. If the appeal grading or review of a grader's decision discloses that a material error was made in the original determination, no fee or expenses will be charged.

[84 FR 49642, Sept. 23, 2019]
#### § 501.3 Preservation of property.

It is unlawful to willfully destroy, damage, or remove property or any part thereof. Hunting, fishing, motorcycling, using snowmobiles, and other disturbances or encroachment activities are prohibited except for official purposes.