alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Marcia E. Rosenberg, Respondent-Appellant, v. Frederick H. Rosenberg, Appellant-Respondent.

Judgment of separation entered March 3, 1969, unanimously modified on .the law and the facts, in the following respects: (a) That portion of the third decretal paragraph awarding sole and exclusive possession of the marital home to plaintiff is deleted. The parties are tenants by the entirety. The property is awaiting sale or other disposition by the parties. Neither is presently occupying the premises. Both have voluntarily vacated. The provision is an unnecessary protection under the circumstances and could prove to be an encumbrance to the envisaged sale, which would benefit both parties financially; (b) the amount awarded in alimony to the plaintiff for her exclusive support is reduced to the sum of $300 per week as more in accord with the parties’ way of life, the length of the marriage, and the defendant’s ability to pay; (e) the amount awarded the attorneys for the plaintiff is reduced to the sum of $2,000, in view of the payments already received and the nature and extent of the services rendered; and otherwise affirmed, without costs or disbursements. The record reflects an awareness on the part of the defendant of his legal and moral obligations to his sons. Concur — Capozzoli, J. P., Tilzer, McGivern, Nunez and McNally, JJ.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PANAMA CITY DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

v. 5:98CR29-SPM

JAMES FRANKLIN SANGSTER

 /

 

ORDER REMITTING FINE

IN CONSIDERATION of the United States' Petition to Remit Fine and this Court

having been fully advised in the premises, 

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the unpaid portion of the fine imposed upon

the defendant in the Southern District of Georgia, entered March 6, 1995, and which

was subsequently transferred to the Northern District of Florida, is hereby remitted,

pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3573.

DONE AND ORDERED this 18th day of August, 2005.

 s/ Stephan P. Mickle 

Stephan P. Mickle

United States District Judge

Case 5:98-cr-00029-SPM Document 5 Filed 08/18/05 Page 1 of 1
§ 7.16 Report of election. ( a ) The county committee must file an election report with the Secretary through the Deputy Administrator's office not later than 20 days after the date an election is held.
( b ) The election report must include: ( 1 ) The number of eligible voters in the local administrative area;
( 2 ) The number of ballots cast in the election by eligible voters;
( 3 ) The percentage of eligible voters that cast ballots;
( 4 ) The number of ballots disqualified in the election;
( 5 ) The percentage of ballots disqualified;
( 6 ) The number of nominees for each seat up for election;
( 7 ) The race, ethnicity, and gender of each nominee, as provided by the voluntary self identification of each nominee; and
( 8 ) The final election results, including the number of ballots received by each nominee.
#### Emma Lewandowski et al., Appellants, v. Charles Ambrosetti et al., Respondents.

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated April 29, 1968, which granted defendants’ motion to change the place of trial of the action from the County of Queens to the County of Orange, upon the ground that the convenience of material witnesses and the ends of justice will he promoted thereby. Order reversed, on the law and the facts, with $10 costs and disbursements, and motion denied. In our opinion, the moving papers failed to set forth the factual showing required to invoke the court’s discretion (cf. Supplementary Practice Commentary on CPLR 510 in McKinney’s Cons. Laws of N. Y., Book 7B, CPLR 501-2200). Upon the record presented, (a) defendants failed to justify the grounds of convenience of witnesses and ends of justice because their moving papers did not set forth, as required, an affidavit of merits and a showing of what was expected to be proved by the witnesses named (the police officer and St. Luke’s Hospital) and the necessity and materiality of the testimony to be given by them; (b) the preponderance and character of plaintiffs’ material witnesses (the two Queens physicians and plaintiff Anthony’s Brooklyn employer) indicate that the convenience of witnesses and the ends of justice would best be served by keeping the trial in Queens County where these witnesses could more easily attend trial than in Orange County; and (e) defendants failed to establish, as required (CPLR 510, subd. 3), that the convenience of witnesses and the ends of justice woud be served by a change of venue. Christ, Acting P. J., Brennan, Rabin, Hopkins and Benjamin, JJ., concur.
#### § 7.22 State committee duties.

The State committee, subject to the general direction and supervision of the Deputy Administrator, will be generally responsible for carrying out all Farm Programs in the State or any other functions assigned by the Secretary or a designee of the Secretary.
#### The People of the State of New York ex rel. Henry Hawkins, Petitioner, v. Ross E. Herold, as Director of Dannemora State Hospital, et al., Respondents.

Application, pursuant to CPLR 7002 (subd. [b], par. 2), for a writ of habeas corpus, denied for failure of compliance with article 70 of the CPLR, and more particularly with the provisions of CPLR 7002 (subd. [c], pars. 1, 6) thereof, and as otherwise insufficient on its face. Herlihy, P. J., Staley, Jr., Greenblott, Cooke and Sweeney, JJ., concur.
§ 56.24 Rejection of application. ( a ) An application for grading service may be rejected by the Administrator: ( 1 ) Whenever the applicant fails to meet the requirements of the regulations prescribing the conditions under which the service is made available;
( 2 ) Whenever the product is owned by or located on the premises of a person currently denied the benefits of the Act;
( 3 ) Where any individual holding office or a responsible position with or having a substantial financial interest or share in the applicant is currently denied the benefits of the Act or was responsible in whole or in part for the current denial of the benefits of the Act to any person;
( 4 ) Where the Administrator determines that the application is an attempt on the part of a person currently denied the benefits of the Act to obtain grading services;
( 5 ) Whenever the applicant, after an initial survey has been made in accordance with the regulations, fails to bring the grading facilities and equipment into compliance with the regulations within a reasonable period of time;
( 6 ) Notwithstanding any prior approval whenever, before inauguration of service, the applicant fails to fulfill commitments concerning the inauguration of the service;
( 7 ) When it appears that to perform the services specified in this part would not be to the best interests of the public welfare or of the Government; or
( 8 ) When it appears to the Administrator that prior commitments of the Department necessitate rejection of the application.
( b ) Each such applicant shall be promptly notified by registered mail of the reasons for the rejection. A written petition for reconsideration of such rejection may be filed by the applicant with the Administrator if postmarked or delivered within 10 days after the receipt of notice of the rejection. Such petition shall state specifically the errors alleged to have been made by the Administrator in rejecting the application. Within 20 days following the receipt of such a petition for reconsideration, the Administrator shall approve the application or notify the applicant by registered mail of the reasons for the rejection thereof.
[71 FR 42009, July 24, 2006]
Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

WILEY DERRELL REESE,

Plaintiff,

vs. Case No. 3:04cv17/RV/EMT

KEVIN COXWELL,

DEVIN SHANE HUNNICUTT,

Defendants.

____________________________/

O R D E R

This cause comes on for consideration upon the magistrate judge’s report and

recommendation dated February 9, 2006. Plaintiff has been furnished a copy of the report and

recommendation and has been 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 all timely filed objections.

Having considered the report and recommendation, and all objections thereto timely filed,

I have determined that the report and recommendation should be adopted.

Accordingly, it is now ORDERED as follows:

1. The magistrate judge’s report and recommendation is adopted and incorporated by

reference in this order.

2. Plaintiff’s claims under the Eighth Amendment are DISMISSED.

3. Defendants’ motion for summary judgment (Doc. 32) is GRANTED IN PART AND

DENIED IN PART as follows:

a. Defendants’ motion for summary judgment is granted as to Plaintiff’s Fourth

Amendment claim of unlawful entry.

b. Defendants’ motion for summary judgment is denied as to Plaintiff’s Fourth

Amendment claims of excessive force against Defendants.

Case 3:04-cv-00017-RV-EMT Document 46 Filed 03/13/06 Page 1 of 2
Page 2 of 2

Case No. 3:04cv17/RV/EMT

4. The clerk is directed to return this file to the assigned Magistrate Judge for further

proceedings.

DONE AND ORDERED this 13th day of March, 2006.

__/s/RogerVinson____________________________

ROGER VINSON

SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:04-cv-00017-RV-EMT Document 46 Filed 03/13/06 Page 2 of 2
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2886 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

109th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 2886

To extend temporarily the suspension of duty on Methidathion Technical.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              May 19, 2006

   Mr. Burr introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
                  referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To extend temporarily the suspension of duty on Methidathion Technical.

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

SECTION 1. METHIDATHION TECHNICAL.

    (a) In General.--Heading 9902.02.02 of the Harmonized Tariff 
Schedule of the United States (relating to Methidathion Technical) is 
amended by striking ``12/31/2006'' and inserting ``12/31/2009''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or 
after the 15th day after the date of enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
EXHIBIT 32.1

    CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 1350 OF CHAPTER 63 OF TITLE 18 OF THE
                              UNITED STATES CODE


      I, Julie M. DeMatteo, the President and Chief Executive Officer of UBS
Managed Fund Services, Inc., the Sponsor of UBS Managed Futures LLC (Aspect
Series) (the "Series"), certify that (i) the Annual Report of the Series on
Form 10-K for the period ending December 31, 2006 fully complies with the
requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
and (ii) the information contained in such Annual Report fairly presents, in
all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
the Series.


Date:  March 27, 2007
       --------------
                                    /s/ Julie M. DeMatteo
                                        -----------------
                                        Julie M. DeMatteo
                                        President and Chief Executive Officer
#### § 51.1320 Fairly well formed.

*Fairly well formed* means that the pear may be slightly abnormal in shape but not to an extent which detracts materially from the appearance of the fruit. Winter Nelis pears with characteristic slight sutures or with slight flattening on one side and/or other slight irregularities which do not materially detract from the general appearance of the pear shall be considered fairly well formed.
Case 3:06-cv-00638-SRW Document 22 Filed 02/22/2007 Page 1 of 1
§ 652.36 Appeal of decertification decisions. ( a ) Within 20 calendar days from the date of receipt of the Deputy Chief for Program's decertification determination, the technical service provider may appeal in writing to the NRCS Chief. The written appeal must state the reasons for appeal and any arguments in support of those reasons. If the technical service provider fails to appeal, the decision of the Deputy Chief for Programs is final.
( b ) Final decision. Within 30 calendar days of receipt of the technical service provider's written appeal, the Chief or his designee, will make a final determination, in writing, based upon the administrative record and any additional information submitted to the Chief by the technical service provider. The decision of the Chief, or his designee, is final and not subject to further administrative review. The Chief's determination will include the reasons for decertification, the period of decertification, and the scope of decertification.
[75 FR 6845, Feb. 12, 2010, as amended at 79 FR 44640, Aug. 1, 2014]
Page 1 of 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

vs. Case No: 3:03cr147/RV

3:07cv340/RV/MD

ROBERT M. MURPHY

_____________________________________________________________________

O R D E R

This cause comes on for consideration upon the magistrate judge's report and

recommendation dated August 21, 2007. The defendant previously has been

furnished a copy of the report and recommendation and has been afforded an

opportunity to file objections pursuant to Title 28, United States Code, Section

636(b)(1), and I have made a de novo determination of those portions to which an

objection has been made.

Having considered the report and recommendation and all objections thereto

timely filed by the parties, I have determined that the report and recommendation

should be adopted.

Accordingly, it is now ORDERED as follows:

1. The magistrate judge's report and recommendation is adopted and

incorporated by reference in this order.

2. The motion to vacate, set aside or correct sentence (doc. 16) is

summarily DENIED as untimely.

DONE AND ORDERED this 12th day of September, 2007.

/s/ Roger Vinson 

ROGER VINSON

SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:03-cr-00147-RV-MD Document 20 Filed 09/12/07 Page 1 of 1
Case 5:99-cv-00303-MP Document 77 Filed 11/04/02 Page 1 of 2
Case 5:99-cv-00303-MP Document 77 Filed 11/04/02 Page 2 of 2
§ 760.701 Applicability. ( a ) This subpart specifies the eligibility requirements and payment calculations for the Crop Assistance Program (CAP), which will be administered using funds authorized by Section 32 of the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1935 (7 U.S.C. 612c, as amended).
( b ) CAP, within the limits of the funds made available by the Secretary for this program, is intended to help reestablish purchasing power to producers of long grain rice, medium or short grain rice, upland cotton, soybeans, and sweet potatoes who suffered a five percent or greater loss in the 2009 crop year due to disaster.
( c ) Only producers who have a share in a farm located in a disaster county (a county that is the primary county that is the subject of a Secretarial disaster designation for 2009 crop year due to excessive moisture and related conditions, as determined by FSA) are eligible for CAP benefits.
§ 7.1 Administration. ( a ) The regulations in this part apply to the election and functions of the Farm Service Agency (FSA) county committees and the functions of FSA State committees (“county committees” and “State committees,” respectively). State and county committees will be under the general supervision of the FSA Administrator.
( b ) State and county committees, and representatives and employees of those committees, do not have authority to modify or waive any of the provisions of this part.
( c ) State committees will take any actions required by these regulations that have not been taken by a county committee. State committees will also: ( 1 ) Correct, or require a county committee to correct, any action taken by such county committee that is not in accordance with this part, or
( 2 ) Require a county committee to withhold taking any action that is not in accordance with this part.
( d ) No provision or delegation to a State or county committee will preclude the FSA Administrator, or designee, from determining any question arising under this part, or from reversing or modifying any determination made by a State or county committee.
( e ) These regulations will be administered in accordance with the Uniform Guidelines for Conducting FSA County Committee Elections.
( f ) Unless specifically provided in this part, the Deputy Administrator, Field Operations, FSA (Deputy Administrator), is authorized to issue the official instructions and procedures referred to in this part to implement the provisions of this part.
( g ) This part applies to the United States, its territories, and Puerto Rico.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

vs. 3:04cr1/LAC 

3:06cv245/LAC/MD

LA WANDA NALL,

Defendant.

_____________________________________________________________________

ORDER

This cause comes on for consideration upon the magistrate judge’s report and

recommendation filed August 18, 2009. The plaintiff has been furnished a copy of

the report and recommendation and has been afforded an opportunity to file

objections pursuant to Title 28, United States Code, Section 636(b)(1)(B). No

objections have been filed. 

Having considered the report and recommendation, I have determined that the

report and recommendation should be adopted. 

Accordingly, it is ORDERED:

1. The magistrate judge's report and recommendation is adopted and

incorporated by reference in this order.

2. Defendant’s motion to vacate, set aside, or correct sentence (doc. 145)

is DENIED.

DONE AND ORDERED this 23 day of September, 2009.

rd

s/L.A. Collier

LACEY A. COLLIER 

SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
225.7703-4 Solicitation provisions and

contract clauses.

(a) Use the provision at 252.225-7023, Preference for Products or Services from Afghanistan, in

solicitations, including solicitations using FAR part 12 procedures for the acquisition of commercial

products and commercial services, that provide a preference for products or services from

Afghanistan in accordance with 225.7703-1(a)(1). The contracting officer may modify the 50 percent

evaluation factor in accordance with contracting office procedures.

(b) Use the clause at 252.225-7024, Requirement for Products or Services from Afghanistan, in

solicitations, including solicitations using FAR part 12 procedures for the acquisition of commercial

products and commercial services, that include the provision at 252.225-7023, Preference for

Products or Services from Afghanistan, and in the resulting contract.

(c) Use the clause at 252.225-7026, Acquisition Restricted to Products or Services from Afghanistan,

in solicitations and contracts, including solicitations and contracts using FAR part 12 procedures for

the acquisition of commercial products and commercial services, that -

(1) Are restricted to the acquisition of products or services from Afghanistan in accordance with

225.7703-1(a)(2); or

(2) Will be directed to a particular source or sources from Afghanistan in accordance with

225.7703-1(a)(3).

(d) Use the clause at 252.225-7029, Acquisition of Uniform Components for Afghan Military or

Afghan National Police, in solicitations and contracts, including solicitations and contracts using

FAR part 12 procedures for the acquisition of commercial products and commercial services, for the

acquisition of any textile components that DoD intends to supply to the Afghan National Army or the

Afghan National Police for purposes of production of uniforms.

(e) When the Trade Agreements Act applies to the acquisition, use the appropriate clause and

provision as prescribed at 225.1101 (5) and (6).

(f) Do not use any of the following provisions or clauses in solicitations or contracts that include the

provision at 252.225-7023, the clause at 252.225-7024, or the clause at 252.225-7026:

(1) 252.225-7000, Buy American - Balance of Payments Program Certificate.

(2) 252.225-7001, Buy American and Balance of Payments Program.

(3) 252.225-7002, Qualifying Country Sources as Subcontractors.

(4) 252.225-7035, Buy American - Free Trade Agreements - Balance of Payments Program

Certificate.

(5) 252.225-7036, Buy American - Free Trade Agreements - Balance of Payments Program.

(6) 252.225-7044, Balance of Payments Program - Construction Material.

(7) 252.225-7045, Balance of Payments Program - Construction Material Under Trade Agreements.
(g) Do not use the following clause or provision in solicitations or contracts that include the clause at

252.225-7026:

(1) 252.225-7020, Trade Agreements Certificate.

(2) 252.225-7021, Trade Agreements.

Parent topic: 225.7703 Enhanced authority to acquire products or services from Afghanistan.
Case 3:06-cv-00631-MHT-VPM Document 3 Filed 07/19/2006 Page 1 of 2
Case 3:06-cv-00631-MHT-VPM Document 3 Filed 07/19/2006 Page 2 of 2
#### In the Matter of Dennis G. Maresca, Respondent, v. Motor Vehicle Accident Indemnification Corporation, Appellant

Appeal by Motor Vehicle Accident Indemnification Corporation [MVAIC] from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated October 16, 1968, which referred to a Special Referee, to hear and determine, petitioner’s motion for leave to renew his previously denied motion for leave to sue said MVAIC for injuries allegedly received by him when struck by a “ hit and run ” driver. Order reversed, on the law and the facts, without costs, and motion denied. On this record, we believe the motion should have been denied outright; and Special Term’s failure to so determine the motion was an improvident exercise of discretion. Brennan, Acting P. J., Hopkins, Benjamin, Munder and Kleinfeld, JJ., concur.
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 235 (Wednesday, December 8, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Page 76478]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-30816]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; Amended Notice of 
Meeting

    Notice is hereby given of a change in the meeting of the National 
Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Special Emphasis Panel, December 14, 
2010, 8 a.m. to December 14, 2010, 2 p.m., Doubletree Hotel Bethesda 
(Formerly Holiday Inn Select), 8120 Wisconsin Avenue, Bethesda, MD 
20814 which was published in the Federal Register on November 17, 2010, 
FR2010-28981.
    The meeting location changed from Doubletree Hotel Bethesda to 
Hyatt Regency Bethesda, 7400 Wisconsin Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20814. The 
meeting is closed to the public.

    Dated: December 2, 2010.
Jennifer S. Spaeth,
Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 2010-30816 Filed 12-7-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-P