alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 46.14 General. ( a ) Every commission merchant, dealer, and broker shall prepare and preserve for a period of two years from the closing date of the transaction the accounts, records, and memoranda required by the Act, which shall fully and correctly disclose all transactions involved in his business. Licensees shall keep records which are adapted to the particular business that the licensee is conducting and in each case such records shall fully disclose all transactions in the business in sufficient detail as to be readily understood and audited. It is impracticable to specify in detail every class of records which may be found essential since many different types of business are conducted in the produce industry and many different types of contracts are made covering a wide range of services by agents and others. The responsibility is placed on every licensee to maintain records which will disclose all essential facts regarding the transactions in his business.
( b ) Every commission merchant, dealer, and broker shall prepare and preserve records and memoranda required by the Act which shall fully and correctly disclose the true ownership and management of such business during the preceding four years. Such records shall include the number and location of all branches or additional business facilities operated by or for the commission merchant, dealer or broker. In the case of a corporation, such records shall include the corporate charter, record of stock subscription and stock issued, the amounts paid in for stock and minutes of stockholders' and directors' meetings showing the election of directors and officers, resignations and other pertinent corporate actions. In the case of a partnership, the records shall contain a copy of the partnership agreement showing the type of partnership, the full names and addresses of all partners including general, special or limited partners, the partnership interest of each individual and any other pertinent records of the partnership.
[28 FR 7067, July 11, 1963; 28 FR 7287, July 17, 1963, as amended at 44 FR 50576, Aug. 29, 1979]
OAO 247 (02/08) Order Regarding Motion for Sentence Reduction

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

for the

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

United States of America )

)

)

)

)

)

v.

Gerald Fulton Case No: 5:98cr36-002

USM No: 04437-017

Date of Previous Judgment: March 19, 1999 Christopher N. Patterson

(Use Date of Last Amended Judgment if Applicable) Defendant’s Attorney

Order Regarding Motion for Sentence Reduction Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2)

Upon motion of 9 the defendant 9 the Director of the Bureau of Prisons : the court under 18 U.S.C.

§ 3582(c)(2) for a reduction in the term of imprisonment imposed based on a guideline sentencing range that has

subsequently been lowered and made retroactive by the United States Sentencing Commission pursuant to 28 U.S.C.

§ 994(u), and having considered such motion,

IT IS ORDERED that the motion is:

9 DENIED. : GRANTED and the defendant’s previously imposed sentence of imprisonment (as reflected in 

the last judgment issued) of 211 months is reduced to 169 .

I. COURT DETERMINATION OF GUIDELINE RANGE (Prior to Any Departures)

Previous Offense Level: 36 Amended Offense Level: 34

Criminal History Category: I Criminal History Category: I

Previous Guideline Range: 188 to 235 months Amended Guideline Range: 151 to 188 months

II. SENTENCE RELATIVE TO AMENDED GUIDELINE RANGE

: The reduced sentence is within the amended guideline range.

9 The previous term of imprisonment imposed was less than the guideline range applicable to the defendant at the time

of sentencing as a result of a departure or Rule 35 reduction, and the reduced sentence is comparably less than the

amended guideline range.

9 Other (explain):

III. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS

As with the original sentence, the amended sentence is at the mid-point of the guideline range.

Except as provided above, all provisions of the judgment dated March 19, 1999 shall remain in effect.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Order Date: March 24, 2008 s/ Stephan P. Mickle

Judge’s signature

Effective Date: Stephan P. Mickle, United States District Judge

(if different from order date) Printed name and title

Case 5:98-cr-00036-RS Document 377 Filed 03/24/08 Page 1 of 1
#### § 502.11 Pets.

Pets, except assistance trained animals, brought upon BARC property must be kept on a leash and have proper vaccinations. Pets that are the property of employees residing on BARC must be up to date on their vaccinations, in accordance with State or local laws, and be kept on a leash or similarly restrained. The abandonment of unwanted animals on BARC grounds is prohibited.

[61 FR 51212, Oct. 1, 1996]
#### Margaret Marino et al., Respondents, v. Vincent Dattalo, Appellant.

In a negligence action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Richmond County, dated August 5, 1968, which granted plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment. Order reversed, on the law, without costs, and motion denied. In our opinion, there are triable issues of fact which preclude the granting of summary judg*567ment. Brennan, Acting P. J., Benjamin, Munder, Martuscello and Kleinfeld, JJ., concur.
#### § 760.501 Administration.

The program will be administered as specified in § 760.102 and in this subpart.
Executive Cash Bonus Plan



 Exhibit 10.28 
 DIVX, INC. 
 SUMMARY OF 
 2009 EXECUTIVE CASH BONUS PLAN 
 General 
  

	 	•	 	 Each of: (i) the Chief Executive Officer; (ii) the Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer; (iii) the Executive Vice President, Business
and Legal Affairs and (iv) the Executive Vice President, Sales and Marketing (the “Executives”) of DivX, Inc. (the “Company”) is included in the Company’s 2009 Executive Cash Bonus Plan (the
“Plan”). 


  

	 	•	 	 The Plan provides for the payment of cash bonuses to the Executives based upon the achievement by the Company of specific 2009 quarterly and annual revenue and
earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization (“EBITDA”) milestones and achievement by the Company of Key Area Results (“KRA”) milestones. Revenue and EBITDA milestones are classified
under the Plan as “Bronze 1,” “Bronze 2,” “Silver 1,” “Silver 2,” “Gold 1,” “Gold 2,” “Platinum 1” “Platinum 2” and “Platinum 3.” 



 

	 	•	 	 Amounts received by Executives under the Plan are separate from any equity-based awards that the Board of Directors (the “Board”) may
provide to such Executives. 


  

	 	•	 	 The Board may change or modify the Plan at any time. 


 Revenue and EBITDA Milestones 
  

	 	•	 	 For each quarter, the maximum bonus payable for achievement of a revenue milestone that each of the Executives is eligible to receive is equal to 20% of his
quarterly base salary. 


  

	 	•	 	 For each quarter, the maximum bonus payable for achievement of an EBITDA milestone that each of the Executives is eligible to receive is equal to 100% of his
quarterly base salary. 


  

	 	•	 	 At the end of 2009, the annual revenue and EBITDA results will be compared to the amounts paid as quarterly bonuses. Any discrepancy between amounts paid as
quarterly bonuses and the total amounts due on an annual basis will be paid as an adjustment to the fourth quarter bonus payment. 


  

	 	•	 	 Revenue and EBITDA milestone payments will be paid in arrears for the prior performance period (whether annually or quarterly) subsequent to the approval of
financial results by the Audit Committee of the Board. 


 KRA Milestones 
  

	 	•	 	 The achievement of KRA milestones will be assessed on a discretionary basis by the Compensation Committee of the Board. 


  

	 	•	 	 Achievement of each KRA milestone will result in a cash payment of up to 20% of annual base salary to each of the Executives, for a maximum possible bonus payment
for achievement of all of the KRA milestones equal to 80% of annual base salary. 


  

	 	•	 	 The KRA milestones are related to the Company’s progress with licensing and integration in certain hardware sectors and the Company’s success in
developing and creating demand for new technologies during 2009.
Case 4:20-cv-00387-MW-HTC Document 13 Filed 11/16/20 Page 1 of 29
Case 4:20-cv-00387-MW-HTC Document 13 Filed 11/16/20 Page 2 of 29
Case 4:20-cv-00387-MW-HTC Document 13 Filed 11/16/20 Page 3 of 29
Case 4:20-cv-00387-MW-HTC Document 13 Filed 11/16/20 Page 4 of 29
Case 4:20-cv-00387-MW-HTC Document 13 Filed 11/16/20 Page 5 of 29
Case 4:20-cv-00387-MW-HTC Document 13 Filed 11/16/20 Page 6 of 29
Case 4:20-cv-00387-MW-HTC Document 13 Filed 11/16/20 Page 7 of 29
Case 4:20-cv-00387-MW-HTC Document 13 Filed 11/16/20 Page 8 of 29
Case 4:20-cv-00387-MW-HTC Document 13 Filed 11/16/20 Page 9 of 29
Case 4:20-cv-00387-MW-HTC Document 13 Filed 11/16/20 Page 10 of 29
Case 4:20-cv-00387-MW-HTC Document 13 Filed 11/16/20 Page 11 of 29
Case 4:20-cv-00387-MW-HTC Document 13 Filed 11/16/20 Page 12 of 29
Case 4:20-cv-00387-MW-HTC Document 13 Filed 11/16/20 Page 13 of 29
Case 4:20-cv-00387-MW-HTC Document 13 Filed 11/16/20 Page 14 of 29
Case 4:20-cv-00387-MW-HTC Document 13 Filed 11/16/20 Page 15 of 29
Case 4:20-cv-00387-MW-HTC Document 13 Filed 11/16/20 Page 16 of 29
Case 4:20-cv-00387-MW-HTC Document 13 Filed 11/16/20 Page 17 of 29
Case 4:20-cv-00387-MW-HTC Document 13 Filed 11/16/20 Page 18 of 29
Case 4:20-cv-00387-MW-HTC Document 13 Filed 11/16/20 Page 19 of 29
Case 4:20-cv-00387-MW-HTC Document 13 Filed 11/16/20 Page 20 of 29
Case 4:20-cv-00387-MW-HTC Document 13 Filed 11/16/20 Page 21 of 29
Case 4:20-cv-00387-MW-HTC Document 13 Filed 11/16/20 Page 22 of 29
Case 4:20-cv-00387-MW-HTC Document 13 Filed 11/16/20 Page 23 of 29
Case 4:20-cv-00387-MW-HTC Document 13 Filed 11/16/20 Page 24 of 29
Case 4:20-cv-00387-MW-HTC Document 13 Filed 11/16/20 Page 25 of 29
Case 4:20-cv-00387-MW-HTC Document 13 Filed 11/16/20 Page 26 of 29
Case 4:20-cv-00387-MW-HTC Document 13 Filed 11/16/20 Page 27 of 29
Case 4:20-cv-00387-MW-HTC Document 13 Filed 11/16/20 Page 28 of 29
Case 4:20-cv-00387-MW-HTC Document 13 Filed 11/16/20 Page 29 of 29
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Bridget M. McCormack, Chief Justice

Brian K. Zahra

David F. Viviano,

Richard H. Bernstein

Elizabeth T. Clement

Megan K. Cavanagh

Elizabeth M. Welch, Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

 January 12, 2021

Order 

Clerk

January 12, 2021

161974(80)

DOUGLAS S. TOUMA, Personal Representative 

of the ESTATE OF GARYLYN S. LANGELL, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

SC: 161974 

v COA: 347274

St. Clair CC: 15-002567-NH 

MCLAREN PORT HURON, formerly known as 

PORT HURON HOSPITAL,

Defendant-Appellee, 

and

PHYSICIAN HEALTHCARE NETWORK, P.C., 

and MICHAEL PAUL, M.D., 

Defendants-Appellants,

and 

PARTRIDGE FAMILY PHYSICIANS, P.C., and 

TIMOTHY HORRIGAN, M.D., 

Defendants.

__________________________________________/

On order of the Chief Justice, the joint motion of the Michigan State Medical 

Society, American Medical Association, and Regents of the University of Michigan to file 

a brief amicus curiae is GRANTED. The amicus brief submitted on January 5, 2021, is 

accepted for filing.
Exhibit 22. List of Subsidiaries of Networks North Inc. as at August 31, 1999

Name of Subsidiary (1)                           Jurisdiction of Incorporation
----------------------                           -----------------------------

B.C. Learning Connection Inc. (2).............................British Columbia
Magic Lantern Communications Ltd. (3)...................................Canada
NTN Interactive Network Inc.............................................Canada
3484751 Canada Inc......................................................Canada
1113659 Ontario Ltd. (4)...............................................Ontario
745695 Ontario Ltd. (5)................................................Ontario
Sonoptic Technologies Inc. (6)..........................................Canada
Interlynx Multimedia Inc. (7)..........................................Ontario

----------
(1)   Unless otherwise indicated, all named entities are wholly-owned
      subsidiaries of Networks North Inc.
(2)   Wholly-owned subsidiary of 745695 Ontario Ltd.
(3)   Wholly-owned subsidiary of NTN Interactive Network Inc.
(4)   Wholly-owned subsidiary of Magic Lantern Communications Ltd.
(5)   Wholly-owned subsidiary of Magic Lantern Communications Ltd.
(6)   Majority owned (75%) subsidiary of Magic Lantern Communications Ltd.
(7)   Wholly-owned subsidiary of NTN Interactive Network Inc.


                                      110
Editorial Note on Part 4290
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 4290 appear at 85 FR 16522, Mar. 24, 2020.

§ 4290.230 Private Capital for RBICs. ( a ) *General.* Private Capital means the contributed capital of a RBIC, plus unfunded binding commitments by Institutional Investors (including commitments evidenced by a promissory note) to contribute capital to a RBIC.
( b ) *Contributed capital.* For purposes of this section, contributed capital means the paid-in capital and paid-in surplus of a Corporate RBIC, the members' contributed capital of a LLC RBIC, or the partners' contributed capital of a Partnership RBIC, in each case subject to the limitations in paragraph (c) of this section.
( c ) *Exclusions from Private Capital.* Private Capital does not include: ( 1 ) Funds borrowed by an Applicant or a RBIC from any source.
( 2 ) Funds obtained through the issuance of Leverage.
( 3 ) Funds obtained directly or indirectly from the Federal government or any State (including by a political subdivision, agency or instrumentality of the Federal government or a State), except that the following categories of such funds are not excluded from Private Capital— ( i ) Funds obtained directly or indirectly from the business revenues (excluding any governmental appropriation) of any federally-chartered or government-sponsored enterprise established prior to May 13, 2002;
( ii ) Funds invested by an employee welfare benefit plan or pension plan; and
( iii ) Qualified Non-private Funds in an amount not to exceed 33 percent of the total Private Capital of any Applicant or RBIC, *provided, however,* that in no event may any investor or investors of Qualified Non-private Funds have the power to Control, directly or indirectly, the management, board of directors, general partners, or members of the RBIC.
( 4 ) Any portion of an unfunded commitment from an Institutional Investor with a net worth of less than $10 million that exceeds 10 percent of such Institutional Investor's net worth.
( 5 ) An unfunded commitment from an investor if the Agency determines that the collectability of the commitment is questionable.
( d ) *Non-cash capital contributions.* Capital contributions in a form other than cash are subject to the limitations in § 4290.240 of this part.
( e ) *Contributions with borrowed funds.* You may not accept any capital contribution made with funds borrowed by a Person seeking to own an equity interest (whether direct or indirect, beneficial or of record) of at least 10 percent of your Private Capital. This exclusion does not apply if: ( 1 ) Such Person's net worth is at least twice the amount borrowed; or
( 2 ) The Agency gives its prior written approval of the capital contribution.
[69 FR 32204, June 8, 2004, as amended at 85 FR 16523, Mar. 24, 2020]
July 1, 2015

Mr. Joshua Williams

Fourpoint Media LLC

1945 SE Water Avenue

Portland, OR 97214

Dear Mr. Williams:

This letter is to inform you that we are unable to process your request for an exemption from 

Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR). It explains why we can not process your 

request and what you should do in the next 30 days.

Why We Can Not Process Your Request

We entered your [date], exemption request on behalf of Fourpoint Media into the public 

docket (No. FAA-2015-1213), but we are unable to process your request any further. The 

information you sent does not comply with the requirements of § 11.81 (copy enclosed). For 

us to consider the request any further, you must send us all of the following:.

 The reasons why granting the request would be in the public interest; that is, how it would 

benefit the public as a whole.

 Any additional information, views, or arguments available to support your request.

What You Should Do

If you want us to process your request any further, you must send the information described 

earlier to reach us within 30 days. Please note that § 11.63(d) requires you to send your 

petition for exemption at least 120 days before the proposed effective date of the exemption.
2

If We Do Not Hear From You

If we do not hear from you within 30 days, we will close the docket without notifying you 

further. If you have any questions or require additional time, you may call (202) 267-9677.

Sincerely,

Brittany Newton

Program Analyst, Airmen and 

 Airspace Rules Division

Enclosure
52.247-8 Estimated Weights or Quantities

Not Guaranteed.

As prescribed in 47.207-3(e)(2), insert the following clause in solicitations and contracts for

transportation or for transportation-related services when weights or quantities are estimates:

Estimated Weights or Quantities Not Guaranteed (Apr 1984)

The estimated weights or quantities are not a guarantee of actual weights or quantities, as the

Government does not guarantee any particular volume of traffic described in this contract. However,

to the extent services are required as described in this contract and in accordance with the terms of

this contract, orders for these services will be placed with the Contractor.

(End of clause)

Parent topic: 52.247 [Reserved]
(April 26, 1967)

#### The People of the State of New York ex rel. Clarence Martinez, Appellant, v. Ross E. Herold, as Superintendent of Dannemora State Hospital, Respondent.

Motion to dismiss appeal as academic granted, appellant having been discharged from Dannemora State Hospital. (See *People ex rel. Pylypcuk*v. *Herold,*25 A D 2d 690.) Gibson, P. J., Herlihy, Reynolds, Staley, Jr., and Gabrielli, JJ., concur.
#### Frank Cunha, Appellant, v Blanche S. Shapiro, Individually and as Executrix of Jesse Shapiro, Deceased, et al., Respondents.

Submitted June 4, 2007;

decided September 4, 2007

Reported below, 42 AD3d 95.

Motion for leave to appeal dismissed upon the ground that the order sought to be appealed from does not finally determine the action within the meaning of the Constitution.
EXHIBIT 35.1
                  SERVICER COMPLIANCE STATEMENT (ITEM 1123)
                        RESIDENTIAL FUNDING COMPANY, LLC
             RALI SERIES 2006-QS11 TRUST (THE "ISSUING ENTITY")

The undersigned,  a duly authorized officer of Residential Funding Company, LLC,
as servicer  (the  "Servicer")  pursuant to the Series  Supplement,  dated as of
August 1, 2006, and the Standard Terms of Pooling and Servicing Agreement, dated
as of March 1, 2006 (as  amended  from  time to time,  the  "Agreement"),  among
Residential  Accredit Loans, Inc., as company,  Residential Funding Company, LLC
(formerly  Residential Funding  Corporation),  as master servicer,  and Deutsche
Bank Trust Company Americas, as trustee, does hereby certify that:

1.   A review of the  Servicer's  activities  during the  period  covered by the
     Issuing  Entity's  report  on Form 10-K and of the  Servicer's  performance
     under the Agreement has been made under my supervision.

2.   To the  best of my  knowledge,  based  on such  review,  the  Servicer  has
     fulfilled  all of its  obligations  under  the  Agreement  in all  material
     respects throughout such period.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has duly executed this Certificate this 26th
day of March 2007.

By:      /s/ Anthony N. Renzi
      Name:  Anthony N. Renzi
      Title:    Managing Director
```

[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 41 (Friday, March 1, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Page 13931]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-04814]

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

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice 8209]

Designation of Commander Nazir Group, Also Known as Mullah Nazir 
Group, as a Specially Designated Global Terrorist Pursuant to Section 
1(b) of Executive Order 13224, as Amended

    Acting under the authority of and in accordance with section 1(b) 
of Executive Order 13224 of September 23, 2001, as amended by Executive 
Order 13268 of July 2, 2002, and Executive Order 13284 of January 23, 
2003, I hereby determine that the entity known as Commander Nazir 
Group, also known as Mullah Nazir Group, committed, or poses a 
significant risk of committing, acts of terrorism that threaten the 
security of U.S. nationals or the national security, foreign policy, or 
economy of the United States.
    Consistent with the determination in section 10 of Executive Order 
13224 that ``prior notice to persons determined to be subject to the 
Order who might have a constitutional presence in the United States 
would render ineffectual the blocking and other measures authorized in 
the Order because of the ability to transfer funds instantaneously,'' I 
determine that no prior notice needs to be provided to any person 
subject to this determination who might have a constitutional presence 
in the United States, because to do so would render ineffectual the 
measures authorized in the Order.
    This notice shall be published in the Federal Register.

    Dated: February 20, 2013.
John F. Kerry,
Secretary of State.
[FR Doc. 2013-04814 Filed 2-28-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-10-P
```
Case 2:06-cr-00169-WKW-SRW Document 214 Filed 04/25/2007 Page 1 of 2
Case 2:06-cr-00169-WKW-SRW Document 214 Filed 04/25/2007 Page 2 of 2
```

[107th Congress Public Law 309]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office]

<DOC>
[DOCID: f:publ309.107]

[[Page 116 STAT. 2449]]

Public Law 107-309
107th Congress

                                 An Act

 
 To amend title 36, United States Code, to clarify the requirements for 
   eligibility in the American Legion. <<NOTE: Dec. 2, 2002 -  [H.R. 
                                3988]>> 

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

SECTION 1. CLARIFICATION OF REQUIREMENTS FOR ELIGIBILITY IN THE AMERICAN 
            LEGION.

    Section 21703(2) of title 36, United States Code, is amended by 
inserting ``during or'' after ``continues to serve honorably''.

    Approved December 2, 2002.

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY--H.R. 3988:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

HOUSE REPORTS: No. 107-571 (Comm. on the Judiciary).
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 148 (2002):
            July 15, considered and passed House.
            Nov. 14, considered and passed Senate.

                                  <all>
```
#### § 54.8 When request for service deemed made.

A request for service is considered made when received by the designated office as identified on the Application for Service form. Records showing the date and time of the request shall be made and maintained in the designated office.

[84 FR 48556, Sept. 16, 2019]