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

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA 

GAINESVILLE DIVISION

TIMOTHY BAILEY,

Plaintiff,

v. Case No.: 1:21cv1-MW/GRJ

ROBERT WILKIE, SECRETARY

DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS

AFFAIRS,

Defendant.

__________________________________/

ORDER ADMITTING 

GEORGIA A. LAWRENCE PRO HAC VICE

This Court has considered, without hearing, the motion to admit Georgia A. 

Lawrence pro hac vice, ECF No. 26. The motion is GRANTED. Having fulfilled 

the requirements of the Local Rules for admission, Georgia A. Lawrence is 

admitted pro hac vice as counsel for Plaintiff. 

SO ORDERED on December 3, 2021.

s/Mark E. Walker 

Chief United States District Judge

Case 1:21-cv-00001-MW-GRJ Document 28 Filed 12/03/21 Page 1 of 1
Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PANAMA CITY DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Case No. 5:03cr18-RH

 vs. Case No. 5:04cv168-RH/WCS

CARLTON GWYN SEIGLER,

Defendant.

 /

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION ON § 2255 MOTION

Defendant Seigler, represented by counsel, filed a motion to vacate sentence

pursuant 28 U.S.C. § 2255. Doc. 23. The Government was directed to respond, doc.

24, and a response was filed. Doc. 25. Defendant was given time to file a response if

he wished to do so, and no response has been filed. 

Defendant asserts that his sentence is illegal and unconstitutional under Blakely

v. Washington, 542 U.S. , 124 S.Ct. 2531, 159 L.Ed.2d 403 (2004). See also United

States v. Booker, U.S. , 125 S.Ct. 738, 2005 WL 50108 (January 12, 2005),

Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000), Ring v.

Arizona, 536 U.S. 584, 122 S.Ct. 2428, 153 L.Ed.2d 556 (2002). 

Case 5:03-cr-00018-RH-WCS Document 26 Filed 03/08/05 Page 1 of 2
Page 2 of 2

Case Nos. 5:03cr18-RH and 5:04cv168-RH/WCS

In the context of an initial § 2255 motion, the Eleventh Circuit has recently

determined that Blakely and Booker do not apply retroactively on collateral review. 

Varela v. United States, F.3d , 2005 WL 367095 (11th Cir. February 17, 2005)

(finding "essentially dispositive" the opinion in Schriro v. Summerlin, 542 U.S. , 124

S.Ct. 2519, 159 L.Ed.2d 442 (2004), that Ring announced a new rule of procedure

which did not apply retroactively on collateral review) (other citations omitted); McCoy v.

United States, 266 F.3d 1245, 1256-58 (11th Cir. 2001) (Apprendi established a new

procedural rule which did not apply retroactively on collateral review). See also In re

Anderson, 396 F.3d 1336 (11th Cir. 2005) and In re Dean, 375 F.3d 1287 (11th Cir.

2004) (denying leave to file successive § 2255 motions raising Booker, and Blakely,

respectively, as they have not been made retroactive on collateral review by the

Supreme Court). 

It is therefore respectfully RECOMMENDED that Defendant's motion to vacate

sentence pursuant to § 2255 (doc. 23) be DENIED.

IN CHAMBERS at Tallahassee, Florida, on March 8, 2005.

 s/ William C. Sherrill, Jr. 

WILLIAM C. SHERRILL, JR.

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

NOTICE TO THE PARTIES

A party may file specific, written objections to the proposed findings and

recommendations within 15 days after being served with a copy of this report and

recommendation. A party may respond to another party's objections within 10 days after

being served with a copy thereof. Failure to file specific objections limits the scope of

review of proposed factual findings and recommendations.

Case 5:03-cr-00018-RH-WCS Document 26 Filed 03/08/05 Page 2 of 2
§ 632.50 Environmental evaluation. ( a ) Environmental evaluation is an integral part of planning used by NRCS in developing each reclamation plan under this program. Planning includes site inventory and analysis, evaluation of reasonable alternatives, and identification of significant environmental impacts. Major points in planning when NRCS or the land user can make decisions concerning further action are: ( 1 ) After an evaluation of the application for program assistance to verify eligibility, land user objectives, and priorities for funding.
( 2 ) After a site-specific inventory and analysis to evaluate feasible treatment alternatives, costs, and environmental impacts.
( 3 ) After development of an acceptable reclamation plan as a basis for contract.
( 4 ) Before the signing of a mutually acceptable contract for financial cost-share assistance.
( b ) The scope and complexity of the assessment is to be consistent with the scope and complexity of the proposed reclamation.
( c ) An interdisciplinary team, consisting of NRCS and/or other cooperating agency personnel as needed, is used in making the assessment.
( d ) The Responsible Federal Official (RFO) is to use the environmental evaluation to make a decision concerning the need to prepare an environmental impact statement (EIS) in accordance with § 632.52.
[43 FR 44749, Sept. 28, 1978, as amended at 45 FR 65181, Oct. 2, 1980]
#### §§ 764.256-764.300 [Reserved]
#### § 760.1719 Availability of funds.

Milk loss program payments will be made on a first-come, first-served basis. Applications received after all funds are used will not be paid.

[84 FR 48534, Sept. 13, 2019. Redesignated at 88 FR 62290, Sept. 11, 2023]
pmt-ex1019_280.htm



Exhibit 10.19

 

EXECUTION

 

SECOND AMENDMENT

TO THE

PENNYMAC MORTGAGE INVESTMENT TRUST

 2009 EQUITY INCENTIVE PLAN

This Second Amendment to the PennyMac Mortgage Investment Trust 2009 Equity Incentive Plan (this “Amendment”), effective as of February 15, 2018, is made and entered into by PennyMac Mortgage Investment Trust, a Maryland real estate investment trust (the “Company”). Terms used in this Amendment with initial capital letters that are not otherwise defined herein shall the meanings ascribed to such terms in the PennyMac Mortgage Investment Trust 2009 Equity Incentive Plan (the “Plan”).

RECITALS

WHEREAS, Section 9(d)(ii) of the Plan provides that the Board of Trustees of the Company (the “Board”) may amend the Plan at any time; and

WHEREAS, the Board desires to amend Section 6 of the Plan to place certain restrictions on Awards granted thereunder.

NOW, THEREFORE, in accordance with Section 9(d)(ii) of the Plan, the Company hereby amends the Plan as follows:

1. Section 6(b) of the Plan is hereby amended by deleting the first paragraph thereof in its entirety and replacing it to read as follows:

(b)Terms of Specified Awards. The Board is authorized to grant the Awards described in this Section 6(b), under such terms and conditions as deemed by the Board to be consistent with the purposes of the Plan. Each Award under the Plan shall be subject to a minimum period of one (1) year before such Award vests or becomes exercisable, as applicable; provided, however, that such restriction shall not apply to Awards granted under the Plan with respect to the number of Shares that, in the aggregate, does not exceed five percent (5%) of the total number of Shares initially available for Awards under the Plan. Such Awards may be granted with vesting, value and/or payment contingent upon attainment of one or more performance goals. Except as otherwise set forth herein or as may be determined by the Board, each Award granted under the Plan shall be evidenced by an Award Agreement containing such terms and conditions applicable to such Award as the Board shall determine at the date of grant or thereafter.

 



 

2. Section 6(b)(i)(D) of the Plan is hereby amended by deleting it in its entirety and replacing it to read as follows:

(D)Other Provisions. Options may not be repriced and may be subject to such other conditions including, but not limited to, restrictions on transferability of the Shares acquired upon exercise of such Options, as the Board may prescribe in its discretion or as may be required by applicable law.

3. Except as expressly amended by this Amendment, the Plan shall continue in full force and effect in accordance with the provisions thereof.

[Signature page to follow]




 



 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Company has caused this Amendment to be duly executed as of the date first written above.

PENNYMAC MORTGAGE INVESTMENT TRUST

 


	
By:
	
 
	
/s/Anne D. McCallion
	
 

	
Name:
	
 
	
Anne D. McCallion 
	
 

	
Title:
	
 
	
Senior Managing Director and
	
 

	
 
	
 
	
Chief Enterprise Operations Officer
34.000 Scope of part.

This part describes acquisition policies and procedures for use in acquiring major systems consistent

with OMB Circular No. A-109; and the use of an Earned Value Management System in acquisitions

designated as major acquisitions consistent with OMB Circular A-11, part 7.

Parent topic: Part 34 - Major System Acquisition
II 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 302 

To make improvements in the Foundation for the National Institutes of 

Health. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

FEBRUARY 7, 2005 

Mr. KENNEDY (for himself, Mr. GREGG, Mr. ENZI, Mr. FRIST, and Mr. 

BINGAMAN) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions 

A BILL 

To make improvements in the Foundation for the National 

Institutes of Health. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Foundation for the 

5 National Institutes of Health Improvement Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. NATIONAL INSTITUTES OF HEALTH ESTABLISH7 MENT AND DUTIES. 

8 Section 499 of the Public Health Service Act (42 

9 U.S.C. 290b) is amended— 

10 (1) in subsection (d)— 
2 

•S 302 IS 

1 (A) in paragraph (1)— 

2 (i) by amending subparagraph (D)(ii) 

3 to read as follows: 

4 ‘‘(ii) Upon the appointment of the ap5 pointed members of the Board under clause 

6 (i)(II), the terms of service as members of the 

7 Board of the ex officio members of the Board 

8 described in clauses (i) and (ii) of subparagraph 

9 (B) shall terminate. The ex officio members of 

10 the Board described in clauses (iii) and (iv) of 

11 subparagraph (B) shall continue to serve as ex 

12 officio members of the Board.’’; and 

13 (ii) in subparagraph (G), by inserting 

14 ‘‘appointed’’ after ‘‘that the number of’’; 

15 (B) by amending paragraph (3)(B) to read 

16 as follows: 

17 ‘‘(B) Any vacancy in the membership of 

18 the appointed members of the Board shall be 

19 filled in accordance with the bylaws of the 

20 Foundation established in accordance with 

21 paragraph (6), and shall not affect the power of 

22 the remaining appointed members to execute 

23 the duties of the Board.’’; and 

24 (C) in paragraph (5), by inserting ‘‘ap25 pointed’’ after ‘‘majority of the’’; 
3 

•S 302 IS 

1 (2) in subsection (j)— 

2 (A) in paragraph (2), by striking 

3 ‘‘(d)(2)(B)(i)(II)’’ and inserting ‘‘(d)(6)’’; and 

4 (B) in paragraph (10), by striking ‘‘of 

5 Health.’’ and inserting ‘‘of Health and the Na6 tional Institutes of Health may accept transfers 

7 of funds from the Foundation.’’; and 

8 (3) by striking subsection (l) and inserting the 

9 following: 

10 ‘‘(l) FUNDING.—From amounts appropriated to the 

11 National Institutes of Health, for each fiscal year, the Di12 rector of NIH shall transfer not less than $500,000 to 

13 the Foundation.’’. 

Æ
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PANAMA CITY DIVISION

ROBERT GENE WELLS,

Plaintiffs,

v. CASE NO.: 5:21-cv-00019-TKW-MJF

TOMMY FORD, in his official capacity as

SHERIFF of BAY COUNTY, and RICK

ANGLIN, in his supervisor capacity,

Defendants. 

_____________________________________/

PLAINTIFF’S RESPONSE TO MOTION TO STRIKE [ECF 47]

Plaintiff, ROBERT GENE WELLS, through his counsel, files this Response 

to Motion to Strike [ECF 47] and states that he consents to the Motion to Strike. 

Respectfully submitted,

/s/ Marie A. Mattox

Marie A. Mattox [FBN 0739685]

MARIE A. MATTOX, P. A.

203 North Gadsden Street

Tallahassee, FL 32301

Telephone: (850) 383-4800

Facsimile: (850) 383-4801

ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF

Case 5:21-cv-00019-TKW-MJF Document 55 Filed 05/26/22 Page 1 of 2
2

CERTIFICATE OF FONT

I HEREBY CERTIFY that this Response is typed in 14 point font and 

contains 169 words. 

/s/ Marie A. Mattox

Marie A. Mattox

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing has been 

furnished to all counsel of record by CM/ECF this 26th day of May 2021. 

/s/ Marie A. Mattox

Marie A. Mattox

Case 5:21-cv-00019-TKW-MJF Document 55 Filed 05/26/22 Page 2 of 2
[if !vml]>[endif]>

[if !vml]>[endif]>

You have reached the FederalDepository Library Program Electronic Collection (FDLP/EC) Archive. Thisarchive assures ongoing access to publications in the FDLP/EC. Access topublications in the archive is available through GPO's suite of cataloging andlocator services, including the Catalog of U.S. Government Publications(CGP).  Archived copies of publications are retrieved in the event thatpublications are no longer available from the original publishing agency site. 
**Title:****Connector [electronic resource]
 
2002: SummerFall| 2003: SpringWinter
 
SuDoc Number:CC 1.62:
Item Number:0283-A-03 (online)
CGP systemNumber:000555366
 
February 3, 2020**
#### § 4284.903 Review or appeal rights.

A person may seek a review of an Agency decision under this subpart from the appropriate Agency official that oversees the program in question or appeal to the National Appeals Division in accordance with 7 CFR part 11.
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

NORTHERN DIVISION

OZZIE LEE HARDY, #116991, )

)

 Plaintiff, )

)

v. ) CASE NO. 2:06-CV-617-MEF

) [WO]

)

COMALA CREDIT UNION, et al., )

)

 Defendants. )

ORDER ON MOTION

The plaintiff filed a motion for appointment of counsel on July 24, 2006 (Court Doc.

No. 5). The court notes that the facts underlying the plaintiff’s claims for relief are relatively

simple and the law applicable to such claims is not complex. The pleadings filed in this case

likewise establish that the plaintiff is capable of presenting the necessary elements of his

claims to this court and fail to demonstrate that there are exceptional circumstances at this

time which justify appointment of counsel. See Bass v. Perrin, 170 F.3d 1312, 1320 (11th

Cir. 1999); Kilgo v. Ricks, 983 F.2d 189, 193 (11 Cir. 1993); Dean v. Barber, 951 F.2d th

1210, 1216 (11 Cir. 1992). Accordingly, it is th

ORDERED that the motion for appointment of counsel be and is hereby DENIED. 

Done this 25 day of July, 2006. th

 /s/Charles S. Coody 

CHARLES S. COODY

CHIEF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 2:06-cv-00617-MEF-CSC Document 6 Filed 07/25/06 Page 1 of 1
5152.247-7027 Riding gang members

requirements.

(c)(2)(ii) The head of the contracting activity may waive the requirement, under certain

circumstances, for riding gang members to pass a Department of Defense background check. See

Appendix GG for further delegation.

Parent topic: Subpart 5152.2 - Texts of Provisions and Clauses
(March 16, 1967)

#### Burkins & Foley, Inc., Respondent, v. George Golowaty, Doing Business as Commercial GMC Truck Sales & Service, Appellant.

Motion insofar as it seeks to require appellant to comply with CPLR 5529 (subds. [e], [d]) granted, and appeal dismissed unless a corrected appendix shall be filed within 10 days from the date hereof; and motion in all other respects denied. (CPLR 5528, subd. [a], par. 5; *E. P. Reynolds, Inc.*v. *Nager Elec. Co.,*17 N Y 2d 51.) Gibson, P. J., Herlihy, Aulisi, Staley, Jr., and Gabrielli, JJ., concur.
Case 2:06-cv-00618-MEF-SRW Document 1 Filed 07/14/2006 Page 1 of 8
Case 2:06-cv-00618-MEF-SRW Document 1 Filed 07/14/2006 Page 2 of 8
Case 2:06-cv-00618-MEF-SRW Document 1 Filed 07/14/2006 Page 3 of 8
Case 2:06-cv-00618-MEF-SRW Document 1 Filed 07/14/2006 Page 4 of 8
Case 2:06-cv-00618-MEF-SRW Document 1 Filed 07/14/2006 Page 5 of 8
Case 2:06-cv-00618-MEF-SRW Document 1 Filed 07/14/2006 Page 6 of 8
Case 2:06-cv-00618-MEF-SRW Document 1 Filed 07/14/2006 Page 7 of 8
Case 2:06-cv-00618-MEF-SRW Document 1 Filed 07/14/2006 Page 8 of 8
209.570-2 Policy.       (a) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this subsection, 10 U.S.C. 4292 prohibits any entity performing lead system integrator functions in the acquisition of a major system by DoD from having any direct financial interest in the development or construction of any individual system or element of any system of systems.          (b)  The prohibition in paragraph (a) of this subsection does not apply if—          (1)  The Secretary of Defense certifies to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives that—          (i)  The entity was selected by DoD as a contractor to develop or construct the system or element concerned through the use of competitive procedures; and          (ii)  DoD took appropriate steps to prevent any organizational conflict of interest in the selection process; or          (2)  The entity was selected by a subcontractor to serve as a lower-tier subcontractor, through a process over which the entity exercised no control.          (c) In accordance with section 802 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Pub. L. 110-181; 10 U.S.C. 4292 note), DoD may award a new contract for lead system integrator functions in the acquisition of a major system only if—          (1)  The major system has not yet proceeded beyond low-rate initial production; or          (2) The Secretary of Defense determines in writing that it would not be practicable to carry out the acquisition without continuing to use a contractor to perform lead system integrator functions and that doing so is in the best interest of DoD. The authority to make this determination may not be delegated below the level of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment. Also, see              209.570-3 (b).          (d)  Effective October 1, 2010, DoD is prohibited from awarding a new contract for lead system integrator functions in the acquisition of a major system to any entity that was not performing lead system integrator functions in the acquisition of the major system prior to January 28, 2008.    **Parent topic:** 209.570 Limitations on contractors acting as lead system integrators.
Searched for **https://www.ssa.gov/pubs/EN-05-10029.pdf**

 

19961997199819992000200120022003200420052006200720082009201020112012201320142015201620172018201920202021202220232024

*Note:* This calendar view maps the number of captures of **https://www.ssa.gov/pubs/EN-05-10029.pdf**, *not* how many times the site was actually updated.

Look Up URL in general Internet Archive web collection.
# 52.230 [Reserved]

- 52.230-1 Cost Accounting Standards Notices and Certification. 
- 52.230-2 Cost Accounting Standards. 
- 52.230-3 Disclosure and Consistency of Cost Accounting Practices. 
- 52.230-4 Disclosure and Consistency of Cost Accounting Practices-Foreign Concerns. 
- 52.230-5 Cost Accounting Standards-Educational Institution. 
- 52.230-6 Administration of Cost Accounting Standards. 
- 52.230-7 Proposal Disclosure-Cost Accounting Practice Changes. 

**Parent topic:**Subpart 52.2 - Text of Provisions and Clauses
EX-33 (i)
PHH Mortgage
(logo) PHH
3000 Leadenhall Road
Mt. Laurel, NJ 08054

REPORT ON ASSESSMENT OF COMPLIANCE WITH REGULATION AB
SERVICING CRITERIA

PHH Mortgage Corporation (the "Asserting Party") is responsible for assessing
compliance as of December 31, 2006 and for the period from January 1, 2006
through December 31, 2006 (the "Reporting Perod"), with the servicing
criteria set forth in Section 229.1122(d) of the Code of Federal Regulations
(the "CFR"), except for criteria set forth in Section 229.1122(d)(3)(i)(c),
(d)(4)(ii), (d)(4)(xv) and (d)(1)(iii) of the CFR, which the Asserting Party has
concluded are not applicable to the servicing activities it performs with
respect to the transactions covered by this report (the "Applicable Servicing
Criteria"). The criteria set forth in Section 229.1122 (d)(4)(vii) and
(d)(4)(xi) of the CFR are performed by outsource providers on behalf of the
Asserting Party; however, the Asserting Party has monitored the outsourcing of
these criteria and assumes responsibility for compliance. The transactions
covered by this report include all non-agency loan sale agreements executed
after January 1, 2006 as well as all re-securitization transactions after
January 1, 2006 for which the Asserting Party served as servicer (the
"Platform").

The Asserting Party has assessed its compliance with the Servicing Criteria as
of December 31, 2006 and for the Reporting Period and has concluded that
the Asserting Party has complied, in all material respects, with the
Servicing Criteria with respect to the Platform taken as a whole except for as
discussed below:

Standard                Description
1122(d)(1)(i)   The Asserting Party has not instituted policies and procedures
                to specifically monitor performance or other triggers or
                events of default stated in the transaction agreements
1122(d)(1)(iv)  During the months of July, August, and September, the Company's
                minimum coverage requirement exceeded its $160 million fidelity
                bond by amounts ranging up to approximately $1.3 million.
1122(d)(3)(i)(A)The Asserting Party did not maintain or provide one of the
                required monthly reports stated in the transaction agreements
                during the year
1122(d)(3)(i)(D)The Asserting Party did not perform procedures to agree the
                unpaid principal balance and number of loans serviced by the
                Asserting Party with that of the investors or trustees

Deloitte & Touche, an independent registered public accounting firm, has issued
an attestation report on the assessment of compliance with the Servicing
Criteria for the Reporting Period as set forth in this assertion.

PHH Mortgage Corporation

Date: February 28, 2007

/s/ Terence W. Edwards
Terence W. Edwards
President and Chief Executive Officer

/s/ Mark Danahy
Mark Danahy
Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer

/s/ Martin L. Foster
Martin L. Foster
Senior Vice President - Loan Servicing
204.270-1 Policy.       (a)  The Electronic Data Access (EDA) system, an online repository for contractual instruments and supporting documents, is DoD’s primary tool for electronic distribution of contract documents and contract data.  Contract attachments shall be uploaded to EDA, except for contract attachments that are classified, are too sensitive for widespread distribution (e.g., personally identifiable information and Privacy Act and Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, or cannot be practicably converted to electronic format (e.g., samples, drawings, and models).  Section J (or similar location when the Uniform Contract Format is not used) shall include the annotation “provided under separate cover” for any attachment not uploaded to EDA.          (b)  Agencies are responsible for ensuring the following when posting documents, including contractual instruments, to EDA—          (1)  The timely distribution of documents; and          (2)  That internal controls are in place to ensure that—          (i)  The electronic version of a contract document in EDA is an accurate representation of the contract; and          (ii)  The contract data in EDA is an accurate representation of the underlying contract.    **Parent topic:** 204.270 Electronic Data Access.
Case 2:06-cr-00169-WKW-SRW Document 79 Filed 02/28/2007 Page 1 of 1