alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
II 

109TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 3239 

To require full disclosure of insurance coverage and noncoverage by insurance 

companies and provide for Federal Trade Commission enforcement. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MAY 25, 2006 

Mr. DAYTON (for himself and Mr. LOTT) introduced the following bill; which 

was read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and 

Transportation 

A BILL 

To require full disclosure of insurance coverage and noncoverage by insurance companies and provide for Federal 

Trade Commission enforcement. 

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 ‘‘Uniform Insurance 

5 Non-Coverage Disclosure Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. UNLAWFUL ACT. 

7 Each individual policy written by a State-registered 

8 insurance company shall include on the front or first page 

9 of the policy a ‘‘Noncoverage Disclosure’’ box restating in 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with BILLS
2 

•S 3239 IS

1 plain English, in bold font twice the size of the text in 

2 the body of the policy, all conditions, exclusions, and other 

3 limitations pertaining to coverage under that policy, re4 gardless of the underlying insurance product in question. 

5 SEC. 3. ENFORCEMENT. 

6 (a) IN GENERAL.—Any violation of this Act shall be 

7 treated as a violation of a regulation under section 

8 18(a)(1)(B) of the Federal Trade Commission Act (15 

9 U.S.C. 57a(a)(1)(B)) regarding unfair or deceptive acts 

10 or practices. 

11 (b) REGULATIONS.—The Federal Trade Commission 

12 (referred to in this Act as the ‘‘Commission’’) shall pro13 mulgate regulations to carry out this Act. 

14 SEC. 4. POWERS OF COMMISSION. 

15 (a) IN GENERAL.—The Commission, acting through 

16 the Division of Financial Practices in the Bureau of Con17 sumer Protection, shall prevent any person from violating 

18 this Act, and any regulation promulgated thereunder, in 

19 the same manner, by the same means, and with the same 

20 jurisdiction, powers and duties as though all applicable 

21 terms and provisions of the Federal Trade Commission 

22 Act (15 U.S.C. 41 et seq.) were incorporated into and 

23 made a part of this Act. 

24 (b) PENALTIES.—Any person who violates regula25 tions promulgated under this Act shall be subject to the 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with BILLS
3 

•S 3239 IS

1 penalties and entitled to the privileges and immunities 

2 provided in the Federal Trade Commission Act as though 

3 all applicable terms and provisions of the Federal Trade 

4 Commission Act were incorporated into and made part of 

5 this Act. 

6 (c) AUTHORITY PRESERVED.—Nothing in this Act 

7 shall be construed to limit the authority of the Commission 

8 under any other provision of law. 

Æ 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with BILLS
237.170-2 Approval requirements    *(a) Acquisition of services through a contract or task order that is not performance based.*       (1) For acquisitions at or below $50 million, obtain the review and approval of the CoCO.       (2) For acquisitions over $50 million up to $100 million, obtain the review and approval of the HCO.       (3) For acquisitions exceeding $100 million, obtain the review and approval of the Senior Procurement Executive (SPE).       (S-90) For each acquisition that is non-performance based, the contracting officer shall prepare a D&F for approval in accordance with paragraph 237.170-2(a). The D&F must be approved prior to release of the solicitation.       (S-91) The review and approval thresholds are based upon the total estimated cost of the acquisition.       (S-92) Technical and requirements personnel are responsible for providing accurate and complete data to the contracting officer to support their recommendation for other than a performance based acquisition. **Parent topic:** SUBPART 37.1 –– SERVICE CONTRACTS––GENERAL
<PAGE>   1

                            CERTIFICATE OF AMENDMENT

                                       OF

                          CERTIFICATE OF INCORPORATION



     CHUBB/COLONIAL LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA, hereinafter referred to
as the "Corporation", a corporation organized and existing under and by virtue
of the General Corporation Law of the State of Delaware, DOES HEREBY

CERTIFY:

     FIRST:    That on the 28th day of June, 1984, the Board of Directors of the
Corporation duly adopted by its written consent, pursuant to Section 141 (f) of
the General Corporation Law of the State of Delaware, a resolution setting forth
a proposed amendment to the Certificate of Incorporation of the said
Corporation, declaring that the proposed amendment be recommended to the
stockholder of the Corporation. The resolution setting forth the proposed
amendment is as follows:

RESOLVED:

     THAT Article One of the Certificate of Incorporation of this Corporation be
     amended by changing the name of the Corporation from CHUBB/COLONIAL LIFE
     INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA to NORTH AMERICAN SECURITY LIFE INSURANCE
     COMPANY;

     AND THAT the change of name be recommended to the stockholder of the
     Corporation;

     AND THAT any two of the directors and officers are hereby authorized to do
     all things and take all actions to effect the change of name.

     SECOND:   That thereafter, pursuant to the resolution of its BOARD of
Directors, the sole stockholder of the Corporation, on the 28th day of June,
1984 duly adopted by its written consent, pursuant to Section 228 of the General
Corporation Law of the State of Delaware, a resolution in favour of the
amendment.


<PAGE>   2


     THIRD:    That said amendment was duly adopted in accordance with the
provisions of Sections 141(f), 228 and 242 of the General Corporation Law of the
State of Delaware.

     FOURTH:   That the capital of said Corporation shall not be reduced under
or by reason of said amendment.

     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, said CHUBB/COLONIAL LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA
has caused its corporate seal to be hereunto affixed and this certificate to be
signed by William J. Atherton, its President, and Barbara E. Burk, its
Secretary, this 19th day of July, 1984.



                                        By /s/ William J. Atherton,

President

                                        Attest

                                        By /s/ Barbara E. Burk, Secretary

(corporate seal)
-84 -82 -80 -78 -76 -74 -72

 34

 36

 38

 40

★

▲

▲

▲

▲

★

▲ ▲

▲ ▲

 500

 1000

 1500

 500

18 12 06 00

06/17

NOAA HYSPLIT MODEL

 Backward trajectory ending at 2300 UTC 17 Jun 06

 EDAS Meteorological Data

Source

★ at 38.77 N 77.11 W Meters AGL
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE AUDITED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF TTI INDUSTRIES, INCORPORATED FOR THE PERIOD ENDED
FEBRUARY 29, 2000, AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          AUG-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             SEP-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               FEB-29-2000
<CASH>                                          11,028
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   57,924
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                68,952
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  73,952
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          213,453
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                      2,700
<COMMON>                                        43,133
<OTHER-SE>                                    (185,334)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    73,952
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                56,637
<CGS>                                           70,753
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   70,753
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               151,754
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (165,690)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (165,690)
<EPS-BASIC>                                       (.04)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     (.03)



</TABLE>
903.1004 Contract clauses.       (b)(2)(ii) Insert the DOE Web site address *http://ig.energy.gov/hotline.htm* in paragraph (b)(3) of the 48 CFR 52.203-14 clause, Display of Hotline Poster(s).    **Parent topic:** Subpart 903.10 - Contractor Code of Business Ethics and Conduct
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA 

PENSACOLA DIVISION 

IN RE: 3M COMBAT ARMS 

EARPLUG PRODUCTS 

LIABILITY LITIGATION 

This Document Relates to: 

PLAINTIFF(S), 

v. 

3M COMP ANY, 3M 

OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY LLC, 

AEARO HOLDING LLC, AEARO 

INTERMEDIATE LLC, AEARO LLC, 

and AEARO TECHNOLOGIES LLC, 

DEFENDANTS. 

Case No. 3:19-md-2885 

Judge M. Casey Rodgers 

Magistrate Judge Gary R. Jones 

MASTER SHORT FORM 

COMPLAINT AND 

JURY TRIAL DEMAND 

Civil Action No.: -------

MASTER SHORT FORM COMPLAINT AND JURY TRIAL DEMAND 

Plaintiff(s) incorporate(s) by reference the Master Long Form Complaint and 

Jury Trial Demand filed in In re: 3M Combat Arms Earplug Products Liability 

Litigation on September 20, 2019. Pursuant to Pretrial Order No. ___ , this Short 

Form Complaint adopts the allegations, claims, and requested relief as set forth in 

the Master Long Form Complaint. As necessary herein, Plaintiff(s) may include: 

(a) additional claims and allegations against Defendants, as set forth in Paragraphs

10 and 11 or an additional sheet attached hereto; and/or (b) additional claims and 

Adam Persha

17

7:20-cv-00504

Case 7:20-cv-00504-MCR-GRJ Document 4 Filed 02/09/22 Page 1 of 6
Case 7:20-cv-00504-MCR-GRJ Document 4 Filed 02/09/22 Page 2 of 6
Southern District of California

Case 7:20-cv-00504-MCR-GRJ Document 4 Filed 02/09/22 Page 3 of 6
Case 7:20-cv-00504-MCR-GRJ Document 4 Filed 02/09/22 Page 4 of 6
Case 7:20-cv-00504-MCR-GRJ Document 4 Filed 02/09/22 Page 5 of 6
Respectfully submitted,

/s/ W. Troy Bouk

W. Troy Bouk, Florida Bar No. 43384

Levin, Papantonio, Rafferty, Proctor,

Buchanan, O’Brien, Barr & Mougey, P.A.

316 South Baylen St., Ste. 600

Pensacola, FL 32502

Tel: 850-435-7155 / Fax: 850-436-6155

Email: tbouk@levinlaw.com

Attorney for Plaintiff

February 9, 2022

Case 7:20-cv-00504-MCR-GRJ Document 4 Filed 02/09/22 Page 6 of 6
Page 1 of 2

Case No. 4:20cv589-RH-MAF

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

FRANKLIN C. SMITH,

Plaintiff,

v. CASE NO. 4:20cv589-RH-MAF

FREDDIE G. BRAXTON et al.,

Defendants.

_____________________________/

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

This case is before the court on the plaintiff’s motion for leave to proceed in 

forma pauperis (ECF No. 10), the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation

(ECF No. 8), and the objections (ECF No. 9). I have reviewed de novo the issues 

raised by the objections.

The objections accuse the magistrate judge of perjury—a frivolous 

assertion—and address other matters. The objections do not, however, suggest that 

federal jurisdiction can survive the probate exception and Rooker-Feldman

doctrine. So even if the plaintiff could amend to cure the other grounds for 

dismissal, he would still be unable to pursue this action. 

IT IS ORDERED:

Case 4:20-cv-00589-RH-MAF Document 11 Filed 02/26/21 Page 1 of 2
Page 2 of 2

Case No. 4:20cv589-RH-MAF

1. The motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis, ECF No. 10, is 

granted.

2. The report and recommendation is accepted and adopted as the court’s 

opinion. 

3. The clerk must enter judgment stating, “This case is dismissed for lack of 

jurisdiction.” 

4. The clerk must close the file.

SO ORDERED on February 26, 2021.

s/Robert L. Hinkle

United States District Judge

Case 4:20-cv-00589-RH-MAF Document 11 Filed 02/26/21 Page 2 of 2
#### Rachel Ehrenfeld, Appellant, v Khalid Salim Bin Mahfouz, Respondent.

Submitted October 22, 2007;

decided November 15, 2007

Motion by the Middle East Forum for leave to appear amicus curiae on consideration of the certified question herein denied *971as untimely *(see*Rules of Prac of Ct of Appeals [22 NYCRR] § 500.23).

Judge Smith taking no part.
---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---
201.670 Appointment of property

administrators and plant clearance officers.

(a) The appropriate agency authority shall appoint or terminate (in writing) property administrators

and plant clearance officers.

(b) In appointing qualified property administrators and plant clearance officers, the appointing

authority shall consider experience, training, education, business acumen, judgment, character, and

ethics.

Parent topic: Subpart 201.6 - CAREER DEVELOPMENT, CONTRACTING AUTHORITY, AND

RESPONSIBILITIES
Searched for **http://bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/sfcisex.pdf**

 

19961997199819992000200120022003200420052006200720082009201020112012201320142015201620172018201920202021202220232024

*Note:* This calendar view maps the number of captures of **http://bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/sfcisex.pdf**, *not* how many times the site was actually updated.

Look Up URL in general Internet Archive web collection.
-       - Superintendent of Documents
      - 2023-07-14T09:57:33-0400
      - Government Publishing Office, Washington, DC 20401
      - Government Publishing Office
      - Government Publishing Office attests that this document has not been altered since it was disseminated by Government Publishing Office
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

## FILED October 31, 2003 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 03-30144 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus HERMAN ROBINSON, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana

USDC No. 01-CR-353-1

-------------------- Before JONES, BENAVIDES, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Herman Robinson pleaded guilty to conspiracy to possess with the intent to distribute more than 50 grams of cocaine base and more than 500 grams, but less than five kilograms, of cocaine hydrochloride and distributing less than 500 grams of cocaine hydrochloride. On appeal, he contends that his guilty plea as to the conspiracy count should be set aside as unsupported by the factual basis. He avers that the factual basis to his guilty plea attributed 49.2 grams of cocaine base to him but that theNo. 03-30144 -2- indictment charged him with conspiracy to possess with the intent to distribute more than 50 grams of cocaine base. Robinson contends that the discrepancy between the factual basis and the indictment rendered his plea invalid. Because Robinson did not challenge the factual basis in the district court, review is for plain error only. United States v.
Vonn , 122 S. Ct. 1043, 1046 (2002). The district court did not plainly err in accepting Robinson’s guilty plea to conspiring to distribute more than 50 grams of cocaine base as alleged in the indictment. Robinson admitted under oath at rearraignment that he was guilty of a more-than-50-gram conspiracy. See F ED . R.
C RIM . P. 11(f); United States v. Adams , 961 F.2d 505, 508-09 (5th Cir. 1992). Even if it is assumed that Robinson admitted to conspiring to possess with the intent to distribute only 49.2 grams of cocaine base, Robinson makes no argument that he was misled or prejudiced by the discrepancy between the indictment and the factual basis, and the record does not show prejudice.
See United States v. Phillips , 625 F.2d 543, 546 (5th Cir. 1980). The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
§ 930.154 Release of inventory reserve cherries. ( a ) As provided in § 930.54, the Board may recommend a release of a portion or all of the primary and/or secondary reserve cherries. The total available reserves will be determined at the beginning of the crop year. The primary reserve as defined in §§ 930.55 and 930.150 must be depleted before the secondary reserve can be released. If a release is recommended, the recommended volume shall be apportioned to handlers on the basis of each handler's proportion of the total volume handled in the preceding three crop years.
( b ) If a handler has less volume in reserve than is apportioned, the excess volume shall be reapportioned to those who still have volume in reserve until the total release is complete.
[81 FR 63679, Sept. 16, 2016]
§ 764.52 Processing an incomplete application. ( a ) Within 7 calendar days of receipt of an incomplete application, the Agency will provide the applicant written notice of any additional information which must be provided. The applicant must provide the additional information within 15 calendar days of the date of this notice.
( b ) If the additional information is not received, the Agency will provide written notice that the application will be withdrawn if the information is not received within 15 calendar days of the date of this second notice.
[72 FR 63298, Nov. 8, 2007, as amended at 86 FR 43391, Aug. 9, 2021]
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

NORTHERN DIVISION

 ______________________________

HOWARD GLENN TOOLE, *

#C 917683

Petitioner, *

 v. * 2:06-CV-714-MHT

 

JAMES MCDONOUGH, et al., * 

Respondents. *

 ______________________________

ORDER ON MOTION

Upon consideration of Respondents’ Motion for Extension of Time of fourteen (14)

days to file their supplemental answer, and for good cause, it is ORDERED that:

1. Respondents’ motion (Doc. No. 17) is GRANTED; and

2. Respondents are GRANTED an extension from December 27, 2006 to January 10,

2007 to file their supplemental answer as directed by order filed December 7, 2006.

Done, this 5th day of January 2007.

 /s/Wallace Capel, Jr. 

WALLACE CAPEL, JR.

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 2:06-cv-00714-MHT-WC Document 18 Filed 01/05/2007 Page 1 of 1
1437.7102 Clauses.       The CO shall insert the clause at 1452.237-70, Information Collection - Department of the Interior, in all solicitations and contracts which are subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980.    **Parent topic:** Subpart 1437.71 - Information Collection Services
EX-34 (k)
(logo) ERNST & YOUNG

Ernst & Young LLP
Suite 2800
600 Peachtree Street
Atlanta Georgia 30308-2215

Phone: (404) 874-8300
www.ey.com

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

We have examined management's assertion, included in the accompanying Report on
Assessment of Compliance with Securities and Exchange Commission's Regulation AB
Servicing Criteria, that ZC Sterling Insurance Agency, Inc. (the Company)
complied with certain servicing criteria set forth in Item 1122 (d) of the
Securities and Exchange Commission's Regulation AB for the ZC Sterling
Integrated Product Solution (ZIPS) hazard insurance outsourcing Platform
(Platform) as of and for the year ended December 31, 2006. The Company has
determined that only certain servicing criteria 1122 (d) 1(iv), 1122 (d) 2(vi),
1122 (d) 4(xi), 1122 (d) 4(xii), and 1122 (d) 4(xiii) are applicable to the
activities performed by them with respect to the Platform covered by this
report. The Company has determined that the remaining servicing criteria set
forth in Item 1122 (d) of the Securities and Exchange Commission's Regulation AB
are not applicable to the activities performed by them with respect to the
Platform covered by this report. See Appendix A of management's assertion for
the Platform covered by this report. Management is responsible for the
Company's compliance with those servicing criteria. Our responsibility is to
express an opinion on management's assertion about the Company's compliance with
the servicing criteria based on our examination.

Our examination was conducted in accordance with standards of the Public Company
Accounting Oversight Board (United States) and, accordingly, included examining,
on a test basis, evidence about the Company's compliance with the applicable
servicing criteria and performing such other procedures as we considered
necessary in the circumstances. Our examination included testing of less than
all of the servicing activities related to the Platform, and determining whether
the Company performed those selected activities in compliance with the servicing
criteria. Furthermore, our procedures were limited to the servicing activities
performed by the Company during the period covered by this report. Our
procedures were not designed to determine whether errors may have occurred
either prior to or subsequent to our tests that may have affected the balances
or amounts calculated or reported by the Company during the period covered by
this report for the Platform. We believe that our examination provides a
reasonable basis for our opinion. Our examination does not provide a legal
determination on the Company's compliance with the servicing criteria.

In our opinion, management's assertion that the Company complied with the
aforementioned servicing criteria as of and for the year ended December 31, 2006
for the ZIPS Platform is fairly stated, in all material respects.


/s/ Ernst & Young

February 20, 2007


A Member Practice of Ernst & Young Global
52.214-11 [Reserved]

Parent topic: 52.214 [Reserved]
1425.1001 Waiver of right to examination of records.       The Director, PAM is authorized to make the determinations prescribed in FAR 25.1001(b). Determinations shall be prepared by the CO and submitted through the HCA to the Director, PAM.    **Parent topic:** Subpart 1425.10 - Additional Foreign Acquisition Regulations