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

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

NORTHERN DIVISION

 _______________________________

JAMES PETTY, #124 252 *

Plaintiff, *

v. * 2:06-CV-639-WKW

RAY B. FINEDOR, et al., *

Defendants. *

 _______________________________

ORDER

For good cause, it is 

ORDERED that Defendant Hardy is GRANTED an extension from October 12, 2006

to December 1, 2006 to comply with the court’s order entered September 13, 2006 that he

file an answer and written report to Plaintiff’s complaint. 

The Clerk is DIRECTED to furnish counsel for Defendant Hardy with a copy of the

docket sheet for this action as well as a copy of Document Numbers 4, 14, & 15.

Done, this 2nd day of November 2006.

 /s/Delores R. Boyd 

DELORES R. BOYD

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 2:06-cv-00639-WKW-TFM Document 20 Filed 11/02/2006 Page 1 of 1
#### CASE v. WALTER et al.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

May 8, 1914.)

Action by Frank M. Case, Jr., against Eugene Walter and others.

No opinion. Motion gr*anted,*without costs. Order filed. See, also, 147 N. Y. Supp. 1102.
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 3358 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

109th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 3358

To suspend temporarily the duty on gemifloxacin, gemifloxacin mesylate, 
                and gemifloxacin mesylate sesquihydrate.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              June 5, 2006

Mr. Kennedy (for himself and Mr. Kerry) introduced the following bill; 
     which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To suspend temporarily the duty on gemifloxacin, gemifloxacin mesylate, 
                and gemifloxacin mesylate sesquihydrate.

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

SECTION 1. GEMIFLOXACIN, GEMIFLOXACIN MESYLATE, AND GEMIFLOXACIN 
              MESYLATE SESQUIHYDRATE.

    (a) In General.--Subchapter II of chapter 99 of the Harmonized 
Tariff Schedule of the United States is amended by inserting in 
numerical sequence the following new heading:

``      9902.05.68      Gemifloxacin (CAS   Free         No change        No change        On or before 12/  ''.
                         No. 175463-14-6);                                                  31/2009
                         gemifloxacin
                         mesylate (CAS No.
                         210353-53-0);
                         gemifloxacin
                         mesylate
                         sesquihydrate
                         (CAS No. 210353-
                         56-3) (the
                         foregoing
                         provided for in
                         subheading
                         2933.99.46)......

    (b) Effective Date.--
            (1) In general.--The amendment made by subsection (a) 
        applies to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for 
        consumption, on or after January 1, 2005.
            (2) Retroactive application.--Notwithstanding section 514 
        of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1514) or any other 
        provision of law, upon proper request filed with U.S. Customs 
        and Border Protection before the 90th day after the date of the 
        enactment of this Act, any entry, or withdrawal from warehouse 
        for consumption, of any good--
                    (A) that was made on or after January 1, 2005, and 
                before the date of the enactment of this Act, and
                    (B) with respect to which there would have been no 
                duty if the amendment made by subsection (a) applied to 
                such entry or withdrawal,
        shall be liquidated or reliquidated as if such amendment 
        applied to such entry or withdrawal.
                                 <all>
```
#### ADAMS v. BRISTOL.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

October 12, 1906.)

Action by William C. Adams against Elias L. M. Bristol.

No opinion. Motion granted. Order filed.
Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter VIII
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 71-87K, 1621-1627.

Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter VIII
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to subchapter A appear at 84 FR 45645, Aug. 30, 2019.

§ 810.103 Basis of determination. ( a ) *Distinctly low quality.* The determination of distinctly low quality is made on the basis of the lot as a whole at the time of sampling when a condition exists that may or may not appear in the representative sample and/or the sample as a whole.
( b ) *Certain quality determinations.* Each determination of rodent pellets, bird droppings, other animal filth, broken glass, castor beans, cockleburs, crotalaria seeds, dockage, garlic, live insect infestation, large stones, moisture, temperature, an unknown foreign substance(s), and a commonly recognized harmful or toxic substance(s) is made on the basis of the sample as a whole. When a condition exists that may not appear in the representative sample, the determination may be made on the basis of the lot as a whole at the time of sampling according to procedures prescribed in FGIS instructions.
( c ) *All other determinations.* The basis of determination for all other factors is contained in the individual standards.
RUSHTON, STAKELY, JOHNSTON

184 Commerce Street

Post Office Box 270

Montgomery, Alabama 36101-0270

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

NORTHERN DIVISION

DELOISE PRICE,

PLAINTIFF

iiJ8 FEB 25 A 10: I

I I,

U.S. DISTRICT COu

MIDDLE DISTRICT ALA

VS. CASE No. 2:06-cv-721

WAL-MART STORES, INC.,

et al.,

DEFENDANTS

STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL

Come now the parties, by and through the undersigned counsel, and stipulate

to the dismissal of all claims in this action, with prejudice, each party to bear

his/her or its own costs.

nan P. Strength, Atto ey for Plaintiffs

COCHRAN, CHERRY, GIvENs, SMITH, TNE-&-F*Yt€

Post Office Box 830419

Tuskegee, Alabama 36083 /7 K

Case 2:06-cv-00721-MHT-TFM Document 57 Filed 02/25/2008 Page 1 of 1
#### § 987.16 Cull dates.

*Cull dates* means dates which fail to meet the requirements (with respect to freedom from defects) prescribed in title 3, group 4, article 24, section 24, section 1434 of the Food and Agricultural Code of California for dates for use in products or by-products other than alcohol, brandy, and products not intended for human consumption and any dates residual from field or packinghouse grading operations.

[27 FR 6818, July 19, 1962, as amended at 43 FR 4251, Feb. 1, 1978]
#### Linda D. Tucker, an Infant, by James A. Tucker, her Father and Natural Guardian, et al., Respondents, v. Walter Jorgensen et al., Appellants.

Memorandum by the Court. Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court entered February 14, 1969 in Schenectady County upon a jury verdict in favor of the plaintiffs and from an order entered February 17, 1969 which denied the motion to set aside the verdict. The infant plaintiff suffered injuries in the area of her mouth when she suffered a fall on premises owned by the appellants. Assuming that the appellants are correct in urging that the trial court erred in admitting certain testimony, it does not appear that such error would be so prejudicial as to require a new trial. The record establishes that the infant plaintiff suffered permanent injuries to her teeth and it does not appear that the verdict in her favor was excessive. In ithe derivative action the proof amounted to $150, and therefore the judgment must be reduced to that amount. Judgment and order, in respect of the derivative cause of action only, reversed, on the law and the facts, and a new trial of said derivative cause of action ordered unless, within 20 days after entry of the order hereon, plaintiff shall stipulate to reduce the amount of the verdict upon said derivative cause of action to $150, in which event orders and judgment upon said derivative cause of action, as so reduced, affirmed; failing such stipulation such new trial of the derivative cause of action to be restricted to the issue of damages; and judgment and order in all other respects affirmed, with costs. Herlihy, *1081P. J., Reynolds, Staley, Jr., Greenblott and Cooke, JJ., concur in memorandum by the court.
Order entered May 31, 2019

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05 - 18 - 00510 - CV JACOLBY ANDERSON, Appellant

V. LONESTAR PATENT SERV ICES, INC., Appellee On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 5

Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. CC - 18 - 00393 - E



### O RDER Before the Court is appellee’s May 28, 2019 unopposed second motion for extension of time to file its brief. We GRANT the motion and ORDER the brief due on or befo re June 27, 2019. We caution appellee that further extensions are disfavored.

/s/ ERIN A. NOWELL JUSTICE
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                    9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                         497,713
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 497,713
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           99,205
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                     398,508
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   497,713
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               106,593
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,886
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (108,479)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (108,479)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (108,479)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (.78)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.78)


</TABLE>
From: Rochelle Boyd/RTP/USEPA/US

To: "Joseph Rykowski" <Joseph.Rykowski@ormet.com>

Cc: Robert Strieter <bstriete@aluminum.org>

Date: 12/09/2010 08:15 AM

Subject: Re: Ormet Database Files



## It looks like we accidentally left out the units in the release point spreadsheet but they are the same units

that are shown in the Whole Facility HAPs and Category HAPs spreadsheet. Temperature is degrees F,

exit velocity is ft/sec.

Bob, can you forward this to the others. Thanks

Rochelle Boyd, Environmental Engineer

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards

Sector Policies and Programs Division

109 T.W. Alexander Drive, RTP, NC 27711

Mail Drop D243

- 02

Ph: (919) 541

- 1390 Fax: (919) 541

- 3207

Email: boyd.rochelle@epa.gov

Fro m: "Joseph Rykowski" <Joseph.Rykowski@ormet.com>

To: Rochelle Boyd/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA

Date: 12/08/2010 04:01 PM

Subject: Ormet Database Files



## I have a quick question about the database file. What units are the exit gas temperature and exit gas

velocity in?
§ 925.141 Late payments. ( a ) The committee shall impose a late payment charge of 5 percent on the unpaid balance on any handler whose assessment has not been received in the committee's office, or the envelope containing the payment legibly postmarked by the U.S. Postal Service, within 45 days of the invoice date shown on the handler's assessment statement.
( b ) In addition to that specified in paragraph (a) of this section, the committee shall impose an interest charge on any handler whose assessment payment has not been received in the committee's office, or the envelope containing the payment legibly postmarked by the U.S. Postal Service, within 45 days of the invoice date. The rate of 11 ⁄ 2 percent per month shall be applied to the unpaid balance and late payment charge for the number of days all or any part of the assessment specified in the handler's assessment statement is delinquent beyond the 45 day period.
( c ) The committee, upon receipt of a late payment, shall promptly notify the handler (by registered mail) of any late payment charge and/or interest charge due as provided in paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section. If such charges are not paid, or the envelope containing payment is not legibly postmarked by the U.S. Postal Service, within 45 days of the date of such notification, late payment and interest charges as provided in paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section will accrue on the unpaid amount.
[57 FR 24352, June 9, 1992]
Exhibit 32.2




Certification




I, R.L. Hartshorn, certify, pursuant to Rule 13(a)-14(b) or Rule 15(d)-14(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that (i) the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Cavitation Technologies, Inc. for the year ended June 30, 2011 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 on Form 10-K fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and results of operations of Cavitation Technologies, Inc.




/s/ R.L. HartshornName:
R.L. HartshornTitle:
Chief Financial OfficerDate:
September 28, 2011





The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, and is not being "filed" as part of the Form 10-K or as a separate disclosure document for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the "Exchange Act"), or otherwise subject to liability under that section. This certification shall not be deemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Exchange Act except to the extent that this Exhibit 32.1 is expressly and specifically incorporated by reference in any such filing.




A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
###### Editorial Note on Part 982

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 982 appear at 61 FR 17559, Apr. 22, 1996.

#### § 982.14 Restricted hazelnuts.

*Restricted hazelnuts* means inshell hazelnuts withheld in satisfaction of a restricted obligation.
PART 50 –– EXTRAORDINARY

CONTRACTUAL ACTIONS AND THE SAFETY

ACT

 SUBPART 50.1 EXTRAORDINARY CONTRACTUAL ACTIONS

 50.102 Delegation of and limitations on exercise of authority.

 50.102-2 Contract adjustment boards.

SUBPART 50.1 EXTRAORDINARY CONTRACTUAL ACTIONS

50.102 Delegation of and limitations on exercise of authority.

50.102-2 Contract adjustment boards.

The DISA Contract Adjustment Board shall be composed of the following members:

SPE Chairperson

HCA Vice Chairperson and Member

General Counsel Member

The Board considers and evaluates requests for contract adjustments and recommends appropriate

action to the Director. The findings of the Board are advisory. The HCA shall assume staff and

administrative cognizance of contract adjustment matters and supply secretarial and recorder

services for the operation of the Board.

A majority constitutes a quorum for any purpose and the concurring vote of a majority of the total

board membership constitutes an action of the board. Alternates may be appointed to act in the

absence of any member.
# FILED January 28, 1998 Cecil W. Crowson Appellate Cou rt Clerk 

### IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE MIDDLE SECTION AT NASHVILLE JERRY ALLEN ESTIS, et. al., ) ) Maury Circuit Plaintiffs/Appellee

s. ) No. 1759

) VS. ) Appeal No. ) 01A01-9709-CV-00513 WILLIAM CAROLL KELLEY, et. al., ) ) Defendants/Appellant

s. ) 

## O R D E R Theappellent, William Carroll Kelley, has filed a respectful petition to rehear which has been duly considered and is hereby respectfully denied. ENTER ________________

___________________________________ HENRY F. TODD PRESIDING JUDGE, MIDDL E SECTION

___________________________________ SAMUEL L. LEWIS, JUDGE

___________________________________ BEN H. CANTRELL, JUDGE
###### Editorial Note on [Subchapter A of Chapter VIII](/current/title-7/chapter-VIII/subchapter-A)

#### Authority:

[7 U.S.C. 71-87K](https://www.govinfo.gov/link/uscode/7/71), [1621-1627](https://www.govinfo.gov/link/uscode/7/1621).

###### Editorial Note on [Subchapter A of Chapter VIII](/current/title-7/chapter-VIII/subchapter-A)

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to subchapter A appear at [84 FR 45645](https://www.federalregister.gov/citation/84-FR-45645), Aug. 30, 2019.

#### § 868.313 Grades and grade requirements for the class Brewers Milled Rice. (See also [§ 868.315](/on/2024-09-16/title-7/section-868.315).)

Grades, Grade Requirements, and Grade Designations

| Grade | Maximum limits of— paddy kernels and seeds | | Color requirements1 | Minimum milling requirements2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Total (singly or combined) (percent) | Objectionable seeds (percent) |
| U.S. No. 13 4 | 0.5 | 0.05 | White or Creamy | Well milled. |
| U.S. No. 23 4 | 1.0 | 0.1 | Slightly gray | Well milled. |
| U.S. No. 33 4 | 1.5 | 0.2 | Light gray or slightly rosy | Reasonably well milled. |
| U.S. No. 43 4 | 3.0 | 0.4 | Gray or rosy | Reasonably well milled. |
| U.S. No. 5 | 5.0 | 1.5 | Dark gray or very rosy | Reasonably well milled. |
| U.S. Sample grade: | | | | |
| U.S. Sample grade shall be milled rice of this class which: (a) Does not meet the requirements for any of the grades from U.S. No. 1 to U.S. No. 5, inclusive; (b) contains more than 15.0 percent of moisture; (c) is musty or sour, or heating; (d) has any commercially objectionable foreign odor; (e) has a badly damaged or extremely red appearance; (f) contains more than 0.1 percent of foreign material; (g) contains more than 15.0 percent of broken kernels that will pass through a 21/2 sieve; (h) contains two or more live or dead weevils or other insects, insect webbing, or insect refuse; or (h) is otherwise of distinctly low quality. | | | | |
| | | | | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 1 For the special grade Parboiled milled rice, see [§ 868.315(c)](/on/2024-09-16/title-7/section-868.315#p-868.315(c)). | | | | |
| 2 For the special grade Undermilled milled rice, see [§ 868.315(d)](/on/2024-09-16/title-7/section-868.315#p-868.315(d)). | | | | |
| 3 Grades U.S. No. 1 to U.S. No. 4, inclusive, shall contain not more than 3.0 percent of heat-damaged kernels, kernels damaged by heat and/or parboiled kernels in nonparboiled rice. | | | | |
| 4 Grades U.S. No. 1 to U.S. No. 4, inclusive, shall contain not more than 1.0 percent of material passing through a 30 sieve. This limit does not apply to the special grade Granulated brewers milled rice. | | | | |

[[67 FR 61252](https://www.federalregister.gov/citation/67-FR-61252), Sept. 30, 2002]
07/23/201 0 FRI 11.'12 FAX 0002/00 2 

Mayor's Office 

814-437-1670 

City Manager's Office 

814-437-1485 

Finance Depaittnent 

814-437-1922 

Community Services E>epa]tment 

814-437-1430 

City of Franklin 

430 TTiirLcenth Street 

Franklin, Pennsylvania 16323 

www.frankUnpa.gov 

July 16, 2010 

Community Development Dept 

8l4^37-7g41 

Fire Department 

Business 814-432-3780 

Emergency 814-437-2911 

Police Depanmcnt 

Business 814-437-1644 

Emerfiency 814-437-2911 

Mr. Dennis J. De Vany 

Chief, Essential Air Service Division, X-53 

Office of Aviation Analysis 

U.S. Dept. of Transportation . : 3 

Dear Mr. Dc Vany: 

I am writing to express my strong support of the Gulfstream Int'l Airlines proposal. Option One, to 

provide scheduled air service to Franklin/Oil City (FKL) under the Essential Air Service program. 

The Cily of Franklin supports Gulfstream's Option One service through Cleveland and will work 

closely with the Airport and Gulfstream through the Save our Service (SOS) effort to improve 

passenger enplanements. The service offered using Cleveland as a hub gives this community more non 

stop destinations and reasonable connections and fares. Gulfstream has proven to be very customer 

conscious and the Continental Connection/ Continental brand is becoming a favorite in this region. The 

Airport works closely with the public and the air carrier on communication and customer service as well 

as providing a cost free-business environment for the carrier. These facts will make the SOS effort 

successful. 

The citizens and businesses of Franklin and the entire Oil Heritage Region are in need of timely^ 

dependable air service. Meaningful, scheduled air service is a key element in the economic viability of 

this region. Our rural area should be allowed to compete with other areas on a level playing field. 

Viable commercial air service helps level that playing field and is necessary for business development 

and sustained economic growth. 

We ask that you recommend this proposal to the Deputy Secretary. On behalf of the City of Franklin, I 

thank you for your work on the Essential Air Service program. 

Sinflerely, 

^^n n Witheru Witherupp Ruaegeair 

Deputy Mayor 

:egea)r Q
###### Editorial Note on Subpart A of Part 989

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 989 appear at 83 FR 53973, Oct. 26, 2018.

#### § 989.79 Expenses.

The Committee is authorized to incur such expenses as the Secretary finds are reasonable and likely to be incurred by it during each crop year, for the maintenance and functioning of the Committee and for such purposes as he may, pursuant to this subpart, determine to be appropriate. The funds to cover such expenses shall be obtained levying assessments as provided in § 989.80. The Committee shall file with the Secretary for each crop year a proposed budget of these expenses and a proposal as to the assessment rate to be fixed pursuant to § 989.80, together with a report thereon. Such filing shall be not later than October 5 of the crop year, but this date may be extended by the Committee not more than 5 days if warranted by a late crop.

[83 FR 53971, Oct. 26, 2018]
/?c77ôiV/1'', /;O,'-cV- 7o3

IN 7M zcTx/i- uf7 .. i-'#ii^' 7225

7( //42 7I f i2

AN

ia//A 2yc

Pet, t,rn11

VI

64er,i9 J1iç

^fcfldcfi?,

I 0

çç )^

, ) 

Sofl /Xc I'?

iit Ci/Stc/ci/

r Sofl1

Ze iJ'

of y-Ae icr1'7c'

Ti'Y X,

C'-

cT)e

P1o,Yt/A/Z'FA' ? if i-/IJ7

//? 8 Fni c€,g,us IYY/9 /M'H iFu77

/24/ / -/7-2'%

(V5C6 J-z)

Case 1:06-cv-00703-MHT-CSC Document 50 Filed 01/18/2008 Page 1 of 2
CMT/F/cRTE QJfT if,f VicE

/7 1%az' a ii e_/7 j4

'co, 7 dVezcOfYof/Ae/o(efO,725 "4

ñ/aA4ma '9á"riY 6enera/ ,Voii, Ty /rj / U.c.fi/Q'1 /' Sz' ff,oa a,I /ff e nY aIIrecI as

/2//c WS1'

LVZL &77,,g4 ,;cy- 7

10 /0

ñ/a,iia AWotij17 t'/Yt/2i/

// ZJ/2 ii stfeei' TA,'yIf/col /)7ontjoPie/7 /?LJ 3'1d'

1AzrLI1________

/'Jt // 3/7 gf//3331ç321I)

2IZZL/ LEzfI,

UN/rED ,9/S7X/cICo VII'I

/o/3oX 71/

moivr6o 712 'rP) ,9.2 Jila / 0 7/i

ñaiA W 1Jo,) J,o

/flOC &/21oc/(

cc rTe, '

n t / / c, '/, 'tY /. I9c %c/'7

/m,n cP lfS,,'9d1 3,1c6'7-.J7'7

iL27 oá'

(tf S i)

Case 1:06-cv-00703-MHT-CSC Document 50 Filed 01/18/2008 Page 2 of 2