alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Editorial Note on Part 2
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 2 appear at 79 FR 75739, Dec. 19, 2014.

§ 2.319 Power of the presiding officer. A presiding officer has the duty to conduct a fair and impartial hearing according to law, to take appropriate action to control the prehearing and hearing process, to avoid delay and to maintain order. The presiding officer has all the powers necessary to those ends, including the powers to: ( a ) Administer oaths and affirmations;
( b ) Issue subpoenas authorized by law, including subpoenas requested by a participant for the attendance and testimony of witnesses or the production of evidence upon the requestor's showing of general relevance and reasonable scope of the evidence sought;
( c ) Consolidate parties and proceedings in accordance with §§ 2.316 and 2.317 and/or direct that common interests be represented by a single spokesperson;
( d ) Rule on offers of proof and receive evidence. In proceedings under this part, strict rules of evidence do not apply to written submissions. However, the presiding officer may, on motion or on the presiding officer's own initiative, strike any portion of a written presentation or a response to a written question that is irrelevant, immaterial, unreliable, duplicative or cumulative.
( e ) Restrict irrelevant, immaterial, unreliable, duplicative or cumulative evidence and/or arguments;
( f ) Order depositions to be taken as appropriate;
( g ) Regulate the course of the hearing and the conduct of participants;
( h ) Dispose of procedural requests or similar matters;
( i ) Examine witnesses;
( j ) Hold conferences before or during the hearing for settlement, simplification of contentions, or any other proper purpose;
( k ) Set reasonable schedules for the conduct of the proceeding and take actions reasonably calculated to maintain overall schedules;
( l ) Refer rulings to the Commission under § 2.323(f)(1), or certify questions to the Commission for its determination, either in the presiding officer's discretion, or on petition of a party under § 2.323(f)(2), or on direction of the Commission.
( m ) Reopen a proceeding for the receipt of further evidence at any time before the initial decision;
( n ) Appoint special assistants from the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel under § 2.322;
( o ) Issue initial decisions as provided in this part;
( p ) Dispose of motions by written order or by oral ruling during the course of a hearing or prehearing conference. The presiding officer should ensure that parties not present for the oral ruling are notified promptly of the ruling;
( q ) Issue orders necessary to carry out the presiding officer's duties and responsibilities under this part; and
( r ) Establish a schedule for briefs and oral arguments to decide any admitted contentions that, as determined by the presiding officer, constitute pure issues of law.
( s ) Take any other action consistent with the Act, this chapter, and 5 U.S.C. 551-558.
[69 FR 2236, Jan. 14, 2004, as amended at 77 FR 46592, Aug. 3, 2012]
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0000764843
<NAME> SEDONA CORP
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<CURRENCY> U.S.

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                           1,011
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      832
<ALLOWANCES>                                        45
<INVENTORY>                                      1,131
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 3,059
<PP&E>                                           4,283
<DEPRECIATION>                                   3,364
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                       0
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            1,416
<BONDS>                                            163
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                      5,268
<COMMON>                                       (2,403)
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     4,444
<SALES>                                          1,082
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 1,082
<CGS>                                              728
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                      728
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 1,496
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  23
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (1,165)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (1,165)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (1,268)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (.06)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.06)


</TABLE>
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

NORTHERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES, )

)

)

v. ) Case. No. 2:06cr200-WHA

)

ROSA E. RINCON )

ORDER

Upon consideration of Defendant’s Motion in Limine (Doc. #42), filed on September 21,

2006, it is

ORDERED that the United States shall show cause, if any there be, on or before

September 29, 2006 why the motion should not be granted. The motion will be taken under

submission on that day for determination without oral hearing.

DONE this 21st day of September, 2006.

 /s/ W. Harold Albritton 

W. HAROLD ALBRITTON

SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 2:06-cr-00200-WHA-CSC Document 43 Filed 09/21/2006 Page 1 of 1
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

NORTHERN DIVISION

GONZALO MURILLO, JR., )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. ) CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:06v765-ID

 ) (WO)

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, )

)

Defendant. )

ORDER

Upon CONSIDERATION of the Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, filed

September 14, 2006, and Plaintiff Gonzalo Murillo, Jr.'s objection, filed October 3, 2006

(see Doc. Nos. 2-3), and upon an independent review of the file in this case, it is

ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff's objection be and the same is hereby OVERRULED;

2. the Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge be and the same is hereby

ADOPTED, APPROVED and AFFIRMED; 

3. the motion filed by Murillo on August 9, 2006 (Doc. No. 1) be and the same is

hereby DENIED and this cause is hereby DISMISSED as Murillo has failed to obtain the

requisite order from the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals authorizing this court to

consider a successive § 2255 motion.

DONE this 4 day of October, 2006. th

/s/ Ira DeMent 

SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 2:06-cv-00765-ID-CSC Document 4 Filed 10/04/2006 Page 1 of 1
gss_ex10-13.htm


    MOTOR
OPERATED COMMERCIAL FOOD PREPARING MACHINES

     

    
      
        

      

    

    K-TEC
- Orem, UT USA

    
      
        

      



    Trade
Name(s): Blendtec.

    


    Commercial
Blender, Model No. ES-3. Model Nos. ICB, ABC followed by -3 to -7.

    


    Commercial
Electric Blenders, Model Nos. Series ABC-3, ABC-5, ABC-6, ABC-7, ES-3, ICB-3,
ICB- 4, ICB-5, ICB-6, ICB-7 (may be installed on counter, stand).

    


    Commercial
Electric Blenders/Dispensers, Model Nos. BDI-, BI- followed by 501, 503, 505,
506, 507, 508, 509, 510, 511, 513, 515, 516, 517, 518, 519, 520. Model Nos.
BD8-501, BD8-502, D4, D8.

    


    Commercial
Electric Blender with Ice Dispenser & Optional Refrigeration & Juice
Dispenser, MegaBlender, Model Nos. MB-1, MB-2.

    


    Long John
Silver's Commercial Batter Mixer, Model No. LJ-1.

    


    Self-Serve
Smoothie Machine, Model No. S01A.

    


    


    Evaluated
to the following...

    A
representative sample of the listed devices have been tested, investigated and
found to comply with the requirements of the Standard(s) for Motor Operated
Commercial Food Preparing Machines (UL- 763) and are identified with the ETL
Listed Mark.
Bank
                of America, N.A.900
                West Trade StreetSuite
                650NC1-026-06-01Charlotte,
                NC 28255www.bankamerica.com




**ANNUAL
        STATEMENT AS TO COMPLIANCE**
 **OFFICER'S
        CERTIFICATION**
  Re:            
          Banc of America Commercial Mortgage Inc.
 Commercial
          Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates
 Series
          2006-5
   In
            connection with the above-referenced transaction the undersigned officer,
            on
            behalf of Bank of America, N.A., hereby certifies that (i) a review of
            the
            Servicing activities, for the period ending December 31, 2006 and of
            its
            performance under the Pooling and Servicing Agreement dated as of October
            1, 2006 has been made under my supervision, and (ii) to the best of my
            knowledge, based on such review, Bank of America, N.A. has fulfilled
            all of its
            obligations under this agreement in all material respects throughout
            the
            aforementioned period.
  Bank
          of America, N.A.
  /s/
          Sean D. Reilly
 Sean
          D. Reilly
 Principal
   /s/
          H. Michael Lumadue
 H.
          Michael Lumadue
 Vice
          President
2906.501 Requirement.       The Assistant Secretary for Administration and Management must appoint a Competition Advocate for the Department of Labor. The appointment will be predicated on an understanding of the competition requirements in the FAR, and particularly small business programs.    **Parent topic:** Subpart 2906.5 - Competition Advocate
937.7040 Contract clauses.       The contracting officer shall insert the clause at 952.237-70 entitled “Collective bargaining agreements - protective services” in all protective services solicitations and contracts involving DOE-owned facilities requiring continuity of services for public safety and national defense reasons. See also, 922.103-5, Contract clauses, which prescribes use of the clause at 48 CFR 52.222-1, Notice to the Government of Labor Disputes.    **Parent topic:** Subpart 937.70 - Protective Services Contracting
226 So.2d 58

#### James E. McGONIGAL v. DISTRICT COURT OF JEFFERSON PARISH, State of Louisiana, et al.

No. 50053.

Sept. 4, 1969.

In re: James E. McGonigal applying for writs of mandamus and habeas corpus.

Application denied as the return made by the district attorney shows that extradition proceedings have commenced.
Editorial Note on Part 35
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 35 appear at 79 FR 75739, Dec. 19, 2014.

§ 35.12 Application for license, amendment, or renewal. ( a ) An application must be signed by the applicant's or licensee's management.
( b ) An application for a license for medical use of byproduct material as described in §§ 35.100, 35.200, 35.300, 35.400, 35.500, 35.600, and 35.1000 must be made by— ( 1 ) Filing an original NRC Form 313, “Application for Material License,” that includes the facility diagram, equipment, and training and experience qualifications of the Radiation Safety Officer, Associate Radiation Safety Officer(s), authorized user(s), authorized medical physicist(s), ophthalmic physicist(s), and authorized nuclear pharmacist(s); and
( 2 ) Submitting procedures required by §§ 35.610, 35.642, 35.643, and 35.645, as applicable.
( c ) A request for a license amendment or renewal must be made by— ( 1 ) Submitting an original of either— ( i ) NRC Form 313, “Application for Material License”; or
( ii ) A letter containing all information required by NRC Form 313; and
( 2 ) Submitting procedures required by §§ 35.610, 35.642, 35.643, and 35.645, as applicable.
( d ) In addition to the requirements in paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section, an application for a license or amendment for medical use of byproduct material as described in § 35.1000 must also include: ( 1 ) Any additional aspects of the medical use of the material that are applicable to radiation safety that are not addressed in, or differ from, subparts A through C, L, and M of this part;
( 2 ) Identification of and commitment to follow the applicable radiation safety program requirements in subparts D through H of this part that are appropriate for the specific § 35.1000 medical use;
( 3 ) Any additional specific information on— ( i ) Radiation safety precautions and instructions;
( ii ) Methodology for measurement of dosages or doses to be administered to patients or human research subjects; and
( iii ) Calibration, maintenance, and repair of instruments and equipment necessary for radiation safety; and
( 4 ) Any other information requested by the Commission in its review of the application.
( e ) An applicant that satisfies the requirements specified in § 33.13 of this chapter may apply for a Type A specific license of broad scope.
[67 FR 20370, Apr. 24, 2002; 67 FR 62872, Oct. 9, 2002; 83 FR 33102, July 16, 2018]
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>               DEC-31-1997             DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                    JUN-30-1997             DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                               551785                       0                             
<SECURITIES>                              0                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                             0                       0
<ALLOWANCES>                              0                       0
<INVENTORY>                               0                       0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                          0                       0
<PP&E>                             13705690                       0
<DEPRECIATION>                      6578901                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                      7768031                      0
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                     0                       0
<BONDS>                                   0                       0
<COMMON>                                  0                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                     0                       0
<PREFERRED>                               0                       0
<OTHER-SE>                                0                       0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>        7768031                       0
<SALES>                             1287029                       0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                    1293248                       0
<CGS>                                     0                       0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                             0                       0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                          0                       0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                          0                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                        0                       0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                      405342                       0
<INCOME-TAX>                              0                       0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                  405342                       0   
<DISCONTINUED>                            0                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                           0                       0
<CHANGES>                                 0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                         405342                       0
<EPS-PRIMARY>                             0                       0
<EPS-DILUTED>                             0                       0
        

</TABLE>
1242.1503 Procedures.

(a)

(1) Each OA is responsible for assigning responsibility and management accountability for the

completeness of past performance submissions as required in FAR 42.1503(a).

Parent topic: Subpart 1242.15—Contractor Performance Information
**Exhibit 31.2**

 

**Certification Pursuant to**

**Rules 13a-14(a) or 15d-14(a) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as Amended**

 

I, Diana M. Laing, certify that:

 

1.                     I have reviewed this Annual Report on Form 10-K/A of American Homes 4 Rent; and

 

2.                     Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report.

 

 
|   | /s/ Diana M. Laing               |
|--------|----------------------------------|
|   | Name: Diana M. Laing             |
|   | Title: Chief Financial   Officer |
|   | Date: May 8, 2015                |

 

----
DISMISS; and Opinion Filed December 7, 2018.

In The

Court of Appeals

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05-18-01354-CR

No. 05-18-01355-CR

LATRICIA FURRER, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 422nd Judicial District Court

Kaufman County, Texas

Trial Court Cause Nos. 14-10102-422-F & 16-30574-422-F

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices Lang-Miers, Fillmore, and Myers

Opinion by Justice Fillmore

On November 7, 2018, Latricia Furrer filed her notice of appeals in the above cases. The 

trial court clerk informed the Court that although motions to revoke Furrer’s community 

supervision had been filed in these cases, the hearing on the motions is scheduled for January 2019.

An appellate court has jurisdiction to determine an appeal only if the appeal is authorized 

by law. Abbott v. State, 271 S.W.3d 694, 696–97 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008). Appellate courts may 

consider criminal appeals only after conviction or the entry of a narrow set of appealable 

interlocutory orders. TEX.R. APP. P. 26.2(a)(1); Wright v. State, 969 S.W.2d 588, 589 (Tex. App.—

Dallas 1998, no pet.).
–2–

Here, although motions to revoke Furrer’s probation have been filed, the trial court has not 

yet ruled on the motions. Thus, there are no final judgments or otherwise appealable orders in 

these cases. Under these circumstances, we conclude we lack jurisdiction.

We dismiss these appeals for want of jurisdiction.

Do Not Publish

TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b)

181354F.U05

/Robert M. Fillmore/

ROBERT M. FILLMORE

JUSTICE
–3–

Court of Appeals

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

JUDGMENT

LATRICIA FURRER, Appellant

No. 05-18-01354-CR V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 422nd Judicial District 

Court, Kaufman County, Texas.

Trial Court Cause No. 14-10102-422-F.

Opinion delivered by Justice Fillmore. 

Justices Lang-Miers and Myers 

participating.

Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, we DISMISS this appeal for want of 

jurisdiction.

Judgment entered this 7th day of December, 2018.
–4–

Court of Appeals

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

JUDGMENT

LATRICIA FURRER, Appellant

No. 05-18-01355-CR V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 422nd Judicial District 

Court, Kaufman County, Texas.

Trial Court Cause No. 16-30574-422-F.

Opinion delivered by Justice Fillmore. 

Justices Lang-Miers and Myers 

participating.

Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, we DISMISS this appeal for want of 

jurisdiction.

Judgment entered this 7th day of December, 2018.
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

NORTHERN DIVISION

)

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA )

 )

 v. ) CR. NO. 2:06-cr-200-WHA

 )

HECTOR R. SILVA and )

ROSA E. RINCON )

UNITED STATES’ NOTICE OF APPEARANCE OF ADDITIONAL COUNSEL

Comes now the United States of America, by and through Leura Garrett Canary, United

States Attorney for the Middle District of Alabama, and hereby notices the appearance of Assistant

United States Attorney Christopher A. Snyder, who will be serving as additional counsel of record

for the United States in this matter. 

 Respectfully submitted this the 10th of October, 2006.

LEURA GARRETT CANARY

UNITED STATES ATTORNEY

/s/ Christopher A. Snyder

CHRISTOPHER A. SNYDER

Assistant United States Attorney

One Court Square, Suite 201

Montgomery, AL 36104

Phone: (334)223-7280

Fax: (334)223-7135

E-mail: christopher.a.snyder@usdoj.gov

Case 2:06-cr-00200-WHA-CSC Document 62 Filed 10/10/2006 Page 1 of 2
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

NORTHERN DIVISION

)

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA )

 )

 v. ) CR. NO. 2:06-cr-200-WHA

 )

HECTOR R. SILVA and )

ROSA E. RINCON )

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on October 10, 2006, I electronically filed the foregoing with the Clerk

of the Court using the CM/ECF system which will send notification of such filing to all attorneys

of record.

LEURA GARRETT CANARY

UNITED STATES ATTORNEY

/s/ Chri s t o p h e r A. Sny der

CHRISTOPHER A. SNYDER

Assistant United States Attorney

One Court Square, Suite 201

Montgomery, AL 36104

Phone: (334)223-7280

Fax: (334)223-7135

E-mail: christopher.a.snyder@usdoj.gov

Case 2:06-cr-00200-WHA-CSC Document 62 Filed 10/10/2006 Page 2 of 2
#### SATTLER v. SLONIMSKY et al.

(District Court, E. D. Pennsylvania.

October 14, 1912.)

No. 1,850.

Bankruptcy (§ 279*) — Action by Trustee — Conspiracy to Hinder and Delay Creditors.

Under Bankr. Act July 1. 1898, c. 541; § 47a, 30 Stat. 557 (U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 3439), as amended by Act Cong. June 25, 1910, e. 412, § 8, 30 Stat. 840 (U. S. Comp. St. Supp. 1911, p. 1500), giving to a bankrupt's trustee, as to all property not in tbe custody of tbe bankruptcy court, tbe rights, remedies, and powers of a judgment creditor bolding an execution duly returned unsatisfied, a creditor being entitled to sue in trespass on tbe case for conspiracy, prior to bankruptcy, to fraudulently secrete and transfer tbe debtor’s property, such action may be maintained by tbe trustee.

[Ed. Note. — Por other cases, see Bankruptcy, Cent. Dig. §§ 419-424; Dec. Dig. § 279.*]

At Daw. Action by one Sattler, as trustee in bankruptcy, against S. Slonimsky and others. On motion to dismiss.

Denied.

Wessel & Aarons, of Philadelphia, Pa., for the motion.

Fox & Rothschild, of Philadelphia, Pa., opposed.

*

For otlier cases see same topic *&*§ number in Dec. *&*Am. Digs. 1907 to date, & Rep’r Indexes

THOMPSON, District Judge.

This action in trespass is brought to recover damages arising from an alleged unlawful conspiracy entered into by the defendants prior to the adjudication in bankruptcy to fraudulently and collusively transfer and conceal moneys of Harry Ruderman and Jacob Ruderman, the bankrupts, for the purpose of hindering and delaying their creditors.

Prior to the amendment of June 25, 1910, to section 47a of the Bankruptcy Act, such a suit could not have been maintained upon a cause of action arising prior to the adjudication in bankruptcy, because the rights of action which vested in the trustee upon his appoint*593ment were only such as were vested in the bankrupts prior to the adjudication. The amendment to section 47a provides, however, that the trustee “as to all property not in the custody of the bankruptcy court shall be deemed vested with all the rights, remedies, and powers of a judgment creditor holding an execution duly returned unsatisfied.”

That a creditor may bring an action of trespass on the case, based upon a conspiracy to fraudulently secrete and transfer the property of a defendant in an execution from the reach of the plaintiff, is well settled. Tams v. Lewis, Trustee, 42 Pa. 402; Collins v. Cronin, 117 Pa. 35, 11 Atl. 869. L think the present action is maintainable against all the parties to the alleged conspiracy»

The motion is therefore denied.