alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Case 1:06-cv-00647-WKW-SRW Document 42 Filed 11/29/2007 Page 1 of 2
Case 1:06-cv-00647-WKW-SRW Document 42 Filed 11/29/2007 Page 2 of 2
Case 2:06-cv-00766-MHT-TFM Document 74 Filed 07/09/2007 Page 1 of 2
Case 2:06-cv-00766-MHT-TFM Document 74 Filed 07/09/2007 Page 2 of 2
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 364 Engrossed in House (EH)]

H. Res. 364

                 In the House of Representatives, U.S.,

                                                         July 18, 2005.
Whereas the Republic of India achieved its independence from the British Empire 
        on August 15, 1947, and has since that time maintained a democratic 
        system of government;
Whereas India has in recent years opened its economy to a considerable extent to 
        trade and investment and has liberalized its internal economic system;
Whereas India's relationship with the United States has deepened in past years 
        and encompasses cooperation on matters relating to international 
        security, political stability, world trade, technology, science, and 
        health;
Whereas India and Pakistan, neighbors who have fought bitter wars in past 
        decades, have increased their efforts to settle their differences by 
        peaceful means;
Whereas Americans of Indian origin have made critical contributions to the 
        culture and economy of the United States;
Whereas the Prime Minister of India, His Excellency Dr. Manmohan Singh, has, in 
        his previous capacity as Finance Minister, helped shape India's economic 
        policies to permit the growth of free markets, which has led to much 
        greater economic prosperity for many people in India and the creation of 
        a large middle class; and
Whereas Prime Minister Singh has accepted an invitation by the United States to 
        make an official visit to Washington, D.C.: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That it is the sense of the House of Representatives that the 
continuing improvement in relations between the United States and the Republic 
of India, exemplified by the current official visit of the Prime Minister of 
India, His Excellency Dr. Manmohan Singh, is to be commended, supported, and 
expanded in the interest of the people of India and the people of the United 
States.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```
RECF I VFO

?1JG •Pt 2 A 10: 22

II

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

NORTHERN DIVISION

CALVIN FLUKER, RICARDO

WRIGHT, BERYL JACKSON,

TRACEY MARTIN, KIMBERLY

LOVE and RESHANDA BROWN,

Plaintiffs,

V. CIVIL ACTION NO.:

2:06cv785-MHT

U.S. FOODSERVICE, INC. and

U.S. FOODSERVICE, INC. -

MONTGOMERY DIVISION,

Defendants.

MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE

MOTION TO ENFORCE PLAINTIFF

TRACEY MARTIN'S: SETTLEMENT UNDER SEAL

Defendant U.S. Foodservice, Inc. moves the Court to allow it to file a

Motion to Enforce Plaintiff Tracey Martin's ("Martin") Settlement Under

Seal. In support of this motion, defendant states the following:

The parties in this case reached a confidential settlement. Although

Martin's counsel settled this case within the authority given to them by their

client, Martin has refused to execute the Settlement Agreement. In order to

maintain the confidential terms of the settlement, defendant respectfully

Case 2:06-cv-00785-MHT-WC Document 75 Filed 04/02/2008 Page 1 of 2
II

requests that this Court enter an Order allowing defendant to file the Motion

to Enforce Settlement and exhibits thereto under seal.

Respectfully submitted,

Tammy L. Baker (ASB-9522-B62T)

E-Mai 1: B akerT@ I acksonlewi s . corn

JACKSON LEWIS LLP

First Commercial Bank Building

800 Shades Creek Parkway

Suite 870

Birmingham, Alabama 35209

Phone: (205) 332-3106

Fax: (205) 332-3131

COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANT

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

This is to certify that on April 1, 2008, a copy of the foregoing was

submitted to counsel of record via U.S. Mail, postage prepaid, and addressed

as follows:

Jon C. Goldfarb, Esq.

Ethan R. Dettling, Esq.

Wiggins, Childs, Quinn & Pantazis, LLC

301 19th Street North

Birmingham, AL 35203

Counsel of Record

Case 2:06-cv-00785-MHT-WC Document 75 Filed 04/02/2008 Page 2 of 2
2007-0507.

#### Albrecht v. Treon.

Certified Question of State Law, United States District Court, Southern District of Ohio, Western Division, No. L06CV274. On motion to strike brief of amici curiae Catholic League and Brunner *1409Funeral Home. Motion denied.

Moyer, C.J., and Cupp, J., dissent.
159 So.2d 286

#### Walter H. DANIELS v. Uriah W. STANSBURY.

No. 47023.

Jan. 20, 1964.

In re: Weill Lumber Company, Inc., applying for writs of certiorari, mandamus and prohibition.

Writ refused. We find no error of* law in the ruling complained of.
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 147 Engrossed in House (EH)]

                 In the House of Representatives, U.S.,

                                                        March 16, 2005.
    Resolved,

SECTION 1. ELECTION OF MEMBERS TO JOINT COMMITTEE ON PRINTING.

    The following Members are hereby elected to the Joint Committee on Printing, 
to serve with the chair of the Committee on House Administration:
            (1) Mr. Doolittle.
            (2) Mr. Reynolds.
            (3) Ms. Millender-McDonald.
            (4) Mr. Brady of Pennsylvania.

SEC. 2. ELECTION OF MEMBERS TO JOINT COMMITTEE OF CONGRESS ON THE LIBRARY.

    The following Members are hereby elected to the Joint Committee of Congress 
on the Library, to serve with the chair of the Committee on House 
Administration:
            (1) Mr. Ehlers.
            (2) Mrs. Miller of Michigan.
            (3) Ms. Millender-McDonald.
            (4) Ms. Zoe Lofgren of California.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```
Editorial Note on Part 1
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 1 appear at 78 FR 34247, June 7, 2013.

§ 1.24 Office of Commission Appellate Adjudication. The Office of Commission Appellate Adjudication— ( a ) Monitors cases pending before presiding officers;
( b ) Provides the Commission with an analysis of any adjudicatory matter requiring a Commission decision (e.g., petitions for review, certified questions, stay requests) including available options;
( c ) Drafts any necessary decisions pursuant to the Commission's guidance after presentation of options; and
( d ) Consults with the Office of the General Counsel in identifying the options to be presented to the Commission and in drafting the final decision to be presented to the Commission.
[56 FR 29407, June 27, 1991]
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 30 Filed 03/12/2007 Page 1 of 2
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 30 Filed 03/12/2007 Page 2 of 2
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                          19,367
<SECURITIES>                                     2,227
<RECEIVABLES>                                   16,415
<ALLOWANCES>                                       864
<INVENTORY>                                     14,970
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                55,839
<PP&E>                                          22,605
<DEPRECIATION>                                   6,210
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  76,976
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           35,161
<BONDS>                                          4,451
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        38,163
<OTHER-SE>                                      (6,854)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    76,976
<SALES>                                          8,633
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 9,108
<CGS>                                            6,281
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    6,967
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                (2,903)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 326
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  4,901
<INCOME-TAX>                                       244
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              4,434
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     4,434
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.63
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.60
        

</TABLE>
###### Editorial Note on Part 31

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 31 appear at 79 FR 75739, Dec. 19, 2014.

#### §§ 31.13-31.20 [Reserved]
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

NORTHERN DIVISION

DONNA DORSEY DAVIS, :

as an individual and derivatively upon :

behalf of I-65 Properties, Inc., :

:

Plaintiff, :

:

vs. : Case No. 2:06-cv-766-MHT

:

RICHARD M. DORSEY, as an individual :

and CD&O, LLC, as a necessary party, :

:

Defendants. :

NOTICE OF SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE AND MEDIATION

COME NOW the parties and, pursuant to the Court’s November 2, 2006 Uniform Scheduling

Order, state as follows:

1. The parties have engaged in settlement negotiations, including but not limited to the

exchanging of documents, offers and demands.

2. The parties advise the Court that there is no possibility for settlement of this case

at this time.

3. Further, while the Plaintiff believes that mediation will assist in resolving this matter,

the Defendant does not agree and does not believe that this matter can be resolved

through mediation.

Counsel for Defendants attests that Lindsay B. Erwin has agreed to the foregoing

statements and has authorized the execution and electronic filing of same on her behalf.

Respectfully Submitted this 18 day of April, 2007. th

DONNA DAVIS DORSEY, PLAINTIFF,

By: /s/ Lindsay B. Erwin 

Meacham, Earley & Fowler, P.C.

5704 Veterans Parkway

Columbus, GA 31904

(706) 576-4064 phone

LindsayErwin@gmail.com

Richard Dorsey and CD&O, LLC, Defendants

By: /s/ Clifford Cleveland 

Cleveland & Colley, P.C.

Post Office Box 680689

Prattville, AL 36068

(334) 356-1500 phone 

Cliff.Cleveland@clevelandcolley.com

Case 2:06-cv-00766-MHT-TFM Document 36 Filed 04/18/2007 Page 1 of 2
2

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that I have electronically filed the foregoing Notice of Settlement Conference

and Mediation with the Clerk of the Court for the United States District Court, for the Middle District

of Alabama, Northern Division, using the CM/ECF system which will send notification of such filing

to Lindsay B. Erwin, Esquire (lindsayerwin@gmail.com) and James Edward Roberts, Esquire

(attyjuris@aol.com) this the 18 day of April, 2007. th

/s/ Clifford W. Cleveland 

OF COUNSEL

Case 2:06-cv-00766-MHT-TFM Document 36 Filed 04/18/2007 Page 2 of 2
### NUMBER 13

- 10

- 00 587

- CV



## COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI

- EDINBURG

BISHOP CONSOLIDATED INDEPENDENT

SCHOOL DISTRICT

, Appellant,

v.

CYNTHIA NAVA, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS

NEXT FRIEND OF DEMI NAVA, A MINOR

, Appellee.

On Appeal from the 17 th District Court

of Nueces County, Texas.



## MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Chief Justice Valdez and Justices Rodriguez and Perkes

Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam

This appeal was abated by this Court on November 18, 2010 , to allow the parties

the opportunity to engage in mediation . This cause is now before the Court on

appellant = s motion to dismiss the appeal on grounds that all matters in controversy2

between the parties have been resolved to the mutual satisfaction of all parties

.

Appellant requests that this Court dismiss the appeal. Accordingly, this c ase is hereby

REINSTATED.

The Court, having considered the documents on file and appellant = s motion to

dismiss the appeal, is of the opinion that the motion should be granted. See T EX

. R. A PP

.

P . 42.1(a). Appellant = s motion to dismiss is granted, and the appeal is hereby

DISMISSED. Costs will be taxed against appellant. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P . 42.1(d) ("Absent

agreement of the parties, the court will tax costs against the appellant."). Having

dismissed the appeal at ap pellant = s request, no motion for rehearing will be entertained,

and our mandate will issue forthwith.

PER CURIAM

D elivered and filed the

10th day of February , 20 11

.
Exhibit 32.1
 32.1 Section 1350 Certifications of Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer.
 Certification of the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer
Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
As Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
 
 (1)
    
    The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and(2)
    
    The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
of the Partnership.
 Date: April 14, 2010
 /s/ Adam J. LauferAdam J. LauferChief Executive Officer and 
Chief Financial Officer

of Soleil Capital  Management L.L.C. *
    
    The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18
U.S.C. Section 1350 and is not being filed as part of the Report or as
a separate disclosure document.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from
financial statements for the three months ended September 30, 2000,
and is qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial
statements.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-2001
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                       1,232,952
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                2,282,950
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                  5,808,990
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            12,134,299
<PP&E>                                      38,372,328
<DEPRECIATION>                              19,351,243
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              32,057,375
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       11,891,478
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        47,326
<OTHER-SE>                                  11,352,607
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                32,057,375
<SALES>                                     13,686,344
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            13,686,344
<CGS>                                       11,791,217
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               11,791,217
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             2,421,466
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             253,691
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (771,343)
<INCOME-TAX>                                 (280,619)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (490,724)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (490,724)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (.10)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.10)


</TABLE>
§ 13.10 Default upon failure to file an answer. ( a ) If the defendant does not file an answer within the time prescribed in § 13.9(a), the reviewing official may refer the complaint to the ALJ.
( b ) Upon the referral of the complaint, the ALJ shall promptly serve on defendant in the manner prescribed in § 13.8 a notice that an initial decision will be issued under this section.
( c ) The ALJ shall assume the facts alleged in the complaint to be true, and, if such facts establish liability under § 13.3, the ALJ shall issue an initial decision imposing the maximum amount of penalties and assessments allowed under the statute.
( d ) Except as otherwise provided in this section, by failing to file a timely answer, the defendant waives any right to further review of the penalties and assessments imposed under paragraph (c) of this section and the initial decision shall become final and binding upon the parties 30 days after it is issued.
( e ) If, before such an initial decision becomes final, the defendant files a motion with the ALJ seeking to reopen on the grounds that extraordinary circumstances prevented the defendant from filing an answer, the initial decision shall be stayed pending the ALJ's decision on the motion.
( f ) If, on such motion, the defendant can demonstrate extraordinary circumstances excusing the failure to file a timely answer, the ALJ shall withdraw the initial decision in paragraph (c) of this section if such a decision has been issued, and shall grant the defendant an opportunity to answer the complaint.
( g ) A decision of the ALJ denying a defendant's motion under paragraph (e) of this section is not subject to reconsideration under § 13.38.
( h ) The defendant may appeal to the authority head the decision denying a motion to reopen by filing a notice of appeal with the authority head within 15 days after the ALJ denies the motion. The timely filing of a notice of appeal shall stay the initial decision until the authority head decides the issue.
( i ) If the defendant files a timely notice of appeal with the authority head, the ALJ shall forward the record of the proceeding to the authority head.
( j ) The authority head shall decide expeditiously whether extraordinary circumstances excuse the defendant's failure to file a timely answer based solely on the record before the ALJ.
( k ) If the authority head decides that extraordinary circumstances excused the defendant's failure to file a timely answer, the authority head shall remand the case to the ALJ with instructions to grant the defendant an opportunity to answer.
( l ) If the authority head decides that the defendant's failure to file a timely answer is not excused, the authority head shall reinstate the initial decision of the ALJ, which shall become final and binding upon the parties 30 days after the authority head issues such decision.
#### In the Matter of the Claim of James Koutsourdais, Respondent, v. A & C Precision, Inc., Appellant, and Hartford Accident *&*Indemnity Company, Respondent. Workmen’s Compensation Board, Respondent.

Motion to dismiss appeal granted, with costs pursuant to section 23 of the Workmen’s Compensation Law. Herlihy, P. J., Reynolds, Staley, Jr., Cooke and Sweeney, JJ., concur.
Case 2:06-cv-00756-MHT-WC Document 4 Filed 09/05/2006 Page 1 of 1
#### Winn’s Inc., Respondent, v. State of New York, Appellant.

(Claim No. 47442.)

Judgement unanimously affirmed, with costs. Memorandum: The award of $167,250 for the appropriation of 20,500 square feet of land on Genesee Street in the Village of New Hartford on which was situated a substantial structure of three stories and a basement used as a retail furniture store was within the range of expert testimony and supported by the proof. The court found the value of the land to be $42,250, the building $120,000, and a sign on the premises $5,000. While it failed to demonstrate the manner by which it determined the building value, a practice we have repeatedly disapproved, there is sufficient evidence in the record from which appropriate findings may be made and we would affirm upon the following evaluations of the proof of building value based upon an economic rental projection. Basement 6,000 sq ft. $.50 $3,000; first floor 8,000 sq. ft. $1.31 $10,480; second floor 6,000 sq. ft. $.75 $4,500; third floor 6,000 sq. ft. $.50 $3,000; $20,980. Less annual expenses and 5% allowance for vacancies $5,649; net income $15,331; return to land $42,250 -6%% $2,745; net income to improvements $12,586. Net income rounded off at $12,600 and capitalized at 10%% produces $120,000 as the value of the improvements which, added to land value of $42,250 and the sign value of $5,000 makes a total valuation of $167,250, the sum awarded. (Appeal from judgment of Court of Claims in claim for permanent appropriation.) Present— Del Vecchio, J. P., Marsh, Witmer, Moule and Bastow, JJ.
#### § 434.301 Design criteria.

301.1 The following design parameters shall be used for calculations required under [subpart D of this part](/on/2024-09-17/title-10/part-434/subpart-D).

301.1.1 *Exterior Design Conditions.* Exterior Design Conditions shall be expressed in accordance with Table 301.1.

Table 301.1—Exterior Design Conditions

| Winter Design Dry-Bulb (99%) | | Degrees F. |
| Summer Design Dry-Bulb (2.5%) | | Degrees F. |
| Mean Coincident Wet-Bulb (2.5%) | | Degrees F. |
| Degree-Days, Heating (Base 65) | | HDD Base 65 °F. |
| Degree-Days, Cooling (Base 65) | | CDD Base 65 °F. |
| Annual Operating Hours, 8 a.m. to 4 p.m. when 55 °F≤T≤69 °F | | Hours. |
| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| [The exterior design conditions shall be added to Table 301.1 from the city-specific Shading Coefficient table from appendix A of RS-1 (incorporated by reference, see [§ 434.701](/on/2024-09-17/title-10/section-434.701)). Copies of specific tables contained in appendix A of RS-1 (incorporated by reference, see [§ 434.701](/on/2024-09-17/title-10/section-434.701)). can be obtained from the Energy Code for Federal Commercial Buildings, Docket No. EE-RM-79-112-C, EE-43, Office of Building Research and Standards, U.S. Department of Energy, Room 1J-018, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585, (202) 586-9127. Adjustments may be made to reflect local climates which differ from the tabulated temperatures or local weather experience as determined by the building official. Where local building site climatic data are not available, climate data from a nearby location included in RS-1, appendix C, (incorporated by reference, see [§ 434.701](/on/2024-09-17/title-10/section-434.701)) and RS-4 Chapter 24, Table 1, (incorporated by reference, see [§ 434.701](/on/2024-09-17/title-10/section-434.701)) shall be used as determined by the building official.] | | |

301.2 *Indoor Design Conditions.* Indoor design temperature and humidity conditions shall be in accordance with the comfort criteria in RS-2 (incorporated by reference, see [§ 434.701](/on/2024-09-17/title-10/section-434.701)), except that humidification and dehumidification are not required.
*Pursuant to 5TH CIR. 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 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 96-60882

 

AUDREY YOUNG, Individually, and

as Guardian and Next Friend of Shana Young,

Megan Young and Alex Young, Jr., minors and

as Administratrix of the Estate of Alex Young,

Deceased, and as Personal Representative

of the Heirs at Law of Alex Young, Deceased,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

GEORGE ROBINSON, M.D.;

MICHAEL MOSES, M.D.,

Defendants-Appellants.

 

Appeal from the United States District Court

For the Southern District of Mississippi

(1:95-CV-153-RR)

 

December 8, 1997

Before WISDOM, HIGGINBOTHAM and STEWART, Circuit Judges. 

PER CURIAM:*

Plaintiff Young waived Mississippi’s prohibition against ex

parte communication with a treating physician. We are left without

the requisite contest of the validity of this state rule. The
2

issue is moot. We do not decide whether the order of the district

court is an appealable order. 

DISMISSED.