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

THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

NORTHERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA )

)

v. ) CASE NO. 2:06-cr-193-MEF

) (WO)

JOSHUA WAYNE HESTER )

O R D E R

On October 16, 2006, the defendant filed an Accused's Unopposed Motion to

Continue Trial (Doc. #29). While the granting of a continuance is left to the sound discretion

of the trial judge, United States v. Warren, 772 F.2d 827, 837 (11th Cir. 1985), the court is,

of course, limited by the requirements of the Speedy Trial Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3161. The

Speedy Trial Act provides generally that the trial of a defendant in a criminal case shall

commence within 70 days of the latter of the filing date of the indictment or the date the

defendant appeared before a judicial officer in such matter. 18 U.S.C. §3161(c)(1). See

United States v. Vasser, 916 F.2d 624 (11th Cir. 1990).

The Act excludes from this 70 day period any continuance that the judge grants "on

the basis of his findings that the ends of justice served by taking such action outweigh the

best interest of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial." 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(8)(A).

The motion states that counsel for the government and counsel for defendant have

been involved in good faith discussions for awhile aimed at resolving this case without the

need for trial. More time is necessary for proper preparation and additional discussions

aimed at resolving this case. The government does not opposed a continuance.

Case 2:06-cr-00193-MEF-CSC Document 30 Filed 10/17/2006 Page 1 of 2
2

Consequently, the court concludes that a continuance of this case is warranted and that the

ends of justice served by continuing this case outweighs the best interest of the public and

the defendant in a speedy trial. See United States v. Davenport, 935 F.2d 1223, 1235 (11th

Cir. 1991)(reasonable time necessary for effective preparation is a significant factor for

granting a continuance under the Speedy Trial Act).

Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED:

1. That the defendant's motion filed on October 16, 2006 is GRANTED;

2. That the trial of this defendant is continued from the October 24, 2006 trial term

to the November 27, 2006 trial term.

3. That the Magistrate Judge conduct a pretrial conference prior to the November 27,

2007 trial term.

DONE this the 17th day of October, 2006.

 /s/ Mark E. Fuller 

CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 2:06-cr-00193-MEF-CSC Document 30 Filed 10/17/2006 Page 2 of 2
Subpart 2103.5 - Other Improper Business Practices    **Parent topic:** PART 2103 - IMPROPER BUSINESS PRACTICES AND PERSONAL CONFLICTS OF INTEREST2103.570 Misleading, Deceptive, or Unfair Advertising.       (a) OPM, or the Contractor with the approval of OPM, makes available to Federal employees a booklet describing the provisions of the FEGLI Program, which includes information about eligibility, enrollment, and general procedures. The booklet, along with valid election documents, serves as certification of the employee's coverage under the FEGLI Program. Any marketing/advertising directed specifically at Federal employees and life insurance contacts with Federal employees for the purpose of selling FEGLI Program coverage must be approved by OPM in advance.          (b) The Contractor is prohibited from making incomplete and/or incorrect comparisons or using disparaging or minimizing techniques to compare its other products or services to those of the FEGLI Program. The Contractor agrees that any advertising material authorized and released by the Contractor which mentions the FEGLI Program will be truthful and not misleading and will present an accurate statement of FEGLI Program benefits. The Contractor will use reasonable efforts to assure that agents selling its other products are aware of and abide by this prohibition.          (c) The contractor's failure to conform to the requirements of this subpart shall be considered by OPM in the determination of the service charge prenegotiation objective.2103.571 Contract clause.       The clause at 2152.203-70 shall be inserted in FEGLI Program contracts and in subcontracts.
#### In the Matter of Frances T. Budabin, Appellant, v. Murray Budabin, Respondent.

Order affirmed, without costs and without disbursements. Concur—• Eager, J. P., Tilzer and Steuer, JJ.; Capozzoli and Nunez, JJ., dissent in the following memorandum by Nunez, J.: I dissent and vote to modify the Family Court order by increasing the allowance for the support of the one-year old child from $75 to $125 per week, and otherwise affirm. The trial court found that the respondent father earns, or has the ability to earn, upwards of $40,000 a year gross. And while the mother’s earnings as a professor amount to approximately $14,000 per year, she cannot pursue her calling unless she employs a nurse to care for the child. If we consider today’s spiraling high cost of living, it is unrealistic to say that $75 per week is sufficient to pay the salary of the nurse and the other expenses of the child.
PGI Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation

PGI Part 219 - SMALL BUSINESS PROGRAMS

PGI Part 222 - APPLICATION OF LABOR LAWS TO GOVERNMENT ACQUISITIONS

PGI Part 223 - ENVIRONMENT, ENERGY AND WATER EFFICIENCY, RENEWABLE

ENERGY TECHNOLOGIES, OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY, AND DRUG-FREE WORKPLACE

PGI Part 225 - INTERNATIONAL ACQUISITION

PGI Part 226 - OTHER SOCIOECONOMIC PROGRAMS

Parent topic: PGI Subchapter D - SOCIOECONOMIC PROGRAMS
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                       2,648,118
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                4,581,376
<ALLOWANCES>                                 (284,116)
<INVENTORY>                                    307,021
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             7,699,164
<PP&E>                                       1,604,058
<DEPRECIATION>                               (913,393)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              18,259,172
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        3,862,692
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       386,741
<OTHER-SE>                                  13,575,432
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                18,259,172
<SALES>                                      2,834,698
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             2,834,698
<CGS>                                        1,324,997
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                3,675,613
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                37,500
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (753,176)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (753,176)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (753,176)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.19)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.19)
        

</TABLE>
IV 

House Calendar No. 35

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 258

[Report No. 109–73] 

Waiving points of order against the conference report to accompany the 

bill (H.R. 1268) making Emergency Supplemental Appropriations for 

Defense, the Global War on Terror, and Tsunami Relief, for the fiscal 

year ending September 30, 2005, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 4, 2005

Mr. COLE, from the Committee on Rules, reported the following resolution; 

which was referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed 

RESOLUTION

Waiving points of order against the conference report to 

accompany the bill (H.R. 1268) making Emergency Supplemental Appropriations for Defense, the Global War 

on Terror, and Tsunami Relief, for the fiscal year ending 

September 30, 2005, and for other purposes.

1 Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it 

2 shall be in order to consider the conference report to ac3 company the bill (H.R. 1268) making Emergency Supple4 mental Appropriations for Defense, the Global War on 

5 Terror, and Tsunami Relief, for the fiscal year ending 
2

HRES 258 RH 

1 September 30, 2005, and for other purposes. All points 

2 of order against the conference report and against its con3 sideration are waived. The conference report shall be con4 sidered as read. 

5 SEC. 2. The chairman of the Committee on the Judi6 ciary is authorized, on behalf of the Committee, to file a 

7 supplemental report to accompany H.R. 748. 

House Calendar No. 35

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 258

[Report No. 109–73] 

RESOLUTION

Waiving points of order against the conference re2005, and for other purposes. Relief, for the fiscal year ending September 30, fense, the Global War on Terror, and Tsunami Emergency Supplemental Appropriations for De- port to accompany the bill (H.R. 1268) making 

MAY 4, 2005

Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be 

printed
First amendment to the Praxair, Inc. Supplemental Retirement Income Plan B



 Exhibit 10.05d 
 FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE 
 PRAXAIR, INC.

 SUPPLEMENTAL RETIREMENT INCOME PLAN B 
 (AS AMENDED AND RESTATED EFFECTIVE DECEMBER 31, 2007) 
 Article III,
Section 1(c) of the Praxair, Inc. Supplemental Retirement Income Plan B (As Amended and Restated Effective December 31, 2007) is hereby amended by the addition of the following sentence at the end thereof, effective as of January 1,
2010: 
 “Notwithstanding the prior sentence, with respect to benefits that become payable on account of a Traditional-Design
Participant’s termination of employment occurring after December 31, 2009, lump sum payments shall be calculated using a discount rate equal to the average of the 10 year Aaa municipal bond rate as published by Moody’s or a similar
rating service for the months of July through December of the year immediately prior to the year in which such Participant terminated employment.” 
  

			
	PRAXAIR, INC.
		
	 By:
	 	  

		
	 Date:
Case 3:06-cv-00772-WKW-TFM Document 2 Filed 08/28/2006 Page 1 of 6
Case 3:06-cv-00772-WKW-TFM Document 2 Filed 08/28/2006 Page 2 of 6
Case 3:06-cv-00772-WKW-TFM Document 2 Filed 08/28/2006 Page 3 of 6
Case 3:06-cv-00772-WKW-TFM Document 2 Filed 08/28/2006 Page 4 of 6
Case 3:06-cv-00772-WKW-TFM Document 2 Filed 08/28/2006 Page 5 of 6
Case 3:06-cv-00772-WKW-TFM Document 2 Filed 08/28/2006 Page 6 of 6
#### § 430.57 Duration of temporary exemption.

A temporary exemption terminates according to its terms but not later than twenty-four months after the affective date of the rule for which the exemption is allowed.
#### MARTIN, Appellant, v. CITY OF NEW YORK, Respondent.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

December 18, 1914.)

Action by Wiener B. Martin against the City of New York. G. W, Elkins, of New York City, for appellant. T. Farley, of New York City, for respondent.

No opinion. Judgment affirmed, with costs. Order filed.
### Regulatory Evaluation

Docket No. FAA
- 

### 2007
- 28059 Directorate Identifier: 

### 2007
- NE
- 13
- AD If you make changes to the values in the table below, you must ensure the totals update accordingly. If they do not, click (or Tab) into a nd then out of the changed cell
. **Estimated Costs:**  Action (e.g., Inspection, replacement) Costs per **Product** (e.g., aircraft, engine,

propeller, appliance) Work
- h ours (include access, testing, and close
- up) Labor

cost ( @ $8 5 /h our) Part s Cost Total Costs ( labor + parts) Number of

**U.S. Registered**  **Products** Total Cost

for U
. S
. Fleet 

### Inspection (on
wing/in
- shop visual) 4.0 $ 340.00 $0 $ 340.00 

### 136 $46,240.00 

### Inspection (in
- shop Eddy Current) 2.0 $ 170.00 $0 $ 170.00 

### 136 $23,120.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0 .00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0 .00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 

### The known number of pr oducts in compliance: Total Costs of compliance for U.S. fleet: $69,360 

### Costs covered under warranty ( if known ) $ 

### Special considerations for Economic Analysis ( Use this field to explain anything in the Estimated Costs table that was assumed or might not be obvious. This field can also be used to explain warranty costs) 

### : 

### 108 Trent 800 engines and 28 Tr ent 700 engines in service (US Registry) as of 7/2010, latest COS sharepoint site data available. For in
- shop inspections, Iassumed all engines would get one shop visit eddy current inspection. Work hour estimates changed from 3.5 on
- wing to 4, and 2.2 in
- shop to 2, per request from Legal ANE
- 07. Indicates related information in AD Manual, FAA

-IR
-M
- 8040.1C . DOUBLE CLICK to follow the link

### Executive Order 12866:

Could the AD be considered a “significant regulatory action”? YES * NO * Explanation: **DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures:**  Is the AD significant? YES * NO * Explanation: **Regulatory Flexibility Act:** Will the AD have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities? E xplain for either a Yes or No answer. YES NO Explanation: **Intrastate Aviation in Alaska:** This AD could affect intrastate aviation in Alaska. Is it appropriate to include specific requirements for aircraft operated in Alaska where aviation might be the only mode of transportation? YES * NO 

### * Explanation 

### :
###### Editorial Note on Part 2

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 2 appear at 79 FR 75739, Dec. 19, 2014.

#### § 2.901 Scope of subpart I.

This subpart applies, as applicable, to all proceedings under subparts G, J, K, L, M, and N of this part.

[69 FR 2264, Jan. 14, 2004]
PGI 225.7902 Defense Trade Cooperation

Treaties.

The following documents are accessible at: http://pmddtc.state.gov/:

• DTC Treaties.

• Implementing Arrangements.

• The provisions of the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR) (22 CFR 126.16 (Australia)

and 22 CFR 126.17 (United Kingdom)) pertaining to the DTC Treaties.

• List of Defense Articles Exempted from DTC Treaty Coverage (also in 22 CFR 126 Supplement No.

1).

• List of Approved Community Members.

• Definitions.

PGI 225.7902-2 Purpose.

PGI 225.7902-4 Procedures.

Parent topic: PGI 225.79 - EXPORT CONTROL
N O T FO R PUB L ICAT IO N UNITED STATES C OUR T OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH C IR C UIT ALONSO NEVAR

EZ, Pe titione r, v. LORETTA E. LYNC H, Attorne y Ge ne ra l, R

e sponde nt . No. 14-72064 Age n c y No. A087-455-218 M EM O R ANDUM *

On Pe tition for Re vie w of a n Orde r of the B oa rd of Im m igration Appe a ls Subm itte d M arc h 15, 2016 ** B e fore : GOODW IN, LEAVY, a nd C HR ISTEN, C irc uit Judge s. Alonso Ne va

re z , a native and c itiz e n of M e xic o, pe titions for re vie w of the B oa rd of Im m igration Appe a l s’ (“ B IA” ) orde r dism issing his a ppe a l from an im m igration judge ’ s de c i sion de ny i ng his a pplic at ion for c a

nc e lla tion of re m ova l. W e hav e jurisdic tion unde r 8 U.S.C . § 1252. W e re vie w for substa ntia l e vide nc e 

# FIL ED MAR 22 2016 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U
. S. CO URT O F APPEALS

* This disposition is not a ppropria te for public at ion a

nd is not pre c e de nt e xc e pt a s provide d

by 9th C ir. R . 36-3. ** The pa

ne l una nim ously c onc lude s this c a se is suita ble for de c ision without oral a

rgum e nt. Se e Fe d. R . App. P. 34(a)(2).the a ge nc y ’ s fa c tua l de te rm i nation re ga rding c ontinuous phy s ic a l pre se n c e , IbarraFlore s v . Gonzale

s , 439 F.3d 614, 618 (9th C ir. 2006), a nd we re vie w de novo c onstitutiona

l c la im s, Singh v . Ashc roft, 367 F.3d 1182, 1185 (9th C ir. 2004). W e de ny the pe tition for re vie w . Substa ntia l e v i de nc e supports the B IA’ s de te rm ination tha

t Ne v are z ’ s volunta ry re turn to M e x i c o disrupte d c ontinuous phy sic a l pre se nc e , re n de ring him ine l igiblefor c an c e lla

tion of re m ova l, whe re Ne va re z signe d a

form indic ating he re que s te d volunta

ry re t urn a nd te stifie d he wa s told of his options, a nd whe re an im m igration offic e r te stifie d tha t he followe d prope r proc e dure in informi ng Ne va re z of his rights. Se e Ibarra-Flore s , 439 F.3d a

t 619 (a dm inistra

tive volunta ry de pa rture unde r thre at of de porta tion c o nstitute s a

bre ak in c o ntinuous phy sic a l pre se n c e if the a lie n is inform e d of a n d a c c e pts thete rm s of the de pa rture ); Gutie rre

z v . Muk ase y , 521 F.3d 1114, 1117-18 (9th C ir. 2008) (a n a lie n’ s te stim ony t

hat he wa s give n a

c hoic e be twe e n re m ova l proc e e d ings a nd a dm inistra

tive volunta

ry de pa rture c onstitute s substa

ntia l e vide nc e tha

t the de pa rture wa s knowing a

nd volunta

ry ). Ne va re z ’ s a sse rtion tha

t the B IA viola

te d due proc e s s by

fa iling to c o nside r his te stim ony

and by m aking sua

sponte fa c t

ua l findings is not supported by the re c o rd. PE T IT IO N FO R RE V IE WDE NIE D. 1 4 - 7 2 0 6 4 2
PGI 203.570-1 Scope.

The complete text of 10 U.S.C. 4656, Prohibition on Persons Convicted of Defense-Contract Related

Felonies and Related Criminal Penalty on Defense Contractors, is available at

http://uscode.house.gov/. (Select “Search the U.S. Code”; then type “10 USC Sec. 4656” (including

the quotation marks) in the search engine window and click on the search button).

Parent topic: PGI 203.570 Prohibition on persons convicted of fraud or other defense-contractrelated felonies.
EXHIBIT 32



Certification

Pursuant to Section
906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

(Subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code)



Pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
(subsections (a) and (b) of section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code), each of the undersigned officers of FNB Corp., a North Carolina corporation (the Corporation), does hereby certify that:



The Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2003
(the Form 10-Q) of the Corporation fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all materials respects, the financial
condition and results of operations of the Corporation.



|                        |  | 
|----------------------- |  | 
|Date: November 12, 2003 |  | 
|                        |  | 

|                        |  | 
|----------------------- |  | 
|Date: November 12, 2003 |  | 
|                        |  | 



The foregoing
certification is being furnished solely pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code) and is not being filed as part of the Form 10-Q or as a separate
disclosure document.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                          48,479
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                               0
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                 6,016
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                    431,334
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                               0
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                                 0
<LOANS>                                      1,695,881
<ALLOWANCE>                                     25,406
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               2,290,029
<DEPOSITS>                                   1,693,243
<SHORT-TERM>                                    86,804
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                             21,917
<LONG-TERM>                                    259,713
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        17,459
<OTHER-SE>                                     210,893
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>               2,290,029
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                 36,812
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                5,270
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                   184
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                42,266
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                              16,303
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              20,285
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                           21,981
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                    1,050
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                (37)
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                 14,832
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 11,509
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                       7,882
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     7,882
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.45
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.45
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                       0
<LOANS-NON>                                          0
<LOANS-PAST>                                         0
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                     0
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                        0
<RECOVERIES>                                         0
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                    0
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                                 0
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0


</TABLE>
IV 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 284 

Amending the Rules of the House of Representatives to repeal the provisional 

quorum provision. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 17, 2005 

Mr. BAIRD submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the 

Committee on Rules 

RESOLUTION 

Amending the Rules of the House of Representatives to 

repeal the provisional quorum provision. 

1 Resolved, That paragraph (c) of clause 5 of rule XX 

2 of the Rules of the House of Representatives (relating to 

3 provisional quorums) is repealed and that paragraph (d) 

4 of such clause is redesignated as paragraph (c). 

Æ
MISCELLANEOUS DISMISSALS

2007-1828.

#### Evans v. Mazda Motors of Am., Inc.

Scioto App. No. 06CA3118, 2007-Ohio-4622. This cause is pending before the court as a discretionary-appeal and claimed appeal of right. Upon consideration of appellant’s application for dismissal,

It is ordered by the court that the application for dismissal is granted. Accordingly, this cause is dismissed.