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

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 385 Engrossed in House (EH)]

H. Res. 385

                 In the House of Representatives, U.S.,

                                                         July 27, 2005.
    Resolved, That upon the adoption of this resolution it shall be in order 
without intervention of any point of order to consider in the House the bill 
(H.R. 5) to improve patient access to health care services and provide improved 
medical care by reducing the excessive burden the liability system places on the 
health care delivery system. The bill shall be considered as read. The previous 
question shall be considered as ordered on the bill to final passage without 
intervening motion except: (1) two hours of debate on the bill equally divided 
and controlled by the Majority Leader and the Minority Leader or their 
designees; and (2) one motion to recommit.
    Sec. 2. During consideration of H.R. 5 pursuant to this resolution, 
notwithstanding the operation of the previous question, the Chair may postpone 
further consideration of the bill to a time designated by the Speaker.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```
#### Lac Leasing Corporation, Respondent, v. Dutchess Aero, Inc., et al., Appellants.

In an action for a declaratory judgment, defendants appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Dutchess County, dated February 24, 1969, which denied their motion (1) to dismiss the complaint on the ground that the court has no jurisdiction of the persons of defendants (CPLR 3211, subd. [a], par. 8) or, (2) in the alternative, to dismiss the complaint as to the individual defendants on the ground that the complaint fails to state a cause of action (CPLR 3211, subd. [a], par. 7). Order modified, on the law as to defendant Theodore Lafko and on the law and the facts as to defendant Fred Lafko, (1) by striking out the words “in all respects” in the decretal paragraph thereof, which paragraph states that the motion “ is in all respects denied”, and (2) by adding, after the word “denied”, the following: “as to defendants Dutchess Aero, Inc. and Dutchess County Aviation Inc. and granted as to defendants Theodore Lafko and Fred Lafko on the ground that the complaint fails to state a cause of action and on the further ground as to defendant Fred Lafko that the court does not have jurisdiction of his person.” As so modified, order affirmed, without costs. In our opinion, the service of a single copy of the summons and complaint upon the individual defendant, Theodore Lafko, who was also an officer and manager, respectively, of the defendant corporations, was sufficient service on the corporations and on himself as an individual defendant *(Port Chester Elec. Co.*v. *Ronbed Corp.,*
      *95028 A D 2d 1008). Furthermore, defendant Theodore Lafko’s admission of service in his answering affidavit precludes defendants from asserting that there was no adequate proof of service on the corporations and Theodore Lafko (CPLR 306 ; cf. *Erickson*v. *Robison,*282 App. Div. 574, 577). To the extent, however, that the motion sought to dismiss the complaint as to the individual defendants, it should have been granted. The complaint fails to state a cause of action as to the individuals *(Salzman Sign Co.*v. *Beck,*11 A D 2d 1068, affd. 10 N Y 2d 63). In any event, as to defendant Fred Lafko, plaintiff conceded that there was no service of process upon him and, as to him, the action should have been dismissed. Beldoek, P. J., Christ, Brennan, Hopkins and Martuscello, JJ., concur.
PUBLIC LAW 109–346—OCT. 13, 2006 120 STAT. 1883

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY—H.R. 4805:

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 152 (2006):

Mar. 28, considered and passed House.

Sept. 29, considered and passed Senate.

Æ

Public Law 109–346

109th Congress

An Act

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 105 North

Quincy Street in Clinton, Illinois, as the ‘‘Gene Vance Post Office Building’’.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of

the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

The facility of the United States Postal Service located at

105 North Quincy Street in Clinton, Illinois, shall be known and

designated as the ‘‘Gene Vance Post Office Building’’.

SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper,

or other record of the United States to the facility referred to

in section 1 shall be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Gene Vance

Post Office Building’’.

Approved October 13, 2006.

Oct. 13, 2006

[H.R. 4805]
PART 23 – ENVIRONMENT, ENERGY AND

WATER EFFICIENCY, RENEWABLE ENERGY

TECHNOLOGIES, OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY,

AND DRUG–FREE WORKPLACE

SUBPART 23.3 – HAZARDOUS MATERIAL IDENTIFICATION AND MATERIAL SAFETY DATA

SHEETS

23.302 Policy.

SUBPART 23.90 – ENSURING ADEQUATE COVID-19 SAFETY PROTOCOLS FOR FEDERAL

CONTRACTORS

23.9001 General.

SUBPART 23.3 – HAZARDOUS MATERIAL IDENTIFICATION

AND MATERIAL SAFETY DATA SHEETS

(Revised September 19, 2016 through PROCLTR 16-09)

23.302 Policy.

For shipments into foreign countries, the contracting officer shall comply with requirements

applicable to each country.

SUBPART 23.90 – ENSURING ADEQUATE COVID-19 SAFETY

PROTOCOLS FOR FEDERAL CONTRACTORS

(Added January 27, 2022 through PROCLTR 22-02)

23.9001 General.

(a) See link to “Vaccination Deviation Flow Chart” at PGI 23.9001. (b) DFARS 252.223-7999 does not

apply to contract actions executed in the system for automated simplified acquisitions.
§ 431.173 Materials incorporated by reference. ( a ) Certain material is incorporated by reference into this subpart with the approval of the Director of the Federal Register in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. To enforce any edition other than that specified in this section, DOE must publish a document in the Federal Register and the material must be available to the public. All approved incorporation by reference (IBR) material is available for inspection at DOE, and at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). Contact DOE at: the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Building Technologies Program, 1000 Independence Ave. SW, EE-5B, Washington, DC 20585, (202) 586-9127, *Buildings@ee.doe.gov*, *https://www.energy.gov/eere/buildings/building-technologies-office .* For information on the availability of this material at NARA, visit *www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html* or email: *fr.inspection@nara.gov .* The material may be obtained from the sources in the following paragraphs of this section.
( b ) *AMCA.* Air Movement and Control Association International, Inc., 30 West University Drive, Arlington Heights, IL 60004-1893; (847) 394-0150; *www.amca.org .* ( 1 ) ANSI/AMCA Standard 210-16 (“AMCA 210-16”), Laboratory Methods of Testing Fans for Certified Aerodynamic Performance Rating, ANSI-approved August 26, 2016; IBR approved for § 431.172; appendix A to this subpart. (Co-published as ASHRAE 51-16).
( 2 ) ANSI/AMCA Standard 214-21 (“AMCA 214-21”), *Test Procedure for Calculating Fan Energy Index (FEI) for Commercial and Industrial Fans and Blowers,* ANSI-approved March 1, 2021; IBR approved for § 431.174; appendix A to this subpart.
( 3 ) ANSI/AMCA Standard 230-23 (“AMCA 230-23”), *Laboratory Methods of Testing Air Circulating Fans for Rating and Certification,* ANSI-approved February 10, 2023. IBR approved for appendix B to this subpart.
( 4 ) ANSI/AMCA Standard 240-15 (“AMCA 240-15”), *Laboratory Methods of Testing Positive Pressure Ventilators for Aerodynamic Performance Rating,* ANSI-approved May 9, 2015; IBR approved for § 431.172.
( c ) *ISO.* International Organization for Standardization, Chemin de Blandonnet 8, CP 401, 1214 Vernier, Geneva, Switzerland; *www.iso.org .* ( 1 ) ISO 5801:2017(E) (“ISO 5801:2017”), *Fans—Performance testing using standardized airways,* Third Edition, approved September 2017; IBR approved for appendix A to this subpart.
( 2 ) ISO 80079-36:2016, *Explosive atmospheres—Part 36: Non-electrical equipment for explosive atmospheres—Basic method and requirements,* Edition 1.0, February 2016; IBR approved for § 431.172.
( d ) *UL.* Underwriters Laboratories, 333 Pfingsten Road, Northbrook, Illinois, 60062; *www.shopulstandards.com .* ( 1 ) UL 705, *Standard for Safety for Power Ventilators,* Edition 7, July 19, 2017 (including revisions through August 19, 2022); IBR approved for § 431.172.
( 2 ) [Reserved].
[88 FR 27390, May 1, 2023, as amended at 88 FR 53375, Aug. 8, 2023]
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA 

NORTHERN DIVISION 

CALVIN FLUKER, RICARDO ) 

WRIGHT, BERYL JACKSON, ) 

TRACEY MARTIN, LISA ) 

PITCHFORD, KIMBERLY LOVE, ) 

) 

Plaintiffs, ) 

) 

v. ) CIVIL ACTION NO.: 

) 2:06cv785-MHT 

U.S. FOODSERVICE, INC. and ) 

U.S. FOODSERVICE, INC. - ) 

MONTGOMERY DIVISION, ) 

) 

Defendants. ) 

DEFENDANT’S UNOPPOSED MOTION TO EXTEND

DEADLINE FOR FILING REPORT OF PARTIES’ PLANNING MEETING

Defendant U.S. Foodservice, Inc.

1

moves the Court to enlarge the deadline 

for filing the Report of Parties’ Planning Meeting, for the following reasons: 

1. The deadline for filing the Report of Parties’ Planning Meeting in this 

case is October 17, 2006. 

2. On October 9, 2006, defendant filed a Motion to Sever plaintiffs’ 

claims pursuant to Rule 21 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The Court set 

the motion for submission on October 17, 2006, with all briefs due by said date. 

 

1

Plaintiffs also named “U.S. Foodservice, Inc. – Montgomery Division” as a defendant. However, no such legal 

entity exists. 

Case 2:06-cv-00785-MHT-WC Document 11 Filed 10/17/2006 Page 1 of 3
2 

3. As this Court’s ruling on the motion will significantly impact the 

parties’ decisions on how to proceed with the litigation of this matter, the parties 

request that the deadline for filing the Report of Parties’ Planning Meeting be 

extended fourteen (14) days from the date the Court rules on defendant’s pending 

motion. 

4. The undersigned contacted plaintiffs’ counsel, and plaintiffs do not 

oppose this motion. 

5. Plaintiffs will not be prejudiced by this short extension. 

Based on the foregoing, the parties respectfully request that this Court 

enlarge the deadline for filing the Report of Parties’ Planning Meeting. 

 Respectfully submitted, 

 /s/Tamula R. Yelling 

 Tammy L. Baker (ASB-9522-B62T) 

 E-mail: tbaker@constangy.com

 Direct Dial No.: (205) 226-5466 

 Tamula R. Yelling (ASB-9447-E61T) 

 E-Mail: tyelling@constangy.com 

Direct Dial No.: (205) 226-5471 

CONSTANGY, BROOKS & SMITH, LLC 

1819 Fifth Avenue North 

One Federal Place, Suite 900 

Birmingham, Alabama 35203 

Fax: (205) 323-7674 

ATTORNEY FOR DEFENDANTS, 

U.S. FOODSERVICE, INC. and 

U.S. FOODSERVICE, INC. – 

MONTGOMERY DIVISION 

Case 2:06-cv-00785-MHT-WC Document 11 Filed 10/17/2006 Page 2 of 3
3 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on October 17, 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 the following: 

Jon C. Goldfarb, Esq. 

Maury S. Weiner, Esq. 

Ethan R. Dettling, Esq. 

Wiggins, Childs, Quinn & Pantazis, LLC 

301 19th Street North 

Birmingham, Alabama 35203 

s/ Tamula R. Yelling 

Tamula R. Yelling 

Case 2:06-cv-00785-MHT-WC Document 11 Filed 10/17/2006 Page 3 of 3
Case 2:06-cv-00749-ID-SRW Document 10 Filed 02/20/2007 Page 1 of 3
Case 2:06-cv-00749-ID-SRW Document 10 Filed 02/20/2007 Page 2 of 3
Case 2:06-cv-00749-ID-SRW Document 10 Filed 02/20/2007 Page 3 of 3
§ 218.31 Incorporated procedures. The following subparts of part 205 of this chapter are, as appropriate, hereby made applicable to this part: ( a ) *Subpart A—* General Provisions; *Provided,* that § 205.11 shall not apply; *and Provided further,* that in addition to the methods of service specified in § 205.7 of this chapter, service shall be effective if a supply order is transmitted by telex, telecopies or other similar means of electronic transmission of a writing and received by the firm to which the supply order is addressed.
( b ) *Subpart F—* Interpretation.
( c ) *Subpart K—* Rulings.
( d ) *Subpart M—* Conferences, Hearings and Public Hearings.
Case 2:06-cr-00206-MHT-CSC Document 71 Filed 09/25/2007 Page 1 of 2
Case 2:06-cr-00206-MHT-CSC Document 71 Filed 09/25/2007 Page 2 of 2
**EXHIBIT 32.1CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 AS ADOPTEDPURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

       In connection with the quarterlyreport of CNB Corporation on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2008 asfiled with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, W.Jennings Duncan, President and Chief Executive Officer of CNB Corporation,certify to the best of my knowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, asadopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 that:
| 1.     | The  above-listed Form 10-Q 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 above-listed Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all  material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the  Company. |
| Date:   May  9, 2008 | /s/W. Jennings Duncan                     W. Jennings  Duncan  President and Chief Executive Officer |
|--------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                                |                                                                                                                                                                                                               |
§ 431.204 Uniform test method for the measurement of energy consumption of illuminated exit signs. ( a ) *Scope.* This section provides the test procedure for measuring, pursuant to EPCA, the input power demand of illuminated exit signs. For purposes of this part 431 and EPCA, the test procedure for measuring the input power demand of illuminated exit signs shall be the test procedure specified in § 431.203(b).
( b ) *Testing and Calculations.* Determine the energy efficiency of each covered product by conducting the test procedure, set forth in the Environmental Protection Agency's “ENERGY STAR Program Requirements for Exit Signs,” Version 2.0, section 4 (Test Criteria), “Conditions for testing” and “Input power measurement.” (Incorporated by reference, see § 431.203)
[71 FR 71373, Dec. 8, 2006]
(logo)Rialto 

         CAPITAL

 

 

**2017 AnnualStatement of Servicer Compliance (Item 1123)**

 

Poolingand Servicing Agreement (the “Pooling and Servicing Agreement”) dated as ofJanuary 1, 2013 by and among Deutsche Mortgage & Asset ReceivingCorporation as Depositor, Midland Loan Services, a Division of PNC Bank,National Association as Master Servicer, Rialto Capital Advisors, LLC asSpecial Servicer, Wells Fargo Bank, National Association as Trustee, WellsFargo Bank, National Association, as Certificate Administrator, Paying Agentand Custodian and Park Bridge Lender Services LLC as Operating Advisor relatingto the COMM 2013-LC6 Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates  (**COMM2013-LC6 )**

           

Theundersigned, a duly authorized officer of Rialto Capital Advisors, LLC, asspecial servicer (the “Special Servicer”) herein certifies to the following:

 

1.       Allservicing activities and performance of such servicing activities under thePooling and Servicing Agreement are performed on behalf of the SpecialServicer.

 

2.       Areview of the servicing activities and performance by the Special Servicer forthe period of January 1, 2017 to December 31, 2017 (the “Reporting Period”) inaccordance with the Pooling and Servicing Agreement has been conducted under mysupervision.

 

3.       To thebest of my knowledge, based on such review, the Special Servicer has fulfilledall of its obligations under the terms of the Pooling and Servicing Agreement,in all material respects for the Reporting Period and if there has been afailure to fulfill any such obligations in any material respect, each failureand the nature and status thereof has been specifically identified herein.

 

 

Certifiedby: /s/ Adam Singer                                 Date:  March 1, 2018

     Adam Singer, Managing Director
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE

MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA, NORTHERN DIVISION

CALVIN FLUKER, et al., )

)

Plaintiffs, )

) CIVIL ACTION NO.

v. ) 2:06cv785-MHT

) 

U.S. FOODSERVICE, INC., )

and U.S. FOODSERVICE, )

INC.- Montgomery Division, )

)

Defendants. )

ORDER

It is ORDERED that the motion for leave to amend

(Doc. No. 24) is granted. The court assumes that the

defendants have no objection to the allowance of the

amendment; however, if they do, they must file the

objection within seven days from the date of this order.

DONE, this the 6th day of March, 2007.

 /s/ Myron H. Thompson 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 2:06-cv-00785-MHT-WC Document 25 Filed 03/06/2007 Page 1 of 1
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                          10,343
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  143,115
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               153,458
<PP&E>                                       9,413,124
<DEPRECIATION>                               2,134,051
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               8,278,124
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          165,860
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 8,278,124
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               959,579
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               804,067
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             557,229
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (336,362)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (336,362)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
Exhibit 10.7


AMENDMENT 

TO THE 

HONEYWELL INTERNATIONAL INC.

SEVERANCE PLAN FOR SENIOR EXECUTIVES

(Amended and restated, effective as of January 1, 2009)


                    Pursuant
to the authority granted to proper officers of Honeywell International Inc.
(the “Company”) by the Management Development and Compensation Committee of the
Board of Directors on December 11, 2009, the Honeywell International Inc.
Severance Plan for Senior Executives (Amended and Restated, effective as of
January 1, 2009) is hereby amended effective January 1, 2010 by replacing
paragraph 20(c) in its entirety with the following new paragraph 20(c): 


	
  

 	
  

 
	
  

 	
 “(c)     In
 the event of a Change in Control, the provisions of this Section 20 shall be
 applicable to each Participant, as defined in Section 1(t), who is a
 Participant on December 31, 2009. 

 
	
  

 	
  

 
	
  

 	
 For the
 avoidance of doubt, no Participant who becomes a Participant on or after
 January 1, 2010 shall be eligible for the Enhancement Benefit described in
 this Section 20. If it is determined that such a Participant is entitled to
 receive payments, benefits and other compensation from the Honeywell
 Employers (whether paid or payable pursuant to the terms of this Plan or
 otherwise) that would subject the Participant to an excise tax under Section
 4999 of the Code, then the Participant may elect to receive either (1) all
 payments, benefits and other compensation from the Honeywell Employers less
 any applicable income taxes and the excise tax imposed under Section 4999 of
 the Code (i.e., without any Enhancement Benefit), or (2) the amount that
 maximizes the payments, benefits and other compensation from the Honeywell
 Employers to the Participant without causing any such payment, benefit or
 other compensation to be an ‘excess parachute payment’ (as defined under
 Section 280G of the Code and regulations and rulings thereunder) less any
 applicable income taxes.” 

 






	
  

 	
  

 
	
  

 	
 HONEYWELL
 INTERNATIONAL INC.

 
	
  

 	
  

 
	
  

 	
 /s/ Mark
 James

 
	
  

 	
 Mark James

 
	
  

 	
 Senior Vice
 President – Human Resources and Communications

 



Dated: January
12, 2010