alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Who is Torreya Taxifolia?

http://www.torreyaguardians.org/torreya.html[6/29/2011 8:20:35 AM]

Who is Torreya taxifolia?

Genus Torreya is a primitive member of the yew family (Taxaceae). Six species of this genus are

known worldwide: 3 in China, one in Japan and Korea, one in California, and one in the Florida

panhandle. The Florida species is by far the most endangered and is the subject of our concern.

 

L: A fleshy sarcotesta surrounds the single large seed of T. tax

R: Connie Barlow with STATE CHAMPION Torreya californica near Santa Cruz CA

Torreya taxifolia (often referred to as T. tax or Florida torreya) is an evergreen conifer tree

historically found only along a 65 kilometer stretch of the Apalachicola River of northern Florida and

the adjacent sliver of southern Georgia. It favors the cool and shady ravines, known as "steepheads,"

that dissect the high bluffs of the river's east shore. Despite its current extreme endemism, the

species was once a prominent mid- and under-story member of its forest community, which includes

an odd mix of northern and southern species: towering beech and hickory next to tall evergreen

magnolia, and surrounded by stubby needle palm. Note: Click to learn more about the the unique

steephead habitats, including the other cool-adapted plants that are now restricted to those

locations, some of which are threatened or endangered.

 
Who is Torreya Taxifolia?

http://www.torreyaguardians.org/torreya.html[6/29/2011 8:20:35 AM]

The approximate native range of

Torreya taxifolia, marked by orange.

A Pious Pilgrimage

In the spring of 1875, distinguished Harvard botanist Asa Gray embarked upon a trip to the

panhandle of Florida, to "make a pious pilgrimage to the secluded native haunts of that rarest of trees,

the Torreya taxifolia". The trees observed by Gray grew up to a meter in circumference and were as

much as 20 meters tall.

 

The Strange Mix of Vegetation Along the Apalachicola River

Left: hickory trunk in front of evergreen magnolia canopy. Center: beech trunk.
Who is Torreya Taxifolia?

http://www.torreyaguardians.org/torreya.html[6/29/2011 8:20:35 AM]

Several shrubby palm species beneath a large beech in Florida's Torreya State Park, along

the Apalachicola River. The botanical mix in this park is a treasure because the same site

served, just 18,000 years ago as a crucial "pocket reserve" in which the botanical richness

of today's southern and central Appalachians took refuge at the peak of the last peak

glacial advance.

Learn why T. tax is at the brink of EXTINCTION

 WWW www.TorreyaGuardians.org 

Return to HOME PAGE.

Who Are Torreya Guardians? Who Is Torreya taxifolia? 

Brink of Extinction Efforts to Save Rewilding Now! 

Comments on Rewilding Recruiting Landowners & Helpers 

Torreya Plantings in North Carolina California's Torreya 

Propagation Advice Contact us
#### § 569.405 Setoffs prohibited.

A setoff against blocked property (including a blocked account), whether by a U.S. bank or other U.S. person, is a prohibited transfer under § 569.201 if effected after the effective date.
11 TH COURT OF APPEALS EASTLAND , TEXAS JUDGMENT
Rickey Lavelle Taylor
, * From the 244 th District Court of Ector County, Trial Court No. A

- 39,256

.

Vs. No. 11

- 12

- 00317

- CR * November 26, 2014

The State of Texas, * Memorandum Opinion by W illson, J

. (Panel consists of: Wright, C.J., Willson , J.
, and Bailey, J. )
This court has inspected the record in this cause and concludes tha t there is error in one of the judgments below. Therefore, in accordance with this court ’ s opinion, we modify the judgment of the trial court in count one to delete the $ 3,000 fine. As modified, we affirm the judgment in count one. We affirm the judgment of the trial court in count two.
114 STAT. 2714 PUBLIC LAW 106–543—DEC. 15, 2000

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY—H.J. Res. 133:

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 146 (2000):

Dec. 15, considered and passed House and Senate.

Æ

Public Law 106–543

106th Congress

Joint Resolution

Making further continuing appropriations for the fiscal year 2001, and for other

purposes.

Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the

United States of America in Congress assembled, That Public Law

106–275, is further amended by striking the date specified in section

106(c) and inserting ‘‘December 21, 2000’’ and by adding the following before the period in section 113: ‘‘, and in addition, from

within the amount provided by section 101, $217,000,000: Provided,

That of these funds, $100,000,000 may be made available only

pursuant to a certification by the Secretary of State that the United

Nations has taken no action in calendar year 2000 prior to the

date of enactment of this Act to increase funding for any United

Nations program without identifying an offsetting decrease elsewhere in the United Nations budget and cause the United Nations

to exceed the budget for the biennium 2000–2001 of $2,535,700,000’’.

Approved December 15, 2000.

Ante, p. 2713.

Dec. 15, 2000

[H.J. Res. 133]
#### § 535.312 Interest.

Except as otherwise provided in this part, the term *interest* when used with respect to property shall mean an interest of any nature whatsoever, direct or indirect.

[44 FR 75352, Dec. 19, 1979]
Exhibit 10.5


 


ACCELERATE ACQUISITION CORP.

51 John F. Kennedy Parkway

Short Hills, New Jersey 07078

[●], 2021


 


Accelerate Acquisition Sponsor LLC

51 John F. Kennedy Parkway

Short Hills, New Jersey 07078


 


Ladies and Gentlemen:


 


This letter agreement will confirm our agreement
that, commencing on the effective date (the “Effective Date”) of the registration statement (the “Registration
Statement”) for the initial public offering (the “IPO”) of the securities of Accelerate Acquisition
Corp. (the “Company”) and continuing until the earlier of (i) the completion by the Company of an initial business
combination or (ii) the Company’s liquidation (in each case as described in the Registration Statement) (such earlier date
hereinafter referred to as the “Termination Date”), Accelerate Acquisition Sponsor LLC (the “Sponsor”)
shall take steps directly or indirectly to make available to the Company, at 51 John F. Kennedy Parkway, Short Hills, New Jersey
07078 (or any successor location), certain office space, secretarial and administrative services (including without limitation
certain financial modeling and related services) as may be required by the Company from time to time. In exchange therefor, the
Company shall pay an affiliate of the Sponsor a sum of $10,000 per month on the Effective Date and continuing monthly thereafter
until the Termination Date. The Sponsor hereby agrees that it does not have any right, title, interest or claim of any kind in
or to any monies that may be set aside in a trust account (the “Trust Account”) that may be established upon
the consummation of the IPO (the “Claim”) and hereby irrevocably waives any Claim it may have in the future
as a result of, or arising out of, any negotiations, contracts or agreements with the Company and will not seek recourse against
the Trust Account for any reason whatsoever.


 


[Signature Page Follows]


 




     


     


    

 


	 	Very truly yours,
	 	 	 
	 	ACCELERATE ACQUISITION CORP.
	 	 	 
	 	By:	 
	 	Name:	Michael Simoff
	 	Title:	Chief Operating Officer, Chief
	 	 	Financial Officer and Treasurer



 


[Signature Page to Administrative Services Agreement]


 




    2


     


    

 


	AGREED TO AND ACCEPTED BY:	 
	 	 	 
	ACCELERATE ACQUISITION SPONSOR LLC	 
	 	 	 
	By:	 	 
	Name:	Robert Nardelli	 
	Title:	Manager	 



 


[Signature Page to Administrative Services Agreement]


 


 


3
Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter II
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to subchapter A appear at 78 FR 60697, Oct. 2, 2013.

Editorial Note on Part 363
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 363 appear at 70 FR 57433, Sept. 30, 2005, 70 FR 57442, Sept. 30, 2005, and 75 FR 70815, Nov. 19, 2010.

§ 363.33 Can an attorney-in-fact conduct transactions in my TreasuryDirect ® account? ( a ) An attorney-in-fact who provides a copy of a durable power of attorney granting him or her the authority to conduct TreasuryDirect transactions on behalf of the owner may conduct transactions online.
( b ) An attorney-in-fact who provides a copy of a limited power of attorney may only conduct transactions that he or she is permitted by his or her power. Such transactions will be through an offline process.
( c ) A written copy of the power of attorney must be sent to the address provided in § 363.5. We may require any additional evidence that we consider necessary to support the power.
----

----

|   | (1) |   | the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q/A of the Company for the quarter ended June 30, 2009 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and |
|--------|-----|--------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | (2) |   | the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. |
|--------|-----|--------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

----

----
EXHIBIT 34.1

 

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm



The Management Committee

BMW Financial Services NA, LLC



We have examined management’s assertion, included in the accompanying Certification Regarding Compliance with Applicable Servicing Criteria, that BMW
      Financial Services NA, LLC (the “Company”) complied with the servicing criteria set forth in Item 1122(d) of the Securities and Exchange  Commission's Regulation AB for Asset-Backed Securities, BMW Vehicle Lease Trust 2017-1, excluding criteria
      1122(d)(1)(ii), 1122(d)(1)(iii), 1122(d)(1)(iv), 1122(d)(2)(vi), 1122(d)(4)(ix), 1122(d)(4)(x)(A)-(C), 1122(d)(4)(xi), 1122(d)(4)(xii), 1122(d)(4)(xiii), and 1122(d)(4)(xv) which management has determined are not applicable to the activities
      performed by the Company with respect to the asset-backed securities transactions being serviced as of December 31, 2018 and for the period from January 1, 2018 to December 31, 2018. Management is responsible for the Company’s compliance with those
      servicing criteria. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on management’s assertion about the Company’s compliance with those servicing criteria based on our examination.



Our examination was conducted in accordance with the attestation standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) and,
      accordingly, included examining, on a test basis, evidence about the Company's compliance with the applicable servicing criteria, including tests on a sample basis of the servicing activities related to BMW Vehicle Lease Trust 2017-1, determining
      whether the Company performed those selected activities in compliance with the servicing criteria during the specified period, and performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances.  Our procedures were limited to
      selected servicing activities performed by the Company during the period covered by this report and, accordingly, such samples may not have included servicing activities related to each asset-backed transaction included in BMW Vehicle Lease Trust
      2017-1.  Further, an examination is not designed to detect noncompliance arising from errors that may have occurred prior to the period specified above that may have affected the balances or amounts calculated or reported by the Company during the
      period covered by this report. We believe that our examination provides a reasonable basis for our opinion. Our examination does not provide a legal determination on the Company's compliance with the servicing criteria specified in the first
      paragraph.



In our opinion, management’s assertion that BMW Financial Services NA, LLC complied with the aforementioned applicable servicing criteria as of December 31,
      2018 and for the period from January 1, 2018 to December 31, 2018 is fairly stated, in all material respects.







/s/ CohnReznick LLP



Roseland, New Jersey

March 28, 2019
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

ANCEL PRATT, JR.,

Appellant,

v.

MICHAEL C. WEISS, D.O., MICHAEL C. WEISS, D.O., P.A., LOUIS H. 

ISAACSON, D.O., LOUIS H. ISAACSON, D.O., P.A., STERLING 

HEALTHCARE GROUP, INC., STERLING MIAMI, INC., LAUDERDALE 

ORTHOPAEDIC SURGEONS, MICHAEL C. WEISS, D.O., P.A., and FMC 

HOSPITAL LTD., a Florida Limited Partnership d/b/a FLORIDA 

MEDICAL CENTER, FMC MEDICAL, INC., f/k/a FMC CENTER INC., 

d/b/a FLORIDA MEDICAL CENTER,

Appellees.

No. 4D10-4398

[November 12, 2015]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, 

Broward County; Jeffrey E. Streitfeld, Judge; L.T. Case No. 98-11569(19).

Linda A. Alley of Sheldon J. Schlesinger, P.A., Fort Lauderdale and 

Philip M. Burlington and Andrew A. Harris of Burlington & Rockenbach, 

P.A., West Palm Beach, for appellant.

A. Candace Marcus and James C. Sawran of McIntosh, Sawran & 

Cartaya, P.A., Fort Lauderdale, for appellees.

MAY, J.

This case comes to us upon remand from the Supreme Court of Florida. 

Pratt v. Weiss, 161 So. 3d 1268 (Fla. 2015). We previously affirmed a trial 

court order, in which the trial court found an offer of judgment complied 

with the requirements of section 768.79, Florida Statutes (2004). The 

supreme court has now quashed our decision and held that the offer failed 

to comply with section 768.79 and rule 1.442 of the Florida Rules of Civil 

Procedure. For the reasons expressed in the supreme court’s decision, we 

now reverse the trial court order and remand the case for further 

proceedings.

Reversed and Remanded.
2

GROSS and DAMOORGIAN, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
EPA SANITIZED Page 1 of 11
 

 

 

EPA SANITIZED Page 2 of 11
EPA SANITIZED Page 3 of 11
EPA SANITIZED Page 4 of 11
EPA SANITIZED Page 5 of 11
EPA SANITIZED Page 6 of 11
EPA SANITIZED Page 7 of 11
EPA SANITIZED Page 8 of 11
EPA SANITIZED Page 9 of 11
EPA SANITIZED Page 10 of 11
EPA SANITIZED Page 11 of 11
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of the Treasury

###### Internal Revenue Service

# AGENCY:

Internal Revenue Service, Treasury.

# ACTION:

Notice of Closed Meeting of Art Advisory Panel.

# SUMMARY:

Closed meeting of the Art Advisory Panel will be held in Washington, DC.

# DATES:

The meeting will be held September 23 and 24, 2009.

# ADDRESSES:

The closed meeting of the Art Advisory Panel will be held on September 23 and 24, 2009, in Room 4136 beginning at 9:30 a.m., Franklin Court Building, 1099 14th Street, NW., Washington, DC 20005.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Karen Carolan, C:AP:ART, 1099 14th Street, NW., Washington, DC 20005. Telephone (202) 435-5609 (not a toll free number).

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Notice is hereby given pursuant to section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App., that a closed meeting of the Art Advisory Panel will be held on September 23 and 24, 2009, in Room 4136 beginning at 9:30 a.m., Franklin Court Building, 1099 14th Street, NW., Washington, DC 20005.

The agenda will consist of the review and evaluation of the acceptability of fair market value appraisals of works of art involved in Federal income, estate, or gift tax returns. This will involve the discussion of material in individual tax returns made confidential by the provisions of 26 U.S.C. 6103.

A determination as required by section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act has been made that this meeting is concerned with matters listed in 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(3), (4), (6), and (7), and that the meeting will not be open to the public.

Kurt Meier,

Deputy Chief, Appeals.

[FR Doc. E9-20636 Filed 8-26-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4830-01-P
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

JOSE LUIS RAYA,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

No. 4D14-1587

[August 5, 2015]

ON MOTION FOR REHEARING

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Nineteenth Judicial Circuit, St. 

Lucie County; Dan L. Vaughn, Judge; L.T. Case No. 14-1587.

Carey Haughwout, Public Defender, and Ian Seldin, Assistant Public 

Defender, West Palm Beach, and Jose Luis Raya, Live Oak, pro se.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Melanie Dale 

Surber, Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

By order we granted rehearing and withdrew our opinion in Raya v. 

State, 39 Fla. L. Weekly D2122 (Fla. 4th DCA Oct. 8, 2014). Having now 

considered appellant’s pro se brief, we issue the following opinion.

Jose Luis Raya appeals the convictions and sentences imposed after 

he entered a plea of no contest to second degree murder and felonious 

possession of a firearm. After reviewing the record, we grant appellate 

counsel’s motion to withdraw filed pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 

U.S. 738, 87 S. Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), and we affirm the 

conviction and sentences. We find no merit to the claim raised in 

appellant’s pro se initial brief.

Nevertheless, we remand for the correction of a scrivener’s error in the 

written sentencing order for count 2. At sentencing, the court orally 

pronounced that the sentence in count 2 would run concurrently with the 
2

sentence imposed in count 1. However, the written sentencing order 

indicates that count 2 “shall run Consecutive to/Concurrent” the sentence 

in count 1. On remand, the trial court is directed to correct the written 

sentencing order so that it is consistent with the oral pronouncement. See 

Simmons v. State, 106 So. 3d 507 (Fla. 4th DCA 2013) (affirming and 

remanding for correction of a scrivener’s error in written judgment in an 

Anders appeal).

Affirmed and remanded with instructions.

DAMOORGIAN, CONNER and FORST, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
§ 550.205 Exempt transactions. ( a ) *Personal communications.* The prohibitions contained in this part do not apply to any postal, telegraphic, telephonic, or other personal communication that does not involve the transfer of anything of value.
( b ) *Official business.* The prohibitions contained in § 550.201(a) do not apply to any transactions for the conduct of the official business of the United States Government by employees, grantees, or contractors thereof.
# In the United States Court of Federal Claims

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

No. 15

- 905 V

Filed: November 13, 2015

Unpublished

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

SHABNAM RANJBAR

, *

*

Petitioner, * Ruling on Entitlement; Concession;

* Influenza ;

* Shoulder Injury ( “ SIRVA ” ) ;

SECRETARY OF HEALTH * Special Processing Unit (“SPU”)

AND HUMAN SERVICES, *

*

Respondent. *

*

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Nancy Routh Meyers, Ward Black Law, Greensboro, NC

, for petitioner.

Douglass Ross , U

. S

. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.

RULING ON ENTITLEMENT 1

Dorsey

, Chief Special Master:

On August 20, 2015

, Petitioner filed a petition for compensation under the

National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, 42 U.S.C. §300aa

- 10, et seq

. , 2 [ the

“Vaccine Act” or “Program”]. Peti tioner alleges that s he experienced a left shoulder

injury as a result of her October 1, 2012 influenza vaccination

. Petit ion at 1

- 2

. The

case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters.

On November 13, 2015

, respondent filed her Rule 4(c) r eport in which she

concedes that petitioner is entitled to compensa tion in this case. Respondent’s Rule

4(c) Report at 1 . Specifically, respondent “ has concluded that petitioner suffered a non

Table injury of SIRVA [Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine Administration] and that the

preponderance of the medical evidence indicates that the injury was causally related to

the flu vaccination she received on October 1, 2012. ” Id. at 3

. Respondent further

1 Because this unpublished ruling contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, the

undersigned intends to post it on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website, in accordance with

the E

- Government Act of 2002, Pub. L. No. 107

- 347, § 205, 116 Stat. 2899, 2913 (codified as amended

at 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2006)). In accordance with Vaccine Rule 18(b), petitioner has 14 days to

identify and move to redact medical or other information, the disclosure of which would constitute an

unwar ranted invasion of privacy. If, upon review, the undersigned agrees that the identified material fits

within this definition, the undersigned will redact such material from public access.

2 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, Pub. L. No. 99

- 660, 100 Stat. 3755. Hereinafter, for

ease of citation, all “§” references to the Vaccine Act will be to the pertinent subpara graph of 42 U.S.C. §

300aa (2012 ).agrees that there is no other identifiable cause for petitioner ’ s SIRVA and that she

suffered the residual effects of her SIRVA for more than six months

. Id.

In view of respondent’s concession and the evidence before me, the

undersigned find s that petitioner is entitle d to compensation

.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/Nora Beth Dorsey

Nora Beth Dorsey

Chief Special Master
#### § 579.405 Setoffs prohibited.

A setoff against blocked property (including a blocked account), whether by a U.S. bank or other U.S. person, is a prohibited transfer under § 579.201 if effected after the effective date.
#### Linda Moffett HENRY, Individually, etc. v. ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY.

No. 64526.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

May 21, 1979.

In re Linda Muffett Henry, Individually, etc., applying for certiorari, or writ of review to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit. Parish of Rapides. 368 So.2d 474.

Writ denied.