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

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

WEST PALM BEACH DIVISION

CASE NO: 22-cv-81294-CANNON

DONALD J. TRUMP,

Plaintiff,

v.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Defendant.

 /

PLAINTIFF’S NOTICE OF FILING

The Plaintiff, DONALD J. TRUMP, pursuant to this Court's Order and the applicable rules 

of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, respectfully files a proposed Judicial Protective Order to be 

considered by this Court. On September 20, 2022, the Defendant filed its proposed Protective Order

[ECF No. 102]. The Plaintiff's proposed Order tracks that of the Defendant except as to the 

language in paragraph 2. The Plaintiff proposes that the names of those given access to the Seized 

Materials be provided to the Special Master, and not to the Government. The Government has not

disclosed and does not plan to disclose the names of all persons on their side, and the Plaintiff 

therefore should not be treated any differently. Moreover, the Special Master can maintain the list of 

names so that in the event there are any compliance issues, there will exist a written record of the 

requisite acknowledgements.

Case 9:22-cv-81294-AMC Document 111 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/23/2022 Page 1 of 3
Respectfully submitted,

CHRIS KISE & ASSOCIATES, P.A.

201 East Park Avenue

5

th Floor

Tallahassee, FL 32301

Telephone: (850) 270-0566

By: /s/ Christopher M. Kise

 Christopher M. Kise

Florida Bar No: 855545

chris@ckise.net

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on September _23rd, 2022, I electronically filed the foregoing document 

with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served 

this day on all counsel of record or pro se parties identified on the attached Service List in the 

manner specified, either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in 

some other authorized manner for those counsel or parties who are not authorized to receive 

electronically Notice of Electronic Filing.

Respectfully submitted,

Lindsey Halligan

Florida Bar No. 109481

511 S.E. 5th Avenue

Suite 1008

Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301

Lindseyhalligan@outlook.com

M. Evan Corcoran

SILVERMAN|THOMPSON|

SLUTKIN|WHITE, LLC

400 East Pratt Street – Suite 900

Baltimore, MD 21202

Telephone: (410) 385-2225

Email: ecorcoran@silvermanthompson.com

(pro hac vice)

By: /s/ Christopher M. Kise 

Christopher M. Kise

Florida Bar No. 855545

Chris Kise & Associates, P.A.

201 East Park Avenue

5th Floor

Tallahassee, FL 32301

Telephone: (850) 270-0566

Email: chris@ckise.net

James M. Trusty

Ifrah Law PLLC

1717 Pennsylvania Avenue N.W.

Suite 650

Washington, DC 20006

Telephone: (202) 524-4176

Email: jtrusty@ifrahlaw.com

(pro hac vice)

Counsel for Plaintiff

Donald J. Trump

Case 9:22-cv-81294-AMC Document 111 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/23/2022 Page 2 of 3
Case 9:22-cv-81294-AMC Document 111 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/23/2022 Page 3 of 3
#### § 125.25 Aliens.

Alien registration records together with other papers and documents which indicated the country of which the applicant is a citizen shall be accepted as evidence of citizenship in a foreign nation.
FORM OF CERTIFICATION
                       PURSUANT TO RULE 13a-14 AND 15d-14
              UNDER THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934, AS AMENDED

                                  CERTIFICATION

I, Wing Yu, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB of FinancialContent, Inc.;

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

3.  Based  on my  knowledge,  the  financial  statements,  and  other  financial
information  included  in this annual  report,  fairly  present in all  material
respects the financial  condition,  results of operations  and cash flows of the
registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this annual report;

4. As the registrant's  certifying officer I am responsible for establishing and
maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules
13a-14 and 15(e) and 15d-15(e) for the registrant and I have:

     (a)  designed  such  disclosure  controls  and  procedures  to ensure  that
     material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated
     subsidiaries,  is  made  known  to  us by  others  within  those  entities,
     particularly  during  the  period  in which  this  annual  report  is being
     prepared; and

     (b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and
     procedures  and presented my  conclusions  about the  effectiveness  of the
     disclosure  controls and  procedures as of the end of the period covered by
     the report; and

     (c)  disclosed  in this  report any  changes in the  registrant's  internal
     control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most
     recent fiscal quarter (the small business issuer's fourth fiscal quarter in
     the  case  of  an  annual  report)  that  has  materially  affected,  or is
     reasonably likely to materially affect,  the registrant's  internal control
     over financial reporting;

5. As the  registrant's  certifying  officer I have disclosed,  based on my most
recent  evaluation,  to the registrant's  auditors and the registrant's board of
directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

     (a) all material  weaknesses,  as well as significant  deficiencies  in the
     design or operation of internal control over financial  reporting which are
     reasonably  likely to adversely affect the registrant's  ability to record,
     process, summarize, and report financial information,  have been disclosed;
     and

     (b) any fraud,  whether or not material,  that involves management or other
     employees  who  have  a  significant  role  in  the  registrant's  internal
     controls.


Date: September 28, 2007


/s/ WING YU
-------------------------
Wing Yu,
Chief Executive Officer
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

E MILY LIVINGSTON SCOWN AND

BARBARA SCOWN

,

Appellant s

,

v

.

THE CITY OF ALPINE, TEXAS

,

Appellee. §

§

§

§

§

§

§ No. 08

- 1 6

- 00 301

- CV

Appeal from the

394 th District Court

of Brewster C ounty, Texas

(TC# 2015

- 03

- B0705

- CV )

O R D E R

On December 22 , 2016 this Court issued an order for mediation referral. The order

required the parties to make any objection to referral within ten days of the order. On December

30 , 2016 Appellee timely filed an objection. The Court finds Appellee’s objection persuasive.

Therefore, the Court ORDERS this appeal to continue, the appellate timetable suspension

is lifted and the Clerk ’ s Record shall now be filed in this Court on or before January 29, 2017

.

IT IS SO ORDERED this 30 th day of December , 201 6

.

PER CURIAM

Before McClure , C.J., R odriguez and Hughes

, JJ.
#### BANK OF TIFTON *v.*SAUSSY & HUXFORD *et al.*

Where there are several persons residing in different counties, claiming a fund in the hands of a person who has no interest therein, and who is so situated that he may apply to a. court of equity for an order of inter-pleader, the petition may he filed against all of them in the county of the residence of any one of them.

Submitted July 18, 1906.

Decided February 14, 1907.

Interpleader. Before Judge Mitchell. Tift superior court. December 11, 1905.

*Fulwood & Murray*and *F. S. Harrell,*for plaintiff.

*Saussy Saussy*and *Murrow &*Pate, for defendants.

Atkinson, J.

The Bank of Tifton brought in the superior •court of Berrien county a petition styled a petition for interpleader, against Saussy & Huxford, of Chatham county, and Clyatt, of Berrien county. The defendants Saussy & Huxford filed both a general and special demurrer. Subsequently this demurrer was .amended by the insertion of a ground that the petition on its face .showed that the superior court of Berrien county had no jurisdiciion, .so far as Saussy *&*Huxford were concerned. After the ■County of Tift was created and organized, the case was transferred to the superior court of that county, and the judge of the superior ■court passed an order in the following words: “The demurrer filed by the defendant Saussy *&*Huxford to the jurisdiction of the court, i. e., the superior court of Berrien county, now by law the superior court of Tift county, having been argued, the same is hereby sustained, and the said bill of interpleader is hereby dismissed with costs on the plaintiff.” To the judgment dismissing the petition the plaintiffs excepted.

■ It appears from the order of the judge that he passed only upon one ground of the demurrer, — that one raising the question of .jurisdiction. We think he erred. A petition for interpleader is ■an equitable proceeding. Substantial relief is prayed, so far as the stakeholders are concerned, against each of the persons claiming the fund; and therefore where the claimants reside in différent counties, the petition may be properly filed in the county of the residence of either. Whether the petition, upon its merits, is good ns a petition in the nature of a bill of interpleader, we do not now •determine; for the reason that this question has never been passed *458upon by the trial judge. The superior court of Tift county had jurisdiction of the demurring defendants, and the court may proceed to determine the general and special demurrers.

*Judgment reversed.*

*All the Justices concur, except Fish, G. J., absent.*
<PAGE>
 
                                                                    EXHIBIT (22)


                   LUFKIN INDUSTRIES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

                        SUBSIDIARIES OF THE REGISTRANT

<TABLE> 
<CAPTION> 
                                                                                     Name under which
                                                  Jurisdiction                       such subsidiary
          Name of subsidiary                    of Incorporation                      does business
------------------------------------            ----------------                    ----------------
<S>                                        <C>                                      <C> 
Lufkin Industries Canada, Ltd.                 Province of Alberta,                       Same
      Canada

P. T. Lufkin Indonesia                         Republic of Indonesia                      Same


Lufkin Industries FSC, Inc.                    Barbados                                   Same


Lufkin Industries Europe, Bv.                  The Netherlands                            Same
</TABLE>
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 Health and Human Services

###### Food and Drug Administration

          - [Docket No. FDA-2011-N-0002]

# AGENCY:

Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

                        The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is postponing the Arthritis Advisory Committee meeting scheduled for September 13, 2011. This meeting was announced in the                         **Federal Register**                         of July 19, 2011 (76 FR 42715). The postponement is due to the fact that the Agency recently received submissions from some of the investigational new drug (IND) application holders for anti-nerve growth factor (Anti-NGF) antibody drug products that contain large quantities of new information that will require additional time for Agency review prior to the advisory committee meeting.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        Philip A. Bautista, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 31, rm. 2417, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, 301-796-9001, FAX 301-827-8533,                         *e-mail: AAC@fda.hhs.gov,*                         or FDA Advisory Committee Information Line, 1-800-741-8138 (301-443-0572 in the Washington, DC area), and follow the prompts to the desired center or product area. Please call the Information Line for up-to-date information on this meeting.                    

Dated: August 17, 2011.

Leslie Kux,

Acting Assistant Commissioner for Policy.

[FR Doc. 2011-21380 Filed 8-19-11; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4160-01-P
Exhibit 31(b)CERTIFICATION BY CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICERI, Mark J. Thomas, certify that: 1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Servidyne, Inc.;  2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue statement of amaterial fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, inlight of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading withrespect to the period covered by this report;  3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial informationincluded in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition,results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periodspresented in this report;  4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e)and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have: a. Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused suchdisclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensurethat material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by other within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this report is being prepared;  b. Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness ofthe disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by thisreport based on such evaluation; and  c. Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal controlover financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscalquarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to material affect,the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; 5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our mostrecent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’sauditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or personsperforming the equivalent functions): a. All significant deficiencies and material weakness in the design oroperation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likelyto adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize andreport financial information; and  b. Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or otheremployees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting.        Date: December 15, 2006 /s/ Mark J. Thomas   Mark J. Thomas   Chief Financial Officer
Exhibit 21
  CENTRA
    FINANCIAL HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES ANNUAL REPORT ONFORM 10-K
    for Fiscal Year Ended December 31, 2008
      JurisdictionofName of Subsidiary

IncorporationCentra Bank, Inc.

West VirginiaCentra Financial Corporation  Morgantown, Inc.

West VirginiaCentra Financial Corporation  Martinsburg, Inc.

West VirginiaCentra Financial Corporation  Uniontown, Inc.

West VirginiaCentra Financial Corporation  Hagerstown, Inc.

West VirginiaCentra Financial Statutory Trust I

ConnecticutCentra Financial Statutory Trust II

West VirginiaTitle Services, Inc.

West VirginiaCentra Mortgage I, LLC

West Virginia
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 109 (Tuesday, June 6, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Pages 35916-35917]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-14145]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER00-2566-000]


New England Power Company, Massachusetts Electric Company, and 
The Narragansett Electric Company; Notice of Filing

May 25, 2000.
    Take notice that on May 19, 2000, New England Power Company (NEP), 
Massachusetts Electric Company (MECO) and The Narragansett Electric 
Company (Narragansett) tendered for filing: (i) an amended and restated 
open access transmission tariff--New England Power Company, FERC 
Electric Tariff, Original Volume No. 9 (Tariff No. 9); (ii) amendments 
to NEP's Tariff No. 9 Network Integration Transmission Service 
Agreements with MECO, Narragansett and the Massachusetts Bay 
Transportation Authority; (iii) notices of succession for certain rate 
schedules under which the operating companies of Eastern Utilities 
Associates formerly provided service; and (iv) notices of cancellation 
for certain rate schedules.
    These filings were made in connection with the consummation of the 
merger of National Grid USA (formerly known as New England Electric 
System) with Eastern Utilities Associates, and the subsequent 
consummation of the mergers and consolidations of the respective 
operating companies of the two systems.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest such filing should 
file a motion to intervene or protest with the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE, Washington, DC 20426, in 
accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice 
and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). All such motions and 
protests should be filed on or before June 9, 2000. Protests will be 
considered by the Commission to determine the appropriate action to be 
taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the 
proceedings. Any person wishing to become a party must file a motion to 
intervene. Copies of this filing are on

[[Page 35917]]

file with the Commission and are available for public inspection. This 
filing may also be viewed on the Internet at http://www.ferc.fed.us/online/rims.htm (call 202-208-2222 for assistance).

Linwood A. Watson, Jr.,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 00-14145 Filed 6-5-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
#### § 155.810 Tank vessel security.

Operators of tank vessels carrying more oil cargo residue than normal in any cargo tank must assign a surveillance person or persons responsible for maintaining standard vessel security.

[USCG-2000-7641, 66 FR 55572, Nov. 2, 2001]
EXHIBIT 32.2




CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002




I, Douglas R. Muir, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the accompanying Annual Report on Form 10-K of Krispy Kreme Doughnuts, Inc. (the “Company”) for the fiscal year ended January 30, 2011 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the information contained in such report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.




/s/ Douglas R. MuirDouglas R. MuirChief Financial Officer


Date: March 31, 2011




This certification shall not be deemed to be “filed” for the purpose of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and will not be incorporated by reference into any registration statement filed under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, unless specifically identified therein as being incorporated therein by reference.




A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Krispy Kreme Doughnuts, Inc. and will be retained by Krispy Kreme Doughnuts, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.




---
In The 

Court of Appeals 

Seventh District of Texas at Amarillo

No. 07-15-00214-CR 

CHRISTIAN AURELIO URRUTIA, APPELLANT 

 

V. 

 

THE STATE OF TEXAS, APPELLEE 

 

On Appeal from the 47th District Court 

Randall County, Texas 

Trial Court No. 24,177-A, Honorable Richard Dambold, Presiding 

 

September 10, 2015 

 

MEMORANDUM OPINION 

 

Before QUINN, C.J., and CAMPBELL and HANCOCK, JJ. 

Appellant, Christian Aurelio Urrutia, appeals an order modifying the terms of his 

community supervision.1 We dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction.

The State moved to dismiss this appeal for want of jurisdiction because the 

modification order is not a judgment of guilt or an appealable order. See TEX. R. APP. P. 

25.2(a)(2). Appellant filed a response and concurs with the State’s motion. 

 

1 On April 28, 2015, the trial court entered a Continuation and Modification Special Conditions

order. 
2

It has long been held that an order modifying the conditions of community 

supervision is not an appealable order. See Basaldua v. State, 558 S.W.2d 2, 5 (Tex. 

Crim. App. 1977); accord, Borner v. State, No. 05-15-00465-CR, 2015 Tex. App. LEXIS 

7495, at *1 (Tex. App.—Dallas July 21, 2015, no pet. h.) (stating the same).

Accordingly, we grant the State’s motion to dismiss and dismiss the appeal for 

lack of jurisdiction.

Brian Quinn

Chief Justice

Do not publish.
#### § 779.322 Second requirement for qualifying as a “retail or service establishment.”

If the business is one to which the retail concept is applicable then the second requirement for qualifying as a “retail or service establishment” within that term's statutory definition is that 75 percent of the establishment's annual dollar volume must be derived from sales of goods or services (or of both) which are recognized as retail sales or services in the particular industry. Under the Act, this requirement is distinct from the requirement that 75 percent of annual dollar volume be from sales of goods or services “not for resale” (§ 779.329); many sales which are not for resale lack a retail concept and the fact that a sale is not for resale cannot establish that it is recognized as retail in a particular industry. (See *Wirtz* v. *Steepleton General Tire Co.,* 383 U.S. 190.) To determine whether the sales or services of an establishment are recognized as retail sales or services in the particular industry, we must inquire into what is meant by the terms “recognized” and “in the particular industry,” and into the functions of the Secretary and the courts in determining whether the sales are recognized as retail in the industry.