alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 164.40 Devices to indicate speed and distance. ( a ) Each vessel required to be fitted with an Automatic Radar Plotting Aid (ARPA) under § 164.38 of this part must be fitted with a device to indicate speed and distance of the vessel either through the water or over the ground.
( b ) The device must meet the following specifications: ( 1 ) The display must be easily readable on the bridge by day or night.
( 2 ) Errors in the indicated speed, when the vessel is operating free from shallow water effect, and from the effects of wind, current, and tide, should not exceed 5 percent of the speed of the vessel, or 0.5 knot, whichever is greater.
( 3 ) Errors in the indicated distance run, when the vessel is operating free from shallow water effect, and from the effects of wind, current, and tide, should not exceed 5 percent of the distance run of the vessel in one hour or 0.5 nautical mile in each hour, whichever is greater.
[CGD 83-004, 49 FR 43467, Oct. 29, 1984, as amended by USCG-1998-3799, 63 FR 35532, June 30, 1998]
#### § 167.76 In the approach to Boston, MA: Precautionary areas.

(a) A precautionary area is established with a radius of 6.17 nautical miles centered upon geographical position 42°22.71′ N, 70°46.97′ W.

(b)

(1) A precautionary area is established and is bounded to the east by a circle of radius 15.5 miles, centered upon geographical position 40°35.01′ N, 68°59.96′ W, intersected by the traffic separation schemes in the approach to Boston, MA, and Eastern approach, off Nantucket (part II of the TSS off New York) at the following geographical positions:

| Latitude | Longitude |
| --- | --- |
| 40°50.47′ N | 68°58.67′ W. |
| 40°23.75′ N | 69°13.95′ W. |

(2) The precautionary area is bounded to the west by a line connecting the two TSSs between the following geographical positions:

| Latitude | Longitude |
| --- | --- |
| 40°48.03′ N | 69°02.95′ W. |
| 40°36.76′ N | 69°15.13′ W. |

[USCG-2010-0718, 75 FR 77534, Dec. 13, 2010]
#### Reid, receiver, *v.*Beck.

Submitted July 18,

Decided December 13, 1906.

Rehearing denied December 20, 1906.

Motion to set aside judgment. .Before Judge Lewis. Putnam superior court. September 19, 1905.

*J. H. Hall,*for plaintiff. *Turner & Adams,*for defendants.

Evans, J.

This case is controlled by the decision this day rendered in *Reid*v. *Hearn & Green,*ante, 117.

*Judgment reversed.*

*All the Justices eoneur.*
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

CASE NO. 22-21659-Civ-GAYLES/TORRES 

JAMES EDWARD JOHNSON,

Plaintiff,

v.

KILOLO KIJAKAZI,

Acting Commissioner of Social Security,

Defendant.

/

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION ON UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR ENTRY 

OF JUDGMENT UNDER SENTENCE FOUR OF 42 U.S.C. § 405(g)

This matter is before the Court on Defendant Kilolo Kijakazi’s, the Acting

Commissioner of Social Security (“Commissioner”), motion to enter a judgment with a

remand of the cause to the Commissioner for further action. Commissioner cites 

sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), that grants the Court power “to enter, upon the 

pleadings and transcript of the record, a judgment affirming, modifying or reversing 

the decision of the Commissioner, with or without remanding the cause for a

rehearing.” On remand, the Administrative Law Judge will offer the claimant an 

opportunity for a new hearing, further evaluate the medical opinion evidence 

pursuant to 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(b)(2), 416.920(b)(2), and take any further action

necessary to complete the administrative record. A new decision will follow. 

Case 1:22-cv-21659-DPG Document 27 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/16/2023 Page 1 of 2
Based on the Court’s review of the motion and record, and based on the 

agreement of Plaintiff’s counsel to a sentence four remand, the Court hereby 

RECOMMENDS that the motion be GRANTED and Final Judgment entered in 

Plaintiff’s favor under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) that remands the action to the 

Administrative Law Judge. The action should remain CLOSED. Based on the 

agreement of all parties, no objection period is contemplated. 

DONE AND SUBMITTED in Chambers at Miami, Florida, this 16th day of 

November, 2023. 

___________________________________

EDWIN G. TORRES

Chief United States Magistrate Judge

Case 1:22-cv-21659-DPG Document 27 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/16/2023 Page 2 of 2
Editorial Note on Part 165
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 165 appear by USCG-2006-25556, 72 FR 36328, 36329, July 2, 2007 and by USCG-2018-1049, 84 FR 7813, Mar. 5, 2019.

§ 165.105 Security Zones; Passenger Vessels, Portland, Maine, Captain of the Port Zone. ( a ) *Definition.* “Passenger vessel” as used in this section means a passenger vessel over 100 gross tons authorized to carry more than 500 passengers for hire making voyages, any part of which is on the high seas, and for which passengers are embarked, disembarked or pay a port call, in the Portland, Maine, Captain of the Port zone as delineated in 33 CFR 3.05-15.
( b ) *Location.* The following areas are security zones: ( 1 ) All navigable waters within the Portland, Maine, Captain of the Port Zone, extending from the surface to the sea floor, within a 100-yard radius of any passenger vessel that is anchored, moored, or in the process of mooring.
( 2 ) All navigable waters, within the Portland, Maine, Captain of the Port Zone, extending from the surface to the sea floor, extending 200 yards ahead, and 100 yards aside and astern of any passenger vessel that is underway.
( c ) *Regulations.* ( 1 ) In accordance with the general regulations in § 165.33 of this part, entry into or movement within these zones is prohibited unless previously authorized by the Coast Guard Captain of the Port, Portland, Maine (COTP) or his designated representative.
( 2 ) All persons and vessels must comply with the instructions of the COTP or the designated on-scene Coast Guard patrol personnel. On-scene Coast Guard patrol personnel include commissioned, warrant and petty officers of the Coast Guard on board Coast Guard, Coast Guard Auxiliary, and local, state and federal law enforcement vessels. Emergency response vessels are authorized to move within the zone, but must abide by restrictions imposed by the COTP or his designated representative.
( 3 ) No person may swim upon or below the surface of the water within the boundaries of these security zones unless previously authorized by the COTP or his designated representative.
( d ) *Enforcement.* The Captain of the Port will enforce these zones and may enlist the aid and cooperation of any Federal, state, county, municipal, or private agency to assist in the enforcement of the regulation.
[CGD01-03-001, 68 FR 22305, Apr. 28, 2003]
IJN ITED STA TES DISTR ICT CO URT

SO UTH ERN D ISTRICT O F FLORIDA

CA SE N O.

In the M atter of the Search of

M ar-a-Lago

l l00 S. Ocean Blvd.

Palm Beach, FL 33480

M OTION TO APVEAKPROHAC FTCX,

CONSENT TO DESIGNATION AND REQUEST TO

ELEC TRO NICALLY RECEM N OTICES O F ELECTRON IC FILIN G

In accordance w1t11 Local Rule 4(b) of the Rtlles Goveming the Admission, Practice, Peer

Review, and Discipline of Attom eys' of the United States District Court for the Southem District

of Floridaa the tm dersigned respectfully m oves for the adm issionpr/ hac vice of Jam es M . Trusty

of the law firm of IFRAH, PLLC, 1717 Pennsylvania A venue, N W , Suite 650, W ashington, DC

20006, 202-852-5669, for purposes of appearance as co-cotm sel on behalf of M ovant Donald J.

Trtzm p in the above-styled case only, and pursuant to Rule 2B of the CM /ECF A dm inistrative

Procedures, to permit Jam es M . Trusty to receive electronic filings in this case, and in support

thereof states as follow s:

Jam es M . Trusty is not adm itted to practice in the Southem District of Florida and

%

is a m em ber in good standing of the State Bar of M aryland and the Bar of the D istrict of Colllm bia.

2. M ovant, Lindsey H alligan, Esquire, 51l SE 5th Avenue, Fort Lauderdale, Florida

33301, is a member in good standing of The Florida Bar and the United States District Court for

the Southern D istrict of Florida and is authorized to file tllrough the Court's electronic filing

system . M ovant consents to be designated as a m em ber of the Bar of this Court .4t14 whom the

Court and opposing counsel may readily commtmicate regarding the conduct of the case, upon

22-cv-81294-AMC

Case 9:22-cv-81294-AMC Document 6 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/22/2022 Page 1 of 2
whom filingsshallbeserved,whoshallberequiredtoelectronicallyfileandserveal1docllments

andthingsthatm aybefiledandservedelectronically,andwhoshallberesponsibleforfilingand

serving documentsincompliancewiththeCM /ECF AdministrativeProcedures.SeeSection2B

oftheCM /ECFAdministrativeProcedures.

3. Inaccordancew1111thelocalrulesoftllisCourt,JamesM .Trustyhasmadepayment

ofthisCourt's$200.00admissionfee.A certificationinaccordancewithRule4(b)isattached

hereto.

4. Jnm esM .Trusty,by andthroughdesignated cotmselandptlrsllnntto Section 28

CM JECF AdministrativeProcedures,hereby requeststheCourttoprovideNoticeofElectronic

FilingstoJnmesM.Tmstyatthefolowingemailaddress:jtrusty@ifrahlaw.com.

W HEREFORE,M ovant,LindseyHalligan,movesthisCourtto enteranOrderadmitting

JnmesM .1rtlsty,to appearbeforethisCourton behalfofM ovantDonald J.Tnlmp,for21

purposesrelatingtotheproceedingsintheabove-styledmatleranddirectingtheClerktoprovide

noticeofelectronicfilingstoJam esM .Trusty.

Date:Augtlst22,2022 Respectfullysubm itted,

/s/LindsevHallizan

Lindsey H alligan

FloridaBarN o.109481

511SE 51 Avenue

FortLauderdale,FL 33301

Email:lindseyhalligano@gmail.com

CounselforDonaldl Trump

2

Case 9:22-cv-81294-AMC Document 6 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/22/2022 Page 2 of 2
## Court of Appeals Sixth Appellate District of Texas

J U D G M E N T

Clifford Clark, Appellant

No. 06

- 19

- 00033

- CR v.
The State of Texas, Appellee Appeal from the 102nd District Court of Bowie County, Texas (Tr. Ct. No. 17F1218

- 102 ). Memorandum Opinion delivered by C hief Justice Morriss, Justice Burgess and Justice Stevens participating.

As stated in the Court’s opinion of this date, we find there was partial error in the judgment
of the court below. Therefore, we modify the judgment by deleting the phrase “Terms of Plea Bargain” and delete the assessment of court costs. As modified, the judgment of the trial court is

affirmed. We note that the appellant, Clifford Clark, has adequately indicated his inability to pay costs of appeal. Therefore, we waive payment of costs.

RENDERED NOVEMBER 18, 2019 BY ORDER OF THE COURT JOSH R. MORRISS, III CHIEF JUSTICE

ATTEST: Debra K. Autrey, Clerk
Exhibit 32.1

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



         In connection  with the Annual  Report of Stereo Vision  Entertainment,
Inc.  on Form  10-KSB for the period  ending  June 30,  2003,  as filed with the
Securities and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),  I, John
Honour, Chief Executive Officer of the Company,  certify,  pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted  pursuant to Section 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of
2002, that, to the best of my knowledge and belief:

         (1)      the Report fully  complies  with the  requirements  of Section
                  13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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


/S/ John Honour
---------------
John Honour
C.E.O., President, Director
(Principal Executive Officer)


October 14, 2003


A signed  original of this written  statement  required by Section 906, or other
document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that
appears in typed form within the  electronic  version of this written  statement
has been  provided  to the  Company  and will be  retained  by the  Company  and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
WITH FRIENDS, FAMILY, AND SERVICES THAT SUPPORT PARTICIPATION.

THROUGH ACTIVITIES THAT PROMOTE HE ALTH AND PERSONAL ENRICHMENT. 

TIME, TALENT, AND LIFE E XPERIENCE TO BENEFIT OTHERS. 

Visit oam.acl.gov for more information.
#### Carl A. Arnold et al. v. Globe Investment Company.

Filed April 17, 1894.

No. 5587.

Attachment: Receivers: Banks. On the authority of *Arnold v. Weimer,*40 Neb., 216, the judgment of the district court in this ease is affirmed.

Error from the district court of Custer county. Tried below before Harrison, J.

*George II Hastings, Attorney General, J. 8. Kirkpatrick,*and *Hutchinson & Dickinson,*for plaintiffs in error.

No briefs filed.

Ragan, C.

The facts in this case are the same as in *Arnold v. Weimer,*40 Neb., 216, decided at this term, and on the authority of that case the judgment of the district court is

Affirmed.

Harrison, J., having heard the case in the district court, offered no opinion.
###### Editorial Note on Part 159

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 159 appear by USCG-2008-0179, 73 FR 35015, June 19, 2008.

#### § 159.73 Conductors.

Current carrying conductors must be electrically insulated from non-current carrying metal parts.
###### Editorial Note on Part 157

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 157 appear by USCG-2008-0179, 73 FR 35015, June 19, 2008.

#### § 157.114 Crude Oil Washing Operations and Equipment Manual: Not approved.

If the manuals submitted under § 157.108 or § 157.110 are not approved, the Coast Guard forwards a letter to the submitter with the reasons why the manuals were not approved.
§ 127.1405 Repairs. Each operator of a waterfront facility handling LHG must ensure that— ( a ) Equipment is repaired so that— ( 1 ) The equipment continues to meet the applicable requirements in this subpart;
( 2 ) Safety is not compromised; and
( b ) Welding and cutting meet NFPA 51B (incorporated by reference, see § 127.003).
[CGD 88-049, 60 FR 39796, Aug. 3, 1995, as amended by USCG-2019-0444, 87 FR 5692, Feb. 2, 2022]
fntu_ex108.htm


EXHIBIT 10.8


 


PROMISSORY NOTE


 



	June 10, 2012	$100,000 USD





 


For value received, Finishing Touches Home Goods Inc. (the “Company”) promises to pay $100,000 to or to the order of BAY CAPITAL A.G. (the “Payee”) on demand, at the City of Baar, Switzerland together with interest calculated annually not in advance at the simple rate of sixteen per cent (16%) per annum from the date of advance to the date of payment.


 


The Company has the right to prepay all or any money owing pursuant to this Promissory Note without notice, penalty, or bonus.


 


The Company hereby waives presentment, notice, protest and all other demands and notices in connection with the delivery, acceptance, performance, default or enforcement of this promissory note.


 


Dated: June 10, 2012







Finishing Touches Home Goods Inc.







Per: /s/ "Mark Hunter"


Authorized Signatory
**Exhibit 31(e)2**

**MISSISSIPPI POWER COMPANY**

 

**CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER**
 

I, Frances V. Turnage, certify that:

1.

I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Mississippi Power Company;

2.

Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a 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 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 report; 

4.

The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining 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 such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, 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 report is being prepared;

 

(b)

Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

 

(c)

Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’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; and

5.

The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

(a)

All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses 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; and

 

(b)

Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.

Date:  November 6, 2006

/s/Frances Turnage

Frances V. Turnage

Vice President, Treasurer and Chief Financial Officer
<PAGE>   1
                   K-TRON INTERNATIONAL, INC. & SUBSIDIARIES

                       COMPUTATION OF EARNINGS PER SHARE
                                  (Unaudited)

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                        Three Months Ended                      Six Months Ended
                                                        ------------------                      ----------------
                                                     June 28,         June 29,              June 28,           June 29,
                                                      1997              1996                  1997               1996
                                                      ----              ----                  ----               ----
<S>                                                 <C>               <C>                  <C>               <C>
AVERAGE COMMON AND
 COMMON-EQUIVALENT
 SHARES:

 Weighted Average Common
  Shares Outstanding per Period                      3,146,000        3,113,000             3,142,000         3,113,000

Stock Options                                           51,000            7,000                51,000             7,000
                                                     ---------        ---------             ---------         ---------

ADJUSTED AVERAGE COMMON
AND COMMON-EQUIVALENT
SHARES COMPUTATION                                   3,197,000        3,120,000             3,193,000         3,120,000
                                                     =========        =========             =========         =========

EARNINGS FOR COMMON
AND COMMON-EQUIVALENT
SHARES COMPUTATION:

Net income applicable to Common
  Stock                                             $1,252,000        $ 928,000            $2,302,000        $1,680,000
                                                    ==========        =========            ==========        ==========

EARNINGS PER SHARE                                  $      .39        $     .30            $      .72        $      .54
                                                    ==========        =========            ==========        ==========
</TABLE>
#### § 143.200 Applicability.

This subpart applies to mobile offshore drilling units when engaged in OCS activities.
# ToC

# Other Activities by State

&"Arial Rounded MT Bold,Bold"&14Table A-10: Other Ombudsman Activities for FY 2012	

&"Arial Narrow,Regular"Table A-10: p. &P	

# Other Activities by Region

&"Arial Rounded MT Bold,Bold"&14Table A-10: Other Ombudsman Activities by Region for FY 2012	

&"Arial Narrow,Regular"Table A-10: p. &P
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent *

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision **

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

LEON BULLOCKS, Jr.,

 Plaintiff - Appellant,

 v.

CITY OF LAS VEGAS DETENTION

CENTER and KAREN COYNE, Chief

Director, City of Las Vegas Detention

Center,

 Defendants - Appellees.

No. 10-16609

D.C. No. 2:09-cv-00542-RLHGWF

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Nevada

Roger L. Hunt, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted September 27, 2011** 

Before: SILVERMAN, W. FLETCHER, and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges.

Leon Bullocks, Jr., a former detainee at the City of Las Vegas Detention

Center, appeals pro se from the district court’s summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C.

FILED

OCT 13 2011

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 10-16609

§ 1983 action alleging that he suffered health problems from poor ventilation in his

unit. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo the

decision to grant summary judgment, Toguchi v. Chung, 391 F.3d 1051, 1056 (9th

Cir. 2006), and may affirm on any ground supported by the record. Johnson v.

Riverside Healthcare Sys., 534 F.3d 1116, 1121 (9th Cir. 2008). We affirm. 

Summary judgment on Bullocks’s deliberate indifference claim was proper

because he failed to raise a triable dispute as to whether defendants consciously

disregarded an excessive risk to his health where the evidence showed that they

responded to his complaints, prescribed him medicine, and granted his request for a

transfer to a new unit. See Toguchi, 391 F.3d at 1057 (setting forth standard for

Eighth Amendment deliberate indifference claim); Carnell, 74 F.3d at 979 (noting

that pretrial detainee’s Fourteenth Amendment deliberate indifference claim is

analyzed under the same standard as such a claim under the Eighth Amendment). 

The district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Bullocks’s motions

to compel discovery because he failed to serve any proper or timely discovery

requests. See Draper v. Coombs, 792 F.2d 915, 924 (9th Cir. 1986). To the extent

that Bullocks sought a continuance of the summary judgment motion to conduct

discovery and amend his opposition, the request was properly denied because

Bullocks failed to show that he “diligently pursued” prior discovery opportunities
3 10-16609

or that allowing additional discovery would “preclude[] summary judgment.” 

Qualls v. Blue Cross of Cal., Inc., 22 F.3d 839, 844 (9th Cir. 1994).

 AFFIRMED.
###### Editorial Note on Part 117

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 117 appear by USCG-1998-3799, 63 FR 35529, June 30, 1998.

#### § 117.234 Cedar Creek.

The SR 36 Bridge, mile 0.5 in Cedar Beach, shall open on signal. From April 1 through November 30 from 2 a.m. to 4 a.m.; and from December 1 through March 31 from 6:30 p.m. to 6 a.m., the draw shall open on signal if at least four hours notice is given.

[CGD05-06-044, 71 FR 53325, Sept. 11, 2006]