alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
106TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 4806

AN ACT

To designate the Federal building located at 1710

Alabama Avenue in Jasper, Alabama, as the‘‘Carl Elliott Federal Building’’.

106TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 4806

AN ACT

To designate the Federal building located at 1710 Alabama

Avenue in Jasper, Alabama, as the ‘‘Carl Elliott Federal

Building’’.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
2

•HR 4806 EH

1 SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

2 The Federal building located at 1710 Alabama Ave3 nue in Jasper, Alabama, shall be known and designated

4 as the ‘‘Carl Elliott Federal Building’’.

5 SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

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

7 paper, or other record of the United States to the Federal

8 building referred to in section 1 shall be deemed to be

9 a reference to the ‘‘Carl Elliott Federal Building’’.

Passed the House of Representatives July 25, 2000.

Attest:

Clerk.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

CASE NO. 1:22-CV-22756-CMA

VICTOR ARIZA, 

Plaintiff,

vs.

WHITE HOUSE BLACK MARKET, INC.

a Florida for-profit corporation,

Defendant.

_____________________________________/

PLAINTIFF’S NOTICE OF SETTLEMENT

Plaintiff VICTOR ARIZA, by and through his undersigned Counsel, hereby provides notice 

that the parties have reached a settlement and will be executing necessary paperwork resolving all

claims and matters in the case. Accordingly, the parties respectfully request that the Court provide 

the parties twenty (20) days from the date of filing this Notice to allow the parties to finalize the 

settlement agreement and file dismissal documents with prejudice.

DATED: October 25, 2022.

Respectfully submitted, 

RODERICK V. HANNAH, ESQ., P.A. LAW OFFICE OF PELAYO

Counsel for Plaintiff DURAN, P.A.

4800 N. Hiatus Road Co-Counsel for Plaintiff

Sunrise, FL 33351 4640 N.W. 7th Street

T. 954/362-3800 Miami, FL 33126-2309

954/362-3779 (Facsimile) T. 305/266-9780 

Email: rhannah@rhannahlaw.com 305/269-8311 (Facsimile)

Email: pduran@pelayoduran.com

By____s/ Roderick V. Hannah __ By ___s/ Pelayo M. Duran ______

RODERICK V. HANNAH PELAYO M. DURAN

 Fla. Bar No. 435384 Fla. Bar No. 0146595

Case 1:22-cv-22756-CMA Document 7 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/25/2022 Page 1 of 1
Hillsborough

No. 7312

#### Victor W. Dahar v. Department of Buildings for City of Manchester

February 27, 1976

*Victor W. Dahar,*by brief and orally, pro se.

*Devine, Millimet, Stahl & Branch*and *James E. Townsend (Mr. Townsend*orally) for the defendant.

Per curiam.

This is a petition for declaratory judgment brought by the plaintiff to determine whether a fence erected around his swimming pool is in violation of the terms of a variance *123granted by the zoning board for the erection of the fence. Plaintiff sought and obtained from the zoning board a variance which would permit the erection of a six-foot fence instead of the four-foot fence permitted by the Manchester Zoning Ordinance § 4.03 (69). Plaintiff raised the grade of a portion of the lot on Hall Street by two feet and erected a fence six feet in height over the raised portion and eight feet in height where the grade had not been raised. The Trial Court *(Batchelder,*J.) held that the variance “contemplated the then existing grade of the petitioner’s land and not the raised grade subsequently created by the petitioner.” The court denied plaintiff’s request for a finding that he was not in violation of the ordinance and reserved and transferred his exceptions.

Plaintiff argues that it was necessary to raise the grade of his land in order to properly construct the swimming pool and that the variance must have contemplated the height of a fence from the grade he raised it to. Plaintiff relies upon references in the zoning ordinance dealing with the height of buildings and referring to “mean finished grade” as supporting the measuring of the height of his fence from the grade he raised it to. We pointed out in *Rye v. Ciborowski,*111 N.H. 77, 276 A.2d 482 (1971), that the scope of a variance is dependent upon the representations of the applicant and the intent of the language in the variance at the time it is issued. Accordingly, “meaning depends on popular usage and the circumstances surrounding their use, unaffected by statutory definitions.” *Id.*at 81, 276 A.2d at 486. It follows that plaintiff’s reliance on *Katz v. Board of Zoning Adjustments,*232 So. 2d 546 (La. App. 1970), is misplaced since that case involved violation of the zoning ordinance and not a variance.

Nothing in plaintiff’s application or the variance suggests that the permit to erect a “6’ high fence at street lot line” contemplated a change in the grade. *Katcher v. Home S & L Ass’n,*245 Cal. App. 2d 425, 53 Cal. Rptr. 923 (1966), cited by the plaintiff involved buildings erected on land where the grade was specifically authorized by the city. In the present case, neither the city nor the abutting landowners had knowledge or control of plaintiff’s grading plans. The trial court correctly ruled that plaintiff’s fence exceeds the scope of his variance and was in violation of its terms. *Rye v. Ciborowski supra.*

*Plaintiff’s petition dismissed.*
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  FinancialContent,  Inc. (the
"Company")  on Form 10-KSB for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2003 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),  the
undersigned, the Chief Executive Officer and Controller of the Company, certify,
pursuant  to 18  U.S.C.  1350,  as  adopted  pursuant  to  section  906  of  the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of their knowledge:

         (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 results of operations of the
Company.

/s/ Wing Yu                                 /s/ Thomas McAleer
---------------------------                     -------------------------------
    Wing Yu                                     Thomas McAleer
    Chief Executive Officer,                    Controller
    October 13, 2003                            October 13, 2003

This  certification  accompanies  the  Report  pursuant  to  Section  906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002 and shall not,  except to the extent required by the
Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002,  be deemed  filed by the  Company  for  purposes of
Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA 

WEST PALM BEACH DIVISION

THOMAS J. ZIOL,

Plaintiff,

v.

COLLINS ASSET GROUP, LLC,

Defendant, 

_________________________________/

Civil Action No. 9:22-cv-81341-AHS

UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE DISMISSAL 

PAPERS

NOW COMES THOMAS J. ZIOL, (“Plaintiff”), by and through his 

undersigned counsel, moving this Honorable Court for an extension of time to file 

dismissal papers in connection with the settlement reached with Defendant COLLINS 

ASSET GROUP, LLC, (“Defendant”), and in support thereof, stating as follows:

1. Plaintiff and Defendant (collectively, the “parties”) reached a settlement 

and have memorialized the terms of the settlement. 

2. On September 28, 2022, Plaintiff filed a Notice of Settlement. [Dkt. 13]

3. On November 15, 2022, this Honorable Court entered an order 

administratively closing the case without prejudice to file a stipulation for dismissal by 

December 12, 2022. [Dkt. 18]

Case 9:22-cv-81341-AHS Document 19 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/12/2022 Page 1 of 3
2

4. The Parties are still in the process of satisfying all their respective 

obligations as set forth by the terms of the settlement agreement

5. Specifically, the Settlement Agreement has not been fully executed and 

the settlement funds have not been received by the Plaintiff. 

6. Based on the foregoing, the parties need an additional 45 days, through 

January 26, 2023, to consummate the settlement and file dismissal papers.

7. Plaintiff’s counsel conferred with Defendant’s counsel on December 12, 

2022 regarding the relief sought herein and Defendant has no objection 

8. The relief sought herein will not prejudice any of the Parties and is sought in 

good faith.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests the Court to enter an order 

extending the deadline to file dismissal papers to January 26, 2023, and grant such 

other relief as the Court deems appropriate.

DATED: December 12, 2022 Respectfully submitted,

/s/ Alexander J. Taylor 

Alexander J. Taylor, Esq., 

Of Counsel 

Florida Bar No. 1013947 

Sulaiman Law Group, Ltd.

2500 S. Highland Ave, Suite 200

Lombard, IL 60148

Telephone: (630) 575-8181

Facsimile: (630) 575-8188

ataylor@sulaimanlaw.com 

 Counsel for Plaintiff

Case 9:22-cv-81341-AHS Document 19 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/12/2022 Page 2 of 3
3

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on December 12, 2022, I electronically filed the foregoing 

with the Clerk of the Court for the Southern District of Florida by using the CM/ECF 

system.

/s/ Alexander J. Taylor 

Case 9:22-cv-81341-AHS Document 19 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/12/2022 Page 3 of 3
The next “Cotton Ginnings” report will be released at 8:30 a.m. ET on January 25 , 1999.

The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on

the basis of race, color, national origin, gender, religion, age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, and
Exhibit 31(a)CERTIFICATION BY CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICERI, Alan R. Abrams, certify that: 1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Servidyne, Inc.;  2. Based on my knowledge, this 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 establishingand maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules13a-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: September 14, 2006 /s/ Alan R. Abrams         Alan R. Abrams    Chief Executive Officer
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 Transportation

###### Federal Highway Administration 

# AGENCY:

Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), US DOT. 

# ACTION:

Notice of public meeting.

# SUMMARY:

The Intelligent Transportation Society of America (ITS AMERICA) will hold a meeting of its Coordinating Council meeting on Sunday, July 16, 2000. The following designations are made for each item: (A) is an “action” item; (I) is an “information item;” and (D) is a “discussion” item. The agenda includes the following: (1) Call to Order and Introductions (I); (2) Statements of Introductions (I); (3) Antitrust Statement (I); (4) Approval of Previous Minutes (A); (5) Federal Report (I/D); (6) President's Report (I); (7) Federal Communications Commission Advice on Dedicated Short Range Communication at 5.9GHz (A); (8) New Regional Institutions—What is the ITS America Role? (I/D); (9) Workshop Orientation (I/D); (10) Committee Reports (I); (11) Future Coordinating Council Meeting Dates (I/D); (12) Adjournment. 

# DATES:

The Coordinating Council of ITS AMERICA will meet on Sunday, July 16, 2000, from 2 p.m.-5 p.m. (Eastern Standard time). 

# ADDRESSES:

Radisson Hotel—Berkley Marina, 200 Marina Boulevard, Berkley, CA 94710 Phone: (510) 548-7920; Fax: (510) 548-7944. 

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Materials associated with this meeting may be examined at the offices of ITS AMERICA, 400 Virginia Avenue, SW., Suite 800, Washington, D.C. 20024. Persons needing further information or to request to speak at this meeting should contact Larry Schulman at ITS AMERICA by telephone at (202) 484-4847, or by Fax at (202) 484-3483. 

The DOT contact is Kristy Frizzell, FHWA, HOIT, Washington, D.C. 20590, (202) 366-9536. Office hours are from 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m., e.t., Monday through Friday, except for legal holidays. 

(23 U.S.C. 315; 49 CFR 1.48) 

Issued on: Wednesday, May 24, 2000. 

Jeffrey Paniati, 

Deputy Director, ITS Joint Program Office.

[FR Doc. 00-13698 Filed 5-31-00; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910-22-P
#### § 167.153 Off New York: Eastern approach.

(a) A separation zone is established bounded by a line connecting the following geographical positions:

| Latitude | Longitude |
| --- | --- |
| 40°24.33′ N | 73°04.97′ W |
| 40°24.20′ N | 73°11.50′ W |
| 40°26.00′ N | 73°40.93′ W |
| 40°27.00′ N | 73°40.75′ W |
| 40°27.20′ N | 73°11.50′ W |
| 40°27.33′ N | 73°04.95′ W |

(b) A traffic lane for westbound traffic is established between the separation zone and a line connecting the following geographical positions:

| Latitude | Longitude |
| --- | --- |
| 40°32.33′ N | 73°04.95′ W |
| 40°32.20′ N | 73°11.50′ W |
| 40°28.00′ N | 73°40.73′ W |

(c) A traffic lane for eastbound traffic is established between the separation zone and a line connecting the following geographical positions:

| Latitude | Longitude |
| --- | --- |
| 40°25.05′ N | 73°41.32′ W |
| 40°19.20′ N | 73°11.50′ W |
| 40°19.33′ N | 73°04.97′ W |

[CGD 84-004, 52 FR 33589, Sept. 4, 1987]
#### § 25.501 Scope.

This subpart prescribes the requirements for the administrative settlement of claims against the United States by a foreign country, political subdivision or inhabitant thereof, for death, personal injury, damage to or loss of property occurring outside the United States, its territories, commonwealths, or possessions, caused by a military member or civilian employee of the Coast Guard, or otherwise incident to noncombat activities of the Coast Guard.
I

106TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 4877

To amend title IV of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of

1974 to provide for cost-of-living adjustments to guaranteed benefit payments paid by the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JULY 18, 2000

Mr. ENGLISH (for himself and Mr. TRAFICANT) introduced the following bill;

which was referred to the Committee on Education and the Workforce

A BILL

To amend title IV of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 to provide for cost-of-living adjustments

to guaranteed benefit payments paid by the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘ERISA Guaranteed

5 Benefits COLA Act of 2000’’.
2

•HR 4877 IH

1 SEC. 2. COST-OF-LIVING ADJUSTMENTS FOR GUARANTEED

2 BENEFIT PAYMENTS MADE BY THE PENSION

3 BENEFIT GUARANTY CORPORATION.

4 (a) SINGLE-EMPLOYER PLAN BENEFITS GUARAN5 TEED.—Section 4022 of the Employee Retirement Income

6 Security Act of 1974 (29 U.S.C. 1322) is amended by

7 adding at the end the following:

8 ‘‘(g) The amount of the guaranteed monthly benefit

9 payable with respect to any participant pursuant to this

10 section shall be increased annually, effective with respect

11 to benefits payable after December of each year, by the

12 same percentage as the percentage by which primary in13 surance amounts are increased, effective for such Decem14 ber, under section 215(i)(2)(A)(ii)(II) of the Social Secu15 rity Act.’’.

16 (b) MULTIEMPLOYER PLAN BENEFITS GUARAN17 TEED.—Section 4022A of such Act (29 U.S.C. 1322a) is

18 amended by adding at the end the following:

19 ‘‘(i) The amount of the guaranteed monthly benefit

20 payable with respect to any participant pursuant to this

21 section shall be increased annually, effective with respect

22 to benefits payable after December of each year, by the

23 same percentage as the percentage by which primary in24 surance amounts are increased, effective for such Decem25 ber, under section 215(i)(2)(A)(ii)(II) of the Social Secu26 rity Act.’’.
3

•HR 4877 IH

1 (c) AGGREGATE LIMIT ON BENEFITS GUARAN2 TEED.—Section 4022B of such Act (29 U.S.C. 1322b) is

3 amended by adding at the end the following:

4 ‘‘(c) The maximum amount payable under the pre5 ceding provisions of this section with respect to any partic6 ipant shall be increased annually, effective with respect to

7 benefits payable after December of each year, by the same

8 percentage as the percentage by which primary insurance

9 amounts are increased, effective for such December, under

10 section 215(i)(2)(A)(ii)(II) of the Social Security Act.’’.

11 SEC. 3. EFFECTIVE DATE.

12 The amendments made by this Act shall apply with

13 respect to benefits payable after December 2000.

Æ
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

CASE NO. 22-CR-80144-Smith/Maynard(s)(s)

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

v.

JOFF STENN WROY PHILOSSAINT,

Defendant.

ORDER REGARDING ELECTRONICS AT TRIAL

This matter came before the Court on the Government’s

Unopposed Motion regarding Electronics at Trial [D.E. 176 ]. 

The Court being fully advised of the premises and finding good 

cause for the motion, the Court hereby

ORDERS that the motion is GRANTED;

The Government attorneys, paralegals, law enforcement agents, 

and financial analysts may bring laptop computers into the 

courtroom for trial in this matter; and

FURTHER ORDERS that the Government trial witnesses under 

subpoena may retain their personal electronics/cellular phones in 

the courthouse.

DONE AND ORDERED in chambers in Ft. Lauderdale, Florida this 

25th day of January, 2023.

RODNEY SMITH

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 9:22-cr-80144-RS Document 179 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/25/2023 Page 1 of 1
Exhibit 24(c)2

Cliff S. Thrasher                    Bin 10240
Executive Vice President,            241 Ralph McGill Boulevard NE
Chief Financial Officer and          Atlanta, GA  30308-3374
Treasurer


                                                    [Georgia Power Company Logo]

                                 April 25, 2005

Thomas A. Fanning and Wayne Boston

Dear Sirs:

         As an officer of Georgia Power Company, I hereby make, constitute, and
appoint each of you my true and lawful Attorney in my name, place, and stead, to
sign and cause to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (1) this
Company's Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q during 2005, and (2) any necessary or
appropriate amendment or amendments to any such reports and to this Company's
Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004, each such
report or amendments to such reports to be accompanied in each case by any
necessary or appropriate exhibits or schedules thereto.

                                Yours very truly,

                                /s/Cliff Thrasher

                                Cliff S. Thrasher