alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Tuggle *v.*The State.

Submitted December 19, 1906.■

Decided January 15, 1907.

■ Accusation of larceny from house. Before Judge Nicholson. City court of Abbeville. November 23, 1906. .

. *Sal Lawson,*for plaintiff in error.

■ *M. B. Gannon, solicitor,*contra.

Lumpkin, J.

1. Where two persons were accused of larceny from the house, and the evidence showed that when they went to the house of the prosecutor his wife was present, but that théy began drinking, and some quarreling occurred, and she left before the larceny was committed, and therefore could not have known the facts touching its commission, the failure of the prosecuting attorney to introduce her as a witness, after having placed her under oath, furnished no ground for the application, against the State, of the rule touching the failure by one . who has evidence to repel a claim or charge against him to produce it, or of the rulé relating to one who, having more certain or satisfactory evidence in his power, relies on that which is of a weaker or inferior nature. The case differs from that of *Morgan,*v. *State,*124 *Ga.*442, and similar eases.

2. While the charge in this case may not have been entirely accurate, yet, under the facts of the case, it will not require a new trial.

3. The verdict was supported by the evidence.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*All the Justices concur, except Fish, O. J., absent.*
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 Quarterly Report of CECO Environmental Corp. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2007 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Phillip DeZwirek, Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



| | (1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; 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/ Phillip DeZwirek                             
|Phillip DeZwirek                                 
|Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer
|November 13, 2007                                

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to CECO Environmental
Corp. and will be retained by CECO Environmental Corp. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
#### § 3013.21 Authority to order depositions and responses to written interrogatories.

The Chairman, any designated Commissioner, or any administrative law judge may order the taking of depositions and responses to written interrogatories by a covered person with respect to any proceeding conducted under title 39 of the United States Code or to obtain information to be used to prepare a report under that title.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                     5

<S>                                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                         JUN-30-2001
<PERIOD-END>                              SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                            552
<SECURITIES>                                        0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  13,210
<ALLOWANCES>                                      170
<INVENTORY>                                    12,969
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               30,760
<PP&E>                                         41,532
<DEPRECIATION>                                 27,282
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 50,323
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          10,640
<BONDS>                                        12,154
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                               0
<PREFERRED>                                         0
<COMMON>                                       24,226
<OTHER-SE>                                      (289)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   50,323
<SALES>                                        21,069
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               21,069
<CGS>                                          14,859
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  19,092
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                    0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                188
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 1,789
<INCOME-TAX>                                      550
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             1,239
<DISCONTINUED>                                      0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                     0
<CHANGES>                                           0
<NET-INCOME>                                    1,239
<EPS-BASIC>                                       .24
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     .24


</TABLE>
1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

Case No. 1:22-cv-22343-KMM

JORGE MONTEAGUDO 

ALBURQUERQUE,

Plaintiff,

v.

THE DE MOYA GROUP, INC.,

Defendant.

___________________________________ / 

INTERIM ORDER ON DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SANCTIONS

THIS CAUSE is before the Court following the May 9, 2023 evidentiary hearing on 

Defendant The De Moya Group, Inc.’s Motion for Sanctions under Rule 11 of the Federal Rules 

of Civil Procedure (the “Rule 11 Motion”). (ECF No. 58). The matter has been referred to the 

undersigned by the Honorable K. Michael Moore, United States District Court Judge, pursuant to 

28 U.S.C. § 636 and the Magistrate Judge Rules of the Local Rules of the Southern District of 

Florida, to take all necessary and proper action as required by law with respect to the Motion. 

(ECF No. 59). The matter was set for an evidentiary hearing, to resolve any factual disputes based 

on the assertion in Defendant’s Rule 11 Motion that Plaintiff lacked a good faith evidentiary basis 

to assert his claims in this case. 

On May 9, 2023, the undersigned convened the evidentiary hearing, where Defendant 

agreed that its Rule 11 Motion challenged the legal sufficiency of the allegations asserted in the 

Amended Complaint to establish the cause of actions here raised—that is, that Plaintiff and his 

counsel lacked a good faith basis to believe that the law in the Eleventh Circuit recognized a cause 

Case 1:22-cv-22343-KMM Document 84 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/11/2023 Page 1 of 2
2

of action for Plaintiff’s claims as asserted. Consistent with Almeida v. Bennet Auto Supply, Inc., 

335 F.R.D. 463 (S.D. Fla. 2020), both Parties agreed at the hearing that the present Motion should 

not be decided before Defendant’s pending Motion for Final Summary Judgment (ECF No. 45) is 

decided, and that any recommendation on Defendant’s Rule 11 Motion should be entered at the 

end of the litigation. 

Notwithstanding, Defendant’s counsel presented testimony from Alisa De Moya regarding 

the scope of the investigation undertaken by Plaintiff and his counsel and regarding information 

adduced during the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission charge stage pre-suit. This 

evidence shall be considered later in connection with Defendant’s Rule 11 Motion, following 

disposition of Defendant’s summary judgment motion, without the need to recall Ms. De Moya as 

a witness. 

Accordingly, Defendant’s Rule 11 Motion (ECF No. 58) is HELD IN ABEYANCE 

pending disposition of Defendant’s pending summary judgment motion, at which point the Court 

may convene a telephonic status conference at the end of this case to evaluate the need for the 

further presentation of evidence at that time. 

DONE AND ORDERED in open court at Miami, Florida, on this 9th day of May, 2023.

____________________________________

LAUREN F. LOUIS 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

cc: Honorable K. Michael Moore

Counsel of record

Case 1:22-cv-22343-KMM Document 84 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/11/2023 Page 2 of 2
#### § 3055.70 Nonpostal products. [Reserved]
Editorial Note on Part 96
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 96 appear by USCG-2010-0351, 75 FR 36281, June 25, 2010, and by USCG-2014-0410, 79 FR 38432, July 7, 2014.

§ 96.440 How will the Coast Guard decide whether to approve an organization's request to be authorized? ( a ) First, the Coast Guard will evaluate the organization's request for authorization and supporting written materials, looking for evidence of the following— ( 1 ) The organization's clear assignment of management duties;
( 2 ) Ethical standards for managers and auditors;
( 3 ) Procedures for auditor training, qualification, certification, and requalification that are consistent with recognized industry standards;
( 4 ) Procedures for auditing safety management systems that are consistent with recognized industry standards and IMO Resolution A.788(19);
( 5 ) Acceptable standards for internal auditing and management review;
( 6 ) Record-keeping standards for safety management auditing and certification;
( 7 ) Methods for reporting non-conformities and recording completion of remedial actions;
( 8 ) Methods for certifying safety management systems;
( 9 ) Methods for periodic and intermediate audits of safety management systems;
( 10 ) Methods for renewal audits of safety management systems;
( 11 ) Methods for handling appeals; and
( 12 ) Overall procedures consistent with IMO Resolution A.739(18), “Guidelines for the Authorization of Organizations Acting on Behalf of the Administration.”
( b ) After a favorable evaluation of the organization's written request, the Coast Guard will arrange to visit the organization's corporate offices and port offices for an on-site evaluation of operations.
( c ) When a request is approved, the recognized organization and the Coast Guard will enter into a written agreement. This agreement will define the scope, terms, conditions and requirements of the authorization. Conditions of this agreement are found in § 96.460 of this part.
Editorial Note on Part 3005
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 3005, formerly part 3003, appear at 70 FR 48277, Aug. 17, 2005.

§ 3005.103 Procedures for requesting inspection, copying, or correction. ( a ) An individual who— ( 1 ) Wishes to know whether a Commission system of records contains a record about the individual,
( 2 ) Seeks access to a Commission record about the individual that is maintained in a system of records (including the accounting of disclosures), or
( 3 ) Seeks to amend a record about the individual that is maintained in a system of records, may file a written request with the chief administrative officer of the Commission at the Commission's current address (901 New York Avenue NW, Suite 200, Washington, DC 20268-0001). The request should state on the outside of the envelope and in the request that it is a Privacy Act request.
( b ) A request for amendment must describe the information sought to be amended and the specific reasons for the amendment.
( c ) A requester— ( 1 ) May request an appointment to inspect records at the Commission's offices between the hours of 8 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. on any day;
( 2 ) Must present suitable identification, such as a driver's license, employee identification card, or Medicare card;
( 3 ) If accompanied by another individual, must sign a statement, if requested by the chief administrative officer, authorizing discussion of the individual's record in the presence of that individual;
( 4 ) Who files a request by mail must include the individual's date of birth, dates of employment at the Commission (if applicable), and suitable proof of identity, such as a facsimile of a driver's license, employee identification card, or Medicare card; and
( 5 ) Must, if requested by the chief administrative officer, provide additional proof of identification.
[64 FR 57982, Oct. 28, 1999. Redesignated and amended at 85 FR 9615, 9616, Feb. 19, 2020]
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

WESTERN DISTRICT

IN RE: ADOPTION OF P.A.

PETITION OF: J.A., MOTHER :

:

:

:

: No. 21 WAL 2023

Petition for Allowance of Appeal

from the Order of the Superior Court

IN RE: ADOPTION OF: D.A.

PETITION OF: J.A., MOTHER :

:

:

:

: No. 22 WAL 2023

Petition for Allowance of Appeal

from the Order of the Superior Court

IN RE: ADOPTION OF: G.A.

PETITION OF: J.A., MOTHER :

:

:

:

: No. 23 WAL 2023

Petition for Allowance of Appeal

from the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 3rd day of March, 2023

, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is

DENIED

.
#### § 3030.262 Supplemental information.

The Commission may require the Postal Service to provide clarification of its request or to provide additional information in order to gain a better understanding of the circumstances leading to the request or the justification for the specific rate adjustments requested. The Postal Service shall include within its request the identification of one or more knowledgeable Postal Service official(s) who will be available to provide prompt responses to Commission requests for clarification or additional information.
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5239 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

        H.R.5239

                       One Hundred Sixth Congress

                                 of the

                        United States of America

                          AT THE SECOND SESSION

           Begun and held at the City of Washington on Monday,
             the twenty-fourth day of January, two thousand

                                 An Act

 
    To provide for increased penalties for violations of the Export 
           Administration Act of 1979, and for other purposes.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled, That section 20 of the 
Export Administration Act of 1979 (50 U.S.C. App. 2419) is amended by 
striking ``August 20, 1994'' and inserting ``August 20, 2001''.

                               Speaker of the House of Representatives.

                            Vice President of the United States and    
                                               President of the Senate.
```
§ 3022.10 Complaint contents. ( a ) A complaint must: ( 1 ) Set forth the facts and circumstances that give rise to the complaint;
( 2 ) Clearly identify and explain how the Postal Service action or inaction violates applicable statutory standards or regulatory requirements including citations to the relied upon section or sections of title 39, order, regulation, or other regulatory requirements;
( 3 ) Set forth the business, commercial, economic or other issues presented by the action or inaction as such relate to the complainant;
( 4 ) Include a description of persons or classes of persons known or believed to be similarly affected by the issues involved in the complaint, if applicable;
( 5 ) State the nature of the evidentiary support that the complainant has or expects to obtain during discovery to support the facts alleged in the complaint;
( 6 ) Include an explanation as to why such facts could not reasonably be ascertained by the complainant where claims are premised on information and belief;
( 7 ) State whether the issues presented are pending in or have been resolved by an existing Commission proceeding or a proceeding in any other forum in which the complainant is a party; and if so, provide an explanation why timely resolution cannot be achieved in that forum;
( 8 ) State the specific relief or remedy requested and the basis for that relief; and
( 9 ) Include a certification that states that prior to filing, the complainant attempted to meet or confer with the Postal Service's general counsel to resolve or settle the complaint, why the complainant believes additional such steps would be inadequate, and the reasons for that belief; and
( 10 ) Include a certification that the complaint has been served on the United States Postal Service as required by § 3022.11.
( b ) The Commission may waive any of the requirements listed in paragraph (a) of this section to serve the interests of justice.
[74 FR 16744, Apr. 10, 2009, as amended at 85 FR 9655, Feb. 19, 2020]
FILED WITH FAA 

AIRCRAFT REGISTRATION BR 

lOl~ OEG 31 PPl 2 Yli 

OKLAHOMA CITY 

OKLAHOMA 

. ' / jl > ,-;
- All
            - Title
            - Author
            - Subject
            - Date
            - Full-Text

            -                              Explore                            ******                - Educational Resources
              - Archival Collections
              -                                      Themes                                    ******                  - Economic Data
                - Federal Reserve
                - View all 
              - Timelines 
            -                              Browse                            ******                - Titles
              - Authors
              - Subjects
              - Dates 
            -                              About                            ******                - About FRASER
              - FAQ
              - Contact Us
              -                                      FRASER API                                    ******                  - REST API
                - OAI-PMH 
            - Inside FRASER Blog

            - **

Home                 > Browse by Title > Guaranteed Wage or Employment Plans

              																	United States. Bureau of Labor Statistics					 and 	United States. Office of War Mobilization and Reconversion. 						*Guaranteed Wage or Employment Plans : Bulletin of the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics, No. 906*,												Washington: 								United States Bureau of Labor Statistics, 										1947,									https://fraser.stlouisfed.org/title/4353,			accessed on September 22, 2024.						    

        - **FRASER**
        - About
        - FAQ
        - Legal and Privacy
        - FRASER API

          -                              @FedFRASER 
          - ** Contact Us
          -  **  What's New  
          -  **  Inside FRASER
#### § 780.212 Hatchery employees working on farms.

The work of hatchery employees in connection with the maintenance of the quality of the poultry flock on farms is also part of the “raising” operations. This includes testing for disese, culling, weighing, cooping, loading, and transporting the culled birds. The catching and loading of broilers on farms by hatchery employees for transportation to market are agricultural operations.
§ 334.640 Gulf of Mexico south of Apalachee Bay, Fla.; Air Force rocket firing range. ( a ) *The danger zone.* An area about 45 statute miles wide and 60 statute miles long, approximately parallel to and about 30 miles off the west coast of Florida, south of Apalachee Bay. The area is bounded as follows: Beginning at latitude 29°42′30′′, longitude 84°40′00′′; thence east along latitude 29°42′30′′ to longitude 84°00′00′′; thence southeast to latitude 28°56′00′′, longitude 83°31′00′′; thence southwest to latitude 28°37′00′′, longitude 84°11′00′′; thence northwest to latitude 29°17′30′′, longitude 84°40′00′′; thence northwest to latitude 29°32′00′′, longitude 85°00′00′′; thence northeast along a line three miles off the meanderings of the shore to the point of beginning.
( b ) *The regulations.* ( 1 ) The fact that aerial rocket firing will be conducted over the danger zone will be advertised to the public through the usual media for the dissemination of information. Inasmuch as such firing is likely to be conducted during the day or night throughout the year without regard to season, such advertising of firing will be repeated at intervals not exceeding three months and at more frequent intervals when in the opinion of the enforcing agency, repetition is necessary in the interest of public safety.
( 2 ) Prior to the conduct of rocket firing, the area will be patrolled by surface patrol boat and/or patrol aircraft to insure that no persons or watercraft are within the danger zone and to warn any such persons or watercraft seen in the vicinity that rocket firing is about to take place in the area. When aircraft is used to patrol the area, low flight of the aircraft across the bow will be used as a signal or warning.
( 3 ) Any such person or watercraft shall, upon being so warned, immediately leave the area, and until the conclusion of the firing shall remain at such a distance that they will be safe from the fallout resulting from such rocket firing.
( 4 ) The regulations in this section shall not deny access to or egress from harbors contiguous to the danger zone in the case of regular passenger or cargo carrying vessels proceeding to or from such harbors. In the case of the presence of any such vessel in the danger zone the officer in charge shall cause the cessation or postponement of fire until the vessel shall have cleared that part of the area in which it might be endangered by the fallout. The vessel shall proceed on its normal course and shall not delay its progress unnecessarily. Masters are requested to avoid the danger zone whenever possible so that interference with firing training may be minimized.
( c ) The regulations in this section shall be enforced by the Commander, Moody Air Force Base, Valdosta, Georgia, and such agencies as he may designate.
[21 FR 2944, May 3, 1956, as amended at 22 FR 3755, May 29, 1957. Redesignated at 50 FR 42696, Oct. 22, 1985, as amended at 62 FR 17554, Apr. 10, 1997]