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

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

FORT PIERCE DIVISION

CASE NO. 22-14301-CIV-CANNON/McCabe

SARABETH DEMARTINO, 

Plaintiff,

v.

EMPIRE HOLDINGS AND INVESTMENTS, LLC

and JUAN CARLOS MARRERO,

Defendants.

_______________________________/

ORDER ACCEPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION [ECF No. 111]

THIS CAUSE comes before the Court upon the Magistrate Judge’s Report and 

Recommendation on Plaintiff’s Motion for Sanctions (the “Report”), filed on January 26, 2024 

[ECF No. 111]. On October 11, 2023, Plaintiff filed a Motion for Sanctions (the “Motion”) 

[ECF No. 66]. On January 26, 2024, following referral, Judge McCabe issued a Report 

recommending that the Motion be denied [ECF No. 111 pp. 1, 14]. Objections to the Report were 

due on February 9, 2024 [ECF No. 111 p. 14]. On January 31, 2024, Plaintiff filed a Notice of No 

Objections [ECF No. 117]. Defendants have not filed objections, and the time to do so has expired 

[ECF No. 111 p. 14].

To challenge the findings and recommendations of a magistrate judge, a party must file 

specific written objections identifying the portions of the proposed findings and recommendation

to which objection is made. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3); Heath v. Jones, 863 F.2d 815, 822 

(11th Cir. 1989); Macort v. Prem, Inc., 208 F. App’x 781, 784 (11th Cir. 2006). A district court 

reviews de novo those portions of the report to which objection is made and may accept, reject, 

or modify in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge. 

Case 2:22-cv-14301-AMC Document 123 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/21/2024 Page 1 of 2
CASE NO. 22-14301-CIV-CANNON/McCabe

2

28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). To the extent a party fails to object to parts of the magistrate judge’s report, 

the Court may accept the recommendation so long as there is no clear error on the face of the 

record. Macort, 208 F. App’x at 784. Legal conclusions are reviewed de novo, even in the absence 

of an objection. See LeCroy v. McNeil, 397 F. App’x 554, 556 (11th Cir. 2010); Cooper-Houston 

v. S. Ry. Co., 37 F.3d 603, 604 (11th Cir. 1994).

Following review, the Court finds the Report to be well reasoned and correct and to contain 

no clear error of fact or law. For the reasons set forth in the Report [ECF No. 111 pp. 8–14], it is 

hereby

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows:

1. The Report and Recommendation [ECF No. 111] is ACCEPTED.

2. Plaintiff’s Motion for Sanctions [ECF No. 66] is DENIED.

DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at Fort Pierce, Florida this 21st day of February

2024.

 _________________________________

 AILEEN M. CANNON

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

cc: counsel of record

Case 2:22-cv-14301-AMC Document 123 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/21/2024 Page 2 of 2
**Exhibit 31(d)2**

**GULF POWER COMPANY**

 

**CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER**
 

I, Ronnie R. Labrato, certify that:

1.

I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Gulf 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, 2007

/s/Ronnie R. Labrato

Ronnie R. Labrato

Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
Exhibit








SHUTTERSTOCK, INC.
Empire State Building
350 Fifth Avenue, 21st Floor
New York, NY 10118


Steven Ciardiello
**************
**************




Re:     AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT


Dear Steve:


This Amendment (the “Amendment”) to the Employment Agreement dated August 5, 2019 between you and Shutterstock, Inc. (the “Employment Agreement”) is entered into effective as of November 5, 2019 by and between you (referred to hereinafter as the “Executive” or “you”) and Shutterstock, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the “Company”). 


Capitalized terms utilized but not otherwise defined herein shall have the meanings set forth in the Employment Agreement. 


In consideration of the mutual agreements set forth herein, and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, you and the Company hereby agree that the Employment Agreement shall be amended as hereafter provided: 


		
	1.
	Section 7(a)(iv) is amended and restated to read as follows: 




Equity. If the Executive’s termination date is at least twelve (12) months following the Effective Start Date, all of Executive’s unvested and outstanding equity awards that would have become vested had Executive remained in the employ of the Company for the twelve (12)-month period following Executive’s termination of employment shall immediately vest and become exercisable as of the date of Executive’s termination.


		
	2.
	Section 7(b)(iv) is amended and restated to read as follows: 




Equity. Unless otherwise set forth in a performance restricted stock unit award agreement, all of Executive’s unvested and outstanding equity awards shall immediately vest and become exercisable as of the date Executive’s Release (as defined in Section 8 herein) actually becomes effective.


		
	3.
	Section 10(h) is amended and restated to read as follows:




Severance Period. “Severance Period” shall mean twelve (12) months. 


Except as amended hereby, the Employment Agreement shall remain in full force and effect, and the valid and binding obligation of the parties thereto.  


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto, have caused this Amendment to Executive Employment Agreement to be duly executed and delivered as of the date written above.




SHUTTERSTOCK, INC. 


By: /s/ Lisa Nadler
    
Name:    Lisa Nadler


Title: Chief Human Resources Officer




EXECUTIVE


/s/ Steven Ciardiello
Steven Ciardiello
#### GRACE TATHAM, Appellant, *v.*THE COMMERCE INSURANCE COMPANY OF ALBANY, Respondent.

*Policy of insurance*— *when molded by sale of property.*

This action was-brought upon a policy of insurance, issued by the defendant, which contained a clause providing that “if the property be sold or transferred, or any change take place in title or possession, except in case of succession by reason of the death of the assured, whether by legal process or judicial decree or voluntary transfer or conveyance, * * * the policy shall be void.” After the issuing of the policy, the plaintiff conveyed the property insured thereby to Winn & Weaver, who held a mortgage thereon, by whom an agreement was executed, giving to the plaintiff possession of the property for one year, and also the option to pay $18,500 during said time, “as a consideration for the reconveyance. If payment not made, said property is to become fully vested” in Winn & Weaver. *Held,*that the transaction was a sale, and not a mortgage, and that the policy was avoided thereby.

Appeal from a judgment in favor of the defendant.

---, for the appellant.

---, for the respondent.

Opinion by

Barnard, P. J.

Present — Barnard, P. J., and Gilbert, J.

Judgment affirmed, with costs.
#### § 403.1 Purpose of the Joint Tolls Review Board. [Rule 1]

The Board shall hear complaints relating to the interpretation of the St. Lawrence Seaway Tariff of Tolls or allegations of unjust discrimination arising out of the operation of the said Tariff and shall conduct such other business as agreed to by the Board (Rule 1).

[47 FR 13805, Apr. 1, 1982]
§ 3030.263 Docket and notice. ( a ) The Commission will establish a docket for each request to adjust rates due to extraordinary or exceptional circumstances, publish notice of the request in the Federal Register, and post the filing on its website. The notice shall include the items specified in paragraphs (b) through (g) of this section.
( b ) The general nature of the proceeding.
( c ) A reference to legal authority under which the proceeding is to be conducted.
( d ) A concise description of the proposals for changes in rates, fees, and the Mail Classification Schedule.
( e ) The identification of an officer of the Commission to represent the interests of the general public in the docket.
( f ) A specified period for public comment.
( g ) Such other information as the Commission deems appropriate.
#### § 80.1116 Redondo Harbor, CA.

A line drawn from Redondo Beach East Jetty Light 2 to Redondo Beach West Jetty Light 3.

[CGD 77-118a, 42 FR 35784, July 11, 1977. Redesignated by CGD 81-017, 46 FR 28154, May 26, 1981, and CGD 87-008b, 52 FR 25218, July 6, 1987]
§ 386.7 American iron and steel. ( a ) All projects receiving credit assistance under this part for construction, alteration, maintenance, or repair of a project shall use only iron and steel products produced in the United States, unless waiver of the requirement in this paragraph (a) is granted by an official authorized to do so.
( b ) Consistent with 33 U.S.C. 3914(b), “iron and steel products” means the following products made primarily of iron or steel: lined or unlined pipes and fittings, manhole covers and other municipal castings, hydrants, tanks, flanges, pipe clamps and restraints, valves, structural steel, reinforced precast concrete and construction materials. Equipment employed in construction that does not become part of the project is not an “iron and steel product” for the purpose of this section.
§ 20.1102 Petitions to set aside decisions and provide hearings for civil penalty proceedings. ( a ) If no hearing takes place on a complaint for a class II civil penalty, any interested person may file a petition, 30 days or less after the issuance of an order assessing or denying a civil penalty, asking the Commandant to set aside the order and to provide a hearing.
( b ) If the Commandant decides that evidence presented by an interested person in support of a petition under paragraph (a) of this section is material and that the ALJ did not consider the evidence in the issuance of the decision, the Commandant shall set aside the decision and direct that a hearing take place in accordance with the requirements of this part.
( c ) If the Commandant denies a hearing sought under this section, he or she shall provide to the interested person, and publish in the Federal Register, notice of and the reasons for the denial.
Dear Secretary Foxx: 

As pilots working for Norwegian Air International and its affiliates, we are writing in support of 

Norwegian Air International's (NAI) exemption and foreign air carrier permit applications currently 

pending before the U.S. Department ofTransportation. We urge the Department to grant NAI's 

applications without further delay to allow us to bring this exciting new service to U.S. markets. 

As pilots for Norwegian, we can assure you that the allegations made by pilots unions and others calling 

into question Norwegian's labor practices and safety records have no basis in fact or reality. 

First, our salaries are competitive with our peers around the globe. As you know, operating a 787 

Dream liner requires thousands of hours of pilot experience, and our experience is very much in demand 

around the world. This competitive advantage for pilots redounds no matter where we are based. 

Indeed, pilots based in Asia and Europe with our levels of experience, often make far more than their 

unionized pilots in the U.S. 

Second, our working conditions are good. We have the flexibility to fly schedules convenient to us. We 

enjoy competitive working conditions wherever we are based, which are subject to local employment 

laws and labor standards. Indeed, in the U.S. our pilots have the right to unionize just like pilots in other 

bases across the world, subject to local and country laws in effect. 

Third, we are fully licensed and qualified pilots. NAI's pilots are subject to the oversight and licensing 

requirements of Ireland- one of the most robust aviation safety oversight organizations in the world. 

The company fully complies with European safety standards (EASA) and all its crews are trained 

according to EU standards and the company's own additional training programs. We have well-trained 

and experienced pilots on long-haul with several thousand flight hours from major airlines all over the 

world. 

Fourth, to suggest that any of us would compromise safety simply because of our employment 

arrangements and risk our lives or those of our passengers, or risk our licenses offends us personally and 

professionally. Not to mention that to suggest a lesser level of safety based on our particular 

employment arrangement would fly in the face of establish norms under the Chicago Convention and 

the U.S-EU Open Skies Agreement. This criticism does not only hit the company, but also all of us, who 

every day have our passengers' and co-workers' safety as our main priority. We, pilots hired by 

Norwegian, would strongly urge DOT to renounce the misleading information about our operations and 

the false claims about our safety standards. 
Ulrik Pridal RCA 16118 NAI
§ 334.520 Lake George, Fla.; naval bombing area. ( a ) *The danger zone.* An area in the eastern part of Lake George described as follows: Beginning at latitude 29°13′16′′, longitude 81°34′28′′; thence along a line parallel to the navigation channel to latitude 29°20′05′′, longitude 81°36′15′′; thence along a line about three-fifths mile southerly from the Putnam-Volusia County line to latitude 29°20′19′′, longitude 81°35′12′′; thence to latitude 29°18′36′′, longitude 81°33′53′′; thence to latitude 29°13′22′′, longitude 81°32′38′′; and thence to the point of beginning. The area will be marked by appropriate warnings signs at the five corners and at the midpoint of the longer side.
( b ) *The regulations.* ( 1 ) Bombing operations will be confined, as nearly as practicable, to the north-south center line of the danger zone, keeping well clear of the navigation channel.
( 2 ) Prior to each bombing operation the danger zone will be patrolled by naval aircraft which will warn all persons and vessels to leave the area by “zooming” a safe distance to the side and at least 500 feet above the surface. Upon being so warned, such persons and vessels shall leave the danger zone immediately and shall not re-enter the danger zone until bombing operations have ceased.
( 3 ) At intervals of not more than three months, public notices will be issued that bombing operations are continuing. Such notices will appear in the local newspaper and in “Notice to Mariners”.
( 4 ) The regulations in this section shall not deny passage through Lake George by regular cargo-carrying vessels proceeding along established lanes for such vessels. When any such vessel is within the danger zone the officer in charge of the bombing operations will cause the cessation or postponement of such operations until the vessel has cleared the area. The vessel shall proceed on its normal course and shall not delay its progress.
( 5 ) The regulations in this section shall be enforced by the Commander, Naval Air Bases, Sixth Naval District, Naval Air Station, Jacksonville, Florida, and such agencies as he may designate.
[16 FR 10992, Oct. 30, 1951. Redesignated at 50 FR 42696, Oct. 22, 1985, as amended at 62 FR 17554, Apr. 10, 1997]
NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.



## United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 2009-3152 KYAW SOE, Petitioner,

v. MERIT SYSTEMS PROTECTION BOARD, Respondent. Petition for review of the Merit Systems Protection Board

in SF3443090014-I-1. ON MOTION 

### ORDER The United States Postal Service moves to reform the official caption to designate the Merit Systems Protection Board as the respondent. The USPS also moves to stay the briefing schedule, pending disposition of the motion to reform the caption. Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 7703(a)(2), the Board is designated as the respondent when the Board's decision concerns the procedure or jurisdiction of the Board. The employing agency is designated as the respondent when the Board reaches the merits of the underlying case. In this case, the Board dismissed the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. Upon consideration thereof, IT IS ORDERED THAT: (1) The motion to reform the caption is granted. The revised official caption is reflected above.(2) The motion to stay the briefing schedule is granted to the extent that the

Board should calculate its brief due date from the date of filing of this order. FOR THE COURT 

# MAY 2 6 2009 /s/ Jan Horbalv Date Jan Horbaly Clerk cc: Kyaw Soe Jeffrey D. Klingman, Esq. Stephanie M. Conley, Esq. s8 

# u.stgrditliamPeN

MAY 2 6 2009 JAN HUNtind CLERK

2009-3152 - 2 -
Partners in Care Foundation

Evidence-Based Falls Prevention Program Grantee

1 of 2

Prevention and Public Health Fund 2020, effective August 1, 2020

Goals, Strategies, and Activities

The overall purposes of this 3-year “Integrated 

Networks to Deliver and Sustain Evidence-Based 

Falls Prevention Programs” grant are to:

• Goal 1: Strengthen integrated state or 

regional networks that address the social 

and behavioral determinants of health of 

older adults and adults with disabilities; 

and

• Goal 2: Significantly increase the number 

of older adults and adults with disabilities 

who participate in evidence-based 

community programs to reduce falls and 

falls risk.

Partners in Care Foundation (Partners) and its 

partners will: 

• Strengthen the Partners at Home delivery 

network;

• Establish county partnerships with local 

Emergency Medical Service Departments

for referrals to evidence-based programs; 

and

• Integrate initiatives focused on social 

determinants of health with falls 

prevention programming.

Proposed Interventions

• A Matter of Balance

• Bingocize

• CAPABLE

• EnhanceFitness

• Stay Active and Independent for Life 

(SAIL)

• Tai Chi for Arthritis

• Tai Ji Quan: Moving for Better Balance

Partnerships

To achieve the goals of the grant, Partners will 

collaborate with the following key partners:

• Alameda County Health Care Services 

Agency

• California Department of Aging

• California Department of Public Health

• California Healthier Living Coalition

• Camarillo Health Care District

• Community based organizations (i.e. Area 

agencies on aging, low-income senior 

housing, senior centers, etc.)

• County Emergency Medical Service 

Departments

• Humboldt County Department of Public 

Health
2 of 2

Prevention and Public Health Fund 2020, effective August 1, 2020

• Kaweah Delta Health Care District

• Meals on Wheels Orange County

• On Lok

• San Diego County Aging and Independent 

Services

• Scripps Health

• San Joaquin County Department of Aging 

and Community Services

• The Health Trust

Anticipated Results 

Partners and its partners propose to achieve the 

following results: 

• Engage 6,786 participants and 3,773

completers in falls prevention programs 

in targeted areas;

• Reduce the number of self-reported falls; 

• Increase physical activity and reduce fear 

of falling; and

• Secure three payer contracts to support 

program sustainability.

Contact:

Dianne Davis

Partners in Care Foundation

ddavis@picf.org

For more information: 

Administration for Community Living 

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services

Washington, DC 20201

https://acl.gov/
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5210 Received in Senate (RDS)]

  2d Session
                                H. R. 5210

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

            October 18 (legislative day, September 22), 2000

                                Received

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
at 200 South George Street in York, Pennsylvania, as the ``George Atlee 
                    Goodling Post Office Building''.

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

SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

    The facility of the United States Postal Service located at 200 
South George Street in York, Pennsylvania, shall be known and 
designated as the ``George Atlee Goodling Post Office Building''.

SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

    Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper, or other 
record of the United States to the facility referred to in section 1 
shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``George Atlee Goodling Post 
Office Building''.

            Passed the House of Representatives October 17, 2000.

            Attest:

                                                 JEFF TRANDAHL,

                                                                 Clerk.
```