alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
1

4886-1697-8769.2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

MIAMI DIVISION

Case No.: 1:22-cv-23226-LENARD

Venus Concept USA, Inc., a

Delaware corporation,

Plaintiff,

v.

Fanatical Skin Ink, LLC, a North Carolina 

limited liability company, and Nicole 

Johnson, an individual,

Defendants.

___________________________________/

NOTICE OF FILING1

Plaintiff, Venus Concept USA, Inc. (“Plaintiff” or “Venus”), hereby gives notice of filing 

the attached Plaintiff’s Declaration of Damages, which is Exhibit B to the Motion for Default 

Final Judgment Against Defendants [ECF No. 11] filed by Venus on February 10, 2023.

Dated: February 16, 2023 Respectfully submitted,

LEWIS BRISBOIS BISGAARD & SMITH, LLP

Counsel for Venus Concept USA, Inc.

110 SE 6th Street, Suite 2600

Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301

Tel.: 954-728-1280

Fax: 954-678-4090

Vincent.Alexander@lewisbrisbois.com

By: /s/ Vincent F. Alexander

Vincent Alexander

Fla. Bar No. 68114

1 The executed signature page to Plaintiff’s Declaration of Damages was inadvertently omitted 

from the initial filing.

Case 1:22-cv-23226-JAL Document 12 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/16/2023 Page 1 of 2
2

4886-1697-8769.2

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I CERTIFY that on February 16, 2023, I electronically filed the foregoing document with 

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

day by (1) transmission of Notice of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF on all counsel of 

record or pro se parties who are authorized to receive electronically Notice of Electronic Filing in 

this case; and (2) U.S. First Class Mail on the parties on the attached Service List. 

By: /s/ Vincent F. Alexander

Vincent F. Alexander

SERVICE LIST

Fanatical Skin Ink, LLC

3 Ice Court

Pinehurst, NC 28374

Nicole Johnson

3 Ice Court

Pinehurst, NC 28374

Case 1:22-cv-23226-JAL Document 12 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/16/2023 Page 2 of 2
Rockingham

No. 78-153

#### Susan K. Wright v. Wesley D. Wright

February 28, 1979

*103*Nadeau & Reiner, P.A.,*of Portsmouth *(J. P. Nadeau*orally), for the plaintiff.

*Tetter & Holmes,*of Hampton *(Edward R. Woiccak*orally), for the defendant.

Memorandum Opinion

This case involves a marital dispute, and is before us as the result of the last of a series of legal skirmishes.

The Master *(Nicholas G. Copadis,*Esq.), after an informal hearing wherein the defendant’s contumacious actions as recited in the pleadings were argued, ruled on plaintiff’s motion for contempt as follows:

> Motion for contempt is denied, the defendant, by February 23,1978, had made all payments ordered by the Court by its decree effective December 6, 1977.

> Under those circumstances, the motion for contempt should have been withdrawn.

> Court awards defendant counsel fees of $150.00 and orders payment made no later than March 25, 1978.

The superior court approved the report and entered an order in accordance therewith. Plaintiff’s exceptions were reserved and transferred by *Mullavey,*J.

The master’s finding that the motion should have been withdrawn was well grounded. He was familiar with the marital problems of the parties because he had not only heard and recommended the granting of the divorce decree, but had also acted and ruled on several motions including previous ones wherein contempt was alleged. The *104defendant, having complied with the court order, had purged himself of any alleged civil contempt. *Duval v. Duval,*114 N.H. 422, 425, 322 A.2d 1, 3 (1974). The record before us sustains a finding that the plaintiffs insistence on a hearing was frivolous and unreasonable. The master was justified in refusing to proceed with criminal contempt.

Superior Court Rule 59, RSA 491:App. R. 56 (Supp. 1977), allows assessment of reasonable costs including counsel fees for frivolous or unreasonable conduct making necessary a hearing on any motion. Rule 201 makes rules relating to actions at law also applicable to suits in equity. Even where a superior court rule does not contain a specific provision for the assessment of counsel fees against a party which has violated it, such fees may be awarded “[u]pon violation of any rule of court,” and “the court may take such action as justice may require.” Introduction to Rules of Superior Court, RSA 491:App. (Supp. 1977). *See generally Tuttle v. Palmer,*118 N.H. 553, 392 A.2d 574 (1978).

We affirm and, on our own motion, award double the costs of appeal and interest at twelve percent. RSA 490:14-a (1977).

*Exceptions overruled.*
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

EASTERN DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

BERNANDO HERNANDEZ,

Petitioner :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 501 EAL 2017

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from

the Unpublished Judgment Order of the Superior Court at No. 3143 EDA 2015 entered on September 28, 2017, affirming the Order of the Philadelphia County Court of

Common Pleas at No. MC

- 51

- CR

0047176

- 2012 entered on October 14,

2015

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 17 th day of May, 2019, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is

GRANTED , the Superior Court’s order is VACATED , and this matter is REMANDED for

proceedings consistent with this Court’s decision in Commonwealth v. Perfetto

, ___

A.3d ___, 2019 WL 1866653 (Pa. Apr. 26, 2019).
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5362 Engrossed in House (EH)]

  2d Session

                               H. R. 5362

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

To increase the amount of fees charged to employers who are petitioners 
    for the employment of H-1B non-immigrant workers, and for other 
                               purposes.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
106th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5362

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
To increase the amount of fees charged to employers who are petitioners 
    for the employment of H-1B non-immigrant workers, and for other 
                               purposes.

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

SECTION 1. AUTHORITIES RELATING TO THE IMPOSITION OF FEES.

    Section 214(c)(9) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 
1184(c)(9)) is amended--
            (1) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``(excluding'' and all 
        that follows through ``2001)'' and inserting ``(excluding any 
        employer that is a primary or secondary education institution, 
        an institution of higher education, as defined in section 
        101(a) of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1001(a), 
        a nonprofit entity related to or affiliated with any such 
        institution, a nonprofit entity which engages in established 
        curriculum-related clinical training of students registered at 
        any such institution, a nonprofit research organization, or a 
        governmental research organization) filing before October 1, 
        2003''; and
            (2) in subparagraph (B), by striking ``$500'' and inserting 
        ``$1000''.

SEC. 2. EFFECTIVE DATE.

    The amendment made by section 1(2) shall apply only to petitions 
that are filed on or after the date that is 2 months after the date of 
the enactment of this Act.

            Passed the House of Representatives October 6, 2000.

            Attest:

                                                                 Clerk.
```
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.                  

###### Environmental Protection Agency

          - 40 CFR Part 62 
          - [WV-6013b; FRL-6714-3] 

# AGENCY:

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 

# ACTION:

Proposed rule. 

# SUMMARY:

                        EPA is proposing to approve the West Virginia hospital/medical/infectious waste incinerator (HMIWI) 111(d)/129 plan submitted on August 18, 1999 by the West Virginia Division of Environmental Protection (WV DEP), and the subsequent plan amendment of April 19, 2000. The plan establishes emission limitations for existing HMIWIs, and provides for the implementation and enforcement of those limitations. In the final rules section of today's                         **Federal Register**                        , EPA is approving the plan. A detailed rationale for the approval is set forth in the direct final rule. If no adverse comments are received in response to that rule, no further activity is contemplated in relation to this rule. If EPA receives relevant adverse comments, the direct final rule will be withdrawn and all public comments received will be addressed in a subsequent final rule based on this rule. EPA will not institute a second comment period on this document. Any parties interested in commenting on this document should do so at this time.                     

# DATES:

Comments must be received in writing by July 13, 2000. 

# ADDRESSES:

Comments may be mailed to Makeba A. Morris, Chief, Technical Assessment Branch, Mailcode 3AP22, Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103-2029. 

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

James B. Topsale at (215) 814-2190, or by e-mail at topsale.jim@epa.gov. 

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    See the information provided in the direct final rule, of the same title, which is located in the rules section of the                     **Federal Register**                    .                 

Authority:42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q. 

Dated: June 1, 2000. 

Bradley M. Campbell, 

Regional Administrator, EPA Region III. 

[FR Doc. 00-14767 Filed 6-12-00; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
<PAGE>
                                                                      EXHIBIT 15

December 2, 2005

Albertson's, Inc.
Boise, Idaho

We have made a review, in accordance with standards of the Public Company
Accounting Oversight Board (United States), of the unaudited interim financial
information of Albertson's, Inc. and subsidiaries for the thirteen and
thirty-nine week periods ended November 3, 2005 and October 28, 2004, as
indicated in our report dated December 2, 2005; because we did not perform an
audit, we expressed no opinion on that information.

We are aware that our report referred to above, which is included in your
Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the thirteen week period ended November 3,
2005, is incorporated by reference in Registration Statement Nos. 33-54998 and
333-113995 on Form S-3 and Registration Statement Nos. 2-80776, 33-2139,
33-7901, 33-15062, 33-43635, 33-62799, 33-59803, 333-121020, 333-82157,
333-82161, 333-87773, 333-73194 and 333-63019 on Form S-8.

We also are aware that the aforementioned report, pursuant to Rule 436(c) under
the Securities Act of 1933, is not considered a part of the Registration
Statement prepared or certified by an accountant or a report prepared or
certified by an accountant within the meaning of Sections 7 and 11 of that Act.

/s/ DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP
------------------------
Boise, Idaho
I

106TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 5341

To preserve the requirement for the annual bank fee report by the Board

of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, and for other purposes.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

SEPTEMBER 28, 2000

Mr. LAFALCE introduced the following bill; which was referred to the

Committee on Banking and Financial Services

A BILL

To preserve the requirement for the annual bank fee report

by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, and for other purposes.

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 ‘‘Annual Banking Fee

5 Survey Extension Act’’.

6 SEC. 2. PRESERVATION OF BANK FEE REPORT REQUIRE7 MENTS.

8 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 3003(a)(1) of the Federal

9 Reports Elimination and Sunset Act of 1995 (31 U.S.C.

10 1113 note) shall not apply to any report required to be
2

•HR 5341 IH

1 submitted under section 1002(b) of Financial Institutions

2 Reform, Recovery, and Enforcement Act of 1989.

3 (b) REPEAL OF SUNSET OF REPORT.—Section 108

4 of the Riegle–Neal Interstate Banking and Branching Ef5 ficiency Act of 1994 (12 U.S.C. 1811 note) is amended

6 by striking subsection (b).

7 (c) CREDIT UNIONS INCLUDED IN SURVEY.—

8 (1) IN GENERAL.—Section 1002(a)(1) of the

9 Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery, and En10 forcement Act of 1989 (12 U.S.C. 1811 note) is

11 amended by inserting ‘‘, including credit unions’’

12 after ‘‘insured depository institutions’’.

13 (2) TECHNICAL AND CONFORMING AMEND14 MENT.—Section 1002(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the Financial

15 Institutions Reform, Recovery, and Enforcement Act

16 of 1989 (12 U.S.C. 1811 note) is amended by in17 serting ‘‘, or by the National Credit Union Adminis18 tration Board in the case of an insured credit

19 union’’ before the period at the end.

20 (d) CREDIT CARD FEES.—Section 1002(a)(2) of the

21 Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery, and Enforce22 ment Act of 1989 (12 U.S.C. 1811 note) is amended by

23 inserting ‘‘credit cards,’’ after ‘‘deposit items returned,’’.

Æ
Exhibit 12
                        AMERICAN AIRLINES, INC.
           Computation of Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges
                             (in millions)

                                                 Three Months Ended March 31,
                                                    2006             2005

 Earnings (loss):
   Loss before income taxes                      $  (106)          $  (171)

   Add:  Total fixed charges (per below)             418               384

   Less:  Interest capitalized                         7                22
     Total earnings (loss) before income taxes   $   305          $    191

 Fixed charges:
   Interest                                      $   207          $    177

   Portion of rental expense
   representative of the interest Factor             206               204

   Amortization of debt expense                        5                 3
     Total fixed charges                         $   418          $    384

 Coverage deficiency                            $    113          $    193


Note:  As  of  March  31, 2006  American  has guaranteed approximately $1.2
       billion of AMR's unsecured debt and approximately $408 million of AMR
       Eagle's secured debt. The impact  of these unconditional guarantees is
       not included  in  the above computation.
§ 3011.305 Producing non-public materials in non-Commission proceedings. ( a ) If a court or other administrative agency issues a subpoena or orders production of non-public materials that a person obtained under protective conditions ordered by the Commission, the target of the subpoena or order shall, within two days of receipt of the subpoena or order, notify each person identified pursuant to § 3011.201(b)(2) of the pendency of the subpoena or order to allow time to object to that production or to seek a protective order or other relief.
( b ) Any person that has obtained non-public materials under protective conditions ordered by the Commission and seeks to disclose the non-public materials in a court or other administrative proceeding shall make a good faith effort to obtain protective conditions at least as effective as those set forth in the Commission order establishing the protective conditions.
( c ) Unless overridden by the reviewing court or other administrative agency, protective conditions ordered by the Commission will remain in effect.
[83 FR 31281, July 3, 2018, as amended at 85 FR 9643, Feb. 19, 2020]
Exhibit 15 The Board of Directors and Shareholders
Allied Capital Corporation: Re: Registration Statement
Nos. 333-45525, 333-13584, 333-88681, 333-101849, 333-115979,
333-115980, 333-115981, 333-130793, 333-130792 and 333-143409 Ladies and Gentlemen: With respect to the subject registration statements, we acknowledge our awareness
of the use therein of our report dated
August 10, 2009 related to our review of
interim financial information. Pursuant to Rule 436 under the Securities Act of 1933 (the Act), such report is not
considered part of a registration statement prepared or certified by
an independent registered public accounting firm,
or a report prepared or certified by an independent registered public accounting firm within the meaning of Sections 7
and 11 of the Act. /s/ KPMG LLP Washington, D.C.
August 10, 2009
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA 

MIAMI DIVISION 

Case Number: 22-CR-20536-MARTINEZ/BECERRA 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

Plaintiff, 

V. 

DANIEL ALEJANDRO HERNANDEZ MATOS, 

Defendant. 

I ------------------

ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE'S 

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION ON CHANGE OF PLEA 

THIS CAUSE came before the Comi upon the Order of Reference from the District Court 

to conduct a Change of Plea Hearing before a Magistrate Judge. 

THE MATTER was heard in front of Magistrate Judge Jacqueline Becerra on August 18, 

2023 [ECF No. 31]. A Report and Recommendation was filed on August 21, 2023, recommending 

that the Defendant's plea of guilty be accepted [ECF No. 34]. The Defendant and the Government 

were afforded the oppo1iunity to file objections to the Repmi and Recommendation, however none 

were filed. The Court has conducted a de novo review of the entire file and after careful 

consideration, the Comi affirms and adopts the Report and Recommendation. Accordingly, it is 

hereby: 

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the Report and Recommendation [ECF No. 34] of 

United States Magistrate Judge Jacqueline Becerra, is hereby AFFIRMED and ADOPTED in its 

entirety. 

The Defendant is adjudged guilty of Count One of the Indictment. Count One charges 

Defendant with knowingly selling a migratory bird, in violation of Title 16, United States Code, 

Sections 703 and 707(b)(2). The Defendant acknowledged that he understood the statutory 

penalties that apply in his case. 

Case 1:22-cr-20536-JEM Document 36 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/05/2023 Page 1 of 2
Sentencing has been set in this matter for Friday, October 27, 2023, at 11:30 a.m., before 

the Honorable District Judge Jose E. Martinez, at the Wilkie D. Ferguson, United States 

Courthouse, 400 N. Miami Avenue, Courtroom 10-1, Miami, Florida 33128. 

DONE AND ORDERED at Chambers in Miami, Florida, this f day of September, 2023. 

cc: U.S. Magistrate Judge Jacqueline Becerra 

All Counsel of Record 

U.S. Probation Office 

TINEZ 

ATES DISTRICT JUDGE 

Case 1:22-cr-20536-JEM Document 36 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/05/2023 Page 2 of 2
I

106TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 4921

To amend title 38, United States Code, to revise the eligibility criteria

for presumption of service-connection of certain diseases and disabilities

for veterans exposed to ionizing radiation during military service.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JULY 24, 2000

Mrs. MINK of Hawaii introduced the following bill; which was referred to the

Committee on Veterans’ Affairs

A BILL

To amend title 38, United States Code, to revise the eligibility criteria for presumption of service-connection of

certain diseases and disabilities for veterans exposed to

ionizing radiation during military service.

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

3 SECTION 1. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR PRESUMPTION OF

4 SERVICE-CONNECTION RESULTING FROM EX5 POSURE TO IONIZING RADIATION DUE TO

6 OPEN-AIR NUCLEAR TESTING.

7 Section 1112(c) of title 38, United States Code, is

8 amended—
2

•HR 4921 IH

1 (1) in paragraph (3)(B)(i), by inserting before

2 the period at the end the following:‘‘or exposure to

3 ionzing radiation due to residual contamination re4 sulting from such a detonation’’; and

5 (2) by adding at the end the following new

6 paragraph:

7 ‘‘(4) For purposes of paragraph (3)(B)(i), onsite par8 ticipation by any individual in a test involving the atmos9 pheric detonation of a nuclear device and any exposure

10 to ionzing radiation due to residual contamination result11 ing from such a detonation shall be determined without

12 regard to whether any particular level of radiation expo13 sure was measured for that individual.’’.

Æ
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
     THIS SCHEDULE  CONTAINS SUMMARY  FINANCIAL  INFORMATION  EXTRACTED FROM THE
BALANCE  SHEET OF  UNIMANN,  INC.  AS OF  SEPTEMBER  30,  2000  AND THE  RELATED
STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS AND CASH FLOWS FOR THE YEAR THEN ENDED AND IS QUALIFIED
IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              SEP-30-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                   SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                         0
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  0
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               0
<PP&E>                                         0
<DEPRECIATION>                                 0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 0
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          1
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       1
<OTHER-SE>                                     (2)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   0
<SALES>                                        0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               0
<CGS>                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               3
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (3)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (3)
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (3)
<EPS-BASIC>                                    0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  0



</TABLE>
#### § 3055.6 Addition of new market dominant products or changes to existing market dominant products.

Whenever the Postal Service proposes the addition of a new market dominant product or a change to an existing market dominant product, it also shall propose new or revised (as necessary) service performance measurement systems, service standards, service goals, data reporting elements, and data reporting methodologies.
0-cr-06240-WPD Document 7 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/17/2001 P
0-cr-06240-WPD Document 7 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/17/2001 P