alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### § 52.55 Nonappearance.

An applicant who fails without good cause to appear in person or by counsel at the appointed date, time, and place for hearing, is deemed to have waived the right to a hearing. The application is then considered by the Board on the basis of all the material of record.
Case 9:22-cv-81758-XXXX Document 1-14 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/11/2022 Page 1 of 2
Case 9:22-cv-81758-XXXX Document 1-14 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/11/2022 Page 2 of 2
#### JAMES RYAN, Respondent, v. ANDREW WAVLE, Appellant.

*Cíase on*appeal— *Buie*43 — *when not complied with.*

Appeal by defendant from an order denying a new trial, and from a judgment in favor of plaintiff.

The action was for slander spoken by defendant of plaintiff, in that defendant had charged the plaintiff with setting fire to defendant’s barn, intending thereby to impute to plaintiff the crimé of arson.

Plaintiff had a verdict. The defendant moved for a new trial on a case and exceptions before the Special Term. The motion was there denied, and judgment ordered for the plaintiff. From that order defendant appealed. After a hasty consideration of some exceptions taken in the case, the court say: The printed case used upon this appeal was unusually and unnecessarily voluminous — over 400 pages. It was filled with a vast quantity of irrelevant *805and immaterial matter, and in direct violation of rule 43. All that was material could have been contained in twenty-five pages. Perhaps such a case may be regarded as the legitimate fruit of the last clause of rule 41. If so, the sooner that clause of that rule is stricken out the better. We were rejoiced to learn that the-Court of Appeals, in a recent case, took occasion to signify its disapproval of the practice of taking the stenographic notes for a bill of exceptions. *(Jewell*v. *Van Steenburgh.)*Such practice casts unnecessary labor upon the appellate courts, and makes great and unnecessary expense in the way of printing to parties. Counsel should be required to observe strictly rule 43, and in all cases, when it is not adhered to, the case should be dismissed or sent back for resettlement at the expense of the attorney in fault. Motions to compel an observance of said rule, should be favored, and when granted, should be with costs personally against the attorney in fault.

*M. M. Waters,*for the appellant.

*H. Ballard,*for the respondent.

Opinion by

James, J.

Learned, P. J., and Boardman, J., concurred.

Judgment and order affirmed, with costs.
14910-13-PI

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION """."''''~' '~'lb'SO

Federal Aviation AdministratioD

14 CFR Part 39 1\ 9CO

IDocket No. FAA-20t6-uu*; Directorate Identifier 2010-NM-145-AD]

RIN 212o-AA64

"It

Airworthiness Directives; Saab AB, Saab Aclrosystems Model 5MB 2000 Airplanes It' -z," I(~

~"""'. "'M "

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

AcnON: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

AN'" -."

""'-, <'''.

(.~

infonnation (MeAl) originated by an aviation authority of another country to identify

and correct an unsafe condition on an aviation product. The MeAl describes the unsati

condition as:

/4 -;2.7-/d

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new airworthiness dircclive (AD) for the product "lL'<G"-.....,,

flt\1CI- 11'+

listed above. This proposed AD results from mandatory continuing airworthiness

Corrosion damage in these areas, ifnofdetected and corrected, can result

in a starting point for futw'e crack propagation, which would impair the

integrity of the horizontal stabilizer upper spar cap structure .

Corrosion has been found on the rear spar upper cap of the horizontal

stabilizer of SAAB 2odo aeroplanes. The affected areas are adjacent to the

inboard elevator hinge where the elee~eal wiring harnesses are located

and wired through the lightening holes! The upper spar cap is a primary

structural element and is important LOthe structural integrity of the

honzontal stabilizer. 1

• • • • • • •

The proposed AD would require actions that are intended to address lhe unsafe condili ,

,,,,'"..

described in the MeAl.
Case 1:22-cv-23074-BB   Document 182-1   Entered on FLSD Docket 08/04/2023   Page 1 of 1
EXHIBIT 31.2

Certification

I, Denise D. Roberts,
certify that:

1. I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K, and all reports on Form 10-D required to be filed in respect of the period covered by this report on Form 10-K of the American Express Credit Account Master Trust (the Exchange Act periodic
reports);

2. Based on my knowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as a whole, 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, all of the distribution, servicing or other information required to be provided under Form 10-D for the period covered by this report is included in the Exchange Act periodic reports;

4. Based
on my knowledge and the servicer compliance statements required in this report under Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as disclosed in the Exchange Act periodic reports, the servicers have fulfilled their obligations under the servicing
agreements in all material respects; and

5. All of the reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed
securities and their related attestation reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities required to be included in this report in accordance with Item 1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange Act Rules 13a-18 and 15d-18 have been included as an exhibit to this report, except as otherwise disclosed in this report. Any material instances of noncompliance described in such
reports have been disclosed in this report on Form 10-K.

In giving the certifications above, I
have reasonably relied on information provided to me by the following unaffiliated parties: The Bank of New York Mellon and TransCentra, Inc. (formerly known as Regulus Group LLC).



|                     |  |                                                          
|-------------------- |  | ---------------------------------------------------------
|Date: March 28, 2018
|                     | 
|By:                  |  | /s/ Denise D. Roberts                                    
|Name:                |  | Denise D. Roberts                                        
|Title:               |  | President,                                               
|                     |  | American Express Receivables Financing Corporation IV LLC
|                     |  | (Senior officer in charge of securitization)
### Simulation of ground-water flow of the coastal plain aquifers in parts of Maryland, Delaware, and the District of Columbia

By: W.B. FleckD. A. Vroblesky

                            https://doi.org/10.3133/pp1404J

#### Links

-                                                                                                                             Document:                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  **Report**                                                                                                     (pdf)                                                                                                                                     
- Plates:                               - **Plate 1**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 2**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 3**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 4**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 5**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 6**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 7**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 8**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 9**                            (pdf) 
- Download citation as:  RIS                         |                         Dublin                            Core

#### Abstract

Part or all of this report is presented in Portable Document Format                        (PDF). For best results viewing and printing PDF documents, it is recommended that you download                        the documents to your computer and open them with Adobe Reader. PDF documents opened from your                        browser may not display or print as intended. Download the latest version of Adobe Reader, free of charge. More information                        about viewing, downloading, and printing report files can be found at the common download problems FAQ.
#### Jeanette L. Loggins, appellee, v. Edward L. Bundy, appellant.

No. 49064.

(Reported in 79 N.W.2d 545)

December 11, 1956.

Henry T. McKnight, of Des Moines, for appellant.

Leo J. Tapseott, County Attorney, and Richard A. Striekler, Assistant County Attorney, for appellee.

Hays, J.

From a verdict and judgment finding defendant to be the father of plaintiff’s child, he appeals.

Plaintiff, never married, has three children, the one in question being the second. She asserts defendant had intercourse with her numerous times in 1952. She became pregnant in August 1952 and the child was born in May 1953. She denies having intercourse with any other man during the spring and summer of 1952. Defendant admits having intercourse with her in 1952 but asserts the last time was in May 1952. He called three men as *154witnesses who testified they had had intercourse with plaintiff during the summer of 1952.

The error assigned is in denying defendant a new trial. Appellant contends the verdict is contrary to the evidence; the result of passion and prejudice, and that plaintiff has failed to carry the burden of proof.

All parties concede that the granting of a new trial rests in the sotínd discretion of the trial court and that only for a clear abuse thereof will this court interfere.

The case presents purely a fact question. Assuming that the three men did have intercourse with her, that fact would not excuse the defendant, if the father of the child — a fact which the jury could find under this record if it believed the plaintiff, as it must have done. See State v. Baker, 89 Iowa 188, 56 N.W. 425.

Finding no error the judgment of the trial court is affirmed. —Affirmed.

All Justices concur.
Case 9:22-cv-81758-XXXX Document 1-12 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/11/2022 Page 1 of 2
Case 9:22-cv-81758-XXXX Document 1-12 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/11/2022 Page 2 of 2
#### § 72.01-30 Temporary deficiencies.

Temporary deficiencies in aids to navigation are not published in Notices to Mariners when it is known that the defects will be corrected promptly.

[CGFR 52-15, 18 FR 13, Jan. 1, 1953]
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

CASE NO. 22-cv-62228-ALTMAN/Hunt

MANUEL FERNANDEZ, 

on behalf of himself and others 

similarly situated,

Plaintiff,

v.

RB & DC SOLUTIONS, LLC, et al.,

Defendants. 

_________________________________________/

ORDER REQUIRING SCHEDULING REPORT

AND CERTIFICATES OF INTERESTED PARTIES

The parties are directed to prepare and file a joint scheduling report, as required by Local Rule 

16.1, by January 13, 2023. In addition, by January 13, 2023, the parties, including governmental 

parties, must file certificates of interested parties and corporate disclosure statements that contain a 

complete list of persons, associated persons, firms, partnerships, or corporations that have a financial 

interest in the outcome of this case, including subsidiaries, conglomerates, affiliates, parent 

corporations, and other identifiable legal entities related to a party. Throughout the pendency of the 

action, the parties are under a continuing obligation to amend, correct, and update the certificates. 

DONE AND ORDERED in the Southern District of Florida on January 3, 2023. 

 ________________________________

 ROY K. ALTMAN

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

cc: counsel of record

Case 0:22-cv-62228-RKA Document 12 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/04/2023 Page 1 of 1
[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUI T

________________________ No. 18

- 12716 Non

- Argument Calendar

________________________ D.C. Docket No. 3:17

- cr - 00030

- CAR

- CHW

- 4

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff

- Appellee,

versus CHRIS RIVERS, Defendant

- Appellant.

________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Georgia

________________________ ( January 11, 2019 )
B efore MARCUS , ROS EN BAUM and BLACK , Circuit Judges

. PER CURIAM: The Government ’ s motion to dismiss this appeal pursuant to the appeal waiver in Appellant ’ s plea agreement is GRANTED. See United States v. Bushert ,

Case: 18-12716 Date Filed: 01/11/2019 Page: 1 of 22 997 F.2d 1343, 1350

- 51 (11th Cir. 1993) (sentence appeal waiver will be enforced if it was made knowingly and voluntarily); United States v. Bascomb , 451 F.3d 1292, 1297 (11th Cir. 2006) (appeal waiver “ cannot be vitiated or altered by comments the court makes during sentencing ” ); United States v. Grinard

- Henry , 399 F.3d 1294, 1296 (11th Cir. 2005) (waiver of the right to appeal includes waiver of the righ t to appeal difficult or debatable legal issues or even blatant error). Case: 18-12716 Date Filed: 01/11/2019 Page: 2 of 2
#### § 102-36.85 Do we pay for personal property we acquire when it is disposed of by another agency under the exchange/sale authority, and how much do we pay?

Yes, you must pay for personal property disposed of under the exchange/sale authority, in the amount required by the holding agency. The amount of reimbursement is normally the fair market value.
Exhibit 99.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

In
connection with the accompanying quarterly report on Form 10-Q of The Alpine Group, Inc. (the "Company") for the three months ended
March 31, 2003 (the "Periodic Report"), I, David A. Owen, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section
1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my knowledge and belief, that the Periodic Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in the Periodic Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
the Company.

|Date: May 15, 2003 |  | /s/DAVID A. OWENDavid A. Owen Chief Financial Officer
|------------------ |  | -----------------------------------------------------

---

QuickLinks
I

106TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 5398

To provide that land which is owned by the Coushatta Tribe of Louisiana

but which is not held in trust by the United States for the Tribe

may be leased or transferred by the Tribe without further approval

by the United States.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

OCTOBER 5, 2000

Mr. JOHN introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee

on Resources

A BILL

To provide that land which is owned by the Coushatta Tribe

of Louisiana but which is not held in trust by the United

States for the Tribe may be leased or transferred by

the Tribe without further approval by the United States.

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

3 SECTION 1. APPROVAL NOT REQUIRED TO VALIDATE LAND

4 TRANSACTIONS.

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding any other provi6 sion of law, without further approval, ratification, or au7 thorization by the United States, the Coushatta Tribe of

8 Louisiana, may lease, sell, convey, warrant, or otherwise
2

•HR 5398 IH

1 transfer all or any part of the Tribe’s interest in any real

2 property that is not held in trust by the United States

3 for the benefit of the Tribe.

4 (b) TRUST LAND NOT AFFECTED.—Nothing in this

5 section is intended or shall be construed to—

6 (1) authorize the Coushatta Tribe of Louisiana

7 to lease, sell, convey, warrant, or otherwise transfer

8 all or any part of an interest in any real property

9 that is held in trust by the United States for the

10 benefit of the Tribe; or

11 (2) affect the operation of any law governing

12 leasing, selling, conveying, warranting, or otherwise

13 transferring any interest in such trust land.

Æ
### SI()-l(K)3()9-()2 0



# r ( ^ Rocheste rInternationa l Airpor t -^•^::=C_ > ROCHESTER , MINNESOTA , US A 760 0 Helgerso n Driv e Southwes t • Rochester , M l\ l 5590 2 (507 ) 282-232 8 • Fa x(507 ) 282-234 6

Februar y24,201 0

Th e Honorabl e Raymon d H . LaHoo d Secretar y U.S . Departmen t o f Transportatio n 120 0 NewJerseyAve , S

E Washington , D

C 2059 0 Docice t DOT-OST-2010-0034 Dea rMr . Secretary : Than k yo u fo rth e opportunit yt o expres s (my/your ) support fo rth e applicatio n fo rantitrus t immunit y an d propose d join t busines s agreemen t file d byAmerica n Airline s an d Japa n Airlines . Th e propose d ailiaric e betwee n thes e tw o airline s i s vita l fo rth e oneworl d allianc e t o compet e effectivel ywit h th e Sta r an d SkyTea m alliances . Thi s increase d allianc e competitio n wil l i n tur n enhanc e th e benefit s o fth e Department' s Ope n Skie s policy - firs t bysolidifyin g U.S . -Japa n Ope n Skies , the n b yservin g a s a foundatio n fo rfurthe rliberalizatio n acros s Asia . Afte ra thoroug h review , (I/we ) encourag e th e Departmen t o fTransportatio n t o approv e thi s applicatio n a s i t woul d enabl e thes e oneworl d allianc e airline s t o wor k closel ytogethe rt o delive rhighl ycompetitiv e ai rtransportatio n services . Approva l fo rAA/JA L allianc e wil l have a positiv e impac t o n ai rtrave l b y offerin g customers mor e service , schedulin g an d pricin g option s an d wil l hel p t o ensure tha t customer s continu e t o benefi t fro m th e competitio n afforde d b ythre e competitiv e ai ralliances . (I/we ) urg e yo u t o quickl yapprov e thi s application . Sincerely , Steve n W , Leqv

e Airport Manager . SWL/n c
3 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

MIAMI DIVISION

CASE NO.: 22-cv-23753-MOORE/LOUIS

EDWIN GARRISON, et al., on behalf of 

themselves and all other similarly situated,

Plaintiffs,

v. 

SAM BANKMAN-FRIED, et al., 

 

Defendants.

 / 

CERTIFICATION OF JASON D. STRABO

Jason D. Strabo, Esquire, pursuant to Rule 4(b)(1) of the Rules Governing the Admission, 

Practice, Peer Review, and Discipline of Attorneys, hereby certifies that: (1) I have studied the 

Local Rules of the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida; (2) I am a 

member in good standing of the California Bar, the United States District Courts for the Northern, 

Central, Eastern, and Southern Districts of California, and the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, and 

(3) I have not filed more than three pro hac vice motions in different cases in this District within 

the last 365 days. 

/s/ Jason D. Strabo 

JASON D. STRABO

Case 1:22-cv-23753-KMM Document 135-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/13/2023 Page 1 of 1
**EXHIBIT 32.1****SARBANES-OXLEY SECTION 906 CERTIFICATION**     In connection with the Annual Report of United Surgical Partners International, Inc. (the“Company”) on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities andExchange Commission (the “Report”), I, William H. Wilcox, President and Chief Executive Officer ofthe Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to my knowledge: (1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and  (2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company./s/ William H. WilcoxWilliam H. Wilcox
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 118 (Monday, June 19, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Pages 37959-37960]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-15401]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

Foreign-Trade Zones Board

[Order No. 1095]


Approval for Manufacturing Authority (Flavor and Fragrance 
Products) Within Foreign-Trade Zone 44, Givaudan Roure Corporation, Mt. 
Olive, NJ

    Pursuant to its authority under the Foreign-Trade Zones Act of June 
18, 1934, as amended (19 U.S.C. 81a-81u), the Foreign-Trade Zones Board 
(the Board) adopts the following Order:
    Whereas, the New Jersey Commerce and Economic Growth Commission, 
grantee of Foreign-Trade Zone 44, has made application to the Board for 
authority on behalf of Giuvaudan Roure Corporation to manufacture 
flavor and fragrance products under FTZ procedures within FTZ 44(FTZ 
Docket 44-99, filed 9/3/99); Whereas, notice inviting public comment 
has been given in the Federal Register (64 FR 49442, 9/13/99); and,
    Whereas, the Board's regulations (15 CFR Sec. 400.31) provide for 
the authorization of manufacturing within existing zones when it is in 
the public interest; Whereas, the Board adopts the findings and 
recommendations of the examiner's report, and finds that the 
requirements of the FTZ Act and Board's regulations are satisfied, and 
that approval of the application is in the public interest;
    Now therefore, the Board hereby approves the request subject to the 
FTZ

[[Page 37960]]

Act and the Board's regulations, including Sec. 400.28.

    Signed at Washington, DC, this 12th day of June 2000.
Troy H. Cribb,
Acting Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Import Administration, 
Alternate Chairman, Foreign-Trade Zones Board.
    ATTEST:
Dennis Puccinelli,
Acting Executive Secretary.
[FR Doc. 00-15401 Filed 6-16-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
I

106TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 5537

To waive the period of Congressional review of the Child in Need of Protection

Amendment Act of 2000.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

OCTOBER 25, 2000

Mr. DAVIS of Virginia introduced the following bill; which was referred to the

Committee on Government Reform

A BILL

To waive the period of Congressional review of the Child

in Need of Protection Amendment Act of 2000.

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

3 SECTION 1. WAIVER OF CONGRESSIONAL REVIEW PERIOD.

4 Notwithstanding section 602(c)(1) of the District of

5 Columbia Home Rule Act (sec. 1–233(c)(1), D.C. Code),

6 the Child in Need of Protection Amendment Act of 2000

7 (D.C. Bill 13–796) shall take effect on the date of the

8 enactment of such Act or the date of the enactment of

9 this Act, whichever is later.

Æ
Appendix C.8 - Sample VSY Calculator Worksheet

# Appendix C.8 – Sample VSY Worksheet

This sample VSY Worksheet is a visual representation of a VSY Calculator that is functional in Excel. See the full list of Handbook Appendices on the Manage AmeriCorps Seniors Grants page for the Excel version. 

VSY Actual to Target (Cumulative)

Month

Volunteer Hours

Version 2020.2		Pg. 1 of 1This document is provided as a sample ONLY. Its use is optional and, if used, it should be customized as appropriate. For all appendices, including editable versions of samples and templates, visit https://www.nationalservice.gov/operations-handbook-appendices.