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

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

DANNY W. FIFE,

As Personal Representative of the 

Estate of Victor D. Fife,

Plaintiff,

vs.

FORD MOTOR COMPANY, a 

Foreign Corporation, and,

FORD MOTOR COMPANY 

GENERAL RETIREMENT PLAN, 

RETIREMENT COMMITTEE,

Defendants.

Case No. 2:14-cv-14586-MFL-MKM

Hon. Matthew F. Leitman

Mag. Judge Mona K. Majzoub

DEFENDANTS’ NOTICE OF APPEARANCE

PLEASE ENTER THE APPEARANCE of Jason C. Schwartz of Gibson, 

Dunn & Crutcher, LLP, as counsel for defendants Ford Motor Company and Ford 

Motor Company General Retirement Plan, Retirement Committee, in the above 

matter.

Respectfully submitted, 

/s/ Jason C. Schwartz

JASON C. SCHWARTZ

Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher, LLP

1050 Connecticut Ave. N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20036

(202) 955-8500

jschwartz@gibsondunn.com

DATED: June 10, 2015

2:14-cv-14586-MFL-MKM Doc # 24 Filed 06/10/15 Pg 1 of 2 Pg ID 539
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on June 10, 2015, I caused to be electronically filed the 

foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using the ECF system, which will 

send notification of such filing to counsel for Plaintiff: spotter@potterlaw.com, 

rjpatterson@potterlaw.com, and rclark@potterlaw.com, and I hereby certify that I 

have caused to be served via U.S. mail the foregoing document to the following 

non-ECF participants:

(no manual recipients)

/s/ Jason C. Schwartz

JASON C. SCHWARTZ

Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher, LLP

1050 Connecticut Ave. N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20036

Telephone: (202) 955-8500

Facsimile: (202) 530-4223

jschwartz@gibsondunn.com

2:14-cv-14586-MFL-MKM Doc # 24 Filed 06/10/15 Pg 2 of 2 Pg ID 540
!;

N

Barr Footer: Date: 6/3/2004 4:10:56 PM File: C:\Temp\Test.mxd User: bal

0 100

Kilometers

MODELING DOMAIN

Taconite BART Modeling

Taconite Industry Group

Minnesota

0 100

Miles

Legend

Modeling Domain

Class I Area

BWCA

Voyageurs
###### Editorial Note on Part 160

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 160 appear by USCG-2012-0832, 77 FR 59785, 59786, Oct. 1, 2012.

#### § 160.076-7 [Reserved]
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

______________________________________________________________________________

DOUGLAS B. HOHMAN, )

)

Plaintiff, )

) CIVIL ACTION NO.: 2:14–cv-13913

v ) HONORABLE GEORGE CARAM STEEH

) MAGISTRATE PATRICIA T. MORRIS

COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, )

)

Defendant. ) ORDER FOR THE AWARD OF

) ATTORNEY FEES UNDER THE 

) EQUAL ACCESS TO JUSTICE ACT

______________________________________________________________________________

This matter having come before the Court upon the parties’ stipulation to attorney fees under

the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA), and the Court being fully advised in the premises;

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff is granted an award in the total amount

of $2,242.50, in full satisfaction and settlement of any and all claims Plaintiff may have under the

under the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA), 28 U.S.C. § 2412. Any fees paid belong to Plaintiff

and not his attorney and can be offset to satisfy pre-existing debt that the litigant owes the United

States under Astrue v Ratliff, 2010 WL 2346547 (June 14, 2010).

After the Court enters this award, if counsel for the parties can verify that Plaintiff owes no

pre-existing debt subject to offset, the Defendant will direct that the award be made payable to

Plaintiff’s attorney pursuant to an EAJA assignment duly signed by Plaintiff and counsel.

DATED: July 2, 2015 s/George Caram Steeh

Hon. George Caram Steeh

United States District Judge

2:14-cv-13913-GCS-PTM Doc # 19 Filed 07/02/15 Pg 1 of 1 Pg ID 419
§ 140.630 Lookout. ( a ) Throughout the trip or voyage the master and officer in charge of the navigational watch must assess the requirement for a lookout, consistent with 33 CFR 83.05. A lookout in addition to the master or mate (pilot) should be added when necessary to: ( 1 ) Maintain a state of vigilance with regard to any significant change in the operational environment;
( 2 ) Assess the situation and the risk of collision/allision;
( 3 ) Anticipate stranding and other dangers to navigation; and
( 4 ) Detect any other potential hazards to safe navigation.
( b ) In determining the requirement for a lookout, the officer in charge of the navigational watch must take full account of relevant factors including, but not limited to: state of weather, visibility, traffic density, proximity of dangers to navigation, and the attention necessary when navigating in areas of increased vessel traffic.
Exhibit 32.2

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 First Capital, Inc. and Subsidiaries (the
Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), I, Michael C. Frederick, Senior Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer of
the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 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; and

(2)
The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company as of and for the period covered by the Report.



|                        |  |     |  |                                                             
|----------------------- |  | --- |  | ------------------------------------------------------------
|DATE: November 14, 2007 |  | BY: |  | /s/ Michael C. Frederick                                    
|                        |  |     |  | Michael C. Frederick                                        
|                        |  |     |  | Senior Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer
|                        |  |     |  | (Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)
Due to the use of Java script in the design of the web site, http://www.blm.gov/wo/st/en/res/Volunteer/reports.html, the functionality the site has not been replicated. All annual reports can be found in: ~\netsite-docs\gpo16954\Annual Reports.
Editorial Note on Part 164
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 164 appear by USCG-2012-0832, 77 FR 59787, Oct. 1, 2012.

§ 164.015-5 Procedure for acceptance. ( a ) Unicellular plastic foam is not subject to formal approval, but will be accepted by the Coast Guard on the basis of this subpart for use in the manufacture of lifesaving equipment utilizing it.
( b ) Upon receipt of an application requesting acceptance, the Commander of the Coast Guard District will detail a marine inspector to the factory to observe the production facilities and manufacturing methods and to select from foam already manufactured sufficient sample material for testing for compliance with the requirements of this specification. A copy of the marine inspector's report, together with the sample material and one copy of an independent laboratory test report will be forwarded to the Commandant and if satisfactory notice of acceptance will be given to the manufacturer.
( c ) Acceptance of unicellular plastic foam prior to being incorporated into finished products, or during the course of manufacture, shall in no case be construed as a guarantee of the acceptance of the finished products.
( d ) The manufacturer of the foam shall provide the manufacturer of the lifesaving equipment with an affidavit certifying that the foam conforms to all of the requirements of this subpart.
§ 15.535 Towing vessels. ( a ) *Applicability.* Except as provided in this paragraph (a), the requirements in this section apply to a towing vessel subject to subchapter M of this chapter. Vessels subject to this section must also meet the requirements in § 15.515(c). A towing vessel at least 8 meters (26 feet) in length, measured from end to end over the deck (excluding sheer), that is not subject to subchapter M must meet the requirements in paragraph (b) of this section if it is— ( 1 ) A seagoing towing vessel of 300 gross tons or more subject to the provisions of subchapter I of this chapter;
( 2 ) A vessel inspected under other subchapters of this chapter that may perform occasional towing; or
( 3 ) A public vessel as defined in 46 U.S.C. 2101.
( b ) *Towing vessels 8 meters or more in length.* Every towing vessel of at least 8 meters (26 feet) in length, measured from end to end over the deck (excluding sheer), must be under the direction and control of a person holding a MMC endorsed as master or mate (pilot) of towing vessels or as master or mate of vessels of greater than 200 gross register tons, holding a completed Towing Officer Assessment Record signed by a designated examiner indicating that the officer is proficient in the operation of towing vessels upon the appropriate route.
( c ) *Towing Vessels of Any Length on the Lower Mississippi River.* In addition to the requirements of paragraph (b) of this section, any towing vessel operating in the pilotage waters of the Lower Mississippi River must be under the control of an officer who holds either a first-class pilot's endorsement for that route, or MMC officer endorsement for the Western Rivers, or who meets the requirements of either paragraph (c)(1) or (2) of this section, as applicable. ( 1 ) *Moving tank or hazardous material barges.* To operate a towing vessel with tank barges or a tow of barges carrying hazardous material regulated under subchapter N or O of this chapter, the officer in charge of the towing vessel must have completed at least 12 round trips over this route as an observer, with at least 3 of those trips during hours of darkness, and must provide evidence to the Coast Guard upon request that at least 1 of the 12 round trips occurred within the last 5 years.
( 2 ) *Moving uninspected barges or no barges.* To operate a towing vessel without barges or a tow of uninspected barges, the officer in charge of the towing vessel must have completed at least 4 round trips over this route as an observer, with at least 1 of those trips during hours of darkness, and must provide evidence to the Coast Guard upon request that at least 1 of the 4 round trips occurred within the last 5 years.
[USCG-2006-24412, 81 FR 40100, June 20, 2016]
**EXHIBIT 23.2**

 

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PETROLEUM ENGINEERS**

 

We the firm of W.D. Von Gonten & Co. consents to the use of our name and to the use of our report regarding Evolution Petroleum Corporation Estimated Reserves and Revenues “as of July 1, 2005 through July 1, 2011” in the relevant pages of the Form 10-K of Evolution Petroleum Corporation for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2011.  We further consent to the incorporation by reference of information contained in our report as of June 30, 2011, in the Evolution Petroleum Corporation Registration Statement No. 333-152136 on Form S-8 and Registration Statement No. 333-168107 on Form S-3.

 

 

Yours truly,

 

W.D. VON GONTEN & CO.

 
| /s/ William D. Von Gonten, Jr. |   |
|-------------------------------------|--------|

 

William D. Von Gonten, Jr.

President

TX #73244

 

September 9, 2011

 

----
Editorial Note on Part 162
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 162 appear by USCG-2012-0832, 77 FR 59787, Oct. 1, 2012.

§ 162.017-6 Procedure for approval. Cross Reference
Link to an amendment published at 89 FR 76704 , Sept. 18, 2024.
( a ) *General.* Pressure-vacuum relief valves intended for use on tank vessels must be approved for such use by the Commanding Officer, U.S. Coast Guard Marine Safety Center. Applications for approval may be delivered by visitors to the Commanding Officer, Marine Safety Center, U.S. Coast Guard, 2703 Martin Luther King Jr. Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20593, or transmitted by mail to: Commanding Officer (MSC), Attn: Marine Safety Center, U.S. Coast Guard Stop 7430, 2703 Martin Luther King Jr. Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20593-7430, in a written or electronic format. Information for electronic submittals can be found at *https://www.uscg.mil/HQ/MSC*.
( b ) *Drawings and specifications.* Manufacturers desiring approval of a new design or type of pressure-vacuum relief valve shall submit drawings in quadruplicate showing the design of the valve, the sizes for which approval is requested, method of operation, thickness and material specification of component parts, diameter of seat opening and lift of discs, mesh and size of wire of flame screens.
( c ) *Pre-approval tests.* Before approval is granted, the manufacturer shall have tests conducted, or submit evidence that such tests have been conducted, by the Underwriters' Laboratories, the Factory Mutual Laboratories, or by a properly supervised and inspected test laboratory acceptable to the Commandant (CG-ENG), relative to determining the lift, relieving pressure and vacuum, and flow capacity of a representative sample of the pressure-vacuum relief valve in each size for which approval is desired. Test reports including flow capacity curves must be submitted to the Commanding Officer, USCG Marine Safety Center.
[56 FR 35827, July 29, 1991, as amended by CGD 95-072, 60 FR 50467, Sept. 29, 1995; CGD 96-041, 61 FR 50734, Sept. 27, 1996; USCG-2001-10224, 66 FR 48620, Sept. 21, 2001; USCG-2004-18884, 69 FR 58350, Sept. 30, 2004; USCG-2007-29018, 72 FR 53967, Sept. 21, 2007; USCG-2009-0702, 74 FR 49238, Sept. 25, 2009; USCG-2013-0671, 78 FR 60160, Sept. 30, 2013; USCG-2016-0498, 82 FR 35092, July 28, 2017; USCG-2022-0323, 88 FR 10031, Feb. 16, 2023]
§ 138.505 Submittal of external audit results. ( a ) *Submission of external management audits.* The results of an external management audit as required by § 138.315 must be submitted to the Towing Vessel National Center of Expertise within 30 days of audit completion by the TPO conducting the external audit. The mailing address for the Coast Guard Towing Vessel National Center of Expertise is 504 Broadway Street, Suite 101, Paducah, Kentucky 42001.
( b ) *Submission of external vessel audits.* The results of any external vessel audits required by § 138.315 must be submitted to the cognizant OCMI within 30 days of audit completion by the TPO conducting the external audit.
( c ) *Electronic submissions.* The results of external audits required by this section may be submitted electronically so long as the means used allows the Coast Guard to reliably verify the person making the submission and the authenticity of the records submitted. For those seeking to submit external audit records to the Coast Guard electronically, the TSMS must address the means to be used to make these electronic submissions.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Plaintiff,

Case No. 14-CR-20764

vs.

HON. GEORGE CARAM STEEH

CONSTANCE TAYLOR

Defendant.

___________________________________/

ORDER TRANSFERRING DEFENDANT’S EMERGENCY MOTION FOR

APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL TO EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

This matter is before the court on defendant’s emergency motion for appointment

of counsel, filed September 29, 2015. The criminal case originated in the Eastern

District of Pennsylvania, where defendant was found guilty on three counts of the

superseding indictment following a jury trial on October 20, 2008. Case No.

06CR00658-003 (Judge Anita Brody). On December 3, 2014, the Eastern District of

Pennsylvania requested that jurisdiction be transferred to this court since defendant is

incarcerated in this jurisdiction, and this court accepted transfer of jurisdiction on that

date. Prior to transferring jurisdiction, defendant filed a motion to vacate, set aside or

correct sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255. That motion is scheduled for hearing

before the Pennsylvania court on October 13, 2015 at 11:00 a.m. As the emergency

motion for appointment of counsel concerns the pending § 2255 motion, this court

believes that it is in the best interest of efficiency to transfer the motion for appointment

of counsel to the court which is hearing the related matter. Now, therefore,

2:14-cr-20764-GCS Doc # 4 Filed 09/30/15 Pg 1 of 2 Pg ID 51
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the clerk shall transfer defendant’s emergency

motion for appointment of counsel to the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, Judge Anita

Brody, for determination.

After conferring with Judge Brody, this court has agreed to furnish defendant with

space and technical assistance to enable defendant to participate in the scheduled

hearing remotely. In the event she wishes to do so, defendant shall appear at the

Theodore Levin United States Courthouse, 231 West Lafayette Blvd., Detroit, MI 48226,

Judge George Caram Steeh’s Chambers, room 238, at 10:30 a.m. on October 13, 2015. 

This arrangement will permit defendant to attend the hearing taking place in Judge

Brody’s courtroom by way of video conference.

It is so ordered.

Dated: September 30, 2015

S/George Caram Steeh

GEORGE CARAM STEEH

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

Copies of this Order were served upon Constance Taylor,

2936 Airport Road, Waterford, MI 48329 on

September 30, 2015, by ordinary mail.

S/Marcia Beauchemin

Deputy Clerk

2

2:14-cr-20764-GCS Doc # 4 Filed 09/30/15 Pg 2 of 2 Pg ID 52
#### STATE OF NEW JERSEY, DEFENDANT IN ERROR, v. EUGENE GIBBS AND JOHN HERMAN, PLAINTIFFS IN ERROR.

Decided May 29, 1929.

Before Gummeke, Chief Justice, and Justices Black and Lloyd.

*523For the plaintiff in error, *Walter 8. Keown.*

For the defendant in error, *Ethan P. Wescott*and *Joseph Varbalow.*

Pee Cueiam.

(Note.—The state of the case and briefs in this case were mislaid and were not presented to the justices until the May term, 1929.)

Plaintiffs in error were convicted in the Camden Quarter Sessions; Gibbs of rape and Herman of assault with intent to commit rape, and both sentenced to terms of imprisonment,

A number of reasons are presented for reversal of the judgments entered on the verdict, these reasons consisting of alleged trial errors and denial of a motion for direction of a verdict in favor of the defendants; also that the verdict is against the weight of the evidence.

The ruling of the court on the motion to direct a verdict could not have been otherwise, and our examination of the evidence convinces us that the verdict was not contrary to the weight of the evidence. The proofs were ample to establish that Gibbs had carnal knowledge of the girl and that this was against her will. In this he was aided by the defendant Herman, who assisted Gibbs in forcing her into an automobile, knowing full well the purpose of Gibbs to assault her. The intercourse by Gibbs is not denied, and the bruises and marks on the girl’s body after the assault were strong corroborative evidence that it was against her will. We find no error in the rulings on evidence.

The judgment is affirmed.
§ 111.51-4 Short-circuit calculations for systems 1500 kilowatts or above. Short-circuit calculations must be submitted for systems with an aggregate generating capacity of 1500 kilowatts or more by utilizing one of the following methods: ( a ) Exact calculations using actual impedance and reactance values of system components.
( b ) Estimated calculations using IEC 61363-1:1998 for AC systems and IEC 61660-1:1997 for DC systems (both incorporated by reference; see § 110.10-1 of this subchapter).
( c ) The estimated calculations using a commercially established analysis procedure for utility or industrial applications.
# C_2012025EN.01003602.xml

| 28.1.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 25/36 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.1.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 25/36

---

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Simvoulio tis Epikratias (Greece) lodged on 16 November 2011 — Εleftherios-Themistoklis Nasiopoulos v Ipourgos Igias kai Pronias

(Case C-575/11)

(2012/C 25/70)

Language of the case: Greek

Referring court

Simvoulio tis Epikratias

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Εleftherios-Themistoklis Nasiopoulos

Defendant: Ipourgos Igias kai Pronias (Minister for Health and Social Welfare)

Question referred

For the purposes of Article 43 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, is the aim of safeguarding the provision of a high level of health services sufficient, taking account also of the principle of proportionality, to justify a restriction on the freedom of establishment, which arises in the system of provisions that are in force in a certain Member State (the host Member State) and that: (a) allow only persons who have a right to engage, in that Member State, in the regulated profession of physiotherapist to carry out certain professional activities, (b) preclude the possibility of partial access to that profession and (c) therefore mean that a national of the host Member State who has acquired in another Member State (the Member State of origin) a qualification which permits him to engage in a profession regulated in the latter Member State that is connected with the provision of health services (but does not permit him, because the requirements of Council Directive 92/51/EEC on a second general system for the recognition of professional education and training to supplement Directive 89/48/EEC (OJ 1992 L 209, p. 25) are not fulfilled, to engage in the profession of physiotherapist in the host Member State) is entirely unable to carry out in the host Member State, by way of partial access to the profession of physiotherapist, just some of the activities coming under the latter profession, that is to say, those which the person concerned has the right to carry out in the Member State of origin?

---