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

NEMI265

File Hashes for IP Address 68.62.31.2

ISP: Comcast Cable Holdings, LLC

Physical Location: Grand Blanc, MI

Hit Date UTC File Hash Title

03/01/2015 18:23:55 B52CBE3959575399BEBBDEE6D4A5553D476F204F Me Myself And I

03/01/2015 16:42:35 A4BFA9B1278D2CDC4C985B87DB983F7578738244 Fashion Models Are Bisexual

02/28/2015 19:02:31 4CBE8879EDEEC66D681CC570CD3434B1CE7788AA X-art Unauthorized Pack #89

02/22/2015 02:53:49 385AD09ACB8FED755652269104CCECD518BEC7A9 Midnight Passion

02/15/2015 21:37:58 F42B34B6556172AEB09CE7FC520DDDFDCADC29B6 Competition

02/15/2015 21:31:59 D68E08268A69BB3CF305BE24C01C58E9E0C194E6 Girls Night Out

02/15/2015 21:15:28 C3F656CDA6134E3569B0476DAB07D8913E01DF6E Bring Me To My Knees

02/14/2015 02:21:46 1C35BF414326079576DD727963F40A73CEDA4EF9 Spread Wide Open

12/14/2014 15:46:03 DE24C3F03A30E1E0E3D7A2B66D4885E4A80D7549 Still Mine

08/24/2014 14:50:31 DD54541DD3CE9E43D2314BC8BCA659AB983DE330 Sexy En Noir

Total Statutory Claims Against Defendant: 136

2:15-cv-11498-LJM-RSW Doc # 1-2 Filed 04/25/15 Pg 1 of 1 Pg ID 12
§ 28.240 General alarm system. ( a ) Except as provided in paragraph (f) of this section, each vessel with an accommodation space or a work space which is not adjacent to the operating station, must have an audible general alarm system with a contact-maker at the operating station suitable for notifying individuals on board in the event of an emergency.
( b ) The general alarm system must be capable of notifying an individual in any accommodation space or work space where they may normally be employed.
( c ) In a work space where background noise makes a general alarm system difficult to hear, a flashing red light must also be installed.
( d ) Each general alarm bell and flashing red light must be identified with red lettering at least 1 ⁄ 2 inch (13 millimeters) high as follows: Attention General Alarm—When Alarm Sounds Go to Your Station.
( e ) A general alarm system must be tested prior to operation of the vessel and at least once each week thereafter.
( f ) A public address system or other means of alerting all individuals on board may be used in lieu of a general alarm system provided it complies with paragraphs (b), (c), and (e) of this section and can be activated from the operating station.
[CGD 88-079, 56 FR 40393, Aug. 14, 1991, as amended by CGD 95-012, 60 FR 48048, Sept. 18, 1995]
§ 120.200 General design, installation, and maintenance requirements. Electrical equipment on a vessel must be installed and maintained to: ( a ) Provide services necessary for safety under normal and emergency conditions;
( b ) Protect passengers, crew, other persons, and the vessel from electrical hazards, including fire, caused by or originating in electrical equipment, and electrical shock;
( c ) Minimize accidental personnel contact with energized parts; and
( d ) Prevent electrical ignition of flammable vapors.
#### § 201.45 Certificate of service.

The original of every document filed with the Administration and required to be served upon all parties to a proceeding shall be accompanied by a certificate of service signed by the party making service, stating that such service has been made upon each party to the proceeding. Certificates of service may be in substantially the following form:

I hereby certify that I have this day served the foregoing document upon all parties of record in this proceeding by mailing, postage prepaid (or by delivering in person) a copy to each such party.

Dated at __________________ this ____________ day of ________________, 19____

(Signature)________________

For________________
#### § 201.150 Record for decision.

The transcript of testimony and exhibits, together with all papers and requests (except the correspondence section of the docket), including rulings and any recommended or initial decisions filed in the proceeding shall constitute the exclusive record for decision. Final decisions will be predicated on the same record, including the initial decision of the presiding officer.
#### § 188.10-71 Scientific personnel.

This term means those persons who are aboard an oceanographic research vessel solely for the purpose of engaging in scientific research, or in instructing, or receiving instruction, in oceanography or limnology, and shall not be considered seamen under the provisions of Title 46, United States Code.

[CGFR 67-83, 33 FR 1113, Jan. 27, 1968, as amended by CGD 77-081, 46 FR 56204, Nov. 16, 1981; CGD 97-057, 62 FR 51050, Sept. 30, 1997]
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 82 (Monday, April 30, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Page 21265]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 07-2138]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION


Sunshine Act Meeting Notices

Date AND Time: Thursday, May 3, 2007, at 10 a.m.

Place: 999 E Street, NW., Washington, DC (Ninth Floor).

Status: This Meeting will be Open to the Public.

Items to be Discussed: 

Correction and Approval of Minutes.
Advisory Opinion 2007-05: Erik Iverson by counsel, Donald F. McGahn, 
II.
Advisory Opinion 2007-06: Libertarian Party of Indiana by Todd Singer, 
Treasurer.
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on Hybrid Ads.
Management and Administrative Matters.

Person to Contact for Information: Mr. Robert Biersack, Press Officer, 
Telephone: (202) 694-1220.

Mary W. Dove,
Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. 07-2138 Filed 4-26-07; 2:57 pm]
BILLING CODE 6715-01-M
# C_2013367EN.01001501.xml

| 14.12.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 367/15 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.12.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 367/15

---

Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 24 October 2013 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgericht Hannover — Germany) — Andreas Ingemar Thiele Meneses v Region Hannover

(Case C-220/12) (1)

1

(Citizenship of the Union - Articles 20 TFEU and 21 TFEU - Right of free movement and residence - National of a Member State - Studies pursued in another Member State - Education or training grant - Permanent residence requirement - Place of education or training located in the applicant’s State of residence or in a neighbouring State - Limited exception - Applicant’s specific circumstances)

2013/C 367/24

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Referring court

Verwaltungsgericht Hannover

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Andreas Ingemar Thiele Meneses

Applicant:

Defendant: Region Hannover

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Request for a preliminary ruling — Verwaltungsgericht Hannover — Interpretation of Articles 20 and 21 TFEU — Education or training grant (‘BAföG’) — Member State’s legislation making its award subject to the condition that its nationals who are resident abroad show ‘special circumstances’ and restricting the place of education or training to the Member State of residence or a neighbouring State

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

Articles 20 TFEU and 21 TFEU must be interpreted as precluding legislation of a Member State, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, which, as a rule, makes the award of an education or training grant for studies pursued in another Member State subject to the sole condition of having established a permanent residence, within the meaning of that legislation, on national territory and which, in a case where the applicant is a national of that State with no permanent residence within that State, provides for a grant for education or training abroad only in the applicant’s State of residence or in a neighbouring State thereof and only where specific circumstances justify such a grant.

---

(1)  OJ C 287, 22.9.2012.

1

---
# C_2013336EN.01002202.xml

| 16.11.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 336/22 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.11.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 336/22

---

Order of the General Court of 9 September 2013 — Telefónica v Commission

(Case T-430/11) (1)

1

(Action for annulment - State aid - Aid scheme permitting tax amortisation of financial goodwill for foreign shareholding acquisitions - Decision declaring the aid scheme incompatible with the internal market and not ordering the recovery of the aid - Act entailing implementing measures - Lack of individual concern - Lack of status as an actual recipient under the aid scheme - No obligation to repay the aid - Inadmissibility)

2013/C 336/45

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Parties

Applicant Telefónica, SA (Madrid, Spain) (represented by J. Ruiz Calzado, M. Núñez Müller and J. Domínguez Pérez, lawyers)

Applicant

Defendant: European Commission (represented by R. Lyal, C. Urraca Caviedes and P. Němečková, acting as Agents)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Request for partial annulment of Commission Decision 2011/282/EU of 12 January 2011 on the tax amortisation of financial goodwill for foreign shareholding acquisitions No C 45/07 (ex NN 51/07, ex CP 9/07) implemented by Spain (OJ 2011 L 135, p. 1).

Operative part of the order

Operative part of the order

| 1. | The action is dismissed. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The action is dismissed.

| 2. | Telefónica, SA is ordered to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Telefónica, SA is ordered to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 282, 24.9.2011.

1

---
#### § 201.114 Certification and filing by officer; copies.

The officer taking the deposition shall certify on the deposition that the witness was duly sworn by him and that the deposition is a true record of the testimony given by the witness, and that said officer is not of counsel or attorney to either of the parties and is not directly or indirectly interested in the outcome of the proceeding or investigation. He shall then securely seal the deposition in an envelope endorsed with the title of the proceeding and marked “Deposition of (here insert name of witness)”, and shall promptly send the original and two copies thereof, together with the original and two copies of all exhibits, by registered mail to the Administration. Parties shall make their own arrangements with the officer taking the deposition for copies of the testimony and exhibits.
1 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN 

SOUTHERN DIVISION 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

 Plaintiff, Case No. 15-cr-20094-10 

 Hon. Matthew F. Leitman 

v. 

D10, VERDELL KENNEDY, 

 

 Defendant. 

__________________________________________________________________/ 

ORDER DIRECTING DEFENDANT TO SUPPLEMENT HIS MOTION 

FOR COMPASSIONATE RELEASE (ECF No. 317) 

 Defendant Verdell Kennedy is a federal prisoner. On October 25, 2021, 

Kennedy filed an emergency motion for compassionate release from custody pesuant 

to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A).1

 (See Mot., ECF No. 317.) In his motion, Kennedy 

seeks release based on an alleged COVID-19 outbreak at the prison where he is 

currently incaerated (FCI Hazelton). 

 As the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit recently 

recognized, “when [a prisoner] has access to the COVID-19 vaccine,” the prisoner’s 

potential exposure to the virus while in custody “does not present an extraordinary 

and compelling reason warranting” release. United States v. Lemons, --- F.4th ---, 

1

 The Court has previously denied Kennedy compassionate release on several 

occasions. (See Orders, ECF Nos. 289, 297, and 315.) 

Case 2:15-cr-20094-MFL-EAS ECF No. 318, PageID.1614 Filed 10/28/21 Page 1 of 3
2 

2021 WL 4699249, at *3 (6th Cir. Oct. 8, 2021). Thus, in order to fully evaluate 

Kennedy’s motion, the Court requires additional information from him. The Court 

therefore DIRECTS Kennedy, by no later than December 17, 2021, to file a 

supplement with the Court that answers the following questions: 

1. Has a COVID-19 vaccaine been made available to prisoners genally at 

FCI Hazelton? 

2. Have you been offered a COVID-19 vaccine? If so, which vaccine, and 

when was it offered to you? 

3. If a vaccine was offered to you, did you agree to be vaccinated, or did 

you reject the offer to be vaccinated? 

4. If you accepted the offer to be vaccinated, has the vaccine been 

administered to you? If so, how many doses of the vaccine have you 

received, and when were the doses administered? 

5. Finally, if you agreed to be vaccinated but have not yet been vaccinated, 

when will the vaccine be administered to you? 

Once the Court receives this supplemental information from Kennedy, it will 

rule on his motion. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

 s/Matthew F. Leitman 

 MATTHEW F. LEITMAN 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 

Dated: October 28, 2021 

 

Case 2:15-cr-20094-MFL-EAS ECF No. 318, PageID.1615 Filed 10/28/21 Page 2 of 3
3 

I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was served upon the 

parties and/or counsel of record on October 28, 2021, by electronic means and/or 

ordinary mail. 

 s/Holly A. Monda 

 Case Manager 

 (810) 341-9761 

Case 2:15-cr-20094-MFL-EAS ECF No. 318, PageID.1616 Filed 10/28/21 Page 3 of 3
VINTAGE NEWSWIRE LLC
                              150 WEST 46TH STREET
                               NEW YORK, NY 10036
                                  212 730 4302
                             WWW.VINTAGENEWSWIRE.COM

December 13, 2004

NetWorth Technologies
Attention: Josh Eikov

Josh,

As discussed, we would be pleased to provide you with an unlimited number of
press releases for the fiscal year 2005. You can upload all releases through our
web site at www.vintagenewswire.com after which we will disseminate the release
for your company via our current distribution channels and resources. In
exchange for such services, you agree to issue shares of RESTRICTED common stock
of NWRT, in equal amounts of 100,000 shares each, to Seth Farbman and Shai
Stern. Such shares shall have piggy back registration rights.

VintageNewswire shall have the right to reject any particular release should our
compliance or distribution managers view the context of the release, or its
source, as a potential liability to VintageNewswire.

Please sign and fax back to us at 212 730 4306. We look forward to being of
service to you.

/s/ Seth Farbman
Best Wishes,
Seth Farbman, Pres.


                                                       /s/ L. Joshua Eikov

                                                       L. Joshua Eikov, CEO
Editorial Note on Part 151
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 151 appear by USCG-2009-0702, 74 FR 49236, Sept. 25, 2009, and USCG-2012-0832, 77 FR 59784, Oct. 1, 2012.

§ 151.01-15 Dangerous cargoes not specifically named. ( a ) Any liquid or liquefied gas, which meets the definitions referred to in § 151.01-1 and is not named in Table 151.05 or Table 30.25-1 of this chapter shall not be transported in bulk in a manned or unmanned tank barge without the prior specific approval of the Commandant.
( b ) Mixtures or blends of two or more cargoes, one or more of which appears in Table 151.05, will be treated as though they were new products and specific approval of the Commandant must be obtained prior to undertaking their transportation.
[CGFR-70-10, 35 FR 3714, Feb. 25, 1970, as amended by CGD 81-101, 52 FR 7777, Mar. 12, 1987; CGD 81-101, 53 FR 28974, Aug. 1, 1988 and 54 FR 12629, Mar. 28, 1989; CGD 88-100, 54 FR 40029, Sept. 29, 1989]
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

ROBERT EDWARD LEE,

Plaintiff, No. 14-11722

v. District Judge Matthew F. Leitman

Magistrate Judge R. Steven Whalen

SAI LI, ET AL.,

Defendants.

 /

ORDER

Before the Court is Plaintiff Robert Lee’s self-styled and rambling Motion to Show

Cause, Amended Supplemental Pleadings, and Request for Marshals to Serve CoDefendants [Doc. #39].

Because Plaintiff is proceeding pro se, I will liberally construe this motion as (1) a

request for Marshal’s service, and (2) a response to Defendant Sai Li’s motion for

judgment on the pleadings [Doc. #32]. There is no basis to issue an order to show cause

to anyone.

Defendant Eli Lilly Corporate Center has been dismissed. Sai Li is the only

remaining Defendant. He has been served, and has filed a dispositive motion. There are

no Defendants to be served; therefore, the motion for Marshal’s service [Doc. #32] is

DENIED.

Plaintiff’s motion will nevertheless be considered in assessing Defendant’s motion

for judgment on the pleadings.

-1-

2:14-cv-11722-MFL-RSW Doc # 40 Filed 11/06/15 Pg 1 of 2 Pg ID 315
IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/R. Steven Whalen 

R. STEVEN WHALEN

United States Magistrate Judge

Dated: November 6, 2015

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was sent to parties of record on

November 6, 2015, electronically and/or by U.S. mail.

s/C. Ciesla 

Case Manager 

-2-

2:14-cv-11722-MFL-RSW Doc # 40 Filed 11/06/15 Pg 2 of 2 Pg ID 316
Exhibit
      32.1





**CERTIFICATION
        PURSUANT TO**


**18
      U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**


**AS
      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906**


**OF
      THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**




In
      connection with the Quarterly Report of Sanders Morris Harris Group Inc. (the
      “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2005 (the “Report”), as
      filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Ben
      T.
      Morris, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
      §1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
      that:





1.
            The
                Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d)
                of
                the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and





2.
              The
                  information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
                  respects, the financial condition
                  and results of operations of the
                  Company.








/s/
      BEN
      T. MORRIS


Ben
      T.
      Morris


Chief
      Executive Officer





August
      8,
      2005




A
      signed
      original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided
      to
      Sanders Morris Harris Group Inc. and will be retained by Sanders Morris Harris
      Group Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff
      upon request.
§ 112.30-3 Normal source for emergency loads. ( a ) The normal source for emergency loads must be the ship's service generating plant.
( b ) The power from the ship's service generating plant for the emergency loads must be supplied to the emergency loads through automatic transfer switches.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Maura D. Corrigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway

Alton Thomas Davis, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

 _________________________________________ 

 Clerk

November 22, 2010 

y1115 

Order 

 

November 22, 2010 

141193 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 141193 

 COA: 295328 

Wayne CC: 03-012024 

TYRONE ANTHONY BELL, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

 On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the April 15, 2010 order 

of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because the defendant has 

failed to meet the burden of establishing entitlement to relief under MCR 6.508(D).
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 Sanders Morris Harris Group Inc. (the
      “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2006 (the “Report”), as
      filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Rick
      Berry, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
      §1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
      that:





1.
      The
      Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
      Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and





The
      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
      the financial condition
      and results of operations of the Company.














/s/
      RICK
      BERRY


Rick
      Berry


Chief
      Financial Officer







August
      8,
      2006








A
      signed
      original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided
      to
      Sanders Morris Harris Group Inc. and will be retained by Sanders Morris Harris
      Group Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff
      upon request.
#### In the Matter of the Probate of the Last Will, etc., of Edward Hewitt, *Deceased*.

Decree affirmed on opinion of surrogate, without costs.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN 

SOUTHERN DIVISION 

 

JACK SMITH, 

 Plaintiff, CASE NO: 15-CV-10090-DT 

v. 

MR. DOYLE, ET AL., 

 Defendants. 

 / 

ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S 

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION 

 This matter was referred to United States Magistrate Judge R. Steven Whalen 

pursuant to U.S.C. §636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 72.1. In his report filed on February 6, 

2017, the magistrate judge recommended that this court deny Defendant C. Johnson’s 

Motion to Dismiss. No objections have been filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), 

thus further appeal rights are waived.1

 Having reviewed the file and the report, the court concludes that the findings and 

conclusions of the magistrate judge are correct and ADOPTS the same for purposes of 

this Order. 

 Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that, for the reasons set forth in the Magistrate 

Judge’s Report and Recommendation, Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss {Dkt #28} is 

DENIED. 

 

 1

 The failure to object to the magistrate judge’s report releases the court from its duty to 

independently review the motion. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985). 

2:15-cv-10090-RHC-RSW Doc # 46 Filed 03/07/17 Pg 1 of 2 Pg ID 233
SO ORDERED. 

Dated: March 7, 2017 s/Robert H. Cleland 

 ROBERT H. CLELAND 

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 

I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was mailed to counsel of record 

and/or pro se parties on this date, March 7, 2017, by electronic and/or ordinary mail. 

 s/Shawna C. Burns 

 Case Manager Generalist 

 (810) 984-2056 

 

2:15-cv-10090-RHC-RSW Doc # 46 Filed 03/07/17 Pg 2 of 2 Pg ID 234
# Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas

June 24, 2015

N o. 04

- 15

- 00094

- CV

IN THE MATTER OF H.L.,

From the 436th District Court, Bexar County, Texas Trial Court No. 2014

- JUV

- 00757 The Honorable Lisa Jarrett, Judge Presiding



### O R D E R

A ppellant ’ s brief wa s due to be filed with this court on June 18, 2015

. On June 18, 2015

, Appellant f

iled a n unopposed first motion for a thirty

- day extension of time to file his brief until July 20, 2015

. Appellant’s motion is GRANTED. Appellant must file his brief with this court by July 20, 2015

.

_________________________________ Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said court on this 24th day of June, 201 5

.

___________________________________ Keith E. Hottle Clerk of Court
# C_2013304EN.01000802.xml

| 19.10.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 304/8 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.10.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 304/8

---

Order of the President of the Forth Chamber of the Court of 10 July 2013 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunalul Giurgiu — Romania) — SC Volksbank România SA v Comisariatul Județean pentru Protecția Consumatorilor Giurgiu

(Case C-123/12) (1)

1

2013/C 304/15

Language of the case: Romanian

The President of the Forth Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

---

(1)  OJ C 151, 26.5.2012.

1

---