alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EX-10.17






 Exhibit 10.17 

In 2015, the United States Grand Jury for the North District of Florida began an investigation into alleged corruption by local officials in
Tallahassee, Florida. In June 2017, the grand jury issued subpoenas to the City of Tallahassee and the Community Redevelopment Agency (the “Agency”), for records of communications, bids for proposals, applications, and more from
approximately two dozen business entities and individuals, including Ms. Rivers, the Chief Executive Officer of Trulieve Cannabis Corp. (the “Company”), her husband, J.T. Burnette, and Inkbridge LLC, a business associated with
Ms. Rivers. The grand jury also directly subpoenaed Ms. Rivers for information related to her involvement with the Agency, a specific commissioner of the Agency, and political contributions Ms. Rivers made through an associated
business. Ms. Rivers timely complied with the subpoena. Ms. Rivers has not been charged with any crime. Based on a review by the board of directors of the Company and the advice of counsel, the board of directors of the Company concluded
that Ms. Rivers was not a target of the investigation. The investigation remains ongoing. 
 Ms. Rivers and the Company have
orally agreed that, if Ms. Rivers is indicted in connection with the foregoing investigation, Ms. Rivers will convert any Super Voting Shares controlled by her into Multiple Voting Shares.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

IQBAL SINGH, AKA Ibal Singh, 

Petitioner, 

 v. 

JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney 

General, 

Respondent.

No. 16-73853 

Agency No. A205-934-794 

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted April 11, 2018**

Before: SILVERMAN, PAEZ, and OWENS, Circuit Judges. 

Iqbal Singh, a native and citizen of India, petitions for review of the Board 

of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s

(“IJ”) decision denying his application for asylum, withholding of removal, and 

relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under 

 

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent 

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision 

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

FILED

APR 13 2018

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 16-73853 

8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review de novo claims of due process violations, Hernandez 

v. Mukasey, 524 F.3d 1014, 1017 (9th Cir. 2008), and review for substantial 

evidence the agency’s factual findings, applying the standards governing adverse 

credibility determinations created by the REAL ID Act, Shrestha v. Holder, 590 

F.3d 1034, 1039-40 (9th Cir. 2010). We deny the petition for review. 

Substantial evidence supports the agency’s adverse credibility determination 

based on inconsistencies as to the details of the first attack against Singh, the 

number of phone threats Singh received, and which of Singh’s family members

attempted to file a police report on his behalf, and based on the omission from 

Singh’s application of efforts by his alleged persecutors to find him after he 

departed from India. See id. at 1048 (adverse credibility finding reasonable under 

the totality of the circumstances); Zamanov v. Holder, 649 F.3d 969, 973-74 (9th 

Cir. 2011) (adverse credibility determination properly relied on an omission where 

the added details presented more compelling story of persecution). Singh’s 

explanations do not compel a contrary conclusion. See Lata v. INS, 204 F.3d 1241, 

1245 (9th Cir. 2000). Thus, in the absence of credible testimony, in this case, 

Singh’s asylum and withholding of removal claims fail. See Farah v. Ashcroft, 

348 F.3d 1153, 1156 (9th Cir. 2003). 

Singh’s CAT claim fails because it is based on the same testimony the 

agency found not credible, and Singh does not point to any other evidence in the 
3 16-73853 

record that compels the conclusion that it is more likely than not he would be 

tortured by or with the consent or acquiescence of the government of India. Id. at 

1156-57.

Finally, we reject Singh’s contention that the IJ violated his right to due 

process. See Lata, 204 F.3d at 1246 (requiring error to prevail on a due process 

challenge).

 PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                             142
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   34,153
<ALLOWANCES>                                     (660)
<INVENTORY>                                     29,300
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                64,815
<PP&E>                                          37,870
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (4,406)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 358,262
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           31,755
<BONDS>                                        225,315
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                      82,781
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   358,262
<SALES>                                        176,010
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               176,042
<CGS>                                           96,217
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  158,444
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    94
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              15,465
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  2,133
<INCOME-TAX>                                     2,306
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               (173)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                      (173) 
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.73
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.73
        

</TABLE>
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 123 (Tuesday, June 26, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Page 29779]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-13705]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. EL18-174-000]


American Municipal Power, Inc.; Notice of Filing

    Take notice that on June 19, 2018, American Municipal Power, Inc. 
submitted a filing of proposed cost-based revenue requirement for the 
provision of Reactive Supply and Voltage Control from Generation or 
Other Sources Service under Schedule 2 of the Midwest Independent 
Transmission System Operator, Inc. Open Access Transmission Tariff.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must 
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of 
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be 
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to 
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the 
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of 
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices, 
motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date. On or 
before the comment date, it is not necessary to serve motions to 
intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and 
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an 
original and 5 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal 
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC 
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the 
``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's 
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription'' 
link on the website that enables subscribers to receive email 
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For 
assistance with any FERC Online service, please email 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#e2a4a7b0a1ad8c8e8b8c87b19792928d9096a284879081cc858d94"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="094f4c5b4a46676560676c5a7c7979667b7d496f6c7b6a276e667f">[email protected]</span></a>, or call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For 
TTY, call (202) 502-8659.
    Comment Date: 5:00 pm Eastern Time on July 10, 2018.

    Dated: June 20, 2018.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-13705 Filed 6-25-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
Form for Reporting Jlcqubltion of Power-Operated Collators for Use In Other Than Authorized Printing Plants, 

JCP FORM NO. 3 (3/63) 

Department he�dquarters shall submit this form to the Joint Committee on Printing within 30 days after acquisition of each poweroperated collating machine for any installation other than an authorized printing plant. 

DEPARTMENT OR AGENCY NAME AND LOCATION OF INSTALLATION (State, City, Street, Building, and ltoom No.) 

PRODUCTION INFORMATION FOR PAST YEAR 

Stencil duplicators 

Spirit duplicators 

Offset duplicators 

Total units produced 

NUMBER OF DUPLICATORS IN EACH 

CATEGORY REPORTED 

X X X X X X X X X X X X 

NUMBER OF STENCILS,

MASTERS, PLATES 

X X X X X X X X X X X X

TOTAL UNITS 

PRODUCED 

PROJECTED PRODUCTION INFORMATION FOR NEXT YEAR 

Stencil duplicators 

NUMBER OF DUPLICATORS 

IN EACH CATEGORY 

NUMBER OF STENCILS, 

MASTERS, PLATES 

TOTAL UNITS 

ANTICIPATED 

Spirit duplicators 

Offset duplicators 

Total projected production X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X

INVENTORY OF EQUIPMENT 

Ust below all equipment (see par. 9, cols. 1, 2, and 3, of current Government Printing and Binding Regulations) now in installation. 

DESCRIPTION 

Group and identify by type of machinery in the following order: AGE CONDITION' SERIAL NO. SIZE MODEL ESTIMATED VALUE 

Composing, platemaking, duplicators, binding, and related equipment 

$ 

SIGNATURE OFFICIAL TITLE DATE SUBMlmD 

•condition: N=new; E=excellent; G=good; F=fair; P=poor; U=unserviceable. 16-79890-1 (OVER) 
- -

JOBS PRODUCED DURING MOST RECENT 90-DAY PERIOD 

CATEGORY OF JOBS TO 

BE COLLATED BY NUMBER 

SHEETS IN A SET 

Up to 8 sheets 

9 to 12 sheets 

13 to 24 sheets 

Over 24 sheets --.. � . .. - -

·- -- -

Up to 50 

copies 

NUMBER OF JOBS IN THESE CATEGORIES 

51 to 100 

copies 

101 to 250 

copies 

Over 250 

copies 

TOTAL NUMBER

OF SHEETS

IN CATEGORY

\ 

TOTAL NUMBER

OF PAGES

IN CATEGORY 

JCP FORM NO. 3 (3/63) (BACK) 16-79890-1 U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
House Calendar No. 204

103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. RES. 506

[Report No. 103–659]

RESOLUTION

Waiving points of order against the conference renancial institutions, and for other purposes. the establishment of community development fi- safe and sound banking practices, to facilitate tory institutions to the extent consistent with administrative requirements for insured deposi- port to accompany the bill (H.R. 3474) to reduce

AUGUST 3, 1994

Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be

printed
IV

House Calendar No. 204

103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. RES. 506

[Report No. 103–659]

Waiving points of order against the conference report to accompany the

bill (H.R. 3474) to reduce administrative requirements for insured depository institutions to the extent consistent with safe and sound banking

practices, to facilitate the establishment of community development financial institutions, and for other purposes.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

AUGUST 3, 1994

Mr. BEILENSON, from the Committee on Rules, reported the following resolution; which was referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed

RESOLUTION

Waiving points of order against the conference report to

accompany the bill (H.R. 3474) to reduce administrative

requirements for insured depository institutions to the

extent consistent with safe and sound banking practices,

to facilitate the establishment of community development

financial institutions, and for other purposes.

1 Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it

2 shall be in order to consider the conference report to ac3 company the bill (H.R. 3474) to reduce administrative re-
2

HRES 506 RH

1 quirements for insured depository institutions to the ex2 tent consistent with safe and sound banking practices, to

3 facilitate the establishment of community development fi4 nancial institutions, and for other purposes. All points of

5 order against the conference report and against its consid6 eration are waived. The conference report shall be consid7 ered as read.
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED AUGUST 12, 2015

NO. 03-14-00616-CR

Alexis Marie Ireland, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

APPEAL FROM THE 27TH DISTRICT COURT OF BELL COUNTY

BEFORE CHIEF JUSTICE ROSE, JUSTICES GOODWIN AND FIELD

MODIFIED AND, AS MODIFIED, AFFIRMED -- OPINION BY JUSTICE GOODWIN

This is an appeal from the judgment adjudicating guilt entered by the trial court. Having 

reviewed the record and the parties’ arguments, the Court holds that there was no error in the 

court’s judgment requiring reversal. Therefore, the Court affirms the trial court’s judgment 

adjudicating guilt. However, there was error in the judgment that requires correction. Therefore, 

the Court modifies the trial court’s judgment as follows: we modify the judgment adjudicating 

guilt to delete the restitution order. The judgment, as modified, is affirmed. Because appellant is 

indigent and unable to pay costs, no adjudication of costs is made.
United States Court of Appeals

For the Eighth Circuit 

___________________________

No. 21-1901

___________________________ 

United States of America

 Plaintiff - Appellee

v.

Lewis Miles

 Defendant - Appellant

____________

Appeal from United States District Court 

for the Eastern District of Arkansas 

____________ 

Submitted: April 13, 2022

Filed: August 8, 2022

[Unpublished]

____________ 

Before SMITH, Chief Judge, WOLLMAN and GRASZ, Circuit Judges. 

____________ 

PER CURIAM.

 After Lewis Miles pled guilty to conspiring to distribute methamphetamine, 

the district court sentenced him to 240 months of imprisonment. See 21 U.S.C. 

§§ 841(a)(1) and (b)(1)(C) and 846. Miles argues that his sentence is substantively 

unreasonable. We affirm. 
-2- 

Despite varying 52 months upward above the top of the advisory United States 

Sentencing Guidelines (“Guidelines”) range, the district court1 did not abuse its 

discretion. See United States v. Feemster, 572 F.3d 455, 461 (8th Cir. 2009) (en 

banc) (setting forth the standard of review). The record establishes the district court 

carefully considered the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) sentencing factors and concluded the 

upward variance was necessary to reflect Miles’s extensive criminal history, the 

need to deter future criminal conduct, and the need to protect the public from further 

crimes by Miles. See 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)(1) and (2)(B)–(C). 

Miles argues the district court improperly relied on his criminal history to 

justify the upward variance because his criminal history was fully accounted for by 

the Guidelines. Not so. We have repeatedly stated, “factors that have already been 

taken into account in calculating the advisory Guidelines range can nevertheless 

form the basis of a variance.” United States v. David, 682 F.3d 1074, 1077 (8th Cir. 

2012) (citing United States v. Chase, 560 F.3d 828, 831 (8th Cir. 2009)). This may 

be the case, for example, when “the Guidelines do not fully account for those 

factors[.]” United States v. Richart, 662 F.3d 1037, 1052 (8th Cir. 2011). And here 

the district court properly concluded the Guidelines did not fully account for Miles’s 

criminal history. Specifically, the district court emphasized that Miles had 

repeatedly returned to selling drugs immediately upon completing past sentences. 

This included the instance here where Miles dealt drugs while on pretrial release and 

only days after he had pled guilty to another federal drug charge. The district court’s 

upward variance was not improper.

In sum, we conclude this is not the “unusual case” that warrants reversal due 

to a substantively unreasonable sentence. Feemster, 572 F.3d at 464. Accordingly, 

we affirm the judgment of the district court. 

______________________________

1

The Honorable Brian S. Miller, United States District Judge for the Eastern 

District of Arkansas.
#### Norman ARROW, Appellant, v. Seymour FRIEND, Appellee.

No. 73-787.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

July 9, 1973.

Rehearing Denied Aug. 27, 1973.

PER CURIAM.

Appeal dismissed.
For references related to EPA’s Water Quality Standards for the State of

Florida's Lakes and Flowing Waters, see Docket ID: EPA-HQ-OW-2009-0596 at

www.regulations.gov
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 49 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. RES. 49

Amending the Rules of the House of Representatives to limit the number 
         of years a Member may serve on a particular committee.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 26, 1993

 Mr. Shaw (for himself, Mr. Shays, Mr. Gallegly, Mr. Goss, Mr. Porter, 
    Mr. Canady, and Mr. Miller of Florida) submitted the following 
        resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Rules

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
Amending the Rules of the House of Representatives to limit the number 
         of years a Member may serve on a particular committee.

    Resolved, 

SECTION 1. LIMITATION OF SERVICE ON PARTICULAR COMMITTEES.

    Clause 6 of rule X of the Rules of the House of Representatives is 
amended by inserting at the end the following:
    ``(i) No Member shall serve as a member of any particular committee 
for more than 8 years (disregarding for this purpose any service 
performed as a member of such committee for less than a full session in 
any Congress). Previous service on any committee before the beginning 
of the One Hundred Third Congress shall be disregarded for purposes of 
this prohibition.''.

SEC. 2. EFFECTIVE DATE.

    The amendment made by section 1 shall take effect immediately 
before noon January 3, 1995.

                                 <all>
```
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 503 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. RES. 503

Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that Congress, in 
    providing funds for any fiscal year for programs to assist the 
  homeless, should ensure that these funds are fairly apportioned for 
 homeless veterans to help return homeless veterans to self-sufficient 
                         and productive lives.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             August 1, 1994

 Mr. Stump (for himself, Mr. Spence, Mr. Sangmeister, Mr. Smith of New 
 Jersey, Mr. Bilirakis, Ms. Brown of Florida, Mr. Quinn, Mr. Bachus of 
Alabama, Mr. Rangel, Mr. Machtley, Mr. Santorum, and Mr. Faleomavaega) 
 submitted the following resolution; which was referred jointly to the 
 Committees on Banking, Finance and Urban Affairs and Veterans' Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that Congress, in 
    providing funds for any fiscal year for programs to assist the 
  homeless, should ensure that these funds are fairly apportioned for 
 homeless veterans to help return homeless veterans to self-sufficient 
                         and productive lives.

Whereas homelessness affects an estimated 250,000 veterans and possibly twice 
        that number over the course of a year;
Whereas nationwide one-third of America's adult homeless are veterans;
Whereas these individuals who once proudly wore the uniform of this country face 
        difficult and sometimes seemingly overwhelming obstacles in getting back 
        on their feet; and
Whereas Congress has established an array of Federal programs to help return the 
        homeless to self-sufficient and productive lives: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That it is the sense of the House of Representatives 
that--
            (1) a more proportionate share of the funds appropriated 
        for any fiscal year for programs to assist the homeless should 
        be appropriated to the Secretary of Veterans Affairs for 
        programs to assist homeless veterans that are administered by 
        that Secretary; and
            (2) funds appropriated for any fiscal year for programs to 
        assist the homeless should be administered by all agencies in a 
        proportional manner to reach out to homeless veterans and help 
        return these men and women to self-sufficient and productive 
        lives.
                                 <all>
```