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

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

EASTERN DIVISION

JEREMY R.J. HIGGINS, 

 Plaintiff, 

 

v. Case No.: 2:17-cv-1152

JUDGE GEORGE C. SMITH

Magistrate Judge Vascura

COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, 

 

Defendant. 

 

ORDER

This case is before the Court to consider the Report and Recommendation issued by the

Magistrate Judge on October 24, 2018. The Magistrate Judge recommended that Plaintiff’s

Statement of Errors be overruled and the decision of the Commissioner of Social Security be

affirmed. (See Report and Recommendation, Doc. 15). This matter is now before the Court on

Plaintiff’s Objections to the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation. (Doc. 16). The

Court will consider the matter de novo. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3).

Plaintiff raises one main objection to the ALJ and Magistrate Judge’s findings: that the

ALJ failed to properly provide good reasons for rejecting the opinions of the treating physician. 

Specifically, Plaintiff asserts that the ALJ’s reasoning for dismissing Plaintiff’s treating

physician’s opinions was not sufficient. Plaintiff states that Dr. Weiss, Plaintiff’s treating

physician for over 15 years, did provide sufficient documentation of the problems that the ALJ

suggests is missing from the record. 
This objection presents the same issue already presented to, and carefully considered by,

the Magistrate Judge in the Report and Recommendation. Plaintiff has not presented any new

evidence or argument other than what was previously presented in his Statement of Errors. 

Plaintiff merely disagrees with the ALJ and Magistrate Judge’s conclusions, specifically with

respect to consideration of Dr. Weiss’s opinions. The Court agrees with the Magistrate Judge’s

conclusions regarding the weight given to Dr. Weiss’s opinions by the ALJ. The ALJ provided

detailed reasoning for discrediting Dr. Weiss’s opinion. 

The Court has carefully considered Plaintiff’s objection, but finds that the decision of the

ALJ was supported by substantial evidence as acknowledged in detail in the Magistrate Judge’s

Report and Recommendation. Therefore, for the reasons stated in the well-reasoned Report and

Recommendation, this Court finds that Plaintiff’s objection is without merit.

Based on the aforementioned and the detailed Report and Recommendation, the Court

finds that Plaintiff’s objection has been thoroughly considered and is hereby OVERRULED. 

Accordingly, the Report and Recommendation, Document 15, is ADOPTED and AFFIRMED. 

Plaintiff’s Statement of Errors is hereby OVERRULED, and the decision of the Commissioner

of Social Security is AFFIRMED.

The Clerk shall remove Documents 15 and 16 from the Court’s pending motions list, and

enter final judgment in favor of Defendant, the Commissioner of Social Security.

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

 /s/ George C. Smith 

 GEORGE C. SMITH, JUDGE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

-2-
#### John G. Hall, Respondent, v Lucille Cucco, Appellant.

[774 NYS2d 770]

In an action to recover legal fees, the defendant appeals from (1) an order of the Supreme Court, Richmond County (Lebowitz, J.), dated October 15, 2002, which granted the plaintiffs motion to prehminarily enjoin her from transferring, selling, disposing of, changing, encumbering, wasting, conveying, or undertaking any act which would affect title to certain real property, conditioned upon the posting of an undertaking in an amount to be fixed by the court, and (2) an order of the same court dated December 19, 2002, which fixed the amount of the undertaking at $20,000.

Ordered that the orders are reversed, on the law, with one bill of costs, and the motion is denied.

*632On a prior appeal, this Court determined that the plaintiffs only cause of action sounds in quantum meruit *(see Hall v Cucco,*294 AD2d 332 [2002]). The plaintiff did not move for leave to reargue that determination, nor did he seek leave from this Court to appeal to the Court of Appeals. Reconsideration of the issues determined on the prior appeal is now barred by the doctrine of law of the case *(see Wendy v Spector,*305 AD2d 403 [2003]). Thus, the plaintiffs remedy, if any, is the reasonable value of the legal services he performed, but not a conveyance of the real property in question. Accordingly, the Supreme Court should have denied the plaintiffs motion for a preliminary injunction *(see Credit Agricole Indosuez v Rossiyskiy Kredit Bank,*94 NY2d 541 [2000]).

In light of our determination, the Supreme Court’s order dated December 19, 2002, fixing an undertaking at $20,000, must also be reversed. Altman, J.P., Krausman, H. Miller and Cozier, JJ., concur.
**Final Listing of Questionnaire Files for Steam Electric Rulemaking Record**

**Plant ID 03790**  **Removed from Public**  **(Non-CBI) Docket**  **1 Copyright** 

**Flag 2**  **File Name Description**  x 03790\03790_Checklist.xls EPA Technical Review Checklist Workbook

03790\03790_Completeness_Checklist.xls EPA Completeness Review Checklist 03790\03790_HardcopyLog.doc EPA log of hardcopy documents submitted x 03790\03790_PartA.xls Plant submitted survey file x 03790\03790_PartE.xls Plant submitted survey file x 03790\03790_PartH.xls Plant submitted survey file

03790\Certification Statement Plant ID 03790.pdf Plant certification statement x 03790\Supplemental Documents\Part A Section 5 MAP-1.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey x 03790\Supplemental Documents\Part A Section 5 WB-1.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

1Final reviewed survey responses are located in the Steam Electric Technical Questionnaire Database
. 2Copyright documents are available from the docket.
P.1 

OAR Box 1812 

Prepped by Ollie Stewart 

Document Number: 

291) IV-C-4 

Docket Number: ^fcfr-lf* 

Printed 11/3/2008 10:13:06 AM Sheet 291 of 307 
P.2 

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY rl ^ _• 

"AR 19 t::s 

Honorable Lawrence Coughlin 

House of Reprentatives 

Washington, D. C. 20515 

Dear Mr. Coughlin: 

This letter is in response to your letter of 

February 20, 1990 to William Reilly, regarding the finalization 

of on-highway diesel fuel regulations. In the letter,, you 

urged EPA to finalized this rulemaking without any exemptions 

for small refiners, in order to allow the engine manufactures 

to certify their engines on low-sulfur fuel. 

First, I want to emphasize that we ' fully expect to 

finalize this package in time for 1991 certification. We 

agree that this rulemaking will have very significant benefits; 

and thus we consider its promulgation a top priority. However, 

you were correct to note that we have been requested, to 

consider providing an interim exemption for small refiners. As 

I am sure you are aware, we are required to fully consider the 

merits of all such requests raised during the comment period. 

This is especially true when dealing with issues as serious as 

the potential for regional fuel shortages as a result of our 

action. Thus, we must make our decision only after the merits 

of both sides of the issue are considered. As such, we will 

consider your comments very seriously in making our decision as 

to whether a small refiner exemption is justified. Thank you 

for sharing your thoughts with us. 

Sincerely yours, 

0?;3!NAL SIGNED BY 

Rx.-HARD u. WiLSON . 

Richard D. Wilson 

Director, Office of Mobile Sources
EXHIBIT 32: Rule 13a-14(b) Certification

The undersigned officer certifies that this report fully complies with
the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,
and that the information contained in the report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
Headliners Entertainment Group, Inc.

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has
been provided to Headliners Entertainment Group, Inc. and will be
retained by Headliners Entertainment Group, Inc. and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

Date: August 12, 2005          /s/ Eduardo Rodriguez
                               -------------------------------------------
                               Eduardo Rodriguez (Chief Executive Officer)
The Honorable Fernando J. Gaitan, Jr., United States District Judge for the 1 Western District of Missouri. United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 97-1844

___________ Robert B. DePugh, * * Appellant, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * Western District of Missouri. Willis Swearingin, * * [UNPUBLISHED] Appellee. *

___________ Submitted: September 30, 1997 Filed: October 3, 1997

___________ Before FAGG, BOWMAN, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM. Robert B. DePugh appeals from the District Court & s 1 order dism issing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1994) action with prej udice pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedur e 41(b) and 37(b). Upon review of the record and th e-2-

pa rties & briefs, we find no abuse of discretion . Acco rdingly, we affirm without further discussion. Se e 8th Cir. R. 47B.-3-

A true copy. Attest:CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
```

                                  EXHIBIT 32.1

                           SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATIONS

                  CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTIONS
                 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE
                           SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

        In connection with the quarterly report of HydroFlo, Inc. (the "Company")
on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Dennis L. Mast,
Chief Executive Officer 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
based on my knowledge:

        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 results of operations of the Company.

Date: May 6, 2005

/s/ DENNIS L. MAST
Dennis L. Mast
Chief Executive Officer
```
Exhibit 32

# CERTIFICATIONS
PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the filing of the
Annual Report of Headwaters Incorporated (the Company) on Form 10-K for the
year ended September 30, 2006 (the Report), we, Kirk A. Benson, Chief
Executive Officer of the Company, and Scott K. Sorensen, 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:

| | (i) |  | The
Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) of the           Securities
Exchange Act of 1934; and
| | --- |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

/s/ Kirk A. Benson Kirk A. Benson Chief Executive Officer November 22, 2006

/s/  Scott K. SorensenScott K. SorensenChief Financial OfficerNovember 22, 2006
From: Don DiCristofaro <DDiCristofaro@enernoc.com> To: Melanie King/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA

Cc: Rick Counihan <RCounihan@enernoc.com>
Date: 12/12/2012 10:55 PM Subject: Follow up re EDF Late Filed Comment

Melanie, This is a follow up to the conversation Rick Counihan and I had with you last Friday regarding your question about the bar chart on page 5 of the late filed comment made by the Environmental Defense Fund to the RICE NESHAP docket on December 3, 2012 (EPA-HQ-OAR-2008-0708-1482). This bar chart was created by EnerNOC using PJM supplied data for economic demand response (DR) that has entered the PJM market as a

result of FERC Order 745. The data shown is the DR from the PJM Economic Load Response Program. Any generators participating in this program must be permitted by the appropriate state/county for non-emergency engine use. This chart has nothing to do with engines participating in emergency demand response (e.g., the Emergency Load Response Program (ELRP) in PJM). Currently EnerNOC only has two sites with generators participating in the PJM Economic Load Response Program and all of the generators are natural-gas fired. Currently, EnerNOC only targets natural gas gens because other fuels are too expensive to run relative to current power prices (which are driven by low price of natural gas). Approximately 80 to 85% of EnerNOC’s portfolio in this DR program is from curtailment only (e.g., turning off equipment or turning down lights, AC, etc.). Please let me know if you have any questions or require additional information.

Don Don DiCristofaro, CCM – Air Quality Meteorologist Consultant EnerNOC, Inc. | 101 Federal Street, Suite 1100 | Boston, MA 02110 m: 617.834.8408 | f: 857.221.9464 DDiCristofaro@EnerNOC.com| www.EnerNOC.com
EnerNOC - get more from energy

This email and any information disclosed in connection herewith, whether written or oral, is the property of EnerNOC, Inc. and is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed. This email may contain information that is privileged, confidential or otherwise protected from disclosure. Distributing or copying any information contained in this email to anyone other than the intended recipient is strictly prohibited.
Exhibit 10.3

AMENDED AND RESTATED  EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT

This AMENDED AND RESTATED EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT (this "Agreement") is made and entered into as of the 17 day of September, 2003, by and between FIRST
HORIZON PHARMACEUTICAL CORPORATION, a Delaware corporation (the "Company") and PATRICK FOURTEAU ("Executive").

WITNESSETH:

WHEREAS, Executive is employed by the Company pursuant to the terms and conditions of that certain Employment Agreement dated May 16, 2003 between the
Company and Executive (the "Original Agreement"): and

WHEREAS,
the parties desire to amend and restate the terms and conditions of the Original Agreement, effective as of the date hereof;

NOW,
THEREFORE, in consideration of Executive's employment or continued employment, the covenants and mutual agreements set forth herein and other good and valuable consideration, the
receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties hereto do hereby agree as follows:



---



2

---



3

---



4

---



5

---



6

---



7

---





8

---





9

---



IN
WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Employment Agreement as of the day and year first above written.

| |  | EXECUTIVE:                                
| |  | ------------------------------------------
| |  | /s/ PATRICK FOURTEAUName: Patrick Fourteau
| |  | FIRST HORIZON PHARMACEUTICAL CORPORATION  
| |  | By:                                       
| |  | Its:                                      

10

---

QuickLinks
TradeOn Inc.: Exhibit 10.12 - Filed by newsfilecorp.com











Exhibit 10.12 


Summary of Loan (Credit) Contract of Maximum Amount 


Summary of Loan (Credit) Contract of Maximum Amount between Changzhou Wujin Best Cable Co., Ltd. (the “Company”) and Jiangsu Wujin Rural Commercial Bank (the “Creditor”) dated August 14,
2009. 


Main contents:

	
Contract number: 3218852009130017;

	
The Creditor will provide to the Company a credit with maximum amount of RMB 1.45 million for the period from August 14, 2009 to August 13, 2012;

	
Interest rate of loan: for short term loan (less than one year), the rate is fixed subject to each loan agreement to be signed; for loan term loan(more than one year), the rate shall be floating rate subject to adjust of benchmark rate published by
the People’s Bank. The interest shall be settled on a monthly basis.

	
The Creditor is entitled to adjust the credit at the discretion of the Creditor.

	
The Creditor’s approval shall be obtained in case of material change of the Company, including transfer of the significant assets, lease out, reform as a company limited by shares, joint operation, combination, merger, division, joint venture,
equity transfer, and any other activities which shall affect the realization of the Creditor’s rights hereunder

	
Breach of contract penalty: adjustment of credit, cancellation of unused credit, imposition of punitive interest, demand prepayment of loan and other measures;
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO. DS gee x tort
WESTERN DIVISION
W/28//8

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, :

Plaintiff, :
CASE NO. 1:18-po-00006
v.
MOTION TO DISMISS
SAMUEL HOLTON,
Defendant.

The United States moves to dismiss the above-captioned case.
Respectfully submitted,

BENJAMIN C. GLASSMAN
United States Attorney

s/ Timothy A. Landry
TIMOTHY A. LANDRY

Special Assistant United States Attorney
221 East Fourth Street, Suite 400
Cincinnati, Ohio 45202

Office: (513) 684-3711
Timothy.Landry@usdoj.gov
<PAGE>   1







                                                                      EXHIBIT 99



Report of Independent Public Accountants




To Applied Bioscience International Inc. and Subsidiaries:

         We have audited the consolidated balance sheet of Applied Bioscience
International Inc. (a Delaware corporation) and subsidiaries as of December 31,
1995 and the related consolidated statements of operations, stockholders' equity
and cash flows for each of the two years in the period ended December 31, 1995
prior to the restatement (and, therefore, are not presented herein) for the
merger accounted for as a pooling of interests transaction as described in Note
2 to the restated financial statements. These consolidated financial statements
are the responsibility of the company's management. Our responsibility is to
express an opinion on these consolidated financial statements based on our
audits.

         We conducted our audits in accordance with generally accepted auditing
standards. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain
reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material
misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting
the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. An audit also includes
assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by
management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation.
We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.

         In our opinion, the consolidated financial statements referred to above
present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of Applied
Bioscience International Inc. and subsidiaries as of December 31, 1995 and the
results of their operations and their cash flows for each of the two years in
the period ended December 31, 1995, in conformity with generally accepted
accounting principles.


                                               /s/ARTHUR ANDERSEN LLP



Washington, DC
February 22, 1996
From: Treggon Owens

Date: Monday, August 17, 2015 at 5:06 PM

To: "333exemptions@faa.gov"

Subject: FAA-2014-0353 Exemption-11066 

Dear Administrator:

Docket# FAA-2014-0353

Exemption# 11066

Aircraft Addition-2015-0817

This letter is to submit new aircraft to our ‘333 Exemption’ referenced above. Aerial MOB llc herby requests 

an Amendment to the Exemption to allow an additional type of unmanned aircraft system (UAS) that fully 

complies with the conditions of the Exemption.

Aerial MOB llc wishes to operate the following new aircraft under our exemption: Freefly Alta, DJI Inspire, 

Aerial MOB Mini Racer, Aerial MOB Light Lifter Mark II, Aerial MOB Long Endurance, Aerial MOB Heavy Lifter 

Mark II Attached hereto, and submitted as a confidential document, is the Flight Operations and Procedures 

Manual (FOPM) for the additional UAS’s. All operations of the additional UAS will be in full compliance with 

the terms of the Exemption.

As this is an amendment to an existing exemption asking for only the addition of another type of unmanned 

aerial vehicle, Aerial MOB llc respectfully submits that good cause exists so that notice does not need to be 

published in the Federal Register for the requested amendment. Please contact the undersigned should you 

have any question concerning this request for an amendment to the Exemption.

We are requesting that the included manuals are to be kept confidential. I have included the cover letter as a 

separate, signed PDF. Let me know if this is not acceptable. 

Thank you so much for your consideration.
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4266 Introduced in House (IH)]

111th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 4266

 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
at 4110 Almeda Road in Houston, Texas, as the ``George Thomas `Mickey' 
                     Leland Post Office Building''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           December 10, 2009

   Ms. Jackson-Lee of Texas (for herself, Mr. Edwards of Texas, Mr. 
 Gonzalez, Mr. Al Green of Texas, Mr. Hall of Texas, Mr. Hinojosa, Mr. 
   Cuellar, Mr. Doggett, Mr. Gene Green of Texas, Ms. Eddie Bernice 
 Johnson of Texas, Mr. Reyes, Mr. Ortiz, and Mr. Rodriguez) introduced 
 the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Oversight 
                         and Government Reform

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
at 4110 Almeda Road in Houston, Texas, as the ``George Thomas `Mickey' 
                     Leland Post Office Building''.

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

SECTION 1. GEORGE THOMAS ``MICKEY'' LELAND POST OFFICE BUILDING.

    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 4110 Almeda Road in Houston, Texas, shall be known and 
designated as the ``George Thomas `Mickey' Leland Post Office 
Building''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referred to 
in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``George 
Thomas `Mickey' Leland Post Office Building''.
                                 <all>
```
#### People v Flint Riggers and Erectors, Inc,

No. 90421.

In lieu of granting leave to appeal, the case is remanded to the Court of Appeals for consideration as on leave granted. MCR 7.302(F)(1). Court of Appeals No. 130181.