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

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

WESTERN DIVISION AT DAYTON

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, :

Case No. 3:18CR0040

Plaintiff, :

 vs. : District Judge Thomas M. Rose

Magistrate Judge Sharon L. Ovington

MICHAEL LEE BOWMAN, JR., :

Defendant. :

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS

This case came on for hearing on May 15, 2018. The United States was

represented by Assistant United States Attorney Amy Smith and Defendant was

represented by Mr. Thomas W. Anderson.

The parties have entered into a plea agreement which has been filed of record.

(Doc. # 28). The undersigned carefully inquired of Defendant regarding his understanding

of the agreement as well as his competence to understand the agreement. Having fully

inquired, the undersigned Judicial Officer finds that Defendant’s tendered plea of guilty

to Count 1 of the Information is knowing, intelligent and voluntary. Based on the

statement of facts as set forth in the plea colloquy the undersigned finds that there is a

sufficient factual basis for a finding of guilt as to the count.

It is accordingly recommended that the Court accept the plea of guilty to Count 1
of the Information and find Defendant guilty as charged in such Count of Distribution of

Child Pornography in violation of Title 18 U.S.C. §§ 2252(a)(2) and (b)(1).

Pending the Court’s acceptance of Defendant’s pleas, Defendant has been referred

to the Probation Department for a pre-sentence investigation.

May 21, 2018 s/ Sharon L. Ovington 

Sharon L. Ovington

 United States Magistrate Judge
NOTICE REGARDING OBJECTIONS 

Pursuant to Fed. R. Crim. P. 59(b), any party may serve and file specific, written

objections to the proposed findings and recommendations within FOURTEEN days after

being served with this Report and Recommendations. Pursuant to Fed. R. Crim. P. 49(c)

and Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(d), this period is extended to SEVENTEEN days because this

Report is being served by one of the methods of service listed in Fed. R. Civ. P.

5(b)(2)(C), (D), (E), or (F). Such objections shall specify the portions of the Report

objected to and shall be accompanied by a memorandum of law in support of the

objections. If the Report and Recommendation is based in whole or in part upon matters

occurring of record at an oral hearing, the objecting party shall promptly arrange for the

transcription of the record, or such portions of it as all parties may agree upon or the

Magistrate Judge deems sufficient, unless the assigned District Judge otherwise directs. A

party may respond to another party’s objections within FOURTEEN days after being

served with a copy thereof. 

Failure to make objections in accordance with this procedure may forfeit rights on

appeal. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985); United States v. Walters, 638 F.2d 947,

949-50 (6th Cir. 1981).
#### Moore v. Horsley.

Actiox : *When if accrues on nofe.*

An action on a note payable on or before a particular day can not be brought until after that day.

*164APPEAL from *Benton*Circuit Court.

Hon. J. Frank "Wilson, Special Judge.

*JS. 8. McDaniel*for appellant.

The note was not due, and the suit was prematurely brought. *Pomeroy on Rem, etc., sec. 519; Gantt’s Digest, sec. 568; Wait’s Action and Def., vol. 1, p. 6^0; Story Prom. Notes, Ifti ed., sec. §85; 17 Ark., ^§.*

Smith, J.

The plaintiff sued July 1, 1882, and obtained judgment upon an instrument for the payment of a certain sum of money on or before the first day of July, 1882. The maker had the whole of that day to pay it, and could not be sued until the next day. *Zachery v. Brown, 17 Ark., 442.*

Reversed and remanded, with directions to abate the action as premature.
Case: 2:18-cv-00272-MHW-CMV Doc #: 4-1 Filed: 03/29/18 Page: 1 of 1  PAGEID #: 48
exhibit04_20.htm - Generated by SEC Publisher for SEC Filing



  





 


EXHIBIT 4.20 



Summary of Sugarcane Purchase and Sale Agreement


 


Parties: Brenco – Companhia Brasileira de Energia Renovável, as Purchaser, and Brasilagro – Companhia Brasileira de Propriedades Agrícolas, as Seller.


Purpose: Purchase and Sale of the sugarcane owned by the Seller by virtue of the agricultural sub partnership agreement and/or the instrument for regulation of rights and obligations between farmer partners.


Duration: The Agreement shall remain in force until the end of crop 2025/2026.


Final price: The price that the seller will receive by the sugar cane sell will be determined at the end of the respective crop year, based on the formula: PF = QC x QATR x VATR 


Wherein:


PF: means the price, in reais, that the buyer will pay to the seller on each crop year 


QC: means the total volume of sugar cane delivered to the seller on each crop year, measured in tons


QATR: means the weighted average number of TOTAL RECOVERABLE SUGAR CONTENT (ATR) measured in kilograms, extracted in a ton of sugar cane under the harvest


VATR: means the fixed value and/or payment based on the Regulation for the Business of Purchase and Sale of Sugarcane in the State of São Paulo (CONSECANA-SP) in the Plant Mix.


 


____________________________________________________________________


BRENCO – COMPANHIA BRASILEIRA DE ENERGIA RENOVÁVEL




	

   /s/ Luiz Paulo Sant’Anna


   Agro-industrial Superintendent
	

   /s/    Celso Luiz Tavares Ferreira


   Vice Chief Operating Officer





 


_____________________________________________________________________


BRASILAGRO COMPANHIA BRASILEIRA DE PROPRIEDADES AGRÍCOLAS


	

   /s/ André Guillaumon


   Chief Operating Officer 
	

   /s/ Gustavo Javier Lopez


   Chief Administrative Officer

	

    


    


    


    


   WITNESSES: 


   /s/Ana Luisa Gomes Kós Duboc de Almeida


   /s/Ana Carolina Carpegiani
Order entered August 9 , 2013

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05
- 12
- 01433
- CR GLENA EDDINGTON, Appellant

V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the 291st Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. F
- 1271251
- U



### O RDER In this case, appellant raises an issue related to the costs assessed against her. The record, however, does not contain a cost bill or other document with an itemized list of costs assessed in this case. Accordingly, we ORDE R the Dallas County District Clerk to file, within FIFTEEN DAYS of the date of this order, a supplemental clerk’s record containing a detailed itemization of the costs assessed in this case, including but not limited to, specific court costs, fees, and cou rt appointed attorney fees. In accordance with Texas Code of Criminal Procedure article 103.001, the cost bill shall be signed by the officer who charged the cost or the officer who is entitled to receive payment for the cost. We further ORDER that the s upplemental clerk’s record include adocument explaining any and all abbreviations used to designate a particular fee, cost, or court

appointed attorney fee.
We DIRECT the Clerk to send copies of this order, by electronic transmission, to Gary Fitzsimmons, Dallas County District Clerk; Dallas County District Clerk’s Office, Criminal Records Division; and to counsel for all parties.

/s/ DAVID EVANS JUSTICE
AO 450 (Rev. 11/11) Judgment in a Civil Action

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

for the

__________ District of __________

)

)

)

)

)

Plaintiff

v. Civil Action No.

Defendant

JUDGMENT IN A CIVIL ACTION

The court has ordered that (check one):

u the plaintiff (name) recover from the

defendant (name) the amount of

dollars ($ ), which includes prejudgment

interest at the rate of %, plus post judgment interest at the rate of % per annum, along with costs.

u the plaintiff recover nothing, the action be dismissed on the merits, and the defendant (name)

recover costs from the plaintiff (name)

.

u other:

.

This action was (check one):

u tried by a jury with Judge presiding, and the jury has

rendered a verdict.

u tried by Judge without a jury and the above decision

was reached.

u decided by Judge on a motion for

.

Date: CLERK OF COURT

Signature of Clerk or Deputy Clerk

9/25/2019

 Southern District of Ohio

Megan Free

3:18-CV-15

Commissioner of Social Security

✔ Judgment in favor of Plaintiff and against Defendant; case is remanded under sentence four of 42 U.S.C. §

405(g) for further proceedings; case terminated in the docket of this Court.

✔ Sharon L. Ovington

Decision and Entry
#### Jones v. The State.

Time : *Computation of.*

When a certain number of days are required to intervene between two acts the day of one, only, of the acts is to be counted, but when a statute requires notice of at least a certain number of days before an act, this me^ns so many full days, and the day of the notice and the act are both excluded from the computation.

APPEAL from *Yell*Circuit Court.

Hon. G. S. Cunningham, Circuit Judge.

£. *R. Allen and T. M. Gibson,*for appellant.

The use of the words “ at least” means three clear days, as held in the English and Texas cases cited by the Attorney General.

*G. B. Moore, Attorney General,*for the State.

"When a certain number of days are required to intervene between two acts, the day of only one of the acts may be counted. *Gantt’s Digest, see. 5648.*

But in England and Texas it has been held that the words “ *at*least” mean so many clear or full days. *Robinson’s Practice, vol. 1, ch. 78,*pp. *430-1; 1 Texas, 107.*

Smith, J.

Jones was convicted upon an indictment which charged him with a failure to work upon the public roads. He was subject to road duty; but he alleges that he had not received timely notice of the proposed working. The statute under which he was indicted *(Gantt’s Digest, sec. 5324)*provides for “ at least three days’ actual notice.” He was warned late on Saturday evening to attend and work on the following Tuesday morning. The court charged that the notice was sufficient.

*94Section 5648 of Gantt’s Digest directs that when a certain number of days are required to intervene between two acts, the day of only one of the acts is to be counted. This is> the common practice everywhere. But it seems that when a statute requires notice of at least a certain number of days before a meeting, this means so many clear days ; that is, the day of notice and the day of meeting are both excluded from the computation. Such is the rule in England. The cases are collected in *1 Robinson’s Practice, ch. 78, pp. 430-1;*also in *Bishop on Written Laws, p. 110.*

The English rule was followed in *O’ Conner v. Towns, 1*Texas, *107.*But in *State v. Gasconade, 33 Mo., 102,*the court, for the purpose of avoiding a forfeiture, departed from it; otherwise it would have been adhered to.

The defendant had but two full days’ notice, when by law he was entitled to three.

Reversed and remanded for further proceedings.
**EXHIBIT 99.2**

 

**CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO****18 U.S.C. §1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

 

In connection with theQuarterly Report of HF Financial Corp. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for thenine months ended March 31, 2003, as filed with the Securities and ExchangeCommission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Darrel L. Posegate, ExecutiveVice President and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Actof 2002, that to the best of my knowledge:

 

(1)     The Report fully complieswith the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Actof 1934; and

 

(2)     The information containedin the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financialcondition and results of operations of the Company.

 

 
|   |    /s/  Darrel L. Posegate                                 |                                              |
|--------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------|
|   | Darrel  L. Posegate, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer |                                              |
|   |                                                                      |                                              |
|   | Date:                                                                     |       May 14,  2003 |   |
|        |                                                                           |                                                   |  |

 

 

A signed original of this written statement required by Section906 has been provided to H.F. Financial Corp. and will be retained by H.F.Financial Corp. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission orits staff upon request.

 

----
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 02-40780 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus AMADO PEREZ-AVALOS, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. B-02-CR-14-ALL

-------------------- December 12, 2002 Before JOLLY, JONES, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Amado Perez-Avalos appeals the 30-month sentence imposed following his guilty plea to a charge of illegal re-entry after having been deported following an aggravated felony conviction in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. Perez-Avalos argues that the sentencing provisions of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(1) and (b)(2) are unconstitutional in light of Apprendi v. New Jersey , 530 U.S. 466 (2000). He concedes that this argument is foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v. United States , 523 U.S. 224 (1998), but heNo. 02-40780 -2- seeks to preserve the issue for Supreme Court review. Apprendi did not overrule Almendarez-Torres
. See Apprendi , 530 U.S. at 489-90; United States v. Dabeit , 231 F.3d 979, 984 (5th Cir. 2000). This court must follow the precedent set in Almendarez-Torres "unless and until the Supreme Court itself determines to overrule it." Dabeit , 231 F.3d at 984 (internal quotation and citation omitted). AFFIRMED.
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 on Form 10-Q of American Superconductor Corporation (the
Company) for the period ended September 30, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the undersigned, David A. Henry, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby
certifies, 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 results of operations of the Company.



|                 |  |  |  |                        
|---------------- |  |  |  | -----------------------
|                 |  | 
|November 9, 2007 |  |  |  | /s/    DAVID A.
HENRY  
|                 |  |  |  | David A. Henry         
|                 |  |  |  | Chief Financial Officer
III 

116TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. RES. 505 

Expressing the sense of the Senate that the United States will continue 

to provide support to international partners to help prevent and stop 

the spread of the coronavirus. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

FEBRUARY 13, 2020 

Mr. CASSIDY submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the 

Committee on Foreign Relations 

RESOLUTION 

Expressing the sense of the Senate that the United States 

will continue to provide support to international partners 

to help prevent and stop the spread of the coronavirus. 

Whereas an outbreak of the coronavirus, known as ‘‘COVID19’’, was first detected in Wuhan, China, and was reported by China to the World Health Organization on 

December 31, 2019; 

Whereas the characteristics of the coronavirus, such as the 

way the virus is transmitted and the ability of the virus 

to rapidly spread, have raised concerns among experts 

that the virus may have the potential to become a pandemic; 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
2 

•SRES 505 IS 

Whereas the World Health Organization declared that the 

outbreak of the coronavirus constitutes a public health 

emergency of international concern; 

Whereas the medical facilities in China have been overwhelmed; 

Whereas the coronavirus has infected tens of thousands of 

people in China and hundreds more people worldwide; 

Whereas the coronavirus has infected more than a dozen citizens of the United States; 

Whereas the United States Government has pledged the support of the United States in combating the coronavirus; 

Whereas experts in the United States Government, including 

public health experts from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, should join the World Health Organization in efforts to stop the spread of the coronavirus 

in China; and 

Whereas ending the spread of the coronavirus is in the best 

interest of people at home in the United States and 

abroad: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That— 

2 (1) it is the sense of the Senate that— 

3 (A) the United States will continue to pro4 vide support to international partners to help 

5 prevent and stop the spread of the coronavirus; 

6 and 

7 (B) the United States stands in solidarity 

8 with the people of China and other countries 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
3 

•SRES 505 IS 

1 around the world who are suffering from the 

2 coronavirus; and 

3 (2) the Senate encourages the United States 

4 Government to continue to work together with the 

5 World Health Organization and other countries on 

6 the goal of preventing the coronavirus from taking 

7 more lives. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 15 (Monday, January 24, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Page 3538]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-01435]


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

FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION


Sunshine Act Meeting

TIME AND DATE: Thursday, January 27, 2022 at 10:00 a.m.

PLACE: Virtual Meeting. Note: Because of the COVID-19 pandemic, we will 
conduct the open meeting virtually. If you would like to access the 
meeting, see the instructions below.

STATUS: This meeting will be open to the public. To access the virtual 
meeting, go to the Commission's website www.fec.gov and click on the 
banner to be taken to the meeting page.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: 
Draft Advisory Opinion 2021-13: Matthew P. Hoh
Proposed Rule of Agency Procedure Concerning Foreign State Respondents
Audit Division Recommendation Memorandum on the Connecticut Democratic 
State Central Committee (A19-19)
Proposed Final Audit Report on the Republican Party of Minnesota--
Federal (A19-09)
Audit Division Recommendation Memorandum on the Democracy Engine, Inc., 
PAC (A19-18)
Management and Administrative Matters

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: Judith Ingram, Press Officer, 
telephone: (202) 694-1220.
    Authority: Government in the Sunshine Act, 5 U.S.C. 552b.

Laura E. Sinram,
Acting Secretary and Clerk of the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2022-01435 Filed 1-20-22; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 6715-01-P
Menley & James, Inc.
100 Tournament Drive
Horsham, PA 19044

October 1, 1996

Securities and Exchange Commission
450 5th Street, N.W.
Judiciary Plaza
Washington, D.C. 20549

Ladies and Gentlemen:

     Pursuant to regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission,
submitted herewith on behalf of Menley & James, Inc. (the "Company") is 
Amendment number 1 to the Company's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for
the fiscal quarter ended June 30, 1996.  This Amendment includes Exhibit
number 27 - Financial Data Schedule, which is submitted electronically
for information only and not filed.

  This information is being submitted by direct transmission to the 
Commission's EDGAR System.

Sincerely,


William W. Yeager
Chief Financial Officer


                             SIGNATURE

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the 
registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the 
undersigned thereunto duly authorized.

                                              MENLEY & JAMES, INC.

                                              William W. Yeager

                                              William W. Yeager
                                                Chief Financial Officer
                                                  (and duly authorized
                                                   officer of the registrant)

Date:  October 1, 1996
EXHIBIT 10.2


                                  STATEMENT OF
                              NETBLOO MEDIA, LTD.,
                                AND JONATHAN LINT
                                      AS TO
                       THE JOINT FILING OF SCHEDULE 13D/A

We, the Undersigned,  hereby consent to the joint filing with the Securities and
Exchange Commission ("SEC") of the Schedule 13D/A, dated October 28, 2015 on our
behalf by Jonathan Lint.

Date:  October 28, 2015




                                               NETBLOO MEDIA, LTD.


                                               /s/ Jonathan Lint
                                               ---------------------------------
                                               Jonathan Lint, Manager




                                               JONATHAN LINT, INDIVIDUAL

                                               /s/ Jonathan Lint
                                               ---------------------------------
                                               Jonathan Lint, Individual
|                       |   | P.A.M.      TRANSPORTATION SERVICES, INC.             |   |
|----------------------------|--------|-------------------------------------------------------|--------|
|                       |   |                                                  |   |
| Dated:      March 13, 2009 | By:    | /s/      Robert W. Weaver                             |   |
|                       |   | ROBERT      W. WEAVER                                 |   |
|                       |   | President      and Chief Executive Officer            |   |
|                       |   | (principal      executive officer)                    |   |
|                       |   |                                                  |   |
| Dated:      March 13, 2009 | By:    | /s/      Larry J. Goddard                             |   |
|                       |   | LARRY      J. GODDARD                                 |   |
|                       |   | Vice      President-Finance, Chief Financial Officer, |   |
|                       |   | Secretary      and Treasurer                          |   |
|                       |   | (principal      accounting and financial officer)     |   |
|                       |   |                                                  |   |
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

EASTERN DIVISION

NOBLE ALIM EL BEY,

Plaintiff, Case No. 2:18-cv-522

Chief Judge Edmund A. Sargus, Jr.
v. Magistrate Judge Kimberly A. Jolson

FRANKLIN COUNTY
MUNICIPAL COURT, et al.,

Defendants.

ORDER

On July 10, 2018, the Magistrate Judge issued a Report and Recommendation (ECF No.
8) in this case recommending that the action be dismissed for want of prosecution. The Report
and Recommendation advised the parties that failure to object within fourteen days would result
in a waiver of review, The time period for objections has run and no party has objected to the
Report and Recommendation. Accordingly, the Report and Recommendation is ADOPTED, and

the Clerk is DIRECTED to DISMISS without prejudice Plaintiff's Complaint. (ECF No. 7.)

IT IS SO ORDERED.
_ak7-300t Pc
DATE EDMUNDA. SARGUS, JR.

CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE