alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Executive privilege may properly be asserted with respect to the entire set of White House Counsel’s 

Office documents currently being withheld from the Committee on Government Reform and Oversight of the House of Representatives, pending a final Presidential decision on the matter. This 

would be a protective assertion of executive privilege designed to ensure the President’s ability 

to make a final decision, after consultation with the Attorney General, as to which specific documents are deserving of a conclusive claim of executive privilege.

May 8, 1996

THE PRESIDENT

THE W HITE HOUSE

My Dear M r. President: You have requested my legal advice as to whether 

executive privilege may properly be asserted in response to a subpoena issued 

to the Counsel to the President by the Committee on Government Reform and 

Oversight of the House of Representatives.

The subpoena covers a large volume of confidential White House Counsel’s 

Office documents. The Counsel to the President notified the Chairman of the Committee today that he was invoking the procedures of the standing directive governing consideration of whether to assert executive privilege, President Reagan’s 

memorandum of November 4, 1982, and that he specifically requested, pursuant 

to paragraph 5 of that directive, that the Committee hold its subpoena in abeyance 

pending a final Presidential decision on the matter. Memorandum for the Heads 

of Executive Departments and Agencies, Re: Procedures Governing Responses

to Congressional Requests for Information at 2 (Nov. 4, 1982). This request was 

necessitated by the deadline imposed by the Chairman, the volume of documents 

that must be specifically and individually reviewed for possible assertion of privilege and the need under the directive to consult with the Attorney General, on 

the basis of that review, before presenting the matter to the President for a final 

determination. The Chairman rejected the request and indicated that he intends 

to proceed with a Committee vote on the contempt citation tomorrow.

Based on these circumstances, it is my legal judgment that executive privilege 

may properly be asserted with respect to the entire set of White House Counsel’s 

Office documents currently being withheld from the Committee, pending a final 

Presidential decision on the matter. This would be a protective assertion of executive privilege designed to ensure your ability to make a final decision, after consultation with the Attorney General, as to which specific documents are deserving 

of a conclusive claim of executive privilege.

Sincerely,

JANET RENO 

Attorney General

Protective Assertion of Executive Privilege Regarding White

House Counsel’s Office Documents

1
1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

Case No. 1:18-cv-00326-MWM

 Judge Matthew W. McFarland

PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF PARTIAL CLASS 

ACTION SETTLEMENT WITH AON HEWITT RETIREMENT CONSULTING, INC.

Plaintiffs Wendy Berry, Lorri Hulings, and Kathleen Sammons (“Plaintiffs”), as 

representatives of the class previously certified by the Court (see Dkt. 82) and on behalf of the 

FirstGroup America, Inc. Retirement Savings Plan (the “Plan”), respectfully move this Court for 

an Order: (1) preliminarily approving the Settling Parties’ Class Action Settlement Agreement; 

(2) approving the proposed Notices of Settlement and authorizing distribution of the Notices; 

(3) scheduling a Fairness Hearing; and (4) granting such other relief as set forth in the proposed 

Preliminary Approval Order submitted herewith, including a preliminary bar order consistent with 

Paragraphs 2.4(g) of the Settlement Agreement.

This motion is made pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(e), and is based on the 

accompanying Memorandum of Law and authorities cited therein, the Declaration of Brock Specht 

and exhibits thereto, the Settling Parties’ Settlement Agreement, and all files, records, and 

proceedings in this matter.

Wendy Berry, Lorri Hulings, and Kathleen 

Sammons, individually and as representatives of a 

class of similarly situated persons, and on behalf of 

the FirstGroup America, Inc. Retirement Savings 

Plan,

Plaintiffs,

v.

FirstGroup America, Inc., FirstGroup America, Inc.

Employee Benefits Committee, and Aon Hewitt

Investment Consulting, Inc.,

Defendants.

Case: 1:18-cv-00326-MWM Doc #: 144 Filed: 12/12/22 Page: 1 of 3 PAGEID #: 12354
2

Aon Hewitt Investment Consulting, Inc. does not oppose Plaintiffs’ motion. 

Respectfully Submitted,

Dated: December 12, 2022 NICHOLS KASTER, PLLP

By: /s/ Brock J. Specht

Paul J. Lukas, admitted pro hac vice

Brock J. Specht, admitted pro hac vice

Matthew H. Morgan, admitted pro hac vice

Anna P. Prakash, admitted pro hac vice

Steven J. Eiden, admitted pro hac vice

Patricia C. Dana, admitted pro hac vice

4700 IDS Center

80 S 8th Street

Minneapolis, MN 55402

Telephone: 612-256-3200

Facsimile: 612-338-4878

lukas@nka.com

bspecht@nka.com

morgan@nka.com

aprakash@nka.com

seiden@nka.com

pdana@nka.com

FREKING MYERS & REUL

George M. Reul, Jr. (OH 0069992)

600 Vine Street, Suite 900

Cincinnati, Ohio 45202

Telephone: 513-721-1975

Facsimile: (513) 651-2570

greul@fmr.law

ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFFS

Case: 1:18-cv-00326-MWM Doc #: 144 Filed: 12/12/22 Page: 2 of 3 PAGEID #: 12355
3

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I, Brock J. Specht, hereby certify that I served this document on counsel of record via ECF 

on December 12, 2022. 

/s/ Brock J. Specht 

Brock J. Specht

Case: 1:18-cv-00326-MWM Doc #: 144 Filed: 12/12/22 Page: 3 of 3 PAGEID #: 12356
|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 Palomar Medical Technologies, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended
September 30, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), I, Joseph P. Caruso, and I, Paul S. Weiner
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to our
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.
|--- |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by
the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its Staff upon request.
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|                                      | 
|------------------------------------- | 
|Dated: November 2, 2007               | 
|                                      | 
|                                      | 
|By:/s/ Joseph P. Caruso               | 
|Joseph P. Caruso                      | 
|President and Chief Executive Officer | 
|                                      | 

|                        | 
|----------------------- | 
|Dated: November 2, 2007 | 
|                        | 
|                        | 
|By:/s/ Paul S. Weiner   | 
|Paul S. Weiner          | 
|Chief Financial Officer | 
|                        | 

|
|
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO**

**18 U.S.C. §1350,**

**AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906 OF THESARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

Inconnection with the Quarterly Report of HF Financial Corp. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Qfor the quarterly period ended September 30, 2009, as filed with theSecurities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, CurtisL. Hage, Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company,certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge:

 

(1)                                  The Report fullycomplies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

(2)                                  The informationcontained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

 
|   | /s/ Curtis L. Hage                  |
|--------|-------------------------------------|
|   | Curtis L. Hage, Chairman, President |
|   | and Chief Executive Officer         |
|   |                                |
|   | Date:                               | November 16,  2009 |

 

 

----

*                                         A signed original of this written statementrequired by Section 906 has been provided to HF Financial Corp. and willbe retained by HF Financial Corp. and furnished to the Securities and ExchangeCommission or its staff upon request.

 

1

----
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 on Form 10-Q of Da-Lite Screen Company, Inc. (the Company) for the period ending June 27, 2008
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Richard E. Lundin, as Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to and for purposes of 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; 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/ Richard E. LundinRichard E. LundinChief Executive OfficerJuly 29, 2008




24
SDOH, 7/03

PAYMENT SCHEDULE FOR COURT-ORDERED MONETARY PENALTIES

Name: Aaron E. Luke Docket #: 3:18CR73-02
Address: 1902 East 120th Street, Down Judge: The Honorable Thomas M.
Cleveland, OH 44106 Rose, U.S. District Judge

You have been ordered by the United States District Court to pay a special assessment of $100.00,

restitution of $3.500,000.00, and/or a fine of $N/A, as a condition of your supervised release.

Probation Officer’s Recommendation:
It is the recommendation of the Probation Officer that the Court order a payment schedule in the about of

$75.00 per month, commencing in June of 2021. This is based on the following analysis of your ability to

pay: Please see included memorandum.

Cure A Sebufaksy 6/3/21
Laura A. Sebulsky Date
Senior U. S. Probation Officer

Order of the Court: The Court orders minimum monthly payments of $75.00 to commence in June of

2021 and to continue until the debt is satisfied or the Court alters the payment schedule.

Gf tl 2

Signafure of Judicial Officer Date
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

WESTERN DIVISION
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Plaintiff 4 Case No. 3:18-MJ-92 (1)
vs. HONORABLE SHARON L. OVINGTON

CRAWFORD, JOSHUA

Defendant

ORDER AMENDING BOND CONDITIONS

For good cause shown, the Court hereby amends the bond conditions filed in this matter on
March 29, 2018 and adds the following condition:

1. The defendant must submit to supervision and report for supervision report to the 200
W. 2" St. Dayton, Ohio, telephone 937-512-1430, no later than as directed.

All other bond conditions remain in full force and effect.

Date: 5/4/2018 Alec LM a

HONORABLE SHARON L. OVINGTON
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                           FEB-1-1997
<PERIOD-START>                              FEB-4-1996
<PERIOD-END>                                FEB-1-1997
<CASH>                                           7,022
<SECURITIES>                                    54,084
<RECEIVABLES>                                    5,561
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                    100,442
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               172,843
<PP&E>                                         169,740
<DEPRECIATION>                                  74,356
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 272,333
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           20,889
<BONDS>                                         58,853
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                     20,000
<COMMON>                                            58
<OTHER-SE>                                     150,350
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   272,333
<SALES>                                        441,243
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               441,243
<CGS>                                          322,110
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  322,110
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               111,218
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               5,003
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  4,543
<INCOME-TAX>                                     1,200
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     3,343
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .15
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .15
        

</TABLE>
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

EASTERN DIVISION

Frank K.C. Hertel, Sr.,

Plaintiff,

v. Case No. 2:18-cv-179

Judge Everett H. Krueger,

et al.,

Defendants.

OPINION AND ORDER

This is an action filed by plaintiff pursuant to 42 U.S.C.

§1983 against Delaware County, Ohio, and various state officials

and judges who where involved in plaintiff’s state criminal

prosecution and subsequent related proceedings. In a July 5, 2018,

report and recommendation on an initial screen under 28 U.S.C.

§1915(e), the magistrate judge recommended that plaintiff’s claims

be dismissed on several grounds, including Eleventh Amendment

immunity, judicial and prosecutorial immunity, the statute of

limitations bar, the unavailability under §1983 of the relief

sought, and waiver. By order dated August 16, 2018, this court

adopted the report and recommendation and dismissed this action

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) for failure to state a

claim for which relief may be granted.

On August 28, 2018, plaintiff filed a “MOTION TO AMEND OPINION

AND ORDER” which cited Fed. R. Civ. P. 52(b). On August 29, 2018,

the magistrate judge issued a report and recommendation concerning

that motion. The magistrate judge concluded that plaintiff failed

to state grounds for relief under Rule 52(b). The magistrate judge

also analyzed plaintiff’s motion as a motion to alter or amend

judgment under Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e) and a motion for relief from
judgment under Rule 60(b), and concluded that no basis for relief

had been shown under those rules. The magistrate judge found no

reason to reconsider this court’s earlier decision and recommended

that the motion be denied.

The report and recommendation specifically advised the parties

that objections to the report and recommendation were due within

fourteen days, and that the failure to object to the report and

recommendation would result in a waiver of the right to de novo

review by the district judge and a waiver of the right to appeal

the judgment of the district court. Doc. 10, p. 5. The time

period for filing objections to the report and recommendation has

expired, and no objections to the report and recommendation have

been filed.

The court agrees with the report and recommendation (Doc. 10),

and it is hereby adopted. Plaintiff’s motion (Doc. 9) to amend

this court’s opinion and order of August 16, 2018, is denied. 

Plaintiff’s motion (Doc. 1) for leave to proceed in forma pauperis

is denied as moot.

Date: September 20, 2018 s/James L. Graham 

 James L. Graham

 United States District Judge

2
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

6/24/19

 Southern District of Ohio

Patricia Knight

3:18-cv-147

Commissioner of Social Security

✔ Judgment in favor of Plaintiff and against Defendant; reversing the ALJ's non-disability finding as

unsupported by substantial evidence; remanding the case under the fourth sentence of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g)

for further proceedings

✔ Michael J. Newman
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### National Science Foundation

The National Science Board's (NSB) Committee on Oversight hereby gives notice of the scheduling of a teleconference for the transaction of National Science Board business pursuant to the National Science Foundation Act and the Government in the Sunshine Act.

# TIME AND DATE: 

Wednesday, January 26, 2022, from 1:00-2:15 p.m. EST.

# PLACE: 

This meeting will be held by teleconference through the National Science Foundation.

# STATUS: 

Parts of this meeting will be open to the public. The rest of the meeting will be closed to the public.

# MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: 

Committee Chair's opening remarks; Approval of prior Committee minutes; Discussion of Committee plans for the remainder of the NSB term; Committee Chair's opening remarks; Presentation on NSF's Annual Performance Report, and Committee discussion.

# PORTIONS OPEN TO THE PUBLIC:

 Between 1:00-1:30 p.m. EST, the following matters will be considered: Committee Chair's opening remarks; Approval of prior Committee minutes; Discussion of Committee plans for the remainder of the NSB term.

      ( print page 3591)    

# PORTIONS CLOSED TO THE PUBLIC:

 Between 1:30-2:15 p.m. EST, the following matters will be considered: Committee Chair's opening remarks; Presentation on NSF's Annual Performance Report, and Committee discussion.

# CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: 

                        Point of contact for this meeting is: Chris Blair, 703/292-7000. Members of the public may observe the public portion of the meeting, which will be streamed to the NSB YouTube channel. A link to the YouTube page can be found at                         *https://www.nsf.gov/​nsb/​meetings/​index.jsp#up.*

Chris Blair,

Executive Assistant to the National Science Board Office.

[FR Doc. 2022-01380 Filed 1-20-22; 4:15 pm]

BILLING CODE 7555-01-P
November 16, 2015

Attn: U. S. Department of Transportation Docket Operations West Building Ground Floor, Room w12
- 140 1200 New Jersey

Ave, SE Washington, DC 20590 RE: STEVEN LIGHTCAP REQUEST AN EXEMPTI ON FROM THE REQUIREMENTS OF TI TL E 14 OF THE CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS SECTIONS 61.113(a) & (b), 91.7(a), 91.121, 91.151(b), 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(1) & (a)(2), AND 91.417(a) & (b) CONCERNI NG COMMERCI AL OPERATION OF DJ I Phantom 3 and Blade 350 QX3 UNMANNED AI RCRAFT SYSTEMS PURSUANT TO SECTIO N 333 OF THE FAA MODERNIZATION AND REFORM ACT OF 2012 (PUBLIC LAW 112
- 95) Addendum
- I would like to add the following UAS to my exemption, DJIINSPI RE ONE, DJ I S900, DJIS1000. To be included with my original UAS's DJ I PHANTOM 3, and BLADE 350QX3. These UAS's will be used for Aerial Photography and Videography , Inspection and Patrolling, Agriculture Documenting, Wildlife and Forestry Monitoring, Survey ing, Search and Rescue, Disaster and catastrophe events, Motion Picture Filming, Aerial Im aging/Mapping, Cinematograph y, Roof Inspections. All of the rules set b y the FAA will be followed with extreme precaution to the safet y of the public. All pre
- flight checklist will be excuted. All UAS's will be used in accordance with the FAA rules and regulations. Thank y ou for y our time and please call me with any questions.

Steven L ig htcap Jr
- Operator 11532 Crescent Pines Blvd. Clermont, FL34711 352
- 267
- 9132 stevelightcap@y ahoo.com
Case: 3:18-mj-00013-SLO Doc #: 1 Filed: 01/10/18 Page: 1 of 10 PAGEID #: 1
Case: 3:18-mj-00013-SLO Doc #: 1 Filed: 01/10/18 Page: 2 of 10 PAGEID #: 2
Case: 3:18-mj-00013-SLO Doc #: 1 Filed: 01/10/18 Page: 3 of 10 PAGEID #: 3
Case: 3:18-mj-00013-SLO Doc #: 1 Filed: 01/10/18 Page: 4 of 10 PAGEID #: 4
Case: 3:18-mj-00013-SLO Doc #: 1 Filed: 01/10/18 Page: 5 of 10 PAGEID #: 5
Case: 3:18-mj-00013-SLO Doc #: 1 Filed: 01/10/18 Page: 6 of 10 PAGEID #: 6
Case: 3:18-mj-00013-SLO Doc #: 1 Filed: 01/10/18 Page: 7 of 10 PAGEID #: 7
Case: 3:18-mj-00013-SLO Doc #: 1 Filed: 01/10/18 Page: 8 of 10 PAGEID #: 8
Case: 3:18-mj-00013-SLO Doc #: 1 Filed: 01/10/18 Page: 9 of 10 PAGEID #: 9
Case: 3:18-mj-00013-SLO Doc #: 1 Filed: 01/10/18 Page: 10 of 10 PAGEID #: 10