alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

ANGELA STEWART,

Appellant,

v.

RCS RECOVERY SERVICES, LLC,

Appellee.

No. 4D20-795

[December 3, 2020]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm 

Beach County; Lisa S. Small, Judge; L.T. Case No. 502017CA012443.

Christopher J. Donnelly of C.J. Donnelly Law Offices, PLLC, Ft.

Lauderdale, for appellant.

Hugh Shafritz and Aaron F. Miller of Shafritz and Associates, PA, Delray 

Beach, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

LEVINE, C.J., MAY and ARTAU, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
Exhibit
32.2





Certification
of Principal Financial Officer


Pursuant
to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C §1350)











I, Lori
A. Jones, of Analytical Surveys, Inc., certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:





(1)  the Quarterly
Report on Form 10-QSB for the quarterly period ended December 31, 2007 (the
“Report”) which this statement accompanies 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 Analytical Surveys,
Inc.








Dated: February 8, 2008





/s/ Lori A.
Jones


Lori A.
Jones


Principal
Financial Officer
Darrell Hoemann Photography 

Business Technology Center 

701 Devonshire Drive 

Champaign, IL 61820 

217-369-1860 

dhoemann@mac.com 

April 4, 2016 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION 

DOCKET MANAGEMENT SYSTEM 

1200 NEW JERSEY AVE., SE 

WASHINGTON, DC 20590 

REFERENCE: Regulatory Docket No. FAA-2015-4553 

Dear Madam or Sir:

Darrell Hoemann Photography (hereinafter the Petitioner) has been granted an Exemption in 

Regulatory Docket No. FAA-2015-4553 (hereinafter the Exemption) from 14 CFR §§ 61.23(a) and 

(c), 61.101(e)(4) and (5), 61.113(a), 61.315(a), 91.7(a), 91.119(c), 91.121, 91.151(a)(1), 

91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(1) and (2), and 91.417(a) and (b), to the extent necessary to 

allow the Petitioner to operate a UAS to perform aerial data collection and closed set motion 

picture and filming. 

The Petitioner respectfully requests an Amendment to this Exemption to additionally operate 

any aircraft identified on the List of Approved Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS) under Section 

333 at Regulatory Docket No. FAA-2007-3330 at www.regulations.gov, when weighing less than 

55 pounds including payload. The Petitioner understands that proposed operations of any 

aircraft not on the list currently posted to the above docket will require a new petition or a 

petition to amend this exemption. All operations of the additional UAS that are currently on 

the List of Approved Unmanned Aerial Systems will be in full compliance with the existing 

terms of the Exemption. 

As this is an Amendment to an existing Exemption asking only for the addition of other types of 

Unmanned Aerial Systems, Darrell Hoemann Photography respectfully submits that good cause 

exists so that notice does not need to be published in the Federal Register for the requested 

Amendment.

Please feel free to contact the undersigned should you have any question or concerns 

concerning this request for an amendment to the Exemption.

Sincerely,

Darrell Hoemann, owner
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from
unaudited condensed consolidated balance sheets, statements of operations
and statements of cash flows and is qualified in its entirety by reference
to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-29-1997
<CASH>                                         107,000
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                               10,104,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                 14,108,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            25,685,000
<PP&E>                                      17,320,000
<DEPRECIATION>                               7,480,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              36,524,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        7,168,000
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        68,000
<OTHER-SE>                                  19,008,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                36,524,000
<SALES>                                     21,034,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            21,034,000
<CGS>                                       16,193,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               19,829,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             388,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                817,000
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            817,000
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   817,000
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .14
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .14
        

</TABLE>
II 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1328 

To clarify the rights of Indians and Indian Tribes on Indian lands under 

the National Labor Relations Act. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

APRIL 27, 2023 

Mr. MORAN (for himself, Mr. DAINES, Mr. RISCH, Mr. CRAMER, Mr. HOEVEN, 

Mr. ROUNDS, Mr. CRAPO, Mr. THUNE, Mr. MULLIN, and Mr. 

LANKFORD) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Indian Affairs 

A BILL 

To clarify the rights of Indians and Indian Tribes on Indian 

lands under the National Labor Relations Act. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Tribal Labor Sov5 ereignty Act of 2023’’. 

6 SEC. 2. DEFINITION OF EMPLOYER. 

7 Section 2 of the National Labor Relations Act (29 

8 U.S.C. 152) is amended— 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 1328 IS

1 (1) in paragraph (2), by inserting ‘‘or any In2 dian Tribe, or any enterprise or institution owned 

3 and operated by an Indian Tribe and located on its 

4 Indian lands,’’ after ‘‘subdivision thereof,’’; and 

5 (2) by adding at the end the following: 

6 ‘‘(15) The term ‘Indian Tribe’ means any Indian 

7 Tribe, band, nation, pueblo, or other organized group or 

8 community which is recognized as eligible for the special 

9 programs and services provided by the United States to 

10 Indians because of their status as Indians. 

11 ‘‘(16) The term ‘Indian’ means any individual who 

12 is a member of an Indian Tribe. 

13 ‘‘(17) The term ‘Indian lands’ means— 

14 ‘‘(A) all lands within the limits of any Indian 

15 reservation; 

16 ‘‘(B) any lands title to which is either held in 

17 trust by the United States for the benefit of any In18 dian Tribe or Indian or held by any Indian Tribe or 

19 Indian subject to restriction by the United States 

20 against alienation; and 

21 ‘‘(C) any lands in the State of Oklahoma that 

22 are within the boundaries of a former reservation (as 

23 defined by the Secretary of the Interior) of a feder24 ally recognized Indian Tribe.’’. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
[Slavie
      Federal Savings Bank Letterhead]




October
      26, 2005





Via:
      Federal Express, certified mail and facsimile





Mr.
      Ronald Benfield


Benfield
      Properties, LLC


103
      North
      Main Street


Bel
      Air,
      Maryland 21014





Re:
            Lease
                between Benfield Properties, LLC and Slavie Federal Savings Bank
                for 601
                Edgewood Road





Dear
      Mr.
      Benfield:





Pursuant
      to the above-referenced Lease, specifically Section 1.2 Renewal Option, please
      accept this letter as notice of election that we will not be renewing our lease
      of 601 Edgewood Road following the expiration of the initial term on
      April 30, 2006. Unfortunately, we have not been able to significantly grow
      our deposit base at this location to offset expenses. Therefore, we can no
      longer justify the continued operation of this branch in Edgewood. Pursuant
      to
      the Lease, we intend to return all keys and provide to you all other required
      information on or before April 30, 2006. If you intend to schedule a
      walk-through of the property prior to the end of the lease term, please call
      me
      to schedule same.





On
      behalf
      of the Board, I would like to take this opportunity to inform you it has been
      a
      pleasure working with you the last five years. If you have any questions, please
      do not hesitate to contact me. I can be reached at 410-893-2555.





Sincerely,





/s/
      Philip E. Logan


Philip
      E.
      Logan


President
1 Order filed December 8 , 2016

In The 

## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________ NO. 14

- 14

- 00822

- CV

____________ TOKES AD E LEYE , Appellant

V.

MAGARET MODUPE DRISC AL , Appellee

On Appeal from the 310th District Court Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 2013

- 66224

____________ NO. 14

- 16

- 00922

- CV

____________ IN RE TOKES ADELEYE , Relator

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING WRIT OF MANDAMUS



### ORDER2 On October 14, 2014
, Tokes Ad e leye filed a notice of appeal from the trial court’s order signed October 8, 2014

. That appeal was assigned to this court under our appellate case number 14

- 14

- 00 822

- CV. On March 8, 2016, this court issued an opinion affirming the trial court’s judgment. On March 21, 2016, Ad e leye notified this court that he filed for bankruptcy on January 1, 2013, prior to the trial
court’s order in this case. On April 28, 2016, this court abated the appeal and remanded to the trial court for consideration of the bankruptc y stay’s effect on the trial court’s judgment. The bankruptcy was discharged July 10, 2015.

On November 14, 2016, Ad e leye filed a petition for writ of mandamus complaining of the trial court’s order on remand. The original proceeding has been assigned ou r case number 14

- 16

- 00 922

- CV.
Today, the court, on its own motion, orders the appeal REINSTATED and
set at issue. The appeal and the original proceeding are ordered CONSOLIDATED.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Jamison, McCally, and Wise.
Document

Exhibit 10.7


In connection with a review of director compensation in November 2021, the Board of Directors of the Federal Agricultural Mortgage Corporation approved the following level of director compensation in the form of cash retainer and targeted value of equity, effective January 1, 2022:
•The base annual cash retainer payable to all directors remained unchanged at $62,000.
•The value of the annual equity award grant to all directors was increased by $4,000 from $58,000 to $62,000.
•The incremental annual cash retainer payable to:
◦the Chair of the Board remained unchanged at $40,000, with the total annual cash retainer unchanged at $102,000;
◦the Vice Chair of the Board remained unchanged at $20,000, with the total annual cash retainer unchanged at $82,000;
•The incremental annual cash retainer payable to Committee chairs is set forth below* (all of which remain the same as the incremental cash retainers set for 2021):
◦the Chair of the Audit Committee receives an incremental annual cash retainer of  $15,000, with the total annual cash retainer unchanged at $77,000;
◦the Chairs of the Compensation Committee, the Corporate Governance Committee, the Enterprise Risk Committee, and the Financial Risk Committee each receives an incremental annual cash retainer of $12,000, with the total annual cash retainers unchanged at $74,000 (the Chair of the Corporate Governance Committee currently serves as Chair of the Board); and
◦the Chairs of the Credit Risk Committee, the Public Policy and Corporate Social Responsibility Committee, and the Strategy and Business Development Committee each receives an incremental annual cash retainer of $6,000, with the total annual cash retainers unchanged at $68,000 (the Chair of the Public Policy and Corporate Social Responsibility Committee currently serves as Vice Chair of the Board).
* No director shall receive the supplemental retainer for being the Chair of a Committee if that individual is already receiving the supplemental annual retainer applicable to the Chair of the Board or the Vice Chair of the Board.
Yvon LOUISSAINT, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D17-2289

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed January 10, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
---

Exhibit 13.1

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

In
connection with the Annual Report of Cardero Resource Corp. (the Company) on
Form 20-F for the fiscal year ended October 31, 2012 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Michael
Hunter, the President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §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.

Date: February 28, 2013

| | /s/
      Michael Hunter             
| | -------------------------------------
| | Michael Hunter,                      
| | President and Chief Executive Officer

---
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Anthony SHOMORIN, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 03-16606.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted May 10, 2004.*

Decided May 19, 2004.

Laurel Beeler, USSF — Office of the U.S. Attorney, San Francisco, CA, for PlaintiffAppellee.

Albert J. Kutchins, Esq., Berkeley, CA, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before: CANBY, KOZINSKI and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.

*

 This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for *decision*without oral *argument. See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Anthony Shomorin appeals the district court’s order denying his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253, and we affirm.

Shomorin is entitled to an evidentiary hearing on his § 2255 claims if he makes *754“specific factual allegations that, if true, state a claim on which relief could be granted.” *United States v. Leonti,*326 F.3d 1111, 1116 (9th Cir.2003). We review the district court’s denial of an evidentiary hearing for abuse of discretion. *Id.*

Here, Shomorin contends that the district court failed to respond to a jury note seeking clarification of the “and means or” jury instruction. Even if a note was sent to the court and the court failed to respond, we conclude that any error was harmless because those events did not have a “substantial and injurious effect or influence in determining the jury’s verdict.” *Brecht v. Abrahamson,*507 U.S. 619, 623, 113 S.Ct. 1710, 123 L.Ed.2d 353 (1993) (citation omitted). Accordingly, Shomorin does not state a claim on which relief could be granted, and he is therefore not entitled to an evidentiary hearing. *See Leonti,*326 F.3d at 1116.

AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 73 (Friday, April 17, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 17871]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-8776]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2008-N-0345]


Agency Information Collection Activities; Announcement of Office 
of Management and Budget Approval; Current Good Manufacturing Practices 
and Related Regulations for Blood and Blood Components; and 
Requirements for Donor Testing, Donor Notification, and ``Lookback''

AGENCY:  Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION:  Notice.

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

SUMMARY:  The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing that a 
collection of information entitled ``Current Good Manufacturing 
Practices and Related Regulations for Blood and Blood Components; and 
Requirements for Donor Testing, Donor Notification, and `Lookback''' 
has been approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under 
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jonna Capezzuto, Office of Information 
Management (HFA-710), Food and Drug Administration, 5600 Fishers Lane, 
Rockville, MD 20857, 301-796-3794.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the Federal Register of November 12, 2008 
(73 FR 66901), the agency announced that the proposed information 
collection had been submitted to OMB for review and clearance under 44 
U.S.C. 3507. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not 
required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays 
a currently valid OMB control number. OMB has now approved the 
information collection and has assigned OMB control number 0910-0116. 
The approval expires on February 29, 2012. A copy of the supporting 
statement for this information collection is available on the Internet 
at http://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain.

    Dated: April 10, 2009.
Jeffrey Shuren,
Associate Commissioner for Policy and Planning.
[FR Doc. E9-8776 Filed 4-16-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-S
# Official Journal C 140/2022

| | ISSN 1977-091X |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 140 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 6529 March 2022 |

ISSN 1977-091X

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 140

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 6529 March 2022

---

| Contents | page |
| --- | --- |
| | II   Information |
| | INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES |
| | European Commission |
| 2022/C 140/01 | Common catalogue of varieties of agricultural plant species — Supplement 2022/3 (
  1
  ) | 1 |
| 2022/C 140/02 | Common catalogue of varieties of vegetable species — Supplement 2022/3 (
  1
  ) | 30 |

Contents

page

II   Information

INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

European Commission

2022/C 140/01

Common catalogue of varieties of agricultural plant species — Supplement 2022/3 (
  1
  )

1

1

2022/C 140/02

Common catalogue of varieties of vegetable species — Supplement 2022/3 (
  1
  )

1

30

---

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | (1)   Text with EEA relevance. |

---

(1)   Text with EEA relevance.

1

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN
II 

112TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 2661 

To suspend temporarily the duty on Agilon 400. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MAY 7, 2012 

Mr. CASEY introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred 

to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To suspend temporarily the duty on Agilon 400. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. AGILON 400. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter II of chapter 99 of 

5 the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is 

6 amended by inserting in numerical sequence the following 

7 new heading: 

‘‘ 9902.01.00 Agilon 400 (CAS No. 7631– 

86–9) (provided for in subheading 3824.90.92) ............. Free No change No change On or before 

12/31/2015 ’’. 

8 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

9 subsection (a) applies with respect to goods entered, or 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 2661 IS

1 withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or after 

2 the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
Mark KREJCI; The Continental-National Group, Inc.; and CN Indian Shores, LLC, Appellants, v. Jeffrey GORDON; Michael Hall; and Le Scampi Condominium Association, Inc., Appellees.

Case No. 2D16-5294

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed November 8, 2017.

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
* 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. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

## FILED January 27, 2004 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 03-30544 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus JILMAR OVANDO-CANDELO, also known as Jilmar Candelo, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana

USDC No. 02-CR-137-2-C

-------------------- Before REAVLEY, JOLLY and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Jilmar Ovando-Candelo appeals his sentence following his guilty plea of conspiring to possess with the intent todistribute approximately five kilograms of heroin. OvandoCandelo argues that the district court should not have held him accountable for the heroin that was found on a vessel because the district court should have taken into consideration the lack of evidence to show that he was aware of the heroin on the vessel.No. 03-30544 -2- The factual basis for Ovando-Candelo’s guilty plea stated that, if called, one of Ovando-Candelo’s co-conspirators, who, with Ovando-Candelo, was present when the heroin changed hands, would have testified that the seized quantity of heroin was delivered as a show of good faith, that more drugs remained on the vessel, and that , at the co-conspirator’s direction, agents found approximately 3.2 additional kilograms of heroin on the vessel. Because the offense level is determined by the quantity of drugs involved in the offense, Ovando-Candelo has not shown that the district court clearly erred in including the heroin found on the vessel in the offense conduct. See United States v. Schorovsky , 202 F.3d 727, 729 (5th Cir. 2000); United States v. Alford , 142 F.3d 825, 831 (5th Cir. 1998). Ovando-Candelo also argues that the district court clearly erred in denying a downward adjustment for his being a minor participant because he had a limited role in the offense, was not aware of the total amount of drugs, and was not the purchaser of the drugs. The district court’s refusal to grant Ovando-Candelo a two level reduction for being a minor participant was not clearly erroneous. See United States v. Virgen-Moreno , 265 F.3d 276, 296 (5th Cir. 2001) . The large quantity of heroin that Ovando-Candelo was transporting strongly supports the denial of a reduction for being a minor participant. See United States v. Rojas , 868 F.2d 1409, 1409-10 (5th Cir. 1989). Furthermore, the district court was not required to accept Ovando-Candelo’sNo. 03-30544 -3- account of his role in the drug trafficking scheme. See United
States v. Buenrostro , 868 F.2d 135, 138 (5th Cir. 1989). The district court’s judgment is AFFIRMED.