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

###### Department of State

          - [Public Notice: 12647]

# SUMMARY:

                        Notice is hereby given of the following determinations: I hereby determine that certain objects being imported from abroad pursuant to an agreement with their foreign owner or custodian for temporary display in the exhibition “Rosa Barba: The Ocean of One's Pause” at The Museum of Modern Art, New York, New York, and at possible additional exhibitions or venues yet to be determined, are of cultural significance, and, further, that their temporary exhibition or display within the United States as aforementioned is in the national interest. I have ordered that Public Notice of these determinations be published in the                         **Federal Register**                        .                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        Reed Liriano, Program Coordinator, Office of the Legal Adviser, U.S. Department of State (telephone: 202-632-6471; email:                         *section2459@state.gov*). The mailing address is U.S. Department of State, L/PD, 2200 C Street NW (SA-5), Suite 5H03, Washington, DC 20522-0505.                    

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    The foregoing determinations were made pursuant to the authority vested in me by the Act of October 19, 1965 (79 Stat. 985; 22 U.S.C. 2459), Executive Order 12047 of March 27, 1978, the Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act of 1998 (112 Stat. 2681,                     *et seq.;*22 U.S.C. 6501 note,                     *et seq.*), Delegation of Authority No. 234 of October 1, 1999, Delegation of Authority No. 236-3 of August 28, 2000, and Delegation of Authority No. 257-1 of December 11, 2015.                

Rafik K. Mansour,

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy, Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs, Department of State.

[FR Doc. 2025-02199 Filed 2-3-25; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4710-05-P
### TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED AUGUST 9 , 2013

NO. 03

- 12

- 00577

- CV

Appellants, Lewis S. Christian, Jr.; Mark E. Morgan, Sr.; and South Texas Urgent Care

Center Corp.// Cross

- Appellant, Monroe Medical Management, In c.

v.
Appellee, Monroe Medical Management, Inc.// Cross

- Appellees, Lewis S. Christian, Jr.;

Mark E. Morgan, Sr.; and South Texas Urgent Care Center Corp.

APPEAL FROM 353RD DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY BEFORE JUSTICES PURYEAR, RO SE, AND GOODWIN DIS MISSED ON JOINT MOTION IN PART; DISMISSED FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION IN PART

-- OPINION BY JUSTICE ROSE

THIS DAY came to be submitted Lewis S. Christian, Jr. and Monroe Medical Management

Inc. ’s joint agreed motion to dismiss the appeal in the above cause, and the Court having fully

considered said motion is of the opinion that same should be granted

. IT IS THEREFORE
ordered that said motion is granted and that the appeal as to them is dismissed. Additionally,
Mark E. Morgan , Sr. and South Texas Urgent Ca re Center Corp. have failed to file a brief, and,
accordingly, have failed to prosecute the appeal. IT IS THEREFORE ordered that the appeal
as to Mark E. Morgan , Sr. and South Texas Urgent Care Center Corp. is dismissed for want of
prosecution. It is FUR THER ordered that each party shall pay the costs of the appeal incurred
by that party, both in this Court and the court below
, and that this decision be certified below for

obs ervance

.
ARTHUR ANDERSEN LLP


                    REPORT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS


To the Board of Directors
of SunTrust Mortgage, Inc.:

We  have  examined  management's assertion  about SUNTRUST  MORTGAGE, INC.'S
compliance  with the minimum  servicing  standards identified in the  Mortgage
Bankers Association of America's UNIFORM SINGLE ATTESTATION PROGRAM FOR MORTGAGE
BANKS ("USAP") and that the Company had in effect a fidelity bond and errors and
omissions policy in the amounts of $100,000,000 and $20,000,000, respectively,
as of and for the year ended  December  31, 1997,  included in the accompanying
management  assertion.  Management is responsible  for the Company's compliance
with those minimum  servicing  standards and for maintaining a fidelity bond and
errors and  omissions  policy.  Our  responsibility  is to express an opinion on
management's  assertion about the entity's compliance with the minimum servicing
standards and  maintenance  of a fidelity  bond and errors and omissions policy
based on our examination.

Our examination was made in accordance with standards established  by the
American  Institute of Certified Public Accountants and,  accordingly, included
examining,  on a test basis,  evidence about the Company's  compliance  with the
minimum  servicing   standards and  performing  such  other procedures as we
considered necessary in the circumstances.  We believe  that our examination
provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.  Our examination does not provide
a legal determination on the Company's compliance with the minimum servicing
standards.

In our  opinion, management's  assertion  that the  Company complied with the
aforementioned minimum servicing standards and that the Company had in effect
a fidelity bond and errors and omissions policy in the amounts of $100,000,000
and $20,000,000, respectively, as of and for the year ended December  31, 1997
is fairly stated in all material respects.


/S/Arthur Andersen LLP

Atlanta, Georgia
January 30,1998
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



I, Menderes Akdag, and I, Bruce S. Rosenbloom, each certify to the best of our knowledge, based upon a review of the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended March 31, 2010 (the Report) of the Registrant, that:



(1)

the Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and



(2)

the information contained in the Report, fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Registrant.





Date: June 1, 2010By:  /s/  Menderes AkdagMenderes AkdagChief Executive Officer and PresidentBy:  /s/  Bruce S. RosenbloomBruce S. RosenbloomChief Financial Officer
EXHIBIT 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

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 MHI Hospitality Corporation (the Corporation) on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31,
2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Andrew M. Sims, Chief Executive Officer of the Corporation, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of 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 result of operations of the Corporation.
| | --- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                  |  |        |  |                                      
|----------------- |  | ------ |  | -------------------------------------
|Date: May 7, 2008 |  |        |  |                                      
|                  |  |       
|                  |  | By:    |  | /s/ Andrew M. Sims                   
|                  |  | Name:  |  | Andrew M. Sims                       
|                  |  | Title: |  | President and Chief Executive Officer
FLORIDA GAS TRANSMISSION COMPANY, LLC v. TEXAS BRINE COMPANY, LLC

NO. 2019-CC-0528

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

June 3, 2019

Not considered. See La.S.Ct.R. IX, § 6.

HUGHES, J., would grant reconsideration.

CRICHTON, J., would grant reconsideration.

GENOVESE, J., would grant reconsideration.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 12-7810

LANCE ADAM GOLDMAN,

 Plaintiff – Appellant,

v.

CHRISTEN DEGABRIELLE SIMMONS,

 Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Fox, Senior

District Judge. (5:12-ct-03118-F)

Submitted: February 21, 2013 Decided: February 25, 2013

Before AGEE and DAVIS, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior 

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Lance Adam Goldman, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Lance Adam Goldman appeals the district court’s order 

dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint under 28 U.S.C. 

§ 1915(e)(2)(B) (2006). We have reviewed the record and find 

that this appeal is frivolous. Accordingly, we dismiss the 

appeal for the reasons stated by the district court. Goldman v. 

Simmons, No. 5:12-ct-03118-F (E.D.N.C. Oct. 10, 2012). We 

dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal 

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before 

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
Everly S. LIPPWE, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D18-2928

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

March 21, 2019 Rehearing Denied May 28, 2019

Everly S. Lippwe, pro se, Appellant.

Ashley B. Moody, Attorney General, and Virginia Chester Harris, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

Per Curiam.

AFFIRMED .

Roberts, Ray, and Jay, JJ., concur.
Exhibit 11

Marcam Solutions, Inc.
Statement re Computation of Earnings (Loss) Per Share
In thousands (except per share data)

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                           1997          1996           1995
                                                        ---------     ---------      ---------
<S>                                                     <C>           <C>            <C>       
   Net Loss                                             $ (46,883)    $ (26,326)     $ (34,357)
                                                        ---------     ---------      ---------
PRIMARY LOSS PER SHARE
Common Stock:
   Shares outstanding from beginning of period              5,716         5,636          5,560
Pro rata shares:
   Exercise of stock options                                   15            44              5
   Sales of common stock under employee stock
    purchase plan                                              20            18             49
   Stock grants issued/(canceled)                              (1)           (6)            20
   Preferred stock conversion                                 285             -              -
                                                        ---------     ---------      ---------
Weighted average number of share outstanding                6,035         5,692          5,634
                                                        =========     =========      =========

Net loss per share                                      $   (7.77)    $   (4.63)     $   (6.10)
                                                        =========     =========      =========

FULLY DILUTED LOSS PER SHARE
Common Stock:
   Shares outstanding from beginning of period              5,716         5,636          5,560
Pro rata shares:
   Exercise of stock options                                   15            44              5
   Sales of common stock under employee stock
    purchase plan                                              20            18             49
   Stock grants issued/(canceled)                              (1)           (6)            20
   Preferred stock conversion                                 285             -              -
                                                        ---------     ---------      ---------
Weighted average number of share outstanding                6,035         5,692          5,634
                                                        =========     =========      =========

Net loss per share                                      $   (7.77)    $   (4.63)     $   (6.10)
                                                        =========     =========      =========

Note: Historical weighted average shares outstanding and net
      loss per share have been restated for the Distribution, 
      which has been presented, in part for accounting purposes, as
      a 2-for-1 reverse stock split occurring on July 29, 1997.


</TABLE>
EX PARTE D.E. and T.G.

(In re: Russell County Department of Human Resources v. D.E. and T.G.)

2170578

Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.

March 22, 2018

Mand. pet. denied.
Case 3:06-cv-00153-N Document 5 Filed 01/30/06 Page 1 of 10 PageID 31
Case 3:06-cv-00153-N Document 5 Filed 01/30/06 Page 2 of 10 PageID 32
Case 3:06-cv-00153-N Document 5 Filed 01/30/06 Page 3 of 10 PageID 33
Case 3:06-cv-00153-N Document 5 Filed 01/30/06 Page 4 of 10 PageID 34
Case 3:06-cv-00153-N Document 5 Filed 01/30/06 Page 5 of 10 PageID 35
Case 3:06-cv-00153-N Document 5 Filed 01/30/06 Page 6 of 10 PageID 36
Case 3:06-cv-00153-N Document 5 Filed 01/30/06 Page 7 of 10 PageID 37
Case 3:06-cv-00153-N Document 5 Filed 01/30/06 Page 8 of 10 PageID 38
Case 3:06-cv-00153-N Document 5 Filed 01/30/06 Page 9 of 10 PageID 39
Case 3:06-cv-00153-N Document 5 Filed 01/30/06 Page 10 of 10 PageID 40
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.                  

###### Postal Service

# AGENCY:

                        Postal ServiceTM.                    

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.

# DATES:

*Date of required notice:*                         January 24, 2025.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Sean C. Robinson, 202-268-8405.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    The United States Postal Service® hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on January 16, 2025, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a                     *USPS Request to Add Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail & USPS Ground Advantage® Contract 1317 to Competitive Product List*. Documents are available at                     *www.prc.gov,*                     Docket Nos. MC2025-1144, K2025-1144.                

Sean Robinson,

Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.

[FR Doc. 2025-01642 Filed 1-23-25; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
K.D.G., INC. d/b/a Wildcat, Appellant, v. WESTFIELD INSURANCE COMPANY, a foreign corporation, and Cohen Dania Beach Hotel, LLC, a foreign limited liability company, Appellees.

No. 4D18-3314

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

[June 12, 2019]

Michael J. Yates of the Law Offices of Michael J. Yates, P.L., Miami, for appellant.

Alex P. Rosenthal, Amanda Jassem Jones, and Rhiannon Sforza-Flick of Rosenthal Law Group, Weston, for appellees.

Per Curiam.

*Affirmed* . *See**Lee v. All Fla. Constr. Co.* , 662 So. 2d 365 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995).

Damoorgian, Levine and Kuntz, JJ., concur.
EXHIBIT 32.1 CERTIFICATION Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (Subsection (a) and (b) of Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code)  Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code), the undersigned officer of Vornado Realty L.P. (the “Company”), hereby certifies, to such officer’s knowledge, that:  The Annual Report on Form 10-K/A (Amendment No. 1) for year ended December 31, 2013(the “Report”) of the Company fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.  April 1, 2014

   

   

   /s/ Steven RothName:

   Steven RothTitle:

   Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer

   of Vornado Realty Trust, sole General Partner of

   Vornado Realty L.P.
Jennifer Logan KAMERER v. Philip Michael KAMERER

2160784

Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.

March 16, 2018

Affirmed.
George WHIDDEN, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D18-4012

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed May 1, 2019

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. *See**Reeves v. State*, 957 So. 2d 625 (Fla. 2007) ; *Chapman v. State*, 968 So. 2d 583 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007).

CASANUEVA, SILBERMAN, and ATKINSON, JJ., Concur.
1

Case No. 17-CV-00220-LHK 

ORDER DENYING QUALCOMM’S MOTION FOR STAY PENDING APPEAL

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN JOSE DIVISION

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION,

Plaintiff,

v.

QUALCOMM INCORPORATED,

Defendant.

Case No. 17-CV-00220-LHK 

ORDER DENYING QUALCOMM’S 

MOTION FOR STAY PENDING 

APPEAL

Re: Dkt. No. 1495

The Court SUSTAINS the Federal Trade Commission’s objections to Qualcomm’s 

Exhibits C, D, and E that Qualcomm filed with Qualcomm’s reply brief. Exhibits C, D, and E are 

offered in support of a new argument raised for the first time in Qualcomm’s reply brief. See 

Zamani v. Carnes, 491 F.3d 990, 997 (9th Cir. 2007) (“The district court need not consider 

arguments raised for the first time in a reply brief.”). 

In addition, the Court GRANTS the FTC’s motion to strike Exhibit F. Exhibit F is not an

exhibit from the January 2019 11-day bench trial in the instant case or part of the discovery or 

record in the instant case. Instead, Exhibit F is the entire 31-page slide deck for Qualcomm’s

April 16, 2019 opening statement for a jury trial in an entirely different case in the Southern 

District of California. Although Qualcomm’s reply brief cites only one page from the entire slide 

Case 5:17-cv-00220-LHK Document 1520 Filed 07/03/19 Page 1 of 2
2

Case No. 17-CV-00220-LHK 

ORDER DENYING QUALCOMM’S MOTION FOR STAY PENDING APPEAL

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

deck, Qualcomm improperly seeks to insert the entire slide deck into this record. Moreover, the 

single slide that Qualcomm’s reply brief cites is not responsive to any argument in the FTC’s or 

amici’s briefs. Thus, the Court need not consider it. Zamani, 491 F.3d at 997. Nor has 

Qualcomm authenticated the document that the slide purports to excerpt. Accordingly, Exhibit F 

is stricken from the record. 

Having reviewed the parties’ briefing on Qualcomm’s motion for stay pending appeal, 

ECF Nos. 1495, 1500, 1506; amicus briefs in opposition to Qualcomm’s motion submitted by LG

Electronics, Inc. and ACT, the App Association, ECF Nos. 1501-1, 1503-2; the arguments and 

evidence from the 11-day trial; the Court’s 233-page Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, 

ECF No. 1490; the record in this case; and the relevant law, the Court hereby DENIES 

Qualcomm’s motion for stay pending appeal. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: July 3, 2019

______________________________________

LUCY H. KOH

United States District Judge

Case 5:17-cv-00220-LHK Document 1520 Filed 07/03/19 Page 2 of 2
FILED

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

 JULY 2, 2010

JOHN LEY

CLERK

[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

________________________

No. 09-16356

Non-Argument Calendar

________________________

D. C. Docket No. 09-00087-CR-3-LAC

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

HENRY RICHARD HALE,

Defendant-Appellant.

________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Florida

_________________________

(July 2, 2010)

Before TJOFLAT, CARNES and WILSON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Chet Kaufman, appointed counsel for Henry Richard Hale in this direct
criminal appeal has moved to withdraw from further representation of the

appellant, because, in his opinion, the appeal is without merit. Counsel has filed a

brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d

493 (1967). Our independent review of the entire record reveals that counsel’s

assessment of the relative merit of the appeal is correct. Because independent

examination of the entire record reveals no arguable issues of merit, counsel’s

motion to withdraw is GRANTED, and Hale’s convictions and sentences are

AFFIRMED.

2
Case 3:17-cv-00058-EMC Document 24 Filed 03/03/17 Page 1 of 5
Case 3:17-cv-00058-EMC Document 24 Filed 03/03/17 Page 2 of 5
Case 3:17-cv-00058-EMC Document 24 Filed 03/03/17 Page 3 of 5
CMC is reset from

3/16/17 to 4/13/17 at 1:30 p.m. (same time as motion to appoint 

lead counsel.) Joint CMC statement due 4/6/17. 

 3/3/17 

U

NITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

IT IS SO ORDERED

AS MODIFIED

Judge Edward M. Chen

Case 3:17-cv-00058-EMC Document 24 Filed 03/03/17 Page 4 of 5
Case 3:17-cv-00058-EMC Document 24 Filed 03/03/17 Page 5 of 5