alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
PAGE 1 – ORDER

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON

FRANKLIN R. LEE,

Plaintiff,

v.

CAROLYN W. COLVIN,

Acting Commissioner of Social Security,

Defendant.

Case No. 6:13-cv-00801-AC

ORDER

Michael H. Simon, District Judge.

United States Magistrate Judge John V. Acosta issued Findings and Recommendation in 

this case on December 15, 2014. Dkt. 17. Judge Acosta recommended that the Commissioner of 

Social Security’s (“Commissioner”) decision denying Plaintiff’s application for Supplemental 

Security Income under Title XVI of the Act be reversed and remanded for an award of benefits. 

No party has filed objections.

Under the Federal Magistrates Act (“Act”), the court may “accept, reject or modify, in 

whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate.” 28 U.S.C. 

§ 636(b)(1). If a party files objections to a magistrate’s findings and recommendation, “the court 

shall make a de novo determination of those portions of the report or specified proposed findings 

or recommendations to which objection is made.” Id.; Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3).

If no party objects, the Act does not prescribe any standard of review. See Thomas v. Arn, 

474 U.S. 140, 152 (1985) (“There is no indication that Congress, in enacting [the Act], intended 

to require a district judge to review a magistrate’s report[.]”); United States. v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 

Case 6:13-cv-00801-AC Document 19 Filed 01/06/15 Page 1 of 2
PAGE 2 – ORDER

F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003) (en banc) (the court must review de novo magistrate’s findings 

and recommendation if objection is made, “but not otherwise”). 

Although review is not required in the absence of objections, the Act “does not preclude 

further review by the district judge[] sua sponte . . . under a de novo or any other standard.” 

Thomas, 474 U.S. at 154. Indeed, the Advisory Committee Notes to Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b) 

recommend that “[w]hen no timely objection is filed,” the court review the magistrate’s findings 

and recommendation for “clear error on the face of the record.”

No party having made objections, this Court follows the recommendation of the Advisory 

Committee and reviews Judge Acosta’s Findings and Recommendation for clear error on the 

face of the record. No such error is apparent. Accordingly, the Court ADOPTS Judge Acosta’s 

Findings and Recommendation. Dkt. 17. The decision of the Commissioner denying Plaintiff’s 

application is REVERSED and REMANDED for an award of benefits.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED this 6th day of January, 2015.

/s/ Michael H. Simon

Michael H. Simon

United States District Judge

Case 6:13-cv-00801-AC Document 19 Filed 01/06/15 Page 2 of 2
#### Frank Ravenna, Respondent, v Entenmann’s Sales Company, Inc., et al., Appellants, et al., Defendants. Arthur A. Urena, Respondent, v Entenmann’s Sales Company, Inc., et al., Appellants. (And Another Action.)

[946 NYS2d 861]

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Laura Douglas, J.), entered March 6, 2012, which, to the extent appealed from, denied the defendants-appellants ’ motion for a change of venue to Rockland County, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Two of the drivers involved in a multivehicle accident that oc*625curred in Rockland County commenced actions in Bronx County, properly designating venue on the basis of the residence of one of the parties in the Bronx (CPLR 503 [a]). The motion to change venue of those actions to Rockland County was properly denied since the movants failed to show the nature and materiality of the anticipated testimony of the investigating police officer, or to provide adequate support for their assertion that she would be inconvenienced by having to testify in Bronx County rather than in Rockland County *(see Yavner v Toal,*294 AD2d 244 [2002]; *Morrison v Lawler,*290 AD2d 370, 370 [2002]). The affidavit of an out-of-state witness who did not indicate that he would provide material testimony also did not warrant a change of venue. Concur — Tom, J.P., Andrias, Friedman, Moskowitz and Renwick, JJ.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          OCT-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             NOV-01-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               OCT-31-1996
<CASH>                                           5,618
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      507
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     23,196
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                29,730
<PP&E>                                           5,411
<DEPRECIATION>                                   1,061
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  34,411
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           19,282
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            75
<OTHER-SE>                                      14,698
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    34,411
<SALES>                                         74,764
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                74,764
<CGS>                                           61,562
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   61,562
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,505
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  2,161
<INCOME-TAX>                                       829
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              1,331
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,331
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .18
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .18
        

</TABLE>
CERTIFICATIONS
 
 I,
Raymond R. Brandstrom, Chief Financial Officer, certify that:
 
 1.
    I
      have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of Emeritus
      Corporation;
 
 2.
    Based
      on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a
      material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the
      statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements
      were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this
      report;
 
 3.
    Based
      on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information
      included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the
      financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the
      registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;
 
 4.
    The
      registrant's other certifying officer and I are responsible for
      establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as
      defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant
      and have:
 
 (a)
    Designed
      such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure
      controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure
      that material information relating to the registrant, including its
      consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those
      entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being
      prepared;
 
 (b)
    Evaluated
      the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and procedures
      and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of
      the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period
      covered by this report based on such evaluation; and
 
 (c)
    Disclosed
      in this report any change in the registrant's internal control over
      financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most recent
      fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to
      materially affect, the registrant's internal control over financial
      reporting; and
 
 5.
    The
      registrant's other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our
      most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to
      the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of the registrant's
      board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):
 
 (a)
    All
      significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or
      operation of internal control over financial reporting which are
      reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to record,
      process, summarize and report financial information; and
 
 (b)
    Any
      fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
      employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal control
      over financial reporting.
 
 
 /s/    Raymond
R. Brandstrom
 Raymond
R. Brandstrom
 Chief
Financial Officer
 March 30,
2005
Case: 1:04-cv-03149 Document #: 231 Filed: 10/25/07 Page 1 of 19 PageID #:1907
Case: 1:04-cv-03149 Document #: 231 Filed: 10/25/07 Page 2 of 19 PageID #:1908
Case: 1:04-cv-03149 Document #: 231 Filed: 10/25/07 Page 3 of 19 PageID #:1909
Case: 1:04-cv-03149 Document #: 231 Filed: 10/25/07 Page 4 of 19 PageID #:1910
Case: 1:04-cv-03149 Document #: 231 Filed: 10/25/07 Page 5 of 19 PageID #:1911
Case: 1:04-cv-03149 Document #: 231 Filed: 10/25/07 Page 6 of 19 PageID #:1912
Case: 1:04-cv-03149 Document #: 231 Filed: 10/25/07 Page 7 of 19 PageID #:1913
Case: 1:04-cv-03149 Document #: 231 Filed: 10/25/07 Page 8 of 19 PageID #:1914
Case: 1:04-cv-03149 Document #: 231 Filed: 10/25/07 Page 9 of 19 PageID #:1915
Case: 1:04-cv-03149 Document #: 231 Filed: 10/25/07 Page 10 of 19 PageID #:1916
Case: 1:04-cv-03149 Document #: 231 Filed: 10/25/07 Page 11 of 19 PageID #:1917
Case: 1:04-cv-03149 Document #: 231 Filed: 10/25/07 Page 12 of 19 PageID #:1918
Case: 1:04-cv-03149 Document #: 231 Filed: 10/25/07 Page 13 of 19 PageID #:1919
Case: 1:04-cv-03149 Document #: 231 Filed: 10/25/07 Page 14 of 19 PageID #:1920
Case: 1:04-cv-03149 Document #: 231 Filed: 10/25/07 Page 15 of 19 PageID #:1921
Case: 1:04-cv-03149 Document #: 231 Filed: 10/25/07 Page 16 of 19 PageID #:1922
Case: 1:04-cv-03149 Document #: 231 Filed: 10/25/07 Page 17 of 19 PageID #:1923
Case: 1:04-cv-03149 Document #: 231 Filed: 10/25/07 Page 18 of 19 PageID #:1924
Case: 1:04-cv-03149 Document #: 231 Filed: 10/25/07 Page 19 of 19 PageID #:1925
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 Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of Bio-Imaging Technologies, Inc. (the Company) for the year ended December 31, 2004 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the undersigned, Ted I. Kaminer, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, 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.



|                      |  |                                                                                                               
|--------------------- |  | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|Dated: March 31, 2005 |  | /s/    TED I.
KAMINER*                                                                                        
|                      |  | Ted I. Kaminer, Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial and Accounting
Officer)

---

|* | 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.
|- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Description of Compensatory Arrangements



 EXHIBIT 10.16 
 DESCRIPTION OF COMPENSATORY ARRANGEMENTS 
 BETWEEN REGISTRANT AND NON-EMPLOYEE DIRECTORS

 Members of the Board of Directors who are not employees of Concur receive compensation for their services as directors as provided
below. 
 Each outside director who joined the Board prior to June 2003 was granted an option to purchase 50,000 shares of Concur common
stock under the 1998 Directors Stock Option Plan on the date he first became a member of the Board of Directors and, if he served as a director continuously since the date of his original option grant, he was granted an option to purchase 20,000
shares under the 1998 Directors Stock Option Plan on the date of each annual meeting of stockholders. 
 Each outside director who joined the
Board after June 2003 and prior to March 2007 had the right to select one of two compensation alternatives. Under the first alternative, the outside director received a cash stipend of approximately $35,000 per year, was granted an option to
purchase 40,000 shares of Concur common stock under the 1998 Directors Stock Option Plan on the date he first became a member of the Board of Directors, and, if he served as a director continuously since the date of his original option grant, he was
granted an option to purchase 10,000 shares under the 1998 Directors Stock Option Plan on the date of each annual meeting of stockholders. Under the second alternative, the outside director was granted an option to purchase 60,000 shares of Concur
common stock under the 1998 Directors Stock Option Plan on the date he first became a member of the Board of Directors and, if he served as a director continuously since the date of his original option grant, he was granted an option to purchase
20,000 shares under the 1998 Directors Stock Option Plan on the date of each annual meeting of stockholders. 
 Beginning March 2007, each
outside director has the right to select one of two compensation alternatives (which, for the then-existing outside directors, is in replacement of the compensatory arrangements described above). Under the first alternative, the outside director
receives a cash stipend of approximately $35,000 per year and, if he has served as a director continuously since the date of his original appointment to the Board of Directors, he is granted 3,250 restricted stock units under the 2007 Equity
Incentive Plan on March 15 of each year for so long as he has served as a director continuously since the date of his original appointment to the Board of Directors. Under the second alternative, the outside director is granted 6,500 restricted
stock units under the 2007 Equity Incentive Plan on March 15 of each year for so long as he has served as a director continuously since the date of his original appointment to the Board of Directors. 
 All directors are reimbursed for their reasonable travel expenses in attending Board and committee meetings.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                               0
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                       0
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           400
<OTHER-SE>                                       (400)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                         0
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                      381
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  (381)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                   (381)
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                         0
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
Exhibit 10.32

Summary of
Non-Employee Director Compensation

     Ruddick Corporation (the “Company”) compensates each member of its
Board of Directors (the “Board) who is not an employee of the Company or its
subsidiaries. Effective January 1, 2009, non-employee directors will receive
$34,000 per year for services as a director, plus $2,000 for each Board meeting
or committee meeting attended. In addition to the general fees for directors
described above, the Chairman of the Audit Committee of the Board is paid an
additional annual fee of $6,000 for services as chairman of that
committee.

     Non-employee directors of the Company may
defer the payment of the annual fee and/or Board meeting fees, pursuant to the
Company’s Director Deferral Plan (the “Deferral Plan”). The deferred fees are
converted into units representing shares of Common Stock of the Company (the
“Common Stock”) with a fair market value equal to the value of the fees
deferred, and the number of units is then credited to the director’s account,
along with additional units representing the amount of any dividends or stock
distributions. Upon termination of service as a director or in the event of
death, the balance of the director’s account will be distributed to the director
or a designated beneficiary in the form of Common Stock.

     Under the Company’s 1995 Comprehensive
Stock Option Plan (the “1995 Plan”), the Company automatically granted each
non-employee director at the time the 1995 Plan was adopted a ten-year option to
purchase 10,000 shares of Common Stock at an exercise price equal to the fair
market value of the Common Stock on the date of the option grant. Since that
time, pursuant to the provisions of the Company’s stock option plans, the
Company has automatically granted a ten-year option to purchase 10,000 shares of
Common Stock to each new non-employee director upon his or her initial election
as director. These options are immediately vested, and the exercise price of
these options is equal to the fair market value of the Common Stock on the date
of the director’s election.

     The Company grants additional equity
awards to its non-employee directors from time to time, at the Board’s
discretion. These equity awards generally have taken the form of stock option
grants and discretionary contributions by the Company to the Deferral Plan for
the benefit of each non-employee director, however, other award types may be
granted in the future at the discretion of the Board. On November 20, 2008, the
Board approved discretionary contributions by the Company to the Deferral Plan
for the benefit of each non-employee director in the amount of
$14,000.

     The Company also provides term life
insurance coverage for each non-employee director.
Case 3:14-cv-01173-JR    Document 40    Filed 03/24/15    Page 1 of 3

Case 3:14-cv-01173-JR    Document 40    Filed 03/24/15    Page 2 of 3

Case 3:14-cv-01173-JR    Document 40    Filed 03/24/15    Page 3 of 3
#### PEOPLE ex rel. DELAWARE, L. & W. R. CO., Appellant, v. CLAPP et al., Respondents.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department.

July 30, 1896.)

Proceeding on the relation of the Delaware, Lackawanna & Western Railroad Company against William H. Clapp and others, assessors, and Henry Walker, as supervisor', of the town of York, in the county of Livingston.

No opinion. Judgment and order affirmed, with costs.
```

[Congressional Bills 105th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1588 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

105th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 1588

   To exclude the social security trust funds, the Federal military 
 retiree trust fund, the highway trust funds, the medicare trust fund, 
 the civil service retirement trust fund, the unemployment trust fund, 
and the airports trust fund from the annual Federal budget baseline for 
               all purposes including budget enforcement.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            January 29, 1998

 Mr. Hollings introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
 referred jointly pursuant to the order of August 4, 1977, as modified 
 by the order of April 11, 1986, to the Committees on the Budget, and 
Governmental Affairs, with instructions that if one committee reports, 
    the other committee have thirty days to report or be discharged.

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To exclude the social security trust funds, the Federal military 
 retiree trust fund, the highway trust funds, the medicare trust fund, 
 the civil service retirement trust fund, the unemployment trust fund, 
and the airports trust fund from the annual Federal budget baseline for 
               all purposes including budget enforcement.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Deficit Integrity Act''.

SEC. 2. TRUST FUND PROTECTION.

    The receipts and disbursements of the social security trust funds, 
the Federal military retiree trust fund, the highway trust funds, the 
medicare trust fund, the civil service retirement trust fund, the 
unemployment trust fund, the airports trust fund, and any other Federal 
trust fund included in the gross Federal debt shall not be--
            (1) included in the Federal budget baseline for any fiscal 
        year; and
            (2) counted as new budget authority, outlays, receipts, or 
        deficit or surplus for purposes of--
                    (A) offsetting any tax decrease; and
                    (B) offsetting any spending increase.
                                 <all>
```