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

DISTRICT OF OREGON

CHARLENE GEHRING,

Plaintiff,

v. 

CAROLYN COLVIN, Acting

Commissioner, Social Security

Administration,

Defendant.

Case No. 2:14-cv-01830-KI

JUDGMENT

Rory Linerud

Linerud Law Firm

P.O. Box 1105

Salem, OR 97308

Attorney for Plaintiff

Billy J. Williams

United States Attorney

District of Oregon

Janice E. Hebert

Assistant United States Attorney

Page 1 - JUDGMENT

Case 2:14-cv-01830-KI Document 16 Filed 01/13/16 Page 1 of 2
1000 SW Third Ave., Ste. 600

Portland, OR 97204-2902

Leisa A. Wolf

Special Assistant United States Attorney

Office of the General Counsel

Social Security Administration

701 Fifth Ave., Ste. 2900 M/S 221A

Seattle, WA 98104-7075

Attorneys for Defendant

KING, Judge:

Based on the record, IT IS ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the decision of the

Commissioner is affirmed and this case is dismissed.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED this 13th

 day of January, 2016. 

 /s/ Garr M. King 

Garr M. King

United States District Judge

Page 2 - JUDGMENT

Case 2:14-cv-01830-KI Document 16 Filed 01/13/16 Page 2 of 2
The reorganization of 

GCMRC: Oct 9, 2003

The reorganization of 

GCMRC: Oct 9, 2003

Jeff Lovich
Why reorganize?

• Always be content 

with what you have, never with what you are.
Why reorganize (cont)

• "We trained very hard, but it seemed tha

every time we were beginning to form intteams, we would be reorganized. I was to later in life that we tend to meet any new situation by reorganizing, and what a wonderful method it can be for creating tillusion of progress while producing confuinefficiency and demoralization."

Gaius Petronius AD 66
Why we reorganized

• Promote opportunities for integrate

science

• Place support functions in closer 

proximity to the science they suppor

• Increase efficiencies• Change from a program- to a center

oriented focus for GCMRC
Chief GCMRC

Biology Physical Cultural IT Logistics

Remote sensing Library GIS Database 
Chief GCMRC

Chief Information

Officer (MIKE)

Cultural Program

(HELEN)

Integrated Ecosystem

Science Program (TED)

Spec. Assistant [Flagstaff]

(STEVE)

Website

Library

Systems administration

Biology Coordinator GIS

Remote s

Control netw

Datab
Implementation and 

assessment

• Instituted Oct 9, 2003• Operational plans in 30 days• Organization Assessment

- 6 months- 12 months

• Can be readjusted in the spirit of 

adaptive management
## St at e of Ne w York Supre me Court , Appe llat e D i vi s i on T h i rd J udi cial D e

part me n t Decided and Entered: January 26, 2017 106753 106754

________________________________ THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v MEMORANDUM AND ORDER DEVANTE KNOX, Appellant.

________________________________ Calendar Date: November 29, 2016 Before: McCarthy, J.P., Garry, Lynch, Clark and Mulvey, JJ.

__________ Jack H. Weiner, Chatham, for appellant. D. Holley Carnright, District Attorney, Kingston (Joan Gudesblatt Lamb of counsel), for respondent.

__________ Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Ulster County (Williams, J.), rendered April 21, 2014, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crimes of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree and criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree. Defendant was charged in two separate indictments with multiple crimes. During a combined proceeding, he pleaded guilty to criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree and criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree in satisfaction of both indictments. He also waived his right to appeal both orally and in writing. Under the terms of the plea agreement, County Court agreed to sentence defendant as a prior felony offender to concurrent prison terms of no more than 10 years for each crime, to be followed by five years of postrelease-2- 106753 106754 supervision for criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree and three years of postrelease supervision for criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree. At sentencing, the court sentenced defendant to concurrent prison terms of seven years for each crime, to be followed by the aforementioned periods of postrelease supervision. Defendant now appeals. Appellate counsel seeks to be relieved of his assignment of representing defendant on the ground that there are no nonfrivolous issues to be raised on appeal. Based upon our review of the record and counsel's brief, we agree. Therefore, the judgment is affirmed and counsel's request for leave to withdraw is granted (see People v Cruwys , 113 AD2d 979, 980 [1985], lv denied 67 NY2d 650 [1986]; see generally People v Stokes, 95 NY2d 633 [2001]). McCarthy, J.P., Garry, Lynch, Clark and Mulvey, JJ., concur.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, and application to be relieved of assignment granted.

ENTER:

Robert D. Mayberger Clerk of the Court
Section 106 of the NHPA

• LTEMP has an existing Programmatic Agreement for adverse effects 

to historic properties. 

• Under this agreement, there are stipulations that Reclamation must 

fulfill before LTEMP expires. 

• Some are ongoing – like river monitoring support for Hopi, Hualapai, 

Navajo, NPS, Southern Paiute Consortium, and Zuni.

• Others are singular events – write a report on HFE effects.

• This week: Annual Meeting.
Status of LTEMP

• Annual Meeting for cultural resources concluded yesterday.

• River Monitoring – recommendations; We will have a new meeting associated 

with Fall TWG to review recommendations from the monitoring trips & 

provide NPS with data earlier for planning purposes.

• HFEs and Archaeological sites – Helen Fairley and Joel Sanskey shared their 

insights into wind-borne sediment movements.

• LiDAR – Helen and Joel talked about using LiDAR to record petroglyphs. The 

group was enthusiastic about this project.

• Jamesita Peshlakai shared her efforts over the last year in helping projects 

advance, coordinate meetings, and the importance of communication.
Status of LTEMP

• Cultural Sensitivity Update

• Reclamation changed course on how to proceed with the Cultural Sensitivity 

Training stipulated in the LTEMP PA.

• Rather than using a 3rd Party negotiator, Reclamation and GCMRC will help 

the Hopi, Hualapai, Navajo, Southern Paiute Consortium, and Zuni work on 

presentations as a demonstration of individual cultural sensitivity trainings 

and then refine them.

• Tribal Project Updates

• Projects under D6-D12 are ongoing.
Some Action Items

• Communication - to respond with receipt of message and timeframe 

to get back to sender about issues (close the blackhole)

• Response: Ongoing effort. Some improvement over last year.

• Tribal names for locations and which Tribal language for which name. 

• Future discussion. 

• Early consultation on high flow experiments 

• Response: I will send out notifications EARLY to alert people.

• Additional meeting at Fall TWG; Send out meeting notes.

• Specific timeline for Cultural Sensitivity Actions.

• Meet in 3 weeks to discuss specifics.
Zachary Nelson (znelson@usbr.gov)

Cell: 801-372-2027

Office: 801-379-1164 

(which forwards to cell)
Exhibit 10

Case 3:14-cv-01772-MO Document 33-24 Filed 04/10/15 Page 1 of 2
July 30, 2014

093907.0004/6069849.1

LINNTON PLYWOOD ASSOCIATION

Financial Information

List of Current Liens to be Paid at Closing

1. Line of Credit Deed of Trust

Recorded: October 31, 2008

Amount: $350,000.00

Beneficiary: Foster Pepper LLP, an Oregon limited liability partnership

2. Second Line of Credit Deed of Trust

Recorded: February 3, 2011

Amount: $100,000.00

Beneficiary: Roberts Kaplan LLP, an Oregon limited liability partnership

3. Third Line of Credit Deed of Trust

Recorded: April 2, 2012

Amount: $350,000.00

Beneficiary: Lane Powell PC, an Oregon professional corporation

4. Stipulated Corrected General Judgment (Money Award), Weiss, Doug/Linnton Plywood 

Association, Case #: 080710423

Filed: Originally filed October 28, 2009, and as corrected on March 21, 2014

Amount: $3,139,045

Beneficiary: Linnton Plywood Association Members-Plaintiffs

5. Real Property Tax Statement July 1, 2013 to June 30, 2014 (including delinquent tax 

amounts 2010-2012)

Total Amount Due: $480,077.29

Property Description:

 10504 NW St. Helens Rd., Section 02 1N 1W, TL 100 21.15 acres; 

 10504 WI/NW St. Helens Rd., Section 02 1N 1W, TL 800 0.91 acres

 10504 WI/NW St. Helens Rd., Section 02 1N, 1W, TL 200 1.11 acres

Case 3:14-cv-01772-MO Document 33-24 Filed 04/10/15 Page 2 of 2
WEBER - PROVO DIVERSION AT OAKLEYLatitude: 40.712Longitude: -111.279Elevation: 6493

WEBER - PROVO DIVERSION AT OAKLEY

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Redden Mine Lwr Site Page...



Redden Mine Lwr

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Beaver Divide Site Page...



Beaver Divide

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Smith  Morehouse Site Page...



Smith  Morehouse

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Thaynes Canyon Site Page...



Thaynes Canyon
EXHIBIT 23.1
                                  ------------






[Letter Head of McGovern, Hurley, Cunningham]






                          INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT

We consent to the  incorporation by reference in the  Registration  Statement on
Form S-3,  Registration No. 333-45511,  filed by Altair  International Inc. with
the  Securities  and Exchange  Commission of our report dated  February 9, 1998,
except for Note  2(b)(i)  which is dated March 19, 1998  appearing in the Annual
Report on Form 10-K of Altair International Inc. for the year ended December 31,
1997.


                                              McGovern, Hurley, Cunningham

                                              /s/McGovern, Hurley, Cunningham

                                              Chartered Accountants


North York, Canada
March 27, 1998
#### Priscilla Gross et al. *v.*Planning and Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Greenwich et al.

*David Albert,*in support of the petition.

*A. William Mottolese*and *Bradford 8. Magill,*in opposition.

Submitted May 12

decided June *5,*1975

The plaintiffs’ petition for certification for appeal from the Court of Common Pleas in Fairfield County at Stamford is granted.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

In the Matter Of 

ADAM J. RODGERS

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 2192 Disciplinary Docket No. 3

No. 215 DB 2015

Attorney Registration No. 64987

(Philadelphia)

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 19th day of January, 2018, on certification by the Disciplinary 

Board that Adam J. Rodgers, who was suspended for a period of three months, has 

filed a verified statement showing compliance with the Order of Suspension and 

Pa.R.D.E. 217, and there being no other outstanding order of suspension or 

disbarment, Adam J. Rodgers shall resume active status, subject to the terms of 

probation, as outlined in this Court’s order dated June 1, 2016.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<RESTATED> 
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                          13,313
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   13,740
<ALLOWANCES>                                    13,769
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                79,919
<PP&E>                                           4,034
<DEPRECIATION>                                   9,969
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  89,363
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           30,079
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           146
<OTHER-SE>                                       8,331
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    89,363
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                93,156
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   61,581
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                52,311
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 1,661
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               3,050
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (20,476)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (8,745)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (11,731)
<DISCONTINUED>                                     447
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (11,284)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (1.70)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (1.70)
        

</TABLE>
PAGE 1 – ORDER

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON

ELUID NEWSOME,

Plaintiff,

v.

STATE OF OREGON – OREGON 

HEALTH AUTHORITY,

Defendant.

Case No. 3:16-cv-00561-AC

ORDER

Michael H. Simon, District Judge.

United States Magistrate Judge John Acosta issued Findings and Recommendation in this 

case on August 22, 2016. ECF 13. Judge Acosta recommended that Defendant’s motion to 

dismiss be granted and Plaintiff be given leave to amend his complaint. 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 recommendations, “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).

Case 3:16-cv-00561-AC Document 16 Filed 09/22/16 Page 1 of 2
PAGE 2 – ORDER

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 to which no objections are filed.”); 

United States. v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003) (en banc) (holding that the 

court must review de novo magistrate’s findings and recommendations 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 recommendations 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, ECF 13. Defendant’s motion to dismiss this case (ECF 167) is 

GRANTED. This case is dismissed without prejudice. Plaintiff is given leave to amend his 

complaint to assert claims against Oregon Health Authority Deputy Director John Thompson.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED this 22nd day of September, 2016.

/s/ Michael H. Simon

Michael H. Simon

United States District Judge

Case 3:16-cv-00561-AC Document 16 Filed 09/22/16 Page 2 of 2
ovv-ex101_866.htm



 

Exhibit 10.1

First Amendment 

to The

Encana (USA) Deferred Compensation Plan 

(Amended and Restated Effective April 1, 2018)

 

1.Plan Sponsor:  Ovintiv Services Inc. (the “Plan Sponsor”).

 

2.Amendment of Plan:  Pursuant to the authority of the undersigned and the provisions of Section 7.1 of the Encana (USA) Deferred Compensation Plan (the “Plan”), the following Amendment to the Plan is adopted, effective January 24, 2020.

 

A.Section 1.1 of the Plan is amended to read as follows:

 

1.1Name of Plan.  The name of this plan is the “Ovintiv U.S. Deferred Compensation Plan.”

 

B.Section 1.4 of the Plan is amended to read as follows:

 

1.4Company.  For purposes of this Plan, “Company” means Ovintiv Services Inc. (f/k/a Encana Services Company Ltd., which was the successor employer to Alenco Inc.) and any successor employer thereof.

 

C.Section 1.5 of the Plan is amended to read as follows:

 

1.5Participating Employers.  The Company is a “Participating Employer” in the Plan. Each subsidiary or affiliate of the Company that employs one or more Participants shall also be a Participating Employer. Each Participating Employer shall pay the cost of the benefits to which a Participant is entitled under the Plan attributable to service with that employer, and its share of the other expenses of the Plan, in each case in such amounts as are determined by the Company in its sole discretion. The Participating Employers are Ovintiv Services Inc. (f/k/a Encana Services Company Ltd.), Ovintiv USA Inc. (f/k/a Encana Oil & Gas (USA)) and, Ovintiv Inc. (including any payments made by Alenco Inc.).

 

3.Terms and Conditions of Plan:  Except for the above amendment, all terms and conditions of the Plan are unamended and shall remain in full force and effect.

 

***Signature Page Follows***

 

 

First Amendment to the Encana (USA) Deferred Compensation Plan3/20201



 

3.Execution:  This First Amendment has been executed on the date set forth below.

 

 

Ovintiv Services Inc.

Plan Sponsor

 

 

By: /s/ Mike Williams

 

Title: Chair, Management Pension Benefits Committee

 

Date: April 6, 2020 

 

 

14171580_v2

 

First Amendment to the Encana (USA) Deferred Compensation Plan3/20202
Exhibit 32.1 - Certification of Principal Executive Officer



CERTIFICATION IN ACCORDANCE WITH

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

AS ADOPTED BY

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of Internet America, Inc. (the Company) for the three
months ended September 30, 2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, William E. Ladin, Jr., Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify in accordance with 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to my knowledge 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/ William E. Ladin, Jr.William E. (Billy) Ladin, Jr.Chief Executive OfficerDate: November 14, 2005




19
Exhibit 4.13


 


PROMISSORY
NOTE


 


	Principal
    Amount $US40,000.00	Burbank,
        California

        May
        2, 2018



 


FOR
VALUE RECEIVED, the undersigned, Imaging3,Inc,
a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of California, and having an office and principal place of business
at 3022 North Hollywood Way, Burbank, California (hereinafter called “Borrower”) promises to pay to the order of the
Gary Werner Living Trust, an individual whose address is 35252 Robinsong Road, Agua Dulce, Ca 91390 (the “Lender”),
the principal amount of Forty Thousand Dollars ($40,000) on or before the earlier of the Borrower funding the a private placement
of its common stock in the amount of $250,000.00 (the “Private Placement”) or November 2, 2018 (the “Maturity Date”).


 


1.
INTEREST RATE. The interest rate shall be 2% from the date of this Note to
the Maturity Date.


 


2.
REPAYMENT. The parties hereto agree that at the time of repayment, Borrower
will pay Lender forty thousand (40,000) shares of common stock. At the discretion of the Lender, the principal plus accrued interest
may be repaid in cash or the note may be convertible into common shares (up to 100% of the note at $0.168/share).


 


3.
GOVERNING LAW. This Note and its interpretation, construction, validity and
enforceability shall be governed by the laws of the State of California. No interpretation or construction shall, however, be
adverse to or decided against the Lender with respect to any unclear or ambiguous terms or provisions of this Note based on same
having been drafted by the Lender’s counsel.


 


4.
ENTIRE AGREEMENT. This Note constitutes the entire understanding between Borrower,
and Lender and to the extent that any writings not signed by Lender or oral statements or conversations at anytime made or had
shall be inconsistent with the provisions of this Note and the other Loan Documents, the terms of this Note shall prevail.


 


PRIOR
TO SIGNING THIS NOTE, BORROWER HAS READ AND UNDERSTOOD ALL THE PROVISIONS OF THIS NOTE. BORROWER AGREES TO THE TERMS OF THIS NOTE
AND ACKNOWLEDGES RECEIPT OF A COMPLETED COPY OF THIS NOTE.


 


	 	Imaging3,
    Inc.
	 	 
	 	/s/John
    Hollister
	 	By
    John Hollister, CEO, Director


 




    	1



     


    

 


Wiring
Instructions:


 


East
West Bank


135
N. Los Robles Ave


Pasadena,
California 91101


ABA#
322070381


Acct#
5500000148


Attn:
Imaging3, Inc.


 




    	2
[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 173 (Friday, September 10, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Page 50791]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-19502]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Internal Revenue Service


Open Meeting of the Taxpayer Advocacy Panel's Toll-Free Phone 
Lines Project Committee

AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury.

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

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

SUMMARY: An open meeting of the Taxpayer Advocacy Panel's Toll-Free 
Phone Lines Project Committee will be conducted. The Taxpayer Advocacy 
Panel is soliciting public comments, ideas, and suggestions on 
improving customer service at the Internal Revenue Service.

DATES: The meeting will be held Tuesday, October 12, 2021.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rosalind Matherne at 1-888-912-1227 or 
202-317-4115.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given pursuant to Section 
10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App. (1988) 
that an open meeting of the Taxpayer Advocacy Panel Toll-Free Phone 
Lines Project Committee will be held Tuesday, October 12, 2021 at 11:00 
a.m. Eastern Time. The public is invited to make oral comments or 
submit written statements for consideration. Due to limited time and 
structure of meeting, notification of intent to participate must be 
made with Rosalind Matherne. For more information please contact 
Rosalind Matherne at 1-888-912-1227 or 202-317-4115, or write TAP 
Office, 1111 Constitution Ave. NW, Room 1509, Washington, DC 20224 or 
contact us at the website: http://www.improveirs.org. The agenda will 
include various IRS issues.

    Dated: September 3, 2021.
Kevin Brown,
Acting Director, Taxpayer Advocacy Panel.
[FR Doc. 2021-19502 Filed 9-9-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4830-01-P