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

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK 

IN RE WORLD TRADE CENTER 

LOWER MANHATTAN DISASTER 

SITE LITIGATION 

21MC102(AKH)

GREGORY FISCO (AND WIFE, NICOLE FISCO), 

Plaintiff(s), 

-against100 CHURCH LLC, et al., 

Defendants. 

07CV5289(AKH)

NOTICE OF ADOPTION BY 

100 CHURCH LLC OF 

AMENDED ANSWER TO 

MASTER COMPLAINT

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that defendant 100 CHURCH LLC (hereinafter “100 

Church”), as and for its response to the allegations set forth in the Complaint by Adoption 

(Check-Off Complaint) related to the Master Complaint adding new defendants not previously 

served filed in the above-referenced action, herein adopts 100 Church's Amended Answer to 

Master Complaint dated August 30, 2007, which was filed in the matter of In re World Trade 

Center Lower Manhattan Disaster Site Litigation, 21 MC 102 (AKH). 100 CHURCH has filed 

a Master Disclosure of Interested Parties in 21 MC 102 (AKH), and as such, is exempt from 

having to file such a disclosure in this specific matter, pursuant to the provisions of Case 

Management Order No. 4 (¶ J(2)). 

PLEASE TAKE FURTHER NOTICE THAT defendant, 100 CHURCH reserves its 

right to assert any defenses to which it is entitled, including but not limited to those enumerated 

in Case Management Order No. 4 (¶¶ D(1)-(5)). 

Case 1:07-cv-05289-AKH Document 28 Filed 05/14/2008 Page 1 of 3
WHEREFORE, 100 Church demands judgment dismissing the above-captioned action 

as against it, together with its costs and disbursements. 

Dated: New York, New York 

 May 14, 2008 

HARRIS BEACH PLLC 

Attorneys for Defendant 

100 CHURCH LLC 

 /s/ 

 Stanley Goos, Esq. (SG 7062) 

100 Wall Street, 23rd Floor 

New York, New York 10005 

(212) 687-0100 

TO: 

Paul Napoli, Esq. 

Worby Groner Edelman & Napoli Bern LLP 

115 Broadway, 12th Floor 

New York, New York 10006 

Robert A. Grochow, Esq. 

Robert A. Grochow, P.C. 

233 Broadway, 5th Floor 

New York, New York 10279 

Gregory J. Cannata, Esq. 

Law Offices of Gregory J. Cannata 

233 Broadway, 5th Floor 

New York, New York 10279 

Liaison Counsel for Plaintiff

James E. Tyrrell, Esq. 

Joseph Hopkins, Esq. 

Patton Boggs LLP 

One Riverfront Plaza, 6th Floor 

Newark, New Jersey 07102 

All Counsel via ECF 

Case 1:07-cv-05289-AKH Document 28 Filed 05/14/2008 Page 2 of 3
CERTIFICATION AS TO SERVICE

The undersigned certifies that on May 14, 2008, I caused to be filed and served 

the following document electronically via the Court’s ECF system upon the parties: 

1. Notice of 100 Church LLC's Adoption of Amended Answer to Master 

Complaint. 

Dated: May 14, 2008 

 /s/ 

 Stanley Goos, Esq. (SG 7062)

Case 1:07-cv-05289-AKH Document 28 Filed 05/14/2008 Page 3 of 3
The Honorable Patrick A. Conmy, United States District Judge for the District 1

of North Dakota.

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 97-4394

___________

Allison G. Ghylin, *

*

Appellant, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the District

* of North Dakota.

William Clinton, as representative *

of U.S. Government and Congress, * [UNPUBLISHED]

*

Appellee. *

___________

 Submitted: February 2, 1998

 Filed: February 2, 1998

___________

Before BOWMAN, WOLLMAN, and MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, Circuit 

Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Allison G. Ghylin appeals the district court&s order dismissing Ghylin&s suit for 1

lack of jurisdiction. Because we agree with the district court&s conclusion that the

complaint presented no cognizable or justiciable matter, see Berger Levee Dist.,
-2-

Franklin County, Mo. v. United States, 128 F.3d 679, 680-81 (8th Cir. 1997)

(concerning existence of federal question jurisdiction), we affirm. See 8th Cir. R.

47A(a).

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
## Breadcrumb

-  Earth Resources Observation and Science (EROS) Center  

#           Eyes on Earth Episode 17 – Evapotranspiration      

      By Earth Resources Observation and Science (EROS) Center 

## Eyes on Earth

Get every episode

-  Home 
-  Science 
-  Data 
-  Multimedia 
-  Publications 
-  Web Tools 
-  News 
-  Connect 
-  Partners 
-  About 

Eyes on Earth is a podcast on remote sensing, Earth observation, land change and science, brought to you by the USGS Earth Resources Observation and Science (EROS) Center. In this episode, we learn how EROS scientists use satellites to help manage water use.

View Media Details

View

Download and Transcript Access

View Media Details

**Summary**: It’s easy enough to measure rainfall, and nearly as easy to measure streamflow. Calculating the efficiency of water use through the metric of evapotranspiration (ET) – evaporation off the Earth’s surface and transpiration from the leaves of plants – is a far trickier proposal. In this episode, we hear how scientists use satellites like Landsat to measure ET, and how those measurements help guide water management decisions in the U.S. and around the world.

**Guests**: Gabriel Senay, Research Physical Scientist, EROS

**Host**: John Hult

**Producer**: John Hult

**Release date**: Feb. 24, 2020

**More on Evapotranspiration**: 
                            - Water Consumption Work at EROS Important Asset to Colorado River Concerns
                            - Brazilians Work with EROS Staff to Map, Monitor Agricultural Irrigation
                            - EROS Evapotranspiration Model Key Part of Upper Rio Grande Basin Study
                            - Senay, EROS Helping to Solve Riddle of Water Use in Upper Klamath Basin

### Contacts
Case 1:07-cv-05295-AKH Document 3 Filed 07/18/2007 Page 1 of 3
Case 1:07-cv-05295-AKH Document 3 Filed 07/18/2007 Page 2 of 3
Case 1:07-cv-05295-AKH Document 3 Filed 07/18/2007 Page 3 of 3
Case 1:07-cv-05370-AKH Document 9 Filed 08/06/2007 Page 1 of 1
Exhibit 32.2
  CFO CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350*
 
 In connection with the Quarterly Report of Guaranty Federal Bancshares, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Carter Peters, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:
  1.           The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
  2.           The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
  /s/  Carter PetersCarter PetersChief Financial Officer(Principal Financial Officer)
 
 May 12, 2010
 
 *  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.
Case 1:07-cv-01528-AKH Document 5-2 Filed 08/07/2007 Page 1 of 3
Case 1:07-cv-01528-AKH Document 5-2 Filed 08/07/2007 Page 2 of 3
Case 1:07-cv-01528-AKH Document 5-2 Filed 08/07/2007 Page 3 of 3
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>     5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
BALANCE SHEET AND STATEMENTS OF LOSS AND ACCUMULATED DEFICIT AND IS QUALIFIED
IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE  TO SUCH 10QSB FOR THE QUARTER ENDED February
29, 2000.


<S>                                        <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                              3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          Aug-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               Feb-29-2000
<CASH>                                            1138
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  2000000
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               2001138
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 2001138
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                             8306
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       2020435
<OTHER-SE>                                      (27603)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   2001138
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                     5739
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  (5739)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (5739)
<EPS-BASIC>                                    (.000)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.000)



</TABLE>
Case 1:07-cv-05370-AKH Document 3-2 Filed 07/19/2007 Page 1 of 1
<Page>

                                                                    Exhibit 23.1

                    CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS

As independent public accountants, we hereby consent to the incorporation by
reference of our report dated March 26, 2003, with respect to the consolidated
financial statements and schedules of The Seibels Bruce Group, Inc., included in
this Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31, 2002 into the
Company's previously filed Registration Statements (Form S-2 File Nos.
333-24081, 333-14123 and 333-14125 and Form S-8 File Nos. 333-65537, 333-14135,
333-15457, 2-70057, 2-83595, 33-34973, 33-43618, 33-43601 and 2-48782).


                                                   JOHNSON LAMBERT & CO.


Raleigh, North Carolina,
March 26, 2003

                                       125
# United States Court **of Appeals**  **f or the Fifth Circuit** 

No. 20

- 30210 Summary Calendar

**United States of America,**
Plaintiff

— Appellee **,**

versus
**Jereme Thomas,**
Defendant

— Appellant

**.**

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana USDC No. 2:06

- CR

- 269

- 1

Before **King, Costa,** and **Ho,** Circuit Judges.

**Per Curiam :**  * Jereme Thomas, federal prisoner # 29977

- 034, appeals the denial of his motion under § 404 of the First Step A ct of 2018 , Pub. L. No. 115

- 391, 132 Stat. 5194, 5222 , to reduce his 240

- month sentence for conspiracy to distribute cocaine base

. We review the district court’s decision to deny a

* Pursuant to **5th Cir cuit**  **R ule**  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 **5th Cir cuit**  **R ule**  47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED August 13, 2021

Lyle W. C ayce Clerk Case: 20-30210 Document: 00515978759 Page: 1 Date Filed: 08/13/2021No. 20

- 30210

2 First Step Act reduction for an abuse of discretion. United States v. Jackson , 945 F.3d 315, 319 (5th Cir. 2019), cert. denied , 140 S. Ct. 2699 (2020). Although Thomas contends that the district court fa iled to acknowledge the applicable amended guidelines range , the order denying the First Step Act motion listed the amended guidelines range and the amended statutory minimum. Thomas also argues that the district court did not adequately explain its reaso ns for denying First Step Act relief , but Thomas’s arguments in his motion were before the district court, which gave specific reasons, tied to relevant 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors, for denying a reduction

. See United States v. Batiste , 980 F.3d 466, 479 (5th Cir. 2020)

. **AFFIRMED**

. Case: 20-30210 Document: 00515978759 Page: 2 Date Filed: 08/13/2021
#### Karen M. Spetter, Respondent, v Job M. Spetter, Appellant.

— In a matrimonial action in which the parties were divorced by judgment dated November 13, 1981, the defendant father appeals (1) from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Dachenhausen, J.), entered May 15, 1986, which, after a hearing, denied his motion for a change of custody of his infant son to him, and (2), as limited by his brief, from so much of an order of the same court, entered June 4, 1986, as set forth a schedule of visitation.

Ordered that the order entered May 15, 1986 is affirmed, without costs or disbursements; and it is further,

Ordered that the order entered June 4, 1986 is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the facts, and in the exercise of discretion, without costs or disbursements, and the visitation schedule as set forth in the separation agreement of the parties dated August 19, 1981 is reinstated.

Although we find both parties to be loving and fit parents we agree with the Supreme Court’s determination that physical custody of the parties’ infant son should remain with the plaintiff mother. We recognize that the parties’ son, who was eight years old at the time the orders appealed from were entered, voiced a desire to live with the defendant father, but note that this preference is not determinative in light of the child’s age, maturity and the potential influence which has been exerted upon him *(see, Eschbach v Eschbach,*56 NY2d 167, 173).

*751However, we disagree with the court’s schedule of visitation as set forth in the order entered June 4, 1986. We find that the original visitation schedule, as agreed upon by the parties in their 1981 separation agreement and which survived the divorce judgment, is in the best interest of the child. Kunzeman, J. P., Hooper, Spatt and Sullivan, JJ., concur.
**Exhibit 23.5**

**CONSENTOF INDEPENDENT PETROLEUM ENGINEERS**

Ryder Scott Company, L.P. hereby consents to the useof its name and the information from its reports regarding its estimates ofreserves and future net revenues from the production and sale of those reservesof Latigo Petroleum Inc. for the year ended December 31, 2006 in Pogo ProducingCompany’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2006,including the filing of its letter reports as exhibits thereto, and to theincorporation by reference thereof into Pogo Producing Company’s previouslyfiled Registration Statement Nos. 33-54969, 333-04233, 333-75105, 333-75105-01,333-75105-02, 333-74861, 333-42426, 333-42428, 333-60800, 333-67324, 333-65548,333-86856, 333-98205, 333-102775, 333-115130, 333-86417, 333-126097, 333-130557and 333-136926.
|            | **/s/ RYDER SCOTT COMPANY, L.P.** |
|------------|-----------------------------------|
| ** ** | **RYDER SCOTT COMPANY, L.P.**     |

 

Houston, Texas

February 28, 2007

 

----
Cook Safely!

Prevent

Kitchen Fires

Did you know?

Cooking is the main cause of home fires and fire injuries. 

You can prevent cooking fires. Take these steps to keep 

your family safe!

o Stand by your pan:

If you leave the kitchen, turn the burner off.

o Watch what you are cooking:

Fires start when the heat is too high. If you

see any smoke or the grease starts to boil,

turn the burner off.

o Turn pot handles toward the

back of the stove:

Then no one can bump them or pull

them over.

o Keep a pan lid or baking sheet

nearby:

Use it to cover the pan if it catches on fire.

This will put out the fire.

For more information and resources, visit

www.usfa.fema.gov
Case 1:07-cv-05556-AKH Document 24 Filed 09/17/2007 Page 1 of 2
Case 1:07-cv-05556-AKH Document 24 Filed 09/17/2007 Page 2 of 2
Case 1:07-cv-05773-LAK-GWG     Document 4-2      Filed 07/13/2007     Page 1 of 1
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 Energy

###### Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

          - [Docket No. CP99-580-002]

On May 17, 2001, at 9 a.m., staff from the Office of Energy Projects (OEP) will conduct a pre-certification site visit of the proposed Sendout Modification Project at Southern LNG Inc.'s (Southern LNG) existing liquefied natural gas import terminal on Elba Island near Savannah, Georgia. Representatives of Southern LNG  will accompany the OEP staff.

At 1:30 p.m. on May 17, 2001, OEP staff and Southern LNG will conduct an informal Plant Open House to discuss general LNG issues.

All interested parties may attend the site visit and/or open house. Those planning to attend must provide their own transportation. For further information on attending the site visit or open house, please contact the Commission's Office of External Affairs at (202) 208-0004.

Linwood A. Watson, Jr.,

Acting Secretary.

[FR Doc. 01-11973  Filed 5-11-01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 17

- 40106 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff

- Appellee

v.
MIGUEL GOMEZ

- REGALADO , Defendant

- Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 5:16

- CR

- 545

- 1

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, JONES, and SMITH, Circuit Judges

. PER CURIAM: *
The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Miguel Gomez

Regalado has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance
with Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores , 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Gomez

- Regalado h a s not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no

* 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 September 27, 2017 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 17-40106 Document: 00514173456 Page: 1 Date Filed: 09/27/2017No. 17

- 40106

2 nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave
to wi thdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5 TH C IR

. R. 42.2. Case: 17-40106 Document: 00514173456 Page: 2 Date Filed: 09/27/2017
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent *

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision **

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

EVELIA CAMPUZANO-BLANCO,

 Petitioner,

 v.

ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,

 Respondent.

No. 10-73915

Agency No. A097-857-938

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted December 19, 2012** 

Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and FISHER, Circuit Judges.

Evelia Campuzano-Blanco, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions pro se

for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying her

motion to reopen removal proceedings. Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C.

§ 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen and

FILED

DEC 21 2012

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 10-73915

review de novo questions of law. Mohammed v. Gonzales, 400 F.3d 785, 791-92

(9th Cir. 2005). We deny in part and dismiss in part the petition for review. 

The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Campuzano-Blanco’s

motion to reopen as untimely where the motion was filed over nine months after

the BIA’s order dismissing the underlying appeal, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2)

(motion to reopen generally must be filed within 90 days of the final order), and

Campuzano-Blanco failed to present material evidence of changed circumstances

in Mexico to qualify for the regulatory exception to the filing deadline, see 8

C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(3)(ii); Delgado-Ortiz v. Holder, 600 F.3d 1148, 1151 (9th Cir.

2010) (“Asylum is not available to victims of indiscriminate violence, unless they

are singled out on account of a protected ground.”). 

We lack jurisdiction to review the BIA’s November 2, 2009, order

dismissing Campuzano-Blanco’s appeal from the immigration judge’s decision

denying cancellation of removal because this petition for review is not timely as to

that order. See Singh v. INS, 315 F.3d 1186, 1188 (9th Cir. 2003). 

We also lack jurisdiction to review the BIA’s decision not to invoke its sua

sponte authority to reopen proceedings under 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(a). See MejiaHernandez v. Holder, 633 F.3d 818, 824 (9th Cir. 2011). 
3 10-73915

Finally, we reject Campuzano-Blanco’s contention that her removal results

in the deprivation of her children’s due process rights. See Cabrera-Alvarez v.

Gonzales, 423 F.3d 1006, 1012-13 (9th Cir. 2005).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.