alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Case 1:07-cv-03494-DLC Document 9 Filed 05/11/2007 Page 1 of 3
Case 1:07-cv-03494-DLC Document 9 Filed 05/11/2007 Page 2 of 3
Case 1:07-cv-03494-DLC Document 9 Filed 05/11/2007 Page 3 of 3
- -4

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MON g iia 

# D
PR 21-0005 

### OCT 0 52021
Bovven Greenwood Clerk of Supreme Court State of tvtontana IN RE THE MOTION OF CHRISTOPHER M. WATTS FORADMISSION TO THE BAR OF THE STATE OF MONTANA ORDER

Christopher M. Watts has filed a motion for admission to the Bar ofthe State of Montana pursuant to Rule V ofthe Rules for Admission, Admission on Motion. The Bar Admissions Administrator of the State Bar of Montana has informed the Court that the Commission on Character and Fitness has certified that Watts hasprovided the necessary documentation and has satisfied the requirements prerequisite to admission on motion under Rule V. Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that upon payment of any application fees and completion of any other processing requirements as set forth by the Bar Admissions Administrator, Christopher M. Watts may be sworn in to the practice oflaw in the State of Montana. Arrangements forswearingin may be madeby contactingthe officeoftheClerk ofthe Montana Supreme Court. The Clerk is directed to provide copies ofthis order to Petitioner and to the State Bar ofMontana. DATED this day ofOctober, 2021

ChiefJust' 10/05/2021

Case Number: PR 21-0005
Order entered March 6 , 2014

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05

- 13

- 01423

- CR

KEITH ALLEN WILLIAMS , Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the Criminal District Court No. 1

Dallas County, Texas Trial Co urt Cause No. F01

- 46409

- H



### O RDER

The Court REINSTATE S the appeal.

On January 10, 2014, we ordered the trial court to make findings regarding wh y t he

c lerk’s and reporter’s records had not been filed. On January 28, 2014, we received the clerk’s

record an d on March 5, 2014, we received the reporter’s record. Therefore, in the interest of

expediting the appeal, we VACATE the January 10, 2014 order requiring findings.

Appellant’s brief is due within thirty days of the date of this order.

/s/ LANA MYERS J USTICE
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5 
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted
from the interim financial statements of Kinark Corporation dated
September 30, 1995, set forth in the accompanying Form 10-Q and
is qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial
statements.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1995
<CASH>                                             128
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    3,522
<ALLOWANCES>                                        84
<INVENTORY>                                      2,476
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 6,949
<PP&E>                                          29,992
<DEPRECIATION>                                  21,110
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  18,252
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            9,879
<BONDS>                                             84
<COMMON>                                           520
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                       7,769
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    18,252
<SALES>                                         18,971
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                18,971
<CGS>                                           15,352
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   19,271
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   467
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 467
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  (767)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     (280)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              (487)
<DISCONTINUED>                                 (1,268)
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (1,755)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.47)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.47)
        

</TABLE>
<PAGE>   1

                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.53

                            MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT


This Memorandum of Agreement specifies the terms that KNOLOGY Holdings Inc. and
Interstate Fiber Network (IFN) will implement to allow sharing of duct
facilities at two locations.

Location 1 involves an entrance duct into the Opelika Cell Site Equipment
building on Highway 29 in Opelika, AL. IFN owns a duct route from a riser pole
at the end of the pole route at the Cell Site into the equipment building. IFN
agrees to allow KNOLOGY Holdings Inc. to place one fiber optic cable from the
riser pole to the Opelika Cell Site equipment building through a spare IFN
innerduct. The duct route goes from the riser pole to the Cell Site Equipment
building via an underground vault.

Location 2 involves an entrance duct route to an IFN splice vault adjacent to
the new Panama City PoP building on Highway 231 near Ten Acre Rd. in Panama
City, FL. KNOLOGY owns two duct routes into two IFN splice vaults at the new
Panama City PoP -- a north duct entrance and a south duct entrance. The KNOLOGY
duct route for the north approach to the PoP contains three KNOLOGY 1 1/8"
innerducts. A KNOLOGY fiber cable will occupy one of the innerducts. KNOLOGY
will allow one innerduct to be occupied by IFN for placement of one fiber
cable. The third innerduct in KNOLOGY's north duct route to the IFN vault
adjacent to the Panama City PoP will remain vacant for KNOLOGY's future use.
This agreement does not involve the KNOLOGY duct entrance into the Panama City
POP from the south side.

KNOLOGY will place a tag that says "IFN" on each end of the KNOLOGY innerduct
into the IFN splice vault adjacent to Panama City PoP that is reserved for IFN.

The signatures below by representatives of KNOLOGY and IFN place this agreement
into immediate effect. This agreement remains in effect until both parties
decide to discontinue the agreement.


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
KNOLOGY Holdings, Inc.                      Interstate Fiber Network (IFN)
----------------------                      ------------------------------
<S>                                         <C>
Name (printed): Bret T. McCants             Name (printed): J. Wayne King

Signature: /s/ Bret T. McCants              Signature: /s/ J. Wayne King

Title: VP Network Services                  Title: Facility Manager

Date: 7/24/99                               Date: 7/27/99
</TABLE>
Case 1:07-cv-03345-RJS Document 41 Filed 09/11/2008 Page 1 of 1
Case 4:10-cv-00007-RH-WCS Document 1 Filed 01/07/10 Page 1 of 14
Case 4:10-cv-00007-RH-WCS Document 1 Filed 01/07/10 Page 2 of 14
Case 4:10-cv-00007-RH-WCS Document 1 Filed 01/07/10 Page 3 of 14
Case 4:10-cv-00007-RH-WCS Document 1 Filed 01/07/10 Page 4 of 14
Case 4:10-cv-00007-RH-WCS Document 1 Filed 01/07/10 Page 5 of 14
Case 4:10-cv-00007-RH-WCS Document 1 Filed 01/07/10 Page 6 of 14
Case 4:10-cv-00007-RH-WCS Document 1 Filed 01/07/10 Page 7 of 14
Case 4:10-cv-00007-RH-WCS Document 1 Filed 01/07/10 Page 8 of 14
Case 4:10-cv-00007-RH-WCS Document 1 Filed 01/07/10 Page 9 of 14
Case 4:10-cv-00007-RH-WCS Document 1 Filed 01/07/10 Page 10 of 14
Case 4:10-cv-00007-RH-WCS Document 1 Filed 01/07/10 Page 11 of 14
Case 4:10-cv-00007-RH-WCS Document 1 Filed 01/07/10 Page 12 of 14
Case 4:10-cv-00007-RH-WCS Document 1 Filed 01/07/10 Page 13 of 14
Case 4:10-cv-00007-RH-WCS Document 1 Filed 01/07/10 Page 14 of 14
#### WIGGINS v. BUNCH

No. 7.

Reported: 280 N.C. 106.

Petition by Wiggins to rehear denied 28 January 1972.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Michael JULIA, a/k/a Michael Constanti, Appellant.

No. 506, Docket 29381.

United States Court of Appeals Second Circuit.

Argued June 3, 1965.

Decided July 14, 1965.

Paul K. Rooney, Asst. U. S. Atty. (Robert M. Morgenthau, U. S. Atty., on the brief, John S. Martin, Jr., Asst. U. S. Atty., of counsel), for appellee.

James H. Durand, New York City (Anthony F. Marra, New York City, on the brief), for appellant.

*916Before MOORE and ANDERSON, Circuit Judges, and WEINFELD, District Judge.*

*

 Of the Southern District, sitting by designation.

PER CURIAM.

After a nonjury trial, Michael Julia was convicted on two counts for selling heroin on two different days in violation of 21 U.S.C.A. §§ 173-174. The sales were made to the same federal narcotics agent. Julia’s defense as to the first sale was that it had been made by a friend and that he had merely been standing nearby; as to the second sale, he claimed entrapment through the persuasion and pressure of the Government agent and a “special employee.” Julia sought by bill of particulars and at the opening of the trial to have the court order the Government to disclose the special employee’s name and whereabouts. However, later in the trial he failed to follow up the court’s apparent readiness to do so. He also sought a continuance so that the special employee and another witness could be located. Julia argues that reversible error was committed when the trial court failed both to order the Government to disclose the name of a special employee involved in the case and to grant a continuance.

Because testimony from the best source, the defendant himself, indicates that the claim of entrapment is totally lacking in substance, we need not decide whether Julia’s awareness of a name of the special employee and his identity— they had met four or five times — would bring this case within the ambit of our decisions finding no error in nondisclosure for that reason. See United States v. Rosario, 327 F.2d 561, 563-564 (2d Cir. 1964); United States v. Glaze, 313 F.2d 757, 760-761 (2d Cir. 1963); United States v. Romano, 278 F.2d 202, 204-205 (2d Cir. 1960); United States v. Gernie, 252 F.2d 664, 669 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 356 U.S. 968, 78 S.Ct. 1006, 2 L.Ed.2d 1073 (1958). And, just as the meager claim of entrapment does not make prejudicial error out of nondisclosure, so also does it fail to make denial of a continuance an abuse of discretion, compare United States v. White, 324 F.2d 814 (2d Cir. 1963), even less reversible error, although in a simple non-jury case like this a continuance would not seem too inconvenient.

Finding sufficient grounds for sustaining the conviction on one count, we do not need to consider the errors claimed as to the first sale, concurrent sentences having been imposed.

Affirmed.
# C_2009091EN.01000701.xml

| 21.4.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 91/7 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

21.4.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 91/7

---

Special Report No 1/2009 ‘Banking measures in the Mediterranean area in the context of the MEDA programme and the previous protocols’

2009/C 91/03

The European Court of Auditors hereby informs you that Special Report No 1/2009 ‘Banking measures in the Mediterranean area in the context of the MEDA programme and the previous protocols’ has just been published.

The report can be accessed for consultation or downloading on the European Court of Auditors' website: www.eca.europa.eu

A hard copy and a CD-ROM version of the report may be obtained free of charge on request to the Court of Auditors:

| European Court of Auditors |
| --- |
| Communication and Reports Unit |
| 12 rue Alcide De Gasperi |
| 1615 Luxembourg |
| LUXEMBOURG |
| Tel: +352 4398-1 |
| e-mail: euraud@eca.europa.eu |

European Court of Auditors

Communication and Reports Unit

12 rue Alcide De Gasperi

1615 Luxembourg

LUXEMBOURG

Tel: +352 4398-1

e-mail: euraud@eca.europa.eu

or by filling in an electronic order form on EU-Bookshop.

---
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 26 (Thursday, February 8, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Page 5982]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 07-559]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Heart, Lung, and Blood Substitute; Notice of Closed 
Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice is hereby given of the following 
meeting.
    The meeting will be closed to the pubic in accordance with the 
provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 
U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could 
disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as 
patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals 
associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would 
constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Heart, Lung, and Blood Substitute 
Special Emphasis Panel; Pathway to Independence Award (K99).
    Date: March 9, 2007.
    Time: 8 a.m. to 5 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: Four Points Sheradon BWI Airport Hotel, 7032 Elm Road, 
Baltimore, MD 21240.
    Contact Person: William J. Johnson, PhD., Scientific Review 
Administrator, Review Branch/DERA, National Heart, Lung, and Blood 
Substitute, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 7178, Bethesda, MD 20892-
7924, 301-435-0725, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#c9a3a6a1a7baa6a7be89a7a1a5aba0e7a7a0a1e7aea6bf"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="610b0e090f120e0f16210f090d03084f0f08094f060e17">[email protected]</span></a>.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.233, 
National Center for Sleep Disorders Research; 93.837, Heart and 
Vascular Diseases Research; 93.838, Lung Diseases Research; 93.839, 
Blood Diseases and Resources Research, National Institutes of 
Health, HHS)

    Dated: February 1, 2007.
Anna Snouffer,
Acting Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 07-559 Filed 2-7-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-M


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
Case 1:09-cv-00257-MP -AK Document 118 Filed 08/02/10 Page 1 of 2Case 1:09-cv-00257-MP -AK Document 118 Filed 08/02/10 Page 2 of 2
Page 1 of 3

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

vs. CASE NO. 4:10cr29-SPM

FRANK PEGUERO, JR., 

 

Defendant.

 /

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

Defendant proposed to enter a guilty plea to Counts One and Two of this

indictment. The district judge referred this matter to me for purposes of hearing

Defendant's proposed change of plea pursuant to Fed.R.Crim.P. 11 and to enter a

report and recommendation as to whether to accept the change of plea. All parties

consented to this procedure, and the written consent has been entered. After hearing, it

is found that:

1. Defendant understands the nature of the charge or charges as to which the

plea is offered.

2. Defendant understands the right to trial by jury, to persist in a plea of not

guilty, to assistance of counsel at trial, and to confront and cross examine adverse

witnesses, and understands the right against compelled self-incrimination.
Page 2 of 3

3. Defendant understands the maximum possible sentence if the guilty plea is

accepted, including the effect of a supervised release term, understands that the

sentencing guidelines are advisory, and understands that the court has discretion to

depart from those guidelines and sentence up to the statutory maximum sentence.

4. The plea of guilty by the Defendant has been knowingly and voluntarily made,

and is not the result of force or threats, or of promises except for promises contained in

the written plea agreement between the parties.

5. Defendant is competent to plead guilty.

6. Defendant understands that answers given by the Defendant during the plea

colloquy, which were under oath, may be later used against the Defendant in

prosecution for perjury or false statement.

7. There is a factual basis for Defendant's guilty plea.

8. There is a plea agreement which should be accepted by the court. Defendant

understands the terms of the plea agreement.

9. Defendant has voluntarily consented to go forward with this plea of guilty

before me. Defendant knowingly and voluntarily has waived the ten day period for filing

objections to this report and recommendation, and agrees that written objections, if any,

must be filed within twenty-four hours from receipt of a copy of this report and

recommendation. The United States also consents to this procedure, including the

shorter period for objections.

Case No. 4:10cr29-SPM
Page 3 of 3

Accordingly, it is RECOMMENDED that the court ACCEPT the plea agreement

and defendant's plea of guilty.

IN CHAMBERS at Tallahassee, Florida, on October 25, 2010. 

s/ William C. Sherrill, Jr. 

WILLIAM C. SHERRILL, JR.

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

 

NOTICE TO THE PARTIES

A party may file specific, written objections to the proposed findings and

recommendations within 24 hours after receiving a copy of this report and

recommendation.

Case No. 4:10cr29-SPM
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM LESCARDEN
INC.'S NOVEMBER 30,2000 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERNCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL LEGENDS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAY-31-2001
<PERIOD-END>                               NOV-30-2000
<CASH>                                          48,450
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     87,300
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               135,750
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 135,750
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          372,806
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        22,369
<OTHER-SE>                                   (259,425)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   135,750
<SALES>                                         17,921
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                17,921
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  261,625
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (243,704)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (243,704)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (243,704)
<EPS-BASIC>                                   (0.01)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.01)


</TABLE>
# C_2011299EN.01000301.xml

| 11.10.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 299/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

11.10.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 299/3

---

Notice for the attention of the persons to which measures provided for in Council Decision 2011/235/CFSP, as implemented by Council Implementing Decision 2011/667/CFSP, and in Council Regulation (EU) No 359/2011, as implemented by Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1000/2011 concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities in view of the situation in Iran apply

2011/C 299/04

COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

The following information is brought to the attention of the persons that appear in the Annex to Council Decision 2011/235/CFSP, as implemented by Council Implementing Decision 2011/667/CFSP (1), and in Annex I to Council Regulation (EU) No 359/2011, as implemented by Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1000/2011 (2) concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities in view of the situation in Iran.

1

2

The Council of the European Union has decided that the persons that appear in the abovementioned Annexes should be included in the list of persons and entities subject to restrictive measures provided for in Decision 2011/235/CFSP and in Regulation (EU) No 359/2011.

The attention of the persons concerned is drawn to the possibility of making an application to the competent authorities of the relevant Member State(s) as indicated on the websites in Annex II to Regulation (EU) No 359/2011, in order to obtain an authorisation to use frozen funds for basic needs or specific payments (cf. Article 4 of the Regulation).

The persons concerned may submit a request to the Council, together with supporting documentation, that the decision to include them on the abovementioned list should be reconsidered, to the following address:

| Council of the European Union |
| --- |
| General Secretariat |
| DG K Coordination |
| Rue de la Loi/Wetstraat 175 |
| 1048 Bruxelles/Brussel |
| BELGIQUE/BELGIË |

Council of the European Union

General Secretariat

DG K Coordination

Rue de la Loi/Wetstraat 175

1048 Bruxelles/Brussel

BELGIQUE/BELGIË

The attention of the persons concerned is also drawn to the possibility of challenging the Council's decision before the General Court of the European Union, in accordance with the conditions laid down in Article 275, second paragraph, and Article 263, fourth and sixth paragraphs, of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.

---

(1)  OJ L 265, 11.10.2011, p. 34.

1

(2)  OJ L 265, 11.10.2011, p. 7.

2

---
““SSLU. “rnn-mmo 

OFFKE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL 

To* 0. lo-L C”AmLu “Tr* *m111 Il. 8caTr JOI! SItAmP 

AUSTIN OICK aTaUT 

January Bth, 1939 :kxs?SW 

mm W‘Lw0N-w lyynwAl.llm 6Y&m.l!, . . WIt.Kmm Y. I.. WlWIoIID 

l&r. Dan W. Jaokson 

Criminal Mstriot Attorney 

Houston* Texas 

Dear tfr. Jaokson: 0plsl10n 230. 

Re: Valldlty and A&lloatlon 

of ArticleePUSj9+15?2 of the 

Texas B-1 Codkhhare the 

Federal Eio* 

is applioabls. 

the validity and 

1572 or the Texas 

of+mc-ihe Aat is appllaable. -em-' 

Yours very truly,
Case 3:01-cr-00008-RV   Document 123   Filed 12/13/06   Page 1 of 1
Page 1 of 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

PROPHET PAULCIN,

Plaintiff,

vs. Case No.: 3:09cv573/RV/EMT

WALTER A. McNEIL, et al.,

 Defendants.

____________________________/

O R D E R

This cause comes on for consideration upon the magistrate judge’s Report and

Recommendation dated July 23, 2010 (Doc. 15). Plaintiff has been furnished a copy of the Report

and Recommendation and has been afforded an opportunity to file objections pursuant to Title 28,

United States Code, Section 636(b)(1). I have made a de novo determination of all timely filed

objections.

Having considered the Report and Recommendation, and any timely filed objections thereto

timely filed, I have determined that the Report and Recommendation should be adopted.

Accordingly, it is now ORDERED as follows:

1. The magistrate judge’s Report and Recommendation is adopted and incorporated by

reference in this order.

2. Plaintiff’s notice of voluntary dismissal (Doc. 14) is GRANTED and this case is

DISMISSED without prejudice.

DONE AND ORDERED this 23rd day of August, 2010.

/s/ Roger Vinson 

ROGER VINSON

SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE