alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
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. 4:10cr35-SPM

RALPHY JOSEPH,

 

Defendant.

 /

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

Defendant proposed to enter a guilty plea to Counts One, Two and Four 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. 4:10cr35-SPM/WCS
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 July 12, 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. 4:10cr35-SPM/WCS
# C_2009118EN.01000201.xml

| 27.5.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 118/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.5.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 118/2

---

NOTICE OF OPEN COMPETITION EPSO/AD/175/09

NOTICE OF OPEN COMPETITION

2009/C 118/02

The European Personnel Selection Office (EPSO) is organising open competition EPSO/AD/175/09 to recruit conference interpreters (AD 5/AD 7) with Greek as their main language.

The competition notice is published in Official Journal C 118 A of 27 May 2009 in Greek only.

Further details can be found on the EPSO website: http://eu-careers.eu

---
EXHIBIT 31.1
SECTION 302 CERTIFICATION
OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

I, George Tsafalas, Chief Executive Officer of Fairchild International Corporation, certify that:

1.	I have reviewed this Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of Fairchild International 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 officers 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)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the registrant and have:

1. 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;
2. 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
3. Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the small business issuer's most recent fiscal quarter (the small business issuer's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the small business issuer's internal control over financial reporting; and

1. The registrant's other certifying officer(s) 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 registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

1. 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
2. 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.

Date: April 15, 2004

/s/ George Tsafalas

_____________________________
George Tsafalas, President
and Chief Executive Officer
PROMISSORYNOTE   Toronto, Canada $9,937.99 January22,2013   Theundersigned,MyriadInteractiveMediaInc.,havinganaddressof7IngramDrive Suite128,inToronto,OntarioM6M2L7(“Borrower”),promisestopaytotheorderofSean McConnell,at72CordellaAve,inToronto,OntarioCanadaM6N2J6(“Holder”),oratsuch otherplaceastheHolderhereofmayhereafterdesignateinwriting,thesumofNineThousand NineHundredyThirtySevenandninetynineCents($9,937).Theprincipalsumofthis PromissoryNote(the”Note”)shallaccrueinterestat9%perannumuntilJanuary22,2014(the “MaturityDate”),atwhichtimetheentireprincipalbalanceofthisNoteandanyaccruedbut unpaidinterestshallbedueandpayable.Paymentsshallbeappliedfirsttoaccruedinterestand thentoprincipal.  PrepaymentofthisNote,withinteresttodateofpayment,maybemadeatany timewithoutpenalty.  TheundersignedBorroweragreestopaytotheHolderhereofreasonable attorney'sfees,legalexpenses,andlawfulcollectioncostsinadditiontoallothersumsdue hereunder,intheeventofanymaterialdefaultunderthisNote.  Eachpaymentshallbecreditedfirsttointerestthendue,withtheremainder appliedtotheprincipal,andinterestshallthenceaseonanyportionofprincipalcredited.  TheunenforceabilityorinvalidityofanyprovisionofthisNoteastoanypersons orcircumstancesshallnotrenderthatprovisionorthoseprovisionsunenforceableorinvalidasto anyotherpersonsorcircumstances,andallotherprovisionshereof,inallotherrespects,shall remainvalidandenforceable.  TimeisoftheessencewithrespecttoallprovisionsofthisNote.                  MyriadInteractiveMediaInc.Jan222013-PromissoryNote-SeanMcConnell.doc     Presentment,demand,protest,noticeofdishonor,andextensionoftimewithout noticeareherebywaived,andtheundersignedconsentstothereleaseofanysecurity,oranypart thereof,withorwithoutsubstitution.        /s/ Derek Ivany   Signedby:DerekIvany,C/OMyriad       /s/ Sean Mcconnell
## COURT OF APPEALS SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH
NO. 02
- 13
- 00599
- CR

GREGORY MCCAIN APPELLANT

V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS STATE

---------- FROM CRIMINAL DISTRI CT COURT NO. 2 OF TA RRANT COUNTY

---------- 

### MEMORANDUM OPINION 1

---------- On Dec ember 13, 2013, Appellant Gregory McCain filed a motion for post

conviction DNA testing and appointment of counsel and also filed a notice of appeal. The trial court clerk has informed us that the trial judge has not signed
an order in this case

. On Janu ary 3, 2014 , we notified McCain that it appears we lack jurisdiction over this matter because there is no order and his notice of

1 See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4.2

appeal is premature. See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(a)(2), 26.2(a)(1), 27.1(b). W e advised that this appeal could be dismissed unl ess he, or any party desiring to continue the appeal, filed a response showing grounds for continuing the appeal
on or before January 23, 2014

. No response has been filed. The rules of appellate procedure provide that a criminal defendant has the right to appeal a judgment of guilt or other appealable order. See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(a)(2). T here is no appealable order in this case, and McCain’s notice of appeal is premature. See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(a)(2), 26.2(a)(1), 27.1(b). Accordingly, the appeal i s ordered dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

PER CURIAM PANEL: WALKER, MCCOY, and MEIER, JJ.
DO NOT PUBLISH Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b) DELIVERED: February 20, 2013
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2295 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 2295

  To amend the Federal Water Pollution Control Act to reauthorize the 
      Great Lakes Restoration Initiative, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             July 25, 2019

  Ms. Stabenow (for herself, Mr. Portman, Ms. Baldwin, Mr. Brown, Mr. 
Durbin, Ms. Klobuchar, Mr. Peters, Ms. Smith, Mr. Casey, Ms. Duckworth, 
 Mrs. Gillibrand, Mr. Schumer, and Mr. Young) introduced the following 
bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment 
                            and Public Works

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To amend the Federal Water Pollution Control Act to reauthorize the 
      Great Lakes Restoration Initiative, and for other purposes.

    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 ``Great Lakes Restoration Initiative 
Act of 2019'' or the ``GLRI Act of 2019''.

SEC. 2. GREAT LAKES RESTORATION INITIATIVE REAUTHORIZATION.

    Section 118(c)(7)(J)(i) of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act 
(33 U.S.C. 1268(c)(7)(J)(i)) is amended--
            (1) by striking ``is authorized'' and inserting ``are 
        authorized'';
            (2) by striking the period at the end and inserting a 
        semicolon;
            (3) by striking ``this paragraph $300,000,000'' and 
        inserting the following: ``this paragraph--
                                    ``(I) $300,000,000''; and
            (4) by adding at the end the following:
                                    ``(II) $375,000,000 for fiscal year 
                                2022;
                                    ``(III) $400,000,000 for fiscal 
                                year 2023;
                                    ``(IV) $425,000,000 for fiscal year 
                                2024;
                                    ``(V) $450,000,000 for fiscal year 
                                2025; and
                                    ``(VI) $475,000,000 for fiscal year 
                                2026.''.
                                 <all>
```
# C_2011351EN.01001501.xml

| 2.12.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 351/15 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

2.12.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 351/15

---

Notice for the attention of the persons and entities to which Articles 19(1)(b) and 20(1)(b) of Council Decision 2010/413/CFSP (Annex II) and Article 16(2) of Council Regulation (EU) No 961/2010 (Annex VIII) apply

2011/C 351/05

COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

The following information is brought to the attention of the persons and entities that appear in Annex II to Council Decision 2010/413/CFSP of 26 July 2010, as amended by Council Decision 2011/783/CFSP of 1 December 2011 (1), and in Annex VIII to Council Regulation (EU) No 961/2010, as implemented by Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1245/2011 of 1 December 2011 (2).

1

2

Following a review of the lists of persons and entities to which Articles 19(1)(b) and 20(1)(b) of Council Decision 2010/413/CFSP and Article 16(2) of Council Regulation (EU) No 961/2010 concerning restrictive measures against Iran respectively apply, the Council of the European Union has decided that the persons and entities that appear in the above-mentioned Annexes should continue to remain subject to the restrictive measures provided for under that Council Decision and Council Regulation.

Furthermore, the Council of the European Union has also decided that additional persons and entities should be included in the above-mentioned Annexes. The grounds for designations of those persons and entities appear in the relevant entries in those Annexes.

The attention of the persons and entities concerned is drawn to the possibility of making an application to the competent authorities of the relevant Member State(s) as indicated in the web-sites in Annex V of the Regulation, in order to obtain an authorisation to use frozen funds for basic needs or specific payments (cf. Articles 17, 18 and 19 of the Regulation).

The persons and entities 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

Attention is also drawn to the possibility for each person and entity concerned 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 319, 2.12.2011, p. 71.

1

(2)  OJ L 319, 2.12.2011, p. 11.

2

---
#### BETTY V. JOHNSON v. JOE STONE d/b/a SURRY DRUG COMPANY

No. 217PC

(Filed 17 August 1981)

ORDER

IT appearing that plaintiff’s notice of appeal given in open court at the conclusion of the trial in the Superior Court, SURRY County was inadvertantly omitted from the record on appeal before the North Carolina Court of Appeals, and that the Court of Appeals dismissed plaintiff’s appeal for failure of the record to indicate such notice, and that said court further declined to suspend the rules in the interest of justice to include said notice, and

It further appearing to the Court that the transcript of the trial proceedings at page 132 clearly shows that plaintiff gave appropriate notice of appeal in open court which was acknowledged by the trial judge and dictated into the trial proceedings, and

It further appearing that the interests of justice would be better served if the record is amended to include such notice of appeal to permit plaintiff’s appeal to be heard on the merits by the Court of Appeals,

NOW, THEREFORE, upon motion by the plaintiff that this Court note *de novo*a deficiency in the record, and pursuant to Rule 15(f)(1) of the Rules of Appellate Procedure, the Court hereby amends the record on appeal before the Court of Appeals to include plaintiff’s notice of appeal in open court in the trial tribunal.

It Is Further Ordered that the decision of the North Carolina Court of Appeals in number 8017SC836 filed 2 June 1981, 52 N.C. App. 378, is reversed and the cause is remanded to the North Carolina Court of Appeals for further proceedings consistent with this order.

By order of the Court in conference this 17th day of August, 1981.

MEYER, J.

For the Court
<PAGE>
                                                                EXHIBIT 10.37
                                                                Page 1

 
                               STRAIGHT NOTE




   $100,000             South El Monte, California   November 4, 1997
------------

   For value received, Lee Pharmaceuticals promises to pay Mark DiSalvo or 
order, at South El Monte, California the sum of ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS, 
with interest from November 4, 1997, on unpaid principal at the rate of 
twenty (20) per cent per annum; principal payable on December 1, 1998. 
Interest shall be calculated on the basis of the unpaid principal balance 
daily, based on a 365 day year, actual day month, payable monthly. Principal 
and interest shall be payable in lawful money of the United States. If action 
be instituted on this note, I promise to pay such sum as the Court may fix as 
attorney's fees. This note is secured by the trademark in the product brand 
KLUTCH -Registered Trademark-.

   NOVEMBER 7, 1997                    RONALD G. LEE
   --------------------                -------------------------------------
   Date                                Lee Pharmaceuticals - Ronald G. Lee




   NOVEMBER 7, 1997                    MICHAEL L. AGRESTI
   --------------------                --------------------------------------
   Date                                Lee Pharmaceuticals - Michael L. Agresti
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

, Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Stephen J. Markman

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano

, Justices

I, Larry S. Royster , Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

July 29, 2014

s0721 

# Order

Clerk July 29, 2014

148593

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff

- Appellee,

v SC: 148593

COA: 319146

Wayne CC: 09

- 013772

- FC

LAJUAN DONTE BROWN

, Defendant

- Appellant.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the December 4, 2013

o rder of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
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 Justice

###### Antitrust Division

                    Notice is hereby given that, on October 10, 2007, pursuant to Section 6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301*et seq.*                     (“the Act”), Interchangeable Virtual Instruments Foundation, Inc. has filed written notifications simultaneously with the Attorney General and the Federal Trade Commission disclosing changes in its membership. The notifications were filed for the purpose of extending the Act's provisions limiting the recovery of antitrust plaintiffs to actual damages under specified circumstances. Specifically, Lockheed Martin, Lakeland, FL has withdrawn as a party to this venture.                

No other changes have been made in either the membership or planned activity of the group research project. Membership in this group research project remains open, and Interchangeable Virtual Instruments Foundation, Inc. intends to file additional written notifications disclosing all changes in membership.

                    On May 29, 2001, Interchangeable Virtual Instruments Foundation, Inc. filed its original notification pursuant to Section 6(a) of the Act. The Department of Justice published a notice in the                     **Federal Register**                     pursuant to Section 6(b) of the Act on July 30, 2001 (66 FR 39336).                

                    The last notification was filed with the Department on July 25, 2007. A notice was published in the                     **Federal Register**                     pursuant to Section 6(b) of the Act on August 23, 2007 (72 FR 48307).                

Patricia A. Brink, 

Deputy Director of Operations, Antitrust Division.

[FR Doc. 07-5569 Filed 11-6-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4410-11-M
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  of   USA   Telcom
Internationale (the "Company") on Form 10-KSB for the period ending
December  31,  2003,  as  filed with the  Securities  and  Exchange
Commission  on  the  date hereof (the "Report"),  I,  Allen  Jones,
acting  in  the capacity as the Chief Executive Officer  and  Chief
Financial  Officer  of the Company, certify  to  the  best  of  our
knowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted  pursuant
to Section 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 result of
     operations of the Company.


/s/ Allen Jones
----------------
     Allen Jones
     Chief Executive Officer
     March 18, 2004