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

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

JAMES M. ROWCLIFF, III,

Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant,

vs. CASE NO. 3:10cv282/RS-EMT

LUTHER J. RONGSTAD,

Defendant/Counter-Plaintiff.

_____________________________________/

ORDER

Before me is the Mediator’s Report (Doc. 27). Pursuant to Local Rule 16.2(D), it

is ordered:

1. This case is dismissed from the active docket of the court.

2. In the event that the settlement is not consummated, the court reserves

jurisdiction, upon motion filed by any party within sixty days of the date of this Order, to

amend or vacate and set aside this Order and reinstate the case.

3. The clerk is directed to close the file of this case for administrative

purposes, and upon the expiration of sixty days without activity, the clerk is directed to

close the case in its entirety for all purposes.

ORDERED on March 4, 2011.

/S/ Richard Smoak 

RICHARD SMOAK

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Case 1:10-cv-00140-MP-GRJ Document 106-4 Filed 09/09/11 Page 1 of 9
Case 1:10-cv-00140-MP-GRJ Document 106-4 Filed 09/09/11 Page 2 of 9
Case 1:10-cv-00140-MP-GRJ Document 106-4 Filed 09/09/11 Page 3 of 9
Case 1:10-cv-00140-MP-GRJ Document 106-4 Filed 09/09/11 Page 4 of 9
Case 1:10-cv-00140-MP-GRJ Document 106-4 Filed 09/09/11 Page 5 of 9
Case 1:10-cv-00140-MP-GRJ Document 106-4 Filed 09/09/11 Page 6 of 9
Case 1:10-cv-00140-MP-GRJ Document 106-4 Filed 09/09/11 Page 7 of 9
Case 1:10-cv-00140-MP-GRJ Document 106-4 Filed 09/09/11 Page 8 of 9
Case 1:10-cv-00140-MP-GRJ Document 106-4 Filed 09/09/11 Page 9 of 9
# Continuation of Emergency Regarding Weapons of Mass Destruction

                        On November 14, 1994, by Executive Order 12938, the President declared a national emergency with respect to the unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security, foreign policy, and economy of the United States posed by the proliferation of nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons “weapons of mass destruction” and the means of delivering such weapons. On July 28, 1998, the President issued Executive Order 13094 amending Executive Order 12938 to respond more effectively to the worldwide threat of weapons of mass destruction proliferation activities. On June 28, 2005, I issued Executive Order 13382 which,                         *inter alia*, further amended Executive Order 12938 to improve our ability to combat proliferation. The proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them continues to pose an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security, foreign policy, and economy of the United States; therefore, the national emergency first declared on November 14, 1994, and extended in each subsequent year, must continue. In accordance with section 202(d) of the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1622(d)), I am continuing for 1 year the national emergency declared in Executive Order 12938, as amended.                     

                        This notice shall be published in the                         **Federal Register**                         and transmitted to the Congress.                     

[FR Doc. 07-5657

Billing code 3195-01-P
# C_2011149EN.01000101.xml

| 20.5.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 149/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.5.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 149/1

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.5985 — ZMB CH/GWH)

(Text with EEA relevance)

2011/C 149/01

On 13 May 2011, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/en/index.htm) under document number 32011M5985. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to the European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/en/index.htm) under document number 32011M5985. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to the European law.

---
Case 5:10-cv-00205-RS -MD Document 10 Filed 12/06/10 Page 1 of 8
Case 5:10-cv-00205-RS -MD Document 10 Filed 12/06/10 Page 2 of 8
Case 5:10-cv-00205-RS -MD Document 10 Filed 12/06/10 Page 3 of 8
Case 5:10-cv-00205-RS -MD Document 10 Filed 12/06/10 Page 4 of 8
Case 5:10-cv-00205-RS -MD Document 10 Filed 12/06/10 Page 5 of 8
Case 5:10-cv-00205-RS -MD Document 10 Filed 12/06/10 Page 6 of 8
Case 5:10-cv-00205-RS -MD Document 10 Filed 12/06/10 Page 7 of 8
Case 5:10-cv-00205-RS -MD Document 10 Filed 12/06/10 Page 8 of 8
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 the Interior National Park Service
 AGENCY: National Park Service, Interior.
 ACTION: Public notice.
 SUMMARY: Pursuant to the terms of existing concession contracts, public notice is hereby given that the National Park Service intends to request a continuation of visitor services for a period not-to-exceed 1 year from the date of contract expiration.
 DATES: *Effective Date:*
                         January 1, 2007.


SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The contracts listed below have been extended to maximum allowable under 36 CFR 51.23. Under the provisions of current concession contracts and pending the completion of the public solicitation of a prospectus for a new concession contract, the National Park Service authorizes continuation of visitor services for a period not-to-exceed 1 year under the terms and conditions of the current contract as amended. The continuation of operations does not affect any rights with respect to selection for award of a new concession contract. Conc ID No.
Concessioner name
ParkNACE005-92
Langston Legacy Golf Corp
National Capital Parks-East.ROCR003-89
Golf Course Specialists, Inc
Rock Creek Park.PRWI001-88
Prince William Travel Trailer Village, Inc
Prince William Forest Park.
 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jo A. Pendry, Concession Program Manager, National Park Service, Washington, DC 20240, Telephone 202/513-7156. Dated: December 16, 2006. John Wessels, Acting Assistant Director, Business Services.


[FR Doc. 07-661  Filed 2-13-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4312-53-M
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PANAMA CITY DIVISION

ZARY WHITE,

Plaintiff, 

vs. CASE NO. 5:11-cv-62/RS-EMT

NORTH FLORIDA ROCK, LTD.,

Defendant. 

_________________________________________ /

ORDER

Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 6) is DENIED. In the light most favorable 

to Plaintiff, sufficient allegations of administrative exhaustion have been pled. 

ORDERED on April 25, 2011.

 /S/ Richard Smoak

 RICHARD SMOAK

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 

Case 5:11-cv-00062-RS-EMT Document 11 Filed 04/25/11 Page 1 of 1
### The HONORABLE DAVID D. NOCE, United States Magistrate Judge 1 

### for the Eastern District of Missouri, to whom the case was submitted by consent of the parties. No. 95-1343

Derrick Merritt Bey; Darryl * C. Merritt Bey, * * Plaintiffs - Appellants,* * v. * Appeal from the United * States District Court for Paul Delo; Ronald Roper; Gregory * the Eastern District of Wilson; Larry Youngman; Ray * Missouri. Pogue; Fred Johnson; Linda * Wilkson; Lonnie Salts; Robert A. * [UNPUBLISHED] Cole; Brian O'Connel; Unknown * Dunn ("John Doe #1"); John * Doe #2, * * Defendants - Appellees. *

Submitted: September 10, 1996 Filed: September 23, 1996

Before MAGILL, FLOYD R. GIBSON, and MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, Circui t Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Appellant s Derrick Merritt Bey and Darryl Merritt Bey, brothers and fellow inmates at the Potosi Correctional Center in Missouri, appeal the district court's order granting summary judgment to various priso n 1 officials in this 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. In light of this Court's recen t opinion in Wycoff v. Nichols , No. 95-1117, 1996 WL 498904 (8th Cir. Sept. 5, 1996), the Beys' p rocedural due process claim is without merit. After carefulreview of the materials submitted to us by the parties, we conclude that

the district court co mmitted no error in disposing of the Beys' remaining grounds for relief. Because an opinion would lack precedential value, we summarily affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

A true copy.

Attest.

CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

ANESTHESIA HEALTHCARE

PARTNERS INC., et al.,

Plaintiffs,

vs. CASE NO.: 3:11cv149/MCR/EMT

ANESTHESIA HEALTHCARE

SOLUTIONS OF NORTH 

FLORIDA LLC, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

ORDER

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

and Recommendation dated May 20, 2011. (Doc. 25). Defendants have been

furnished a copy of the Report and Recommendation and have been afforded an

opportunity to file objections pursuant to Title 28, United States Code, Section

636(b)(1), and I have made a de novo determination of those portions to which an

objection has been made.

Having considered the Report and Recommendation, and any objections

thereto timely filed, I have determined that the Report and Recommendation should

be adopted to the extent it finds that the plaintiff has failed to establish a substantial

threat of irreparable injury if the requested injunction is not granted, that the

threatened injury to the plaintiff outweighs the harm an injunction could cause the

defendant, and that granting the injunction would not disserve the public interest. 

Although the undersigned has questions regarding the magistrate judge’s

determination that David Simpson is not subject to the non-compete agreement and

thus that the plaintiff cannot show a substantial likelihood of success on the merits,

it is unnecessary to decide this issue now in light of the plaintiff’s failure to satisfy

the other factors required for a preliminary injunction. The court would also note

Case 3:11-cv-00149-MCR-EMT Document 33 Filed 06/17/11 Page 1 of 2
Page 2 of 2

that the time limit of the non-compete agreement has expired, leaving the court no

basis upon which to enjoin any conduct in violation thereof and rendering the

plaintiff’s motion moot.

Accordingly, it is now ORDERED as follows:

1. The magistrate judge's Report and Recommendation is adopted to the

extent referenced above, with the pertinent provisions incorporated by reference in

this order.

2. Plaintiffs’ motion for preliminary injunction (doc. 7) is DENIED.

DONE AND ORDERED this 17th day of June, 2011.

s/ M. Casey Rodgers 

 M. CASEY RODGERS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:11-cv-00149-MCR-EMT Document 33 Filed 06/17/11 Page 2 of 2
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PANAMA CITY DIVISION 

BRICE BUILDING CO., INC., 

Plaintiff, 

vs. Case No.: 5-10-mc-4/RS-EMT 

WILLIAM DEL LEE, an individual, 

and TALMEDGE E. LEE, an individual, 

Defendants, 

and 

BAY BANK & TRUST CO.

Garnishee. 

_________________________________________/

ORDER

Before me is the Plaintiff’s Motion for Writ of Garnishment and Appointment of 

Special Process Server (Doc. 4). 

IT IS ORDERED: 

1. The Motion is GRANTED. 

2. Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 64 and 69, and Fla. Stat. § 77.01, et seq., the Clerk of 

the Court is directed to issue the Writ of Garnishment directed to the Garnishee, 

BAY BANK & TRUST CO. 
3. Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 4.1(a), Mr. Charles Lance, an agent of L. Lance &

Associates, LLC, is appointed as the special process server who shall serve the 

Writ of Garnishment. 

ORDERED on December 16, 2010

/S/ Richard Smoak 

RICHARD SMOAK

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
# C_2011165EN.01000302.xml

| 7.6.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 165/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.6.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 165/3

---

Initiation of proceedings

(Case COMP/M.6214 — Seagate Technology/The HDD Business of Samsung Electronics)

(Text with EEA relevance)

2011/C 165/05

On 30 May 2011, the Commission decided to initiate proceedings in the abovementioned case after finding that the notified concentration raises serious doubts as to its compatibility with the common market. The initiation of proceedings opens a second phase investigation with regard to the notified concentration, and is without prejudice to the final decision on the case. The decision is based on Article 6(1)(c) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004.

The Commission invites interested third parties to submit their observations on the proposed concentration to the Commission.

In order to be fully taken into account in the procedure, observations should reach the Commission not later than 15 days following the date of this publication. Observations can be sent to the Commission by fax (+32 22964301 / 22967244) or by post, under reference COMP/M.6214 — Seagate Technology/The HDD Business of Samsung Electronics, to the following address:

| European Commission |
| --- |
| Directorate-General for Competition |
| Merger Registry |
| J-70 |
| 1049 Bruxelles/Brussel |
| BELGIQUE/BELGIË |

European Commission

Directorate-General for Competition

Merger Registry

J-70

1049 Bruxelles/Brussel

BELGIQUE/BELGIË

---
Case 3:11-cr-00029-MCR   Document 42   Filed 01/19/12   Page 1 of 7

Case 3:11-cr-00029-MCR   Document 42   Filed 01/19/12   Page 2 of 7

Case 3:11-cr-00029-MCR   Document 42   Filed 01/19/12   Page 3 of 7

Case 3:11-cr-00029-MCR   Document 42   Filed 01/19/12   Page 4 of 7

Case 3:11-cr-00029-MCR   Document 42   Filed 01/19/12   Page 5 of 7

Case 3:11-cr-00029-MCR   Document 42   Filed 01/19/12   Page 6 of 7

Case 3:11-cr-00029-MCR   Document 42   Filed 01/19/12   Page 7 of 7
xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?


C\_2011118EN.01006201.xml


| | | | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 15.4.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 118/62 |

---

Information communicated by Member States regarding State aid granted under Commission Regulation (EC) No 800/2008 declaring certain categories of aid compatible with the common market in application of Articles 87 and 88 of the Treaty (General Block Exemption Regulation)

(Text with EEA relevance)

2011/C 118/05

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Reference number of the State Aid | X 251/10 | |
| Member State | Spain | |
| Member State reference number | — | |
| Name of the Region (NUTS) | ASTURIAS Article 107(3)(a) | |
| Granting authority | | | | --- | | Instituto de Desarrollo Económico del Principado de Asturias (IDEPA) | | Parque Tecnológico de Asturias | | 33428 Llanera, Asturias, España | | www.idepa.es | | |
| Title of the aid measure | Concesión de subvenciones dirigidas a empresas del Principado de Asturias, en el marco de la Iniciativa Europea Manunet | |
| National legal basis (Reference to the relevant national official publication) | Resolución de 8 de abril de 2010, de la Consejería de Industria y Empleo, por la que se aprueban las bases reguladoras para la concesión de subvenciones dirigidas a empresas del Principado de Asturias, en el marco de la iniciativa europea Manunet (Red Eranet) | |
| Type of measure | Scheme | |
| Amendment of an existing aid measure | — | |
| Duration | 17.4.2010—31.12.2013 | |
| Economic sector(s) concerned | All economic sectors eligible to receive aid | |
| Type of beneficiary | SME,large enterprise | |
| Annual overall amount of the budget planned under the scheme | EUR 0,30 (in millions) | |
| For guarantees | — | |
| Aid Instrument (Article 5) | Direct grant | |
| Reference to the Commission Decision | — | |
| If co-financed by Community funds | — | |
| Objectives | Maximum aid intensity in % or Maximum aid amount in national currency | SME-bonuses in % |
| Industrial research (Art. 31(2)(b)) | 65 % | 15 % |
| Experimental development (Art. 31(2)(c)) | 40 % | 20 % |

Web link to the full text of the aid measure:

http://www.asturias.es/bopa/2010/04/16/2010-08311.pdf

---
Exhibit 32.1  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 Quarterly Report of HPC POS SYSTEM, CORP. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended December 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Mordechai Guttman, Chief Executive and 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 to my knowledge:  1. The Report fully complies with 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/ Mordechai Guttman Mordechai Guttman Title: President and Chief Financial Officer   February 16, 2009
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

GAINESVILLE DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

v. CASE NO.: 1:11cr11/MMP

RAUL PAGAN RODRIGUEZ

 /

ACCEPTANCE OF PLEA OF GUILTY

Pursuant to the Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate

Judge, to which there has been no timely objections, and subject to this Court’s

consideration of the Plea Agreement pursuant to Fed.R.Crim.P. 11(e)(2), the plea of guilty

of the Defendant, RAUL PAGAN RODRIGUEZ, to Counts One, Three and Five of the

indictment is hereby ACCEPTED. All parties shall appear before this Court for sentencing

as directed.

DONE and ORDERED this 28th day of October, 2011.

 s/ M. Casey Rodgers 

M. CASEY RODGERS

CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:11-cr-00011-MP-GRJ Document 95 Filed 10/28/11 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.                  

###### Tennessee Valley Authority

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:

Please call Media Relations at (865) 632-6000, Knoxville, Tennessee. People who plan to attend the meeting and have special needs should call (865) 632-6000. Anyone who wishes to comment on any of the agenda in writing may send their comments to: TVA Board of Directors, Board Agenda Comments, 400 West Summit Hill Drive, Knoxville, Tennessee 37902. 

Dated: November 21, 2007. 

Maureen H. Dunn, 

General Counsel and Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 07-5855 Filed 11-23-07; 9:41 am] 

BILLING CODE 8120-08-P
Page 1 of 2

Case No. 5:11cv172-RH/GRJ

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PANAMA CITY DIVISION

RAY CHARLES MOBLEY,

Plaintiff,

v. CASE NO. 5:11cv172-RH/GRJ

LT. BROCK et al.,

Defendants.

_____________________________/

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

The plaintiff was a prisoner when he filed this civil-rights case. The case is 

before the court on the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation, ECF No. 9. 

No objections have been filed. 

The report and recommendation concludes that the case should be dismissed 

without prejudice based on the plaintiff’s failure to disclose prior lawsuits as 

required by this district’s standard prisoner civil-rights complaint form. Dismissal 

without prejudice is not too severe a sanction under these circumstances. If the 

form is to serve its purpose, a plaintiff must provide accurate information. If word 

got around the prisons that inaccurate or incomplete information could be provided 

Case 5:11-cv-00172-RH-GRJ Document 10 Filed 01/31/12 Page 1 of 2
Page 2 of 2

Case No. 5:11cv172-RH/GRJ

with no effective sanction, the form would serve little purpose. And word does get 

around the prisons.

For these reasons, and the additional reasons set forth by the report and 

recommendation, 

IT IS ORDERED:

The report and recommendation is ACCEPTED and adopted as the court’s 

opinion. The clerk must enter judgment stating, “This case is DISMISSED 

without prejudice.” The clerk must close the file.

SO ORDERED on January 31, 2012.

s/Robert L. Hinkle

United States District Judge

Case 5:11-cv-00172-RH-GRJ Document 10 Filed 01/31/12 Page 2 of 2
Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

PERRY GENE VANDERFORD,

Plaintiff,

vs. Case No. 3:10cv552/MCR/EMT

LT. NELSON, et al.,

Defendants.

__________________________________/

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

This cause is before the court upon referral from the clerk. Plaintiff commenced this action

by filing a civil rights complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Doc. 1). Plaintiff subsequently filed

several amended complaints (Docs. 2, 5 & 6). By order of this court dated March 25, 2011, the

court denied Plaintiff’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis and gave him thirty (30) days in which

to pay the filing fee or file a complete application to proceed in forma pauperis (see Doc. 14). 

Plaintiff failed to comply with the March 25 order; therefore, on May 3, 2011, the court issued an

order requiring Plaintiff to show cause, within twenty-one (21) days, why this action should not be

dismissed for failure to comply with an order of the court (Doc. 15). The time for compliance with

the show cause order has now elapsed, and Plaintiff has still failed to pay the filing fee or file an

application to proceed in forma pauperis.

 Accordingly, it is respectfully RECOMMENDED:

That this case be DISMISSED without prejudice for Plaintiff’s failure to comply with an

order of the court.

At Pensacola, Florida, this 27th day of May 2011.

/s/ Elizabeth M. Timothy 

ELIZABETH M. TIMOTHY

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 3:10-cv-00552-MCR-EMT Document 16 Filed 05/27/11 Page 1 of 2
Page 2 of 2

NOTICE TO THE PARTIES

Any objections to these proposed findings and recommendations must be filed within

fourteen (14) days after being served a copy thereof. Any different deadline that may appear

on the electronic docket is for the court’s internal use only. A copy of objections shall be

served upon all other parties. Failure to object may limit the scope of appellate review of

factual findings. See 28 U.S.C. § 636; United States v. Roberts, 858 F.2d 698, 701 (11th Cir.

1988).

Case No: 3:10cv552/MCR/EMT

Case 3:10-cv-00552-MCR-EMT Document 16 Filed 05/27/11 Page 2 of 2