alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
115TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5349 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 1325 Autumn Avenue in Memphis, Tennessee, 

as the ‘‘Judge Russell B. Sugarmon Post Office Building’’. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
2 

•HR 5349 EH

1 SECTION 1. JUDGE RUSSELL B. SUGARMON POST OFFICE 

2 BUILDING. 

3 (a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States 

4 Postal Service located at 1325 Autumn Avenue in Mem5 phis, Tennessee, shall be known and designated as the 

6 ‘‘Judge Russell B. Sugarmon Post Office Building’’. 

7 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg8 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

9 States to the facility referred to in subsection (a) shall 

10 be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Judge Russell B. 

11 Sugarmon Post Office Building’’. 

Passed the House of Representatives September 13, 

2018. 

Attest: 

Clerk. 

115TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5349 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States PostSugarmon Post Office Building’’. Memphis, Tennessee, as the ‘‘Judge Russell B. al Service located at 1325 Autumn Avenue in
NEWYORK/#192674.1 1 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK 

ESTER LORUSSO, 

Plaintiff, 

Case No. 07 CV 3583 (LBS)(RLE) 

-againstALITALIA–LINEE AEREE ITALIANE SpA, 

Defendant. 

NOTICE OF MOTION

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE THAT upon the accompanying Declaration of Alan M. 

Koral, Esq., dated April 28, 2008, and the exhibits annexed thereto, the accompanying Affidavit 

of Marco D’Ilario, the accompanying Memorandum of Law, the accompanying Statement of 

Uncontested Material Facts, made pursuant to Local Rule 56.1, and all the papers and 

proceedings heretofore had herein, including the Complaint (annexed as Exhibit A hereto) and 

the Answer (annexed as Exhibit B hereto), defendant Alitalia–Linee Aeree Italiane SpA 

(“Alitalia”), by its attorneys, Vedder Price P.C., will move this Court, at the Daniel Patrick 

Moynihan United States Courthouse, 500 Pearl St., New York, New York, Courtroom 15-A, on 

May 8, 2008 at 2:15 p.m., before the Hon. Leonard B. Sand, for an Order pursuant to Rule 56 of 

the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, for summary judgment dismissing the Complaint in the 

above captioned action on the grounds that it fails to state a claim upon which relief may be 

granted as against Alitalia, awarding Defendant its reasonable costs and disbursements incurred 

on this motion, and granting such other and further relief as the Court may deem just and proper. 

PLEASE TAKE FURTHER NOTICE THAT, pursuant to the Individual Practices of 

Judge Sand, answering papers, if any, shall be served upon the undersigned no later than 12:00 

noon on May 5, 2008. 

Case 1:07-cv-03583-LBS-RLE Document 21 Filed 04/28/2008 Page 1 of 3
NEWYORK/#192674.1 2 

Dated: New York, New York 

April 28, 2008

VEDDER PRICE P.C. 

By: s/ Alan M. Koral

Alan M. Koral (AK-1503) 

Daniel C. Green (DG-0059) 

1633 Broadway, 47th Floor 

New York, New York 10019 

(212) 407-7700 

Attorneys for Defendant

Alitalia–Linee Aeree Italiane SpA

Case 1:07-cv-03583-LBS-RLE Document 21 Filed 04/28/2008 Page 2 of 3
NEWYORK/#192674.1 3 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK 

ESTER LORUSSO, 

Plaintiff, 

Case No. 07 CV 3583 (LBS)(RLE) 

-againstALITALIA–LINEE AEREE ITALIANE SpA, 

Defendant. 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I, Daniel Green, hereby declare, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1746, under penalty of perjury, 

that on April 28, 2008, I caused a copy of the NOTICE OF MOTION to be served upon 

Plaintiff by electronically filing same, thereby ensuring that Plaintiff’s attorney, Robert Ottinger, 

Esq. of The Ottinger Firm, P.C., received same because he is a registered e-filer and registered to 

receive e-notices in this case.

DATED: April 28, 2008 s/ Daniel C. Green 

Daniel C. Green

Case 1:07-cv-03583-LBS-RLE Document 21 Filed 04/28/2008 Page 3 of 3
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 31 (Thursday, February 15, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Page 7486]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 07-725]


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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION


Sunshine Act Meeting

Federal Register Citation of Previous Announcement: [To be Published].

Status: Closed meeting.

Place: 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC.

Announcement of Additional Meeting: Additional Meeting (Week of 
February 12, 2007).
    A Closed Meeting has been scheduled for Tuesday, February 13, 2007 
at 12:30 p.m.
    Commissioners and certain staff members who have an interest in the 
matter will attend the Closed Meeting.
    The General Counsel of the Commission, or his designee, has 
certified that, in his opinion as set forth in 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(10) and 
17 CFR 200.402(a)(10), permit consideration of the scheduled matter at 
the Closed Meeting.
    Commissioner Campos as duty officer, voted to consider the item 
listed for the closed meeting in closed session, and determined that no 
earlier notice thereof was possible.
    The subject matter of the Closed Meeting scheduled for Tuesday, 
February 13, 2007 will be:
    An adjudicatory matter.
    At times, changes in Commission priorities require alterations in 
the scheduling of meeting items. For further information and to 
ascertain what, if any, matters have been added, deleted or postponed, 
please contact:
    The Office of the Secretary at (202) 551-5400.

    Dated: February 12, 2007.
Nancy M. Morris,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 07-725 Filed 2-13-07; 11:06 am]
BILLING CODE 8010-01-P
Filed 10/4/05 by Clerk of Supreme Court

IN THE SUPREME COURT

STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA

2005 ND 168

In the Matter of the Application for Disciplinary Action Against

Richard C. Wilkes, a Member of the Bar of the State of North Dakota

Disciplinary Board of the Supreme 

Court of the State of North Dakota, Petitioner

v.

Richard C. Wilkes, Respondent

No. 20050297

DISBARMENT ORDERED.

Per Curiam.

[¶1]Richard C. Wilkes was admitted to practice as an attorney at law in the courts of North Dakota on September 22, 1976, and his name has appeared on the roll of attorneys since that date.  On January 15, 2004, Wilkes was placed on interim suspension under N.D.R. Lawyer Discipl. 3.4(B) until further order of the Court.  See Disciplinary Board v. Wilkes, 2004 ND 13, 673 N.W.2d 614.  After a hearing on the matter, Wilkes’s suspension was continued in effect.  See Disciplinary Board v. Wilkes, 2004 ND 18, 674 N.W.2d 1.

[¶2]A Petition for Discipline asserts that Wilkes’s conviction of two felonies for attempt to evade and defeat tax assessment under 26 U.S.C. § 7201 and mail fraud under 18 U.S.C. § 1341 violates N.D.R. Lawyer Discipl. 4.1, and is grounds for discipline under N.D.R. Lawyer Discipl. 1.2.

[¶3]Wilkes signed a Stipulation and Consent to Discipline, acknowledging the material facts are true and cannot be successfully defended.  Wilkes admits the Stipulation is given freely and voluntarily and without coercion or duress.  Wilkes further agrees to discipline in the form of disbarment and the payment of costs of $250.

[¶4]The matter was submitted to a Hearing Panel of the Disciplinary Board under N.D.R. Lawyer Discipl. 4.2.  The Report of the Hearing Panel was filed August 30, 2005.  The Hearing Panel found that Wilkes was convicted of two felonies for attempt to evade and defeat tax assessment under 26 U.S.C. § 7201 and mail fraud under 18 U.S.C. § 1341.

[¶5]The Hearing Panel concluded that Wilkes’s conviction is a serious crime within the meaning of N.D.R. Lawyer Discipl. 4.1.  Further, Wilkes’s conviction is a violation of N.D.R. Lawyer Discipl. 1.2 which provides a lawyer may be disciplined for committing a criminal act that reflects adversely on the lawyer’s honesty, trustworthiness, or fitness as a lawyer.

[¶6]The Report of the Hearing Panel was referred to the Supreme Court under N.D.R. Lawyer Discipl. 3.1(F)(2).  The Court considered the matter, and

[¶7]ORDERED, the Report of the Hearing Panel and the Stipulation and Consent to Discipline are accepted, and Richard C. Wilkes is DISBARRED from the practice of law.

[¶8]FURTHER ORDERED, Richard C. Wilkes pay the costs and expenses of the disciplinary proceedings in the amount of $250, payable to the Secretary of the Disciplinary Board.

[¶9]Gerald W. VandeWalle, C.J.

Daniel J. Crothers

Mary Muehlen Maring

Dale V. Sandstrom

Carol Ronning Kapsner
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                                                                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                                          12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                                    DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                                         DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                                                  711,000
<SECURITIES>                                                                  0
<RECEIVABLES>                                                         2,292,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                                            125,000
<INVENTORY>                                                             341,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                                      3,658,000
<PP&E>                                                                1,698,000
<DEPRECIATION>                                                          717,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                                        5,265,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                                 3,372,000
<BONDS>                                                                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                                         0
<PREFERRED>                                                                   0
<COMMON>                                                              8,059,000
<OTHER-SE>                                                           (6,260,000)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                                          5,265,000
<SALES>                                                               8,555,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                                      8,555,000
<CGS>                                                                 5,870,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                                         6,234,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                                          4,000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                                         75,000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                                      414,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                                      (3,933,000)
<INCOME-TAX>                                                                  0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                                           0
<DISCONTINUED>                                                                0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                                               0
<CHANGES>                                                                     0
<NET-INCOME>                                                         (3,933,000)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                                             (1.10)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                             (1.10)
        

</TABLE>
Page 1 of 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

JOHN EDWARD PARKER,

Petitioner,

v. Case No.: 3:10cv424/MCR/EMT

EDWIN G. BUSS,

Respondent.

_________________________________/

O R D E R

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

Recommendation dated June 28, 2011 (Doc. 19). The parties 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). I have made a de

novo determination of any timely filed objections.

Having considered the Report and Recommendation, and any 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. Respondent’s motion to dismiss (Doc. 15) is GRANTED.

3. This habeas action is DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction. 

4. A certificate of appealability is DENIED.

DONE AND ORDERED this 20th day of July, 2011.

M. Casey Rodgers

M. CASEY RODGERS

CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:10-cv-00424-MCR-EMT Document 22 Filed 07/20/11 Page 1 of 1
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
YEAR ENDED JANUARY 31, 2000
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                                 <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                       12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              JAN-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                                 FEB-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                   JAN-31-2000
<CASH>                                               4,207
<SECURITIES>                                             0
<RECEIVABLES>                                       77,441
<ALLOWANCES>                                         1,874
<INVENTORY>                                        217,556
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                   302,813
<PP&E>                                              37,384
<DEPRECIATION>                                      15,440
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                     361,997
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                              238,588
<BONDS>                                             11,483
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                    0
<PREFERRED>                                              0
<COMMON>                                               132
<OTHER-SE>                                         109,143
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                       361,997
<SALES>                                            688,970
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                   523,275
<CGS>                                              566,877
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                      566,877
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                    97,431
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                         0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  14,536
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                     11,729
<INCOME-TAX>                                         5,252
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  6,507
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                          0
<CHANGES>                                                0
<NET-INCOME>                                         6,537
<EPS-BASIC>                                           0.50
<EPS-DILUTED>                                         0.50



</TABLE>
### Filed 3/21/19 by Clerk of Supreme Court IN THE SUPREME COURT STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA

2019 ND 88 Interest of D.M.H., a child State of North Dakota, Petitioner and Appellee

v. D.M.H., child, J.D.H., father, J.H.T., guardian, L.H.T., guardian, and Lisa Larsen, Lay Guardian Ad Litem, Respondents and S.L.S., Respondent and Appellant
No. 20180313 Appeal from the Juvenile Court of Grand Forks County, NortheastCentral Judicial District, the Honorable Jay D. Knudson, Judge

. REVERSED AND REMANDED. Per Curiam. Nancy D. Yon , Assistant State’s Attorney, Grand Forks, N.D., for petitioner and appellee; submitted on brief. Rhiannon L. Gorham , Grand Forks, N.D., for respondent and appellant; submitted on brief.Interest of D.M.H. No. 20180313 Per Curiam. [¶1] S.L.S., the mother of D.M.H., a minor child, appeals from the juvenile court’s order appointing the child’s paternal grandparents as legal gua rdians for D.M.H. The juvenile court did not establish a visitation schedule for S.L. S. Her parental rights have not been terminated. S.L.S. argues the juvenile court shou ld have included a visitation schedule in its order rather than delegate visitatio n decisions to the child’s guardians. The State agrees with S.L.S. and joins her request f or a remand for the juvenile court to establish a visitation schedule. [¶2] We summarily reverse under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(b) and remand for further proceedings. Interest of G.L. , 2018 ND 176, ¶ 15, 915 N.W.2d 685 (holding a juvenile court may not delegate parental visitation to a child’s guardia n). We remand for a determination by the juvenile court whether visitation “is like ly to endanger the child’s physical or emotional health.” Id. at ¶ 14; N.D.C.C. § 14-05-22(2). If the juvenile court finds that visitation between S.L.S. and D.M.H. is not a danger to the child, it must order an appropriate visitation schedule. [¶3] Gerald W. VandeWalle, C.J. Jerod E. Tufte Daniel J. Crothers Lisa Fair McEvers Donovan J. Foughty, D.J. [¶4] The Honorable Donovan J. Foughty, D.J. , sitting in place of Jensen, J. , disqualified.

1
EXHIBIT
32.02








CERTIFICATION
OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER 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 Managed Futures Profile HV, L.P. (the
“Partnership”) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2009, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”),
I, Christian Angstadt, Chief Financial Officer of Demeter Management LLC, the
general partner of the Partnership, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to
the best of my knowledge:




(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
      Partnership.




























By:
            /s/
      Christian AngstadtName:
            Christian
      AngstadtTitle:
            Chief
      Financial Officer ofDemeter
      Management LLC,general
      partner of the registrantDate:
            November
      16, 2009
Exhibit 32.1

Section 1350 Certification



In connection with the Quarterly Report of Green EnviroTech Holdings Corp. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the quarter March 31, 2013 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Gary DeLaurentiis, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, 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 results of operations of the Company.



|                    |     |                                             | 
|------------------- | --- | ------------------------------------------- | 
|                    |     |                                             | 
|Dated: May 15, 2013 | By: | /s/ Gary DeLaurentiis                       | 
|                    |     | Gary DeLaurentiis                          
|                    |     | Chief Executive Officer                    
|                    |     | (principal executive and financial officer)
# C_2011147EN.01000701.xml

| 18.5.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 147/7 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

18.5.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 147/7

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.6204 — Linea/Donalink)

(Text with EEA relevance)

2011/C 147/03

On 6 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 32011M6204. 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 32011M6204. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to the European law.

---