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

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA 

SOUTHERN DIVISION 

 

UNITED BANK, ) 

 ) 

 Plaintiff, ) 

 ) 

vs. ) CIVIL ACTION NO. 09-0294-CG-C 

 ) 

M/V THE CROWN ROYAL, her engines ) 

tackle, furniture appurtenances, etc., ) 

M/V RESTLESS, her engines, tackle, ) 

appurtenances, boats, etc., in rem, and ) 

RICHARD J. ALLEN, SHERI A. ALLEN, ) 

and R&S, LLC, an Alabama limited liability ) 

company, in personam, ) 

 ) 

 Defendants. ) 

DEFAULT JUDGMENT 

 This matter is before the court on the plaintiff’s motion for default judgment against the 

in personam defendants. (Doc. 38) 

 Upon due consideration, the motion is hereby GRANTED. 

 It is, therefore, ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED that default judgment is 

entered in favor of plaintiff, United Bank, and against defendants Richard J. Allen, Sheri A. 

Allen, and R & S, LLC, separately and severally, and damages are awarded in the amount of 

TWO HUNDRED SEVENTY-SEVEN THOUSAND NINE HUNDRED TWENTY AND 

57/100 DOLLARS ($277,920.57). Post-judgment interest shall accrue on this judgment at the 

rate of 0.27% per day pursuant to Title 28 § 1961 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Costs 

are taxed against the defendants. 

Case 1:09-cv-00294-CG-C Document 52 Filed 08/10/10 Page 1 of 2
 The plaintiff shall file a motion for attorney’s fees in compliance with Rule 54 of the 

Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Local Rule 54.3. 

DONE and ORDERED this 10th day of August, 2010. 

 /s/ Callie V. S. Granade 

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 

Case 1:09-cv-00294-CG-C Document 52 Filed 08/10/10 Page 2 of 2
NIST Handbook 133 

Checking the Net Contents 

of Packaged Goods

 as adopted by the 89th National Conference on Weights and Measures 2004

 Editors: 

 Tom Coleman 

 Linda Crown 

 Kathryn M. Dresser 

 

 Henry V. Oppermann, Chief 

NIST Weights and Measures Division 

 Gaithersburg, MD 20899-2600 

NIST Handbook 133

Fourth Edition 

January 2005 

Supersedes NIST Handbook 133,Third Edition, 1998; Supplement1, 1990;

Supplement 2, 1991; Supplement 3, 1992; Supplement 4, 1994; Fourth Edition

January 2002; Revised 2004)

U.S. Department of Commerce 

Donald L. Evans, Secretary

Technology Administration 

Phillip J. Bond, Under Secretary 

of Commerce for Technology

National Institute of 

Standards and Technology 

Hratch G. Semerjian, Acting Director
Certain commercial entities, equipment, or materials may be identified in this document in order 

to describe an experimental procedure or concept adequately. Such identification is not intended 

to imply recommendation or endorsement by the National Institute of Standards and Technology, 

nor is it intended to imply that the entities, materials, or equipment are necessarily the best 

available for the purpose. 

National Institute of Standards and Technology Handbook 133, 2005 Edition 

Natl. Inst. Stand. Technol. Handb. 133, 2005 Ed. 109 Pages (Dec. 2004) 

CODEN : NIHAE2 

U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 

WASHINGTON: 2004

ternet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800; DC area (202) 512-1800 

Fax: (202) 512-2250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402-0001 

ISBN 0-16-051249-2
EXHIBIT 10(xii)



On December 8, 2005, the Company's Compensation Committee approved the following
2006 salaries for the Company's named executive officers:

   Name and Principal Position                                           Salary
   ---------------------------                                           ------

   Mark D. Bradford, President, CEO and Director                        $185,000

   John E. Christy, President, Central Indiana Region                   $146,000

   Gordon M. Dyott, Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer   $138,000

   Christopher G. Tietz, Senior Vice President, Chief Credit Officer    $136,000

   R. Scott Walters, Senior Vice President, Wealth Management Group     $116,000

Monthly and Annual Variable Incentive Compensation. The Named Executive Officers
are also compensated under the monthly and annual variable incentive
compensation program.

The monthly component of incentive compensation provides the executives with a
fixed amount each month if the Bank's most recent cumulative three months' net
income exceeds the Bank's most recent cumulative three months' budgeted net
income as of the end of the specific month. For 2006, Mr. Bradford is eligible
to receive $2,500 per month under this component of incentive compensation; Mr.
Dyott is eligible to receive $2,000 per month; Mr. Walters is eligible to
receive $1,000 per month; Mr. Tietz is eligible to receive $1,000 per month; and
Mr. Christy is eligible to receive $1,000 per month.

Under the annual variable incentive compensation component of the program, there
is specified a percentage of the annual increase in the Bank's net income over
the prior year's net income that each executive officer will receive. These
amounts cannot be determined and will not be paid until the Bank's final
performance results for 2006 have been determined.

In addition, all of the executive officers except Mr. Bradford may also receive
variable incentive compensation based on performance criteria established for
the various areas of the Company directly under their control. Mr. Bradford will
not have his payments under the annual variable incentive compensation program
be contingent on any other performance criteria, other than the increase in
Bank's income as discussed above.

The target payout for each Executive Officer participating in the program is
based upon bonus targets for equivalent positions at peer group companies. For
2006, the target payout for Mr. Bradford is 24.0% of his base salary; the target
payout for Mr. Dyott is 28.2% of his base salary; the target payout for Mr.
Walters is 45.0% of his base salary; the target payout for Mr. Tietz is 30.0% of
his base salary; and, the target payout for Mr. Christy is 32.4% of his base
salary.
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4813 Introduced in House (IH)]

108th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4813

To suspend temporarily the duty on certain pimientos (capsicum anuum), 
    prepared or preserved otherwise than by vinegar or acetic acid.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             July 12, 2004

  Mr. Garrett of New Jersey introduced the following bill; which was 
              referred to the Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To suspend temporarily the duty on certain pimientos (capsicum anuum), 
    prepared or preserved otherwise than by vinegar or acetic acid.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. CERTAIN PIMIENTOS, PREPARED OR PRESERVED BY VINEGAR OR 
              ACETIC ACID.

    (a) In General.--Subchapter II of chapter 99 of the Harmonized 
Tariff Schedule of the United States is amended by inserting in 
numerical sequence the following new heading:

``      9902.20.03      Pimientos           Free         No change        No change        On or before 12/  ''.
                         (capsicum anuum),                                                  31/2006
                         prepared or
                         preserved
                         otherwise than by
                         vinegar or acetic
                         acid, not frozen,
                         in containers
                         holding not more
                         than 227 g.
                         (provided for in
                         subheading
                         2005.90.50)......

    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or 
after the 15th day after the date of enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
11131.

#### Garrett, for use, etc., *v.*Combs.

Jenkins, P. J.

1. The exception taken to the refusal of the trial judge to strike the plea of the defendant is controlled hy the ruling made by this court in *Southern Express Co.*v. *Chero-Cola Bot. Co.,*24 *Ga. App.*189 (100 S. E. 289); s. c. 150 *Ga.*430 (104 S. E. 233). Under the facts of this case, which are similar to those there stated, the court did not err in the refusal to strike.

2. Where a fi. fa. is levied on personal property sufficient to pay the debt, and a forthcoming bond with security is given by the defendant in fi. fa., and where upon a claim being filed to the property the plaintiff in fi. fa. withdraws the original fi. fa., pending the claim proceeding, and levies upon additional property of the defendant, and under the second levy another forthcoming bond with new sureties is given, upon a suit brought upon the second bond a verdict in favor of the defendants would he authorized where it appears that upon a suit on the first *275forthcoming bond the plaintiff compromised with the solvent surety thereon by accepting from him a certain sum in satisfaction of all liability on his part. Under such a state of facts the previous levy remains unaccounted for, and, so far as the sureties on the second bond are concerned, amounts to a satisfaction of the fi. fa. Civil Code (1910), §§ 6047, 6048.

Decided May 5, 1920.

Adhered to on rehearing, September 17, 1920.

Action on bond; from city court of Carrollton — Judge Beall. November 3, 1919.

*C. E. Roop, Boykin & Boykin,*for plaintiff.

*S. Holderness, Leon Hood,*for defendant.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*Stephens and Smith, JJ., concur.*
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4809 Introduced in House (IH)]

108th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4809

   To make permanent the reduction in taxes on dividends and capital 
                                 gains.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              July 9, 2004

Mr. Ryan of Wisconsin introduced the following bill; which was referred 
                   to the Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To make permanent the reduction in taxes on dividends and capital 
                                 gains.

    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 ``Investment Tax Increase Prevention 
Act of 2004''.

SEC. 2. PERMANENT REDUCTION IN TAXES ON DIVIDENDS AND CAPITAL GAINS.

    Section 303 of the Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 
2003 (relating to sunset of title) is repealed.
                                 <all>
```
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

ABDULLAH NAIM HAFIZ,

Plaintiff

- Appellant,

v.

JAMES A. YATES, Warden; et al.,

Defendants

- Appellees. No. 16

- 15855

D.C. No. 1:13

- cv

- 01392

- BAM

MEMORANDUM *

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of California

Barbara McAuliffe, Magistrate Judge, Presiding

Submitted June 11, 2019 **

Before: CANBY, GRABER, and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges.

California state prisoner Abdullah Naim Hafiz appeals pro se from the

magistrate judge’s order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging deliberate

indifference and due process claims . We have jurisdictio n under 28 U.S.C. § 1291.

We review de novo whether the magistrate judge validly entered judgment on

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36

- 3.

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

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

# FILED

JUN 13 2019

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLER K

U.S. COURT OF APPEAL S2

behalf of the district court. Allen v. Meyer

, 755 F.3d 866, 867

- 68 (9th Cir. 2014).

We vacate and remand.

Hafiz consented to proceed before the magistra te judge. See 28 U.S.C.

§ 636(c). The magistrate judge then dismissed Hafiz’s action before the named

defendants had been served

. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) (ii) . Because all

parties, including unserved defendants, must consent to proceed before the

magistrate judge for jurisdiction to vest, see Williams v. King

, 875 F.3d 500 , 503

-

04 (9th Cir. 2017), we vacate the judgment and remand for further proceedings.

VACATED and REMANDED

.
<Page>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1

                         Consent of Independent Auditors


We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement (Form
S-8 No. 33-54487) pertaining to the 1994 Stock Incentive Plan of Nash Finch
Company, Registration Statements (Forms S-8 No. 33-64313 and No. 333-51512)
pertaining to the 1995 Director Stock Option Plan of Nash Finch Company,
Registration Statements (Forms S-8 No. 333-27563 and No. 333-63756) pertaining
to the 1997 Non-Employee Director Stock Compensation Plan, and Registration
Statements (Forms S-8 No. 333-81441 and No. 333-63754) pertaining to the Nash
Finch Company 1999 Employee Stock Purchase Plan, Registration Statement (Form
S-8 No. 333-51506) pertaining to the Non-Plan Stock Option of Nash Finch
Company, and Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-51508) pertaining to the
2000 Stock Incentive Plan of Nash Finch Company, of our report dated February
20, 2002, with respect to the consolidated financial statements and schedule of
Nash Finch Company included in this Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended
December 29, 2001.

Ernst & Young LLP

Minneapolis, Minnesota
March 6, 2002
EXHIBIT 4.20


 


Deed of settlement and release and deed of indemnity –
Mr Michael T Laing


 


The deed of
settlement and release and deed of indemnity of Mr Michael T Laing is
incorporated by reference to National Australia Bank Limited’s Annual Report on
Form 20-F for the fiscal year ended September 30, 2004 as filed with
the Commission on January 20, 2005
NIST PSCR: 

A strategic, 

scientific 

research 

engine.

America’s status as the leader 

in national security requires an 

objective, federal laboratory to 

conduct the research, development, 

testing, and evaluation of 

technologies slated for the nation’s 

first responder broadband network.

A technical advisor, NIST PSCR drives 

America’s leadership in public safety 

communications science, research, 

and innovation, and supports the 

Department’s strategic objective to 

deploy public safety broadband.

How do we do it?
Pioneering technological innovation.

• Mission critical push-to-talk call model

• Next generation heads-up displays

• Lidar for in-building mapping

Pulling the future forward

Home click through 

the icons below

NIST PSCR Logo
Accelerating cutting-edge 

communications research.

• Audio quality and intelligibility 

• Differential privacy 

• Indoor localization accuracy

• Unmanned aircraft systems for public safety

Pulling the future forward

Home click through 

the icons below
Setting the standard to which 

others look.

• 3GPP-standards-based LMR to LTE 

interfaces for public safety

• Mission Critical Voice Quality of Experience 

measurement system

• Identity, Credential, and Access 

Management for public safety 

organizations

Pulling the future forward

Home click through 

the icons below
Fueling American prosperity.

• $509.8 million in economic output

• $261.8 million in earnings

• 4,280 new jobs

Pulling the future forward

Home click through 

the icons below
Creating America’s 

competitive advantage.

• Internationally-recognized innovation lab 

network enabling advancements in mission 

critical communications, NextG research, 

and spectrum sharing

• Resilient communications in extreme weather 

events such as Wildland Urban Interface (WUI) 

fires, hurricanes, flash floods, and tornadoes

• Equitable data representation of urban, 

suburban, and rural areas 

Pulling the future forward

Home click through 

the icons below
Pulling the future forward. 

NIST PSCR has achieved these and more accomplishments 

since the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012. 

But the road ahead remains lined with opportunities to keep 

the momentum going. 

America depends on an objective, technical advisor

dedicated to ensuring the reliability, functionality, and 

security of public safety broadband communications. 

With more than 60,000 public safety agencies potentially 

taking advantage of the expanded coverage and capacity 

being delivered by FirstNet—a 25-year investment by 

the Department of Commerce—objective research and 

innovation is critical for strategic success. NIST PSCR serves as 

a catalyst for driving current and future capabilities made 

possible by the emergence of NextG technology—augmented 

reality, ground truth accuracy, and more. 

For more than 20 years, PSCR has been a national asset 

that drives advancements in communication tools that help 

save lives, solve crimes, and keep our communities and 

emergency responders safe! 

Home
Exhibit 99.

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 Questar Gas Company (the "Company") on Form 10-K for 2002, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
D. N. Rose, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and S. E. Parks, Vice President, Treasurer and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, each hereby certifies, 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 his knowledge:

(1)  The
Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 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.

|               |  | QUESTAR GAS COMPANY                                                            
|-------------- |  | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|March 27, 2003 |  |                                                                                
|               |  | /s/D. N. ROSED. N. Rose
President and Chief Executive Officer                  
|March 27, 2003 |  |                                                                                
|               |  | /s/S. E. PARKSS. E. Parks
Vice President, Treasurer and Chief Financial Officer

This
certification accompanies the Report pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be
deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.

---

QuickLinks
11448.

#### Yother *v.*The State.

Decided June 15, 1920.

. Indictment for sale of liquor; from Murray superior court — Judge Tarver. February 28, 1920.

*H. H. Anderson,*for plaintiff in error.

*Joseph M. Lang, solicitor-general,*contra.

Broyles, C. J.

There is no merit in the special ground of the motion for a new trial, and the verdict was authorized by the evidence.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*Luke and Bloodworth, JJ., concur.*
10897.

#### Holder *v.*Webb, administrator.

Decided May 5, 1920.

Stephens, J.

1. Where an heir at law filed a caveat to the application of an administrator for discharge, and upon the hearing the only issues for determination were whether or not certain realty deeded by the intestate to the caveator was an advancement, and, if such, what was the value of the property at the time of the advancement, and where it appeared that before the property was so deeded to the caveator he had made improvements upon it while in his possession under a previous contract of purchase by him from the intestate, which had been cancelled, it was not error on the part of the trial judge to fail to instruct the jury that the caveator was entitled to tlie benefit of the improvements so made; the judge having given in charge to the jury the law governing the determination of the value of an advancement, in charging substantially in the language of the Civil Code (1910), § 4056, that “Every advancement, unless a value is agreed on at the time of its acceptance, shall be estimated at its value at the time of the advancement, and no interest shall be charged upon the value thereof until the time of the first distribution of the estate, from which date advancements shall be reckoned, with regard to interest, in the same manner as an equal amount of the estate received at that time.”

2. Tlie evidence supports the verdict, and no error of law appears.

*Judgment af/vrmed.*

*Jenkins, P. J., and Smith, J., concur.*

*259Petition for discharge of administrator, from Carroll superior court — Judge Terrell. July 15, 1919.

*S. Holderness,*for plaintiif in error.

*Boykin & Boykin,*contra.
No. 86-1294.

#### Webster, Director of Central Intelligence *v.*Doe.

C. A. D. C. Cir. [Certiorari granted, 482 U. S. 913.] Motion of respondent for leave to file a supplemental brief after argument granted.

Justice Kennedy took no part in the consideration or decision of this motion.
WARNING: THE EDGAR SYSTEM ENCOUNTERED ERROR(S) WHILE PROCESSING THIS SCHEDULE.

<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                      5
<MULTIPLIER>                   1,000

<S>                                                    <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                          12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                      NOV-30-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                           NOV-30-1999
<CASH>                                                 38,232
<SECURITIES>                                           000
<RECEIVABLES>                                          747
<ALLOWANCES>                                           000
<INVENTORY>                                            000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                       3,222
<PP&E>                                                 56,310
<DEPRECIATION>                                         000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                         98,511
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                  15,088
<BONDS>                                                4,585
<COMMON>                                               13,774
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                  000
<PREFERRED>                                            000
<OTHER-SE>                                             65,064
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                           98,511
<SALES>                                                0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                       53,076
<CGS>                                                  000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                          40,432
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                       0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                       11,031
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                     6,276
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                        (4,663)
<INCOME-TAX>                                           000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                    (4,663)
<GAINS>                                                159,655
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                        (286)
<CHANGES>                                              000
<NET-INCOME>                                           154,706
<EPS-BASIC>                                          11.23
<EPS-DILUTED>                                          11.06



</TABLE>