alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
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 Homeland Security Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 165
[Docket No. USCG-2017-0832]
 AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
 ACTION: Notice of enforcement of regulation.
 SUMMARY: The Coast Guard will enforce one safety zone within the Captain of the Port Boston zone on September 17, 2017. This action is necessary to ensure the safety of vessels, spectators, and participants from hazards associated with swim event. During the enforcement period, no person or vessel, except for the safety vessels assisting with the events, may enter the safety zones without permission of the Captain of the Port (COTP) or their designated on-scene representative.
 DATES: The regulation in 33 CFR 165.118 will be enforced for the safety zone identified in the 
                        **SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION**
                         section below on September 17, 2017, from 8:50 a.m. to 9:50 a.m.
 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions about this notice of enforcement, call or email Mark Cutter, Sector Boston Waterways Management Division, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone 617-223-4000, email 
                        *Mark.E.Cutter@uscg.mil.*


SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Coast Guard will enforce the safety zone listed in Table 1 from 33 CFR 165.118 on the specified dates and times specified: Table 1 From 33 CFR 165.118
Name
Location
Date
Time9.7 Boston Harbor Sharkfest Swim
All waters of Boston Inner Harbor, Piers Park East Boston to Fan Pier, South Boston, MA within the following points (NAD 83): 42°21.7′ N, 071°02.1′ W; 42°21.8′ N, 071°02.4′ W; 42°21.3′ N, 071°02.9′ W; 42°21.3′ N, 071°02.3′ W
September 17, 2017
8:50 a.m. to 9:50 a.m.
 This notice of enforcement is issued under authority of 33 CFR 165.118 and 5 U.S.C. 552(a). During the enforcement period, persons and vessels are prohibited from entering into, transiting through, mooring, or anchoring within the safety zone unless they receive permission from the COTP or designated representative. In addition to this notice of enforcement in the 
                    **Federal Register**
                    , the Coast Guard plans to provide mariners with advanced notification of this enforcement period via the Local Notice to Mariners. Dated: September 12, 2017. B.W. Kelly, Commander, U.S. Coast Guard, Acting, Captain of the Port Boston.


[FR Doc. 2017-19752 Filed 9-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
591 F.2d 808

#### PUBLIC CITIZEN HEALTH RESEARCH GROUP v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR et al., Appellants.

No. 78-1642.

United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit.

Oct. 31, 1978.

Before BAZELON and McGOWAN, Circuit Judges.

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Upon consideration of appellee’s motion for summary affirmance, appellants’ motion for summary reversal, the responses thereto, and the record in this case, and for the reasons expressed in the accompanying memorandum, it is

ORDERED by the Court that the motion for summary affirmance is denied, the motion for summary reversal is granted, and the case is remanded for further proceedings not inconsistent with the accompanying memorandum.

SPOTTSWOOD W. ROBINSON, III, Circuit Judge, was a member of this panel, but did not participate in the foregoing order.

*200MEMORANDUM

In the opinion of this Court, the District Court should have looked at the secret, *in camera*affidavit of Mr. Miller explaining why the disclosure of the two lines would cause extreme injury to his interest in personal privacy. While the District Court did have a document to examine (Mr. Miller’s Standard Form 171), the two-line item on that form does not alone explain the reasons behind the claim of exemption under 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(6). The only matter available to the court that would have enabled it to properly decide *de novo*the propriety of Miller’s claim that the material was exempt from disclosure was the proffered *in camera*affidavit. Since the District Court has the duty to decide the case on the fullest offered record, it should not have refused to examine the affidavit. *See Phillippi v. Central Intelligence Agency,*178 U.S.App.D.C. 243, 246-247, 546 F.2d 1009, 1012-1013 (1976).

In addition, the language of 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(6) . would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy” has been interpreted by this Court as requiring a balancing of the interest in personal privacy against the public interest in disclosure. See *Rural Housing Alliance v. United States Dept. of Agr.,*162 U.S.App.D.C. 122, 126-127, 498 F.2d 73, 77-78 (1974), and *Getman v. NLRB,*146 U.S.App.D.C. 209, 450 F.2d 670 (1971). Since this is a balancing test, any invasion of privacy can prevail, so long as the public interest balanced against it is sufficiently weaker. The threat to privacy thus need not be patent or obvious to be relevant. It need only outweigh the public interest.
United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 96-3644

___________

Charles Gordon Long, *

*

Appellant, *

*

Terrence Pick, *

* Appeal from the United States

Plaintiff, * District Court for the 

* District of Minnesota.

v. * [UNPUBLISHED]

*

Commissioner of Corrections, *

*

Appellee. *

___________

 Submitted: August 22, 1997

 Filed: August 29, 1997

___________

Before FAGG, BOWMAN, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Charles Gordon Long filed this petition for a writ of

habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241, alleging that

he was confined at Minnesota Correctional Facility-Lino

Lakes (MCF-LL), and that prison officials informed him he
-2-

could not receive three paperback books his mother

attempted to send him in April 1995 because they did not
The Honorable Michael James Davis, United States District Judge for the

1

District of Minnesota, adopting the report and recommendation of the Honorable John

M. Mason, United States Magistrate Judge for the District of Minnesota.

-3-

come from an approved vendor. Long claimed this

prohibition infringed his First Amendment rights, and

sought injunctive and declaratory relief. He also asked

for certification of a class action. After the State

responded that Long had been released from MCF-LL, the

district court dismissed Long&s action as moot. Long

1

appeals, and we affirm.

We conclude the district court&s dismissal of Long&s

action as moot was proper, see Scher v. Chief Postal

Inspector, 973 F.2d 682, 683 (8th Cir. 1992) (per curiam)

(because prisoner is no longer incarcerated, his claim

for declaratory and injunctive relief is moot), and the

court did not abuse its discretion in not permitting Long

to amend his complaint, see Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a);

Williams v. Little Rock Mun. Water Works, 21 F.3d 218,

224-25 (8th Cir. 1994) (standard of review). We also

conclude the district court did not err in denying Long&s

joinder motion and in not ruling on class certification.

Accordingly, we affirm. 

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
#### In the Matter of: POS SYSTEMS, INC., Debtor. Anthony H. Mason, Trustee—Appellant, v. Mirpad, LLC; Douglas Allred; Dave Allred; Douglas Allred Co., Appellees.

No. 04-15206.

D.C. Nos. CV-03-00933-FJM (Lead: 00-842).

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Argued and Submitted Nov. 14, 2005.

Decided Nov. 18, 2005.

Steven J. Brown, Steven D. Nemeeek, Steve Brown & Associates, Phoenix, AZ, for Trustee-Appellant.

*280Mike Walker, Mark C. Hudson, Schian Walker P.C., Dean J. Formanek, Ariel I. Worth, Warner Angle Hallam Jackson *&*Formanek PLC, Phoenix, *AZ,*for Appel-lees.

Before NOONAN, RYMER, and GOULD, Circuit Judges.

MEMORANDUM *

Anthony Mason, the trustee for the estate of POS Systems Co., appeals the district court’s decision affirming the bankruptcy court’s judgment in an adversarial action he brought against Mirpad LLC, Douglas Allred, Dave Allred and Douglas Allred Co. (collectively, “Mirpad”). We affirm.

Assuming, without deciding, that *Foundation Development Corp. v. Loehmann’s Inc.,*788 P.2d 1189, 163 Ariz. 438 (Ariz.1990), applies, POS’s breach was material. While POS had been a long-term tenant with a no-default record, and forfeiture is undoubtedly a harsh result, POS told Mir-pad in April 2000 that it had cash-flow problems and could not pay the April rent; it did not pay the rent by its customary due date; it was given the contractually-prescribed notice of default; it did not offer to provide a definite date or plan for payment of the rent due and arrearage; the financials it provided showed $427,000 in aged payables as of April 10 with $169,000 over 90 days past due; and it manifested no intent to pay until after the lock-out, even though, as it turns' out, it had money on hand to do so. In these circumstances, we cannot say that POS’s breach was trivial. This being the case, it follows that none of Mason’s remaining claims has merit.

While we recognize our discretion to award attorney’s fees, we decline to do so.

AFFIRMED.

*

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.2

                CERTIFICATION REQUIRED BY 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
     (AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002)

I, William S. Creekmuir, as Chief Financial Officer of Simmons Bedding Company
(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 to my
knowledge:

            (1) the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarter
      ended June 26, 2004 (the "Report"), being filed with the U.S. Securities
      and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, fully complies with the
      requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of
      1934, as amended; and

            (2) the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
      material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
      the Company.

Date: November 8, 2004                         /s/ William S. Creekmuir
                                               -------------------------------
                                               Name: William S. Creekmuir
                                               Title:  Chief Financial Officer

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to Simmons Bedding Company and will be retained by Simmons Bedding
Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff
upon request.
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 172 (Thursday, September 7, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Page 42347]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-18986]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION


Notice of Agreements Filed

    The Commission hereby gives notice of the filing of the following 
agreements under the Shipping Act of 1984. Interested parties may 
submit comments on the agreement to the Secretary, Federal Maritime 
Commission, Washington, DC 20573, within twelve days of the date this 
notice appears in the Federal Register. A copy of the agreement is 
available through the Commission's Web site (www.fmc.gov) or by 
contacting the Office of Agreements at (202)-523-5793 or 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#245056454041454a45485d574d57644249470a434b52"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="215553404544404f404d5852485261474c420f464e57">[email protected]</span></a>.

    Agreement No.: 201143-015.
    Title: West Coast MTO Agreement.
    Parties: APM Terminals Pacific, Ltd.; Eagle Marine Services, Ltd.; 
Everport Terminal Services, Inc.; International Transportation Service, 
Inc.; LBCT LLC d/b/a Long Beach Container Terminal LLC; Trapac, Inc.; 
Total Terminals LLC; West Basin Container Terminal LLC; Yusen 
Terminals, Inc.; Pacific Maritime Services, L.L.C.; SSA Terminals, LLC; 
and SSA Terminal (Long Beach), LLC.
    Filing Party: Wayne R. Rohde, Esq.; Cozen O'Connor; 1200 19th 
Street NW.; Washington, DC 20036.
    Synopsis: The amendment deletes California United Terminals, Inc. 
as a party to the Agreement.

    Agreement No.: 012490.
    Title: APL/SWIRE Guam, Saipan-S. Korea, Japan Slot Charter 
Agreement.
    Parties: American President Lines, LLC; APL Co. Pte Ltd; and The 
China Navigation Co. Pte Ltd d/b/a/Swire Shipping.
    Filing Party: Draughn Arbona; CMA CGM (America) LLC; 5701 Lake 
Wright Drive; Norfolk, VA 23502.
    Synopsis: The Agreement authorizes APL to charter space to SWIRE in 
the trade between Guam and Saipan, Northern Mariana Islands on the one 
hand, and ports in South Korea and Japan on the other hand.

    By Order of the Federal Maritime Commission.

    Dated: September 1, 2017.
JoAnne D. O'Bryant,
Program Analyst.
[FR Doc. 2017-18986 Filed 9-6-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6731-AA-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
Promissory Note



 Exhibit 10.2 
 PROMISSORY NOTE 
  

			
	 $1,235,892.00
	 	December 16, 2011

 For value received, Ghostzapper Racing Corporation, a Delaware corporation having an address at 901 South
Federal Highway, Hallandale Beach, Florida 33009 (“Borrower”), promises to pay to the order of The Alpen House Racing ULC, an Alberta unlimited liability company, (“Lender”), at its office in Aurora, Ontario, Canada (or at such
other location as Lender may direct), in lawful money of the United States of America and in immediately available funds, on the Maturity Date (as hereafter defined), the principal sum of One Million Two Hundred Thirty-Five Thousand Eight Hundred
Ninety-Two Dollars and No Cents ($1,235,892.00), together with interest on the unpaid principal balance hereof at the rate of 0.19% per annum, compounded annually on each anniversary of the date hereof, from and including the date hereof to but
excluding the date of payment. As used herein, “Maturity Date” shall mean the earlier of (i) December 16, 2014 and (ii) the date of consummation of an offering of equity securities of Borrower pursuant to which net proceeds
from the sale of such equity securities to persons other than affiliates of Lender or Borrower equal or exceed the amount then due under this Note. This Note may be prepaid in whole or in part at any time without penalty or premium. An “Event
of Default” shall occur hereunder if the principal of and all accrued and unpaid interest on this Note shall not have been paid in full by 5:00 Eastern Standard Time on the Maturity Date. 

Borrower shall pay all costs of collection, including reasonable attorneys’ fees and legal expenses, if this Note is not paid when
due, whether or not legal proceedings are commenced. 
 Presentment for payment, demand, notice of dishonor and protest and any
and all other notices and defenses, including but not limited to set-off and counterclaim, are expressly waived. 
 This Note
shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Florida without giving effect to conflicts of law provisions thereof. 
  


			
	GHOSTZAPPER RACING CORPORATION
	a Delaware corporation, as Borrower
		
	By:	 	/s/ Lyle Strachan
	Name:	 	Lyle Strachan
	Title:	 	Chief Financial Officer
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Con. Res. 29 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

        S.Con.Res.29
                                      Agreed to February 3, 2016        

                     One Hundred Fourteenth Congress

                                 of the

                        United States of America

                          AT THE SECOND SESSION

           Begun and held at the City of Washington on Monday,
           the fourth day of January, two thousand and sixteen

                          Concurrent Resolution

    Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives concurring),

SECTION 1. USE OF THE ROTUNDA AND EMANCIPATION HALL OF THE CAPITOL.

    The rotunda and Emancipation Hall of the United States Capitol are 
authorized to be used on January 20, 2017, by the Joint Congressional 
Committee on Inaugural Ceremonies in connection with the proceedings 
and ceremonies conducted for the inauguration of the President-elect 
and the Vice President-elect of the United States.
Attest:

                                               Secretary of the Senate.
Attest:

                                 Clerk of the House of Representatives.
```
#### Byron MURPHY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Joe L. GORDWIN, FBI Agent; The Federal Bureau of Investigation, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 06-16924.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Dec. 3, 2007.*

Filed Dec. 28, 2007.

Byron Murphy, Florence, *AZ,*pro se.

Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and FISHER, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Byron Murphy, an Arizona state prisoner, appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his civil rights action against the Federal Bureau of Investigation (“FBI”) and one of its agents. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo the dismissal of a prisoner’s complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, *Resnick v. Hayes,*213 F.3d 443, 447 (9th Cir.2000), and we affirm.

The defendants are federal actors, therefore Murphy’s claims arise under *Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of the Fed. Bureau of Narcotics,*403 U.S. 388, 91 S.Ct. 1999, 29 L.Ed.2d 619 (1971). *Ting v. United States,*927 F.2d 1504, 1513 (9th Cir.1991) (A *Bivens*claim “is a judicially created cause of action against federal officers arising under the United States Constitution ...”).

The district court properly dismissed Murphy’s claims against defendant FBI Agent Gordwin because the vague and conclusory allegations in Murphy’s amended complaint failed to state any civil rights violation. *See Ivey v. Board of Regents of Univ. of Alaska,*673 F.2d 266, 268 (9th Cir.1982) (“Vague and conclusory allegations of official participation in civil rights violations are not sufficient to withstand a motion to dismiss.”); *see also Oltarzewski v. Ruggiero,*830 F.2d 136, 139 (9th Cir. *7771987) (holding that verbal harassment does not constitute a constitutional deprivation).

The district court also properly dismissed Murphy’s claims against the FBI because *Bivens*does not provide a cause of action against a federal agency. *See FDIC v. Meyer,*510 U.S. 471, 484-85, 114 S.Ct. 996, 127 L.Ed.2d 308 (1994); *cf. Falser v. Department of Justice Office of U.S. Trustee,*327 F.3d 903, 909 (9th Cir.2003) (“The basis of a *Bivens*action is some illegal or inappropriate conduct on the part of a federal official or agent that violates a clearly established constitutional right.”).

AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
PACINO D. NEELY

,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA

,

Appellee

. IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D 16

- 3575

________ _____________________/

Opinion filed November 9, 2016.

An appeal from an order of the Circuit Court for Duval County

. Mark Hulsey , Judge

.

Pacino D. Neely, pro se , Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Thomas H. Duffy, Assistant Attorney

Gen eral, Tallahassee , for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

B.L. THOMAS, WETHERELL, and M.K. THOMAS, JJ., CONCUR.
exhibit102.htm
















 


Exhibit 10.2


 




 


SECOND AMENDMENT


TO


ADM DEFERRED COMPENSATION PLAN


FOR


SELECTED MANAGEMENT EMPLOYEES II


(As Amended and Restated Effective January 1, 2009)







The ADM Deferred Compensation Plan for Selected Management Employees II (As Amended and Restated Effective January 1, 2009) is hereby amended effective January 1, 2009, in the following respects:







I.







Section 12.3 is amended to read as follows:








	
  

	
12.3

	
Right of Setoff.  ADM reserves the right to withhold and setoff from any payments to a Participant or Beneficiary under the Plan any amount owed to ADM or an Affiliate by the Participant, whether such obligation is matured or unmatured and however arising, at the time of (and with priority over) any such distribution or payment to the extent that the retention or exercise of such right does not have adverse tax consequences to the Participant or Beneficiary under Code § 409A (for clarity, this right of setoff is against amounts then due and payable under the Plan and is not intended to accelerate payment of any amount).  ADM further reserves the right to withhold and setoff from the Participant’s Account (even if a payment is not then due and payable) any amount owed to ADM or an Affiliate by the Participant, as satisfaction of such obligation of the Participant, where such obligation is incurred in the ordinary course of the service relationship between the Participant and ADM or an Affiliate, the entire amount of reduction in any of ADM’s taxable years that does not exceed five thousand dollars ($5,000), and the reduction is made at the same time and in the same amount as the obligation otherwise would have been due and collected from the Participant.