alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Jessalynn BURKE, Plaintiff, v. FIRE UNDERWRITERS ASSOCIATION, Truck Underwriters Association, Farmers Underwriters Association, and Donald Albert Heerman, et al., Defendants.

No. 1355.

United States District Court W. D. Missouri, S. W. D.

Feb. 19, 1958.

A. H. Maus, Edward V. Sweeney, Mo-nett, Mo., for plaintiff.

Robert E. Seiler, Seiler, Blanchard & Van Fleet, Joplin, Mo., for defendants.

RIDGE, District Judge.

 One of the salient features of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and particularly those dealing with discovery practice (Rules 26 to 37, 28 U.S. C.A.), is that they are to be utilized to eliminate the surprise element in litigation and permit all parties to obtain adequate factual information for trial. They are designed primarily tó operate without judicial scrutiny, except where *584the court may be called upon to protect a party from “annoyance, embarrassment, or oppression.” Rule 30(b).

For the purpose of discovery, Rule 33 specifically provides that a “party may serve upon any adverse party” interrogatories to be answered, or objected to, within a specified term; that “interrogatories may relate to any matters which can be inquired into under Rule 26(b), and the answers may be used to the same extent as provided in Rule 26 (d) for the use of the deposition of a party. Interrogatories may be served after a deposition has been taken, and a deposition may be sought after interrogatories have been answered, * * *. The number of interrogatories or of sets of interrogatories to be served is not limited * * *. The provisions of Rule 30(b) are applicable for the protection of the party from whom answers to interrogatories are sought under this rule.”

So much has been written on the subject of the form of interrogatories, and objections thereto, it seems unnecessary to expatiate upon that matter here, except to say that it is now too late for any court to hold that Rule 33, and other Rules on discovery, can be construed to mean that diligence of a party, or his counsel, to make extensive use thereof is *a, priori*“annoyance, embarrassment, or oppression” of an opposite party; nor that judicial discretion is a fiat to read restriction into such Rules, not intended by the framers thereof.

Pleadings in the United States District Courts are considered nothing more than notice of a claim or defense. The Rules contemplate that they are to be supplemented by discovery of facts. The underlying philosophy of the Rules is that issues be submitted to the courts on their merits. The merits of a case are the combination and weight to be legally given to a factual situation. When a federal court is called upon to pass on that matter, the discovery rules demand that the parties be ready to disgorge all knowledge they have concerning that situation, no matter if it is laborious to do so, subject only to “vexation, embarrassment, or oppression.”

The latter factor does not exist here, from a consideration of plaintiff’s suggestions in support of her motion to strike interrogatories propounded by defendant. Such motion is accordingly overruled.

It is so ordered.
I 

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 3149 

To amend title I of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act to 

expand access to high risk pools. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

OCTOBER 11, 2011 

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina introduced the following bill; which was referred 

to the Committee on Energy and Commerce 

A BILL 

To amend title I of the Patient Protection and Affordable 

Care Act to expand access to high risk pools. 

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

3 SECTION 1. EXPANDING ACCESS TO HIGH RISK POOLS. 

4 Section 1101(d)(2) of the Patient Protection and Af5 fordable Care Act (Public Law 111–148) is amended by— 

6 (1) inserting ‘‘(A)’’ after ‘‘(2)’’; 

7 (2) striking ‘‘; and’’ at the end and inserting ‘‘; 

8 or’’; and 

9 (3) and inserting at the end the following: 


smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 3149 IH

1 ‘‘(B) has been covered under a State health 

2 benefits risk pool (including a ‘qualified high risk 

3 pool’, as such term is defined in section 2744(c)(2) 

4 of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 300gg– 

5 44(c)(2))) during such 6-month period; and’’. 

Æ 


smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
Exhibit 4.404

 

Ministry of Communications of Turkmenistan

 

LICENSE

 

No. 1-20-21-40                                                                    July 26, 2015

 

According to the Law of Turkmenistan “On Licensing of Certain Activities”,

 

Economic Society MTS-Turkmenistan, located at: 85, A. Niyazova prospekt, city of Ashgabat

 

State Registration Number: 24565073,                          date: 24.03.2015

 

Taxpayer Identification Number: 102621002734

 

Bank details: State Bank for Foreign Economic Affairs of Turkmenistan, current account 23203934220184000135000, MFO 390101201

 

is entitled to the following activities: Provision of Communication Services

 

61.20 “Obtaining a permit for transfer form equipment for its use and maintenance, carrying out transfer of data and other information via a wireless network, maintenance and operation of communication and information transmission facilities; ensuring the continuity of communication through overhead transmission devices, with allocation of radio waves; assignment of a license right to a number of owners and operators of wireless communication channels services; provision of access to the Internet through wireless communication channels”

 

61.90 “Organization of voice communication in the Internet and resumption of communication services provision” (service for the provision of communication channels to the lessee is to be provided only to subordinate organizations of the Ministry of Communications of Turkmenistan and joint-stock companies being the shareholders of the Ministry).

 

Location of licensed activities:

 

the territory of Turkmenistan.

 

The License is valid: from July 26, 2015 to July 26, 2018.

STAMP HERE

B. Ovezov

 

The License is extended until                    ,        .

STAMP HERE

 

Seal:

Ministry of Communications of Turkmenistan

 











 

According to Article 29 Part 2 of the Law of Turkmenistan “On Communications”, the owner of license within the framework of granted rights undertakes to agree on technical characteristics of communication equipment imported into the territory of Turkmenistan with the Interdepartmental Committee on Radio Frequencies under the Council of Ministers of Turkmenistan.
**Exhibit 31.1**
**CERTIFICATION**
I, Robert W. Boykin, Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer, certifythat:
1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Boykin LodgingCompany; 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untruestatement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessaryto make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under whichsuch statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this report, fairly present in all materialrespects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flowsof the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report; 4. The registrant’s other certifying officers and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (asdefined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for theregistrant and have:
a. Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or causedsuch disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under oursupervision, to ensure that material information relating to theregistrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made knownto us by others within those entities, particularly during theperiod in which this report is being prepared; b. Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosurecontrols and procedures and presented in this report ourconclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures, as of the end of the period covered by this reportbased on such evaluation; and c. Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting that occurred during theregistrant’s most recent fiscal quarter that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and
5. The registrant’s other certifying officers and I have disclosed,based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financialreporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee ofregistrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions):
a. All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in thedesign or operation of internal control over financial reportingwhich are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’sability to record, process, summarize and report financialinformation; and b. Any fraud, whether or not material, that involvesmanagement or other employees who have a significant role in theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting.     Date: May 6, 2004     By: /s/ Robert W. Boykin      Robert W. Boykin  Chairman of the Board  and Chief Executive Officer
FILED

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

JAN 04 2008

THOMAS K. KAHN

CLERK

[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

________________________

No. 07-13109

Non-Argument Calendar

________________________

D. C. Docket No. 06-00020-CR-J-20HTS

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

versus 

OBDULIO GONZALEZ-NAVAS, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Middle District of Florida

_________________________

(January 4, 2008)

Before CARNES, BARKETT and WILSON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Lynn Palmer Bailey, appointed counsel for Obdulio Gonzalez-Navas in this
2

appeal, has moved to withdraw from further representation of the appellant and

filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18

L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). Our independent review of the entire record reveals that

counsel’s assessment of the relative merit of the appeal is correct. Because

independent examination of the entire record reveals no arguable issues of merit,

counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED, and Gonzalez-Navas’s revocation of

supervised release and resulting sentence are AFFIRMED.
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.
 Small Business Administration [Disaster Declaration #15328 and #15329; California Disaster Number CA-00278]
 AGENCY: U.S. Small Business Administration.
 ACTION: Notice.
 SUMMARY: This is a notice of an Administrative declaration of a disaster for the State of California dated 09/26/2017. *Incident:*
                         Ponderosa Fire. *Incident Period:*
                         08/29/2017 through 09/12/2017.
 DATES: Issued on 09/26/2017. *Physical Loan Application Deadline Date:*
                         11/27/2017. *Economic Injury (EIDL) Loan Application Deadline Date:*
                         06/26/2018.
 ADDRESSES: Submit completed loan applications to: U.S. Small Business Administration, Processing and Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport Road, Fort Worth, TX 76155.
 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: A. Escobar, Office of Disaster Assistance, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street SW., Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416, (202) 205-6734.


SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that as a result of the Administrator's disaster declaration, applications for disaster loans may be filed at the address listed above or other locally announced locations. The following areas have been determined to be adversely affected by the disaster: *Primary Counties:*
                     Butte. *Contiguous Counties:* *California:*
                     Colusa, Glenn, Plumas, Sutter, Tehama, Yuba. The Interest Rates are: Percent*For Physical Damage:*Homeowners with Credit Available Elsewhere
3.500Homeowners without Credit Available Elsewhere
1.750Businesses with Credit Available Elsewhere
6.610Businesses without Credit Available Elsewhere
3.305Non-Profit Organizations with Credit Available Elsewhere
2.500Non-Profit Organizations without Credit Available Elsewhere
2.500*For Economic Injury:*Businesses & Small Agricultural Cooperatives without Credit Available Elsewhere
3.305Non-Profit Organizations without Credit Available Elsewhere
2.500
 The number assigned to this disaster for physical damage is 153285 and for economic injury is 153290. The State which received an EIDL Declaration # is California. (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number 59008) Dated: September 26, 2017. Linda E. McMahon, Administrator.


[FR Doc. 2017-21199 Filed 10-2-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8025-01-P
DENY; and Opinion Filed August 20 , 2018 .

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05
- 18
- 00815
- CV IN RE QUINCY BLAKELY , Relator Original Proceeding from the 194th Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. WX1890017 

### MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Lang

- Miers, Fillmore, and Stoddart

Opinion by Justice Lang

- Miers In this original proceeding, relator seeks a writ directing the trial court to sign and file a written order disposing of relator’s application for pretrial writ of habeas corpus and a certification of relator’s right to appeal. We requested a response to relator’s petition for writ of mandamus. In its response, the State inform ed the Court that the trial court signed a written order on August 3, 2018 denying relator’s application for pretrial writ of habeas corpus , and that a certification of right to appeal is pending relator’s signature

. Relator has appealed the August 3, 2018 order, and this Court has ordered the trial court to prepare a certification of right to appeal and to file the certification with the clerk’s record in that appeal. See 05

- 18

- 00909

- CR. Relator has received the– 2

–

relief requested in this original proceeding

. Accordingly , we deny as moot relator’s petition for
writ of mandamus.

180815F.P05 /s/ Elizabeth Lang

- Miers ELIZABETH LANG

- MIERS JUSTICE
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3276 Introduced in House (IH)]

112th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 3276

 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
 at 2810 East Hillsborough Avenue in Tampa, Florida, as the ``Reverend 
                   Abe Brown Post Office Building''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            October 27, 2011

Ms. Castor of Florida introduced the following bill; which was referred 
          to the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
 at 2810 East Hillsborough Avenue in Tampa, Florida, as the ``Reverend 
                   Abe Brown Post Office Building''.

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

SECTION 1. REVEREND ABE BROWN POST OFFICE BUILDING.

    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 2810 East Hillsborough Avenue in Tampa, Florida, shall be 
known and designated as the ``Reverend Abe Brown Post Office 
Building''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referred to 
in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Reverend 
Abe Brown Post Office Building''.
                                 <all>
```
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3248 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

        H.R.3248

                      One Hundred Twelfth Congress

                                 of the

                        United States of America

                          AT THE SECOND SESSION

          Begun and held at the City of Washington on Tuesday,
            the third day of January, two thousand and twelve

                                 An Act

 
To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 
112 South 5th Street in Saint Charles, Missouri, as the ``Lance Corporal 
                 Drew W. Weaver Post Office Building''.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. LANCE CORPORAL DREW W. WEAVER POST OFFICE BUILDING.
    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 112 South 5th Street in Saint Charles, Missouri, shall be 
known and designated as the ``Lance Corporal Drew W. Weaver Post Office 
Building''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referred to 
in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Lance 
Corporal Drew W. Weaver Post Office Building''.

                               Speaker of the House of Representatives.

                            Vice President of the United States and    
                                               President of the Senate.
```
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 14**  **- 7478** 

RASHEED OLDS , Plaintiff

- Appellant ,
v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Defendant

- Appellee
.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina , at Raleigh
. James E. Gates , Magistrate Judge. ( 5:08

- ct

- 03120

- JG )

Submitted : January 15, 2015 Decided: January 21, 2015

Before WILKINSON and NIEMEYER , Circuit Judges , and DAVIS , Senior Circuit Judge
.
Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion
. Rasheed Olds, Appellant Pro Se. Tobin Webb Lathan, Joshua Bryan Royster, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER C URIAM: Rasheed Olds appeals the magistrate judge’s order denying relief on his action filed under the Federal Tort Claims Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1346(b)(1) (2012)
. On appeal, we confine our review to the issues raised in the Appellant’s brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Because Old s’ informal brief does not sufficiently challenge the order’s ruling as to proximate causation, an independent basis for the magistrate judge’s disposition, Olds has forfeited appellate review of the magistrate judge’s order. Accordingl y , we affirm the magistrate judge’s judgment . We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before th is court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

IN RE: PLAINS PIPELINE, L.P. AND 

PLAINS ALL AMERICAN PIPELINE, 

L.P.,

 

 Relators.

§

§

§

§

§

No. 08-19-00224-CV

AN ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

IN MANDAMUS

O R D E R

The Court has this day considered the Relators’ motion for emergency stay and concludes 

the motion should be GRANTED. The Honorable John L. Pool is directed to stay all 

proceedings in cause number DC16-17018, styled Winkler Land, LLC and Winkler Services, 

LLC and Plains Pipeline, L.P. and Plains All American Pipeline, L.P., pending disposition of 

this mandamus proceeding or further order of this Court. 

IT IS SO ORDERED this 4

th day of September, 2019.

PER CURIAM
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                              JAN-1-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                       3,606,904
<SECURITIES>                                 5,766,905
<RECEIVABLES>                                4,286,237
<ALLOWANCES>                                    49,000
<INVENTORY>                                  7,228,918
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            22,407,380
<PP&E>                                       4,788,404
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              33,869,827
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        4,319,871
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         8,319
<OTHER-SE>                                  28,152,278
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                33,869,827
<SALES>                                     15,913,274
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            15,913,274
<CGS>                                        5,567,989
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                5,567,989
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             6,884,993
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              97,455
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              3,463,198
<INCOME-TAX>                                   696,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 2,767,198
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .35
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .35
        

</TABLE>
## SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK 

## Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

**360 CA 10-00573**  PRESENT: SCUDDER, P.J., CENTRA, SCONIERS, GORSKI, AND MARTOCHE, JJ.

HERKIMER COUNTY INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AGENCY, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT,

V MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

VILLAGE OF HERKIMER, DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT, AND COUNTY OF HERKIMER, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT. (APPEAL NO. 1.)

ROBERT J. MALONE, COUNTY ATTORNEY, HERKIMER (LORRAINE H. LEWANDROWSKI OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

KERNAN AND KERNAN, P.C., UTICA (MICHAEL H. STEPHENS OF COUNSEL), FOR PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT.
LONGSTREET & BERRY, LLP, SYRACUSE (MICHAEL LONGSTREET OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT.

Appeals from a judgment (denominated order) of the Supreme Court, Herkimer County (Michael E. Daley, J.), entered June 17, 2009. The judgment denied the motion of defendant County of Herkimer for summary judgment and granted the motion of defendant Village of Herkimer for summary judgment.
It is hereby ORDERED that the appeal by defendant County of Herkimer from that part of the judgment denying its motion for summary judgment is unanimously dismissed ( see Loafin’ Tree Rest. v Pardi [appeal No. 1], 162 AD2d 985) and the judgment is modified on the law by denying the motion of defendant Village of Herkimer in its entirety, reinstating the complaint against that defendant and reinstating the cross claims of defendant County of Herkimer and as modified the judgment is affirmed without costs.

Same Memorandum as in Herkimer County Indus. Dev. Agency v Village of Herkimer ([appeal No. 2] ___ AD3d ___ [May 6, 2011]).

Entered: May 6, 2011 Patricia L. Morgan Clerk of the Court