alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
## United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 03-3644

___________ Joseph Dixon, * * Appellant, * * v. * Appeal from the United States * District Court for the District City of Minneapolis Water * of Minnesota. Department; Minneapolis Community * Development Agency; Hennepin * [UNPUBLISHED] County Economic Assistance Ramar * Building; Minneapolis City Attorney’s * Office, * * Appellees. *

___________ Submitted: July 6, 2004 Filed: July 9, 2004

___________ Before MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, FAGG, and SMITH, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM. Joseph Dixon sued the City of Minneapolis Water Department and other local entities, asserting claims about the discriminatory delivery of water and sewer* The Honorable Richard H. Kyle, United States District Judge for the District of Minnesota, adopting the report and recommendations of the Honorable Arthur J. Boylan, United States Magistrate Judge for the District of Minnesota. -2- services, economic assistance, and police protection. The district court * granted summary judgment in favor of defendants, and Dixon appeals. Having carefully reviewed the record, we find Dixon’s conclusory allegations of discrimination and other misconduct by defendants insufficient to avoid summary judgment in the face of defendants’ evidence. See Krenik v. County of Le Sueur , 47 F.3d 953, 957 (8th Cir. 1995). Further, Dixon’s claims either were or could have been brought in his earlier state court actions, and thus are barred by res judicata. Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. We also deny Dixon’s pending motion.

______________________________
Exhibit 32.1



Section 1350 Certification

As Adopted Pursuant to

Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002



In connection with the Annual Report of MK Resources Company (the Company) on
Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2004, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, G. Frank Joklik, Chairman of the Board and 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 to 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 Company.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                                                 
|-------------------------------------------------
|/s/ G. Frank Joklik                              
|G. Frank Joklik                                  
|Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer
|March 30, 2005
### §775. Sex discrimination; enforcement; other legal remedies

No individual shall on the grounds of sex be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity carried on or receiving Federal assistance under this chapter. This provision will be enforced through agency provisions and rules similar to those already established, with respect to racial and other discrimination, under title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 [42 U.S.C. 2000d et seq.]. However, this remedy is not exclusive and will not prejudice or remove any other legal remedies available to any individual alleging discrimination.

(Pub. L. 93–275, §16, May 7, 1974, 88 Stat. 109.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

The Civil Rights Act of 1964, referred to in text, is Pub. L. 88–352, July 2, 1964, 78 Stat. 241. Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is classified generally to subchapter V (§2000d et seq.) of chapter 21 of Title 42, The Public Health and Welfare. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 2000a of Title 42 and Tables.
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    EXHIBIT 11.1
                                  PROXIM, INC.
                     COMPUTATION OF NET INCOME PER SHARE(1)
                      (IN THOUSANDS, EXCEPT PER SHARE DATA)
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                   DECEMBER 31,
                                                                  --------------
                                                              1996     1995     1994
                                                             ------   ------   ------

<S>                                                          <C>      <C>       <C>  
Net income.................................................  $6,654   $ 2,846   $ 745
                                                             ======   =======   =====
Weighted average shares outstanding:
Common Stock...............................................   8,466     7,150   6,922
Common Stock issuable upon exercise of options and warrants     920     1,022     816
                                                             ------   -------   -----
Weighted average common shares and equivalents.............   9,386     8,172   7,738
                                                             ======   =======   =====
Net income per share.......................................  $ 0.71   $  0.35   $0.10
                                                             ======   =======   =====               
</TABLE>
---------------

(1)   This Exhibit should be read with Note 2 of Notes to Financial Statements.


                                      -43-
### **CHAPTER 29—WATER BANK PROGRAM FOR WETLANDS PRESERVATION**

Sec.
1301.
Congressional declaration of policy; authority of Secretary.
1302.
Conservation agreements to effectuate water bank program; duration and renewal; adjustment of payment rate for renewal period; "wetlands" defined; duration of ownership or control of land as determining eligibility for agreements; protection of and compensation for tenants and sharecroppers; participation by owner or operator in other Federal or State programs.
1303.
Terms of agreement; required provisions.
1304.
Annual payment; adjustment.
1305.
Renewal or extension of agreement; participation of subsequent owner or operator in program.
1306.
Termination or modification of agreements.
1307.
Utilization of services and facilities.
1308.
Advisory Board; appointment; functions; membership; reimbursement for expenses.
1309.
Consultation with Secretary of the Interior; conformity of program with wetlands programs administered by Secretary of the Interior; consultation with and utilization of technical services of appropriate local, State, Federal, and private conservation agencies; coordination of programs.
1310.
Authorization of appropriations; maximum amount of payments pursuant to agreements.
1311.
Rules and regulations.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

EASTERN DISTRICT

DAVID HATCHIGIAN,

Petitioner

v.

PECO/EXELON AND MUNICIPAL INSPECTION CORPORATION,

Respondents :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 442 EAL 2019

Petition for Allowance of Appeal

from the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 19th day of February, 2020

, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal

is DENIED

.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Small Business Administration

          - [Disaster Declaration #12467]

# AGENCY:

U.S. Small Business Administration.

# ACTION:

Amendment 1.

# SUMMARY:

This is an amendment of the Economic Injury Disaster Loan (EIDL) declaration for the State of Arizona, dated 02/07/2011.

*Incident:*                         Rainfall, Flooding and Flash Flooding.                    

*Incident Period:*                         10/03/2010 through 10/06/2010.                    

*Effective Date:*                         03/09/2011.                    

*EIDL Loan Application Deadline Date:*                         11/07/2011.                    

# 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.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The notice of an Economic Injury Disaster Declaration for the State of Arizona, dated 02/07/2011 is hereby amended to include the following areas as adversely affected by the disaster.

*Primary Counties:*                     Maricopa.                

*Contiguous Counties:*                     Arizona: La Paz, Pima, Pinal, Yuma.                

All other information in the original declaration remains unchanged.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number 59002)

Dated: March 9, 2011.

Karen G. Mills,

Administrator.

[FR Doc. 2011-5989 Filed 3-14-11; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8025-01-P
### §115. Leases and permits; prehistoric ruins not included

The Secretary of the Interior may, upon terms and conditions to be fixed by him, grant leases and permits for the use of the land or development of the resources thereof, in the Mesa Verde National Park, and the funds derived therefrom shall be covered into the Treasury of the United States. Such leases or grants shall not include any of the prehistoric ruins in said park or exclude the public from free or convenient access thereto.

(June 25, 1910, ch. 385, §1, 36 Stat. 796.)
## Breadcrumb

-  Home 
-  About SBA 
-  Organization 
-  Observances 
-  National Women’s Small Business Month 

## Section navigation

-  SBA locations 
-  Open government 
-  SBA Newsroom 
-  Work for SBA 
-  Organization    -  SBA leadership 
  -  Contact SBA 
  -  SBA initiatives 
  -  Forms and documents 
  -  Performance 
  -  Observances      -  Celebrating 70 years of service to America's small businesses 
    -  Hispanic Heritage Month 
    -  LGBTQ+ Pride Month 
    -  AANHPI Heritage Month 
    -  National Small Business Week 
    -  Women's History Month 
    -  Black History Month 
    -  National Veterans Small Business Week 
    -  Native American Heritage Month 
    -  National Women’s Small Business Month 
  -  Federal advisory committees 
-  Oversight and advocacy 
-  Information in other languages 

# National Women’s Small Business Month

----

## Content

----

In 1972, there were a little over 400,000 women-owned businesses in the United States. Until 1988, women needed a male relative to co-sign if they wanted to apply for a business loan. That same year, the Women’s Business Ownership Act increased SBA’s access to capital to provide financial assistance to organizations geared toward women-owned small businesses. By 2019, women-owned businesses represented 42% of all U.S. businesses and generated $1.9 trillion worth of revenue. Today, there are over 13 million women-owned businesses and counting. Every October, SBA honors the milestone achievements of today’s women-owned businesses. 

## Explore SBA's resources for women entrepreneurs

                  - Enter your address to find your  local Women's Business Center  
                  - Learn how to grow your business with the  free Ascent learning platform
                  - Take advantage of other SBA  resources for women-owned businesses

## Participate in the Women-Owned Small Business Federal Contracting Program

Five percent of all federal contracting work is set aside for women-owned businesses. Here’s how you can participate:
                  - Understand the WOSB program eligibility requirements
                  - Apply to become a certified women-owned business

Maintaining your certification as a women-owned business makes you eligible to compete in contracts specifically set aside for underrepresented businesses. 

## Sign up for a free training webinar

Select an event for women-owned businesses from SBA's general calendar. 

## Reach out to SBA

Office of Women's Business Ownership409 3rd St. SW, Suite 6600Washington, DC 20416TTY/TTD: 711

wosb@sba.gov
#### In the Matter of Hector L. Sanchez, Appellant, v Raymond Kelly, as Statutorily Designated Handgun Licensing Officer and as Police Commissioner of the City of New York, Respondent.

[823 NYS2d 400]

Order and judgment (one paper), Supreme Court, New York County (Kibbie F. Payne, J.), entered January 28, 2005, which denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding brought pursuant to CPLR article 78 to annul respondent’s determination denying petitioner’s application for a handgun license, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

In altering the standard form pistol permit application so as to style his application as one for a “Carry Target” license, petitioner sought a type of license that had been properly discontinued *(see Matter of Murad v City of New York,*12 AD3d 193 [2004], *lv denied*4 NY3d 708 [2005]; *de Illy v Kelly,*6 AD3d 217 [2004]). Accordingly, respondent rationally declined to issue *253the permit sought. Concur—Tom, J.B, Marlow, Sullivan, McGuire and Malone, JJ.
### Part A—Programs
**Exhibit 23**

**Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm**

The Board of Directors The Goldfield Corporation:

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statement (No. 333-72241) on Form S-8 of The Goldfield Corporation of our report dated February 17, 2006, except as to note 17 which is as of March 17, 2006 with respect to the consolidated balance sheets of The Goldfield Corporation and subsidiaries as of December 31, 2005 and 2004, and the related consolidated statements of operations, stockholders’ equity and cash flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 2005, which report appears in the annual report on Form 10-K of The Goldfield Corporation.

Orlando, Florida March 24, 2006 Certified Public Accountants

----
#### Dolvin *v.*American Harrow Company *et al.*

Holden, J.

1. Affidavits referred to in the bill of exceptions as having been introduced in evidence and specified in the bill of exceptions as material to an understanding of the case, which affidavits are not set *114forth" in the bill of exceptions or made a part thereof, nor incorporated in an approved brief of evidence, but are merely brought to this court as a part of the transcript of record certified to by the clerk, will not be considered by this court. *Roberts*v. *Reinsolm,*123 *Ga.*685 (51 S. E. 589) ; *Jones*v. *Middle Georgia Cotton Mills,*131 *Ga.*52 (61 S. E. 977) ; *Roberts*v. *Cairo,*133 *Ga.*642 (66 S. E. 938).

February 22, 1910.

Petition for injunction. Before Judge Lewis. Greene superior court.

May 3, 1909.

*James Davison*and *George A. Merrill,*for plaintiff.

*Parle & Parle,*for defendants.

2. Where in such case the bill of exceptions recites that the presiding judge “after hearing the pleadings in said case and the said affidavits read,” granted, on an 'interlocutory hearing, the order denying the injunction, which is complained of, and the pleadings (which alone can be considered) do not of themselves demand the granting of the injunction sought,' this court can not say that the presiding- judge erred in refusing it. *Roberts*v. *Cairo,*supra.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*All the Justices concur.*
Exhibit99.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Annual Report of The Goldfield Corporation (the"Company") on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2002 as filedwith the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the"Report"), I, John H. Sottile, Chairman of the Board of Directors,President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Actof 2002, that:

> 
(1)   The Report fully complies with therequirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;and

(2)   The information contained in the Reportfairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and resultof operations of the Company.

/s/ John H. SottileJohn H. Sottile Chairman of the Board of Directors,    President and Chief Executive OfficerMarch 25, 2003
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Stephen J. Markman, Chief Justice

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano 

Richard H. Bernstein

Kurtis T. Wilder

Elizabeth T. Clement, Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

 November 29, 2017

t1120s

Order 

Clerk

November 29, 2017

154592

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 154592

COA: 327375 

Bay CC: 13-010011-FH

JOEL IRWING WILSON,

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the August 23, 2016 

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered and, pursuant to MCR 7.305(H)(1), in 

lieu of granting leave to appeal, we REVERSE that part of the judgment of the Court of 

Appeals remanding this case to the trial court for a hearing pursuant to People v 

Lockridge, 498 Mich 358 (2015), and we REMAND this case to the Court of Appeals for 

plenary review of the defendant’s claim that his sentence was disproportionate under the 

standard set forth in People v Milbourn, 435 Mich 630, 636 (1990). See People v 

Steanhouse, 500 Mich 453, 460-461 (2017). In all other respects, leave to appeal is 

DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the remaining questions presented should be 

reviewed by this Court.

We do not retain jurisdiction.

CLEMENT, J., did not participate.
### §68d. Enforcement of subchapter

#### (a) Authority of Commission

Except as otherwise specifically provided herein, this subchapter shall be enforced by the Federal Trade Commission under rules, regulations, and procedure provided for in the Federal Trade Commission Act.

The Commission is authorized and directed to prevent any person from violating the provisions of this subchapter in the same manner, by the same means, and with the same jurisdiction, powers, and duties as though all applicable terms and provisions of the Federal Trade Commission Act were incorporated into and made a part of this subchapter; and any such person violating the provisions of this subchapter shall be subject to the penalties and entitled to the privileges and immunities provided in said Federal Trade Commission Act in the same manner, by the same means, and with the same jurisdiction, powers, and duties as though the applicable terms and provisions of the Federal Trade Commission Act were incorporated into and made a part of this subchapter.

The Commission is authorized and directed to make rules and regulations for the manner and form of disclosing information required by this subchapter, and for segregation of such information for different portions of a wool product as may be necessary to avoid deception or confusion, and to make such further rules and regulations under and in pursuance of the terms of this subchapter as may be necessary and proper for administration and enforcement.

The Commission is also authorized to cause inspections, analyses, tests, and examinations to be made of any wool products subject to this subchapter; and to cooperate with any department or agency of the Government, with any State, Territory, or possession, or with the District of Columbia; or with any department, agency, or political subdivision thereof; or with any person.

#### (b) Maintenance of records by wool manufacturers

Every manufacturer of wool products shall maintain proper records showing the fiber content as required by this subchapter of all wool products made by him, and shall preserve such records for at least three years.

The neglect or refusal to maintain and so preserve such records is unlawful, and any such manufacturer who neglects or refuses to maintain and so preserve such records shall forfeit to the United States the sum of $100 for each day of such failure, which shall accrue to the United States and be recoverable in a civil action.

(Oct. 14, 1940, ch. 871, §6, 54 Stat. 1131.)

#### **Executive Documents**

#### Transfer of Functions

For transfer of functions of Federal Trade Commission, with certain exceptions, to Chairman of such Commission, see Reorg. Plan No. 8 of 1950, §1, eff. May 24, 1950, 15 F.R. 3175, 64 Stat. 1264, set out under section 41 of this title.
#### § 385.204 Applications (Rule 204).

Any person seeking a license, permit, certification, or similar authorization or permission, must file an application to obtain that authorization or permission.