alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 02-2372

TRACY WOODY,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

ONLINE EXCHANGE, INCORPORATED,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle, Chief

District Judge. (CA-02-185-BO)

Submitted: April 29, 2003 Decided: June 2, 2003

Before WILLIAMS, MICHAEL, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Tracy Woody, Appellant Pro Se. James Benjamin Trachtman, KILPATRICK

STOCKTON, L.L.P., Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Tracy Woody appeals the district court’s order granting

Appellee Online Exchange, Inc.’s motion to dismiss for improper

venue pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1406 (2000). We have reviewed the

record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for

the reasons stated by the district court. See Woody v. Online

Exchange, Inc., No. CA-02-185-BO (E.D.N.C. Oct. 21, 2002). We also

deny Appellee’s motion to dismiss the appeal as moot. We dispense

with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are

adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument

would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
#### In the Matter of Fran Lee, Appellant, and Albert Boyars et al., Petitoners, v Robert Low, as Administrator of the Environmental Protection Administration, et al., Respondents.

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County, entered on or about June 15, 1977, unanimously affirmed for the reasons stated by Nadel, J., at Special Term without costs and without disbursements. Concur—Lupiano, J. P., Birns, Silverman, Fein and Markewich, JJ.
§ 172.2 Service of summonses and complaints. ( a ) Only the Executive Office of the Office of the Legal Adviser (L/H-EX) is authorized to receive and accept summonses or complaints sought to be served upon the Department or Department employees. All such documents should be delivered or addressed to: The Executive Office, Office of the Legal Adviser, Suite 5.600, 600 19th Street NW., Washington DC 20522. (Note that the suite number is 5.600.)
( b ) In the event any summons or complaint described in § 172.1(a) is delivered to an employee of the Department other than in the manner specified in this part, such attempted service shall be ineffective, and the recipient thereof shall either decline to accept the proffered service or return such document under cover of a written communication which directs the person attempting to make service to the procedures set forth herein.
( c ) Except as otherwise provided §§ 172.2(d) and 172.3(c), the Department is not an authorized agent for service of process with respect to civil litigation against Department employees purely in their personal, non-official capacity. Copies of summonses or complaints directed to Department employees in connection with legal proceedings arising out of the performance of official duties may, however, be served upon L/H-EX.
( d ) Although the Department is not an agent for the service of process upon its employees with respect to purely personal, non-official litigation, the Department recognizes that its employees stationed overseas should not use their official positions to evade their personal obligations and will, therefore, counsel and encourage Department employees to accept service of process in appropriate cases, and will waive applicable diplomatic or consular privileges and immunities when the Department determines that it is in the interest of the United States to do so.
( e ) Documents for which L/H-EX accepts service in official capacity only shall be stamped “Service Accepted in Official Capacity Only”. Acceptance of service shall not constitute an admission or waiver with respect to jurisdiction, propriety of service, improper venue, or any other defense in law or equity available under the laws of rules applicable for the service of process.
[57 FR 32896, July 24, 1992, as amended at 80 FR 12082, Mar. 6, 2015; 80 FR 30155, May 27, 2015; 83 FR 17489, Apr. 20, 2018]
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

GALLUP, INC.,

Plaintiff,

 v.

BUSINESS RESEARCH BUREAU (PVT.)

LTD., d/b/a GALLUP PAKISTAN, IJAZ

SHAFI GILANI, GALLUP BUSINESS

RESEARCH SERVICES (PVT.) LTD.,

d/b/a PAKISTAN (PVT.) LTD.,

Defendants. /

No. C 08-01577 WHA

ORDER REFERRING

DEFENDANT TO FEDERAL 

PRO BONO PROJECT

The undersigned has received pro se defendant Ijaz Shafi Gilani’s request for counsel to

assist him in this matter (filed alongside this order). Good cause appearing, defendant Gilani

shall be referred to the Federal Pro Bono Project in the manner set forth below:

1. The clerk shall forward to the Volunteer Legal Services Program of the Bar

Association of San Francisco a copy of the court file with a notice of referral of the

case pursuant to the guidelines of the Federal Pro Bono Project for referral to a

volunteer attorney.

2. Upon being notified by the Bar Association of San Francisco that an attorney has

been located to represent defendant Gilani, that attorney shall be appointed as

counsel for defendant Gilani in this matter until further order of the Court.

Case 3:08-cv-01577-WHA Document 117 Filed 04/07/10 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2

Defendant Gilani is reminded that referral to the Federal Pro Bono Project does not

guarantee, in any way, that pro bono counsel will be appointed.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: April 7, 2010. WILLIAM ALSUP

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:08-cv-01577-WHA Document 117 Filed 04/07/10 Page 2 of 2
**Exhibit 32**

**Certificationof Financial Reports Pursuant to 18 USC Section 1350**

The undersigned hereby certify that the quarterlyreport on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2007, fully complieswith the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities ExchangeAct of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d) and that information contained in thatForm 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financialcondition and results of operations of the Company.
| By:                |                                            |
|--------------------|-------------------------------------------------|
|               |                                            |
|               | /s/ Nathan L. Grass                             |   |
|               | Nathan L. Grass                                 |
|               | Interim President and Chief Executive Officer   |   |
|               |                                            |
|               | /s/ Michael I. Williams                         |   |
|               | Michael I. Williams                             |
|               | Senior Vice President, Chief Financial Officer, |
|               | and Interim  Chief Operating Officer            |
|               |                                            |
| Dated: May 8, 2007 |
|                    |                                                 |  |  |

 

This certification is made solely for purposes of 18USC Section 1350, subject to the knowledge standard contained therein, andnot for any other purpose.

----
Case 3:08-cv-01498-MHP Document 11 Filed 06/29/10 Page 1 of 1
#### In the Matter of the Claim of Joseph Tower, Appellant, against Staten Island Shipbuilding Co., Respondent. Workmen’s Compensation Board, Respondent.

*973Present — Foster, P. J., Heffernan, Brewster, Santry and Bergan, JJ.
##### 



Exhibit 32.1 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 Quarterly Report of Kroll Inc. on Form 10-Q for the
three months ended March 31, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Michael G. Cherkasky, Chief
Executive Officer of Kroll Inc., certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:  1.
    
    The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and2.
    
    The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Kroll Inc. /s/ Michael G. Cherkasky

Michael G. Cherkasky
Chief Executive Officer
 Date: May 7, 2004 37
§ 46.11 Reporting of errors and omissions in previously reported data. ( a ) Each swap counterparty required by this part 46 to report data for a pre-enactment or a transition swap shall report any errors and omissions in the data so reported. Corrections of errors or omissions shall be reported as soon as technologically practicable after discovery of any such error or omission.
( b ) Each counterparty to a pre-enactment or transition swap that is not the reporting counterparty as determined pursuant to § 46.5, and that discovers any error or omission with respect to any data for a pre-enactment or transition swap reported to a swap data repository for that swap, shall promptly notify the reporting counterparty of each such error or omission. As soon as technologically practicable after receiving such notice, the reporting counterparty shall report a correction of each such error or omission to the swap data repository.
( c ) Each swap counterparty reporting corrections to errors or omissions in data previously reported as required by this part shall report such corrections in the same format as it reported the erroneous or omitted data.
[77 FR 35226, June 12, 2012, as amended at 85 FR 75595, Nov. 25, 2020]
#### In the Matter of Edward S. Silver, as District Attorney, Petitioner, v. Samuel Turchin, an Attorney, Respondent.

Motion by respondent for reargument of the motion to confirm the Official Referee’s report recommending respondent’s disbarment, referred to the court that rendered the decision. Nolan, P. J., Beldock, Kleinfeld, Christ and Pette, JJ., concur. Motion denied. Beldock, Acting P. J., TJghetta, Kleinfeld, Christ and Pette, JJ., concur.
### §300d–22. Report by Secretary

Not later than October 1, 2008, the Secretary shall report to the appropriate committees of Congress on the activities of the States carried out pursuant to section 300d–11 of this title. Such report shall include an assessment of the extent to which Federal and State efforts to develop systems of trauma care and to designate trauma centers have reduced the incidence of mortality, and the incidence of permanent disability, resulting from trauma. Such report may include any recommendations of the Secretary for appropriate administrative and legislative initiatives with respect to trauma care.

(July 1, 1944, ch. 373, title XII, §1222, as added Pub. L. 101–590, §3, Nov. 16, 1990, 104 Stat. 2926; amended Pub. L. 103–183, title VI, §601(d), Dec. 14, 1993, 107 Stat. 2238; Pub. L. 110–23, §11, May 3, 2007, 121 Stat. 97.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

2007—Pub. L. 110–23 amended section generally. Prior to amendment, section required Secretary to submit report no later than Oct. 1, 1995.

1993—Pub. L. 103–183 substituted "1995" for "1992" and inserted after first sentence "Such report shall include an assessment of the extent to which Federal and State efforts to develop systems of trauma care and to designate trauma centers have reduced the incidence of mortality, and the incidence of permanent disability, resulting from trauma."
Exhibit 10.3


 


2006
INCENTIVE COMPENSATION PLAN


PERFORMANCE
TARGETS


 


Officers and Executives:


 


Intent:  To align compensation with business
objectives and performance and enable the company to attract, retain and reward
executive officers whose contributions are critical to long-term success.


 


Short-term
Incentive Component


 


Measurement Criteria:  Award
based on achieving operating income budgeted plans of MarkWest Hydrocarbon Inc.
(“MarkWest Hydrocarbon”) and MarkWest Energy Partners, L.P. (“MarkWest Energy”),
and on department/individual goals and performance, with each criterion
weighted based on individual and department responsibilities to align
performance and goals.


 


Threshold:  The
payout of incentive awards is contingent upon EBITDA (earnings before interest,
taxes, depreciation, depletion and amortization) being a minimum of 85% of
target for both MarkWest Energy and MarkWest Hydrocarbon.


 


Incentive Award Range:  The
incentive award range is set from 30% to 50% of base salary depending on level
and performance achievement, with opportunity for stretch incentive awards in
the range of 30% to 50% if stretch performance is achieved.


 


Payout:  Cash.
§ 191.5 Relationships among agencies. ( a ) The Assistant Secretary of State for Administration shall promptly inform the head of any agency whenever an employee (including a member of the Armed Forces) in that agency, or Family Member of such employee, is determined to be eligible for benefits under this subchapter.
( b ) In accordance with inter-agency agreements between the Department of State and relevant agencies— ( 1 ) The Veterans Administration will periodically bill the Department of State for expenses it pays for each eligible person under subpart D of this subchapter plus the administrative costs of carrying out its responsibilities under this part.
( 2 ) The Department of State will, on a periodic basis, determine the cost for services and benefits it provides to all eligible persons under this subchapter and bill each agency for the costs attributable to Principals (and Family Members) in or acting on behalf of the agency plus a proportionate share of related administrative expenses.
#### Edmund J. McDonald, Respondent, v John J. McNulty, Jr., Individually and as Sheriff of the County of Albany, et al., Appellants.

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court at Special Term, entered December 3, 1976 in Albany County, which granted a motion to strike defendants’ first affirmative defense. Order affirmed, with costs, upon the opinion of Mr. Justice Pennock at Special Term (see *Carr v Allied Aviation Serv. Corp.,*40 AD2d 608; *Matter of Hurd v County of Allegany,*39 AD2d 499). Koreman, P. J., Greenblott, Kane, Larkin and Herlihy, JJ., concur.
Exhibit 15

December 13,
2006

Securities
and Exchange Commission
100 F Street, N.E.
Washington, D.C. 20549

We
are aware that Monster Worldwide, Inc. has incorporated by reference in its previously filed open Registration Statements on Form S-8 (Nos. 333-81843,
333-63631, 333-50699, 333-18937 and 333-131899) its Form 10Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2006, which includes our report dated
April 26, 2006, except for the effects of the restatement discussed in Note 2 and Note 10 which are as of December 11, 2006, covering the unaudited interim financial
information contained therein. Pursuant to Regulation C of the Securities Act of 1933 (the "Act"), that report is not considered part of the registration statement prepared or certified by our
firm or a report prepared or certified by our firm within the meaning of Sections 7 and 11 of the Act. It should be noted that we have not performed any procedures subsequent to April 26, 2006,
except for the effects of the restatement discussed in Note 2 and Note 10 which are as of December 11, 2006.

/s/
BDO Seidman, LLP
New York, New York

---
§ 219.160 Communications. ( a ) The agency shall take appropriate steps to ensure effective communication with applicants, participants, personnel of other Federal entities, and members of the public. ( 1 ) The agency shall furnish appropriate auxiliary aids where necessary to afford a handicapped person an equal opportunity to participate in, and enjoy the benefits of, a program or activity conducted by the agency. ( i ) In determining what type of auxiliary aid is necessary, the agency shall give primary consideration to the requests of the handicapped person.
( ii ) The agency need not provide individually prescribed devices, readers for personal use or study, or other devices of a personal nature.
( 2 ) Where the agency communicates with applicants and beneficiaries by telephone, telecommunication devices for deaf persons (TDD's) or equally effective telecommunication systems shall be used.
( b ) The agency shall ensure that interested persons, including persons with impaired vision or hearing, can obtain information as to the existence and location of accessible services, activities, and facilities.
( c ) The agency shall provide signage at a primary entrance to each of its inaccessible facilities, directing users to a location at which they can obtain information about accessible facilities. The international symbol for accessibility shall be used at each primary entrance of an accessible facility.
( d ) This section does not require the agency to take any action that it can demonstrate would result in a fundamental alteration in the nature of a program or activity or in undue financial and administrative burdens. In those circumstances where agency personnel believe that the proposed action would fundamentally alter the program or activity or would result in undue financial and administrative burdens, the agency has the burden of proving that compliance with § 219.160 would result in such alteration or burdens. The decision that compliance would result in such alteration or burdens must be made by the agency head or his or her designee after considering all agency resources available for use in the funding and operation of the conducted program or activity, and must be accompanied by a written statement of the reasons for reaching that conclusion. If an action required to comply with this section would result in such an alteration or such burdens, the agency shall take any other action that would not result in such an alteration or such burdens but would nevertheless ensure that, to the maximum extent possible, handicapped persons receive the benefits and services of the program or activity.
Order entered February 25, 2014

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-14-00209-CV

IN RE KENNETH HALL, Relator

Original Proceeding from the 194th Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. F09-52103-SPM

ORDER

Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, we DISMISS relator’s petition for writ of 

habeas corpus. We ORDER that relator bear the costs of this original proceeding.

/s/ DOUGLAS S. LANG 

JUSTICE
#### Theodore M. Cox, as Trustee in Bankruptcy of Kingsbury-Leahy Company, Bankrupt, Appellant, v. Edward W. Leahy and Others, Respondents.

Order modified so as to permit the plaintiff, at his option, to pay into court, in lieu of the undertaking, $250, and, as so modified, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.2

                            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 Quarterly Report of Pacific Biometrics, Inc.
(the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending September 30, 2003 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
I, Michael P. Carrosino, Chief Financial 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 the best of my knowledge and belief:

         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 result of operations of the
Company.

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to Pacific Biometrics, Inc. and will be retained by Pacific Biometrics,
Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.

Date: November 14, 2003

                                    /s/ Michael P. Carrosino
                                   -----------------------------------
                                   Michael P. Carrosino
                                   Chief Financial Officer

                                      -23-
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.                  

###### Department of Justice

###### Antitrust Division

                    Notice is hereby given that, on September 22, 2004, pursuant to section 6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301*et seq.*                     (“the Act”), Optical Internetworking Forum (“OIF”) has filed written notifications simultaneously with the Attorney General and the Federal Trade Commission disclosing (1) the name and principal place of business of the standards development organization and (2) the nature and scope of its standards development activities. The notifications were filed for the purpose of invoking the Act's provisions limiting the recovery of antitrust plaintiffs to actual damages under specified circumstances.                

Pursuant to section 6(b) of the Act, the name and principal place of business of the standards development organization is: Optical Internetworking Forum, Fremont, CA. The nature and scope of OIF's standards development activities are: (1) To support the rapid advancement of an efficient and compatible technology base that promotes a competitive marketplace; (2) to promote global development of optical internetworking technology; (3) to identify optical internetworking applications; (4) to provide educational services; (5) to promote worldwide compatibility and interoperability; (6) to encourage input to appropriate national and international standards bodies; (7) to identify, select, augment as appropriate, and publish optical internetworking implementation agreements drawn from appropriate national and international standards; and (8) to foster the development and deployment of interoperable products and services for data switching and routing using optical networking technologies.

Dorothy B. Fountain,

Deputy Director of Operations, Antitrust Division.

[FR Doc. 04-27546 Filed 12-15-04; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4410-11-M