alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
* Pursuant to 5th CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except

under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th CIR. R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 97-31324

Summary Calendar

JOSE GUILLOT,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

EDGAR C. DAY, JR., Warden, Washington Correctional Institute;

MAG SEALS, Supervisor, Washington Correctional Institute;

CAPTAIN SLADE, Supervisor, Washington Correctional Institute;

DR. RAMIREZ, Director of Medical for DPSC, Washington

Correctional Institute;

KATHLEEN McGINNIS, Director of Nursing for DPSC, Washington

Correctional Institute;

LIEUTENANT DIXON, Shift Lieutenant for (b) team for DPSC,

Washington Correctional Institute;

UNIDENTIFIED PARTY;

JUDITH PHELPS, Incorrectly named as Judity Phillips,

Defendant-Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Louisiana

(95-CV-1818-T)

May 28, 1998

Before JOHNSON, DeMOSS, and JONES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Jose Guillot, Louisiana inmate # 290502, appeals the district

court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claims. Guillot

contends that prison officials acted with deliberate indifference
2

to his medical needs in violation of his Eighth Amendment right to

be free from cruel and unusual punishment.

The district court referred this action to a magistrate judge.

The magistrate judge prepared a report and recommendation,

concluding that Guillot’s complaint should be dismissed with

prejudice. Guillot failed to specifically object to the report and

recommendation. We review for plain error only. See Douglass v.

United Services Auto. Ass’n, 79 F.3d 1415, 1428-29 (5th Cir. 1996).

As a preliminary matter, we note that issues must be briefed

to be preserved for appeal. Yohey v. Collins, 985 F.2d 222, 224-25

(5th Cir. 1993). Therefore, Guillot has abandoned any challenge to

the district court’s dismissal of his complaint as frivolous as to

all defendants other than Dr. Ramirez and Lt. Dixon.

Guillot has failed to demonstrate that the district court

plainly erred in dismissing his remaining § 1983 claims. A prison

inmate may only obtain relief under § 1983 on grounds of denial of

medical care by proving that prison officials were deliberately

indifferent to his or her serious medical needs. Estelle v.

Gamble, 429 U.S. 97, 106 (1976). Deliberate indifference

“encompasses only unnecessary and wanton infliction of pain

repugnant to the conscience of mankind.” McCormick v. Stalder, 105

F.3d 1059, 1061 (5th Cir. 1997). Guillot contends that Dr. Ramirez

acted with deliberate indifference in changing his work duty status

despite knowing that he complained of a heart condition. However,

Guillot has not shown that the actual condition of his heart
3

presented a serious medical condition of which prison officials

were, or even could be, aware. Furthermore, Guillot has not shown

that the decision to change his duty status constituted deliberate

indifference. Therefore, the district court did not err in

dismissing his remaining § 1983 claims.

AFFIRMED.
### §3442. Repealed. Pub. L. 90–574, title III, §303(b), Oct. 15, 1968, 82 Stat. 1011

Section, Pub. L. 89–793, title IV, §402, Nov. 8, 1966, 80 Stat. 1448, authorized appropriations for grants to States and political subdivisions thereof and to private organizations and institutions for development of narcotic addict rehabilitation and treatment programs.
NUMBER 13-17-00622-CV

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG 

____________________________________________________________

SYLVIA CHOLICK, Appellant,

v.

TSPC BROS., LLC, Appellee.

____________________________________________________________

On appeal from the County Court at Law No. 1

of Cameron County, Texas.

____________________________________________________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Chief Justice Valdez and Justices Benavides and Longoria

Memorandum Opinion by Justice Longoria

Appellant, Sylvia Cholick, appeals the trial court’s final judgment of eviction 

entered against appellant in a forcible detainer suit. Upon review of the documents 

before the Court, it appeared that the appeal is moot. On February 8, 2018, the Clerk of 

this Court notified appellant of this defect so that steps could be taken to correct the defect, 

if it could be done. See TEX. R. APP. P. 37.1, 42.3. Appellant was advised that, if the 
2

defect was not corrected within ten days from the date of receipt of the notice, the appeal 

would be dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Appellant has not filed a response. 

“The only issue in an action for forcible detainer is the right to actual possession of

the premises, and the merits of title shall not be adjudicated.” Wilhelm v. Fannie Mae, 

349 S.W.3d 766, 768 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2011, no pet.) (citing Tex. R. Civ. 

P. 746; Marshall v. Housing Auth. of City of San Antonio, 198 S.W.3d 782, 785 (Tex. 

2006)). Although the failure to supersede a forcible-detainer judgment does not divest a 

defendant of his right to appeal when the defendant is no longer in possession of the 

premises, an appeal from the judgment in that case is moot unless the defendant asserts 

a “potentially meritorious claim of right to current, actual possession.” Marshall, 198 

S.W.3d at 787; Wilhelm, 349 S.W.3d at 768.

On March 8, 2018, appellees filed an opposed motion to dismiss the appeal as 

moot, stating that a writ of possession has been executed and appellant is no longer in 

possession of the property. Absent any assertion of a potentially meritorious claim of 

right to current, actual possession, we dismiss the appeal as moot. See Marshall, 198 

S.W.3d at 787; Wilhelm, 349 S.W.3d at 768.

NORA L. LONGORIA

Justice

Delivered and filed the

15th day of March, 2018.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Enrique YANEZ-ZUNIGA, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 06-41181

Conference Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

April 17, 2007.

James Lee Turner, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Marjorie A. Meyers, Federal Public Defender, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, BENAVIDES, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Enrique Yanez-Zuniga (Yanez) appeals the sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for illegal reentry after deportation. Yanez argues that the district court erroneously characterized his state court convictions for simple possession of controlled substances as aggravated felonies under U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(l)(C). We review Yanez’s challenge to the district court’s application of the Sentencing Guidelines de novo. *See United States v. Villegas,*404 F.3d 355, 359 (5th Cir.2005). Given the Supreme Court’s recent decision in *Lopez v. Gonzales,*— U.S.—, 127 S.Ct. 625, 166 L.Ed.2d 462 (2006), Yanez’s argument has merit. *See United States v. Estrada-Mendoza,*475 F.3d 258, 260-61 (5th Cir.2007). Accordingly, Yanez’s sentence is vacated, and the case is remanded for resentencing in light of *Lopez.*

CONVICTION AFFIRMED; SENTENCE VACATED AND REMANDED FOR RESENTENCING.

*

 Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
#### § 130.1 Purpose.

Section 39(a) of the Arms Export Control Act (22 U.S.C. 2779) provides that the Secretary of State shall prescribe regulations with respect to reporting on certain payments relating to sales of defense articles and defense services. The provisions of this part implement that requirement. Definitions which apply to this part are contained in §§ 130.2 through 130.8.
#### In the Matter of the Arbitration between Local 459, International Union of Electrical Radio & Machine Workers, AFL-CIO, Respondent, and Remington Rand, Division of Sperry Rand Corporation, Appellant.

Order unanimously affirmed, with $20 costs and disbursements to the respondent. No opinion. Concur — Breitel, J. P., Rabin, Valente and Bergan, JJ.
[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 27 (Tuesday, February 10, 2004)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 6139]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-2774]



========================================================================
Rules and Regulations
                                                Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents 
having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed 
to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published 
under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.

The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents. 
Prices of new books are listed in the first FEDERAL REGISTER issue of each 
week.

========================================================================


Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 27 / Tuesday, February 10, 2004 / 
Rules and Regulations

[[Page 6139]]


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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

10 CFR Part 71

RIN 3150-AG71


Compatibility With IAEA Transportation Safety Standards and Other 
Transportation Safety Amendments; Correction

AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

ACTION: Final rule: correction.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This document corrects a final rule appearing in the Federal 
Register on January 26, 2004 (69 FR 3698) amending the regulations 
governing the packaging and transportation of radioactive materials. 
This action is necessary to precisely identify provisions that will 
expire four years after the final rule becomes effective and the date 
on which that will occur.

EFFECTIVE DATE: The final rule is effective on October 1, 2004. 
Sections 71.19(a) and 71.20 expire on October 1, 2008.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Naiem S. Tanious, Office of Nuclear 
Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 
Washington, DC 20555-0001, telephone (301) 415-6103, e-mail 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#452b3631052b37266b222a33"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="c0aeb3b480aeb2a3eea7afb6">[email protected]</span></a>.

0
1. On page 3698, the effective date is corrected to read as follows: 
EFFECTIVE DATE: The final rule is effective on October 1, 2004. 
Sections 71.19(a) and 71.20 expire on October 1, 2008.
    2. In Sec. 71.19 paragraph (a)(3) is corrected to read as follows:


Sec. 71.19  Previously approved package.

    (a) * * *
    (3) Paragraph (a) of this section expires October 1, 2008.
* * * * *

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 4th day of February, 2004.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Michael T. Lesar,
Federal Register Liaison Officer.
[FR Doc. 04-2774 Filed 2-9-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P]


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

g

(9) Withdrawn from Locatable Mineral Entry

NO WARRANTY IS MADE BY THE BLM FOR USE OF THE DATA FOR PURPOSES NOT INTENDED BY BLM

CARBON
ALBANY

2
8

oa
s

us
ee
<
4
Aa
a

Cheyenne

0 10 20 40 60 80 100
Kilometers
0 5 10 20 30 40 50
Miles

Map 2-4

Locatable Mineral Withdrawals
Alternative 1
Exhibit 32(ii)

Certification

STATEMENT OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

AND INTERIM CHIEF ACCOUNTING OFFICER

OF ATMOSPHERIC GLOW TECHNOLOGIES, INC.

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 Atmospheric Glow Technologies, Inc. (the
Company) on Form 10-QSB for the period ended June 30, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), the undersigned officer of the Company, certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the undersigneds knowledge:



| | 1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities and 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.
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: August 13, 2007



| |  |                                                             
| |  | ------------------------------------------------------------
| |  | /s/ W. Scott McDonald                                       
| |  | W. Scott McDonald,                                          
| |  | Chief Executive Officer and Interim Chief Accounting Officer
|

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the
Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request. This certificate is being furnished solely for purposes of Section 906 and is not being filed as part of the Report
or as a separate disclosure document.
EXHIBIT 23.2


                                                  [Drew Field,, P.L. LETTERHEAD]

                                                               December 18, 1997
                                                              Board of Directors
                                         Success Development International, Inc.
                                                     9799 Old St. Augustine Road
                                                     Jacksonville, Florida 32257

                                                                 Dear Directors:

You have requested my opinion as to the legality of the securities being
registered by Success Development International, Inc. (the Company) under the
Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the Act), by filing a registration statement
on Form SB-2, relating to the offering of up to 500,000 shares of its common
stock a (the Shares) as described in the registration statement.

In connection with your request for my opinion, you have provided me and I have
reviewed the Company's Articles of Incorporation, as amended, bylaws,
resolutions of the Board of Directors of the Company concerning the offering,
the registration statement and such other corporate documents as I have
considered necessary or appropriate for the purposes of this opinion.

Upon the basis of such examination, it is my opinion that, when the registration
statement shall have become effective under the Act, and when the payment of the
consideration therefor, the Shares will, when sold, be legally issued, fully
paid and non-assessable.

I hereby consent to the filing of this opinion as an exhibit to the registration
statement.

                                                               Very truly yours,

                                                                              By
                                                                      DREW FIELD
#### § 221.32 Change in agreements.

No Noteholder will consent to any change or waiver of any provision of any document contemplated by this Guarantee without the prior written consent of A.I.D.
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 12-40865

Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

CARLOS TENEYUQUE-MEDINA,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 7:11-CR-1779-1

Before JOLLY, DENNIS, and PRADO, Circuit Judges. 

PER CURIAM:*

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Carlos

Teneyuque-Medina has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in

accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v.

Flores, 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Teneyuque-Medina has not filed a

response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the

record reflected therein. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal

presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

April 16, 2013

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not

be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

 Case: 12-40865 Document: 00512210462 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/16/2013
No. 12-40865

motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further

responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.

2

 Case: 12-40865 Document: 00512210462 Page: 2 Date Filed: 04/16/2013
[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 241 (Thursday, December 16, 2004)]
[Notices]
[Pages 75339-75340]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-27533]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management


Potential for Oil Shale Development, Extension of Public Comment 
Period

AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management (BLM), Interior.

ACTION: Notice of extension of comment period.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The BLM published a Federal Register on November 22, 2004 
seeking public input on the terms to be included in leases of small 
tracts for oil shale research and development within the Piceance Creek 
Basin, northwestern Colorado; the Uinta Basin, southeastern Utah: and 
the Green River and Washakie Basins, western Wyoming. BLM received a 
request to extend the

[[Page 75340]]

comment period and have agreed to extend the period to January 31, 
2005.

DATES: Please send your comments no later than January 31, 2005.

ADDRESSES: Please hand-deliver written comments: To Nick Douglas, Suite 
700, 1620 L Street, NW., Washington, DC. This is also the FedEx 
address. Mail written comments to BLM (Attention: Nick Douglas), 
Minerals, Realty and Resource Protection, Mail Stop: LS 700, 1849 C 
Street, NW., Washington, DC 20240. Electronic Mail: You may send 
comments through the Internet to BLM at: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#4c02252f27130823392b202d3f0c2e2021622b233a"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="b3fddad0d8ecf7dcc6d4dfd2c0f3d1dfde9dd4dcc5">[email protected]</span></a>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nick Douglas, Senior Policy Advisor, 
Minerals, Realty and Resource Protection, Bureau of Land Management, 
Mail Stop: LS 700, 1849 C Street, NW., Washington, DC 20240 at (202) 
452-0374.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: BLM published a Notice of Request for 
Comments on Potential for Oil Shale Development on November 22, 2004; 
see 69 FR 67935. The purpose of this notice is to extend the comment 
period from December 22, 2004 to January 31, 2005. The United States 
holds over 50 percent of the world's oil shale resources, which contain 
2.6 trillion barrels of oil. These resources include the oil shale 
deposits in the Green River formation in the Western United States.

    Dated: December 9, 2004.
Thomas P. Lonnie,
Assistant Director, Minerals Realty, and Resource Protection.
[FR Doc. 04-27533 Filed 12-15-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-AG-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
#### In the Matter of the Arbitration between Board of Education of the Yonkers City School District, Respondent, and Yonkers Federation of Teachers, Appellant.

— In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 75 to vacate an arbitration award on the ground that the arbitrator exceeded his authority, the Yonkers Federation of Teachers appeals, as limited by its brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, dated July 19, 1976, as granted the petition to the extent of vacating the remedy furnished by the arbitrator and "remitted [the matter] to the arbitrator with the direction to order the petitioner to reinstate Mrs. Helen Bona as a teacher for a reasonable specific period, without tenure, during which period the evaluation machinery may be utilized in accordance with the agreement between the Yonkers Board of Education and the Yonkers Federation of Teachers.” Order affirmed insofar as appealed from, with $50 costs and disbursements. The determination by Special Term 'that the arbitrator’s remedy, viz., that Mrs. Bona (a probationary teacher employed by petitioner since 1971, whose services were terminated on September 30, 1974) be restored to her position as of October 1, 1974, with reimbursement for any loss of earnings suffered, should be vacated and a new remedy fashioned (as stated above) was proper (see *Matter of Cohoes City School Disk v Cohoes Teachers Assn.,*40 NY2d 774; *Board of Educ., v BellmoreMerrick United Secondary Teachers,*39 NY2d 167; *Board of Educ. v Chautauqua Cent. School Teachers Assn.,*41 AD2d 47). Hopkins, J. P., Martuscello, Margett and O’Connor, JJ., concur.
§ 506.2 Review of positions. Positions becoming vacant unless excepted as provided by § 506.7, will be reviewed to determine the feasibility of converting them to part-time. Among the criteria which may be used when conducting this review are: ( a ) Mission requirements and occupational mix.
( b ) Workload fluctuations.
( c ) Employment ceilings and budgetary considerations.
( d ) Size of workforce, turnover rate and employment trends.
( e ) Affirmative action.
- All
            - Title
            - Author
            - Subject
            - Date
            - Full-Text

            -                              Explore                            ******                - Educational Resources
              - Archival Collections
              -                                      Themes                                    ******                  - Economic Data
                - Federal Reserve
                - View all 
              - Timelines 
            -                              Browse                            ******                - Titles
              - Authors
              - Subjects
              - Dates 
            -                              About                            ******                - About FRASER
              - FAQ
              - Contact Us
              -                                      FRASER API                                    ******                  - REST API
                - OAI-PMH 
            - Inside FRASER Blog

            - **

Home                 > Browse by Title > Wage Chronology: Rockwell International (Electronics, North American Aircraft/Space Operations) and the UAW, May 1941-September 1977

              																	United States. Bureau of Labor Statistics					,	Lacombe, John J.					 and 	Davis, William M., Jr. 						*Wage Chronology: Rockwell International (Electronics, North American Aircraft/Space Operations) and the UAW, May 1941-September 1977 : Bulletin of the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics, No. 1893*,												Washington, D.C: 								U.S. Dept. of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, 										1976,									https://fraser.stlouisfed.org/title/4903,			accessed on September 11, 2024.						    

        - **FRASER**
        - About
        - FAQ
        - Legal and Privacy
        - FRASER API

          -                              @FedFRASER 
          - ** Contact Us
          -  **  What's New  
          -  **  Inside FRASER