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

UNITED 

STATES 

DISTRICT 

COURT

U

For the Northern District of California

NITED 

STATES 

DISTRICT 

COURT

For the Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

Northern District of California

SERVICE EMPLOYEES

Plaintiff(s),

v.

SEIU UNITED HEALTHCARE WORKERS

Defendant(s).

_____________________________________/

No. C 09-00404 WHA (MEJ)

ORDER DIRECTING DEFENDANTS

TO SUBMIT CHAMBERS COPIES IN

COMPLIANCE WITH GENERAL

ORDER 45 AND THE COURT'S

STANDING ORDERS

On January 27, 2010, Defendantns electronically filed a discovery reply letter. (Dkt. #468.) 

However, Defendants have failed to comply with General Order 45 and the Court’s Standing Orders

by failing to deliver to the Clerk’s Office “no later than noon on the business day following the day

that the papers are filed electronically, one paper copy of each document that is filed electronically .

. . marked ‘Chambers Copy’ and . . . clearly marked with the judge’s name, case number, and

‘Chambers Copy-Do Not File.’” See General Order 45 § VI.G; see also Case Management Standing

Order, Magistrate Judge Maria-Elena James, ¶ 6. Defendants are hereby ORDERED to comply with

General Order 45 and the Court’s Standing Orders by immediately submitting a chambers copy,

with exhibits and appropriate tab dividers if necessary, of the above-referenced documents. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 1, 2010 _______________________________

Maria-Elena James 

Chief United States Magistrate Judge 

Case 3:09-cv-00404-WHA Document 478 Filed 02/01/10 Page 1 of 1
**\TED S'4) 

# nQL 

# mm UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY % <,ae REGION IX

'''*4< pQoreG 75 Hawthorne Street San Francisco, CA 941 05-3901



## JUL 

## 2 0 2012 Mr. Henry Darwin Director Arizona Department of Environmental Quality 1 110West Washington Street

&$hay 25,'2012, you submitted a package ofmaterials containing a revision to the Arizona State Implementation Plan for achieving and maintaining the National Ambient Air Quality Standard for Particulate Matter less than 10 microns (PM-10). This revision includes the 20 12 Five Percent Plan for PM- 10 for the Maricopa NonattainmentArea and the 201 2 Five Percent Plan for PM- 10 for the Pinal County Township 1 North, Range 8 East Nonattainment Area. Thispackage was supplemented with additional information transmittedby letter on June 22,2012 and July 2,2012. We understand that this revision is intended by ADEQ to address the requirements of section 189(d)ofthe Clean Air Act for the Phoenix Planning Area. We have reviewed this package for completeness and found that it conformsto the completeness criteria in 40 CFR part 5 1, appendix V. Therefore, this submittal addressesthe finding of failureto submit for the Phoenix Planning area made by EPA on February 14,2011 (76 FR 8300). The finding of completeness conveyed in this letter stops the related clock for mandatory sanctions under section 179(a)of the Clean Air Act. If you have any questions regarding our review, please call me or have your staff contact Colleen McKaughan, Associate Director, at (520) 498-01 18,

### mckaughan.colleen~,eua.nov. Sincerely,

Director, Air Division

cc: Dennis Smith, Executive Director Maricopa Association of Governments
* Pursuant to Local Rule 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 Local Rule

47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 96-50041

Summary Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

LUIS SANCHEZ,

Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. SA-95-CV-1033 and SA-94-CR-174

- - - - - - - - - -

November 25, 1996

Before JONES, DeMOSS and PARKER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Luis Sanchez, # 63949-080, appeals the district court’s

denial of his motion to vacate, set aside or correct sentence

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255. Having reviewed Sanchez’ arguments

and the record on appeal, we affirm for essentially the same

reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Sanchez,

SA-95-CV-1033 and SA-94-CR-174 (W.D. Tex., Jan. 3, 1996). 

Additionally, Sanchez’ claims are meritless under the intervening

decision of United States v. Ursery, 116 S. Ct. 2135 (1996).
No.

- 2 -

AFFIRMED.
EXHIBIT 31.1

                                  CERTIFICATION

I, Aaron Dobrinsky, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of RoomLinX, Inc.;

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a
material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements
made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not
misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the
financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as
of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4. The registrant's other certifying officer and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure
controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that
material information relating to the registrant is made known to us by others,
particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and
procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness
of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered
by this report based on such evaluation; and

c) disclosed in this report any changes in the registrant's internal control
over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most recent
fiscal quarter (the registrant's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual
report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially
affect, the registrant's internal controls over financial reporting; and

5. The registrant's other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our
most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the
registrant's auditors and the audit committee of the registrant's board of
directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or
operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably
likely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process,
summarize and report financial information; and

b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal controls over
financial reporting.

Date: September 13, 2005


                                                /s/ Aaron Dobrinsky
                                                ------------------------------
                                                Aaron Dobrinsky
                                                Chief Executive Officer
### §5661. Transferred

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section 5661 was editorially reclassified as section 11161 of Title 34, Crime Control and Law Enforcement.

#### Prior Provisions

A prior section 5661, Pub. L. 93–415, title II, §247, formerly §251, Sept. 7, 1974, 88 Stat. 1128; renumbered §250 and amended Pub. L. 95–115, §§3(a)(3)(B), 5(e)(1), (2)(B), Oct. 3, 1977, 91 Stat. 1048, 1057; Pub. L. 96–509, §19(p), Dec. 8, 1980, 94 Stat. 2765; renumbered §249 and amended Pub. L. 98–473, title II, §639, Oct. 12, 1984, 98 Stat. 2120; renumbered §247 and amended Pub. L. 100–690, title VII, §7263(a)(2)(D), (E), Nov. 18, 1988, 102 Stat. 4443, related to participation in training program and State advisory group conferences, prior to repeal by Pub. L. 107–273, div. C, title II, §12210(1), Nov. 2, 2002, 116 Stat. 1880.
### §155. Withdrawal, reservation, or restriction of public lands for defense purposes; "public lands" defined; exception

Notwithstanding any other provisions of law, except in time of war or national emergency hereafter declared by the President or the Congress, on and after February 28, 1958 the provisions hereof shall apply to the withdrawal and reservation for, restriction of, and utilization by, the Department of Defense for defense purposes of the public lands of the United States, including public lands in the Territories of Alaska and Hawaii: Provided, That—

(1) for the purposes of this Act, the term "public lands" shall be deemed to include, without limiting the meaning thereof, Federal lands and waters of the Outer Continental Shelf, as defined in section 1331 of this title, and Federal lands and waters off the coast of the Territories of Alaska and Hawaii;

(2) nothing in this Act shall be deemed to be applicable to the withdrawal or reservation of public lands specifically as naval petroleum, naval oil shale, or naval coal reserves;

(3) nothing in this Act shall be deemed to be applicable to the warning areas over the Federal lands and waters of the Outer Continental Shelf and Federal lands and waters off the coast of the Territory of Alaska reserved for use of the military departments prior to August 7, 1953, and

(4) nothing in this section, section 156, or section 157 of this title shall be deemed to be applicable either to those reservations or withdrawals which expired due to the ending of the unlimited national emergency of May 27, 1941, and which subsequent to such expiration have been and are now used by the military departments with the concurrence of the Department of the Interior, or to the withdrawal of public domain lands of the Marine Corps Training Center, Twentynine Palms, California, and the naval gunnery ranges in the State of Nevada designated as Basic Black Rock and Basic Sahwave Mountain.

(Pub. L. 85–337, §1, Feb. 28, 1958, 72 Stat. 27.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

This Act, referred to in pars. (1), (2), and (3), is Pub. L. 85–337, Feb. 28, 1958, 72 Stat. 27, which enacted sections 155 to 158 of this title and section 2671 of Title 10, Armed Forces, and amended section 472 of former Title 40, Public Buildings, Property, and Works. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Tables.

#### **Executive Documents**

#### Admission of Alaska and Hawaii to Statehood

Alaska was admitted into the Union on Jan. 3, 1959, on issuance of Proc. No. 3269, Jan. 3, 1959, 24 F.R. 81, 73 Stat. c16, and Hawaii was admitted into the Union on Aug. 21, 1959, on issuance of Proc. No. 3309, Aug. 21, 1959, 24 F.R. 6868, 73 Stat. c74. For Alaska Statehood Law, see Pub. L. 85–508, July 7, 1958, 72 Stat. 339, set out as a note preceding section 21 of Title 48, Territories and Insular Possessions. For Hawaii Statehood Law, see Pub. L. 86–3, Mar. 18, 1959, 73 Stat. 4, set out as a note preceding section 491 of Title 48.
### §1471e. Reimbursement of employee license costs and certification fees

Notwithstanding any other provision of law, in fiscal year 1993 and thereafter, appropriations or funds available to the Department of the Interior or the Forest Service, Department of Agriculture, may be used to reimburse employees for the cost of State licenses and certification fees pursuant to their employment and that are necessary to comply with State or Federal laws, regulations, or requirements.

(Pub. L. 102–381, title III, §317, Oct. 5, 1992, 106 Stat. 1417.)
#### James A. Garvey et al., Appellants, v St. Paul Fire & Marine Insurance Company et al., Respondents.

Order unanimously affirmed, without costs. Memorandum: Special Term properly denied plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment made pursuant to CPLR 3212 (subd [c]). While there is no question that defendants are liable for the reasonable value of

*993the necessary legal services rendered by plaintiffs to their assignors, the legal services provided have not been specified and it has not otherwise been established sufficiently that the services were necessarily rendered. Thus we are unable to conclude as a matter of law that defendants must pay for all of the services rendered by plaintiffs (see CPLR 3212, subd [b]). Moreover, the issue of damages is so closely related to that of liability that proof on an assessment would be substantially the same as proof on a trial and thus neither the time nor effort of the court or the litigants would be conserved by resort to summary judgment (see *People v Record Club of Amer.,*51 AD2d 709; *McMahon v PBster,*49 AD2d 729, 730; *Williamson v Ditmars Theatre,*30 AD2d 785; *Harold Ohringer, Inc. v Kass,*28 AD2d 1117; *Schwartz v New England Mut. Life Ins. Co. of Boston,*20 AD2d 688). (Appeal from order of Erie Supreme Court—summary judgment.) Present— Moule, J. P., Cardamone, Simons, Dillon and Goldman, JJ.
ex10_3.htm








Exhibit 10.3


 


AMENDMENT #1 TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT









ePlus inc. (the “Company”), a Delaware corporation, and Elaine D. Marion (the “Executive”) (collectively, “the Parties”) have previously entered into an Employment Agreement (the “Agreement”), effective September 30, 2009.  The Parties hereby agree to this Amendment #1 (“Amendment #1”)







1.           Paragraph 2(b) of the Agreement shall be replaced in its entirety with the following:







(b) “Employment Term” shall be the period from the date of the last signature below through and including September 30, 2011.







2.           The last sentence of Section 5(b) shall be replaced with the following:







In no event will any bonus earned under this Section 5(b) be paid later than the next December 31st following the fiscal year in which the bonus was earned, unless calculation of the bonus is not administratively practicable by that date, and further delay would not violate Code Section 409A.







3.           Subsection 7(c)(5) shall be added which reads as follows:







              (5)           Any release and certification required from the Executive under the first paragraph of this Section 7(c) shall be on the form attached as Exhibit 1 unless the Company has provided Executive a different form on or before his termination of employment.  The applicable release and certification must be signed and returned by Executive to the Company within twenty one (21) days of the date of termination of employment and not revoked in order for Executive to be entitled to payments under Section 7(c).  Except as provided by subsection 7(c)(4), provided the requirements of this subsection are met, any lump sum payment due Executive under subsection 7(c)(1), (2),  or (3) shall be paid on the last day of the thirty (30) day, sixty (60) day or other applicable period in which the Company may make such payment in compliance with the applicable provision.







4.           Sample Release and Certification







The Sample Release included as Exhibit 1 to the Agreement shall be amended to include the following as the penultimate sentence:







Employee hereby certifies he has complied with Sections 8, 9, 10, 11 and 12 of his Employment Agreement (confidentiality, intellectual property, non-compete, non-solicit, conflict of interest and return of property provisions).







No other provision of the Agreement is affected by this Amendment #1.


 


 




	
/s/ Phillip G. Norton 

	  	
/s/ Elaine D. Marion

	  
	
Phillip G. Norton

	  	
Elaine D. Marion

	  
	
Chief Executive Officer

	  	
Chief Financial Officer

	  
	
Date: September 16, 2010

	  	
Date: September 14, 2010
#### CONGER v. CONGER et al.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

March 10, 1905.)

Action by Clarence R. Conger against Theodore H. Conger and others. No opinion. Motion granted, to the extent stated in memorandum.
##### 



Exhibit 32.1 Section 906 Certification Certification of Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as created by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the
undersigned officers of PRA International (the Company) hereby certify, to such officers
knowledge, that: (i) the accompanying Annual Report of Form 10-K of the Company for the period ended December 31,
2004 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d), as
applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and (ii) the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of the Company. Dated: March 18, 2005 /s/ Patrick K. Donnelly
Patrick K. Donnelly
Chief Executive Officer /s/ J. Matthew Bond
J. Matthew Bond
Chief Financial Officer
#### § 1000.540 What hearing procedures will be used under NAHASDA?

The hearing procedures in 24 CFR part 26 shall be used.
§ 206.121 Commissioner authorized to make payments. ( a ) *Investigation.* The Commissioner will investigate all complaints by a borrower concerning late payments. If the Commissioner determines that the mortgagee is unable or unwilling to make all payments required under the mortgage, including late charges, the Commissioner shall pay such payments and late charges to the borrower.
( b ) *Reimbursement or assignment.* The Commissioner may demand that within 30 days from the demand, the mortgagee reimburse the Commissioner, with interest from the date of payment by the Commissioner, or assign the insured mortgage to the Commissioner. Interest shall be paid at a rate set in conformity with the Treasury Financial Manual. If the mortgagee complies with the reimbursement demand, then the contract of insurance shall not be affected. If the mortgagee complies by assigning the mortgage for record within 30 days of the demand, then the Commissioner shall pay an insurance claim as provided in § 206.129(e)(3) and assume all responsibilities of the mortgagee under the first mortgage. If the mortgagee fails to comply with the demand within 30 days, the contract of insurance will terminate as provided in § 206.133(c).
( c ) *Second mortgage.* If the contract of insurance is terminated as provided in § 206.133(c), all payments to the borrower by the Commissioner will be secured by the second mortgage, unless otherwise provided by the Commissioner. Payments will be due and payable in the same manner as under the insured first mortgage. The liability of the borrower under the first mortgage shall be limited to payments actually made by the mortgagee to or on behalf of the borrower (including prior recoupment of the MIP remitted by the mortgagee and billed to the borrower), and shall exclude accrued interest, whether or not it has been included in the outstanding loan balance, and shared appreciation, if any. Interest will stop accruing on the first mortgage when the Commissioner begins to make payments under the second mortgage. The first mortgage will not be due and payable until the second mortgage is due and payable.
1 

Hatcher v. County of Alameda, et al./Case #C09-01650 TEH (MEJ) 

Stipulation And [Proposed] Order To Continue Settlement Conference 

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

Haapala, Thompson & Abern LLP Attorneys At Law 

Park Plaza Building 

1939 Harrison St., Suite 800 

Oakland, California 94612 

Telephone: 510-763-2324 

Facsimile: 510-273-8570

Clyde A. Thompson, SBN 72920 

Benjamin A. Thompson, SBN 236590 

HAAPALA, THOMPSON & ABERN, LLP 

1939 Harrison Street, Suite 800 

Oakland, California 94612 

Tel: 510-763-2324 

Fax: 510-273-8570 

Attorneys For Defendants 

COUNTY OF ALAMEDA, SHERIFF GREGORY J. AHERN, 

JEREMY C. LUCHA, JAMES A. RUSSELL, VICTOR GALINDO, 

VICTOR CABELLO, MATTHEW NEILL, and VICENTE CLEMENTE 

John L. Burris, SBN 69888 

LAW OFFICES OF JOHN L. BURRIS 

7677 Oakport Street, Suite 1120 

Oakland, California 94621 

Tel: (510) 839-5200 

Fax: (510) 839-3882 

Gayla B. Libet, SBN 109173 

Law Offices of Gayla B. Libet 

486 – 41st Street, Suite 3 

Oakland, California 94609 

Tel/Fax: 510-420-0324 

Attorneys For Plaintiff 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA – SAN FRANCISCO 

BILLY J. HATCHER, 

 Plaintiff, 

 vs. 

COUNTY OF ALAMEDA, a governmental 

entity; GREGORY J. AHERN, in his capacity 

as Sheriff for COUNTY OF ALAMEDA; 

JEREMY C. LUCHA; JAMES A. RUSSELL; 

VICTOR GALINDO; VICTOR CABELLO; 

MATTHEW NEILL; and VICENTE 

CLEMENTE; individually and in their 

capacity as deputy sheriff’s for COUNTY OF 

ALAMEDA; and DOES 1-25, inclusive, 

 Defendants. 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

Case No.: C09-01650 TEH (MEJ) 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] 

ORDER TO CONTINUE SETTLEMENT 

CONFERENCE 

Case 3:09-cv-01650-TEH Document 27 Filed 03/03/10 Page 1 of 2
The case management conference is continued to Monday, 05/17/10 at 1:30 PM. 

A joint case management statement shall be filed by 05/10/10. 03/03/10

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORN

I

A

Judge Thelton E. Henderson

Case 3:09-cv-01650-TEH Document 27 Filed 03/03/10 Page 2 of 2
[if !vml]>[endif]>
[if !vml]>[endif]>
Youhave reached the Federal Depository Library Program Electronic Collection(FDLP/EC) Archive. This archive assures ongoing access to publications in theFDLP/EC. Access to publications in the archive is available through GPO's suiteof cataloging and locator services, including the Catalog of U.S. GovernmentPublications (CGP).
**Title:****Researchand development accomplishments [electronic resource].
 
2003 | 2004
 
SuDoc Number:TD 4.87/2-6:
Item Number:0431-C-76 (online)
CGP System Number:000609341
 
 
 
** 
**Permanent Public Access
** 
Title 44 of  the United States Code (44 U.S.C. Section 1911) stipulates that public access  to official Government information products disseminated through the Federal  Depository Library Program (FDLP) must be maintained permanently in regional  depository libraries and by depository libraries not served by a regional  library. Since online products are not physically distributed to depository  libraries for retention, GPO has assumed responsibility for the provision of  permanent access to Government information products residing on FDsys  servers.
GPO's  permanent public access commitment is also met by bringing  agency-disseminated Internet resources under the purview of GPO and  incorporating them into a digital archive. GPO captures copies of agency  electronic information products, and creates PURLs so that users will be  automatically redirected to the archived products if the information is no  longer accessible on the agency Web site. Please refer to the report Managing  the FDLP Electronic Collection: A Policy and Planning Document for more  information.
 
August 3, 2017********