alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
1

The Honorable Mary Ann L. Medler, United States Magistrate Judge for the

Eastern District of Missouri, to whom the case was referred for final disposition by

consent of the parties pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c). 

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 03-3527

___________

Vincent M. Ventimiglia, *

*

Appellant, *

*

v. * Appeal from the United States

* District Court for the

St. Louis County; Bob McCullouch; * Eastern District of Missouri.

Buzz Westfall; Judge Celeste Endicott; *

Allison Wolfe; David Arthur; Renee * [UNPUBLISHED]

Hines Tyce; Police Officer Angela *

Candler; Judge Robert G. Dowd, *

*

Appellees. *

___________

Submitted: June 3, 2004

Filed: June 17, 2004

___________

Before MELLOY, HANSEN, and COLLOTON, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Vincent M. Ventimiglia appeals from the district court’s1

 adverse grant of

summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. We affirm.
-2-

We agree with the district court that all of Ventimiglia’s claims -- other than

his claim against Officer Angela Candler -- are barred by collateral estoppel because

he unsuccessfully raised the issues underlying these claims during his state criminal

appeal. See Allen v. McCurry, 449 U.S. 90, 103-05 (1980) (collateral estoppel may

apply when § 1983 plaintiff attempts to relitigate in federal court issues decided

against him in state criminal proceedings; federal court gives state court judgment

same preclusive effect it would be given under law of state where it was rendered);

Shahan v. Shahan, 988 S.W.2d 529, 532-33 (Mo. 1999) (summarizing doctrine of

collateral estoppel). As to Ventimiglia’s remaining claim that Officer Candler

falsified information to establish probable cause for his arrest, we conclude that his

conviction precludes such a claim. See Miller v. Benson, 51 F.3d 166, 170 (8th Cir.

1995) (appellate court may affirm on any ground supported by record); Malady v.

Crunk, 902 F.2d 10, 11-12 (8th Cir. 1990) (conviction for offense for which officer

arrested plaintiff bars § 1983 action alleging absence of probable cause).

Ventimiglia’s remaining arguments are meritless. 

Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. We also deny Ventimiglia’s

pending motions.

______________________________
#### In the Matter of Sidney I. Dyer. Association of the Bar of the City of New York.

Motion for an order directing the Association of the Bar of the City of New York to conduct disciplinary proceedings is in all respects denied. Concur — Breitel, J. P., Valente, McNally, Eager and Steuer, JJ.
### §8285c. Authorization of appropriations

(a) To carry out this subchapter there is authorized to be appropriated the sum of $10,000,000 for the fiscal year ending on September 30, 1981, and the sum of $15,000,000 for the fiscal year ending on September 30, 1982.

(b) Any funds appropriated under the authorization contained in this section shall remain available until expended.

(Pub. L. 96–294, title V, §584, June 30, 1980, 94 Stat. 761.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section was enacted as part of the Energy Security Act, and not as part of the National Energy Conservation Policy Act which comprises this chapter.
§ 115.203 Interim certification procedures. ( a ) Upon receipt of a request for interim certification filed under § 115.202, the Assistant Secretary may request further information necessary for a determination to be made under this section. The Assistant Secretary may consider the relative priority given to fair housing administration, as compared to the agency's other duties and responsibilities, as well as the compatibility or potential conflict of fair housing objectives with these other duties and responsibilities.
( b ) If the Assistant Secretary determines, after application of the criteria set forth in § 115.204, that the state or local law, on its face, provides substantive rights, procedures, remedies, and judicial review procedures for alleged discriminatory housing practices that are substantially equivalent to those provided in the Act, the Assistant Secretary may offer to enter into an Agreement for the Interim Referral of Complaints and Other Utilization of Services (interim agreement). The interim agreement will outline the procedures and authorities upon which the interim certification is based.
( c ) Such interim agreement, after it is signed by all appropriate signatories, will result in the agency receiving interim certification. Appropriate signatories include the Assistant Secretary, the FHEO regional director, and the state or local official having principal responsibility for the administration of the state or local fair housing law.
( d ) Interim agreements shall be for a term of no more than three years.
( e ) All regulations, rules, directives, and/or opinions of the State Attorney General or the jurisdiction's chief legal officer that are necessary for the law to be substantially equivalent on its face must be enacted and effective in order for the Assistant Secretary to offer the agency an interim agreement.
( f ) Interim certification required prior to certification. An agency is required to obtain interim certification prior to obtaining certification.
Uni

ted 

Stat

es D

istr

ict C

ourt

For t

he N

orth

ern 

Dis

trict

 of C

alifo

rnia

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

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

GUILLERMO MENDOZA,

Petitioner,

    v.

LOUIS WYNN,

Respondent.                                                                           /

No. C 09-1336 MHP

JUDGMENT

This petition having come before this court, the Honorable Marilyn Hall Patel, United States

District Judge presiding, and the issues having been duly presented and an order having been duly

filed dismissing the petition,

IT IS ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that this action is DISMISSED in its entirety.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: June 4, 2010                                                               MARILYN HALL PATELUnited States District Court JudgeNorthern District of California

Case 3:09-cv-01336-MHP   Document 4   Filed 06/04/10   Page 1 of 1

    -       - Superintendent of Documents
      - 2018-03-08T18:50:17-0500
      - US GPO, Washington, DC 20401
      - Superintendent of Documents
      - GPO attests that this document has not been altered since it was disseminated by GPO
##### 



EXHIBIT 99.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADDED BY
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Boca Resorts, Inc.
(the Company) for the period ending December 31, 2002 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the
undersigned hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as added by
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;
and                              
| | - |  | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
| | 2 |  | The information contained in the Report fairly
presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
result of operations of the Company.

/s/ H. Wayne Huizenga




H. Wayne Huizenga
Chairman (Principal Executive Officer)
February 3, 2003


/s/ Wayne Moor




Wayne Moor
Senior Vice President, Treasurer and
Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial Officer)
February 3, 2003
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

JUDGMENT

No. 04-13-00850-CR

George GALVAN,

Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 186th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2012CR9426

Honorable Maria Teresa Herr, Judge Presiding

BEFORE JUSTICE ANGELINI, JUSTICE MARION, AND JUSTICE BARNARD

In accordance with this court’s opinion of this date, this appeal is DISMISSED.

SIGNED January 29, 2014.

_________________________________

Karen Angelini, Justice
## Observer Magazine 1995

                      - January
                      - February
                      - March
                      -  April
                      - May
                      - June
                      - July
                      - August
                      - September
                      - October
                      - November
                      - December

## Observer Magazine 1996

                      - January
                      - February
                      - March
                      - April
                      - May
                      - June
                      - July
                      - August
                      - September
                      - October

## Observer Magazine 1997

                      - January
                      - February
                      - March
                      - April
                      - May
                      - July/August
                      - September/October
                      - November

## Observer Magazine 1998

                      - April
                      - June
                      - July
                      - August
                      - September/October

## Observer Magazine 1999

                      - Almanac
                      - June/July
                      - August/September
                      - October/November
                      - Special Edition
                      - December/January

## Observer Magazine 2000

                      - February/March
                      - April/May
                      - June/July
                      - August/September
                      - October

## Observer Magazine 2001

                      - March/April
                      - May/June
                      - July/August
                      - September/October
                      - November/December

## Observer Magazine 2002

                      - March/April
                      - May/June
                      - July/August
                      - September/October
                      - November/December

## Observer Magazine 2003

                      - March/April
                      - May/June
                      - Special Edition
                      - July/August
                      - September/October
                      - November/December

## Observer Magazine 2004

                      - March/April
                      - May/June
                      - July/August
                      - November/December

## Observer Magazine 2005

                      - March/April
                      - May/June
                      - July/August
                      - September/October
                      - November/December

## Observer Magazine 2006

                      - March/April
                      - May/June
                      - July/August
                      - November/December

## Public Affairs Office

557 WW/PA101 Nelson DriveOffutt AFB, NE 68113-1023-----Comm: (402) 232-4772DSN: 272-4772E-mail:557WW.PA.PublicAffairs@us.af.mil
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Stephen J. Markman, Chief Justice

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano 

Richard H. Bernstein

Joan L. Larsen, 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.

 April 21, 2017

Order 

Clerk

April 21, 2017

155269(68)

SCOTT SHARP, Personal Representative

ESTATE OF BRIAN P. TURNER, Plaintiff-Appellant, SC: 155269

v COA: 327110

Lenawee CC: 12-004383-NH

CHRISTOPHER M. MOHLER, M.D., OMNI

HEALTH SERVICES LIMITED, MELISSA

THORNTON, R.N., EMMA L. BIXBY

MEDICAL CENTER, a/k/a BIXBY MEDICAL

CENTER, and PROMEDICA HEALTH 

SYSTEMS, INC., Defendants-Appellees,

and

PICIS, INC., and OPTUMINSIGHT, INC.,

Defendants. 

_________________________________________/

On order of the Chief Justice, the motion of defendants-appellees Melissa 

Thornton, R.N., Emma L. Bixby Medical Center, and Promedica Health Systems, Inc., to 

extend the time for filing their answer to the application for leave to appeal is 

GRANTED. The answer submitted on April 12, 2017, is accepted for filing.
### SUBCHAPTER XXIX—NORMAN PROJECT, OKLAHOMA
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

For the Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAM WESLEY, JR., 

Plaintiff,

v.

MICHAEL SAYRE, C.M.O.; et al., 

Defendants. /

No. C 08-5035 SI (pr)

SCHEDULING ORDER

Defendants' request for extension of the deadline to file a dispositive motion is

DISMISSED as moot because they filed their summary judgment motion by the originally

scheduled deadline of January 22, 2010. (Docket # 16.) Because the motion was timely filed,

the opposition and reply dates remain as earlier scheduled. That is, plaintiff must file and serve

his opposition to the motion no later than February 26, 2010, and defendants must file their

reply brief, if any, no later than March 12, 2010. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 27, 2010 _______________________

 SUSAN ILLSTON

United States District Judge

Case 3:08-cv-05035-SI Document 21 Filed 01/27/10 Page 1 of 1
exv10w23






Exhibit 10.23









November 6, 2009




Teresa Sussman

Associate Director

Office of Sponsored Programs

Emory University

1599 Clifton Road NE, 4th Floor

Mailstop: 1599/001/1BA

Atlanta, GA 30322




	 	 	 	 	 

	 

	 	Re:
	 	Subcontract under NIH Grant No. 5 U19 AI074073-03

Mark Mulligan, Principal Investigator (Emory)

Harriet Robinson, Subcontractor Investigator (Geovax, Inc.)





Dear Ms. Sussman:



By this letter I am modifying the subcontract by and between Geovax, Inc. and Emory
University on the above-referenced project.



Article 4. Allocation of Funds



Funds in the amount of $42,120 have been added for the Year 03 budget period.



Article 5. Period of Performance



The budget period for Year 03 is September 1, 2009 through August 31, 2010.



Article 6. Reporting Procedures



(A) Technical Report: An annual technical report shall be submitted to Geovax no
later than three (3) months prior to the budget end date of August 31, 2010 for inclusion
in the non-competing grant application.



(B) Fiscal Report: A final invoice for year 02 shall be made to Geovax no later
than forty-five (45) days after the budget end date of August 31, 2010.



All other terms and conditions of the original subcontract dated June 26, 2008 and any
subsequent modifications remain in effect.



Please have an authorized official sign both copies of this modification, and return one
(1) copy. Please retain the second copy for your file.



Sincerely,




	 	 	 

	/s/ Mark Reynolds

	 	/s/ Teresa Sussman
	 

	 	 
	Mark Reynolds

Chief Financial Officer

Geovax, Inc.

	 	Teresa Sussman

Associate Director

Emory University





 



GeoVax Labs Inc.     –     1900 Lake Park Drive     –     Smyrna, Georgia 30080 USA     –
     678-384-7220 tel     –     www.geovax.com
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 289 Referred in Senate (RFS)]

  1st Session
                                H. R. 289

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            February 2, 2005

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security 
                        and Governmental Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
    at 8200 South Vermont Avenue in Los Angeles, California, as the 
      ``Sergeant First Class John Marshall Post Office Building''.

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

SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

    The facility of the United States Postal Service located at 8200 
South Vermont Avenue in Los Angeles, California, shall be known and 
designated as the ``Sergeant First Class John Marshall Post Office 
Building''.

SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

    Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper, or other 
record of the United States to the facility referred to in section 1 
shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Sergeant First Class John 
Marshall Post Office Building''.

            Passed the House of Representatives February 1, 2005.

            Attest:

                                                 JEFF TRANDAHL,

                                                                 Clerk.
```
#### Scott M. Schmidt et al., Respondents-Appellants, v State of New York, Appellant-Respondent.

(Claim No. 98418.)

[832 NYS2d 842]

Appeal and cross appeal from a judgment of the Court of Claims (Philip J. Patti, J.), entered December 27, 2005 in a personal injury action. The interlocutory judgment, after a nonjury trial on the issue of liability, determined that claimant Scott M. Schmidt and defendant were negligent and that their negligence contributed to the happening of the accident and apportioned liability 60% to claimant and 40% to defendant.

It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed without costs for reasons stated in decision at the Court of Claims. Present— Gorski, J.P, Lunn, Fahey, Green and Pine, JJ.
Exhibit 11

                     METRIS COMPANIES INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
                        Computation of Earnings Per Share

<TABLE>

In thousands, except per-share amounts                                         Three Months Ended March 31,
                                                                                     2002          2001
BASIC:
------

<S>       <C>                                                                      <C>            <C>
Net income(1) ................................................................     $52,340        $41,546
                                                                                   =======        =======


Weighted-average number of common shares outstanding .........................      62,188         62,303
Assumed conversion of convertible preferred stock ............................      33,844         34,357
                                                                                   -------        -------
Basic common shares ..........................................................      96,032         96,660
                                                                                   =======        =======

Net income per share .........................................................     $  0.55        $  0.43

DILUTED:

Net income(1) ................................................................     $52,340        $41,546
                                                                                   =======        =======


Weighted-average number of common shares outstanding .........................      62,188         62,303
Net effect of assumed exercise of stock options based on treasury stock method
     using average market price ..............................................         941          1,785
Assumed conversion of convertible preferred stock ............................      33,844         34,357
                                                                                   -------        -------
Diluted common shares ........................................................      96,973         98,445
                                                                                   =======        =======

Net income per share .........................................................     $  0.54        $  0.42

</TABLE>

(1)  In determining the number of dilutive shares outstanding for the three
     month periods ended March 31, 2002 and 2001, the Series C convertible
     preferred stock is assumed to have been converted into 33.8 million and
     34.4 million shares, respectively, at the beginning of the periods.
### §7385s–6. Administrative and judicial review

#### (a) Judicial review

A person adversely affected or aggrieved by a final decision of the Secretary under this part may review that order in the United States district court in the district in which the injury was sustained, the employee lives, the survivor lives, or the District of Columbia, by filing in such court within 60 days after the date on which that final decision was issued a written petition praying that such decision be modified or set aside. The person shall also provide a copy of the petition to the Secretary. Upon such filing, the court shall have jurisdiction over the proceeding and shall have the power to affirm, modify, or set aside, in whole or in part, such decision. The court may modify or set aside such decision only if the court determines that such decision was arbitrary and capricious.

#### (b) Administrative review

The Secretary shall ensure that recommended decisions of the Secretary with respect to a claim under this part are subject to administrative review. The Secretary shall prescribe regulations for carrying out such review or shall apply to this part the regulations applicable to recommended decisions under part B.

(Pub. L. 106–398, §1 [div. C, title XXXVI, §3677], as added Pub. L. 108–375, div. C, title XXXI, §3161, Oct. 28, 2004, 118 Stat. 2182.)
### §5671. Transferred

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section 5671 was editorially reclassified as section 11181 of Title 34, Crime Control and Law Enforcement.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Jean Harlow, Appellant.

Appeal by defendant from an amended judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County, rendered November 4, 1976, which, after a hearing, (1) revoked the sentence of probation previously imposed upon her conviction of attempted criminal possession of a dangerous drug in the fourth degree and (2) resentenced her to an indeterminate term of imprisonment with a maximum of three years. Amended judgment modified, as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice, by reducing the period of incarceration to the time already served. As so modified, amended judgment affirmed. The sentence imposed was excessive to the extent indicated herein. Latham, J. P., Cohalan, Margett and O’Connor, JJ., concur.
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

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

FRANK MAHAR,

Plaintiff(s),

v.

BNSF RAILWAY CORP.,

Defendant(s).

___________________________________/

Case No. C09-00357 CRB (JCS)

ORDER TO SUBMIT SETTLEMENT

CONFERENCE STATEMENTS IN .PDF

FORMAT

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that in addition to the submission of paper copy of settlement

conference statements to chambers, each party shall submit their confidential settlement conference

statements in .pdf format and email their statement to JCSPO@cand.uscourts.gov.

All other provisions of this Court's original Notice and Settlement Conference Order remain

in effect.

Dated: March 18, 2010

_______________________________

JOSEPH C. SPERO

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 3:09-cv-00357-CRB Document 34 Filed 03/18/10 Page 1 of 1