alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Michael JACOBSON, Appellant, v. Jon BRUNING, in his official capacity as the Attorney General of Nebraska, Appellee.

No. 07-2248.

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.

Submitted: May 27, 2008.

Filed: June 16, 2008.

Before WOLLMAN, RILEY, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Michael Jacobson (Jacobson) appeals the district court’s1 dismissal without prejudice of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action against Nebraska Attorney General Jon Bruning. Upon de novo review, *see Thomas v. St. Louis Bd. of Police Comm’rs,*447 F.3d 1082, 1084-85 (8th Cir.2006) (noting an appellate court reviews de novo a district court’s dismissal based on sovereign immunity), we conclude dismissal was proper because Jacobson’s complaint was barred by sovereign immunity. *See Will v. Mich. Dep’t of State Police,*491 U.S. 58, 71, 109 S.Ct. 2304, 105 L.Ed.2d 45 (1989) (concluding a suit against a state official in his or her official capacity is a suit against the

*639official’s office, and as such is no different than a suit against the state itself). Although Jacobson argues on appeal his complaint fell within the *Ex parte Young,*209 U.S. 128, 28 S.Ct. 441, 52 L.Ed. 714 (1908), exception to sovereign immunity, we conclude the exception did not apply because Jacobson’s suit essentially questioned the state’s ownership in and authority to regulate groundwater, and thus implicated special sovereignty interests. *See Union Elec. Co. v. Mo. Dep’t of Conservation,*366 F.3d 655, 658 (8th Cir.2004) (explaining that, although a determination of *Ex parte Young’s*applicability does not look to the merits of a claim, courts can ask whether a suit implicates special sovereignty interests making the exception unavailable); *Idaho v. Coeur d’Alene Tribe of Idaho,*521 U.S. 261, 281-82, 287, 117 S.Ct. 2028, 138 L.Ed.2d 438 (1997) (stating the *Ex parte Young*exception was not available in the tribe’s suit against the state because the suit was the functional equivalent of a quiet title action, and the tribe sought a determination that certain lands were not within the regulatory jurisdiction of the state; and the requested relief would bar the state’s officers from exercising authority over particular lands and waters). *Cf. Dept. of Rev. of Kentucky v. Davis,*— U.S. -, 128 S.Ct. 1801, 1810-11, 170 L.Ed.2d 685 (2008) (declaring a state may exempt interest on its own municipal bonds from taxation while taxing interest on out of state bonds without violating the Commerce Clause, because “the issuance of debt securities to pay for public projects is a quintessentially public function” of the state. Therefore, “apprehension in ... unprecedented ... interference with a traditional government function is just as warranted here, whei'e [respondents] would have us invalidate a century-old taxing practice ... presently employed by 41 States ... and affirmatively supported by all of them....”) (citations and quotation omitted).

We affirm the judgment of the district court. *See*8th Cir. R. 47B.

1

. The Honorable Richard G. Kopf, United States District Judge for the District of Nebraska.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

DA 21-0349

_________________

SESSEL SAGORIN, as successor to

interest to YELLOWSTONE LODGING, LLC,

 Plaintiff and Appellant,

 v.

SUNRISE HEATING AND COOLING, LLC,

EXCELLENCE HEATING & COOLING, LLC,

BRIAN MEDRAIN, ZACK NELSON, DAIKIN

NORTH AMERICA, LLC, DAKIN APPLIED

AMERICAS, INC., THERMAL SUPPLY, INC.,

LATERAL ELECTRICAL SERVICES, INC,

AMERICAN EXPRESS COMPANY, LESLIE

JONGBERG III, d/b/a MONTANA MOBILE

MOUNTAIN COOLING SERVICES, DOUG'S

CONSTR. AND REPAIR, INC., CHRIS BAKER,

JAMIE WRIGHT, TRAVIS JORDAN, SCOTT

PHELAN, ESQUIRE INTERMOUNTAIN LAW,

LLC, and DODD LAW FIRM, P.C.,

 Defendants and Appellees.

O R D E R

_________________

Pursuant to the Internal Operating Rules of this Court, this cause is classified for 

submission on briefs to a five-justice panel of this Court. 

The Clerk is directed to provide a copy hereof to Sessel Sagorin, to all counsel of 

record and to the Honorable Peter B. Ohman, District Judge.

For the Court,

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

February 2 2022

02/02/2022

Case Number: DA 21-0349
- Overview of the law
          - Questions and answers on age discrimination
          - Age                    discrimination regulations
232.805 Procedure. ( b ) The assignee shall forward— ( i ) To the administrative contracting officer (ACO), a true copy of the instrument of assignment and an original and three copies of the notice of assignment. The ACO shall acknowledge receipt by signing and dating all copies of the notice of assignment and shall— ( A ) File the true copy of the instrument of assignment and the original of the notice in the contract file;
( B ) Forward two copies of the notice to the disbursing officer of the payment office cited in the contract;
( C ) Return a copy of the notice to the assignee; and
( D ) Advise the contracting officer of the assignment.
( ii ) To the surety or sureties, if any, a true copy of the instrument of assignment and an original and three copies of the notice of assignment. The surety shall return three acknowledged copies of the notice to the assignee, who shall forward two copies to the disbursing officer designated in the contract.
( iii ) To the disbursing officer of the payment office cited in the contract, a true copy of the instrument of assignment and an original and one copy of the notice of assignment. The disbursing officer shall acknowledge and return to the assignee the copy of the notice and shall file the true copy of the instrument and original notice.
2406.202 Establishing or maintaining alternative sources. ( b ) (1) The HCA shall sign the Determination and Finding (D&F) required by FAR 6.202(b)(1).
Disclaimer Button

This icon identifies hypertext links or pointers that leave the U.S. Department of Education (ED) web site and go to information created and maintained by other public and private organizations. These links and pointers are provided for the user's convenience. The U.S. Department of Education does not control or guarantee the accuracy, relevance, timeliness, or completeness of this outside information. Further, the inclusion of links or pointers to particular items in hypertext is not intended to reflect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or products or services offered, on these outside sites, or the organizations sponsoring the sites.

(Click on the "BACK" button in your browser to return to the page with an external link and then click on the text link to follow it.)

Thank you for visiting the Department of Education!

This page last updated February 5, 1998 (kms).

|Last Modified: 03/07/2006
|-------------------------
#### 22.303 Administration and enforcement.

The procedures and reports required for construction contracts in subpart 22.4 also apply to investigations of alleged violations of the statute on other than construction contracts.

[48 FR 42258, Sept. 19, 1983, as amended at 79 FR 24203, Apr. 29, 2014]
About FOIA | About the Privacy Act | **FOIA Library**Making a Request | FAQs | Contacts | Links

### FOIA Library

The U.S. Department of Education (ED) makes certain types of records, created by the agency on or after November 1, 1996, available electronically on the Internet. The FOIA Library consists of:

- Frequently requested information
- Decisions rendered in the adjudication of administrative cases
- Final statements of policy
- Annual FOIA reports to the Attorney General
- Other documents, including ED's Records Disposition Schedule
- Reading Room Certification (10/31/2008)   PDF  (40K)
10

10

10

10

10

10

20

20

10

10

10

ATLANTIC OCEAN

Howells

Creek

Robinson

Cove

Mud

Cree

k

Hedges Creek

Abels

Creek

PATCHOGUE BAY

S

w

a

n

River

Howells

Creek

Long Cove

B E L L P O R T B A Y

GREAT

SOUTH

BAY

Howells

Point

Ridge

Island

Shirley

Hospital

Island

Shirley

Smith

Point

Bellport

Village

Golf Course

Bayberry

Dunes

Whalehouse

Point

Bellport

Village

Golf Course

Molasses

Point

Davis

Park

Davis Park

Shirley

Goose

Point

Bellport

John Boyle

Island

Pelican

Island

GREAT

SOUTH

BEACH

FIRE

ISLAND

Smith

Point

PATCHOGUE

FEET

FEET

02

06

70

12

76

07

06

10

00

04

03

73

09

11

71 77

13

74 77

05

79

78

02

01

76

01

03

69 70 75

79

73

08

05

00

74 75

07

10

09

11

08

71 72

12

6

6

45

45

6

45

6 6

45

6 6

45

6

45

45

45

45

45

45

45

45

6

45

6

45

45

45

6

45

6

45

45

45

6

6

6

45

45

45

6

6

45

45

6

6

000m

000m

000m

000m

E

N

N

E

1 270

170000

000 FEET

1 290 000 FEET

210 000

30"

40'

42'30" 42'

72°

XL

37'

30"

30"

40°

40°

55'

XK

00'

XL

40°

55'

30"

00'

52'

XK

45'

57'

57'

45'

37' 30"

73°

40° 30"

73° 72°52'30"

40'

04 45

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

U. S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY

ADJOINING 7.5' QUADRANGLES

QUADRANGLE LOCATION

HOWELLS POINT, NY

2010

Interstate Route State Route

ROAD CLASSIFICATION

WX Interstate Route /. US Route H State Route

Ramp 4WD

US Route Local Road

HOWELLS POINT QUADRANGLE

NEW YORK

7.5-MINUTE SERIES

1000 500 0 METERS 1000 2000

1000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000

FEET

This map was produced to conform with version 0.5.10 of the

draft USGS Standards for 7.5-Minute Quadrangle Maps.

A metadata file associated with this product is also draft version 0.5.10

SCALE 1:24 000

1 0.5 0 1

MILES

1 0.5 0 KILOMETERS 1 2

Zone 18T

Imagery.......................................................NAIP, May 2008

Roads.....................................US Census Bureau TIGER data

with limited USGS updates, 2004

Names...............................................................GNIS, 2008

Hydrography.................National Hydrography Dataset, 2008

Contours............................National Elevation Dataset, 1998

North American Datum of 1983 (NAD83)

World Geodetic System of 1984 (WGS84). Projection and

1 000-meter grid: Universal Transverse Mercator,

Produced by the United States Geological Survey

10 000-foot ticks: New York Coordinate System of 1983

(Long Island zone)

×

Ø

MN

GN

UTM GRID AND 2010 MAGNETIC NORTH DECLINATION AT CENTER OF SHEET

1° 21 ́

24 MILS

13° 38 ́

242 MILS

U.S. National Grid

100,000-m Square ID

Grid Zone Designation

18T

XK

XL 45 00

CONTOUR INTERVAL 10 FEET

Patchogue Bellport

Pattersquash

Island

Howells

Point

Sayville

Moriches

NEW YORK
#### 2501.102 Authority.

The NSF Acquisition Regulations are issued under the authority of section 11(a) of the National Science Foundation Act of 1950, as amended (42 U.S.C. 1870(a)).
#### 1852.216-74 Estimated cost and fixed fee.

As prescribed in 1816.307-70(b), insert the following clause:

# Estimated Cost and Fixed Fee (DEC 1991)

The estimated cost of this contract is ____________ exclusive of the fixed fee of ____________. The total estimated cost and fixed fee is ____________.

(End of clause)

[62 FR 3484, Jan. 23, 1997]
#### 250.104-3 Special procedures for unusually hazardous or nuclear risks.
Exhibit 99.2



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 Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended February 28, 2003 of ACR Group, Inc. (the Company) as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Anthony R. Maresca, Chief Financial Officer, certify that, to the best of my knowledge, the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section
13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



/s/    ANTHONY R.
MARESCAAnthony R. Maresca Chief Financial Officer




May 29, 2003
Order Form (01/2005)

United States District Court, Northern District of Illinois

Name of Assigned Judge

or Magistrate Judge

John W. Darrah

Sitting Judge if Other

than Assigned Judge

CASE NUMBER 12-cv-4535 DATE 6/20/12

CASE

TITLE

Thornton-Bey v. United States of America

DOCKET ENTRY TEXT

Petitioner’s petition for habeas corpus relief pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 is denied. See statement below.

O[ For further details see text below.] Docketing to mail notices.

STATEMENT

Petitioner DeJuan Thornton-Bey’s petition for habeas corpus relief pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 is

denied. Petitioner failed, in conformance with Rule 2 Governing Section 2255 Proceedings for the United

States District Courts, to submit his petition and verify it under penalty of perjury. “The verification

requirement serves to ensure that a petitioner can provide some evidence beyond conclusory and speculative

allegations, even if that evidence is his verified statement alone. Requiring either that the motion be signed

under penalty of perjury or be accompanied by an affidavit is thus not a mere technicality of pleading; once a

pleading is submitted in this form, the allegations contained therein become evidence.” Kafo v. U.S., 467

F.3d 1063, 1068 (7th Cir. 2006) (Kafo). 

 Moreover, it is not apparent from his petition that he is entitled to an evidentiary hearing on the

matter, as he appears to suggest his sentence should be vacated on the basis that he has not seen

commissioning documents for United States Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald. As the U.S. District Court for the

District of Columbia has already explained to Petitioner Thornton-Bey in another case, “commissions, unlike

oaths, are bestowed upon appointed officers, not retained by DOJ.” Thornton-Bey v. Executive Office for U.S.

Attorneys, No. 11-CV-773, 2012 WL 593546, at *2 (D.D.C. Feb. 24, 2012). The mere fact that Petitioner has

not obtained U.S. Attorney Fitzgerald’s commissioning papers is in no way proof that Fitzgerald was not

properly commissioned, thereby negating Petitioner’s sentence. Therefore, his petition for habeas relief is

denied, and no evidentiary hearing is necessary “when a petitioner's allegations are ‘vague, conclusory, or

palpably incredible rather than detailed and specific.’” Kafo, 467 F.3d at 1067 (quoting Bruce v. United

States, 256 F.3d 592, 597 (7th Cir. 2001)).

Page 1 of 1

Case: 1:12-cv-04535 Document #: 3 Filed: 06/21/12 Page 1 of 1 PageID #:11
1 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS 

EASTERN DIVISION

JAMES REPIKA, ) 

on behalf of himself and a class, ) Case No. 12-cv-04290 

 ) 

 Plaintiffs, ) 

v. ) Mag. Jeffrey T. Gilbert 

 ) 

ACCELERATED FINANCIAL ) 

SOLUTIONS, LLC, ) 

 ) 

 Defendant. ) 

JOINT MOTION FOR ENTRY OF FINAL JUDGMENT OF DISMISSAL

 Plaintiff James Repika (“Plaintiff”) and Defendant Accelerated Financial Solutions, LLC 

(“Defendant”), respectfully request that the Court enter the Parties’ Proposed Final Judgment of 

Dismissal attached hereto as Exhibit A. 

 In support of this request, the Parties state as follows: 

 1. On June 4, 2013, this Court entered an Order granting final approval to the Class 

Settlement Agreement (Docket No. 56) (the “Order”). 

 2. The Order directed Defendant to deliver the Settlement Fund to the Class 

Administrator for distribution by the Class Administrator in accordance with the provisions of 

the Final Approval Order. The Settlement Fund has now been delivered to the Class 

Administrator and a Final Accounting has been filed with the Court. (Docket No. 57). 

 3. Additionally, the Final Approval Order provides that the Parties shall file an 

agreed motion requesting entry of final judgment dismissing this litigation with prejudice and 

without costs (other than such costs payable from the Settlement Fund, as authorized by the 

Court as part of the Order). 
2 

 4. Consequently, the Parties now seek entry of a Final Judgment of Dismissal, a 

proposed draft of which is attached hereto as Exhibit A. 

Respectfully submitted, 

JAMES REPIKA ACCELERATED FINANCIAL 

SOLUTIONS, LLC 

 

s/Sharon Goott Nissim s/Stacie E. Barhost

By one of his attorneys By one of its attorneys

Daniel A. Edelman Stacie E. Barhorst 

Sharon Goott Nissim Kaplan, Papadakis & Gournis, P.C. 

EDELMAN, COMBS, LATTURNER 180 N. LaSalle St. 

& GOODWIN, LLC Suite 2108 

120 South LaSalle Street, Suite 1800 Chicago, IL 60601 

Chicago, Illinois 60603 (312) 726-0531 

(312) 739-4200 (312) 726-4928 (FAX) 

(312) 419-0379 (FAX) 

 

 

 
3 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

 I, Sharon Goott Nissim, certify that on November 4, 2013, I had a copy of the foregoing 

document filed with the court via CM/ECF, which caused it to be sent to: 

Stacie E. Barhorst 

sbarhorst@kpglaw.com

Eric D. Kaplan 

ekaplan@kpglaw.com

 

 /s/ Sharon Goott Nissim 

 Sharon Goott Nissim 

Daniel A. Edelman 

Cathleen M. Combs 

Sharon Goott Nissim 

EDELMAN, COMBS, LATTURNER & GOODWIN, LLC 

120 S. LaSalle Street, Suite 1800 

Chicago, Illinois 60603 

(312) 739-4200 

(312) 419-0379 (FAX)
#### 2402.000 Scope of part.

This part contains definitions of terms used generally throughout the HUDAR, in addition to those set forth in FAR part 2. Additional definitions will be found in individual subparts of the FAR and HUDAR covering terms used in those subparts only.

[49 FR 7699, Mar. 1, 1984]
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

EASTERN DIVISION

Sharon Alicia Burke Anzaldi )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. ) No. 12 C 2987

)

Cannon et al., )

)

Defendants. )

MEMORANDUM

One of the deliveries to this Court’s chambers late last

week was a summons directed to Judge Martin Ashman that bears a

May 11, 2012 Clerk’s Office Stamp and appears to reflect a May

14, 2012 date of service. Because of Judge Ashman’s very recent

death, that summons should have no further consequences, but this

memorandum is issued sua sponte in light of its very issuance.

With pro se plaintiff Sharon Alicia Burke Anzaldi

(“Anzaldi”) having paid the $350 filing fee at the outset, this

Court was not of course called upon in the first instance to

address any aspects of the case in the manner that would have

been appropriate if Anzaldi had sought in forma pauperis status. 

All the same, a number of troubling aspects of Anzaldi’s selfprepared Complaint led to this Court’s issuance of an April 26,

2012 memorandum (that was just a few days after suit was filed).

That was done in the hope that some of Anzaldi’s obvious

misapprehensions might be eliminated, on the premise that a word

to the wise is (or at least should be) sufficient.

Case: 1:12-cv-02987 Document #: 16 Filed: 06/18/12 Page 1 of 2 PageID #:53
But what the currently-received summons appears to reflect

is that it was served more than two weeks after issuance of the

April 26 memorandum, in which this Court expressly told Anzaldi

that Magistrate Judge Ashman and two cohorts whom she had also

named in her pro se Complaint were protected by the longestablished doctrine of absolute judicial immunity. In light of

that message, Anzaldi’s continuing pursuit of Judge Ashman (and

perhaps others) by seeking to serve him (and perhaps them)

signals an abuse of the litigation process. In the last

paragraph of the April 26 memorandum this Court cautioned Alzaldi

about the possible adverse consequences of any non-compliance

with court directives (whether covered by specific rules or by

judicial doctrine).

This action has previously been set for a status hearing at

9 a.m. on June 27, 2012. At that time this Court anticipates

inquiring of Anzaldi as to all aspects of the case, including the

subject of this memorandum.

________________________________

Milton I. Shadur

Senior United States District Judge

Dated: June 18, 2012 

2

Case: 1:12-cv-02987 Document #: 16 Filed: 06/18/12 Page 2 of 2 PageID #:54
Borden Institute Home

About the Textbooks

Published Volumes

Ordering Information

Author Information

Related Websites

Contact Information

Search

Published Volumes

# Medical Aspects of Harsh Environments, Volume 1 

### Contents 

#### Credits, Foreword by The Surgeon General, US Army, Preface, Table of Contents

#### Hot Environments: C. Bruce Wenger, MD, PhD, Section Editor 

    - Introduction to Heat-Related Problems in Military Operations 
    - Human Adaptation to Hot Environments
    - Physical Exercise in Hot Climates: Physiology, Performance, and Biomedical Issues 
    - Psychological Aspects of Military Performance in Hot Environments 
    - Pathophysiology of Heatstroke 
    - Prevention of Heat Illness 
    - Clinical Diagnosis, Management, and Surveillance of Exertional Heat Illness 
    - Exertional Heatstroke in the Israeli Defence Forces 
    - Practical Medical Aspects of Military Operations in the Heat 

#### Cold Environments: Robert S. Pozos, PhD, Section Editor

    - Cold, Casualties, and Conquests: The Effects of Cold on Warfare 
    - Human Physiological Responses to Cold Stress and Hypothermia
    - Human Psychological Performance in Cold Environments 
    - Prevention of Cold Injuries 
    - Clinical Aspects of Freezing Cold Injury 
    - Nonfreezing Cold Injury 
    - Treatment of Accidental Hypothermia 
    - Cold Water Immersion
    - Military Medical Operations in Cold Environments 

Appendix: William J. Mills, Jr, MD

Pictorial Atlas of Freezing Cold Injury

Acronyms and Abbreviations

 

Download Adobe Reader to view PDF documents.

External Links DisclaimerPrivacy & Security Notice
**EXHIBIT 31.1**
**CERTIFICATIONS**
I, Steven F. Udvar-Hazy, certify that:
1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K/A of International Lease Finance Corporation;
2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact oromit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstancesunder which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by thisannual report;
3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis annual report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this annualreport;
4. The registrant’s other certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14)for the registrant and we have:
a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating tothe registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within thoseentities, particularly during the period in which this annual report is being prepared;
b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presentedin 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 change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter that has materially affected,or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting; and
5. The registrant’s other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the auditcommittee of registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent function):
a) all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal controls over financialreporting 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 asignificant role in the registrant’s internal controls over financial reporting
Date: March 31, 2005                                        /s/ Steven F. Udvar-Hazy   STEVEN F. UDVAR-HAZY   Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer