alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

EASTERN DIVISION

RAY JOHNSON #B-15761, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. ) No. 12 C 2263

)

MARCUS HARDY, et al., )

)

Defendants. )

MEMORANDUM ORDER

For some reason this Court learned of the filing of this 42

U.S.C. §1983 (“Section 1983”) action only through its month-end

check of the list of cases assigned to its calendar during March

2012 (for some reason the Judge’s Copy of the Complaint filed by

Ray Johnson (“Johnson”) had not been delivered to chambers. With

a photocopy of the Complaint now in hand, this Court is

contemporaneously issuing its customary initial scheduling order,

with this sua sponte memorandum order being occasioned by one

aspect of the Complaint.

Each of the defendants, all of whom are or were affiliated

with Stateville Correctional Center (“Stateville”) is assertedly

being sued in two capacities--individual and official (see

Complaint ¶¶4-12). That, however, appears to misunderstand the

concept of a suit against a public official in his or her

“official capacity,” which is ordinarily equated to an action

brought against the public body itself, with the individual being

named solely as the proxy for that public body. Indeed, in this
instance the only substantive reference to “official capacity”

after those opening paragraphs (which do nothing more than to

identify the individual defendants) is found in what is labeled

“Second Claim for Relief--Deliberate Indifference in Official

Capacity.” That portion of the Complaint names only Stateville’s

Warden Marcus Hardy, and the allegations there reflect a clear

effort to avoid the prohibition in Monell v. Dep’t of Social

Servs. of City of New York, 436 U.S. 658, 691 (1978) against

predicating Section 1983 liability on respondeat superior

grounds.

Accordingly all references to “official capacity” are

stricken except as to Warden Hardy. No view is expressed here as

to the propriety of attaching that label to the Warden in terms

of the possibility of realizing on any judgment, if Johnson were

to prevail, out of assets other than those of the Warden

personally.

________________________________________

Milton I. Shadur

Senior United States District Judge

Date: April 5, 2012

2
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

EASTERN DIVISION

SKIDMORE, OWINGS & MERRILL LLP, )

)

Plaintiff, )

) Case No. 12 cv 05252

v. )

)

JAY MARSHALL STRABALA, individually ) Magistrate Geraldine Soat Brown

and d/b/a 2DEFINE ARCHITECUTRE )

)

Defendant. )

)

ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE

Upon motion of Plaintiff Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP, it is hereby ordered, that

Plaintiffs’ claims against Defendant Jay Marshall Strabala are dismissed in their entirety with

prejudice, and with the parties to bear their own attorneys’ fees and costs.

ENTERED:

Dated: December 18, 2012 _______________________________

Judge

Prepared By:

Leah R. Bruno

SNR Denton US LLP

233 South Wacker Drive

Suite 7800

Chicago, IL 60606

312-876-8000

15041080

Case: 1:12-cv-05252 Document #: 69 Filed: 12/18/12 Page 1 of 1 PageID #:873
#### 252.227-7033 Rights in shop drawings.

As prescribed in 227.7107-(1)(c), use the following clause:

# Rights in Shop Drawings (APR 1966)

(a) Shop drawings for construction means drawings, submitted to the Government by the Construction Contractor, subcontractor or any lower-tier subcontractor pursuant to a construction contract, showing in detail (i) the proposed fabrication and assembly of structural elements and (ii) the installation (i.e., form, fit, and attachment details) of materials or equipment. The Government may duplicate, use, and disclose in any manner and for any purpose shop drawings delivered under this contract.

(b) This clause, including this paragraph (b), shall be included in all subcontracts hereunder at any tier.

(End of clause)

[56 FR 36479, July 31, 1991, as amended at 60 FR 33505, June 28, 1995]
IIA 

115TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. J. RES. 19 

Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United 

States Code, of the rule submitted by the Bureau of Consumer Financial 

Protection relating to prepaid accounts under the Electronic Fund Transfer Act and the Truth in Lending Act. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

FEBRUARY 1, 2017 

Mr. PERDUE (for himself, Mr. COTTON, Mr. ISAKSON, Mr. JOHNSON, Mr. 

LANKFORD, Mr. LEE, and Mr. ROUNDS) introduced the following joint 

resolution; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs 

JOINT RESOLUTION 

Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of 

title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by 

the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection relating 

to prepaid accounts under the Electronic Fund Transfer 

Act and the Truth in Lending Act. 

1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives

2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 That Congress disapproves the rule submitted by the Bu4 reau of Consumer Financial Protection relating to prepaid 

5 accounts under the Electronic Fund Transfer Act (15 

6 U.S.C. 1693 et seq.) and the Truth in Lending Act (15 


smartinez on DSK3GLQ082PROD with BILLS
2 

•SJ 19 IS 

1 U.S.C. 1601 et seq.) (81 Fed. Reg. 83934 (November 22, 

2 2016)), and such rule shall have no force or effect. 

Æ 


smartinez on DSK3GLQ082PROD with BILLS
(November 26, 1963)

#### Clarence Alexander, Doing Business as Saranac Construction Company, Respondent, v. Village of Tupper Lake, Appellant.

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court at Special Term which denied defendant’s motion to dismiss for insufficiency the complaint in an action brought to recover the amount of the cheek which plaintiff deposited with his bid for a construction contract as assurance that he would enter into the contract, should he become the successful bidder, and would furnish security for faithful performance. Plaintiff was awarded the contract and signed it but the defendant village refused to allow him to perform it inasmuch as he failed to provide the performance bond required by the bid specifications. The complaint is deficient in failing to allege compliance with section 341-b of the Village Law, applicable to an action “upon or arising out of a contract of the village”. Plaintiff characterizes the action as for money had and received and as predicated upon unjust enrichment, but the conclusion that it is one “ arising out of a contract ” is inescapable. As was said of the contract constituted by the advertisement and the bid in a case not otherwise in point, the contract “ remained and the deposit, under the notice to bidders, was a part of that contract.” *(Brendese*v. *City of Schenectady,*194 Mise. 150,155, affd. 273 App. Div. 831, affd. 297 N. T. 965.) Order reversed and motion granted, without costs and without prejudice to plaintiff’s right to serve an amended complaint. Settle order. Bergan, P. J., Gibson, Herlihy and Reynolds, JJ., concur.
227.7203-3 Early identification of computer software or computer software documentation to be furnished to the Government with restrictions on use, reproduction, or disclosure. ( a ) Use the provision at 252.227-7017, Identification and Assertion of Use, Release, or Disclosure Restrictions, in all solicitation that include the clause at 252.227-7014, Rights in Other Than Commercial Computer Software and Other Than Commercial Computer Software Documentation. The provision requires offerors to identify any computer software or computer software documentation for which restrictions, other than copyright, on use, modification, reproduction, release, performance, display, or disclosure are asserted and to attach the identification and assertion to the offer.
( b ) Subsequent to contract award, the clause at 252.227-7014 permits a contractor, under certain conditions, to make additional assertions of restrictions. The prescriptions for the use of that clause and its alternates are at 227.7203-6(a).
[60 FR 33482, June 28, 1995, as amended at 88 FR 6586, Jan. 31, 2023]
#### 235.070 Indemnification against unusually hazardous risks.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

EASTERN DIVISION

GEORGE LAGEN, )

) Case No. 12-cv-4056

Plaintiff, ) 

) Judge Blanche M. Manning

v. )

) Magistrate Judge Young B. Kim

UNITED CONTINENTAL HOLDINGS, INC. )

and UNITED AIRLINES, INC., )

)

Defendants. )

AGREED MOTION TO RESET JULY 26, 2012 STATUS HEARING

Defendants United Continental Holdings, Inc. and United Air Lines, Inc. (collectively, 

“United”), by their undersigned counsel and with the agreement of plaintiff George Lagen, 

hereby move this Court for entry of an order rescheduling the status that is currently set for July 

26, 2012 at 11:00 a.m. to August 16, 2012 at 11:00 a.m. In support of this motion, the parties 

state as follows:

1. United’s lead counsel in this case are Patricia Brown Holmes and Sondra A. 

Hemeryck, both of Schiff Hardin LLP.

2. Both Ms. Holmes and Ms. Hemeryck have previously scheduled travel that 

requires them to be out of town on July 26, 2012. As a result, neither Ms. Holmes nor Ms. 

Hemeryck is able to attend the status hearing that is currently sent for that date.

3. United’s counsel and plaintiff’s counsel are both available on August 16, 2012 at 

11:00 a.m. and accordingly request that the Court reschedule the status to that date. Pursuant to 

the Court’s June 29, 2012 minute entry, counsel will discuss settlement, whether they consent to 

proceed before the Magistrate Judge, and a proposed discovery plan prior to the rescheduled 

status.

Case: 1:12-cv-04056 Document #: 15 Filed: 07/19/12 Page 1 of 3 PageID #:95
2

WHEREFORE, United respectfully requests that this Court reschedule the status hearing 

that is currently set for July 26, 2012 at 11:00 a.m. to August 16, 2012 at 11:00 a.m.

Dated: July 19, 2012 Respectfully submitted,

/s/ Sondra A. Hemeryck

Patricia Brown Holmes

E-mail: pholmes@schiffhardin.com

Sondra A. Hemeryck

E-mail: shemeryck@schiffhardin.com

Ayad P. Jacob

E-mail: ajacob@schiffhardin.com

SCHIFF HARDIN LLP

233 South Wacker Drive, Suite 6600

Chicago, Illinois 60606

Telephone: (312) 258-5500

Facsimile: (312) 258-5600

Attorneys for Defendants United Continental 

Holdings, Inc. and United Air Lines, Inc.

Case: 1:12-cv-04056 Document #: 15 Filed: 07/19/12 Page 2 of 3 PageID #:96
Certificate Of Service

I hereby certify that on July 18, 2012, a copy of the foregoing Motion was filed 

electronically. Notice of this filing will be sent to all parties by operation of the Court’s 

electronic filing system. Parties may access this filing through the Court’s system.

/s/ Sondra A. Hemeryck

Attorney for Defendants United Continental

Holdings, Inc. and United Air Lines, Inc.

Case: 1:12-cv-04056 Document #: 15 Filed: 07/19/12 Page 3 of 3 PageID #:97
Gormas, Michael (OST) From: Sent: To: Subject: Liz__. Tuesday, November 18, 2014 3:43 PM EAS (OST) . Alaska Airlines Jet a Service in Southeast Dear Mr. Kevin Schlemmer, Chief, EAS Division Dear Mr. Schlemmer, , ..-:... ·"

I am writing to express my strong support ofAlaska Airlinesjet service to the smaller southeast communities in the Panhandle region . Without dailyjet service, it would be difficult for me to continue working as a dispatched mariner. Many people inmycommunity use AlaskaAirlines as a means ofcommuting to and from work. It's imperative that we continue daily north and southboundjet service in Southeast Alaska so our economies and our qualities oflife can develop to their potential. Akair would lose a large group oftravelers ifitbeganto limit or downsize its services to Southeast, especially Wrangell. Wrangell is the fastest growing community in southeastAlaska. All you have to look at is the current growth and expansion ofWrangell's maritime support; a new 300 ton boat transit, newly developed boat and ship yard, Trident seafoods, etc. Your companies investments into this part ofthe state have for years sustained continued growth and should continue to be a part ofthis exciting and lucrative trend . Formany years Alaska Airlines has provided excellent service in our communities. Let's keep it that way. Thankyou. Regards, Elizabeth Burress Wrangell resident

Sent from my iPhone

1
##### 



Exhibit 32 Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 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 period ended
December 31, 2003 (the Report) of Kiewit Royalty Trust (the Trust), as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Ted L.
Hall, the trust officer of U.S. Bank National Association, the trustee of the
Trust, certify, to the best of my knowledge, that: (1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a)
or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and (2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Trust. By:
    
    /s/ Ted L. HallTed L. HallTrust OfficerU.S. Bank National AssociationTrusteeDate:
March 30, 2004
exv10w23





Exhibit 10.23




AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT OF LEASE




     THIS AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT OF LEASE (this “Amendment”) is made as of March 26, 2009, by and
between LIBERTY PROPERTY LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, a
Pennsylvania limited partnership (“Landlord”) and SYNERGETICS USA, INC., a Delaware corporation
(“Tenant”).



BACKGROUND




     A. Landlord and Valley Forge Scientific Corp., predecessor in interest to Tenant,
entered into a Lease Agreement dated May 3, 2005 (the “Lease”), with respect to Suite 110 at
3600 Horizon Drive, Upper Merion Township, Renaissance Corporate Park, Montgomery
County, Pennsylvania, consisting of approximately 13,625 rentable square feet as more fully
described in the Lease.



     B. The Lease expires October 31, 2009. Landlord and Tenant desire to extend the
Term of the Lease to October 31, 2012, and to make certain other amendments to the Lease.



     NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereto, in consideration of the mutual promises and covenants
contained herein and in the Lease, and intending to be legally bound hereby, agree that the Lease
is amended as follows:



     1. Term. The Term is hereby extended for an additional three (3) years.
Accordingly, Section 1(c) defining “TERM” is amended by deleting the reference to “Thirty-six
(36) months” and inserting “Seventy-two (72) months” in its place, and the Expiration Date of
the Lease shall be October 31, 2012.



     2. Minimum Annual Rent. The following schedule defining “MINIMUM
ANNUAL RENT” is added to Section 1(d)(i) and shall supersede any prior rent schedules set
forth in the Lease to the extent inconsistent with this Amendment:



	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	Lease Period	 	Rate/Sq. Ft	 	Annual	 	Monthly Installment
	05/01/09-10/31/09
	 	$	7.60/s.f.	 	 	$	103,550.00	 	 	$	8,629.17	 
	11/01/09-10/31/10
	 	$	8.10/s.f.	 	 	$	110,362.50	 	 	$	9,196.87	 
	11/01/10-10/31/11
	 	$	8.60/s.f.	 	 	$	117,175.00	 	 	$	9,764.58	 
	11/01/11-10/31/12
	 	$	9.10/s.f.	 	 	$	123,987.50	 	 	$	10,332.29	 






     3. “As-Is”. The condition of the Premises shall be “as is”, and Landlord shall have
no obligation to improve the Premises further as a condition of this Amendment.



     4. Deleted Sections. Sections 30 and 31 of the Lease are hereby deleted in their
entirety.
## FY 2012

Discretionary Funding: Number of Continuation Development Awards: 6Average Continuation Development Award: $392,525Total Continuation Development Award Funding: $2,355,147

Supplemental Funding:Number of Supplemental Awards: 6Average Supplemental Award: $127,324Total Supplemental Award Funding: $763,947

Mandatory Funding:Number of Continuation Development Awards: 13Average Continuation Development Award: $374,798Total Continuation Development Award Funding: $4,872,375

Supplemental Funding: Number of Supplemental Award: 12Average Supplemental Award: $10,635Total Supplemental Award Funding: $127,625

Total Award Funding: $8,119,094Discretionary (Section 320): $3,119,094Mandatory (Section 371): $5,000,000Total Number of Awards (Discretionary and Mandatory): 19

 

Institutional Service Home
Exhibit 31(a)

                                 Certifications

I, Nikolai D. Klinchev, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Chaparral Resources,
Inc.;

2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly 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 quarterly
report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this quarterly 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 quarterly report;

4. The registrant's other certifying officers and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining 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 to ensure that
         material information relating to the registrant, including its
         consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those
         entities, particularly during the period in which this quarterly report
         is being prepared;

         b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls
         and procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of
         this quarterly report (the "Evaluation Date"); and

         c) presented in this quarterly report our conclusions about the
         effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our
         evaluation as of the Evaluation Date;

5. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our
most recent evaluation, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of
registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent function):

a) all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal controls
which could adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process,
summarize and report financial data and have identified for the registrant's
auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; 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; and

6. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have indicated in this
quarterly report whether or not there were significant changes in internal
controls or in other factors that could significantly affect internal controls
subsequent to the date of our most recent evaluation, including any corrective
actions with regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.



Date: May 14, 2004                          /s/  Nikolai D. Klinchev
                                            -----------------------------------
                                            Nikolai D. Klinchev
                                            Chief Executive Officer
#### 2501.601 General.

Authority and responsibility to contract for authorized supplies and services is vested in the Director, NSF, within the limits expressly provided by the National Science Foundation Act of 1950 (42 U.S.C. 1861 *et seq.*). The NSF Procurement Executive is delegated overall responsibility by the Director for the Foundation's contracting activities.
June 7, 2004

Honorable Edward M. Kennedy
  United States Senate
  Washington, DC 20510

Dear Senator Kennedy:

I am writing this letter to you and your colleagues in response to our February 
24, 2004, meeting and your March 10, 2004, letter requesting additional details 
regarding the U.S. Department of Education's (Department) implementation of the 
No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB). Undoubtedly, we share a desire 
to see every student in America meet grade-level expectations in reading and mathematics, 
the academic foundation needed to achieve success in the classroom and beyond. 
NCLB is helping us to realize that vision.

The great responsibility entrusted to the Department to implement NCLB is one 
  that I readily embrace because the law is right for our children and our future. 
  This responsibility includes developing policies that accurately reflect the 
  requirements of the bipartisan law created by the Administration and Congress. 
  It means ensuring that States understand the requirements and resources afforded 
  them in statute and regulations, as well as working with States to find viable 
  solutions to the challenges they experience in implementing this major reform. 
  As you know, in the past few months, I have announced additional areas of flexibility 
  involving students with disabilities, limited English proficient students, highly 
  qualified teachers, and assessment participation rates. Your questions on these 
  and many other areas are answered in an attachment to this letter.

In addition to that detailed information, I want to bring to your attention 
  a new link on our website, www.ed.gov/policy/elsec/guid/stateletters/index.html, 
  which provides the public with access to policy letters shared with States. 
  The website also includes a letter outlining the amendment process States should 
  follow in requesting changes to their accountability plans. All amended plans 
  will be posted to our website as they are approved. You may access the State 
  accountability plans at www.ed.gov/admins/lead/account/stateplans03/index.html.

I hope the information provided with this letter gives you a clearer picture 
  of the Department's commitment and efforts to faithfully implement NCLB and 
  ensure that every child in America receives a high-quality education. I am encouraged 
  by accounts of the positive impact NCLB is having in schools across the nation, 
  and will continue pressing forward in this great work until the achievement 
  gaps are closed and no child is left behind.

Sincerely,

/s/

Rod Paige

Attachment

List of Cosigners of Incoming Letter

|Last Modified: 07/06/2004
|-------------------------
Exhibit
32.2





CERTIFICATION
OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL  OFFICER


UNDER
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In
connection with the quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Cybrdi Inc. (“We") for the
period ended September 30, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission as of the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Xue Bu, the principal
financial officer of us, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350, as
adopted pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the
best of my knowledge:





(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 us





Date:  November
22, 2010





/s/
      Xue BuName:  Xue
      Bu, Principal Financial Officer