alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
NOTE : This order is nonprecedential

. 

# United States Court of Appeals **for the Federal Circuit**

______________________

INTEL CORPORATION, Appellant

v.

ALACRITECH, INC., Appellee

______________________

2022

- 2049

______________________

Appeal from the United States Patent and Trademark Office, Patent Trial and Appeal Board in No. IPR2017

- 01410

.

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

DELL, INC.,

Appellant

v.

ALACRITECH, INC., Appellee

______________________

2022

- 2094

______________________ Case: 22-2049 Document: 53 Page: 1 Filed: 10/27/2023DELL

, INC

. v. ALACRITECH

, INC

. 2

Appeal from the United States Patent and Trademark Office, Patent Trial and Appeal Board i n No. IPR2017

- 01410.

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

CAVIUM, LLC, Appellant

v.

ALACRITECH, INC., Appellee

______________________

2022

- 2103

______________________

Appeal from the United States Patent and Trademark Office, Patent Trial and Appeal Board in Nos. IPR2017

- 01410, IPR2017

- 01737, IPR2018

- 00339.

______________________

ON MOTION AND ON STIPULATION

______________________

O R D E R

On October 2, 2023, Cavium, LLC and Alacritech, Inc. stipulated to voluntary dismissal of their dispute only

. On October 24, 2023, Intel Corporation and Alacritech, Inc. moved to voluntarily dism iss their dispute only.

The parties, having so agreed,

I T I S O RDERED T HAT :
(1) Appeal No. 2022

- 2103 is dismissed under Fed. R. App. P. 42(b) , with each side to bear their own costs.

(2) Appeal No. 2 02 2

- 2049 is dismissed under Fed. R. App. P. 42(b), with each side to bear their own costs. Case: 22-2049 Document: 53 Page: 2 Filed: 10/27/2023DELL

, INC

. v. ALACRITECH

, INC

. 3

( 3 ) Within three business days, Dell, Inc. and Alacritech, Inc. shall file responses to the notice of oral argument in Appeal No. 22

- 20 94

. ( 4 ) The official caption s and sh ort caption , as modified,

are reflected in this order.

October 2 7 , 2023
Date F OR THE C OURT

ISSUED AS A MANDATE (as to Appeal No s

. 2022

- 2049 and 2022

- 2103 only ) : October 2 7

, 2023. Case: 22-2049 Document: 53 Page: 3 Filed: 10/27/2023
EXHIBIT 13.1

              SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF
                        THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002*

In connection  with the annual report of North  American  Nickel Inc.  (formerly
Widescope  Resources  Inc.) (the  "Company")  on Form 20-F for the period ending
December 31, 2010 as filed with the  Securities  and Exchange  Commission on the
date hereof (the "Report"),  I, Richard J. Mark, Chief Executive  Officer of the
Company,  certify,  pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  section 1350, as adopted  pursuant to
section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

(1)  the  Report  containing  the  financial  statements  of the  Company  fully
     complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, 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 results of operations of the Company.

Date: April, 19 2011


/s/ Richard J. Mark
-----------------------------------
Richard J. Mark
Chief Executive Officer


* A signed original of this written  statement  required by Section 906 has been
provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Exhibit 32.2




CERTIFICATION




PURSUANT
TO




SECTION
1350 OF CHAPTER 63 OF TITLE 18 OF THE UNITED STATES CODE




I, Rhowena Blank, the Vice President,
Accounting Officer and principal financial officer of Man Investments (USA)
Corp., the Managing Member of Man-AHL 130, LLC (“Man-AHL 130”), certify that (i)
the Quarterly Report of Man-AHL 130 on Form 10-Q for the period ending December
31, 2008 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and (ii) the information contained in such
Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
results of operations of Man-AHL 130.








Date:  February 13,
2009




/s/ Rhowena
      BlankRhowena
      Blank
                Vice President and Accounting Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                       1,975,513
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,470,293
<ALLOWANCES>                                    51,000
<INVENTORY>                                  1,957,940
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             6,325,063
<PP&E>                                       2,819,325
<DEPRECIATION>                                 801,178
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               9,548,469
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        3,208,754
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                        125
<COMMON>                                           520
<OTHER-SE>                                   4,327,547
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 9,548,469
<SALES>                                     13,506,972
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            13,506,972
<CGS>                                        7,794,089
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                9,718,325
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             (328,793)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             397,716
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (4,074,365)
<INCOME-TAX>                                    35,450
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (4,109,815)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (4,109,815)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.84)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.84)
        

</TABLE>
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY REGION Ill 1650 Arch Street Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103-2029 Mr. David K. Paylor Virginia Department ofEnvironmental Quality 629 East Main Street Richmond, Virginia 23219 Dear Director Paylor: 

## OCT 06 2015
On September 18, 2015 the U.S. Environmental ProtectionAgency (EPA) received a revision to the Virginia State Implementation Plan (SIP) from the Virginia Department ofEnvironmental Quality (VADEQ) revising the definition ofvolatile organic compound (VOC) to add 2-amino-2-methyl-1- propanol (also known as AMP) to the list ofsubstances not considered to be VOCs. EPA has determined that the submittal is administratively and technically complete, and is reviewing the submittal to prepare a Direct Final Rulemaking (DFR) action. Ifmembers ofyour staffhave any questions, they may direct them to Ms. Irene Shandruk, Office ofAir Program Planning, at (215) 814-2166 or shandruk.i.rene@epa.gov. She is the principal contact for this rulemaking.

cc: Michael Dowd, Air Division Director Virginia Department ofEnvironmental Quality Sincerely,



# ~ t:::.



# ~ FDt< DianaEsher, Director Air Protection Division



# .,.

**'..~** Printed onlOO% recycled/recyclablepaper with 100%post-consumer fiber andprocess chlorine free. Customer ServiceHotline: 1-800-438-2474
#### PEOPLE v. YOSKOW.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

October 12, 1906.)

Proceedings by the people of the state of New York against Meyer Yoskow.

No opinion. Motion granted, unless appellant be ready for December term. Order filed.
THE AWORNEY GENERAJ~ 

OFTEXAS 

January 29, 1975 

The Honorable Craig A. Washington 

Chairman 

Opinion No. H- 509 

House Committee on Prairie View 

A&M University 

Box 2910, Capitol Station 

Austin, Texas 78767 

Re: Authority of a college 

to withhold professor’s 

pay checks pending the 

completion of certa~in 

obligations. 

Dear Mr. Washington: 

You have requested our opinion concerning the authority of a 

college to withhold pay checks of a professor pending payment of a 

parking permit fee and submission of semester grades. 

As exemplified by constitutional and statutory provisions prohibiting the garnishment of wages, Texas Constitution, article 16, 

section 28; article 4099, V.T. C. S. , it is the public policy of this state 

to insure the payment of salaries and wages. Attorney General Opinions 

O-6671 (1946) and O-7390 (1946) held that deductions from salaries and 

wages may be made only pursuant to a reasonable contract provision, 

a statute, or a constitutional provision. See also Attorney General 

-- 

Opinion O-6679 (1945). 

Article 16, section 10 of the Texas Constitution allows the Legislature to make deductions from the salaries of public officers for neglect 

of duty. However, this authority rests only with the Legislature and does 

not extend to departments of the state. Attorney General Opinion O-7390 

(1946). That opinion dealt with the authority of the Prison Board or the 

general manager of the Prison System to “assess and collect,,any fees . . . 

from prison employees because such person may have been responsible 

for allowing a convict to escape. ” It states: 

p. 2294 
The Honorable Craig A. Washington, page 2 (H-509) 

There are no statutes authorizing the Board 

of Prison Commissioners or the General Manager, 

of the Prison System to impose fines or pecuniary 

assessments upon employees of the Prison System 

who may neglect the performance of their duties 

assigned them by law . . . . 

In our opinion, the stated practice of the Board 

is in the nature of a penalty, and is beyond the authority 

of the Board. 

While Attorney General Opinion O-7390 concerned fines rather than salary 

deductions, article 16, section 10 was cited, and no distinction was seen 

between the two forms of penalties. 

We have found no statutory or constitutional authority for the 

withhoLding of salaries by a state college administrator and it is therefore our opinion that he lacks the authority to do so. 

SUMMARY 

A state college does not have authority to 

withhold faculty salary payments on the grounds 

of neglect of duty such as tardiness in the sub- : 

mission of semester grades. 

C. ROBERT HEATH, Chairman 

Opinion Committee 

lg 

. 

p. 2295
2006-0937.

#### Elsass v. Jeffreys.

In Habeas Corpus. On petition for writ of habeas corpus of Joshua Elsass. Sua sponte, cause dismissed.

Moyer, C.J., Resnick, Pfeifer, Lundberg Stratton, O’Connor, O’Donnell and Lanzinger, JJ., concur.
§ 3300.79 Application for certificate. An application shall be submitted to the ATP manager by an officer in the organization of the owner of the equipment. Copies of the Form, Application for U.S. ATP Certificate for Equipment in Service, may be obtained by a request to the ATP manager. The following information is requested in the application: ( a ) A statement that the owner is a domestic owner, with the name, address, and telephone number of its principal office, and name and title of person to contact.
( b ) If the operator of the equipment is different from the owner, the name and address of the operator.
( c ) The type of equipment (intermodal freight container, trailer, semi-trailer, railcar, or truck).
( d ) The total number of units of equipment.
( e ) The definition of the equipment for which certification is sought, referring to ATP, Annex 1, paragraph 3 and Appendix 4.
( f ) For equipment which has not been previously certified, one of the following: ( 1 ) For each unit of equipment, the original or certified true copy of the test report, or;
( 2 ) If the equipment is serially-produced by one manufacturer: ( i ) Name of manufacturer.
( ii ) The original or certified true copy of the test report(s) of 1 percent of the equipment which was tested to serve as reference equipment.
( iii ) A report of inspection for each unit of equipment.
( g ) For renewal of a U.S. ATP Certificate which is nearing its expiration date: ( 1 ) The original or certified true copy of that certificate, and;
( 2 ) One of the following, (i) (ii), or (iii): ( i ) For each unit of equipment, the original or certified true copy of the test report.
( ii ) If the equipment is serially-produced by one manufacturer: ( A ) Name of manufacturer.
( B ) The original or certified true copy of the test report(s) of 1 percent of the equipment which was tested to serve as reference equipment.
( C ) A report of inspection from each unit of equipment.
( iii ) A report of inspection for each unit of equipment.
( h ) For equipment which is currently certified according to a U.S. ATP certificate, and which has been transferred from one domestic owner to another: ( 1 ) The original or certified true copy of that certificate.
( 2 ) A report of inspection for each unit of equipment.
( i ) For equipment which is currently certified according to a Foreign-ATP certificate, and which has been transferred from a foreign owner to a domestic owner: ( 1 ) The original or certified true copy of the test report for the reference equipment.
( 2 ) The original or certified true copy of the Foreign-ATP certificate.
( 3 ) A report of inspection for each unit of equipment.
( j ) A statement that each unit of equipment has, or will have, affixed to it a certification plate and distinguishing mark as prescribed in ATP, Annex 1, Appendix 1, paragraphs 4 and 5, and Appendices 3 and 4.
( k ) A list showing, for each unit of equipment, the serial number of the body and the corresponding owner's equipment identification number.
Page 1 of 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

vs. 3:98cr24/RV

3:08cv12/RV/MD

STERLING KENNETH WESTBERRY

ORDER

This cause is before the court on defendant’s notice of appeal (doc. 95) of the

court’s order denying his motion to vacate pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 as second or

successive and his alternative request for relief pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(b) which the

court construes as a request for a certificate of appealability. Edwards v. United States,

114 F.3d 1083 (11th Cir. 1997). Unless a certificate of appealability is issued, the defendant

may not take an appeal from the final order denying Section 2255 relief. See 28 U.S.C.

2253(c)(1)(B). Because the defendant has not made a substantial showing of the denial

of a constitutional right, see United States v. Futch, 518 F.3d 887 (11th Cir. 2008), and for

the reasons set forth in this court’s order (doc. 93) adopting and incorporating the

Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation (doc. 91), his request for a certificate of

appealability is DENIED. 

 Defendant’s motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (doc. 96) is denied, as

this appeal is not taken in good faith and he is not otherwise entitled to so proceed.

Fed.R.App.P. 24(a)(3). Defendant shall pay the $455.00 filing fee within thirty days.

DONE AND ORDERED this 19th day of August, 2008.

/s/ Roger Vinson 

ROGER VINSON

SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:98-cr-00024-RV-MD Document 99 Filed 08/19/08 Page 1 of 1
§ 3560.566 Loan and grant rates and terms. ( a ) *Amortization period.* The loan will be amortized over a period not to exceed 33 years. The amortization schedule will take into account the depreciation of the security and ensure that the loan will be adequately secured.
( b ) *Interest rate.* The effective interest rate will be 1 percent.
( c ) *Term of grant agreement.* The grant agreement will remain in effect for so long as there is a need for farm labor housing.
Editorial Note on Subchapter C of Chapter II
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to subchapter C appear by Amdt. 381, 65 FR 64586, Oct. 30, 2000.

§ 292.23 Records and reports. ( a ) Summer EBT agencies and LEAs may retain necessary records in their original or electronic form.
( b ) Summer EBT agency records must be retained for a period of 3 years after the date of submission of the final Financial Reports for the fiscal year. If audit and investigation findings have not been resolved, the records must be retained beyond the 3-year period as long as is required for the resolution of the issues raised by the audit or investigation.
( c ) Summer EBT agencies receiving Federal awards will be required to submit periodic financial management planning and reporting documentation in the Food Program Reporting System (FPRS), on standard schedules that will be announced annually.
( d ) For Summer EBT Administrative Grants, Summer EBT agencies will be required to submit an expenditure plan for State expenditure planning by August 15th, prior to the beginning of each fiscal year. Regional approval for those documents will set funding levels for the Summer EBT agency. These documents may be amended on a rolling basis throughout the year as agency needs evolve.
( e ) State Administrative Grant expenditures will be reported to FNS quarterly on a Summer EBT financial status report.
( f ) Summer EBT agencies must report participation and issuance on a monthly basis.
Exhibit 10.13

STAR BANK                               
425 Walnut Street
P. O. Box 1038
Cincinnati, OH 45201-1038


                         October 31, 1995


Mr. Richard W. Smith
President
Dataguard Recovery Services, Inc.
P. O. Box 37144
Louisville, KY 40233-7144

Re:  The Revolving Credit and Term Loan Agreement dated
     July 1, 1992 and subsequently amended by and between
     Star Bank, N.A. (the "Bank") and Dataguard Recovery
     Services, Inc. (the "Company") (said agreement shall
     hereinafter be referred to as the "Agreement").

Dear Mr. Smith:

This letter, when duly and validly accepted by the Company, shall
evidence the intention of the Bank to amend the above referenced
Agreement and Promissory Note such that:

1)   The Maturity Date of the Revolving Credit facility shall be
     extended to October 31, 1996.

2)   The Revolving Note shall bear interest at 2.0% over the Bank's
     prime rate (the "Prime Rate").  The Prime Rate is currently
     8.75%.

As a condition to the effectiveness of this amendment, the Company
shall pay the Bank a $100 renewal fee.

All representations and warranties of the Company set forth in the
Agreement are true and correct as of the date hereof.  Except as
amended herein, all other terms, conditions and covenants of the
Agreement shall remain in full force and effect.

If the above terms represent our understanding, please indicate
your agreement by signing one copy of this letter and returning it
to me.

                                   Sincerely,

                                   /s/ Edward L. Dwyer
                                   Edward L. Dwyer
                                   Vice President

Accepted this 29th day of December, 1995.

Dataguard Recovery Services, Inc.

By: /s/Dewey D. Minton, Jr.
*Friday, September 11, 1998*

MOTION DOCKET

97-1997.

#### State ex rel. Rea v. Ohio Dept. of Edn.

In Mandamus. On July 15, 1998, this court granted relators’ motion for attorney fees and required that a bill and documentation in support be filed. Relators filed their itemized fee statement on August 14,1998. On August 24,1998, the parties filed a joint notice of settlement indicating that they have resolved the attorney fee issue.' Upon consideration thereof,

IT IS ORDERED by the court that the pending matter regarding attorney fees in this case be, and hereby is, dismissed.
Exhibit 32

CERTIFICATION
OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER 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 of Trans World Entertainment Corporation (the Registrant) on
Form 10-K for the period ending January 29, 2011 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), we, Robert J.
Higgins, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of the Registrant and John J.
Sullivan, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the
Registrant, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of our 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 results of operations of the Registrant.

|                                      |                              
|------------------------------------- | -----------------------------
|/s/ Robert J. Higgins                 | /s/ John J. Sullivan         
|Chairman and Chief
 Executive Officer | Executive Vice President
 and
|                                      | Chief Financial Officer      
|                                      |                              
|April 14, 2011                        | April 14, 2011               

This certification shall not
be deemed to be filed for the purpose of Section 18 of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and will not be incorporated by reference
into any registration statement filed under the Securities Act of 1933, as
amended, unless specifically identified as being incorporated therein by
reference.

A signed original of this
written statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating,
acknowledging or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form
within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section
906, has been provided to Trans World Entertainment and will be retained by
Trans World Entertainment and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.

---
Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

FREDDIE L. BROWN,

Plaintiff,

vs. Case No. 4:03cv87-RH/WCS

SGT. STEPHEN M. COYNE, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

O R D E R

Plaintiff in this case submitted a letter addressed to the Clerk of Court, doc. 79,

requesting information on the statute of limitations. Doc. 79. 

On April 14, 2004, District Judge Robert Hinkle adopted the undersigned's report

and recommendation, doc. 32, and dismissed Plaintiff's case without prejudice based on

Heck and Younger. Doc. 53. Plaintiff's appeal was dismissed in July of 2004. Doc. 71. 

Finally, Plaintiff's motion to vacate was denied. Docs. 72, 73, and 78. This case is

closed and Plaintiff shall not file anything further in this case. Finally, the Court is not

permitted to give legal advice. Therefore, no response is provided as to Plaintiff's letter,

doc. 79.

Case 4:03-cv-00087-RH-WCS Document 80 Filed 09/28/05 Page 1 of 2
Page 2 of 2

Case No. 4:03cv87-RH/WCS

Accordingly, it is

ORDERED:

1. Plaintiff's letter, construed as a motion for advice as to the statute of

limitations, doc.79, is DENIED.

2. Plaintiff shall not file anything further in this case.

DONE AND ORDERED on September 28, 2005.

s/ William C. Sherrill, Jr. 

WILLIAM C. SHERRILL, JR. 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 4:03-cv-00087-RH-WCS Document 80 Filed 09/28/05 Page 2 of 2