alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### In the Matter of Edwin Negron, Petitioner, v John Verhoff, as Executive Director of the White Plains Housing Authority, et al., Respondents.

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the respondent authority, dated August 16, 1979 and made after a hearing, which found petitioner guilty of certain charges of misconduct and terminated his employment. Determination confirmed and proceeding dismissed on the merits, without costs or disbursements. The authority’s determination has a rational basis and is supported by substantial evidence. Under the circumstances of this case, the sanction imposed is not so disproportionate' to the offenses as to be shocking to one’s sense of fairness (see *Matter of Pell v Board of Educ.,*34 NY2d 222). Lazer, J. P., Rabin, Gulotta and O’Connor, JJ., concur.
Unassociated Document


    


    JAG
Media Holdings, Inc.

    6865
S.W. 18th Street,
Suite B13

    Boca
Raton, FL 33433

    


    April 29,
2009

    


    YA Global
Investments, L.P.

    101
Hudson Street, Suite 3700

    Jersey
City, NJ 07302

    


    
      	
              Re:

            	
              Warrants
      to purchase shares of JAG Media Holdings, Inc. (“JAG Media”) held by YA
      Global Investments, L.P. (“YA
Global”).

            


    

    


    Gentlemen:

    


    This
letter shall set forth our understanding with respect to the warrant (the "Warrant") issued on
May 24, 2006 held by YA Global (Warrant No. CCP-2) to purchase 2,000,000 shares
of JAG Media's common stock at an exercise price of $0.50 per
share.  The warrant is currently exercisable by YA Global on a
cashless basis.  For good and valuable consideration, YA Global and
JAG Media agree as follows: (a) the exercise price of the entire 2,000,000
shares underlying the warrant shall be reduced to $0.05 per share, and (b) YA
Global shall exercise the entire 2,000,000 shares on a cash basis, providing JAG
Media with $100,000 in cash.  Warrant No. CCP-2, and its underlying
warrant shares, are not registered for resale and, accordingly, shall be subject
to the rights and restrictions of Rule 144.

    


    In
connection with the agreements set forth herein, JAG Media represents that it
has proper approval and authority of its board of directors to enter into this
agreement, and that upon exercise and payment of the exercise price as set forth
above, the shares to be issued to YA Global shall be fully paid and validly
issued shares of JAG Media.

    


    If the
foregoing accurately reflects your understanding of our agreement regarding the
above matter, please indicate your agreement and acceptance by signing in the
appropriate space below and returning a fully executed and dated copy of this
agreement to the undersigned.

    


    Sincerely
yours,

     

     

    
      
        
          
            
              
                
                  
                    
                      
                        
                          
                            	JAG Media Holdings,
      Inc.	 	 	
                                    AGREED
      AND ACCEPTED: 

                                    YA
      Global Investments, L.P.

                                  	 
	 	 	 	 	
                                    By:  Yorkville
      Advisors, LLC 

                                    Its:
      Investment Manager

                                  	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	By:	
                                    /s/

                                  	 	 	By:	
                                    /s/

                                  	 
	Name: 	
                                    Thomas
      J. Mazzarisi

                                  	 	 	Name: 
      	
                                    Mark
      Angelo

                                  	 
	Title: 	
                                    Chairman
      and CEO

                                  	 	 	Title:  	
                                    Portfolio
      Manager
#### § 4279.204 Appeals.

Borrowers, Lenders, and Holders have appeal or review rights for adverse Agency decisions made under this subpart. Adverse programmatic decisions based on clear and objective statutory or regulatory requirements are not appealable; however, such decisions are reviewable for appealability by the National Appeals Division (NAD). The Borrower, Lender, and Holder can appeal any Agency decision that directly and adversely impacts them. For an adverse decision that impacts the Borrower, the Lender and Borrower must jointly execute a written request for appeal for an alleged adverse decision made by the Agency. An adverse decision that only impacts the Lender may be appealed by the Lender only. An adverse decision that only impacts the Holder may be appealed by the Holder only. A decision by a Lender adverse to the interest of the Borrower is not a decision by the Agency, whether or not concurred in by the Agency. Appeals will be conducted by NAD and will be handled in accordance with 7 CFR part 11.
#### § 3570.84 Grant servicing.

Grants will be serviced in accordance with RD Instructions 1951-E and 1951-O and 2 CFR part 200 as applicable.

[79 FR 76013, Dec. 19, 2014]
Lead Poisoning in Construction Workers

WARNING!

Workers are at risk of lead poisoning during the maintenance, repaint-

ing, or demolition of bridges or other
lead-containing paint.

steel structures coated with

Take the following steps to protect yourself | e
and your family from lead exposure:

© Be aware of the health effects of lead | @
exposure (see p. 3 of the NIOSH Alert,
Request for Assistance in Preventing
Lead Poisoning in Construction Workers)
and discuss with your doctor any
symptoms or concerns that may be re-
lated to lead poisoning.

® Participate in any blood lead or air
monitoring program offered by your
employer.

® Use engineering controls such as
source containment and local exhaust
ventilation to minimize exposures to
lead.

© Be aware that the highest lead con-
centrations may occur inside contain-
ment structures.

© Use respirators when blasting, sweep-
ing, vacuuming, or performing other
high-risk jobs (as determined by an in-
dustrial hygienist or other qualified
professional).

Please tear out and post. Distribute copies to workers.

Change into disposable or washable
coveralls at the worksite.

Do not eat, drink, or use tobacco prod-
ucts in the work area.

Wash your hands and face before
eating, drinking, or smoking outside the
work area.

Shower and change into clean clothing
before leaving the worksite to prevent
contaminating homes and automobiles.

‘See back of sheet to order complete Alert.


sen
poy

otiing,

“oy,
rae

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Public Health Service
Centers for Disease Control

CDC

(CENTERS FOR DSSEASE CONTROL
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

MICHAEL FOLEY, 

Plaintiff-Appellant, 

 v. 

MICHELLE PONT, an individual; et al., 

Defendants-Appellees. 

No. 14-16774 

D.C. No. 2:11-cv-01769-JCMVCF 

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Nevada

James C. Mahan, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted March 8, 2017**

Before: LEAVY, W. FLETCHER, and OWENS, Circuit Judges.

Michael Foley appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing 

his civil action for failure to prosecute. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. 

§ 1291. We review for an abuse of discretion. Ghazali v. Moran, 46 F.3d 52, 53 

(9th Cir. 1995). We affirm.

The district court did not abuse its discretion by dismissing Foley’s action 

 

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent 

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision 

FILED

MAR 21 2017

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
 2 14-16774 

for failure to prosecute in accordance with local rules because, after Foley failed to 

file documents in the district court for more than 270 days, he failed to respond 

timely to the district court’s notice to take action. See D. Nev. Civ. R. 41-1 

(permitting dismissal after notice of actions that span 270 days without any 

proceeding of record); Ghazali, 46 F.3d at 53 (discussing factors to guide the 

court’s evaluation of dismissal for failure to comply with local rules).

Because we affirm the district court’s dismissal for failure to prosecute, we 

do not consider Foley’s challenges to the district court’s interlocutory orders. See 

Al-Torki v. Kaempen, 78 F.3d 1381, 1386 (9th Cir.1996) (“[I]nterlocutory orders, 

generally appealable after final judgment, are not appealable after a dismissal for 

failure to prosecute[.]”).

Appellees AP Express, AP Express Worldwide, LLC, and Jeffery Pont’s

motion to take judicial notice (Docket Entry No. 9), and Foley’s request for 

judicial notice, set forth in his reply brief, are granted.

Appellee Bradley’s request for sanctions, set forth in her answering brief, is 

denied without prejudice.

AFFIRMED.

 

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
Page 1 of 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

GAINESVILLE DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

v. CASE NO. 1:94-cr-01009-MP-AK

JOHN RICHARD KNOCK,

Defendant.

___________________________/

O R D E R 

This matter is before the Court on Doc. 988, Motion for Joinder, by John Richard Knock. 

 To the extent that the claims raised in the joinder have not already been fully briefed by the

Government in its response to the § 2255 petition, the Court requires a response. Thus, no later

than August 15, 2005, the Government shall file a response to Knock’s motion for joinder.

DONE AND ORDERED this 15th day of July, 2005.

s/ A. KORNBLUM 

ALLAN KORNBLUM

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:94-cr-01009-MP-GRJ Document 997 Filed 07/15/05 Page 1 of 1
Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

v. 4:90cr4051-WS

JAMES DENSON, 4:06cv16-WS

Defendant.

 

ORDER ADOPTING THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

Before the court is the magistrate judge's report and recommendation (doc. 595)

docketed April 19, 2006. The magistrate judge recommends that the defendant's

section 2255 motion be summarily dismissed. The defendant has filed objections (doc.

597) to the report and recommendation.

Upon review of the record in light of the defendant’s objections, this court has

determined that the report and recommendation should be adopted.

Accordingly, it is ORDERED:

1. The magistrate judge's report and recommendation (doc. 595) is hereby

ADOPTED and incorporated by reference into this order.

Case 4:90-cr-04051-WS-WCS Document 598 Filed 05/23/06 Page 1 of 2
Page 2 of 2

Case No. 4:90cr4051-WS

2. The defendant’s section 2255 motion (doc. 594) is hereby summarily

DISMISSED because authorization for filing a second or successive section 2255

motion has not been granted by the court of appeals. 

3. The clerk shall enter judgment accordingly and shall close Case No.

4:06cv16-WS.

DONE AND ORDERED this May 23, 2006.

 /s William Stafford 

WILLIAM STAFFORD

SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 4:90-cr-04051-WS-WCS Document 598 Filed 05/23/06 Page 2 of 2
#### § 3560.8 Administrator's exception authority.

The RHS Administrator may make an exception to any provision of this part or address any omissions provided that the exception is consistent with the applicable statute, does not adversely affect the interest of the Federal Government, and does not adversely affect the accomplishment of the purposes of the MFH programs or application of the requirement would result in undue hardship on the tenants. Exception requests presented to the RHS Administrator must have the concurrence of a Rural Development Leadership Designee or a Deputy Administrator for MFH.

[69 FR 69106, Nov. 26, 2004, as amended at 87 FR 11279, Mar. 1, 2022]
Order filed June 4 , 2013.

In The 

## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________ NO. 14 - 12 - 00796 - CR LISA MICHELLE ESTRAD A , Appellant

V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

____________ NO. 14 - 12 - 00797 - CR EX PARTE LISA MICHELLE ESTRADA
On Appeal from the 262nd District Court

Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No s . 1296827 & 1296827 - A 

### ABATEMENT ORDER In the appeal docketed under number 14

- 12

- 00796

- CR, appellant appeals from the order adjudicating her guilt for theft and sentencing her to confinement for si x months in state jail. In the appeal docketed under number 14

- 12

- 00797

- CR, she appeals from the denial of her pre

- trial application for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to Texas Code of Criminal Procedure article 11.072. See Kniatt v. State , 206 S.W.3d 657, 663

- 64 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006) (reaffirming rule that jurisdiction2

is established at the time the writ is filed and is not defeated by subsequent adjudication of guilt). On appellant’s motion, these appeals were consolidated. Appellant has requested supple mentation of the appellate record with a police statement from witness Melanie Thomas. At the writ hearing, the court ordered: “In an abundance of caution, I’m going to go ahead and order that the State obtain a copy of that witness statement so that it ca n be made a part of this record for purposes of an appeal, if that’s what you choose to do.” On March 21, 2013, this court ordered counsel for the State to see that the witness statement by Melanie Thomas is made a part of the record . We further ordered t hat a supplemental clerk’s record containing the witness statement by Melanie Thomas filed with the clerk of this court in the habeas appeal docketed under number 14

- 12

- 00797

- CR on or before April 26, 2013. To date, the supplemental record has not been fil ed. Accordingly, we issue the following order: We ORDER counsel for the State to see that the witness statement by Melanie Thomas is made a part of the record in the habeas case. The Harris County District Clerk is ordered to file supplemental clerk’s rec ord containing witness statement by Melanie Thomas with the clerk of this court in the habeas appeal docketed under number 14

- 12

- 00797

- CR on or before June 24 , 2013
.

PER CURIAM
KATTEN MUCHIN & ZAVIS
                      525 WEST MONROE STREET * SUITE 1600
                         CHICAGO, ILLINOIS  60661-3693



                               February 25, 1997

VIA FACSIMILE

David Layman, Esq.
Greenberg, Traurig
777 South Flagler Drive, Suite 310-E
West Palm Beach, Florida  33401

Re:  Agreement of Sale dated October 24, 1996 between CEEBRAID-SIGNAL
     CORPORATION, a Florida corporation ("Purchaser") and GLENEAGLES
     INVESTORS A REAL ESTATE LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, an Illinois limited 
     partnership ("Seller") for property commonly known as the Gleneagles
     Apartments, Miami, Florida (as heretofore amended, the "Agreement")

Dear David:

     At my client's request, I am writing to evidence the Seller's agreement to
extend the Closing Date (as said term is defined in the Agreement) until March
13, 1997.

     Please call me if you have any comments or questions.

                              Very truly yours,

                               /s/ Stephen J. Levy
                              -------------------------------
                                   Stephen J. Levy

sjl/269539


cc:  Ms. Gloria Reyes Doreck (via facsimile)
     Mr. Al Lieberman (via facsimile)
     Daniel J. Perlman, Esq.
<PAGE>
Exhibit
32.1





CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO


18 U.S.C.
SECTION 1350,


AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





Each of
the undersigned hereby certifies, in his capacity as an officer of Sino Gas
International Holdings, Inc. (the “Company”), for the purposes of 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that to the best of his knowledge:





(1)  The
Quarterly Report of the Company on Form 10-Q (“Report”) for the fiscal period
ended September 30, 2010 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 Company.





Date:
November 15, 2010





/s/
      Yuchuan LiuYuchuan
      LiuChief
      Executive Officer/s/
      Yugang ZhangYugang
      ZhangChief
      Financial Officer
Form of Director Option Award Letter



 Exhibit 10.20 
  
 [WESTLAKE LETTERHEAD] 
  
 August 16, 2004 
  
 [insert name] 
 [insert address] 
  
 Dear                     :

  
 Westlake Chemical Corporation (the “Company”) hereby grants to you
a nonqualified option (“Option”), effective August 16, 2004 (the “Award Date”), to purchase              shares of common stock of the Company (“Common
Stock”) in accordance with the Westlake Chemical Corporation 2004 Omnibus Incentive Plan (the “Plan”). Your award is more fully described in the attached Appendix A, Terms and Conditions of Director Stock Option Award. 
  
 The price at which you may purchase the shares of Common Stock covered by the Option is
$14.50 (the “Grant Price”). Unless otherwise provided in the attached Appendix A, your Option will expire on the tenth anniversary of the Award Date (the “Expiration Date”), and will become exercisable in installments as follows
(the “Schedule”): 
  

			
	 Period Beginning

	 	 Number of Shares Purchasable


	 First anniversary of the Award Date
	 	1/3
	 Second anniversary of the Award Date
	 	1/3
	 Third anniversary of the Award Date
	 	1/3

  
 Unless otherwise provided in the
attached Appendix A, you must be in continuous service as a Director (as defined in the Plan) with the Company from the Award Date through each date on which your Option becomes exercisable in order for your Option to become exercisable on such
date. 
  
 Your award is subject to the terms and conditions set forth in the
enclosed Plan, any additional terms and conditions set forth in the attached Appendix A, the Prospectus for the Plan and any rules and regulations adopted by the Plan’s Administrator (as defined in the Plan). 
  
 This award letter and the attachments contain the formal terms and conditions of your award
and accordingly should be retained in your files for future reference. 
  
 Very
truly yours, 
  
 James Chao 
 Chairman of the Board 
  
 Enclosures
Exhibit 10(k)

State Street

State Street Bank and Trust Company
225 Franklin Street
Boston, Massachusetts 02110-2804


March 20, 1996


Mr. Carleton F. Bryant III
Chief Operating Officer
Westerbeke Corporation
Avon Industrial Park
Avon, MA 02322

Dear Carl:

I am pleased to inform you that State Street Bank and Trust Company (the 
"Bank") has completed the necessary credit approval process to renew a 
$3,000,000 secured line of credit (the "Line of Credit") for Westerbeke 
Corporation (the "Company").

The terms and conditions of the Bank's facility to the Company are as 
follows:

Line of Credit - $3,000,000

The Bank will make available a Line of Credit, secured by a first lien on 
the Company's accounts receivable and inventory, to be used for working 
capital purposes.  Advances under the Line of Credit will be limited to the 
lesser of (I) $3,000,000 or (ii) a formula including up to 80% of the unpaid 
face amount of all eligible accounts receivable which are no more than 
ninety ("90") days from invoice date, plus 40% of inventory.  Advances 
against inventory will be capped at $2,000,000.  The Line of Credit may be 
used for direct borrowings, letters of credit up to 270 days, and bankers' 
acceptances.   This line of credit will expire March 31, 1997.

A one quarter of one percent (1/4%) per annum fee will be payable on the 
unused Line of Credit amount, charged quarterly in arrears.  Borrowings will 
bear interest at the State Street Bank and Trust Company Prime Rate, as 
announced from time to time.

Equipment Line - $500,000

The Bank will also provide an equipment line of credit, available for 
drawdowns until June 30, 1996.  On July 1, 1996 the equipment line will 
convert to a five year secured term loan.  The loan will amortize in sixty 
(60) equal monthly principal payments.  The term loan will mature by July 
31, 2001.  The interest rate on the equipment line will be the Bank's Prime 
Rate.   At the time of conversion to a term loan, interest will be at the 
Company's option, floating at the Bank's Prime Rate or fixed at a rate equal 
to the rate determined by the Bank as its Cost of Funds plus 225 basis 
points.

All other terms of the original commitment, as amended from time to time, 
will remain the same.

Carl, congratulations on another excellent year at Westerbeke!  If the above 
facilities meet with your approval, please indicate your acceptance by 
signing on the line provided below.  Thank you.


Sincerely,

By /s/ Suzanne L. Dwyer
Suzanne L. Dwyer
Loan Officer



Accepted:



WESTERBEKE CORPORATION



By /s/ Carleton F. Bryant III
By:    Carleton F. Bryant III
Title: Chief Operating Officer
Date:  March 22, 1996
| 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      Company. |
|----------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Date:      August 7, 2008 | By:    | /s/  Michael      C. Linn      |
|--------------------------------|--------|------------------------------------------|
|                           |   | Michael      C. Linn                     |
|                           |   | Chairman      and Chief ExecutiveOfficer |
2006-0723.

#### Klein v. Wolfe.

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

Moyer, C.J., Resnick, Pfeifer, Lundberg Stratton, O’Connor, O’Donnell and Lanzinger, JJ., concur.
#### § 3570.261 Environmental and intergovernmental review.

All grants awarded under this subpart are subject to the environmental requirements of 7 CFR part 1940, subpart G. Technical Assistance under this program is categorically excluded unless extraordinary circumstances exist.
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2213 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

109th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 2213

          To extend the suspension of duty on Sulfur Black 1.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            January 30, 2006

  Mr. DeMint introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
                  referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
          To extend the suspension of duty on Sulfur Black 1.

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

SECTION 1. SULFUR BLACK 1.

    (a) In General.--Heading 9902.03.03 of the Harmonized Tariff 
Schedule of the United States (relating to sulfur black 1) is amended 
by striking ``12/31/2006'' and inserting ``12/31/2008''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or 
after the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```