alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# United States Court **of Appeals**  **f or the Fifth Circuit** 

No. 20

- 30133 Summary Calendar

**Ryan Haygood; Haygood Dental Care, L.L.C.,**
Plaintiffs

— Appellants **,**

versus
**Camp Morrison; C. Barry Ogden; Karen Moorhead; Dana Glorioso,** 
Defendants

— Appellees

**.**

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana USDC N o. 5:13

- CV

- 335

Before **Haynes, Willett,** and **Ho ,**  Circuit Judges

**. Per Curiam**  **:** * This appeal concerns an attorney’s fee award. Ryan Haygood and Haygood Dental Care, LLC ( collectively, “Haygood”) sued Camp Morrison, C. Barry Ogden, Karen Moorhead, and Dana Glorioso (collectively , “Appellees”) , along with defendants not part of this appeal

. After dismissing Haygood’s claims, the district court granted Appellees’ motion for attorney’s fees and denied Haygood’s resulting m otion for

* Pursuant to **5th Cir cuit**  **R ule**  47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in **5th Cir cuit**  **R ule**  47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED September 4, 2020 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 20-30133 Document: 00515553782 Page: 1 Date Filed: 09/04/2020No. 20

- 30133

2 reconsideration. Haygood now appeals. For the following reasons, we **DISMISS** the appeal for want of jurisdiction.

U nder 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , we have authority to hear “appeals from all
final decisions of the district courts of the United States.” In most cases, “an order is final only when it ‘ends the litigation on the merits and leaves nothing
for the court to do but execute the judgment.’” Club R etro, L.L.C. v. Hilton , 568 F.3d 181, 214 (5th Cir. 2009) (quoting Coopers & Lybrand v. Livesay, 437 U.S. 463, 467 (1978)). A n order imposing attorney’s fees that leaves the

amount for “later determination” is not final for purposes of appellate
review. Southern Travel Club. v. Carnival Air Lines , 986 F.2d 125, 131 (5th Cir. 1993) (“[A]n order awarding attorney’s fees or costs is not reviewable on appeal until the award is reduced to a sum certain.”); see also Pechon v. La. Dept. of Health , 368 F. App’x 6 06, 609

– 10 (5th Cir. 2010) (explaining that a claim for attorney’s fees is “a separate action from one on the merits” and leaving the amount in question is not a final order)

.
On March 14, 2019 , the district court granted a motion for attorney’s
fees in Ap pellees’ favor without specifying the amount awarded

. It then ordered Appellees to file detailed time reports within twenty

- one days of the
order so that it could determine a reasonable amount for attorney’s fees. After an extension, Appellees submitted a motion to file detailed time reports with an attached exhibit reflecting same

. Thereafter , the district court granted the motion to submit detailed time reports, but it has not yet entered an order specifying the precise amount of attorney’s fees awarded. Since no order exists specifying the amount awarded in attorney’s fees, we lack jurisdiction over this appeal.

**DISMISSED**

. Case: 20-30133 Document: 00515553782 Page: 2 Date Filed: 09/04/2020
§ 1.871-2 Determining residence of alien individuals. ( a ) *General.* The term *nonresident alien individual* means an individual whose residence is not within the United States, and who is not a citizen of the United States. The term includes a nonresident alien fiduciary. For such purpose the term fiduciary shall have the meaning assigned to it by section 7701(a)(6) and the regulations in part 301 of this chapter (Regulations on Procedure and Administration). For presumption as to an alien's nonresidence, see paragraph (b) of § 1.871-4.
( b ) *Residence defined.* An alien actually present in the United States who is not a mere transient or sojourner is a resident of the United States for purposes of the income tax. Whether he is a transient is determined by his intentions with regard to the length and nature of his stay. A mere floating intention, indefinite as to time, to return to another country is not sufficient to constitute him a transient. If he lives in the United States and has no definite intention as to his stay, he is a resident. One who comes to the United States for a definite purpose which in its nature may be promptly accomplished is a transient; but, if his purpose is of such a nature that an extended stay may be necessary for its accomplishment, and to that end the alien makes his home temporarily in the United States, he becomes a resident, though it may be his intention at all times to return to his domicile abroad when the purpose for which he came has been consummated or abandoned. An alien whose stay in the United States is limited to a definite period by the immigration laws is not a resident of the United States within the meaning of this section, in the absence of exceptional circumstances.
( c ) *Application and effective dates.* Unless the context indicates otherwise, §§ 1.871-2 through 1.871-5 apply to determine the residence of aliens for taxable years beginning before January 1, 1985. To determine the residence of aliens for taxable years beginning after December 31, 1984, see section 7701(b) and §§ 301.7701(b)-1 through 301.7701(b)-9 of this chapter. However, for purposes of determining whether an individual is a qualified individual under section 911(d)(1)(A), the rules of §§ 1.871-2 and 1.871-5 shall continue to apply for taxable years beginning after December 31, 1984. For purposes of determining whether an individual is a resident of the United States for estate and gift tax purposes, see § 20.0-1(b)(1) and (2) and § 25.2501-1(b) of this chapter, respectively.
[T.D. 6500, 25 FR 11910, Nov. 26, 1960; 25 FR 14021, Dec. 31, 1960, as amended by T.D. 8411, 57 FR 15241, Apr. 27, 1992]
- • A li - 3 3

Augus t 17,201 0 AlohaLe y Associat e Director Smal l Communit

y Ai i Servic e Developmen

t Progra m(SCASDP) aIoha.Iey@do(.go v Re : Sma U Communit

y Ai r Servic e Developnteiif

Gran t
Dea r Ms
. Ley , O n behal f o f th e Hear t of Florid aRegiona

l Coalition , f

full y suppoi l Gainesvill e Regiona l Airpoil' s reques t fo r aSmall Communit

y Ai r Servic e Developmen

t grant t o assis t wit h marketin g th e ne

w America n Eagl e Airline s servic e betwee n Gainesvill e and Miam

i and th e existing , loca

l ai r carriers
. Delt

a Ai r Line s an d US Airways
. American' s ne w servic e will allo w businesse s i n th e "Hear

t o f Florida " t o b e mor e productive , ultimatel y improvin g efficiency an d savin g money , Th e Hear t of Florid aRegiona

l Coalitio n represent s th e ke y leadershi p organization s i n th e countie s aroun d th e Gainesvill e Regiona l Airport
. Businesse s an

d industr y leader s i

n th e regio n hav e committed t o partnerin g wit

h th e airpor

t t o hel p suppor t an d improv e ai

r servic e options , includin g American' s ne w servic e t o th e Miam

i hub
. I n additio n t

o convenient

acces s t o Sout h Florida , American' s extensiv e domesti c an d internationa

l rout e structur e fro mMiam i will provid e new trave l option s and agreate r level o f frequenc y fo r bot h busines s an d leisur e travelers
. I t i s importan

t t o ou r regio n tha

t yo u proceed wit

h approvin g th e Airpor

t Authority' s reques t

fo r agran t t o assis t wit h marketin g effort s fo

r th e nex t tw o years . I

f yo u hav e an y question s abou

t ou r organization , partner s o r

th e regio n w e represent , pleas e don' t hesitate t o contac t me . Sincerely ,
Ro n Barnwell Executiv e Directo r Hear t o f Florid aRegiona

l Coalitio n

Pag e S 9
U

. S

. Deportment of Transportation Federal Aviation Administration

March 9, 2017

Mr. Luciano Serra de Queiroz Manager, Airworthiness Bombardier In c. 400 Cote-Vertu Road West Do rval , Quebec , Canada H4S 1 Y9

Dear Mr. Sen-a de Queiroz: Transport Airplane Directorate 1601 Lind Avenue , S.W. Renton , Washington 98057-3356

We have received yo ur letter no. A W / BD 1 II 7 / 0 11 , dated J anuary 17 , 20 17 on behalf of B o m bardi er Inc. (Bo mbardier) , requesti n g and extensio n to t i me-limited exe mption no. 11013. T hi s exemption , if granted, would permit re l ieffrom Title 14, Code ofFederal Regulation s (14 CFR) 25.90 1(c) , the requirements fo r uncontrollabl e high-tlll'ust failure co n d it io ns on Bombardier Mode l BD-1 00-1 AI 0 airp lanes e qu ipped with Honeywell AS907- 2 -l A eng i nes. Your petition has been added to public docke t no. FAA-2014-0417 and is being processed. We will contact you if we need additional information. We will advise you of our final decision on yo ur petition as soon as possible. If you have questions i n the meantime , you may call Margare t Langsted at (425) 227-2677 , e-mail margaret.langsted @ faa. gov. S incerely,



# )v(vd_~ Mark Forseth Sta nd ardization Branch Transport Airplan e Directorate Federal Aviation AdministrationU.S. Deportmen t of T ra nsporta t i on Federal Aviation Administration

M arch 9 , 20 17

Mr. Luciano Serr a de Qu ei ro z Man age r , A irworthine s s Bombardier inc. 400 Cote -V e rtu Road West Dorval , Quebec, Canad a H4S 1Y9

De a r Mr. Serra de Quei roz : Tran sport Airplane Directo ra te 1601 Lind Avenue, S

. W

. Renton , Washington 9805 7-3356

We have r ece ived your letter no. AW/BD 1/1 7 /0 11 , date d January 17,2017 on b e half of Bombardier Inc. (Bombardier) , requestin g and ex tension to time- limit ed exemption no. 110 13. This exemption, if grante d , would p er mit relief from Title 14 , Code of Federal R eg ul at i o n s ( 14 CFR) 25.901 (c), the r equirements for unc o ntrollable high-thrust failme co nditi ons on Bomb ardie r Mode l BD-1 00-1 A 10 airplanes eq uipp ed with H oneywell AS907- 2-1 A eng in es. Yo ur petition has been ad d e d to publi c docket no. FAA-20 14-0417 and is being processed. We wi ll co ntact you ifwc need additional informati on. We will adv ise yo u of ou r ti n a ! de c is ion on your petition as soon as possible. If you have quest io n s in the meanti m e , you m ay call Marga r et Langsted at (425) 227-2677 , e- mail m argaret. lan gs ted @ f a a.gov. S ince r e l y ,



# )tivd:_~ Mark F o rs eth Standardizatio n Branch T ran spo rt Airp lan e Directorate Federal Aviation Admin is tration
II

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. J. RES. 97

To commemorate the sesquicentennial of the Oregon Trail.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

MAY 25 (legislative day, APRIL 19), 1993

Mr. PACKWOOD (for himself and Mr. HATFIELD) introduced the following

joint resolution; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on

the Judiciary

JOINT RESOLUTION

To commemorate the sesquicentennial of the Oregon Trail.

Whereas, of all the western trails used by fur traders, gold

seekers, missionaries, and emigrants, the Oregon Trail

was the most important to the western settlement of this

great Nation;

Whereas, in the year 1843, the first major wave of humanity

left Independence, Missouri and travelled 2,170 miles in

covered wagons across sagebrush, plains, mountains, and

rivers to the Willamette Valley in Oregon Territory;

Whereas over 400,000 men, women, and children risked their

lives in this greatest migration in American history;

Whereas this Nation was expanded from ocean to ocean, as

settlement of the Old Oregon Territory forced Great Britain to relinquish this land to the United States;
2

•SJ 97 IS

Whereas the pioneering spirit of the Oregon Trail emigrants

embodies the spirit of the American people;

Whereas Americans have an ever-increasing desire to understand our national heritage;

Whereas, in 1978, Congress enacted the National Trails System Act, designating the Oregon Trail as a national historic trail, in recognition of the vital role it played in our

Nation’s history; and

Whereas, in 1993, the American people will seek to rekindle

the pioneering spirit of the ‘‘Great Migration’’ and an official Oregon Trail sesquicentennial wagon train will journey across the Nation, arriving in Oregon City, Oregon

on September 4, 1993: Now, therefore, be it

1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives

2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 That September 4, 1993, is hereby designated as ‘‘Na4 tional Oregon Trail Day’’. The President is authorized and

5 requested to issue a proclamation calling upon the people

6 of the United States to observe this day with the appro7 priate ceremonies and activities.

Æ
Exhibit 10.5(b)


FIRST
AMENDMENT TO LEASE


The undersigned
parties are entering into this First Amendment to Lease (“Amendment”) as of
January 1, 2007.  Pursuant to an
industrial building lease dated July 29, 1998 (the “Lease”), Damron Auto Parts
East, Inc. (“Landlord”) currently leases to Damron Holding Company d/b/a LKQ
Melbourne (“Tenant”) certain real property in Melbourne, Florida, as more
particularly described in Exhibit A attached to the Lease (the “Premises”).  Tenant is considering the construction of
various improvements on the Premises but will not do so without the assurance
that it has the option to lease the Premises beyond the end of the term of the
Lease and all options to extend contained therein.


1.  Under Article XI (Options to Extend) of the
Lease, in the third and fourth lines of Section 11.1, the phrase “for three (3)
periods of five (5) years each” is hereby deleted and replaced with the phrase “for
seven (7) periods of five (5) years each”.


2.  At the end
of the Lease term (including all options to extend), all permanent alterations,
additions and improvements made by Tenant in or upon the Premises shall become
Landlord’s property and shall remain upon the Premises.


3.  All terms of the Lease that are not
specifically amended by the terms of this Amendment shall remain in full force
and effect.  In the event any conflict
arises between the terms of the Lease and the terms of this Amendment, then the
terms of this Amendment shall supersede the terms of the Lease with respect to
the subject matters described in this Amendment.


 


	
  DAMRON AUTO PARTS EAST, INC.

  	
   

  	
  DAMRON HOLDING COMPANY

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
  /s/ Leonard A. Damron

  	
   

  	
   

  	
  /s/ Frank P. Erlain

  	
   

  
	
  By: Leonard A. Damron

  	
   

  	
  By: Frank P. Erlain

  
	
  Title:

  	
   

  	
  Title: VP – Finance, Controller & Treasurer
[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

________________________

No. 17-15771

Non-Argument Calendar

________________________

D.C. Docket No. 1:17-cr-20373-KMW-1

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

 Plaintiff - Appellee,

 versus

CAMILO TROCHEZ, 

 Defendant - Appellant.

________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Florida

________________________

(August 16, 2018)

Before WILLIAM PRYOR, MARTIN and ANDERSON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: 

Case: 17-15771 Date Filed: 08/16/2018 Page: 1 of 2 
2

Michael Mirer, appointed counsel for Camilo Trochez, has moved to 

withdraw from further representation of the appellant and filed a brief pursuant to 

Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S. Ct. 1396 (1967). Our independent 

review of the entire record reveals that counsel’s assessment of the relative merit of 

the appeal is correct. Because independent examination of the entire record reveals 

no arguable issues of merit, counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED, and 

Trochez’s conviction and sentence are AFFIRMED.

Case: 17-15771 Date Filed: 08/16/2018 Page: 2 of 2
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Railroad Retirement Board

# SUMMARY:

The Railroad Retirement Board is making corrections to the July 23, 2009 document appearing on page 36540, FR Doc. E9-17510 titled, Agency Forms Submitted for OMB Review. Specifically, the Request for Comments for Information Collection Review (ICR); Application for Survivor Insurance Annuities (OMB 3220-0030) which was published with errors regarding the annual burden computation for the information collection.

## Correction of Publication

In the table titled “Estimate of Annual Respondent Burden”, the AA-17b total burden hours should be 204 (not 270) and the total annual responses should be 3,722 (not 4,022).

Under the Information Collection Request (ICR) heading, the “Estimated annual number of respondents” should be 3,722 (not 4,022) and the “Total annual responses” should be 3,722 (not 4,022).

Charles Mierzwa,

Clearance Officer. 

[FR Doc. E9-18929 Filed 8-6-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7905-01-P
EXHIBIT 31.2





CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER

PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE

SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



I, Frederick W. Smith, Jr., certify that:



1. I have reviewed this report on Form 10-QSB of Itec Environmental Group, Inc.;



2. Based on my knowledge, this 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 report;



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



4. The registrants other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and we have:



a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, 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 report is being prepared;



b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures and presented in 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 financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal control over financial reporting; and



5. The registrants other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, 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 and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting 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 a significant role in the registrants internal control over financial reporting.



|                         |  |     |  |                                
|------------------------ |  | --- |  | -------------------------------
|Dated: November 15, 2004 |  | By: |  | /s/ Frederick W. Smith, Jr.    
|                         |  |     |  | Frederick W. Smith, Jr.        
|                         |  |     |  | Acting  Chief Financial Officer
§ 25.6695-1 Other assessable penalties with respect to the preparation of tax returns for other persons. ( a ) *In general.* A person who is a tax return preparer of any return or claim for refund of gift tax under chapter 12 of subtitle B of the Internal Revenue Code (Code) shall be subject to penalties for failure to furnish a copy to the taxpayer under section 6695(a) of the Code, failure to sign the return under section 6695(b) of the Code, failure to furnish an identification number under section 6695(c) of the Code, failure to retain a copy or list under section 6695(d) of the Code, failure to file a correct information return under section 6695(e) of the Code, and negotiation of a check under section 6695(f) of the Code, in the manner stated in § 1.6695-1 of this chapter.
( b ) *Effective/applicability date.* This section is applicable to returns and claims for refund filed after December 31, 2008.
[T.D. 9436, 73 FR 78452, Dec. 22, 2008]