alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 10-1129

MISSIE M. SAFFORD,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

PORTERS NECK COUNTRY CLUB, INCORPORATED; RAY ARMINI; DENNIS 

MANDRAGONA,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Dever III, 

District Judge. (7:08-cv-00220-D)

Submitted: June 1, 2010 Decided: June 7, 2010

Before GREGORY, SHEDD, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Missie M. Safford, Appellant Pro Se. Stephen C. McIntyre, 

William Augustus Oden, III, WARD & SMITH, PA, Wilmington, North 

Carolina, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Missie M. Safford appeals the district court’s order

granting her former employer’s motion to dismiss her employment 

discrimination complaint as time-barred. We have reviewed the 

record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for 

the reasons stated by the district court. Safford v. Porters

Neck Country Club, Inc., No. 7:08-cv-00220-D (E.D.N.C. Jan. 21, 

2010). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and 

legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials 

before the court and argument would not aid the decisional 

process.

AFFIRMED
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4729 Introduced in House (IH)]

106th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4729

  To authorize the Board of Regents of the Smithsonian Institution to 
  plan, design, construct, and equip laboratory, administrative, and 
      support space to house base operations for the Smithsonian 
 Astrophysical Observatory Submillimeter Array located on Mauna Kea at 
                             Hilo, Hawaii.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             June 23, 2000

   Mr. Matsui (for himself, Mr. Hoyer, Mrs. Mink of Hawaii, and Mr. 
 Abercrombie) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
Committee on House Administration, and in addition to the Committee on 
   Transportation and Infrastucture, for a period to be subsequently 
   determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such 
 provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committed concerned

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To authorize the Board of Regents of the Smithsonian Institution to 
  plan, design, construct, and equip laboratory, administrative, and 
      support space to house base operations for the Smithsonian 
 Astrophysical Observatory Submillimeter Array located on Mauna Kea at 
                             Hilo, Hawaii.

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

SECTION 1. FACILITY AUTHORIZED.

    The Board of Regents of the Smithsonian Institution is authorized 
to plan, design, construct, and equip laboratory, administrative, and 
support space to house base operations for the Smithsonian 
Astrophysical Observatory Submillimeter Array located on Mauna Kea at 
Hilo, Hawaii.

SEC. 2. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

    (a) In General.--There are authorized to be appropriated to the 
Board of Regents of the Smithsonian Institution to carry out this Act 
$2,000,000 for fiscal year 2001 and $2,500,000 for fiscal year 2002.
    (b) Availability of Funds.--Any funds authorized to be appropriated 
to carry out this Act shall remain available until expended.
                                 <all>
```
# In the United States Court of Federal Claims

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

No. 19

- 1101 V

UNPUBLISHED

BRENDA MCBRIDE

,

Petitioner,

v.

SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND

HUMAN SERVICES,

Respondent. Chief Special Master Corcoran

Filed: November 18, 2020

Special Processing Unit (SPU) ;

Rul ing on Entitlement; Concession;

Table Injury; Influenza (Flu) Vaccine ; Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine

Administration (SIRVA)

Lawrence R. Cohan, Anapol Weiss, Philadelphia, PA , for petitioner.

Lara Ann Englund

, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.

RULING ON ENTITLEMENT 1

On July 30, 2019

, Brenda McBride filed a petition for compensation under the

National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, 42 U.S.C. §300aa

- 10, et seq

. 2 (the

“Vaccine Act”). Petitioner alleges that she suffered a full thickness rotator cuff tear that

was cause d

- in

- f act by an influenza ( “ flu ” ) vaccine that was administered to her on

November 10, 2017 . Petit ion at 1 . The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit

of the Office of Special Masters.

On November 17, 2020

, R espondent filed his Rule 4(c) report in which he

concedes that P etitioner is entitled to compensa tion in this case. Respondent’s Rule 4(c)

Report at 1. Specifically, R espondent “ concl uded that [P] etitioner suffered a Table SIRVA

1 Because this unpublished ruling contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, I am required

to post it on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website in accordance with the E

- Government Act

of 2002. 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2012) (Federal Management and Promotion of Electronic Government

Services). This means the ruling will be available to anyone with access to the internet. In accordance

with Vaccine Rule 18(b), Petitioner has 14 days to identify and move to redact medical or other information,

the disclosure of which would constitute an unwarranted invasion of privacy. If, upon review, I agree that

the identified material fits within this definition, I will redact such material from public access.

2 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, Pub. L. No. 99

- 660, 100 Stat. 3755

. Hereinafter, for ease

of citation, all “§” references to the Vaccine Act will be to the pertinent subpara graph of 42 U.S.C. § 300aa

(2012 ).2

as de fined by 42 C.F.R. § 100.3 (c) (10)

. ” Id. at 4 . Respondent further agrees that the

statutory six

- month sequela requiremen t has been satisfied

. Id.

In view of R espondent’s position and the evidence of record, I find that

P etitioner is entitle d to compensation.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/ Brian H. Corcoran

Brian H. Corcoran

Chief Special Master
#### § 146.401 Applicability.

This subpart applies to all U.S. and foreign vessels, except those U.S. vessels traveling directly from a U.S. port or place, or from an OCS block area, bound for a place on the OCS and planning to engage in OCS activities. Vessels under this subpart include, but are not limited to, standby vessels, attending vessels, offshore supply vessels, pipelay vessels, derrick ships, diving support vessels, oceanographic research vessels, towing vessels, and accommodation vessels. This subpart does not apply to MODUs, which are covered under § 146.215; nor does it apply to floating facilities, which are covered under §§ 146.103 and 146.104.

[USCG-2008-1088, 76 FR 2262, Jan. 13, 2011, as amended by USCG-2013-0797, 79 FR 36405, June 27, 2014]
C OURT OF A PPEALS FOR THE

F IRST D ISTRICT OF T EXAS AT H OUSTON

O RDER

Case number: 01

- 1 1

- 01119

- CV

Style: Azel Garrison Goolsbee v . H.E.B. Food Stores, Inc.,

Oscar Moreno, Juanita L. Sandoval, R. Irvin, a nd

Unidentified H.E.B. Food Stores Inc. Employees , No.

2010

- 61454 in the 215th Judicial District Court of Harris

County, Texas, the Honorable Steve Kirkland presiding.

In her brief, pro se appellant Azel Garrison Goolsbee requested that pro bono counsel be appointed to assist her if her brief was found inadequate. We

construe appellant’s request as a motion to appoint pro bono counsel

.

A general information packet was sent to appellant inform ing her that

Section X of the docketing statement must be completed if she believe d that her

matter qua lified for the Pro Bono Project. Appellant never filed a docketing

statement in this case. Further, t his Court does not “appoint” the p ro bono

counsel who take cases through the Pro Bono Project.

Appellant’s motion is denied.

It is so ORDERED.

Judge ’ s signature: /s/ Jim Sharp

Acting individually

Date: August 21, 2013
### TEXA S C OU R T OF A PPEAL S, THIR D DIST R ICT , AT AU STIN

NO. 03-0 9 -00 040 -CR

P aul a J e an To dd , A ppe lla nt

v . The State of Texas, App ellee

F ROM THE DISTRICT CO URT OF B ELL COUNTY , 264TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT NO. 5869 3 , HO NORAB LE MARTH A J. TRUDO , JUDGE PRESIDI NG

M E M O R

A N D U M O P I N I O N
I n Dec ember

2005, appellant Paula J ea n Todd pleade d g uilty to forg ery

and wa s
se nte nc e d to tw o y e ars in s tate ja il, but se nte nc e wa s n ot i mpo se d a nd sh e wa s p la c e d o n c omm

un ity supervision for f

ive y ear s. SeeTex. P enal Code A nn. § 32.21 (West Supp. 2008). I n Dec ember 2008, afte r appe llant pleade d true to the allegations in the S tate’s moti on to revoke , the trial cour t revoke d supervision and imposed a f ifteen- month state jail sentence
. Ap p e l l an t ’ s c o u rt - a

p p o i n t e d a t t o r

n e y h a s f i l e d a m o t i o nt o w i th dr aw s u

p p o rt e d b y a brief c oncluding that the appe al is frivolous and without merit. The br ief mee ts the require ments of An der s v. Ca liforn ia , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), by prese nting a

profe ssional evaluation of the rec ord demonstratingwhy

there are no arguable g rou n d s t o b e advance d. Se e als o Pe ns on v . O hio , 48 8 U .S. 75 (1 98 8) ; H

i g h v . S tate , 57 3 S .W.2d

80 7 ( Te x. Cr im. Ap p. 19 78 ); Cur riev . S tate , 51 6 S.W. 2d

68 4 ( Te x. Cr im. Ap p. 19 74 ); J ac k so n v . S tate , 485 S.W .2d 553 (Tex. Crim. App. 1972);2

Ga ino us v . S

tate , 436 S.W .2d 137 (Tex. Crim. App. 1969). Appellant re ceive d a copy of counse l’s brief and was advised of her rig ht to examine the appellate rec ord and to file a pro se br ief. No pr o se brief has bee n filed. We h a v e re viewed the rec ord and c ounsel’s brief and agree that the appe al is frivolous and without merit. We find nothing in the rec ord that might ar g uably support the appe al. Counsel’s motion to wit hdrawis gr anted.

The orde r re voking c ommunity supervision is affir

med.

_______ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ J an P. Patterson, J ustice Be fore J ustices Patterson, Pury ear and Pember

ton Affir med Filed: August 26, 2009 Do No t Pu

bli sh
Exhibit 31.1
 CERTIFICATION
  1.
    
    I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the period
ended July 4, 2009 of K-Tron International, 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)) and internal
control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules
13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the registrant and have:
     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 the
registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
function):




---



##### 



EDWARD B. CLOUES, IIEdward B. Cloues, IIChairman and Chief Executive Officer
### EAARL coastal topography– Northeast barrier islands 2007: Bare earth

By: Amar NayegandhiJohn Brock**A. H. SallengerC. Wayne WrightXan YatesJamie M. Bonisteel

                            https://doi.org/10.3133/ds398

#### Links

- More information:  **USGS Index Page**                            (html)
- NGMDB Index Page:  **National Geologic Map Database Index Page**
- Download citation as:  RIS                         |                         Dublin                            Core

#### Abstract

#### Study Area
```

                     EXHIBIT 27 - Epixtar Corp. Subsidiaries

Domestic Subsidiaries

NAME                                         STATE of INCORPORATION            DATE of INCORPORATION
Ameripages, Inc.                               DE                                       07/24/03
B2B Advantage Inc.                             DE                                       07/24/03
Epixtar Account Services Inc.                  DE                                       07/24/03
Epixtar BPO Service Corp.                      DE                                       07/24/03
Epixtar Communications Corp.                   FL                                       06/25/02
Epixtar Management Corp.                       DE                                       07/24/03
Epixtar Marketing Services Corp.               DE                                       07/24/04
Epixtar Prepaid Communications Corp.           DE                                       07/24/03
Epixtar Solutions Corp.                        DE                                       07/24/03
Liberty Online Services Inc.                   DE                                       07/24/03
National Online Services Inc.                  DE                                       07/24/03
NOL Group Inc.                                 DE                                       07/24/03
One World Public Communications Corp.          DE                                       09/03/03

Foreign Subsidiaries

NAME                                         COUNTRY of INCORPORATION          DATE of INCORPORATION
Epixtar International Contact Centers Ltd. (Mauritius)      Mauritius                   08/08/03
Epixtar Philippines IT Enabled Services Corporation         Philippines                 07/24/03
Epixtar Information Technology Pvt. Ltd. (Kolkata)          India                       11/05/03
```
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

, Chief Justice

Stephen J. Markman

Mary Be th Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano

Richard H. Bernstein,

Justices

I, Larry S. Royster , Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

May 28, 2015

s0518 

# Order

Clerk May 28, 2015

149961

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff

- Appellee,

v SC: 149961

COA: 312897

Ionia CC: 2011

- 015171

- FC

ROBERT EUGENE PLASTER,

Defendant

- Appellant.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the July 10, 2014

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
### NUMBER 13 - 14 - 003 07 - CR 

## COURT OF APPEALS THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

ANA DEISI MARTINEZ B ANOS , A ppellant ,

v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, A ppellee

.

On a ppeal from the 92nd District Court of Hidalgo County, Texas.



## ORDER OF ABATEMENT
Before Chief Justice Valdez and Justices Rodriguez and Garza Order Per Curiam Appellant ’ s brief was originally due on September 29, 2014 . Counsel filed a motion for extension of time until December 22, 2014 , which was granted by the Court. On January 15, 2015 , the Clerk of the Court notified appellant ’ s counsel that the brief had not been filed and requested that a response concerning the failure to file the brief be filed within ten days. Counsel has nevertheless failed to file either a response or an appellate brief in this matter.2

Accordingly, we now ABATE this appeal and REMAND the cause to the trial court for further proceedings pursuant to Rule 38.8(b)(2) and (3 ) of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. Upon remand, the trial court shall utilize whatever means necessary to make appropriate findings and recommendations concerning the following: (1) whether appellant desires to prosecute this appeal; (2) why app ellant's counsel has failed to file a brief and whether counsel has effectively abandoned the appeal; (3) whether appellant has been denied effective assistance of counsel; (4) whether appellant's counsel should be removed; and (5) whether appellant is ind igent and entitled to court

- appointed counsel. If the trial court determines that appellant does want to continue the appeal, that present counsel should be removed, and that appellant is indigent and entitled to

court

- appointed counsel, the trial court sh all appoint new counsel to represent appellant in this appeal. If new counsel is appointed, the name, address, telephone number, and state bar number of said counsel shall be included in an order appointing counsel. The trial court shall cause its finding s and recommendations, together with any orders it may enter regarding the aforementioned issues, to be included in a supplemental clerk's record. Furthermore, the trial court shall cause a supplemental reporter's record of any proceedings to be prepared. The supplemental clerk's record and supplemental reporter's record, if any, shall be filed with the Clerk of this Court on or before the expiration of thirty days from the date of this order.3

It is so ORDERED. PER CURIAM

Do not publish

. Tex. R . App. P. 47.2(b)

. Delivered and filed the 17th day of February , 201 5

.
R4E R5E R6E R7E

T T
1
i Troutdale’ lL N
V4 Larch
Mountain
T aan T
1 Bull Run 1
Legend Ss Reservoir S
MULTNOMAH COUNTY | OY
10 . . ag: : .
) Recreation Site and Identifier 4 Special Recreation Management Damascus
See Table 18 Area and Identifier
_.8.. Recreation Trail and Identifier See Table 17 7
See Table 19 Environmental Education Site
— 2... Back Country Byway and — See Table 22 +
Identifier © KC Recreation Site Leased under , Sandy 2
See Table 20 R&PP Authority or S
“a: . Congressional Withdrawal ay
19 Area of Critical Environmental See Table 23
Concern and Identifier
See Table 13 BLM Administered Land ROE ASE
Oregon/ City
+
T CA Estacada 3
3 Ss
Ss
S
Clackamas
+
T 4
4 Ss
Ss
Mop
R3W R2W R1W R1E 6
ain 5
219)
“ i / j
va —— af Molalla
T YAMHILL t
5
8 COUNTY } Ss
TILLAMOOK
RESOURCE AREA
g Gervais
219
@9E) rab 20
T T
6 6
Ss Ss
a Lo
TM
H ra
Silverton ( & f
y F Rock
Ne we, Aquilae 14 ;
X vista 4 YF oy = 2
\ MOL dovcaho |
N 4. a 8 j
T q TM aaa 5 “ a R5E R6E R7E
Ss q qu B \ Ss I
\ - s
ee
v \
Salem \ a | 4
Pe °
See, sae
a | “17 District
“|, _____ 2tackamas county | _
MARION COUNTY
+
4 SN 214 Silver | Falls 8
s b, 8
Oy Ye,
& “
Turner Aumsville State |Park A> BS
9 Sublimity O R E G O N
Ky
S ART Elon,
— veep
Stayton 3 —
a . = —-f — N
+ SAR >< Little $
: antian, < North Fork s " .
S s
Gates 1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
NNR ———— —l — —! —! ]
m ° Miles
Sey wa Mill City 10 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
S a |
2 ? Kilometers
Jefferson -
= 2) Scio 226) Albers Equal Area Projection
rad North American Datum of 1983
S| Millersburg J JS
“eg see oe oe ae, es ange
Z SZ SS
& a Wy,
3 Ke 7
“ancn ree
+
1
Ss
Salem District
Resource Management Plan
Cascades Resource Area
Sodaville . . . . .
Recreation Sites and Trails, Special Recreation
Gheen Perer Lake Management Areas, Back Country Byways,
13 ae i Environmental Education Sites and
Ss va s ae :
Ww ° Areas of Critical Environmental Concern
Foster Lake
D A
R3W R2W R1W R1E R2E R3E R4E M08-09-01
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

IN RE: PROMULGATION OF 

CONSUMER PRICE INDEX PURSUANT 

TO 42 Pa.C.S. §§ 1725.1(f) and 

3571(c)(4)

:

:

:

:

No. 540

Judicial Administration Docket

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 7

th day of October, 2020, IT IS ORDERED pursuant to Article V, 

Section 10(c) of the Constitution of Pennsylvania and Section 3502(a) of the Judicial 

Code, 42 Pa.C.S. § 3502(a), that the Court Administrator of Pennsylvania is authorized 

to obtain and publish in the Pennsylvania Bulletin the percentage increase in the 

Consumer Price Index for calendar year 2019 as required by Act 96 of 2010, 42 Pa.C.S. 

§§ 1725.1(f) and 3571(c)(4) (as amended).
_______________________________________ __ 

### Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan



## October 27, 2008 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice



## 136466 Michael F. Cavanag h Elizabeth A. Weave r Marilyn Kell y Maura D. Corriga n 

## PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee, Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markman, J ustices



## v SC: 136466 COA: 283311 Oakland CC: 2004-198351-FC LAWRENCE ROY DUCKETT, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appe al the April 25, 2008 order of the Court of Appeals is considered, a nd it is DENIED, because the defendant has failed to meet the burden of establishi ng entitlement to relief under MCR 6.508(D).

s1020 I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

October 27, 2008

Clerk