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UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-7560

ANTONIO DAVIS,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

DEP. SARA GIRON,

Defendant – Appellee,

and

RICHLAND COUNTY; SHERIFF LEON LOTT; DEP. ADRIAN THOMPSON; 

DEP. ADAM CORNWELL; RICHLAND COUNTY SHERIFF DEPARTMENT,

Defendants.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of 

South Carolina, at Florence. Richard Mark Gergel, District 

Judge. (4:12-cv-03429-RMG)

Submitted: December 15, 2015 Decided: December 18, 2015

Before GREGORY and FLOYD, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior 

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
2

Antonio Davis, Appellant Pro Se. David Allan DeMasters, Joel 

Steve Hughes, DAVIDSON & LINDEMANN, PA, Columbia, South 

Carolina, for Appellee. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
3

PER CURIAM:

Antonio Davis seeks to appeal the district court’s order 

granting summary judgment to Appellee Sara Giron. This court 

may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. 

§ 1291 (2012), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 

28 U.S.C. § 1292 (2012); Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); Cohen v. 

Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541, 545-46 (1949). The 

order Davis seeks to appeal is neither a final order nor an 

appealable interlocutory or collateral order. Accordingly, we 

dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. We dispense with 

oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are 

adequately presented in the materials before this court and 

argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
##### 



EXHIBIT 23.1

KYLE L. TINGLE, CPA



|To Whom It May Concern: | May 22, 2002
|----------------------- | ------------

The firm of Kyle L. Tingle, CPA, LLC consents to the inclusion of his report of
May 22, 2002 accompanying the reviewed financial statements of Discovery
Investments, Inc., as at March 31, 2002, in the Form 10QSB with the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission.

Very truly yours,

/s/ Kyle L. Tingle, CPA

Kyle L. Tingle, CPA, LLC

P.O. Box 50141, Henderson, Nevada 89016, Phone: (702) 434-8452, Fax: (702)
436-4218, e-mail: Ktingle@worldnet.att.net
#### §§ 80.1055-80.1059 [Reserved]
---

Exhibit
32.1





Certification
of Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer


Pursuant
to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002





I,
Agustin Gomez de Segura, President and Chief Executive Officer of Cigma Metals
Corporation (the “Company”), certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:





1.
            The
      Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the period ended June 30,
      2008 which this certification accompanies 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:
      February 17,
      2010
            BY:
            /s/ Agustin Gomez de
  SeguraAgustin
      Gomez de SeguraPresident
      and Chief Executive Officerand
      Chief Financial Officer








This
certification accompanies this Report pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not be deemed filed by the Company for
purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. 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 the Company and will be retained
by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its
staff upon request.
- 1 - 

Alexander Van der Bellen 

Managing Director and 

Associate General Counsel 

Delta Air Lines, Inc. 

1212 New York Avenue NW 

Washington, DC 20005 

202.842.4184 

sascha.vanderbellen@delta.com 

January 19, 2010 

via email and regulations.gov 

Esta Rosenberg 

Chief, U.S. Air Carrier Licensing Division 

Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Ave, SE 

Washington, DC 20590 

Re: Joint Application of Delta Air Lines, Inc., Pinnacle Airlines, Inc., and 

 Société Air France for an Amended Statement of Authorization 

 (U.S.-EU Codesharing) 

 Dockets DOT-OST-2000-6939 and DOT-OST-2004-19214 

 

Dear Ms. Rosenberg: 

This letter is to confirm that Delta has polled all carriers on the service list to the above 

referenced application and there are no objections. In these circumstances, Delta urges that 

the application be granted as soon as possible. 

 

 

Respectfully submitted, 

Alexander Van der Bellen 

cc: Thuy Cooper 

 Mike Orr, Airline Info
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 182 (Wednesday, September 20, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Page 54981]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 06-7746]


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

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Office of the Secretary


Transformation Advisory Group Meeting of the U.S. Joint Forces 
Command

AGENCY: Department of Defense.

ACTION: Notice of Closed Meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The Transformation Advisory Group (TAG) will meet in closed 
session on 12-13 December 2006. The establishment date was already 
published in the Federal Register on 28 May 2003, in accordance with 41 
CFR 102-3.150.
    The mission of the TAG is to provide timely advice on scientific, 
technical, and policy-related issues to the Commander, U.S. Joint 
Forces Command as he develops and executes the DOD transformation 
strategy. Full development of the topics will require discussion of 
information classified in accordance with Executive Order 12958, dated 
17 April 1995, as amended March 2003.
    Access to the information must be strictly limited to personnel 
having the requisite clearances and specific need-to-know, unauthorized 
disclosure of the information to be discussed at the TAG meetings could 
cause serious damage to our national defense. The meeting will be 
closed for security reasons, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552, Exemption(b)1, 
Protection of National Security, and Exemption(b)3 regarding 
information protected under the Homeland Security Act of 2002. In 
accordance with Section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act and 
41 CFR 102-3.155 this meeting will be closed.

DATES: December 12-13, 2006.
    Location: United States Joint Forces Command, 1562 Mitscher Avenue, 
Suite 200, Norfolk, VA 23551-2488.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Robert O. Anderson, Designated 
Federal Officer, (757) 836-6395.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Mr. Floyd March, Joint Staff, (703) 697-
0610.

    Dated: September 13, 2006.
L.M. Bynum,
OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, DoD.
[FR Doc. 06-7746 Filed 9-19-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001-06-M
Case 16-24141 Doc 11 Filed 07/29/16 Entered 08/01/16 08:32:23 Desc Main

 Document Page 1 of 1
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4994 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4994

   To apply the antitrust laws of the United States to major league 
                               baseball.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            August 18, 1994

  Mr. Synar (for himself, Mr. Bunning, Mr. Owens, and Mr. Bilirakis) 
 introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on 
                             the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To apply the antitrust laws of the United States to major league 
                               baseball.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Baseball Fans and Communities 
Protection Act of 1994''.

SEC. 2. PURPOSE.

    It is the purpose of the amendment made by section 3 to encourage 
serious negotiations between the major league baseball players and the 
owners of major league baseball, to prevent the continued economic loss 
to individuals not involved in the negotiations whose livelihood 
depends on baseball being played, to prevent ongoing losses to those 
communities that host major league baseball, and to preserve the 
remainder of the season, the playoffs, and the World Series for the 
fans of baseball.

SEC. 3. APPLICATION OF THE ANTITRUST LAWS TO MAJOR LEAGUE BASEBALL IN 
              EXCEPTIONAL AND EXTRAORDINARY CIRCUMSTANCES.

    The Clayton Act (15 U.S.C. 12 et seq.) is amended by adding at the 
end the following new section:
    ``Sec. 27. (a) In the event that unilateral terms or conditions are 
imposed by any party that has been subject to an agreement between the 
owners of major league baseball and the labor organization representing 
the players of major league baseball, the antitrust laws shall apply to 
such terms and conditions and such terms and conditions may be 
challenged by any party to such agreement in any district court of the 
United States for the district in which one of the parties is doing 
business.
    ``(b) If, prior to the mutual adoption of an agreement between the 
owners of major league baseball and the labor organization representing 
the players of major league baseball that replaces the basic agreement 
between the parties that expired on December 31, 1993, unilateral terms 
and conditions are imposed by any party to the prior agreement, and 
those terms and conditions are challenged in a court action in 
accordance with subsection (a), the application of such unilaterally 
imposed terms and conditions shall be stayed during the pendency of any 
such action or appeal therefrom.
    ``(c) The term `terms and conditions' shall not include either a 
strike or a lockout.''.
                                 <all>
```
EXHIBIT 10

                                [GMAC Letterhead]



                                  May 23. 2005



I/OMagic  Corporation
4  Marconi
Irvine,  CA  92618

RE:     LOAN  AND  SECURITY  AGREEMENT  BETWEEN  GMAC  COMMERCIAL  FINANCE  LLC
("GMAC/CF")  AND  I/OMAGIC  CORPORATION  ("BORROWER")  DATED MARCH 9, 2005, (THE
"LOAN  AGREEMENT").


Dear  Sirs:

     Reference  is  made  to Section 8.13 of the Loan Agreement. Section 8.13 is
amended  to  read  as  follows;

Maintain, as of the end of (a) the months of April and May, 2005, a Fixed Charge
Coverage  Ratio  of at least 1.0 to 1.0, (b) the Measurement Periods ending June
30,  2005 and September 30, 2005. a Fixed Charge Coverage Ratio of at least 1 .2
to  1.0,  and  (c)  all  Measurement Periods thereafter, a Fixed Charge Coverage
Ratio  of  at  least  1.5  to  1.0.

As  a result of the above, there will be no required Fixed Charge Coverage Ratio
for  the  Measurement  Period  ending  March  31,  2005.

     Except  as  amended  hereby, all terms and conditions of the Loan Agreement
remain  in  full  force  and  effect.
Very  truly  yours,

                             GMAC COMMERCIAL FINANCE LLC

                             /s/Mark  A.  Tito
                             By:     Mark  A.  Tito
                             Title;  Vice  President


[ACKNOWLEDGEMENT  CONTINUED  ON  FOLLOWING  PAGE]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
444  South  Flower  Street
Suite  #4500
Los  Angeles,  California  90071
Tel  (213)  284-3600  Fax  (213)  817-6673

<PAGE>

[ACKNOWLEDGEMENT  CONTINUED  FROM  PRIOR  PAGE]

AGREED:

I/OMAGIC  CORPORATION


By:  /s/  Steve  Gillings
Title:  CFO             05/24/05


cc:  Donald  F.  Baty,  Jr.,  Esq.
#### § 96.9 Regulatory status.

Priority Access Licensees and General Authorized Access Users are permitted to provide services on a non-common carrier and/or on a common carrier basis. An authorized Citizens Broadband Radio Service user may render any kind of communications service consistent with the regulatory status in its authorization and with the Commission's rules applicable to that service.
----

Corrigendum to Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 173/2004 of 3 December 2004, amending Annex XX (Environment) to the EEA Agreement

In point 1 of Article 1 of Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 173/2004 the abbreviation ‘IC’ in the table shall be replaced by ‘IS’.

----
Joseph Greene
                                                Director
                                                Compensation Committee Chairman

                                            December 13, 2002


Scott Halperin
10 Andrea Court
Manalapan, New Jersey 07726         PERSONAL, CONFIDENTIAL &  PRIVILEGED

Dear Mr. Halperin:

As per understanding, the purpose of this letter is to document an amendment to
paragraph 5 ("Salary") of your Employment Agreement ("Agreement") dated August
1, 1997. The following changes to the Agreement have been proposed by the
Company's compensation committee:

         1.       Your annual salary effective January 1, 2003 shall be reduced
                  from your current salary of $524,621, which was in accordance
                  with your Employment Agreement, to $250,000. You shall receive
                  an increase of 5% plus the increase in the cost of living, per
                  year through the end of the Agreement.

         2.       Today, and each year on the anniversary date of this letter,
                  you will be given a stock option for no less than an amount of
                  shares equal to your updated annual salary divided by the
                  closing price of the Classica Group, Inc. common stock the
                  previous business day. These options will vest 1/3 one year
                  from the date of granting of the option, and 1/3 each year
                  thereafter on the 1st day of January.

         3.       Additionally, as an inducement to accept the proposed
                  amendment you will be granted an option to purchase 125,000
                  shares of the Company's common stock at yesterdays closing
                  price.

This letter when accepted by you will become a permanent amendment to the
Agreement.

Yours very truly,


Joseph Greene
Director, Compensation Committee Chairman

Agreed to and accepted as of the dated written above.


-------------------------
Scott G. Halperin
§ 95.733 Prohibited RCRS use. The rules in this section restrict certain uses of RCRS transmitters. ( a ) *Simultaneous use of multiple channels.* An RCRS station must not transmit simultaneously on more than one RCRS channel in the 72-76 MHz band when such operation would cause harmful interference to other RCRS operations.
( b ) *Data transmission.* No person shall use a RCRS transmitter to transmit data. Tones or other types of signal encoding are not considered to be data for the purposes of this paragraph, when used only for the purpose of identifying the specific device among multiple devices that the operator intends to turn on/off or the specific sensor among multiple sensors intended to turn on/off an indicating device for the operator.
( c ) *Pay for operation prohibited.* RCRS stations must not be used for commercial purposes. An RCRS operator must not accept direct or indirect payment for operating an RCRS transmitter. An RCRS operator may use an RCRS transmitter to help him or her provide a service and be paid for rendering that service, provided that the payment is only for the service and not for operation of the RCRS transmitter.
( d ) *Limited transmission.* No person shall use an RCRS station to transmit any message other than for the operation of devices at remote locations. Accordingly, the transmission of other messages by an RCRS operator, such as voice, telegraphy, etc. is prohibited.
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit","provider_url":"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov","author_name":"25005pwpadmin","author_url":"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov\/author\/25005pwpadmin\/","title":"Notice of Fee Schedule Change - U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"UXFXsWVQaB\"><a href=\"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov\/notice-of-fee-schedule-change\/\">Notice of Fee Schedule Change<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov\/notice-of-fee-schedule-change\/embed\/#?secret=UXFXsWVQaB\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“Notice of Fee Schedule Change” — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit\" data-secret=\"UXFXsWVQaB\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n<\/script>\n","description":"Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. \u00a7 1914(b), the Judicial Conference of the United States has approved a new fee of $47.00 for the issuance of an apostille beginning October 1, 2019.\u00a0 An updated and expanded fee schedule will be available on our website as of that date."}
#### § 95.573 FRS authorized bandwidth.

Each FRS transmitter type must be designed such that the occupied bandwidth does not exceed 12.5 kHz.
No. 11-6056.

#### Wheeler *v.*United States.

C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.
§ 13.25 Transfer of permits and scope of permit authorization. ( a ) Except as otherwise provided for in this section, permits issued under this part are not transferable or assignable.
( b ) Permits issued under the regulations in this subchapter in § 17.22(b) and (c), § 17.32(b) and (c), or 50 CFR part 22 may be transferred to a successor subject to our determination that the proposed transferee: ( 1 ) Meets all of the qualifications under this part for holding a permit;
( 2 ) Has provided adequate written assurances of sufficient funding for the conservation measures, conservation plan, or conservation benefit agreement, and will implement the relevant terms and conditions of the permit, including any outstanding minimization and mitigation requirements; and
( 3 ) Has provided other information that we determine is relevant to the processing of the submission.
( c ) In the case of the transfer of property subject to an agreement and permit issued under § 17.22(c) or § 17.32(c) of this subchapter, the Service will transfer the permit to the new owner if the new owner agrees in writing to become a party to the original agreement and permit.
( d ) Except as otherwise stated on the face of the permit, any person who is under the direct control of the permittee, or who is employed by or under contract to the permittee for purposes authorized by the permit, may carry out the activity authorized by the permit.
( e ) In the case of permits issued under § 17.22(b) and (c) or § 17.32(b) and (c) of this subchapter to a State, Tribal, or local government entity, a person is under the direct control of the permittee where: ( 1 ) The person is under the jurisdiction of the permittee and the permit provides that such person(s) may carry out the authorized activity; or
( 2 ) The person has been issued a permit by the governmental entity or has executed a written instrument with the governmental entity, pursuant to the terms of the implementing agreement.
( f ) In the case of permits issued under part 22, subpart E, of this subchapter to a Federal, State, tribal, or local governmental entity, a person is under the direct control of the permittee if the person is under the jurisdiction of the permittee, provided the permittee has the regulatory authority to require the person to comply with the terms and conditions of the permit and the permit provides that such person(s) may carry out the authorized activity.
[64 FR 32711, June 17, 1999, as amended at 64 FR 52676, Sept. 30, 1999; 69 FR 24092, May 3, 2004; 78 FR 73725, Dec. 9, 2013; 87 FR 880, Jan. 7, 2022; 89 FR 9957, Feb. 12, 2024; 89 FR 26093, Apr. 12, 2024]