alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### PEABODY WESTERN COAL COMPANY, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. DISTRICT 22, UNITED MINE WORKERS OF AMERICA; Local Union 1620, United Mine Workers of America, Defendants—Appellees.

No. 03-15569.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Argued and Submitted May 12, 2004.

Decided May 18, 2004.

*117Margaret Lopez, Esq., Ogletree Deakins Nash Smoak & Stewart, Washington, DC, Pavneet Singh Uppal, Esq., Joseph T. Clees, Bryan Cave LLP, Phoenix, AZ, for Plaintiff-Appellant.

Jonathan Wilderman, Esq., Wilderman & Linnet, PC, Denver, CO, Michael J. Keenan, Esq., Ward Keenan & Barrett, PC, Phoenix, AZ, for Defendants-Appellees.

Before: B. FLETCHER, TROTT and FISHER, Circuit Judges.

MEMORANDUM *

Peabody Western Coal Company (“Peabody”) appeals the district court’s judgment granting in part and denying in part the motion for summary judgment filed by United Mine Workers of America, District 22 and Local Union 1620, and ordering Peabody to enforce the terms of the arbitrator’s April 2000 award and May 2001 clarification letter. Reviewing the district court’s confirmation of the arbitration award “like any other district court decision ... accepting findings of fact that are not clearly erroneous but deciding questions of law de novo,” *Coutee v. Barington Capital Group, L.P.,*336 F.3d 1128, 1132 (9th Cir.2003), we affirm.

An arbitrator’s interpretation of the scope of the issues submitted is entitled to deference, as is the arbitrator’s resolution of the issues he deems submitted. *Sheet Metal Workers’ Int’l Ass’n Local Union No. 359 v. Madison Indus., Inc. of Arizona,*84 F.3d 1186, 1190 (9th Cir.1996); *Pack Concrete, Inc. v. Cunningham,*866 F.2d 283, 285 (9th Cir.1989). Thus, “courts are not at liberty to substitute their own interpretation of the parties’ submission for that of the arbitrator.” *Ass’n of W. Pulp & Paper Workers, Local 78 v. Rexam Graphic, Inc.,*221 F.3d 1085, 1089 (9th Cir.2000). Further, although the common law doctrine of *functus officio*prohibits an arbitrator from redetermining an arbitration award, see *McClatchy Newspapers v. Cent. Valley Typographical Union No. 46,*686 F.2d 731, 734 (9th Cir. 1982), “an arbitrator *can*correct a mistake which is apparent on the face of his award, complete an arbitration if the award is not complete, and clarify an ambiguity in the award.” *Id.*at 734 n. 1 (emphasis added).

For the reasons expressed by the district court, we conclude that the arbitrator did not exceed his authority in concluding that the issues submitted to him included the issue of starting time for dragline crews. We also agree with the district court that the arbitrator was not *functus officio*when he addressed this issue in his May 2001 letter because that letter merely *118clarified the arbitrator’s ambiguous April 2000 ruling.

AFFIRMED.

*

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
Your session is about to expire.Resume session

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                Welcome.Log inorregisterCOPS OFFICE RESOURCE CENTER

HomeCatalogCartOrders

                    

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                CatalogMatches: 1Offline form Recent Popular Online Print OtherCOPS-P454Evidence-Based Crime Reduction Strategies for Small, Rural, and Tribal AgenciesThis guide presents information on evidence-based policing practices in small, rural, and tribal agencies, which often have different problems and different needs from the large, urban agencies where most law enforcement research is conducted - as well as different strengths. It includes case studies and additional information gleaned from the literature and from conversations with law enforcement leaders.By International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP)Categories: Data and AnalysisLanguage: EnglishPublic linkhttps://portal.cops.usdoj.gov/resourcecenter?item=cops-p454Click here to see the entire catalog.Cart:Download PDFBook • Aug 2021Search catalogreset title abstract authors contentContaining text: exact phraseNot containing text: exact phraseLanguage:anyEnglishSpanishHmongVietnameseCategory:anyAlternatives to IncarcerationCommunity PartnershipsData and AnalysisEthics and IntegrityFoundations of Community PolicingHiring, Recruitment, and RetentionHomeland SecurityNew Immigrant CommunitiesNonviolent CrimeOtherPolice OperationsPOP Center ResourceSchool and Campus SafetyTechnologyTribalViolent CrimeYouth SafetyPublished after:Published before:Page1

                    

FOIA | No FEAR Act | Open Government | Privacy | Legal|HelpCopyright (C) U.S. Department of Justice, COPS Office, IT Division, 2012 - 2024. All rights reserved.
Rendered on Mon Mar 4 2024 at 04:40 (UTC-5) in 0.89 secEnterprise Framework 3.21.7.7 • Store Controls 3.3.1.7Survey 500303407 Section 60000560 Rules Hints Inactive
Case 16-81732 Doc 3 Filed 07/20/16 Entered 07/20/16 14:27:00 Desc Main

 Document Page 1 of 2
Case 16-81732 Doc 3 Filed 07/20/16 Entered 07/20/16 14:27:00 Desc Main

 Document Page 2 of 2
<TABLE> <S> <C>



<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                    3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                               0
<SECURITIES>                                   975,000
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 983,175
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          182,000
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                         78
<COMMON>                                         2,218
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   983,175
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   54,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (54,000)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (46,325)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (46,325)
<EPS-BASIC>                                    (.021)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.015)



</TABLE>
#### § 1.5 Officer in Charge.

*Officer in Charge* means any person in charge of a national fish hatchery, national wildlife refuge, research center, or other U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service installation, or the authorized representative of such official.

[48 FR 44833, Sept. 30, 1983]
Exhibit 32Charles L. Smith and David A. Anderson, being the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, respectively, of ThermoView Industries, Inc., hereby certify as of this 22nd day of August, 2005, that the Form 10-Q for the Quarter ended June 30, 2005, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of ThermoView Industries, Inc.By:/s/ Charles L. SmithCharles L. Smith,Chief Executive OfficerBy:/s/ David A. AndersonDavid A. Anderson,Chief Financial Officer
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5069 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5069

To direct the Attorney General of the United States to enforce existing 
                         anti-pornography laws.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           September 21, 1994

 Mr. Hunter (for himself and Ms. Dunn) introduced the following bill; 
          which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To direct the Attorney General of the United States to enforce existing 
                         anti-pornography laws.

    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 ``Anti-Pornography Strikeforce Act''.

SEC. 2. DIRECTION TO ATTORNEY GENERAL.

    The Attorney General shall--
            (1) direct the Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section of 
        the Criminal Division of the Department of Justice to prosecute 
        all violations of sections 1462, 1463, 1464, 1465, 1467, 2251, 
        2252, and 2253 of title 18, United States Code, and section 223 
        of the Communications Act of 1934, to the fullest extent 
        possible, focusing on the proliferation of child pornography 
        and the electronic transmission of obscene materials;
            (2) expand the number of prosecutors in the Child 
        Exploitation and Obscenity Section to 15 full-time positions, 
        and include necessary support personnel; and
            (3) allocate the necessary resources and manpower within 
        the Federal Bureau of Investigation to assist in the 
        investigation of violations described in paragraph (1).
                                 <all>
```
NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.

United States Court of Appeals 

for the Federal Circuit ______________________ 

ZEST IP HOLDINGS, LLC, ZEST ANCHORS, LLC,

Plaintiffs-Appellees

v.

IMPLANT DIRECT MFG. LLC, DBA IMPLANT 

DIRECT, LLC, IMPLANT DIRECT INT'L,

Defendants-Appellants

IMPLANT DIRECT SYBRON INTERNATIONAL, 

IMPLANT DIRECT SYBRON MANUFACTURING 

LLC,

Defendants-Appellees

______________________ 

2015-1927

______________________ 

Appeal from the United States District Court for the 

Southern District of California in No. 3:10-cv-00541-GPCWVG, Judge Gonzalo P. Curiel.

______________________ 

JUDGMENT

______________________ 

LISA M. FERRI, Mayer Brown, LLP, New York, NY, argued for plaintiffs-appellees. Also represented by MANUEL 

JOSE VELEZ; PAUL WHITFIELD HUGHES, Washington, DC. 
 

MICHAEL HUREY, Kleinberg & Lerner, LLP, Los Angeles, CA, argued for defendants-appellants. 

 CHRISTOPHER MEAD, London & Mead, Washington, 

DC, argued for defendants-appellees. 

______________________ 

THIS CAUSE having been heard and considered, it is

ORDERED and ADJUDGED: 

 PER CURIAM (NEWMAN, SCHALL, and TARANTO, Circuit 

Judges).

AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.

 ENTERED BY ORDER OF THE COURT

 July 11, 2016 /s/ Peter R. Marksteiner 

 Date Peter R. Marksteiner

 Clerk of Court
<PAGE>   1


                                                                   Exhibit 10.48


                                   AGREEMENT

         THIS AGREEMENT ("Agreement") is made and entered into as of June 28,
1996, by and between Allen J. Sheerin ("Sheerin") and Reddi Brake Supply
Corporation, a Nevada corporation ("Reddi Brake"), with reference to the
following facts:

         A.      Sheerin has executed an Amended and Restated Promissory Note
(the "Note"), dated April 7, 1994, in favor of Reddi Brake, the outstanding
balance of which, as of May 1, 1996, is Four Hundred Fifty-Nine Thousand Six
Hundred Nine Dollars and Ninety-Six Cents ($459,609.96).

         B.      Sheerin currently owes Reddi Brake an additional sum of Fifty
Thousand Dollars ($50,000) (the "Good Faith Deposit") pursuant to that certain
Stock Purchase Agreement, dated June 28, 1996, between Sheerin and Reddi Brake.

         C.      As of April 30, 1996, pursuant to that certain Settlement
Agreement, dated April 7, 1994, by and between Reddi Brake and Sheerin (the
"Settlement Agreement"), Reddi Brake owed Sheerin Two Hundred Seventy-Seven
Thousand Eight Hundred Eleven Dollars and Seventy-Two Cents ($277,811.72) (the
"Indebtedness").

         D.      The parties agree that Reddi Brake shall reduce the balance of
the Note by an amount equal to the difference between the Indebtedness and the
Good Faith Deposit in consideration of Sheerin's cancellation of the
Indebtedness, on the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement.

         NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the mutual promises and
agreements contained herein, the parties agree as follows:

         1.      Reddi Brake hereby agrees to (a) reduce, effective
immediately, the outstanding balance of principal and accrued but unpaid
interest on the Note by the net amount of Two Hundred Twenty-Seven Thousand
Eight Hundred Eleven Dollars and Seventy-Two Cents ($227,811.72) to Two Hundred
Thirty-One Thousand Seven Hundred Ninety-Eight Dollars and Twenty Four Cents
($231,798.24) pursuant to an Addendum to Amended and Restated Promissory Note
of even date herewith and (b) cancel Sheerin's obligations to return to Reddi
Brake the Good Faith Deposit.

         2.      In consideration of the foregoing reduction in the balance of
the Note, Sheerin hereby agrees to cancel, effective immediately, the full
amount of the Indebtedness and any other obligations remaining under the
Settlement Agreement.


/////
<PAGE>   2
         3.      This Agreement may be executed by facsimile in one or more
counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, but all of which
together shall constitute one and the same instrument.

         IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have duly executed this Agreement as
of the date first above written.


                                  Reddi Brake Supply Corporation, a Nevada
-------------------------------   corporation
Allen J. Sheerin

                                  By:
                                     -----------------------------------------
                                     S. Gerald Birin, Executive Vice President
Case 16-27657 Doc 11 Filed 09/01/16 Entered 09/01/16 14:18:52 Desc Main

 Document Page 1 of 1
Case 16-28013 Doc 1 Filed 08/31/16 Entered 08/31/16 15:03:12 Desc MainDocument Page 1 of 7Case 16-28013 Doc 1 Filed 08/31/16 Entered 08/31/16 15:03:12 Desc MainDocument Page 2 of 7Case 16-28013 Doc 1 Filed 08/31/16 Entered 08/31/16 15:03:12 Desc MainDocument Page 3 of 7Case 16-28013 Doc 1 Filed 08/31/16 Entered 08/31/16 15:03:12 Desc MainDocument Page 4 of 7Case 16-28013 Doc 1 Filed 08/31/16 Entered 08/31/16 15:03:12 Desc MainDocument Page 5 of 7Case 16-28013 Doc 1 Filed 08/31/16 Entered 08/31/16 15:03:12 Desc MainDocument Page 6 of 7Case 16-28013 Doc 1 Filed 08/31/16 Entered 08/31/16 15:03:12 Desc MainDocument Page 7 of 7
#### CITICORP MORTGAGE, INC. *v.*TODD R. BAINER ET AL.

(AC 19618)

Landau, Spear and Hennessy, Js.

Argued March 2

officially released April 18, 2000

Per Curiam.

The judgment is affirmed.
# EUR-Lex - 11992M/PRO/SEBC/42 - EN

Avis juridique important

*|*

# 11992M/PRO/SEBC/42

**Treaty on European Union - Protocol on the statute of the european system of central banks and of the European Central Bank - Chapter VIII: Amendment of the statute and complementary legislation - Article 42: Complementary legislation **

*
Official Journal C 191 , 29/07/1992 P. 0077 *

Article 42

Complementary legislation

In accordance with Article 106(6) of this Treaty, immediately after the decision on the date for the beginning of the third stage, the Council, acting by a qualified majority either on a proposal from the Commission and after consulting the European Parliament and the ECB or on a recommendation from the ECB and after consulting the European Parliament and the Commission, shall adopt the provisions referred to in Articles 4, 5.4, 19.2, 20, 28.1, 29.2, 30.4 and 34.3 of this Statute.

CHAPTER IX

TRANSITIONAL AND OTHER PROVISIONS

FOR THE ESCB
Case 16-28008 Doc 1 Filed 08/31/16 Entered 08/31/16 14:38:53 Desc Main

 Document Page 1 of 9
Case 16-28008 Doc 1 Filed 08/31/16 Entered 08/31/16 14:38:53 Desc Main

 Document Page 2 of 9
Case 16-28008 Doc 1 Filed 08/31/16 Entered 08/31/16 14:38:53 Desc Main

 Document Page 3 of 9
Case 16-28008 Doc 1 Filed 08/31/16 Entered 08/31/16 14:38:53 Desc Main

 Document Page 4 of 9
Case 16-28008 Doc 1 Filed 08/31/16 Entered 08/31/16 14:38:53 Desc Main

 Document Page 5 of 9
Case 16-28008 Doc 1 Filed 08/31/16 Entered 08/31/16 14:38:53 Desc Main

 Document Page 6 of 9
Case 16-28008 Doc 1 Filed 08/31/16 Entered 08/31/16 14:38:53 Desc Main

 Document Page 7 of 9
Case 16-28008 Doc 1 Filed 08/31/16 Entered 08/31/16 14:38:53 Desc Main

 Document Page 8 of 9
Case 16-28008 Doc 1 Filed 08/31/16 Entered 08/31/16 14:38:53 Desc Main

 Document Page 9 of 9
#### § 29.140 May I cross Federal property to reach the boundary of my oil and gas right?

The Service may grant you the privilege of access on, across, or through Service-administered lands or waters to reach the boundary of your oil and gas right. You should contact the Service to determine if additional permits are necessary for access.
EXHIBIT 10.13


FIRST AMENDMENT


TO THE


2001
STOCK OPTION PLAN


 


INTRODUCTION


WHEREAS, at the
May 3, 2006 Annual Shareholders Meeting, Winmark Corporation’s shareholders
approved an Amendment to the 2001 Stock Option Plan increasing the total number
of shares available for options under the plan from 500,000 to 750,000.


AMENDMENT


1.             Section 6 of the 2001 Stock Option is amended and
restated in its entirety as follows:


“The Stock to be optioned
under this Plan shall consist of authorized but unissued shares of Option
Stock.  Seven Hundred Fifty Thousand
(750,000) shares of Option Stock shall be reserved and available for options
under the Plan; provided, however that the total number of shares of Option
Stock reserved for options under this Plan shall be subject to adjustment as
provided in Section 12 of the Plan.  In
the event that any outstanding option under the Plan for any reason expires or
its terminated prior to the exercise thereof, the shares of Option Stock
allocable to the unexercised portion of such option shall continue to be
reserved for options under the Plan and may be optioned hereunder.”
EXHIBIT (99.2)
                            CERTIFICATION 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 The Classica Group, Inc. (the "Company")
on Form 10-KSB/A for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2002, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Bernard
F. Lillis, Jr., Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify pursuant to 18
U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that:
(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities and Exchange Act of 1934; (2) The information contained in the Report
fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results
of operations of the Company.

/s/ Bernard F. Lillis, Jr.
Bernard F. Lillis, Jr.
Chief Financial Officer
September 4, 2003
Case 16-25089 Doc 5 Filed 08/04/16 Entered 08/04/16 13:32:38 Desc Main

 Document Page 1 of 2
Case 16-25089 Doc 5 Filed 08/04/16 Entered 08/04/16 13:32:38 Desc Main

 Document Page 2 of 2
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                       4,768,177
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   55,642
<ALLOWANCES>                                     5,581
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             4,828,838
<PP&E>                                         664,513
<DEPRECIATION>                                 115,372
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               5,536,798
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        3,145,412
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                        816
<COMMON>                                         8,918
<OTHER-SE>                                   2,381,652
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 5,536,798
<SALES>                                        130,533
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               130,533
<CGS>                                           83,881
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                7,582,713
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             133,081
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (7,669,142)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (7,669,142)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (7,669,142)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (1.10)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (1.10)


</TABLE>